HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes P&Z 081203CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
August 12, 2003
MINUTES
The Regular Meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Palm Beach Gardens,
Florida, was called to order by Vice Chair Barry Present 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 OMINISTRATOR
There was no report by the Growth Management Administrator.
APPROVAL OF ,MINUTES
Mr. Hansen made a motion to approve the minutes of the July 22, 2003 meeting as submitted. Mr.
Channing seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 6 -0 vote.
ROLL CALL
Betty Laur, Secretary for the meeting called the roll for Planning & Zoning Commission:
Present
Vice Chairman Barry Present
Chairman Pro Tem John Glidden
Joel Channing
Douglas Pennell
Randolph Hansen
Alternate Michael Panczak
Absent
Chairman Craig Kunkle
Dennis Solomon
Also in attendance were Principal Planner Talal Benothman, Planner Brad Wiseman, and City Attorney
Christine Tatum.
W„ 2rkshon: (P &Z)
Petition SP- 03 -14: Mirasol Town Square — Site Plan
A request by Bruce Cheguis of Cotleur & Hearing, on behalf of Palm Beach Acquisition LLC, for site
plan approval of 120, 000 square feet of off ce and retail space on an approximately 12 -acre parcel in
the Mirasol Planned Community Development (PCD). The Mirasol PCD is located at the northwest
corner of PGA Boulevard and the Ronald Reagan Turnpike.
Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes
August 12, 2003
Planner Brad Wiseman presented the staff report. Donaldson Hearing spoke on behalf of the petitioner,
and presented a plan and an aerial view of the property. Mr. Hearing explained that the project was
intended to create a sense of place for residents of Mirasol and to attract business owners as well as
owners of homes in Mirasol. Two options for roundabouts were presented as a result of meetings with
some of the commissioners. Mr. Hearing noted that a letter from City Forester Mark Hendrickson had
indicated he had no comments, which was the first letter Mr. Hearing had ever received with no
comments. The building architecture was described as classically proportioned Mediterranean style, and
architectural elevations and streetscape elevations were presented. Architectural precedences were
shown to note the difference in the Classic Mediterranean and Mediterranean Revival styles. Alternative
details were presented for building B and C. Windows were to be recessed 3"-4 ", and one alternate
design was addition of awnings to reinforce the architectural style. A central design element was
proposed for Building D. Requested waivers were presented. Mr. Hearing advised it was important to
the applicant to have a hearing on August 26, and they would resubmit this Friday to accommodate any
comments from tonight's meeting.
Mr. Glidden advised that he had met with the applicant and their representative approximately a week ago
and made comments, and the applicant had addressed a number of them Mr. Glidden expressed his
opinion that this was a nice project and the applicant had done a great job. Mr. Glidden asked if the
straight sidewalk along Jog Road could meander. Mr. Hearing explained that sidewalk was existing. Mr.
Glidden observed that rotaries caused some confusion, and he liked the design best with the paver design
in the center, and felt the raised planter should be eliminated and the scoring pattern of the pavers
changed. Mr. Glidden commented that the center had a square rotary and he liked the way it looked but
felt it could be improved if the paver pattern was such that the counterclockwise movement around the
rotary became one pavement tone, color, pattern or texture and the streets punching into the rotary were
different, so that it would be clearer that the people in the rotary had the right -of -way. Mr. Glidden asked
the parking ratio for retail, to which Mr. Hearing responded it was about 1 to 250 or 4 per thousand,
which the applicant felt was essential in today's office market. Mr. Glidden commented if there was a
parking problem and 1 to 250 was borderline then 1 to 200 would be better. The code called for 1 to
300, which would not work. Mr. Glidden expressed his opinion it was tight. Mr. Hearing indicated there
was no medical. Mr. Glidden requested a backup plan with reserve spaces designated in case there was a
problem. Mr. Glidden recommended the center element be more prominent with more roof and more
mass Mr. Glidden indicated he was in total support of the sign waivers, suggesting four building signs
with two being names of principal tenants and two being the name of the building on the taller stucco
band above the third floor. He would not be in favor of four different names on the building. Mr.
Glidden expressed his opinion that principal tenant signage did not have to be on the first floor so long as
it was tasteful. Mr. Glidden requested the air conditioning equipment on the ground be very well
screened and out of the way, and that exhaust fans not show above the parapet. Mr. Glidden commented
he would like a more pitched roof on the one -story buildings. Rick Gonzales, REG Architects, explained
that they had tried different options. Mr. Glidden suggested breaking the parapet wall. Mr. Glidden
expressed his opinion that on the southwest corner of Building C2 there should be an architectural feature
2
Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes
August 12, 2003
or massing since he felt the leading corner was weak. He suggested an arcade across the building. Mr.
Glidden indicated his most important concerns were to make the rotaries user friendly, punch up the entry
architecture on the C1 and C2 buildings, and he felt strongly that the applicant had a good concept for
signage on the building. Mr. Glidden left the meeting at this point in the meeting at 7:25 p.m. Mr.
