HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes P&Z 052896• CITY OF PALM BRACH GARDENS
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
May 28, 1996
MINUTES
The Regular Meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission of the
City of Palm Beach Gardens, Florida, was called to order by
Chairman Carl Sabatello at 7:30 P.M. in the Assembly Room at the
Municipal Complex, 10500 North Military Trail, Palm Beach
Gardens, Florida, and opened with the Pledge of Allegiance to the
Flag.
The roll was called by Secretary Jackie Holloman:
Present Absent
Carl Sabatello, Chairman Tom Paganini
Diane Carlino, Vice Chair
John Glidden
Christopher Jones
® William Mignogna
Thomas Pastore
Jeff Ornstein, Alternate
Also present at the meeting were City Council Liaison David
Clark, Assistant City Manager Greg Dunham, Assistant City
Attorney Paul Golis, and Principal Planner Bristol Ellington.
ITEMS BY PLANNING AND ZONING DIRECTOR
There were no items by the Planning and Zoning Director.
ITEMS BY CITY COUNCIL LIAISON
There were no items by the City Council Liaison.
Minutes of May 14, 1996 - Mr. Jeff Ornstein made a motion to
approve the minutes as submitted. The motion was seconded by Mr.
Chris Jones. Vice Chair Carlino and Mr. John Glidden abstained.
The motion carried by unanimous 5 -0 vote.
r:
Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes
May 28, 1996
Chairman Sabatello announced that Agenda Item VII under Site Plan
& Appearance Review Committee, Recommendation to City Council of
Petition SP- 95 -08, would be combined with Agenda Item X under
Planning and Zoning Commission, Public Hearing for Petition CU-
95-05.
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
Recommendation to City Council: Petition SP -95 -08 by Raymond Royce,
agent for John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, Inc.,
representing Palm Beach Communications Company, for Site Plan approval
for the installation of three, 400 -foot communication towers on a 36-
acre site located approximately 2,000 feet north of and 700 feet west
of the intersection of Donald Ross Road and N. 69th Drive. (21-415 -
42S)
Public Searing: Petition CU- 95 -05, by Raymond Royce, agent for John
D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, Inc., representing Palm
Beach Communications Company, for Conditional Use approval for the
installation of three, 400 -foot communication towers on a 36 -acre site
located approximately 2,000 feet north of and 700 feet west of the
intersection of Donald Ross Road and N. 69th Drive. (21- 41S -42S)
Principal Planner Ellington reviewed the staff report dated May
23, 1996. Discussion ensued regarding views of towers which had
been reviewed according to criteria in the ordinance.
Raymond Royce, Agent for the Petitioner, introduced additional
representatives Jim Martin and Trisha Dolen, principals of the
applicant; Rocky Biby and Ed Weinberg, with Kimley Horn
Engineers; and Jim Sorensen, electronics and radio expert. Mr.
Royce referred to subsection 14 on pages 8 -9 which referenced
interference and indicated materials required to be presented
with an application and that if reasonable complaints regarding
interference were raised the City at the expense of the applicant
would require inspection of the tower and the applicant would be
required to correct the situation, and could even be required to
move the tower. Mr. Royce briefly reviewed the site plan for the
36 -acre tract consisting of three 12 -acre tracts with one tower
• 2
• Planning & Zoning Cemonission Minutes
May 28, 1996
erected to be used by all who could possibly use it before
erection of a second tower. During discussion of the location,
Mr. Royce explained that the location was as far west as possible
and the most remote piece of property in northern Palm Beach
County. Mr. Royce stated that the applicant had met the setback
requirements and had reduced the tower height to 363 feet. The
question of how the tower would fall within the setback of 110%
of the tower height had been addressed by reducing the tower
height, therefore, Code requirements had been met. 96t of the
property would be preserved in open space. Mr. Royce described
his trip to the Palm Beach Country Estates area where he had
tried to locate the existing tower. Mr. Royce discussed the one
existing tower in the Palm Beach Country Estates area which had
not interfered with development, and pointed out other existing
towers which he stated that people did not notice and which had
not interfered with development. Mr. Royce requested that
emotion be removed from this issue so that the need for the tower
to provide for enhanced communications could be recognized.
Chairman Sabatello declared the Public Hearing open, explained
that comments would be limited to three minutes, and requested
that once a point had been made that others did not repeat the
same item.
