Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes P&Z 061300CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS PLANNING AND ZONING CONIlVIISSION June 13, 2000 N11NUTES The Regular Meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Palm FBeac rdens, Florida, was called to order by Chair Joel Channing at 6:30 P.M. in the Lobby ofthe MComplex, 10500 North Military Trail, Palm Beach Gardens, Florida, and opened with the Pledg giance to the Flag. ITEMS BY GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIRECTOR Principal Planner Tim Norquest announced that staffwould present Zesfprojects acted upon by the City Council at future Planning and Zoning Commission meetings. Mr. Norquest reported that the San Michelle project, proposed for the corner of Central Boulevard and Military Trail, had been denied because the petitioner would not agree to the City's standard drainage condition, and because the City Council felt that the project did not provide enough green space and park area for children to play. The petitioner had requested reconsideration and had presented a redesigned plan eliminating one unit to provide space for a park and extra landscaping, and had agreed to the drainage condition; whereupon the City Council had approved the project. Chair Channing requested a report on the medical center at the mall, to which Principal Planner Norquest responded that the project had proceeded through first reading • with one City Council member absent; at second reading the architecture had been described as being too much like the 3801 Building, and the petition had been tabled. Chair Channing asked the significance of the CRALS denial by the County Land Use Board, to which Mr. Norquest responded that a local businessman had made a case against CRALS, claiming it favored developers, and the Board had been swayed by that; however, there was still support from County staff and from Commissioner Karen Marcus. Mr. Norquest commented that in order to reverse this decision, public relations work would have to be done to change the perception that CRALS benefitted only developers to the idea that it would benefit the whole City. Chair Channing questioned whether this affected all projects. Mr. Norquest explained that it depended on their radius of influence and whether the project touched the roadway, and that the area covered was PGA Boulevard between Military Trail and Prosperity Farms Road. Mr. Norquest commented that the City would have to rely upon County staff and Commissioner Marcus to get this item approved, and noted that the County Engineering Staff supported it, which was in the City's favor. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Mr. Solomon made a motion to approve the May 23, 2000 meeting minutes. Mr. Kunkle seconded the motion. Motion carried by unanimous 6 -0 vote. SITE PLAN AND APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE • The roll was called by Betty Laur, Secretary for the meeting. • Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes June 13, 2000 Present Joel Channing, Chair John Nedvins, Vice Chair Dennis Solomon Craig Kunkle, Jr. Ted Rauch, Alternate Barry Present, Alternate Absent John Glidden, Chair Pro Tem Daniel Lee Cruz Also present at the meeting were City Attorney Leonard Rubin, Senior Planners Talal Benothman and Ed Tombari, and Principal Planner James Norquest. Chair Channing announced that this was his last night to serve as a member of the Commission. A Request by City Staff for a Recommendation Regarding an Exterior Signage Package for the City Hall Municipal Complex at 10500 North Military Trail Building Official Jack Hanson presented the request, explained that several meetings were held last • summer regarding an exterior sign package for the new Complex, that a bid package had been advertised, bids had been opened and read into the record on June 1, 2000, and staff was on the threshold of awarding the bid when it had been learned during review by the Growth Management Department that this item must be presented to the Site Plan and Appearance Review Committee. Building Official Hanson explained that his instructions had been received from the previous City Manager, and that in the future anything that Growth Management was involved with would come before this Board. Mr. Hanson reviewed the proposed sign package, for which a drawing had been provided to each member of the Board. Mr. Kunkle questioned whether the Signage was in compliance with the new regulations, to which Mr. Hanson responded that the Police and Fire signs would be changed to one line and that the package would then meet code. The sign for the parking lot off Johnson Dairy Road was described as an internal sign, not a part ofthis package, and not illuminated, but visible from illumination provided by the parking lot lighting. Vice Chair Nedvins suggested an informal study by the sign consultant as to whether illumination was needed on the four exterior ground signs. Mr. Nedvins recommended an illuminated sign on the fire department similar to that proposed for the police department to identify the building for safety reasons. Mr. Hanson responded he would discuss this with ChiefBergel Mr. Nedvins requested discussion with the City Manager also. Vice Chair Nedvins made a motion