Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes Council 070292i CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS JULY 2, 1992 The Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Palm Beach Gardens, Florida, was called to order at 8:00 P.M. by Mayor Martino in the Assembly Room of the Municipal Complex, 10500 North Military Trail, Palm Beach Gardens, Florida, and opened with the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. ROLL CALL The Deputy City Clerk called the roll and present were Mayor Martino, Vice Mayor Russo, Councilman Aldred, Councilwoman Monroe and Councilman Kiselewski. ANNOUNCEMENTS Mayor Martino stated the announcements were as posted on the Bulletin Boards. ITEMS BY THE CITY MANAGER WASTE MANAGEMENT Per the City Manager's recommendation, the City Council directed Attorney Brant to draft an ordinance to consider an amendment to the Solid Waste and Recycling Collection Agreement between the City of Palm Beach Gardens and Waste Management, Inc. of Florida to be consistent with the City's Charter. BUDGET MEETINGS In response to the City Manager, Councilman Aldred stated he would not be in attendance at the July 13, 1992 or the July 20, 1992 Budget Meetings. The City Manager stated the second Budget Meeting will be held July 20, 1992. CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING, 7/2/92 --x EMS BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL PAGE 2 MAYOR MARTINO Mayor Martino reported he delivered the letter to the County as discussed at the last meeting re: Jog Road. COUNCILWOMAN MONROE Councilwoman Monroe reported inspecting the landscaping at the Surgicenter and felt there was a problem with the City's procedures. Councilwoman Monroe stated the approved landscaping plan does not indicate what plants belong where and the hedge material noted is not the size specified on the plan. Councilwoman Monroe recommended staff make a recommendation for Council's consideration, that the new Landscape Code include language re: planting procedures. Councilwoman Monroe reported the Board of County Commissioners was supportive of the Council's request for a change to the Checker's site on Northlake Blvd., however, there was some confusion as to what the Council really wanted, the stucco and the style or the Wellington site style. Councilwoman Monroe stated the BCC postponed action on this item. Councilwoman requested staff find out what the Wellington store looks like and then the Council should forward a letter to the BCC indicating their desire. COUNCILMAN KISELEWSKI Councilman Kiselewski reported attending the MPO meeting last week. Councilman Kiselewski reported the MPO will be looking for a way to coordinate the Council through an CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING, 7/2/92 PAGE 3 Executive Director and /or an outside firm to coordinate all the MPO's throughout the state. Councilman Kiselewski reported on his visit to Russia and how the people are reacting to the change in government. MUNICIPAL LEAGUE Mayor Martino reported the municipal planners unveiled their intergovernmental process plan and so far the reviews have been positive. The plan will be presented to the BCC on 7/14/92. CONSENT AGENDA Vice Mayor Russo pulled Item #4, Resolution 56, 1992 from the Consent Agenda. Councilman Aldred made a motion; seconded by Councilwoman Monroe, to approve the following items on the Consent Agenda: 1. Approval of Minutes of 6/18/92 Regular Meeting. 2. Approval of Minutes of 6/25/92 Workshop Meeting. 3. Resolution 55, 1992 - Authorizing and directing the City Manager to file an application requesting the portion of the Palm Beach County Emergency Medical Services Surcharge Award Program funds to which the City may be entitled. The motion was unanimously approved by the City Council. RESOLUTIONS RESOLUTION bb, 199T— After clarification by Attorney Brant of the intent Resolution 56, 1992, Vice Mayor Russo made a motion, seconded by Councilman Kiselewski, to approve Resolution 561 1992, supporting a cooperative effort of Government entities to amend Florida's Sunshine Law to permit confidential and private meetings between elected CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING, 7/2/92 PAGE 4 officials and their legal advisors. The motion was unanimously approved by the City Council. RESOLUTION b3, 1997— Attorney Brant stated the purpose of Resolution 53, 1992, Repealing Resolution 51, 1990, re: Frenchman's Creek DRI, was to ratify and adopt the DRI previously enacted by the County. Attorney Brant stated Resolution 51, 1990, adopted the Master Site Plan of Frenchman's Creek, approved by the BCC on October 25, 1988, however, the County did not submit the 1988 amendment to the 1973 Plan to the DCA. Attorney Brant stated Resolution 53, 1992 will bring the City into total compliance with the minimum administrative detail for DCA. Attorney Brant stated the next step would be for the Council to do whatever necessary to process the update of the Plan in satisfaction with DCA's requirements. Per a consensus of the City Council, Resolution 53, 1992, was amended as follows: 1. Create a new Section 1 to read "The City Council hereby repeals Resolution 51, 1990, which heretofore approved the DRI of Frenchman's Creek." 