Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Minutes P&Z 110993
CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION NOVEMBER 9, 1993 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 Multi- Purpose Room at the Palm Beach Gardens High School, 4245 Holly Drive, 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, Diane Carlino, Phillip Lyddon, Alan Strassler, and William Mignogna, Alternate. Member Daniel Honig was absent. Council Liaison David Clark was not present due to attendance at a special City Council meeting. APPROVAL OF MINUTES of October 26, 1993: Mr. Alan Strassler made a motion, seconded by Mr. Phillip Lyddon, to approve the minutes of the October 26, 1993, Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting. The motion was unanimously approved by a 7 -0 vote. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING: Petition PUD- 93 -14, by John C. Bills, agent for Jack O'Neill, to amend the Golf Estate Villas Planned Unit Development, created by Ordinance 5, 1989 and subsequently amended by Ordinance 22, 1992, for a one -year time extension for the development of a 14 multi - family units on 1.44 acres. Located west of Military Trail and approximately 500 feet north of Holly Drive. Mr. Bristol Ellington reviewed the staff report of November 4, 1993. Mr. John Bills, representing the petitioner, stated the real estate market had improved recently and believed there would be more demand for these units on Military Trail. Mr. Richard Walton, Director, Planning and Zoning Department, stated the site had not been maintained in a proper manner; and Mr. John Bills stated the site would be mowed and the grass kept at a height of 8 inches. Mr. Ornstein stated he was concerned with this and all projects which repeatedly come before the Commission for time extensions. He stated he believed the property could be marketed under straight zoning just as easily, with the only problem being concurrency. He stated he was not in favor of extending the time extension and thought the traffic reserves should be "put back into the pool' to be used by other developers who might need • to meet concurrency. Minutes - Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Page 2 • November 9, 1993 • • Mr. Carl Sabatello stated this was a minor project which was not holding up any other development and believed it would be advantageous for this property to be developed. Mr. William Mignogna asked what had been done to market the property, and Mr. Bills responded the main activity was directed toward friends in Chicago. He stated there had been no local activity other than the usual ads in the papers. Chairman Ornstein opened the public hearing for Petition PUD 93 -14. There being no public comment, Chairman Ornstein closed the public hearing. Ms. Diane Carlino made a motion to approve the one -year time extension with the following conditions: 1. The petitioner shall pay to the City of Palm Beach Gardens the following impact fees: (a) Recreations Building and Development Fund Account in the total sum of $9,633, upon issuance of a Building Permit; (b) Road Improvement Fund in the total sum of $7,868, payable upon issuance of a Building Permit. 2. No Building Permit shall be issued until the drainage and paving plans for development of the Planned Unit Development shall be approved by the City Engineer and all other building requirements of other governmental agencies with jurisdiction pertaining to the project shall be met and a copy thereof filed with the Building Official. 3. A performance bond, letter or credit, or escrow agreement shall be posted with the City of Palm Beach Gardens in requisite form approved by the City Manager in a sum of money to be determined by the City Engineer for parking facilities, drainage and utility improvements prior to the issuance of a Building Permit. 4. Any amendment to the landscape plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City Council by subsequent resolution. 5. During the interim period, the site shall be mowed and maintained, and the grass shall be maintained at a height of no more than 8 inches. Mr. Carl Sabatello seconded the motion. • • Minutes - Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting November 9, 1993 Page 3 The motion was approved by a vote of 5 to 2, with Vice Chairman Joseph Hamzy and Chairman Jeffrey Ornstein being opposed to the motion. PUBLIC HEARING: Petition PUD- 93 -13' by Lawrence Smith, agent for American Financial -Downs Partnership, to amend the Bridge Center Planned Unit Development, created by Ordinance 12, 1986 and subsequently amended by Ordinance 27, 1991 and Resolution 85, 1992, for a one -year time extension for the development of a 14,400 square - foot restaurant and