Susan Steckney, representative for the Palm Beach Country Estates
community, presented a petition of over 900 names of residents
who were opposed to the tower. Ms. Steckney reviewed points
which had been presented in a letter to the Planning and Zoning
Director, commenting that the residents believed project was not
consistent with land use for the area, believed that a precedent
would be set by placing a commercial venture into an area not
zoned commercial, believed that health problems would be caused,
believed that the visual analysis had not been done properly,
incompatible with the residential community, and believed there
would be negative repercussions for wildlife in the area.
Karen Marcus, Palm Beach County Commissioner, pointed out that no
roadway as shown by the MacArthur Foundation existed on the
County Thoroughfare Map, which could create a non - conforming land
3
® Planning & Zoning commission Minutes
May 28, 1996
use. Commissioner Marcus stated that one reason there were no
other sites was that the major landowner, MacArthur Foundation,
had offered no other sites. Commissioner Marcus indicated that
visuals provided by the applicant had been were taken from public
rights -of -way and therefore were in violation of City ordinance.
Commissioner Marcus commented that Melaleuca trees were require
to be removed, which would affect the thick wall of trees which
the applicant had indicated would provide screening for the
tower. Commissioner Marcus explained that there were 3,000
residents in Palm Beach Country Estates and 10,000 residents in
the Jupiter Farms community immediately to the north, which were
significant population numbers that would be affected by the
towers; and stated that the county had denied a tower for that
area 18 months ago. Commissioner Marcus stated that this
property was located on the fringe of the Loxahatchee Slough, and
believed that the Sandhill cranes would be affected.
Commissioner Marcus presented information that mosquito control
would be affected since spraying could not take place close to
the towers. Commissioner Marcus stated that it was believed the
application was inconsistent with the communication tower
ordinance, and that work to locate other sites would continue.
Frank Arena, 6842 149th Place North, expressed his concerns
regarding radiation from communication towers as presented in a
letter which he had submitted to the Planning and Zoning
Department.
Joel Friedman, 15323 69th Drive, expressed his opinion that
photos presented by the applicant were a misrepresentation and
that a field trip should be made to similar height towers as
those proposed in order to accurately judge the impact.
James Leach, 15612 78th Drive North, pointed
towers referenced by Mr. Royce were not private
that the MacArthur Foundation was willing to sue i f
placed on Seacoast property. Mr. Leach pointed ou
spraying took place at night since that was when
were outside and children were inside.
is 4
out that other
ventures, and
the tower was
t that mosquito
the mosquitoes
Planning a Zoning Commission Minutes
May 28, 1996
Michael Danshak, 6705 145th Place, expressed concern that Nimby's
had been alluded to, and stated that Palm Beach Country Estates
had helped site the transfer station.
Robert Burman, 6973 Donald Ross Road, explained that he was in
the real estate business in Palm Beach Country Estates and
expressed concern that real estate values within 1500 feet of the
existing tower had been adversely affected by that tower. Mr.
Burman questioned how travel from the end of the existing road to
the roadway on the property would be accomplished since there was
presently no connection between the two.
Robert Faust, 14731 68th Drive, expressed concern that the
benefits of the proposed towers would be commercial.
Jay Morris, 7592 155th Place North, expressed concern that the
visual impact would be that the towers were the gateway to the
community.
Hearing no other comments from the public, Chairman Sabatello
declared the Public Hearing closed.
Mr. Royce addressed concerns which had been raised, explained
that he had been informed by staff that the land use was
consistent for the area; explained that he had understood
MacArthur Foundation had reserved land so that Donald Ross Road
could be extended at some point in the future; and commented that
strobe lights would not be on at night so that they would not be
a problem for aircraft conducting mosquito spraying.
Rocky Biby explained how the visual impact analysis had been
conducted, and clarified for Mr. Glidden the blockage that would
occur from certain vantage points. Mr. Biby stated that the
analysis accurately represented the actual appearance.
Mr. Royce discussed the tower referred to by Commissioner Marcus
which had been denied, and submitted that its location had not
been comparable to that proposed for this project.
5
Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes
May 28, 1996
Mr. Weinberg, Wetland Scientist with Kimley Horn, explained the
timing of construction and that the water levels would not be
changed, so that nesting of Sandhill cranes would not be
adversely affected.
Mike Ford, Palm Beach Gardens resident, MAI /SRA real estate
appraiser for 25 years, reported he had investigated sales
activity from 1987 forward in Palm Beach Country Estates in close
proximity to the Bell South Mobility tower for vacant lots and
improved residential properties. Mr. Ford explained that
property sales within 1/4 mile of the tower had been compared to
sales of properties 34 to 3/4 mile farther from the tower, and no
negative impacts had been found. Mr. Royce advised that Mr.
