Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes P&Z 012594• CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JANUARY 25, 1994 MINUTES The Regular Meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Palm Beach Gardens, Florida, was called to order by Chairman Jeffrey Ornstein 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 the Secretary and present were: Chairman Jeffrey Ornstein, Vice Chairman Joseph Hamzy, Members Carl Sabatello, Alan Strassler, Diane Carlino, Daniel Honig, Phillip Lyddon, and Alternate Member William Mignogna. Also present were Assistant City Attorney Paul Golis, Council Liaison David Clark, and Assistant City Manager Greg Dunham. APPROVAL OF PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES: Mr. Daniel Honig made a motion for approval of the January 11, 1994, minutes. Ms. Diane • Carlin seconded the motion. The minutes were unanimously approved by a vote of 7 -0. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING: Petition CU- 93 -06, by George F. Alsbrooks III, agent for the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, representing AT &T Communications, is requesting a conditional use for a regenerator building on property located at the northwest corner of the intersection of Florida's Turnpike and Beeline Highway. (22- 42S -42E) Mr. Bristol Ellington, City Planner, reviewed the staff report dated January 20, 1994. Mr. George F. Alsbrooks III stated he believed everything was in order and had no further comments. Chairman Jeffrey Ornstein opened and then closed the Public Hearing since there was no comment from the public. Mr. Joseph Hamzy thanked the petitioner for joining the two buildings with a covered walkway. Motion: Mr. Joseph Hamzy made a motion to recommend approval of the above • mentioned petition to the City Council with the following conditions: • Minutes - Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Page 2 January 25, 1994 1. Prior to clearing or construction, trees or native areas designated for preservation shall be tagged or roped -off. Prior to land clearing, the developer shall erect and maintain protective barriers around the drip line of the trees to be protected. All work shall be inspected and approved by the Landscape Architect of Record and the City Forester prior to the issuance of any Building Department permit requiring land clearing. Section 153.50 (Tree Protection) paragraphs B,C, and D shall also be enforced during construction. 2. All tree protection /relocation and landscape work shall be performed using current professional landscaping standards. The Landscape Architect of Record shall monitor all tree protection efforts, all tree relocation work, all landscaping work, and any work that affects the outcome of the approved landscape plans. The Landscape Architect of Record shall notify the City prior to any modifications to the approved landscape plan. 3. All trees or plants designed for preservation /relocation that die during construction or because of construction practices shall replaced using the following schedule: For every inch of tree caliper lost, three inches of new tree caliper shall be replaced with • like specie. The minimum replacement tree shall be three inches in diameter. Palms shall be replaced with like specie one for one with a minimum 10' height. Shrubs shall be replaced with like specie one for one with a minimum 30" height. If the site can not support the total number of replacement trees as required above, City Council may permit the developer to donate excess trees to the City for planting on public lands. 4. Prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy the Landscape Architect of record shall certify in writing to the City that the landscaping has been completed per the approved landscape plans. Any major changes to the approved landscape plans shall be approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission and /or City Council. Once the City has the certified letter from the Landscape Architect, the City Forester shall inspect the site for compliance. Once compliance has been confirmed by the City Forester, the City Building Department shall be notified. Ms. Diane Carlino seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously by a vote of 7 -0. PUBLIC HEARING: PUD- 93 -12, by Stephen Mathison, agent for the O.R.E.O., Inc., to amend the Oakbrook Corporate Center Planned Unit Development, created by Ordinance 17, 1986, for a one -year time extension for the development of a 180,000 square feet of office space, 117,500 square feet of retail and a 30,000 square foot health club. Located on the • southwest corner of PGA Boulevard and U.S. 1. (4- 42S -43E) {Postponed from 11 -9 -93 and Minutes - Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Page 3 January 25, 1994 December 14, 1993 meetings } Mr. Bristol Ellington, City Planner, reviewed the staff report dated January 20, 1994. He stated that staff's recommendation was being changed to require that the cleared area be sodded rather than seeded. Discussion ensued concerning whether the Commission could require that the perimeter buffer areas and the existing cleared areas be landscaped and sodded within three months from the date of approval of the time extension. Mr. Honig stated he was concerned that the retail portion of the property would be developed prior to construction of the amenities. Chairman Ornstein responded that prior to issuance of a C.O. for the first building permit, all on -site amenities, including the water features, the pedestrian way, and entry arches, must be installed. Chairman Ornstein also asked that the words 'Entry Arch" be shown on the plans when referring to the arches. In response to a question from Mr. Honig, Mr. Steve Mathison stated O.R.E.O., Inc. is a subsidiary of First Union Bank. Mr. Mathison stated the architectural firm of Oliver and Glidden had provided an as -built master plan as an exhibit. He further stated a traffic report had