2. Re- number sections accordingly. Councilman Kiselewski made a motion, seconded by Councilman Aldred, to approved Resolution 53, 1992, as amended. The motion was unanimously approved by the City Council. CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING, 712/92 PAGE 5 R-ESOLUTION 54F 1997— Bristol Ellington, Planning and Zoning Department, addressed the City Council stating this is a request to amend the PUD approved for Parcel M -30 within PGA National, to allow for the redesign of the approved entry signs at the entrances to the three (3) communities within M -30. Mr. Ellington stated the original ground sign was approximately 5' in height by 615" in width, with 4' x 4' tile used for the sign face. Mr. Ellington stated an entry wall sign was constructed at the entrance to pod "A" which was not consistent with the plan approved by the City Council. The sign is larger in size, dimensioned at 6' in height and 10' in width, with 816" long stepped- down flanking walls on either side. In addition, the sign face is constructed of coquina stone instead of the approved tile. The petitioner is requesting approval of the existing sign at the entrance to pod "A ", as well as, similar designs for the entrances to pods "B" and 'C ", which would be slightly smaller. Mr. Ellington stated Jack Hanson, Building Official, indicated the signs are in compliance with Code and City Forester, has reviewed the plans and has no concerns. Mr. Ellington stated in addition to the above request, the Petitioner is also requesting to amend the amenity feature approved within the traffic rotary at the intersection of Championship Drive and Championship Trace. The approved plans identified a fountain in this rotary, CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING, 712/92 PAGE 6 however, the petitioner is requesting to amend the PUD to allow for this area to be landscaped. In response to Councilman Kiselewski, Mr. Ellington stated the only pod which has been developed is "A" (The Masters). In response to Councilwoman Monroe, Laurie Schwab stated approximately 45 lots have been sold in pod "A ". The Council expressed concerned with the landowners having purchased their lots and being told the area in question would have a fountain and now the petitioner is requesting an amendment without having notified the landowners. Per a consensus of the Council, the Petitioner was directed to forward a certified, return receipt letter to each landowner indicating the proposed amendment to this area and to include in the letter a ballot for each landowner to complete stating they are "in favor" or "not in favor" of the proposed amendment and also include a self - addressed, stamped, return envelope to the City Clerk's office for the landowner to return the ballot by August 15, 1992. This item will be heard by the City Council on August 20, 1992. . There was a consensus of the City Council to amend Resolution 54, 1992, to approve only the signage issue and schedule for the Consent Agenda for the July 16, 1992 Regular Meeting. The amenity feature issue will be a separate resolution to be considered at the August 20, 1992 Regular Meeting. CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING. 7/2/92 ITEMS FOR =USSION PAGE 7 The City Council requested a report from staff on how the sign got constructed without prior approval for amendments. LAKE CATHERINE STEM Bristol Ellington, Planing and Zoning Department, addressed the City Council regarding the petition of the Lake Catherine Property Owners Association, Inc. to amend the Lake Catherine PUD adopted by Ordinance 20, 1989, to permit an electronically- operated gate system east of the intersection of Lake Catherine Drive and Silverthorne Road. Proposed set back is approximately 50' from the edge of the Silverthorne Road pavement. Mr. Ellington stated Lake Catherine was approved for 298 units, 98 of which are single- family zero lot line homes and 200 multi- family four -plex patio homes. Mr. Ellington stated the concern is there are non - resident vehicles using MacArthur Blvd. as a shortcut to Silverthorne and vice -versa and complaints have been received from the residents to that effect. Mr. Ellington stated per staff's recommendation, Petitioner is identifying a 21x 3' sign on the existing wall at the entrance off Silverthorne Road, indicating that the main entrance and access would be from MacArthur Blvd. The Planning and Zoning Commission further recommended that a sign be installed within the interior of the development at the intersection of Lake Catherine CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING, 7/2/92 PAGE 8 Drive and Ridgewood Court, notifying motorists there is no outlet and allowing them to turn around. Councilman Kiselewski recommended placing a sign at the entrance to the development on MacArthur Blvd. notifying motorists there is no outlet. Mr. Ellington stated that could be included as a condition in the ordinance. Mr. Ellington stated the gate system will consist of two gates, each being 6' in height and 14' wide. The picket style gate system will be constructed of white aluminum and per the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation, the exit gate will swing out of the development and the entrance gate will swing into the development. The gates will be activated by a remote control transmitter. The Petitioner also proposes a 36' wide black chain link pedestrian gate at the sidewalk on Lake Catherine Blvd. Each resident will be given a key because the gate will be padlocked. Mr. Ellington stated all Departments have reviewed the project and had no concerns and indicated it was in compliance with the City Codes. In response to the City Council's concerns re: padlocking the gates, William Shannon, agent for Petitioner, stated the reason for the padlocked gates is there have been complaints from the residents of children coming