HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes P&Z 111296CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS
• PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
November 12, 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 Melissa Prindiville:
Present
Carl Sabatello
Diane Carlino
John Glidden
Chris Jones
William Mignogna
Tom Paganini
Jeff Ornstein
Absent
Thomas Pastore
John Nedvins
Also present at the meeting were Assistant City Attorney Paul Golis,
Assistant City Manager Greg Dunham, Planning and Zoning Director
Richard Walton, Principal Planner Marty Minor, and Planner Edward
• Tombari.
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 October 22,1996 - Vice Chair Carlino made a motion to
approve the minutes as submitted. Mr. Mignogna seconded the motion,
which carried by 6 -0 vote. Mr. Ornstein abstained from voting on the
motion, as he was not present at the October 22 meeting.
SITE PLAN AND APPEARANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE
Recommendation to City Council: Petition SP- 96 -06, by Frank S. Palen,
agent for Devonshire Limited Partnership, is requesting an amendment
to the previously- approved site plan for Devonshire Nursing Home
located within the PGA National Commerce Park Planned Unit Development
(PUD) at PGA National Planned Community Development. (15 -42S -42S)
Principal Planner Marty Minor reviewed the staff report dated November
• Planning 6 Zoning commission Minutes
November 12, 1996
6, 1996.
Frank Palen, agent for the petitioner, referred the Committee to the
changes made since the last meeting which were highlighted in the
staff report, and explained that there would be one chiller which
would be housed within a metal box. The exteriors of the chiller,
generator and boiler equipment were described by Project Manager Josh
Mendelson. Mr. Ornstein pointed out that curbing should be shown on
the plan, and expressed his concern that the equipment should be
screened. Discussion ensued. Petitioner agreed to raise the berm on
which the ficus hedge would be planted by one foot if possible, to
help screen the equipment, and objected to painting over the factory -
applied paint since that could cause a maintenance problem. During
discussion of Mr. Ornstein!s concern regarding how large trucks would
get out of the project, Mr. Palen explained that a DRI amendment would
be needed if dimensions were changed. The letter provided by the City
Engineer was discussed. Mr. Palen explained that the overall issue
was how drainage was handled in Commerce Park as a whole, not only
this project; described how the existing drainage system worked; and
commented that the concerns expressed by the City Engineer were that
changes to this property could affect the drainage of the overall
system. Mr. Palen reported that a drainage study would be done to
discover how the overall system would be affected.
Mr. Glidden questioned the dimension of the row column, which the
petitioner pointed out had been addressed. Mr. Glidden questioned
the colors on the building exterior, row column, and stucco banding;
and window details not shown on the plan. Mr. Glidden explained that
the roof slope and pitches did not work. Petitioner agreed that the
roof plan on Plan C -2 would govern and slope and pitches would be
adjusted accordingly.
Vice Chair Carlino made a motion for recommendation to the City
Council to approve Petition SP -96 -06 with the following conditions:
1. Prior to the issuance of the building permit, the applicant
shall submit a Lighting Plan,that meets the LDR requirements.
2. The construction plans shall show the removal of the raised
median island near the guard house within Hiatt Drive, the
paving of the island, and appropriate pavement marking and
signage to divert exit traffic around the guard house.
3. Prior to the final construction plans, the applicant must submit
drainage calculations that verify the deletion of the swale on
the south property line in respect to time of concentration. If
these calculations do not support the 1986 approved times of
concentration, the applicant will provide such physical
improvements to the infrastructure as needed.
4. Prior to scheduling this project for City Council approval, the
10 -foot drainage easement on the south side of the property
shall be abandoned. A legal document recorded in the courts
• 2
Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes
November 12, 1996
will need to be provided to the City prior to City Council
approval.
5. The berm elevation will be raised one foot as noted on Cross
Section AA to screen boilers and chiller equipment.
6. Indicate on the plans that the decorative columns shall be
natural stone in texture and color.
7. Roof height and design must adhere to Plan C -2 and the elevation
slopes will vary accordingly.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Paganini. During discussion of the
motion, Mr. Glidden commented that the petitioner had not provided a
color elevation, and suggested that the horizontal stucco banding be
made two shades darker or lighter than the building exterior color.