been prepared by Joe Pollock of Kimley Horn Engineers. Mr. Mathison further explained the architect's task had been to take the initial master plan previously approved and combined it with a survey to show what had actually been built and what changes had occurred. Mr. Ed Oliver displayed the resulting master plan and pointed out the changes which had been made. Chairman Ornstein stated he thought they had done a great job, that it could not have been easy. Chairman Ornstein asked if the outparcel owned by John Hancock was not part of the PUD, then how did First Union have the authority to proceed with the improvements such as the archways. Mr. Mathison stated they would look into that. Mr. Ellington stated that former City Attorney Bill Brant did not require sign -off from Hancock. Mr. Carl Sabatello asked that City Engineer Getz review and approve the entrance from PGA Boulevard if he had not already done so. In response to a question from Mr. Honig, Mr., Mathison stated if they cannot find a tenant • for the proposed health club, then they would have to go before the Planning & Zoning Commission to request a change. • Minutes - Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Page 4 January 25, 1994 Mr. Carl Sabatello requested that staff determine if there was a section of the PGA Boulevard median which was to be landscaped; and if so, it should be included in the buffer planting. Mr. Steve Mathison requested that the time extension be effective the date of approval by the City Council. Chairman Ornstein stated he would require, as a condition, that all perimeter landscaping be completed within 90 days after approval by City Council. Otherwise, the time extension would be voided. He further stated that as a condition of the PUD time extension, the arches, waterway, pedestrian way, and all on -site amenities would be completed prior to the first C.O. being issued for any other structure on the property. Mr. Oliver asked if the landscape plan of record was sufficient in order for them to pull a building permit and start the installation. Staff was directed to determine if the plan was acceptable to the City Forester since there was a new Landscape Code. Chairman Ornstein asked that the placement of a 5 -foot wide sidewalk along the major • roadways be clarified on the plans and be installed with the buffer. Mr. Mathison questioned the Commission's ability to impose the condition that the landscaping be installed within three months. He stated they intended to meet this condition but was not certain that such a condition could be placed on a PUD. Chairman Ornstein stated if this could not be a condition, then he would not be in favor of the PUD time extension. Chairman Ornstein opened the Public Hearing. There being no public comment, the Chairman closed the Public Hearing. The Commission directed the petitioner to provide additional information at the next meeting. In summary, the Commission made the following comments: 1. Prior to issuance of the C.O. for the first building permit, all on -site amenities, including the water features, the pedestrian way, and entry arches, shall be installed. The words 'Entry Arch" shall be used when referring to the arches. 2. The time extension, if granted, shall run for one year from the date of approval. 3. The perimeter landscaping, sodding, and irrigation shall be installed within three is months from the date of City Council approval or the time extension shall be voided. • Minutes - Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Page 5 January 25, 1994 • C7 4. Verify whether median on PGA Boulevard is to be landscaped. If so, this is to be included in perimeter landscaping requirement. 5. John Hancock shall sign off on all improvements on the outparcel. 6. City Engineer is to review entrance on U.S. 1. 7. All perimeter sidewalks are to be shown on the plans and constructed along all streets with the buffer. 8. Determine if the landscape plan of record is acceptable to City Forester under the new Landscape Code. WORKSHOP: PUD- 94 -01, by James E. Neuhaus, agent for Ray A. Maiwurm and Anthony L. Graham, a request for Planned Unit Development and site plan approval for two 4,200 square foot medical office buildings (totalling 8,400 square feet) on a 1.04 acre site. This site is located south of Northlake Boulevard and east and west of Dania Drive. (24 -42S- 42E) Mr. Bristol Ellington, City Planner, reviewed the staff report dated January 20, 1994, and presented comments received from the various agencies represented at the DRC meeting of January 21, 1994. Mr. Ellington stated the signage would be addressed at the next meeting. Chairman Ornstein stated he believed the neighbors should be notified of the intended use of the property. Mr. James E. Neuhaus addressed the Commission and explained the reasoning for the type of buildings being proposed. He stated one of the buildings is being designed for a tenant who is interested in a veterinary clinic. He also said that loading zones and dumpster locations were provided for each building for the convenience of visitors and tenants. Mr. Daniel Honig stated the 40 -foot front setback was important, the side setbacks were not quite as important, but believed the rear setbacks could be increased. He further suggested the physical dimensions of the buildings could possibly be wider from east to west and more narrow from north to south. He stated he believed it was impossible to place the two buildings on the sites and still have the appropriate setbacks. Chairman Ornstein pointed out that would be true if it were straight zoning. Discussion ensued concerning the landscaping and setbacks. Minutes - Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Page 6 January 25, 1994 Chairman Ornstein stated he liked the plan and the idea of separating the buildings even further in order to obtain more landscaping. Mr. Neuhaus described the roof - mounted sign which was proposed for the buildings. Chairman