Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes P&Z 061405PLANNING, ZONING AND APPEALS BOARD REGULAR MEETING June 14, 2005 MINUTES The Regular Meeting of the Planning, Zoning and Appeals Board of the City of Palm Beach Gardens, Florida, was called to order by Chair Craig Kunkle 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 ADMINISTRATOR There was no report by the Growth Management Administrator. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Mr. Solomon made a motion to approve the minutes of the May 24, 2005 PZA meeting minutes as submitted. Mr. Panczak seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 7- 0 vote. ROLL CALL Betty Laur, Secretary for the meeting, called the roll for the Planning, Zoning and Appeals Board: Present Absent Chair Craig Kunkle Jay H. Bramson (1" alternate) Vice Chair Barry Present Dennis Solomon Randolph Hansen Michael Panczak Douglas Pennell Charles Hereford Jonathan D. Rubins (2nd alternate) All those intending to testify in tonight's public hearings were sworn in. A motion was made and seconded that no response be made to the fax received from Hometown News. Motion carried by unanimous 7 -0 vote. Discussion: Petition CO -04 -03 10rdinance 12, 2005: Property Maintenance Standards Discussion: A City- initiated request establishing a new Chapter 79 of the Code of Ordinances, to be entitled "Property Maintenance Standards "; repealing Section 86- 27, Code of Ordinances, entitled "Housing Code Adopted". repealing Article V of Chapter 34, Code of Ordinances entitled "Weeds, Rubbish, Unsanitary Conditions ". Planning, Zoning, and Appeals Board Meeting Minutes June 14, 2005 Page 2 Code Enforcement Supervisor Kelvin Wise presented an introduction to the ordinance and to a program called Neighborhood Preservation Initiative, and announced he would come back to the next meeting to give a full presentation. During discussion of the proposed ordinance, Mr. Solomon asked how the notice to residents would be made, to which Mr. Wise responded notice would be by public forums and direct mailings. Mr. Solomon confirmed that Mr. Wise had mentioned a couple of problem areas in the city that the present ordinance did not address and asked if those loopholes would be closed with this ordinance, to which Mr. Wise responded, yes. Mr. Solomon commented that standing water was mentioned, and advised that some swales were designed to hold standing water for a period of time. Mr. Wise responded that had been addressed with the City engineer. Mr. Wise commented that he believed property owners would think this ordinance was fair because it was not restricting them as to colors, etc., and also the Delray Beach ordinance was a successful program. Mr. Solomon asked if there would be fines for non - compliance. Mr. Wise explained violations would go through the code enforcement and Special Master process. Mr. Wise commented enforcement language had been removed but would be added back in. Mr. Hansen commented he thought this was good, and questioned having only one principal color, asking if multiple colors were desired if the property owner would have to come before the City. Mr. Benothman responded that property owners currently must apply for administrative approval for colors, and this ordinance did not change that. Mr. Hansen commented repairs and installations were not always required to have a building permit and asked if it would now be required. The response was that the property owners would have to comply with code. Mr. Hansen asked about the size of address numbers. Mr. Wise explained there was no reason they could not be larger than 6 ". Mr. Hansen asked how it was determined that there were enough bugs to be an infestation. Mr. Wise responded he could tell if there was an infestation when he saw the property. Mr. Hansen commented grass parking had been approved in some areas of the City and that might need to be included, and asked if every window had to have some kind of shade or draperies. Mr. Wise advised that when people were renting property out all the windows had to have some type of covering. Mr. Panczak asked if under the proposed ordinance the City would have authority if a house within an HOA did not meet the standards. Mr. Wise advised they must comply with code. Mr. Rubins suggested a meeting between commercial property owners and the City at this point in the process to get better cooperation. Mr. Hereford confirmed with the City Attorney that the proposed ordinance had met legal scrutiny. It was noted that graffiti on the inside of the wall along I -95 was the responsibility of FDOT for enforcement. Planning, Zoning, and Appeals Board Meeting Minutes June 14, 2005 Page 3 Mr. Pennell asked how it would be determined who would be funded if they could not take care of their own property. Mr. Wise responded that a formula was being considered, and there was a process in place. Recommendations could be taken from the Community Aesthetics Board. Mr. Pennell