Loading...
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