to recommend approval of the Exterior Signage Package for the City Hall Municipal Complex to the City Council with the following suggestions: 1. Revisit whether all ground signs should be illuminated. • 2 • Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes June 13, 2000 2. Reconsider whether the Fire Department should be identified with an illuminated wall sign. Mr. Rauch seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 6-0 vote. Workshop - Petition SP- 99 -18: La Posada Senior Living Facility on Gardens Parkway at the Regional Center DRI A request by Urban Design Studio, agent, for site plan approval of a senior retirement community with 301 living units and beds and a two-story community center. The site is approximately 22.5 acres in size and is located within the Regional Center Development of Regional Impact (DR1), immediately north of the Gardens MaIL (06- 42S -43E) Senior Planner Talal Benothman reviewed the staff report, including staff concerns, waivers requested by the petitioner, and outstanding issues. Vice Chair Nedvins questioned whether the number ofparking spaces proposed was one per unit or one per bedroom, to which Mr. Benothman responded that only one per unit for independent living was • proposed by the applicant, and that the City Code for multi- family had been applied, which called for one per bedroom. For skilled nursing and for Alzheimer uses more parking spaces than required by code had been provided. Mr. Benothman explained that staff was not satisfied with the traffic information provided. Mr. Kunkle requested full size plans be provided as part of the packets. Mr. Present inquired about waivers, to which Mr. Benothman responded that the waivers on page 9 of the staff report were not requested by the applicant. Mr. Present questioned whether the Seacoast Utilities issues had been addressed, to which Mr. Benothman replied no response had been received from Seacoast regarding whether the applicant's response to them was adequate. Mr. Present questioned how this project was tied to the adjacent project. Mr. Benothman explained that a new loop road would link the projects and that the second project would have to align with the project approved first. Mr. Benothman explained that building heights were measured to the height of the towers. Dodi Glas, agent for the petitioner, pointed out the tower feature locations on a rendering. Chair Channing questioned the proposed parking for independent living units. Ms. Glas responded that 1.25 spaces per unit plus guest parking was provided. Vice Chair Nedvins received clarification that these units were apartments rather than condominiums. Discussion ensued regarding differences in parking requirements between condominiums and apartments. Dodi Glas, agent, explained that La Poasada meant The Refuge and that the mix of housing types offered different levels of service, including independent living, for which many different services were offered, assisted living for those who needed assistance with daily living, and skilled nursing which included a dementia unit to deal with Alzheimer patients. Ms. Glas explained that the site plan took advantage of the water feature and that the project was linked by multiple levels of pedestrian walkways to the • 3 • Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes June 13, 2000 surrounding neighborhoods. Pedestrian routes which could be utilized within the project were described by Ms. Glas. A grotto at the community center provided a location to enjoy the water, and courtyards with outdoor access and garden areas were provided in some units. In the independent living units, some cottages were offered, whose residents would enjoy the same amenities and access to the site as those living in the apartments. Ms. Glas explained that the sidewalk had been designed to take advantage of the water management tract without disturbing the existing vegetation. Ms. Glas introduced Mark Sheegan, Graystone Development Company, who developed these types of projects throughout the United States; Tim Messler, Engineer; Joe Pollock, Traffic Consultant; Jay Bridge, Landscape Architect; and Craig Davis, Architect for the project. Mr. Sheegan explained his company acted as consultants to Westport Development, who had completed over 40 ofthese communities across the country in the past 15 years, with 20 more currently under development. Mr. Sheegan explained that this type of project allowed aging in place, or moving from one level of care to another as needed in the same surroundings, which was a less stressful way of aging. The minimum age for admittance was 62, and the average age was 75. Mr. Sheegan explained that this was an upscale facility, and described the different levels of living, the care provided, and the amenities offered. An entrance fee was escrowed and used to buy down monthly charges. Mr. Solomon questioned the number of parking spaces required for the overall project, which Mr. Sheegan responded was 507 with 451 provided. Mr. Sheegan explained that 405,6- 50% of couples had two cars when they moved in but within a few years only had one. Architect Craig Davis pointed out there was no room for additional parking. Mr. Davis explained that there were • elevators located throughout the entire