through the subdivision and trash and debris being thrown throughout the development. CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING, 712192 PAGE 9 Mr. Ellington stated the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended the fence be screened in its entirety per Mark Hendrickson's recommendation. William Shannon, representing the Lake Catherine Property Owners Association, Inc., stated there are two separate homeowner's associations besides the property owner's association of Lake Catherine. Mr. Shannon stated the Sunterrace Homeowner's Association contains 200 residents and it was at the urging of these residents this petition was brought forward. Mr. Shannon stated in the Bedford Homeowner's Association, 30 of the units have been closed and transferred to the residents and 60 units are held by the developer at this time. Mr. Shannon reviewed the plan for the gate system and indicated they will install the ficus hedge as recommended by the City Forester. Mr. Shannon stated, with respect to the pedestrian gates, the residents are concerned not only with thru traffic, but also vandalism and debris. Mr. Shannon stated the Sunterrace Association president's main concern is that every morning there are bags of debris throughout the development and believes the locked gates will prevent this from happening. In response to Mayor Martino, Mr. Shannon stated this will continue to be an egress point, however, outsiders will not be able to enter. The City Council expressed concern with the pedestrian CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING, 7/2/92 PAGE 10 gates being padlocked and the stacking distance at the turnaround and requested the Petitioner look at modifying the plan to provide for a turn around area on both sides of the gates; providing a manual override system for the gate should the power go out or the gates being vandalized; and keeping the gates open should they be broken. The Council requested a sign -off from the residents around the gate area stating they are in agreement with this proposal. Mr. Shannon stated the sign -off by the residents could be accomplished by providing a certified copy of the minutes of the Association approving the gate system. Attorney Brant was directed to prepare an Ordinance amending the PUD. COMFORT INN Bristol Ellington, Planning and Zoning Department, addressed the City Council stating there is a request for a 800 square foot swimming pool and associated pool deck. The Petitioner is also requesting to modify the former bank. They are requesting to convert the bank into a meeting facility ancillary to the hotel. Per Resolution 78A, 1991, the petitioner received a time extension for the remodeling of the bank facility to be consistent architecturally with the hotel. At the March 5, 1992 City Council meeting, the Petitioner indicated the building would be renovated shortly after approval by the City Council, but did not anticipate commencing with the CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING, 7/2/92 PAGE 11 construction of the pool facility for 18 to 24 months. At this same meeting, staff raised concern with the adequacy of parking. The original PUD was approved with 104 parking spaces, however, to accommodate the pool, it will require the elimination of 6 parking spaces. Code requirements are 92 spaces for the hotel, thus staff recommended that the meeting facility be for hotel guests only. The City Engineer, David Getz, concurred with staff's recommendation. Mr. Ellington stated the other concern of the Council was whether the Unity of Title had been recorded per the adopting Ordinance, which has been completed. Petitioner was directed to provide the City with an executed document prior to proceeding with further review. Staff received the document on 6/8/92 and submitted it to Attorney Brant for review and, if sufficient, for recording. The Petitioner also provided a narrative explaining their position on the adequacy of the parking and responded to concerns that were raised earlier by the Police Department. The Police Department has reviewed the revised plans and signed off on them. Mark Hendrickson noted that while it was approved with the original PUD, there are 3 existing parking spaces along U.S. Highway One that are within the required 15' landscape buffer strip. In response to Mayor Martino, Attorney Brant stated the Unity of Title was in order. CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING, 7/2192 PAGE 12 Donaldson Hearing, agent for Devitt - Tolley Partnership, addressed the City Council stating they wish to utilize the bank building for a variety of different types of meetings generally ancillary to the hotel and felt the 98 parking spaces that would be provided would be adequate. Councilman Kiselewski expressed concern that the bank building will be used by people who are not staying at the hotel. Attorney Brant stated the use of the bank building must be an accessory use to the hotel facility. There was a consensus of the City Council for Attorney Brant to prepare an Ordinance for an amendment to the PUD. PALM BEACH GARDENS Y,SINESS PARK Bristol Ellington, Planning and Zoning Department, addressed the City Council stating Petitioner is requesting site plan approval for 34,240 square feet of office /warehouse space and 105,450 square feet of self - storage space with a 1,800 square foot security office. This is a 9.04 acre site located on the north side of Burns Road immediately west of Interstate 95. Mr. Ellington stated this property is zoned M -1, Research and Light Industrial