a 13,946 square -foot office development on 2.678 acres. Located on the northwest corner of PGA Boulevard and Ellison Wilson Road. (5- 42S -43E) A memorandum of opposition was presented to the Commissioners by Attorney Gerald Z. Rossow. Mr. Rossow stated this ordinance was "dead" since seven years had passed while the original ordinance had provided for only five years. Mr. Lawrence Smith, agent for the petitioner, requested a postponement of this item until the next Planning and Zoning Commission meeting scheduled for November 23, 1993. The petitioner stated this additional time was needed to prepare a traffic impact statement as required by the ordinance. Mr. Carl Sabatello made a motion to postpone the public hearing for this item until the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting scheduled for November 23, 1993. The motion was seconded by Ms. Diane Carlino. The motion was approved by a vote of 7 -0. PUBLIC HEARING: Petition 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) Mr. Bristol Ellington reviewed the staff report dated November 4, 1993. Staff recommended the public hearing be postponed until December 14, 1993, to allow time for the petitioner to address inconsistencies existing between the original master plan and the development of the property. In addition, staff expressed concern over the traffic impact analysis. Chairman Ornstein stated he believed the petitioner should reinstate the original PUD and Minutes - Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Page 4 • November 9, 1993 certain amenities on the master plan such as the entrance archway, waterway, and the massive landscaping on the corner. Mr. Rich Walton and Chairman Ornstein stated the petitioner should state what will be accomplished during the next year. Mr. Steve Mathison, agent for O.R.E.O., Inc., a subsidiary of First Union National Bank, stated he would direct their traffic engineer to meet with the City's Traffic Engineer in order to provide necessary data. He further stated they consented to a two -week postponement of the petition. In addition, Mr. Mathison stated serious negotiations are underway with parties who were interested in developing the property. He also stated the function of this application was to preserve the existing PUD rights as well as the obligations. In response to a question from Ms. Diane Carlino, Mr. Mathison stated the petitioner had not revealed what they planned to do with the property in the future. Discussion ensued concerning improvements to be reinstated on the property. Ms. Diane Carlino made a motion to reschedule the public hearing for the December 14, • 1993, Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. Mr. Joseph Hamzy seconded the motion. The motion was approved with a 7 -0 vote. WORKSHOP: Petition PUD- 93 -10, by Stephen Mathison, agent for Gardens East Plaza, LTD., to reinstate the expired Promenade Shopping Center Planned Unit Development. The Promenade shopping center is located east of Alternate A -1 -A and north of Lighthouse Drive. (18- 42S -43E) Mr. Bristol Ellington reviewed the November, 4, 1993, staff report. A "Notice of Objection" from Mr. Philip H. Ward, III, attorney with Cooney, Ward, Lesher & Damon, representing Republic Security Bank, was distributed to the Commissioners. Chairman Ornstein stated this was a private matter between the bank and the shopping center owner. Chairman Ornstein stated that along with staff's list of condition, the master plan must show the square footages on the outparcels. He stated the extension will grant the total 244,000 • square feet as originally approved. Minutes - Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting November 9, 1993 Page 5 Mr. Carl Sabatello asked what would happen if the owner does not complete the list of items which were supposed to be accomplished, and Mr. Richard Walton stated it would go to Code Enforcement if there was no building permit or C.O. which could be used. Chairman Ornstein stated he believed the PUD should be extended for no more than one year in order to see what is accomplished during that time. Mr. Joseph Hamzy stated another option was to not grant a time extension at this time and wait for the improvements to be made which should have been completed years ago. Chairman Ornstein stated he would like to get a legal opinion from the City Attorney at to what would happen if this were done. In response to a question from Mr. Hamzy regarding whether the outparcels would revert to straight zoning, Mr. Walton stated it was the opinion of Attorney George Baldwin that it would not revert to straight zoning since it was a PCD. Mr. Hamzy stated the petitioner should show more effort at creating momentum in terms of improvements. He