Petitioner did not agree with the suggestion. Mr. Glidden withdrew
his suggestion. The motion passed by unanimous vote of 7 -0.
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
Workshop: Petition PUD- 96 -04, by Glenn Pate, agent, for approval for
the construction of an 80,760 square foot church which would
accommodate approximately 2,500 people for worship services. The
proposed Christ Fellowship Church is located on the north side of
• Northlake Boulevard and east of Gibson Road. (14- 42S -42E)
Principal Planner Marty Minor reviewed the staff report dated November
7. 1996.
Glenn Pate, agent for the petitioner and architect on the project,
stated that the petitioner had no objections to any of the comments
in the staff report but did have some questions. Mr. Pate commented
that the major issue was the drive on Gibson Road, and that petitioner
had met with the Homeowners Association, and originally had agreed to
no drives at all; however, the City Engineer had recommended one
drive, and the recommended placement near Northlake Boulevard was
agreeable to the petitioner.
Mr. Ornstein commented on the site plan that the building was being
built to accommodate 2,500 people, and asked what the average
attendance at services was at the present time. Mr. Pate responded
that the present average totaled approximately 2,000 in the current
three services, which would be combined into one service in the new
facility. Mr. Ornstein expressed concern with approving grass parking
in the percentage requested and concern with how the grass could be
maintained with concrete wheel stops in the grass. Mr. Pate agreed
that maintenance would be a problem, and also expressed his concern
with safety problems of cars driving through the grass and people
falling over the wheel stops. Mr. Ornstein commented that the
sidewalk should be concrete rather than the proposed asphalt, and
suggested that moving parking from the front to the rear could provide
• 3
Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes
• November 12, 1996
room for more landscaping in front. Mr. Ornstein requested a revised
plan showing paved parking. Discussion ensued during which Mr. Pate
pointed out that the paved parking was intended for staff and use
during the week, and the grass parking would only be used three hours
each week. Mr. Ornstein commented that there were problems with the
handicap parking and access to the building as proposed. A comment
by another Commission member was the difficulty of turning left coming
out of the Hunt Club, to which Mr. Pate responded that police officers
would direct traffic at services. Mr. Pate responded to Vice Chair
Carlino that the church anticipated growth. Mr. Jones commented that
the handicap parking did not meet code, and expressed concern with the
concrete wheel stops in the grass parking area. Mr. Jones questioned
the drainage on the site and whether the grass parking area might
flood during the time services were held.
Traffic report information was discussed. Suggested alternatives to
wheel stops were curbing the grass parking area or paving the parking
area. Discussion on stacking cars ensued. Mr. Glidden expressed
agreement with the grass parking; commented that the wheel stops only
told cars where to park, and suggested grass paver block to stripe the
parking areas. Mr. Glidden indicated concern with drainage and
requested that petitioner demonstrate the slope was sufficient so that
large amounts of water were not being retained. Mr. Glidden commented
that a roof plan would be required. Mr. Glidden favored two entry
drives onto Gibson Road and questioned whether the traffic engineering
report had indicated the ultimate number of lanes needed on Gibson
• Road at the corner of Northlake Boulevard, where he suggested both
right and left turn lanes. Mr. Glidden expressed concern with the
buffer provided next to the residential area to the west, and offered
suggestions to build up that buffer by eliminating some ]parking
spaces. Mr. Mignogna expressed concern with traffic intensity and
commented that he would like to see the traffic study address that
situation. Mr. Mignogna requested a lighting plan for the site which
would indicate the amount of light slippage which would affect the
adjacent residential areas. In response to Mr. Glidden, Mr. Pate
indicated that the present facility would not be used simultaneously
with the new facility, so that traffic from both entrances would not
be exiting at the same time. Discussion of the median layout and the
access to the nearby Church of the Nazarene ensued.
George Gentile, Landscape Architect, addressed the west and north
buffering by explaining that the major canopy tree was oaks, used
with varying heights of pine trees and Sabal palms as well as a
continuous meandering Coco Plum hedge along the property line (except
for the access drive at Gibson Road) which could reach 6 to 15 feet
in height and was proposed for installation at 2 feet. Discussion
ensued regarding the buffering created with the proposed materials.