Ornstein requested the signs not be located on the roof. Mr. Neuhaus stated they would be submitting a letter of approval from the owners of the duplexes. Discussion ensued concerning the area of green space required under straight zoning. Chairman Ornstein polled the Commissioners as to their preference regarding 10 -foot side setbacks instead of 15 -foot in order to allow more green space on the driveway sides of the buildings. It was the consensus of the Commission to allow 10 -foot setbacks, with Mr. Hamzy dissenting because the adjacent buildings are set back further. Mr. Joseph Hamzy believed there should be a great deal of landscaping on the perimeter of the property and there should be more than the two trees which were shown on the plans. • Mr. Hamzy also believed the setback along Northlake Boulevard should be 40 feet. Further, Mr. Hamzy suggested the covered areas be eliminated from the buildings so the buildings could be moved back further. Regarding the rear setback, Mr. Hamzy stated trees would not survive on the north side of the wall. This area should, therefore, be used for parking. Further, Mr. Hamzy did not believe delivery trucks would use the loading zones because of their location and size. He suggested locating the loading zones and dumpsters where the two parking spaces are shown. Mr. Alan Strassler agreed with Mr. Hamzy that there should be more landscaping where the loading spaces are shown. Mr. Ornstein suggested if the loading zones are relocated to the area of the two parking spaces, then perhaps one loading zone would suffice for the entire project. He also suggested only one dumpster on the other side of the driveway. In response to a question from Mr. Ornstein, Mr. Neuhaus stated the curb would not be raised. Mr. Honig withdrew his comment to move the buildings closer to the side lines and agreed with Mr. Hamzy that more landscaping should be on the east and west sides of the buildings. Chairman Ornstein disagreed and he liked the idea of moving the buildings back • on the property. Minutes - Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Page 7 January 25, 1994 Chairman Ornstein polled the Commissioners and determined the majority were in favor of a 30 -foot front setback provided the landscaping was acceptable. Mr. Carl Sabatello expressed concern that the cluster of trees near the edge of the property at Northlake Boulevard would interfere with drivers' vision as they were entering Northlake Boulevard. The petitioner agreed to maintain the necessary sight lines. In summary, the following was the consensus of the Commission: 1. All property owners within 300 feet of the site are to be notified of the proposal. 2. The dedicated easement of 30 feet is to be widened. 3. Setbacks: A 30 -foot front set back landscape buffer would be acceptable provided landscaping is enhanced on all sides. A 5 -foot setback on the south side would be acceptable provided adjacent property owners do not object. Side yard setbacks are to be reduced to 10 feet so that landscaping may be increased on the sides facing Dania Drive. • 4. Location of signs is to be re- addressed with no signs to be located on the roofs of the buildings. 5. Side and rear elevations are to be submitted for review. 6. A letter from the owners of the duplexes is required stating they have reviewed and approved plans. 7. Install more landscaping where loading spaces are shown on present plans and relocate the loading spaces and the dumpster where the two parking spaces are shown on the plans. 8. Eliminate any landscaping near the Northlake Boulevard curbline which would block the vision of drivers leaving the site. OLD BUSINESS: Mr. Daniel Honig asked if Council Liaison David Clark would give the Planning & Zoning Commission a short report on the outcome of any planning and zoning matters which the City Council considered in the future. • Mr. Carl Sabatello asked Mr. Clark to compliment the City Council on the landscaping being installed along PGA Boulevard. He stated it was a tremendous improvement to the Minutes - Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Page 8 January 25, 1994 City. NEW BUSINESS: Mr. Joseph Hamzy stated the Planning & Zoning Commission goes to a lot of effort to ensure that tops of buildings do not become eyesores. He stated, however, that after the buildings are built, their tops are radically changed. He stated Gardens Plaza Office Building is loaded with communications antennas on top and also has a neon sign visible from the road. Mr. Bristol Ellington responded that the owners had already been notified of the violation concerning the neon sign. Discussion ensued concerning whether the addition of roof top structures was a violation of the Code. Staff was instructed to check the ' PUD to determine if it contained a clause concerning the screening of mechanical equipment line of sight. Mr. Carl Sabatello asked that staff determine the amount of time a temporary sign is allowed to be displayed. He stated the second building (a bank) from the corner of Military Trail and PGA Boulevard has a temporary sign that has been displayed for quite a long • time. Mr. Hamzy stated the Good Samaritan building site has nothing except a developer's temporary sign on the property and wanted to know why the Sign Ordinance permitted this. Chairman Ornstein asked if Attorney Baird had completed review of the LDR's. Mr. Hamzy requested a discussion and direction on the ability of the Planning & Zoning Commission members to meet with and discuss prospective applications to the Commission on an individual basis, such as when an applicant requests a private review of an item. • Minutes - Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting January 25, 1994 ADJOURNMENT: Page 9 There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:30 p.m. The next meeting will be held February 8, 1994. 11 Alan Strassler • Diane Carlino Phillip Lydd n Holloman, Secretary • illiam Mignogna