further stated the petitioner had not given any indication they would • do what they had stated in the original application. Mr. Steve Mathison stated he would be discussing with Mr. Philip Ward the letter received objecting to the time extension. Mr. Mathison then reviewed the events to date and then addressed several of staffs 13 conditions which he stated were acceptable to the petitioner for the most part. He noted their traffic report had been submitted which established concurrency. Discussion ensued concerning liability for any problems or nuisances which might occur, and Mr. Sabatello stated the petitioner should understand they and not the City are responsible for any liability. Mr. Walton stated the City Attorney's opinion was that the petitioner needs to have lighting and security to ensure the area is safe. Mr. Mathison stated they agreed with condition No. 4 to establish a 25' wide landscape buffer along Alternate A1A. Mr. Richard Walton stated a plan is needed showing how the perimeter buffer would be landscaped. Mr. Mathison stated condition No. 9 was acceptable if it is treated as a guideline; condition Nos. 10, 11, and 12 were acceptable. He stated he did not recall receiving any direction • from the Commissioners concerning Condition No. 13 to install landscaping on the west side of the movie theater building. Mr. Ornstein stated this is now a requirement to install more Minutes - Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting • November 9, 1993 landscaping on the west side of the theater. Page 6 Mr. Joseph Hamzy stated he believed the petitioner had complied with everything the Commissioners had requested, and he further stated he did not believe condition No. 13 was something which had previously been discussed. Ms. Carlino asked if that was something that could be approved at the staff level, and Mr. Sabatello agreed. Discussion continued concerning the various conditions. Chairman stated he believed they should go back to the original master plan on the outparcels. Mr. Philip Ward, Attorney for Republic Security Bank, addressed the Commission in support of the reinstatement of the PUD. Mr. Ward stated he wished to make the Commissioners aware that a contract purchaser had filed an application which was contrary to the position of Republic Security Bank which had exercised its right of first refusal with • respect to the same parcel. He further stated they objected to any change or modification to the use of that parcel. Discussion ensued concerning the use of a bank or a video store for that particular outparcel. Mr. Richard Walton stated the current approval shows a drive -thru and a 3,500 s.f. bank while Blockbuster Video is a retail use. Chairman Ornstein directed staff to determine if Blockbuster Video is in fact a contract purchaser. Mr. Carl Sabatello made the motion to reinstate the expired PUD for one year with staff recommendations No. 1, 4, 7, and 13 being modified as indicated below: 1. The total square footage for the project should remain at 244,000 square feet. The existing 211,455 square foot shopping center is reinstated. The remaining undeveloped outparcels, totalling 25,057 square feet, are also reinstated. Development of any outparcel over and above its allocated square footage, up to the 244,000 square feet for the entire shopping center, shall be approved by the City Council on a case -by -case basis and shall meet Concurrency and all City standards. • The outparcels shall have the permitted use of square footage as shown on the Minutes - Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Page 7 • November 9, 1993 original site plan. 2. The pedestrian promenade shall be completed, cleaned and opened to the public by December 31, 1993 or prior to the issuance of the next Building Permit, whichever occurs first. 3. The fence surrounding the promenade and outparcels #1, 2 & 3 shall be removed by December 31, 1993 or prior to the issuance of the next Building Permit, whichever occurs first. 4. Gardens East shopping center shall have a 25 -foot wide landscaped buffer along Alternate A1A. The Gardens East shopping center shall have a unified landscape theme. The petitioner shall supply to the City for review a landscape plan showing landscaping within the 25- buffer along Alternate A1A prior to the petition proceeding to City Council; or the originally approved landscape plan prepared by Landscape Architect Jeff Blakely, and labeled Gardens East Plaza Perimeter Planting, drawing numbers LA 3/22 and LA 4/22 (no date), shall be included in the overall landscape plan submitted for this petition. The 25 -foot buffer adjacent to • Alternate A1A shall be completed by December 31, 1993 or prior to the issuance of the next Building Permit, whichever occurs first. There will be a landscape plan prepared by the petitioner and agreed on by staff prior to being recommended to City Council. 