Ford's report would be submitted to the City.
Mr. James Sorensen presented his credentials and addressed the
health issue concerns raised by one of the residents by
explaining that using the standard FCC formula, one tower would
produce less than 7°s of the maximum worst case radiation exposure
level allowable, and explained that to his knowledge there had
been no lawsuits because of health problems attributed to
communication towers. Mr. Sorensen verified that if tower
appurtenances were increased, the percentage would increase.
Another calculation which had been made for the whole site had
been 14%.
Mr. Royce addressed the thick wall of trees which he estimated
consisted of 75o to 800 old, tall pine trees. Mr. Royce
indicated that laws were not yet in place to realistically remove
Melaleucas. Mr. Biby referred to photographs which he stated
showed a dense line of pines behind the Melaleucas.
The possible future Donald Ross Road extension was discussed.
Mr. Royce read from a letter from Mr. Steven Yohe, Director of
Land Management for Palm Beach County which stated the intention
of the MacArthur Foundation to provide access and land for a
future extension. After further discussion, Mr. Royce explained
that under the existing residential zoning a 250+ acre planned
development would be required and within such a development there
• 6
Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes
May 28, 1996
would probably be a large portion of preserved lands. Mr. Royce
suggested that would be the most likely use of this property if
there were no future road, and the burden would be on the future
applicant to make application to the City for residential use, or
for immediately adjacent industrial use.
Mr. Royce's final comments expressed the opinion that this tower
would be compatible to the area and would have no adverse
effects. Mr. Ellington clarified that the minimum building site
within a PDA shall be 10 acres with a maximum density of one
dwelling unit per 10 acres, but stated because this property was
all owned by the MacArthur Foundation and was not currently
subdivided, it was his understanding that a residential
subdivision could not be created without rezoning to a PCD or
meeting the minimum size requirement as indicated by Mr. Royce.
Assistant City Attorney Golis concurred.
Mr. Ornstein commented that there was a big difference between
the proposed height and the existing 150' tower, and expressed
his opinion that these towers would be seen. In response to a
comment by Mr. Ornstein, Mr. Royce explained that criteria was
set in the ordinance and after completion of the tower if
something violated that criteria that the City had the right to
revoke the approval.
Mr. Pastore questioned why Mr. Royce's client could not locate
their antennae on existing towers in Jupiter. Mr. Royce
explained that he had been told that they were not appropriate
for his client's use. Public benefit and the need for enhanced
fire and police communication systems within the City was
discussed. Trisha Dolen, Palm Beach Communications, explained
that the tower would be strong enough to hold antennae required
by the County or the City but that they would have to appear
before the City Council for approval. Mr. Ornstein commented
that future additional appurtenances had not been taken into
consideration in the environmental reports. During ensuing
discussion, Ms. Dolen explained that the number of future
appurtenances would depend on the weight of each one. Chairman
Sabatello questioned what type of zoning would permit towers
• 7
Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes
May 28, 1996
without a conditional use. Mr. Ellington referred to page three
of the ordinance which stated that a communications tower was
permitted as a conditional use up to a maximum height of 400 feet
in the following zoning districts: (a) Planned Development Area
(PDA) zoning district; and (b) Public and Institutional (P /I)
zoning district. Mr. Ellington commented that the ordinance also
provided zoning designations where rooftop mounted communication
towers may be approved, and referred to another section of the
ordinance which required additional proposed appurtenances to go
through the City's approval process.
Mr. Ornstein made a motion to deny the conditional use for
Petition CU -95 -05 as not being a compatible use in the
neighborhood. Mr. Pastore seconded the motion. The vote on the
motion was 3 -4, therefore the motion failed.
Mr. Mignogna made a motion to approve the conditional use for
Petition CU- 95 -05. Vice Chair Carlin seconded the motion, which
carried by 4 -3 vote.
Note: Although omitted from the motion, the following conditions
were adopted for Petition CU -95 -05 in a later motion:
1. Three, 363-foot guyed communication towers shall comply with
all applicable conditions as set forth in Ordinance 13,
1995.
2. The following appurtenances shall be allowed on the 363 -foot
tower for Phase One:
a. (1)1080 3 around 4 levels panel antenna with 4" rigid
line
b. (9) panel cellular antennas platform mounted @ 150'
C. 8 -2/3 dual lighting system
3. The petitioner shall return for subsequent review and
approval of the appurtenances proposed for the towers in
Phase Two and Phase Three.