complex, there were walkways on different levels, and residents had the ability to walk from one end of the campus to the other under cover. Ms. Glas described the locations of outer perimeter berms, and that the the remaining perimeter areas were landscaped. Significant grade changes on the side adjacent to Mira Flores were described. Mr. Solomon requested a berm of at least Y wherever possible to help screen parking and traffic, and that such a berm be located along Gardens Boulevard, at least in the portion ofit west ofthe main entry, and also along the new loop road. Ms. Glas described the walkway along Fairchild Gardens Avenue which connected to the north into the other neighborhood, as consistent in width with that neighborhood's existing T wide sidewalks. Sidewalk lighting was discussed. Ms. Glas clarified that there would be unified ownership. Mr. Davis reviewed the site plan and described building materials as CMU with cement stucco, with concrete tile roofs, and soffits and eaves of stucco with a finer texture. Areas in the marquee, pedestrian bridge, community center, and covered parking would be cladded with rough -sawn stained cedar. Mr. Solomon suggested a landscape island close to the entry be pulled back. Mr. Davis explained the concept was to separate the buildings to encourage outdoor use, and space for emergency vehicles had been coordinated with the Fire Marshall and the Police Department. Mr. Solomon noted the vehicles would have to back out. Shutters were to be rough -sawn cedar and the developer was looking for a window manufacturer who could provide windows featuring brown vinyl on the exterior rather than white. Mr. Solomon noted the east elevation walls were plain, to which Mr. Craig responded the rendering referred to was of a cross section, and described its use. At Mr. Kunkle's request, Mr. Sheegan described where the different levels of care were located, and reported there were 18 beds for Alzheimer patients. Mr. Sheegan explained that tenants agreed in their contracts to move to another care level when they could not perform three of the required ADL's, and described how the rate for other levels of care was locked in. Jay Bridge, • 4 Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes June 13, 2000 Urban Design Studio, responded to Mr. Kunkle's comments that the landscape plans which were lacking in detail that as the site plan was developed further he would be able to provide more details, but at this point shrubs were shown as groups, and quantities were not yet identified. Mr. Bridge explained that buffers would mimic those already at the mall, plus color would be added, and the next presentation would include details. Mr. Present noted this was a good concept and that he was comfortable with the project at first cut. Ms. Glas verified there were 242 independent living units. Mr. Present discussed parking and observed fromhis family experience that a car represented independence, whichpeople found hard to give up even though they might only take the car out three or so times a month, and that car took up parking space. Ms. Glas clarified that Phase II consisted of only one apartment building with 36 units. Mr. Benothman verified that 1600 units were approved for the DRI and 1708 were proposed, and that additional units were in the NOPC and proposed to be converted from hotel rooms to units, which would bring the total of approved units to 1,813, which was being handled through Coulter. Ms. Glas verified that walkways were open to the public and described how lot coverage had been calculated. Chair Charming requested and received clarification of the location of different care levels and the number of tenants in each category, for a total of 242. The percentages for each care level were calculated based on ages of seniors in the area as well as history from the company's other facilities. Chair Charming requested berms on the south side of the new loop road be 3' high, and asked that all easements be located up front. Ms. Glas noted that none of the utilities were located within the 15' landscape area. Mr. Sheegan showed on the drawings how one could walk undercover through the whole project. Chair • Channing expressed his opinion that people would want to drive to the community center. It was noted that shuttle service would be provided. Mr. Davis clarified that a similar project in St. John's county was currently under construction. It was clarified that this project was not required to have Art in Public Places. Mechanical equipment was requested to be screened from view. Concern was expressed regarding the issue of a couple having two cars and the dead end parking areas. OLD BUSINESS There was no old business to come before the Commission. NEW BUSINESS Mr. Solomon thanked Chair Charming for his service on this Commission. ITEMS BY CITY COUNCIL LIAISON There were no items by the City Council Liaison. 0 5 Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes June 13, 2000 ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:10 p.m. The next regular meeting will be held June 27, 2000. APPROVED: • Joel Ch ' g, Chair Jo ed ' s, Vice Chair John Glidden, Chair Pro ''em Craig (Absent) Daniel Lee Cruz Ted Rauch, Alternate Barry t, Alternate B6tty Laur Secretary for the Meeting • 0