5. The median landscaping should be installed by December 31, 1993 or prior to the issuance of the next Building Permit, whichever occurs first. The owners of the Gardens East Plaza shall be responsible for the maintenance of the median landscaping, including plant replacement, and repair and utility costs of the irrigation. 6. Prior to the sign -off of the median and site landscape improvements, the Landscape Architect of Record shall inspect all landscape improvements, and shall certify in writing to the City that the landscape plan and all other landscape recommendation have been accomplished or implemented. Upon receipt of the certified letter the City Forester shall inspect the site for compliance. 7. All proposed landscaping for the site should be installed before December 31, 1993 or the issuance of the next Certificate of Occupancy for the project, whichever comes first. In addition to the proposed landscaping, the petitioner shall adopt at a minimum a consistent program of maintenance and plant care as recommended and • outlined in Landscape Architect Jeff Blakely's letter to City Forester Mark Hendrickson, dated September 21, 1993 and submitted September 23, 1993 (see • Minutes - Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Page 8 November 9, 1993 • • attachment). The petitioner shall adopt and implement a written management plan covering maintenance for the entire PUD by Landscape Architect Jeff Blakely by December 31, 1993. Landscape Architect Jeff Blakely shall certify in writing that this management plan has been completed and implemented by December 31, 1993. In no way shall this plan be less than the maintenance standard in the City Landscape Code, Ordinance 2, 1993, or as amended. The Landscape Plan shall be agreed on by staff. 8. The previously- approved elevations for the undeveloped outparcels shall be reinstated and shall be substantially used as guidelines for future development applications. 9. Outparcel 1, including but not limited to the tower /entry feature, shall be substantially completed in accordance with the design of the previously- approved elevation plans. 10. All undeveloped outparcels shall meet the current code in place at site plan approval (ie., landscaping, parking, etc.). 11. All undeveloped outparcels shall meet the current Sign Code in place at site plan approval unless modified by the City Council. Signage shall be consistent with the signage currently approved for the shopping center. 12. No drive -thru facility shall be allowed for outparcel #1. 13. A landscape plan reflecting the installation of temporary landscaping on outparcel #1 to screen the west elevation of the movie theater building shall be submitted to the City, and approved by staff, prior to the scheduling of this petition before the City Council. The temporary landscaping shall remain until the issuance of the building permit for construction on outparcel #1. The motion was seconded by Ms. Diane Carlino. Mr. Joseph Hamzy made an amendment to the motion as follows: Under item no. 7 above, the date shall be changed back to March 31. 1994. Mr. Alan Strassler seconded the amendment to the motion. The motion for the amendment passed with a vote of 5 -2, with Ms. Diane Carlino and Mr. • Minutes - Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Page 9 November 9, 1993 Carl Sabatello voting "no ". Chairman Ornstein asked for a vote on the motion which was approved with a vote of 7 -0. WORKSHOP: Petition PUD- 93 -06, by Paul Gershen, agent for Gardens East Plaza, Ltd., representing K.R. Chicken Associates, for Planned Unit Development site plan approval to construct a 3,530 square foot restaurant (Kenny Rogers Roasters restaurant) in an outparcel of the Gardens East (The Promenade) Shopping Center. Located east of Alternate A -1 -A and north of Lighthouse Drive. (18- 42S -43E) Mr. Bristol Ellington reviewed the staff report dated November 4, 1993. Chairman Ornstein stated a 6th condition should be added to the staff report which would state that a C.O. or building permit would not be issued until all work at the Promenade Shopping Center from Petition PUD 93 -10 is completed and approved by the City, and that those items required to be done by permit would apply to this petition as well. • Mr. Steve Mathison stated they hoped the project would go forward right away, and he stated he believed they were in conformity with the guidelines for the outparcels. Mr. Paul Gershen responded to questions concerning the landscaping and site plan. Ms. Diane Carlino asked to see the colors of the signs and