Park and is bounded on the north by vacant property owned by the City zoned RM, Residential Multiple- Family, and bounded on the west by Klock Industries, zoned M -1. Mr. Ellington stated Petitioner is proposing two (2) buildings, each 17,120 square feet, fronting on Burns Road and devoted to office /warehouse CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING, 7/2/92 PAGE 13 space. The site plan identifies a minimum of 15 office /warehouse bays (20' x 50' minimum) per building. To the north of the two buildings, the Petitioner is proposing five (5) buildings, totalling 105,450 square feet, for self - storage and on top of Building C, they are proposing a second story security office totalling 1,800 square feet, which would be living quarters for an on- campus security guard. Mr. Ellington stated Building D, E and F would be 11' in height, Building C would be 14' in height, with the second story being 2516" and the building adjacent to I -95 will be 16' in height. The maximum height allowed in the M -1 District is 501. Mr. Ellington stated the petition is in compliance with all density control requirements. Mr. Ellington stated, per Section 159.089(A)(h) of the City's Zoning Code, the petitioner is allowed to have retail and consumer service establishments, accessory to the permitted use, at 5% of the total floor area of all buildings on any lot or group of contiguous lots in common ownership or control. The Petitioner is proposing to provide accessory retail and consumer business within Buildings A and B, which would total 7,075 square feet. Mr. Ellington stated 1,485 square feet would be used as office and the balance of 25,680 square feet would be used as warehouse use. Mr. Ellington stated that Traffic Consultant, Yvonne Ziel, indicated the petitioner is consistent with the ITE manual CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING, 7/2/92 PAGE 14 for business park category and indicates that the project meets both the City's and County's Traffic Performance Standards Ordinances. Ms. Ziel noted that in order to control the square footage and the limits of the mix of uses within the building, they should be delineated on the site plan. Mr. Ellington stated the Site Plan and Appearance Review Committee recommended the square footage for each use be depicted on the site plan, however, the committee raised a concern with the difficulty of monitoring the mix of uses on the site. Mr. Ellington stated in order to secure the self - storage area, the petitioner is proposing to install an S' chain -link fence with barbed wire along the top of the fence. Building Official, Jack Hanson, indicated that while barbed wire is not prohibited in the Zoning District, he recommends the Petitioner justify why barbed wire is necessary. Mr. Ellington stated the required parking is 212 spaces, with 100 spaces being required for the office /warehouse and accessory retail uses, and 105 spaces for the self - storage use and 7 spaces for the security office. The parking calculations were based on the security office, accessory retail and office uses based on the City's Business Office calculations of one parking space for each 300 square feet of gross floor area, plus one space for each occupant or employee. The Petitioners indicated they would be providing 119 parking spaces for the CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING, 7/2/92 PAGE 15 office /warehouse and accessory retail uses and the balance of 99 spaces would be provided with the gated storage area. Of the 99 spaces, 86 spaces are proposed as parallel spaces. The Petitioner would be providing a drive aisle as required by Fire Code. The parking spaces are dimensioned at 10' x 201, except for the spaces which front on Burns Road and in the back of Building B, which will be 10' x 181. The Petitioner is proposing to provide 2 loading spaces as required by Code. Mr. Ellington stated the Petitioner is identifying the sign location at the most western entrance and the elevations identified the location for signs over each doorway for the bays for Buildings A and B. The Petitioner indicated they will return to the City for approval of the sign package. The Site Plan Appearance and Review Committee required that the sign package be approved prior to the issuance of the initial building permit. Mr. Ellington stated City Forester Mark Hendrickson, has reviewed the proposed landscape plan and indicated the plan exceeded the minimum Landscape Code requirements for the interior and perimeter, however, he notes that the required 20 square feet of landscape area for each parking space is not provided in the parking areas between the self - storage buildings. As provided in Section 153.21(C)of the Landscape Code, landscaping for units of 12 parking spaces may be reduced by 100 square feet providing the reduced CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING, 7/2/92 PAGE 16 -- square footage is relocated so as to emphasize entrance corridors or special landscaped areas within the general parking area. The Petitioner is proposing to heavily landscape the south side of Building C and exceed the Code requirement for perimeter landscaping along Burns Road and the east property line by 200. Mr. Ellington stated the City Engineer, David Getz, indicated the property owned by the city to the north needs to have legal positive outfall to Burns Road. The Petitioner has revised the site plan to reflect a 15' drainage easement along the western property line. Mr. Getz is recommending that prior to final approval, the proper legal