8
Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes
May 28, 1996
4. The tower in Phase One shall comply with the 110 percent
setback to the interior property line. Prior to the
issuance of the building permit for Phase One, the Applicant
shall document to the City that the Phase Two property, or
a sufficient portion thereof, is included in the lease for
the property in Phase One.
5. The tower in Phase Two shall comply with the 110 percent
setback to the interior property line. Prior to the
issuance of the building permit for Phase Two, the Applicant
shall document to the City that the Phase Three property, or
a sufficient portion thereof, is included in the lease for
the property in Phase Two.
Chairman Sabatello announced that there had been a favorable vote
on the conditional use.
Mr. Ornstein made a motion to deny Petition SP -95-08 for
recommendation to the City Council. Mr. Pastore seconded the
motion, which failed by 3 -4 vote.
Mr. Glidden made a motion to approve Petition SP -95 -08 for
recommendation to the City Council. After ensuing discussion,
Mr. Glidden withdrew the motion so that certain items could be
clarified. Mr. Glidden questioned where in the conditions
suspension of operations in regard to the issue of Sandhill
cranes was mentioned. Mr. Glidden questioned the strobe light on
the plans to which Mr. Royce responded that the dual lighting
system was shown and that no strobes were to operate at night,
when the red blinking lights would be on. Mr. Ellington referred
to condition 5 which stated that the project would be micro -sited
to ensure the protection of listed plant and animal species, and
explained that language regarding ceasing operations to
accommodate nesting Sandhill cranes would need to be added. Mr.
Glidden clarified that five recommendations in the staff report
applied to Petition CU-95 -05.
Mr. Glidden made a motion to approve Petition SP -95 -08 subject to
the recommendations by staff items 1 -5 as well as recommendations
• 9
Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes
May 28, 1996
1 -13, with the additional provision that any construction of any
phase of the project be suspended to eliminate the potential for
unnesting of Sandhill crane during the nesting season; and
further, that the strobe light be utilized for daytime use only
and the blinking red light apply to after dark use, as follows:
Conditional Use Conditions applicable to Petition CU-95 -05:
1. Three, 363 -foot guyed comcmmication towers shall comply with
all applicable conditions as set forth in Ordinance 13,
1995.
2. The following appurtenances shall be allowed on the 363 -foot
tower for Phase One:
a. (1)1080 3 around 4 levels panel antenna with 4" rigid
line
b. (9) panel cellular antennas platform mounted 0 150'
•C. 8 -2/3 dual lighting system
3. The petitioner shall return for subsequent review and
approval of the appurtenances proposed for the towers in
Phase Two and Phase Three.
4. The tower in Phase One shall comply with the 110 percent
setback to the interior property line. Prior to the
issuance of the building permit for Phase One, the Applicant
shall document to the City that the Phase Two property, or
a sufficient portion thereof, is included in the lease for
the property in Phase One.
5. The tower in Phase Two shall comply with the 110 percent
setback to the interior property line. Prior to the
issuance of the building permit for Phase Two, the Applicant
shall document to the City that the Phase Three property, or
a sufficient portion thereof, is included in the lease for
the property in Phase Two.
Conditions applicable to Petition SP- 95 -08:
• 10
• Planning a Zoning Commission Minutes
May 28, 1996
1. Prior to issuance of the first building permit for each
phase, the applicant shall flag and /or stake the limits of
work for construction impact for city review.
2. Prior to issuance of the first building permit for each
phase, a survey for the listed plant and animal species
shall be conducted. Specific attention shall be directed
toward sandhill crane nesting and forage areas.
3. All appropriate environmental permits shall be obtained with
USACOE, FDEP, SFWMD, et al, and provide copies of approved
permits with all attachments such as mitigation, design, and
construction plans to the city for reference and review
prior to issuance of the first building permit for each
phase.
4. Prior to issuance of the first building permit for each
phase, the applicant shall provide to the City an Upland
Preserve Management Plan and Wetland Preserve Management
Plan.
5. The proposed project shall be micro -sited to ensure the
protection of listed plant and animal species, ensure the
highest quality wetlands and uplands are preserved intact
and ensure that an adequate buffer is maintained around all
preserved wetlands. Any construction of any phase of the
project shall be suspended to eliminate the potential for
unnesting of Sandhill cranes during the nesting season
Prior to the issuance of the first building permit for each
phase, certification shall be required from the applicant's
landscape architect and /or environmental consultant stating
the highest quality preserve and buffer areas and all listed
plant and animal species have been maintained on -site within
a functional ecosystem.