Mr. Gentile explained that an advantage of the grass parking as
opposed to paved parking was that there would be a lot of percolation
so that water would not accumulate like it would on asphalt. Chairman
Sabatello suggested landscaping along the west side of Gibson Road.
During discussion of the proposed dry retention area in the front,
Mr. Pate explained that the area was necessary for positive outflow
• 4
Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes
. November 12, 1996
and that it would not be practical to move it to the rear with piping
out to the front, which would be very expensive. Chairman Sabatello
expressed his opinion that dry retention areas did not work
aesthetically. Mr. Jones questioned whether the sodded area in the
rear was planned for activities, to which Mr. Pate responded it was
planned only for a play area at the present time.
Principal Planned Marty Minor explained that present land use was
Residential Low and present zoning was PDA; and the petitioner was
requesting a change to PUD. Chairman Sabatello stated that he was
uncomfortable using buffers to conform to Residential Low for such an
intense project, and stressed that conditions of approval must be very
specific because the underlying code did not work. Mr. Gentile
clarified that the front landscape buffer was 107 feet, the Gibson
Road side buffer was 15 feet; and the rear had an 8 foot landscape
buffer as well as additional green space for a total of 194 feet.
Chairman Sabatello suggested that the City Engineer should look at the
grass parking areas and that a bond or appropriate instrument require
that if the grass parking did not work that the petitioner must then
pave the area. Mr. Glidden suggested that a drawing be provided
showing a typical section of a landscape area sloped to the middle
where a car would be parked on both sides that would show the vertical
drop so that the amount of water that would accumulate could be
determined. Chairman Sabatello commented that a flat area would also
hold water, and agreed that a typical section should be provided.
• Mr. Ornstein suggested that this project should be treated like any
other large project, and like other large church petitions, where
guidelines would be established for buffer setbacks, etc.; and that
the Commission should decide how many parking spaces should be paved
or left in grass. Chairman Sabatello expressed concern that if the
growth pattern continued, the petitioner might find it necessary to
conduct more than one service on Sunday. Discussion ensued regarding
the amount of paved parking which should be required. In regard to
the fact that changing the amount of paved parking would affect
drainage, Mr. Ornstein commented that the University of Florida had
experienced a problem of grease and oil from cars which had filtered
into the ground water instead of going into the storm system in a
large grass parking area which was used for football games. The
procedure which must be followed by the Commission in considering
grass parking versus paved parking was explained to the petitioner.
Some of the Commission members expressed a preference for grass
parking. Mr. Ornstein stated that he had a problem with not paving
code - required parking. Other churches with percentages of grass
parking were discussed. Planning and Zoning Director Walton suggested
that the section of Code dealing with grass parking should be studied
before a final opinion was formulated; and stated that the section
indicated grass parking areas may be approved by the City Council for
uses which have infrequent peak demand, subject to standards and
criteria to insure that the grass parking would work on the particular
site. Mr. Ornstein suggested that if all Code required paved spaces
were not going to be met that the Commission should establish a number
• 5
Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes
• November 12, 1996
for required paved spaces to be consistent with other approved
projects. Mr. Glidden expressed the opinion that if grass parking
worked with the drainage then paved spaces should only be required to
meet peak daily load. Chairman Sabatello requested that the
petitioner provide information regarding daily usage for the next
meeting.
During discussion of how many extra services would be held per year
for specific religious celebrations, Tom Mullens indicated that only
Christmas and Easter would entail larger congregations. The
petitioner indicated that plans were to use the existing facility for
current day -to -day and week -to -week operations, and that the new
facility was planned only for weekly services on Sunday and Wednesday
so that one service could be held instead of three, and had been
designed based on projected growth. Petitioner discussed paved versus
grass parking and indicated that paved parking was intended for daily
use and grass parking only for the twice weekly services; and that the
grass area was well compacted, with good percolation, and no problems
had been experienced from cars parking there to date. Petitioner
explained that the primary focus used in designing the new facility
was to provide buffering to the adjacent residential areas.
Chairman Sabatello made the following suggestions in order to provide
direction to the petitioner:
1. Move parking that is currently in front to the rear.
. 2. Provide a 20' landscape buffer around the property.