the furniture. Mr. Ornstein stated he did not want umbrellas outside the establishment; he did not like the parapet point; he thought the front parapet could be higher than the side; and he did not like the sign. Mr. Sabatello did not think the parapet was a typical elevation. Mr. Ornstein stated he found the side elevation offensive and did not believe there was any improvement over the previous design. Mr. Strassler stated he believed the petitioner had done a good job; that he was happy with what had been done; the sign was okay; and the site was well landscaped. He believed the only weak point was the drive thru on the west side since it did not receive the same detail as the rest of the facade. • Ms. Carlino agreed with Mr. Strassler. • Minutes - Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting November 9, 1993 Page 10 Mr. Sabatello did not believe the requirement the building's design guidelines elevation plan be entered as part of the PUD time extension had been met with the design submitted. Chairman Ornstein inquired if Mr. Mathison and the petitioner understood the condition that they would not be able to proceed with this project as far as issuance of building permits, and Mr. Mathison stated he understood it was all part of one PUD. Mr. Sabatello asked if there was a problem with extending the landscaping on the west side of the building beyond the building to screen .the outdoor seating area, and the petitioner stated he did not have a problem as long as there was space for people to walk. Discussion ensued concerning the angle of the dumpster. Mr. Strassler stated he would like more detail on the drive -thru, and the petitioner stated they would agree to this. Mr. Sabatello asked if everyone was comfortable with the width of the peak, and Mr. • Ornstein stated he did not like it at all. Ms. Diane Carlino made the motion to recommend this petition for approval to the City Council with conditions 1 -5 contained in the staff report in addition to conditions #6, #7, #8, and #9, all as follows: 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 and landscape work shall be performed using current professional landscaping standards. The Landscape Architect of Record shall monitor all tree protection efforts, and 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 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 • Minutes - Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Page 11 November 9, 1993 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. 5. Signage shall be prohibited on any of the outdoor furniture. 6. Landscaping shall be extended on the south elevation. 7. There shall be more architectural detail on the drive thru window to match with architectural treatment on the south elevation of the building. 8. A CO shall not be issued until all work on the Promenade Shopping Center is completed and approved by the City. 9. There shall be no outdoor umbrellas. The motion was seconded by Mr. Alan Strassler. The motion to recommend approval to the City Council was denied by a vote of 4 -3, with those opposed being Mr. William Mignogna, Mr. Carl Sabatello, Mr. Joseph Hamzy, and Chairman Jeffrey Ornstein. The petitioner chose to return to the Planning and Zoning Commission with revised plans addressing its concerns in order to receive a favorable recommendation. WORKSHOP: Petition PUD- 93 -15, by Frank Palen, agent for PGA National Venture, Ltd., for a 50 single - family, detached zero lot -line residential Planned Unit Development (Parcel M -2913) within PGA National Planned Community District. (Diamond Head) (15- 42S -42E) Mr. Joseph Hamzy stated he had a conflict with this petition and did not participate in the discussion. Minutes - Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Page 12 November 9, 1993 Mr. Bristol Ellington reviewed the staff report dated November 4, 1993. Chairman Ornstein stated the setback requirements for the pools and screen enclosures should be noted at 5 feet rather than zero except where specifically allowed. In addition, he stated those units which have sides facing the streets must be as architecturally complete with landscaping the same as the front elevations. Mr. Jay Carpenter replied that the landscaping plan addressed those areas which would feature dense landscaping. Mr. Ornstein stated there should be windows installed in any blank walls. In response to a question from Mr. Alan Strassler, Mr. Carpenter replied there is a standard landscape plan for homes without pools. When pools are offered, he said, landscaping is required around the fencing or screen enclosures. Further he stated, the setback between the building and the pool is usually about 5 feet. Also, he stated the rear yards are about 