asked if the City could step in and paint a house. The City Attorney advised this ordinance was really to get cooperation from the residents. Mr. Wise commented that he had three people on staff that would be citing properties, and he had requested two more. Mr. Present commented there had been a Military Trail grant program but this was for neighborhoods that did not have a grant, and asked, if there were a list of ten willing participants, how would they be prioritized. Mr. Wise advised they would be prioritized according to which posed the most danger to the occupants and then to the City. Chair Kunkle asked Mr. Wise to think about how the City could prevent a HOA board from shirking their responsibility and looking to the City to solve their problem. Recommendation to City Council; Ex Parte Communication (Quasi Judicial) Petition MISC- 05 -07; Shoppes on the Green Monument Sign in Fairwav Drive Median Recommendation to City Council. Thomas J. Baird, Esquire, agent for Southeast Centers, LLC, is requesting approval for an amendment to the PGA National Comprehensive Signage Program to allow a 5'6" high x 10'5" long monument sign for Shoppes on the Green within the PGA National Development of Regional Impact (DRI). The sign is to be located within the median of Fairway Drive approximately 15 feet south of PGA Boulevard There was no ex -parte communication reported by the board members. Attorney Tom Baird, agent for the petitioner, presented the request and asked that the petitioner be allowed to continue to work with staff to modify condition one regarding maintenance of the median landscaping. Mr. Rubins questioned what the sign would do for the tenants, to which Mr. Baird responded that many tenants told people that they were located in the Shoppes on the Green, so it would be helpful to the public if someone was looking for that shopping center. Mr. Rubins questioned the visibility of the sign from PGA Boulevard. Mr. Panczak asked what business would be going into the old Publix space. Mr. Baird responded he did not know. Mr. Hansen asked the location of the median, which was pointed out on a plan. It was confirmed that Baskin Palmer had not been required to maintain the median and currently it was maintained on a volunteer basis by the POA, and the applicant was asking that it be a condition of approval so they could work out who would take care of what portion. The Planning, Zoning, and Appeals Board Meeting Minutes June 14, 2005 Page 4 City Forester commented when the City had the opportunity through waivers, they did require projects to maintain medians and there were 52 projects within the City currently maintaining roadways. Mr. Solomon suggested adding language to the condition gave this developer the obligation to maintain that median until such time as the maintenance of that area might be taken over and become the obligation of the PGA POA. The City Forester stated that had been his intent, and Mr. Baird agreed that would make life easier for the applicant. Ms. Holloman noted staff recommended approval, and it was acceptable to staff to modify condition number one. It was confirmed that this was referring to the master POA, of which this was a part. MOTION: Mr. Solomon made a motion to recommend to City Council approval of Petition MISC -05 -07 with the modified language to condition one. Mr. Panczak seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 7 -0 vote. Public Hearing and Recommendation to City Council: Petition CP- 04 -15: City Centre FLUM Public Hearing and Recommendation to City Council. A request by Urban Design Studio, agent for Parcel F, LLC, and Oakbrook Corporate Centre Property Owners Association for a large -scale land -use map amendment to change the current land -use designation of a +/- 4.5 -acre parcel from Commercial (C) to Residential High (RH). The subject site is located on the southeast corner of PGA Boulevard and Ellison Wilson Road within the PGA Boulevard Corridor Overlay zoning district. Chair Kunkle announced that the applicant had requested this item be continued. Chair Kunkle declared the public hearing open. Hearing no comments from the public, Chair Kunkle called for a motion to continue. MOTION: Mr. Present made a motion to continue the public hearing for Petition CP -04 -15 indefinitely. Mr. Hereford seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 7 -0 vote. Public Hearing and Recommendation to City Council: Ex Parte Communication (Ouasi Judicial) Petition PUD- 03 -11: Oak Park Office Condo Phase H Public Hearing and Recommendation to City Council: A request by Cotleur & Hearing, Inc., agent for John C. Bills Properties, Inc., for approval of the final phase of the existing 6.8 -acre Oak Park Office Condominium Planned Unit Development (PUD) consisting of a 17,172 square foot medical office building located on the west Planning, Zoning, and Appeals Board Meeting Minutes June 14, 2005 Page 5 side of Prosperity Farms Road approximately 