instrument be prepared and recorded. Mr. Ellington stated at its June 9, 1992 meeting, the Site Plan and Appearance Review Committee recommended approval of the petition with 17 conditions and there are 2 additional conditions recommended by staff. Mr. Ellington stated the plan identifies a security office that was changed and the Petitioner wishes to discuss this tonight. Councilwoman Monroe stated if the Code does not allow on site security at this time, she felt it should be amended to allow it. Attorney Brant stated such use is permitted on a mobile basis. If there are sleeping facilities in the security office, the city's codes do not technically prohibit it. In response to Councilman Kiselewski, Mr. Ellington stated CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING, 7/2/92 lot coverage is based only on buildings. PAGE 17 Steve Mathison, agent for Petitioner, addressed the City Council and reviewed the proposed site plan. Jeff Blakley, Landscape Architect, addressed the City Council and reviewed the proposed landscape plan. Councilwoman Monroe requested staff have the City Engineer confirm that the water retention areas on Petitioner's property is going to be similar to that of the MacArthur Foundation and the City Recreation Department. Jeff Irvani, Project Engineer, addressed the City Council stating the area being discussed is not a dry retention area, but a dry detention area. Mr. Mathison stated, based upon the City Engineer's request, the Petitioner has agreed to dedicate to the City a 12' strip along the western perimeter of the property. In response to Mayor Martino, Mr. Mathison stated there will not be any outside storage of boats, trailers, RV's, etc. George Kelly, representing Burns Road Associates, Inc., addressed the City Council stating re: the self- storage area, they prohibit any uses whatsoever other than dead storage. Mr. Kelly stated the facilities are not equipped with electricity or water and no automotive uses are allowed. There was a consensus of the City Council to have a condition stating there will be no work performed outside CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING, 7/2/92 of the units. PAGE 18 There was a consensus of the City Council to not allow barbed wire along the fence. The City Council expressed concern regarding the need for 3 curb cuts along Burns Road, and requested Petitioner confer with Mr. Getz re: traffic impact if the middle entrance was eliminated and the eastern entrance was expanded to provide a left -hand and right -hand exit. The City Council requested staff provide an aerial of the site at the next meeting. In response to Councilman Kiselewski, Mr. Kelly submitted a sample of the architectural block proposed to be used on the building. Mr. Kelly stated the block would be used on the southerly elevations of Buildings A and B and on all of the easterly and westerly elevations, as well as some of the interior elevations. Councilwoman Monroe requested a rendering of the elevations of Buildings A and B showing the height and location of the trees before the next meeting. Councilwoman Monroe expressed her preference for an earth tone color for the roof, instead of the proposed blue. Mayor Martino stated the Site Plan needed to reference the color chips and numbers and approximate location, before this project is approved. In response to Mr. Mathison, Councilman Kiselewski stated the sign package does not have to be reviewed by the CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING, 7/2%92 PAGE 19 -� Council, but needs to be in compliance with the Code. Mayor Martino stated he wanted to know what the color scheme of the sign package would be before consideration of approval. The Council requested Petitioner look into moving the eastern building back in line with the other building and provide more green space in front. Vice Mayor Russo expressed concern with allowing 5% retail in this project. The Council requested Attorney Brant's interpretation of Section 159.089 of the Code. Attorney Brant stated Mr. Mathison has agreed to a condition requiring a Unity of Title. In response to Mr. Ellington, the Council requested the Petitioner revise the Site Plan to reflect the concerns raised and conditions recommended by the Committee. The Council directed staff to consult with the City Engineer regarding the proposed drainage easement as it relates to Condition #3. Mr. Mathison requested further discussion regarding the apartment issue. In response to Councilwoman Monroe, Mr. Kelly thought they would be able to submit the plans for permitting within 4 - 6 weeks after approval and the construction of Phase I would be 4 - 6 months. In response to Councilwoman Monroe, Mr. Kelly stated they CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING. 7/2/92 PAGE 20 are anticipating constructing the rear portion first and filling in the front after that. Councilwoman Monroe expressed concern with the rear portion first and if that is done, she would like to see a Phase I landscaping plan that could be supplemented later with Phase II. Council directed staff to prepare a resolution for workshop and consideration for approval for the next City Council meeting. Councilwoman Monroe requested elevations of the first long building. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to discuss, the meeting was adjourned at 10:55. CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING, 712192 PAGE 21 APPROVAL MAYOR MARTINO r t V�E� Y6 ZusO i r f J, RAJ M. RIEF DEPUTY CITY CLERK COUNCILMAN ALDRED v COUNCILWOMAN MONROE c7 MAN KISELEWSKI