18 feet. In response to a question from Mr. Ornstein, Mr. Carpenter stated if a pool is installed the landscaping must be reworked. Discussion continued concerning the landscaping. • Mr. Jay Carpenter stated this project, the units, the landscaping, and the setbacks are the same as other projects in PGA National which have been approved previously. Mr. Ornstein inquired if this project is the same as Grand Cay, and Mr. Carpenter stated it was similar. Mr. Carpenter pointed out there were many recreational areas available within the developments, for a total of approximately two and one -half acres for both active and passive recreational activities. Mr. Jay Carpenter addressed the sidewalk system within the developments and stated they would like to continue with the four -foot sidewalks since it would allow for two feet of grass behind the curb. Mr. Richard Walton stated that City Council had required another development to install five -foot sidewalks on one side. He further stated City Council is planning to discuss this further in order to set a standard width for all projects. Mr. Ornstein stated he believed the sidewalks should be five feet. Mr. Carpenter replied they would like to be consistent with previous projects which had four -foot sidewalks. The Commission directed the petitioner to comply with the City Engineer's recommendation of installing a five -foot sidewalk. Discussion ensued concerning the sideyard and rear setbacks. The Commission directed the • petitioner to increase the sideyard setback from 8 feet to 10 feet. The Commission was agreeable to allowing a 2 -foot encroachment to allow for bay windows. • Minutes - Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Page 13 November 9, 1993 Mr. Carl Sabatello stated those homes with pools would not have enough space for landscaping with trees at the back except for a hedge. Mr. Ornstein stated minimum landscaping should apply to all units, and a pool could not be installed if the minimum landscaping could not be installed. Mr. Ornstein stated all setbacks in recent projects had been changed to five feet from the screen enclosures so that landscaping could be installed. In summary, the Commission had the following comments: 1. Recreational requirements are to be clarified. 2. Setback requirements for the pools and screen enclosures should be noted at 5 feet except where exceptions are allowed. 3. Those units which have side walls facing the streets should be landscaped and "architecturally complete" with windows and no blank walls. 4. Sidewalks are to be five (5) feet in width. 5. Minimum landscape standards are to apply to all units, even when a swimming pool is installed. 6. The 8 -foot sideyard setback should be revised to a 10 -foot setback. The Commission was agreeable to allowing a 2 -foot encroachment to allow for bay windows. WORKSHOP: Petition PUD- 93 -16, by Frank Palen, agent for PGA National Venture, Ltd., for a 56 single - family, detached zero lot -line residential Planned Unit Development (Parcel M -3111) within PGA National Planned Community District. (Grand Cay) (15- 42S -42E) The Commission compared the plans for this project to the Diamond Head project. Discussion ensued concerning the sideyard setbacks. The Commission questioned whether to allow an 8 -foot sideyard setback for the zero lots. However, the Commission was agreeable to a 10 -foot setback for the zipper zero lot with a 2 -foot encroachment for bay windows. Mr. Ornstein again stated he was concerned about the architecture on the sides of the two units in the Diamond Head project. The petitioner replied they could possible install glass blocks in the walls although this could diminish the privacy of the units. Following discussion, the Commission decided since this petition was similar to Diamond • Head, the following requirements would apply to this project as well: • Minutes - Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Page 14 November 9, 1993 1. Recreational requirements are to be clarified. 2. Setback requirements for the pools and screen enclosures should be noted at 5 feet except where exceptions are allowed. 3. Those units which have side walls facing the streets should be landscaped and "architecturally complete" with windows and no blank walls. 4. Sidewalks are to be five (5) feet in width. 5. Minimum landscape standards are to apply to all units, even when a swimming pool is installed. 