3. Repeat the same type of landscaping on the north and east
sides of the property that is used on the west along Gibson
Road.
4. Provide 200 paved parking spaces in the area which
surrounds the main entrances to the building.
5. Substitute the cocoplum with a denser plant installed at 5-
foot height.
6. Provide a typical section to illustrate the landscape
screening.
7. Provide a cross section of the swale area and the trees to
be planted in the swale area, and assure that the City
Forester is comfortable with trees planted in the swale
area.
8. Provide a self- contained traffic plan for stacking on the
property without access to Gibson Road.
9. Provide traffic plan to the Police Department for review.
10. Provide information regarding hiring off -duty police and
0 6
Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes
• November 12, 1996
impacts to neighbors of police directing traffic.
Mr. Jones stated he was in favor of the grass parking, but was not
sure how a figure should be determined for the number of paved spaces.
Chairman Sabatello explained that he had arrived at the figure of 200
based on the number of users of the current facility. Chairman
Sabatello pointed out that if the parking did not work that a vehicle
would be in place to correct the situation.
Vice Chair Carlino expressed concern with the potential for additional
growth so that the number of services might have to be increased, and
the impact of growth on residents in the surrounding community. Vice
Chair Carlino suggested that the project might be too intense for this
location and might need to be downsized.
Discussion ensued regarding how to have a traffic light signal
installed.
Mr. Mignogna requested that the dry retention area and lighting be
added to Chairman Sabatello' s list. The petitioner was also requested
to provide information regarding more realistic use of the facility
in order to establish a number for paved parking spaces. Mr. Pate
commented that a 20 -foot landscape buffer would eliminate a lot of
parking spaces. The Commission requested that the petitioner provide
a floor plan for the building.
• The exterior elevations of the building were reviewed by the
Commission. Mr. Pate described the exterior finishes and textures of
the building. Heat retention of a black metal roof was discussed.
Mr. Ornstein objected to the large black roof as not in keeping with
the surrounding houses. Chairman Sabatello stated that the building
was too massive, and out of character with the area, and that he could
not support the building as presented. Mr. Ornstein agreed. The
petitioner was requested to make the building compatible with the
existing zoning and surrounding communities. Discussion ensued
regarding impact of the building scale. Mr. Pate explained that the
building was one story with sloped seating inside, and that a portion
along the back was two stories. It was brought out that a 25% growth
factor had been assumed in designing the building to accommodate
2,500, since present attendance approximated 2,000. Discussion
continued regarding the building mass and its impact on the
surrounding area. Petitioner questioned direction regarding the
building. Petitioner requested more specific direction, and was told
that the Commission must adhere to specific guidelines and was not
allowed to help redesign a building. Commission members stated that
the building mass was the problem, and the kinds of things that would
reduce the mass would be to reduce the height, architecturally soften
the building, to break up the mass into smaller elements, etc. The
differences between straight zoning requirements and special exception
use in any zoning category were explained. Roof color, size, and
shape; size, height, texture and massing of the building, the square
plane of the building were listed as items for the petitioner to
consider. After further discussion, Mr. Glidden commented that the
• 7
Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes
November 12, 1996
height of the eave was an issue and it would help if it could be
shortened; that if the roof and building mass could be broken up that
would be helpful; that a different color of roof would be helpful;
that more landscaping around the building would be helpful; that the
overall vertical scale and mass needed to be more compatible with the
existing neighborhood.
OLD BIISINESS
There was no old business to come before the Commission.
NEW BIISINESS
There was no new business to come before the Commission.
•
• 8
•
•
-10
Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes
November 12, 1996
There being no further business, upon motion by Mr. Jones, seconded
by Vice Chair Carlino, and unanimously carried, the meeting was
adjourned at 10:05 P.M. a%-e� next meeting will be held November 26,
1996. An j
APPROVED: �/
Carl Sabatello, Chairman
7
Diane Carlino, Vice Chair
John Glidden
::5)� �41�
William Mignogna
Thoma
Jeff Ornstein, Alternate
(Absent)
John Nedvins, Alternate
Melissa Prindiville, Secretary
0J