6. Legal access to the property shall be documented and
recorded in the records of Palm Beach County prior to the
issuance of the first Building Permit for the project.
7. A permit from Palm Beach County shall be obtained to
11
Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes
May 28, 1996
construct the access road within the Donald Ross Road right -
of -way, prior to the first Building Permit for the project.
8. The applicant shall take extreme caution when filling in and
around preservation areas to ensure protection of the root
zone and canopy drip line area. No changes in pH and
topography /drainage may result in disturbance or destruction
of the preserve area.
9. Protection of preserve and buffer areas shall be monitored
by applicant's landscape architect and /or environmental
consultant during land alteration /construction activities.
10. Prior to the issuance of the first building permit of each
phase, deed Restrictions shall be provided as follows:
a. For those lands identified for natural area /preserve
status, appropriate deed restrictions shall be placed
on said lands and recorded in the public records of Palm
Beach County, or they may be dedicated to a public
entity or approved private conservation group for the
purposes of preservation, or appropriate restrictive
conservation easements granted in perpetuity may be
established, or such other similar protective measures
as determined by the City Council, upon completion of
all review process;
b. Such preserve /natural area shall be preserved,
protected, and maintained through recorded covenants
running with the land or developer's agreement;
C. A stated obligation to pay for the cost of care and
maintenance of all preserve areas; and
d. Upland and Wetland Preserve Management Plans shall be
incorporated into the easement documents.
11. Within 60 calendar days of the issuance of the first
building permit for each phase, the applicant shall provide
the city as -built drawings of wetland and upland
• preservation areas, buffer, setback, and any encroachments.
The specific acreages shall be presented in a tabular form.
12
Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes
May 28, 1996
The as -built drawings shall be prepared by a registered land
surveyor and /or professional engineer licensed to conduct
business in the State of Florida.
12. Within 60 calendar days of the issuance of the first
building permit for each phase, a signed and sealed
certification letter shall be provided to the city by the
environmental consultant, surveyor, landscape architect, and
the project engineer attesting the acreages represented in
the as -built drawing.
13. Access to the site by the public shall be restricted by an
adequate security fence and gate.
14. The strobe light shall be utilized for daytime use only and
the blinking red light shall apply to after dark use.
Mr. Mignogna seconded the motion. During ensuing discussion, Me.
® Dolan explained that the color would be unpainted galvanized
steel. Vice Chair Carlin clarified that decisions made by the
Planning and Zoning Commission could only be made by reliance
upon testimony and information provided by experts, which was the
basis for her decision in this matter. Motion carried by a 4 -3
vote.
Recommendation to City Council: Petition SP- 95 -25, by Sank Skokowski,
agent for Minn ixie, is seeking site plan approval for a 10,440
square -foot expansion of the WinnDixie Supermarket within the Gardens
Park Plaza Shopping Center located at the southeast corner of
Northlake Boulevard and Military Trail. (24 -42S -42S)
Principal Planner Bristol Ellington reviewed the staff report
dated May 22, 1996. In response to signage concerns expressed by
Mr. Ornstein, Mr. Ellington stated that it was his understanding
that the R. J. Gators ground sign was non - conforming and he would
need to consult with Building Official Hanson to determine
whether requirements for setbacks and numbers of signs should
include that sign.
Henry Skokowski, agent for the Petitioner, explained that the
basis for this application had been Winn- Dixie's desire to expand
13
Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes
May 28, 1996
their existing facility into a super store, which would involve
expansion into existing buildings as well as new construction
which would constitute an approximate 4% increase in square
footage of the center, and this application had triggered a
number of other issues which the applicant had been requested to
address to upgrade the balance of the shopping center. Mr.
Skokowski reviewed the revised site plan which had resulted from
the previous review, including the cart area, dumpster area,
signage, and landscaping. Mr. Ellington explained that the City
Engineer's concern involved the conflicting traffic pattern of
the most southern curb cut, and correction to eliminate the
traffic hazard had been requested. After ensuing discussion, Mr.
Skokowski commented that Petitioner was willing to do whatever
the engineers felt was appropriate for the area. Mr. Skokowski
provided a photograph of the cooler area. Mr. Ornstein requested
that the change in size of the rear roadway be reflected on the
site plan. Mr. Ornstein stated that a cart corral would be
required. Mr. Ornstein expressed concern that there were too
many ground signs, to which Mr. Skokowski responded that Building
Official Hanson was well aware of the number of existing signs.