1000 feet south of the intersection of PGA Boulevard and Prosperity Farms Road. Chair Kunkle announced that his company was currently the managing agent for the existing Oak Park Office Condo Phases 1 and 3, so passed the gavel to Vice Chair Present. Chair Kunkle left the meeting at this point. Mr. Rubins was seated in the absence of Chair Kunkle. There was no ex -parte communication reported by the members of the Board. Jim Griffin presented an introduction of the project on behalf of the applicant. Kimberly Thayler, Cotleur & Hearing, provided the power point presentation. Mr. Hansen commented his only issue was he did not feel the architecture was consistent with the existing buildings. Architect Alan Strassler responded, and described how the facades had been deliberately softened. Mr. Solomon asked to see elevations of the existing buildings for comparison purposes. Mr. Solomon asked if justification for the waivers had been submitted. Ms. Holloman explained this was a very old petition and a couple of the waivers were carried forward from the old package, which also contained the waiver requests. Mr. Solomon requested the floor plan. Ms. Thayler commented the two waivers on the screen were required between PZA and City Council, so they had been incorporated into this presentation, but were not technically required until before submittal to City Council. Ms. Thayler commented that as further justification for the waivers, the applicant had supplied almost 1,000 more landscaping points than required. Mr. Solomon commented if any of the large oaks did not survive the applicant only had to provide a 16' or 18' replacement. The City Forester stated he felt that was enough since the canopy was already dense and any larger trees could not be accommodated except off -site, and described the effort the applicant was going to have to do to try to save as many trees as possible. Mr. Griffin confirmed this building would be a part of the existing condominium association, and described his company's history of preserving trees within the City. Ms. Holloman was unable to locate elevations of the existing building, since the project was developed in 1980. Architect Alan Strassler answered questions regarding scoring on the building exterior. Mr. Strassler presented floor plans of the building that had been a part of the application submittal. Mr. Rubins agreed there was a difference in the new design and the old design but stated he thought it must be taken into consideration that the old design was many years ago. Mr. Rubins asked if there were any comments from the condo association regarding the new design versus the old. Ms. Thayler responded they had received preliminary approval from the condo board for the project. Ms. Holloman stated a new letter was received yesterday stating it met with their approval for the applicant to proceed with this application. Mr. Rubins pointed out it would be hard to see one building from another with the dense landscaping and although they were not exact replicas they would not drastically contrast and were therefore acceptable. Planning, Zoning, and Appeals Board Meeting Minutes June 14, 2005 Page 6 Ms. Holloman confirmed staff supported the waivers and the City Forester noted before the building was cited the applicant had discussed the location with him in order to save a tree under any circumstance. Mr. Pennell stated his support and that this would be an improvement. Mr. Hereford asked for and was shown the locations of entries to the project. Architect Strassler pointed out the entries and noted the oaks were very large and the applicant had provided the proper configurations to accommodate emergency vehicles. Mr. Strassler provided color samples of the building. Vice Chair Present asked if there would be one uniform parking lot, to which Mr. Griffin responded they had agreed with the condo association the new parking lot would be sufficient to service the new building so that parking in the old lot and walking to the new building would be discouraged. There would also be a depression between the two lots. It was unknown at this point whether this would be a two or four - tenant building and reserved parking had not yet been dealt with, but that would be controlled. Vice Chair Present asked when it would be known what the new signs would look like. Mr. Griffin explained they would work with the condo association and City staff on the signage. Ms. Holloman requested addition of one condition of approval that the applicant shall be responsible for the irrigation and maintenance of all landscaping in accordance with City standards between the property line and the six-foot retaining walls on the north and the west sides of Phase II. Vice Chair Present declared the public hearing open. Ms. Van Cohen asked how many trees were on the property now and how many would remain, and inquired about relocation of gopher tortoises. Ms. Thayler advised there were one to three gopher tortoises and they would be tested for URD. If free of the disease, they would be relocated to Port St. Lucie. 