Channing disclosed that he had met with the applicant, and commented this was a very good project. At
Mr. Channing's request, the color and materials boards were reviewed. The detail over the windows was
discussed. The applicant indicated the owner would like to keep it like it was. Mr. Channing commented
he did not think the awnings were an improvement and he would rather see the applicant stay with what
they were doing, handling the setback in color, texture, etc. Mr. Channing questioned the uses. Mr.
Hearing indicated that professional office and retail were their intent. Mr. Channing indicated that in his
experience, a ratio of 1 to 250 was good for office parking. Mr. Channing asked ifthis commission had
approved a similar decreased sign setback, to which Mr. Wiseman responded, no. Mr. Channing stated
he was okay with the setback waiver, but was not in favor of any other sign waivers. Mr. Hearing
commented they would provide a berm. Mr. Channing commented the center rotary was okay, that
automobiles should not have the right -of -way, and that he was in favor of removing wheel stops. Mr.
Wiseman commented that waiver was not required; it would still meet code. Mr. Hearing clarified that
75% ofthe parking was 9' and the rest was 10'. Mr. Channing indicated the comment about the building
without architectural detail he did not agree with, but thought rythmn created with pilasters or some other
precast treatment should be used to beef up that corner visually. Mr. Channing commented he sort of
agreed with Mr. Glidden about beefing up the roof but thought the applicant was doing such a good job
he hated to bother them. Mr. Channing requested the applicant give that some thought, and said he
thought they did need to do something there. Mr. Panczak was concerned with continuity, and asked
how the colors worked with the others in Mirasol Walk and was told they were close. Mr. Panczak asked
what the roof slopes were in Mirasol Walk and was told they were the same. Mr. Panczak commented he
felt the architecture on the north side of C 1 and south side of C2 were weak, and he also felt the long
runs on the B buildings needed to be broken up. Mr. Panczak commented he could live with the building
name signage being higher than the second floor, but agreed with staffthat generally signs should be kept
below second floor. Mr. Pennell asked if there were any issues with the Fire Department on the square,
and was told it had been resolved and only written confirmation was needed. Mr. Pennell indicated he
agreed with the waivers and sympathized with staff on the sign waivers but some projects on PGA
Boulevard, particularly the banks, had been allowed signage to identify them and he felt this building was
in the same situation and if tastefully done he agreed with placing it above the third floor. Mr. Pennell
stated he liked the traffic circles the way they were, liked the change made on the center building and he
liked Building B as it was. Mr. Pennell stated his one major issue was in agreement with a comment by
Mr. Glidden and he felt the entrance on the two C buildings should make a statement, and he thought it
took away from the project to have such a beautiful project and a plain entry. Mr. Hansen disclosed he
had met with the applicant last week, and that his comments were all architectural and most all except one
had been addressed. Mr. Hansen commented that the roman portico in front of the two -story buildings
seemed out of scale —that he could live with it but he did feel it was out of scale. The historical
precedences which the applicant had shown reinforced this. Mr. Hansen commented he felt the buildings
that framed the entries had weak corners, he felt that awnings did not add to the project, and that overall
3
Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes
August 12, 2003
it was a very nice project. Mr. Hansen commented as far as the waivers, he was glad to see 10' parking
stall widths in retail areas and was fine with 9' on the other spaces. Mr. Hansen commented he would
keep signage to a minimum, and did not have a problem with the location if kept to size and scale, with
no more than two building identification signs and two tenant signs. Mr. Hansen had no problem with
the other waivers. Mr. Hansen commented the project was very nicely done. Acting Chair Present
commented he had met with the applicant last week and this was a nice looking project. Mr. Present
questioned the landscape treatment on the north side toward the day care, to which the response was that
there was a pedestrian connection. Mr. Present asked who maintained the lake, and commented that on
the south side there was a deadhead where sediment would collect. Response was that Northern
maintained the lake. Acting Chairman Present commented he thought this was a tremendous project, but
had a problem with the signage because it was not this commission's job to worry about tenant egos and
how to sell to a tenant, and he felt the name on the building should be the name of the building. Mr.
Present commented that this was only one building and it should make a statement for itself, and there
should be no problem finding it, and his feeling was that waivers should go for other reasons. Acting
Chairman Present advised the applicant they had a very well received project and he looked forward to
them coming back.
OLD BUSINESS
Mr. Benothman thanked the commission for participating in the survey assessing staff and asked if they
would be open to receiving the packets on disk. The survey had indicated an even tie —half would be
open to receiving the packets on disk and half would not; therefore, after discussion, Mr. Benothman
indicated no action would be taken.
NEW BUSINESS
Mr. Pennell asked if Mirasol Walk had been approved. Response was no, that it was rescheduled for
September 14. Mr. Benothman advised he would present an update on City Council approvals at the next
meeting on August 26.
2
Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes
August 12, 2003
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the meeting was
held August 26, 2003. . A
APPROVED:
Jr.,
Barry Present, Vice Chair
John d , Tern
at 7:55 p.m. The next regular meeting will be
Betty La Secretary for the Meeting
5