Mr. Ornstein referred to Code requirements and requested that the
signage be checked out. Mr. Jones expressed his opinion that the
facade needed to be changed so that it would not be a long blank
wall, and clarified previous discussion regarding correction of
the roadway dip at the Northlake entrance. Mr. Glidden
questioned the roof top equipment screening, which Mr. Skokowski
commented would be done. Mr. Glidden expressed concern regarding
any site restrictions which would not allow cross parking other
than on the Great Western Bank site. Mr. Skokowski explained
that there were cross parking agreements which had been required
by the City and had been filed, and that any existing signs
stating that vehicles would be towed if parked in certain areas
would be addressed. In response to Chairman Sabatello, Mr.
Skokowski explained the cafe as a small eating area. Chairman
Sabatello questioned the parking calculation for the cafe, to
which Mr. Ellington responded that parking calculation was not
required to be separate. Chairman Sabatello questioned what
enforcement powers the City had to assure that shopping carts
were collected every 20 minutes. Mr. Ellington explained there
was no Code provision, however, if this matter was included as a
condition of approval that Code Enforcement could enforce the
condition. Chairman Sabatello suggested this matter be addressed
14
Planning a Zoning Commission Minutes
May 28, 1996
by the Commission at a later time.
Chairman Sabatello stated that the outstanding items which would
need to be addressed in a motion were the correction to the plans
to reflect the rear drive from 21' to 261, collection of carts,
and screening of roof mounted equipment. It was agreed that
removal of signs restricting parking should not be a condition of
approval of this application. Chairman Sabatello commented he
had thought that during the approval of R. J. Gators, the
statement had been made that cross parking with the bank was not
allowed, and requested that Mr. Ellington check on that matter.
Chairman Sabatello suggested that if the other members of the
Commission shared Mr. Jones' concern regarding the facade that
the motion could include that item. Mr. Ornstein questioned how
language could be formulated for conditions on some of the
outstanding items, since it was unknown what the petitioner
wanted to do, i.e., regarding cart. corrals, the area at the
® drive -in, signage, facade, etc. Mr. Skokowski stated the
Petitioner would agree to standards for cart corrals; that
Petitioner would abide by Mr. Hanson's direction regarding
signage; and suggested that the brick facade was better than a
plain stucco wall.
Vice Chair Carlin made a motion to approve Petition SP -95 -25 for
recommendation to the City Council with the three staff
conditions and additional conditions that the site plan be
revised to reflect change in the width of the roadway in the rear
of the building from 21' to 261; that condition five reflect
standard language regarding screening of roof mounted equipment;
that condition six reflect that shopping carts be housed in
structures and landscaping that are similar to or like that of
Toys R Us. Therefore, the motion included the following
conditions:
1. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the
engineer -of- record shall certify that the pavement has been
constructed in accordance with the current LDR's, with
supporting laboratory results.
2. The agreement with Seacoast Utility Authority shall be
executed prior to the issuance of the building permit.
15
i
i
Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes
May 28, 1996
3. Prior to City Council approval the site plan shall be
revised to provide for a circulation plan that eliminates
the conflicting traffic movements and provides for safe
circulation at the southwest corner of the shopping center.
4. The site plan shall be revised to reflect the change in
width of the roadway in the rear of the building from 21' to
26'.
I
S. Roof mounted mechanical equipment shall be screened line of
sight from view using materials compatible with the
building. This equipment shall be located so as not to be
visible from any street or adjoining property.
6. Shopping carts shall be housed in structures and landscaped
similar to or like that of Toys R Us.
Motion was seconded by Mr. Mignogna. During discussion of the
® motion Mr. Mignogna clarified that the sidewalk pavers were
satisfactory. Mr.I Jones was assured that the curb cut off
Northlake would be fixed. Motion carried by unanimous 7 -0 vote.
:7
Chairman Sabatello apologized that there was insufficient time to
discuss other agenda items.
OLD BUSINESS
There was no old business to come before the Commission.
There was no new business to come before the Commission.
•
0
i
Planning & Zoning commission Minutes
May 28, 1996
I
ADJOURNME NT
There being no further business, upon motion by Mr. Ornstein,
seconded by Vice Chair Carlino, and unanimously carried, the
meeting was adjourned at 1 :15 P.M. The next meeting will be
held June 11, 1996.
i
APPROVED:
Carl Sab tello, Chairman
Diane Carlino, Vice Chair
ohn Glidden
illiam Mignogna
s Pastore
Paganini
topper Jones
I
J ff 4PFtb4in, Alternate
® a'yqkie Holloman, Se
tary
17
i