35 of the existing large oak trees were being saved. Staff indicated they would obtain Ms. Cohen's phone number so that Ms. Thayler could provide her with the number of existing trees. Mr. Preston Fields, President of the condo board, reported the applicant was working with them to make everything fit, and noted there had been discussion of landscaping running north/south between the old and new development. Mr. Fields commented they had to get approval from 75% of their membership which he believed could be achieved, but not before it went before City Council. Their board had provided two preliminary approvals. Mr. Griffin explained if they received approval this evening they would immediately proceed working to achieve that 75% vote, but could not do so until after the PZA approval. Mr. Griffin explained he would come back to staff regarding placing a hedge between the parking lots. Hearing no further comments from the public, Vice Chair Present declared the public hearing closed. Mr. Hansen asked the floor heights and roof pitch and stated it would be helpful if those were shown on the plans. Mr. Strassler indicated 28' to the trusses, and 5/12 roof pitch. Planning, Zoning, and Appeals Board Meeting Minutes June 14, 2005 Page 7 Mr. Hansen commented the south elevation drawing did not show the windows shown on the floor plan. Mr. Strassler indicated the elevation drawing was intended to be what would govern. Mr. Hansen noted the need for consistency between plans and drawings. Mr. Strassler pointed out locations of air conditioning units on the ground. Mr. Hansen suggested windows in the large blank wall on the north elevation. Mr. Griffin stated they would accept that as a condition. Mr. Hansen suggestion continuing the railing treatment that was on the recessed portion of the walkway and something different on the bays that were projected. Mr. Strassler commented the opening had been designed so there would not have to be a railing there. Mr. Hansen suggested the entry be improved before going to City Council. Mr. Strassler commented the entry design had been deliberate. Mr. Hansen indicated it should be more of a statement. Mr. Strassler commented it was a low -key entrance feature. Mr. Hansen asked that his suggestions be considered. Mr. Solomon asked if the applicant and the City were in agreement with the landscaping points. Mr. Hendrickson indicated that would be done. Mr. Solomon inquired about notices, to which Ms. Thayler responded a courtesy mailing went out for PZA and certified mailings would go out for City Council. No responses were received. Mr. Griffin explained the building to the north was an ACLF and there was good separation between the properties. Mr. Griffin gave exact building heights and agreed those would be noted on the plans before the application went to City Council. Mr. Griffin clarified there would be one condominium association and therefore one parking lot —there were only handshake agreements regarding separate parking. MOTION: Mr. Hansen made a motion to recommend to City Council approval of Petition PUD -03 -11 with the following additional suggestions, that from the architectural standpoint the applicant shall make clarifications as discussed tonight in terms of consistency between the plans and elevations; that they look at adding additional windows to the first and second floors on the north elevation as suggested; that they look at modifying the height of the wall and handrails between the bays that are not a part of the column projection, and before submittal to City Council that the architect and the developer look at possible architectural enhancements to the entry character of this particular building; that all of the architectural dimensions both horizontal dimensions and vertical dimensions and all of the openings be accurately reflected in all of the drawings, including the roof pitch, and including the condition requested by staff as read into the record. Mr. Panczak seconded the motion. Mr. Hansen added to the motion that any signage modifications would have to be brought back for approval. Mr. Panczak seconded the addition to the motion. Motion carried by unanimous 7 -0 vote. OLD BUSINESS Mr. Hansen announced in 1954 on June 14, President Eisenhower had signed the legislation that added "under God" to the pledge of allegiance which had been repeated here tonight. Also, in 1775 the United States Army was formed. Planning, Zoning, and Appeals Board Meeting Minutes June 14, 2005 Page 8 NEW BUSINESS There was no new business to come before the Board. Planning, Zoning, and Appeals Board Meeting Minutes June 14, 2005 Page 9 ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:35 p.m. The next regular meeting will be held June 28, 2005. APPROVED: Craig Kunkle, Jr., Chair &"" (\- 2nd Alternate Jonathan D. Rubins Be ty Laur, S retary for the Meeting