6. The Commission questioned whether to allow an 8 -foot sideyard setback for the zero lots. However, the Commission was agreeable to a 10 -foot setback for the zipper zero lot with a 2 -foot encroachment for bay windows. • • Minutes - Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Page 15 November 9, 1993 ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:10 p.m. The next meeting will be held November 23, 1993. Alan Strassler • Diane Carlino pa� 10 zw� Phillip Lyddon Ja a Holloman, Secretary • Jodi Hamzy, Vice Chairman Carl S atello Daniel Honig (absent) William Mignogna rVKM OW COUNTY, MUNICIPAL, AND OTHER LOCAL PUBLIC OFFICERS I.A1:' NAME -FIRST NAME- MID011 NAME NAME OF BOARD. COUNCIL, COMMISSION. AUTHORITY, OR COMMITTEI fl, MAILING: ADDRESS CA— ITN DAIE ON WHICH VOIL (WCURRkU THE BOARD COUNCIL. COMMISSION. AUTHORITY. OR COMMITTEE ON WHICH ISERVE IS A UNIT OF: (/ 11 Y ) COUNTY (TrHER I.00AI. AGENCY COUN rl 1L UI PUt ITICAL SUBUIVISION: MY PUSIIION IS: WHO MUST FILE FORM Bid ELKIIVE / APPOINT This form is for use by any person ser%ing at the county. city, or other local level of government on an appointed or elected boars council, commission, authority, or committee. It applies equally to members of advisory and non - advisory bodies who are presente with a. voting conflict of interest under Section 112.3143, Florida Statutes. The requirements of this law are mandatory; althoug the use of this particular form is not required by law, you are encouraged to use it in making the disclosure required by law Your responsibilities under the fav► when faced with a measurc in which you have a conflict of interest wary greatly dependin on whether you hold an elective or appointive position. For this reason, please. pay close attention to- ihe�insC:7is fort before completing the reverse side and filing the form. .� G� 9 _ _...• tNt INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 112.3143, ELECTED OFFICERS: X v 0 A person holding elective county, municipal, or other local public office MUST ABSTAIN from voting on a measure which inure to his special - private gain. Each local officer also is prohibited from knowingly voting on a measure which inures to the speci gain of a principal (other than a government agency) by whom he is retained. In either case, you should disclose the conflict: PRIOR TO THE VOTE BEING TAKEN by publicly stating to the assembly the nature of your interest in the measure c which you are abstaining from voting; and WITHIN IS DAYS AFTER THE VOTE OCCURS by completing and filing this form with the person responsible for recordir the minutes of the meeting, who should incorporate the form in the minutes. APPOINTED OFFICERS: A person holding appointive county, municipal, or other local public office MUST ABSTAIN from voting on a measure whil inures to his special private gain. Each local officer also is prohibited from knowingly voting on a measure which inures to ti special gain of a principal (other than a government agency) by whom he is retained. A person holding an appointive local office otherwise may participate in a matter in which he has a conflict of interest, but mL disclose the nature Of the conflict before making any attempt to influence the decision by oral Or written communication, wheth made by the officer or at his direction. IF YOU INTEND TO MAKE ANY ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION PRIOR TO THE MEETING AT WHIC THE VOTE WILL BE TAKEN: • You should complete and file this form (before making any attempt to influence the decision) with the person responsible f 0 recording the minutes of the meeting, who will incorporate the form in the minutes. • A copy of the form should be provided immediately to the other members of the agency. • The form should be read publicly at the meeting prior to consideration of the matter in which you have a conflict of intere I (111NI KB 111•$6 1 . rn IF YOU MAKE NO ATTEM jT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION EXCEPT BY DISCUSSION AT THE MEETING: • You should disclose orally the nature of your conflict in the measure before participating. • You should complete the form and file it within IS days after the vote occurs with the person responsible for recording the minute • of the meeting, who should incorporate the form in the minutes. DISCLOSURE OF LOCAL OFFICER'S INTEREST 1, co1!2�kl A__ , hereby disclose that on �° 1 3 .19 (a) A measure came or will come before my agency which (check one) inured to my special private gain; or inured to the special gain of —15' L �� �� , by whom I am retainec (b) The measure before my agency and the nature of my interest in the measure is as follows: Inc ©►� pot? q!) Date Filed NOTICE: UNDER PROVISIONS OF FLORIDA STATUTES §112.317 (1983), A FAILURE TO MAKE ANY REQUIRI • DISCLOSURE CONSTITUTES GROUNDS FOR AND MAY BE PUNISHED BY ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWIN IMPEACHMENT, REMOVAL OR SUSPENSION FROM OFFICE OR EMPLOYMENT, DEMOTION, REDUCTION SALARY, REPRIMAND, OR A CIVIL PENALTY NOT TO EXCEED $5.000. E FORM 86 • 10.86