Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes P&Z 120892• CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION DECEMBER 8, 1992 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: Jeffrey Ornstein, Chairman; Joseph Hamzy, Domenick Lioce and Carl, Sabatello, Members; and Diane Carlino, Alternate Member. James Leatherman, Alan Strassler, -and Dan Shalloway were not in attendance. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION WORKSHOP: Recommendation to City Council re: PUD -92 -22 - Amending the Ballenisles parcel 18 Planned Unit Development from 52 single - family detached custom homes to 106 single - family attached homes (duplex units). (11- 42S -42E) Mr. Ellington gave a presentation of the December 3, 1992 staff report. A discussion ensued regarding computation of open space on the site. Mr. Ellington made a correction regarding a comment in the staff report in which the Planning and Zoning Commission requested elevations of the front - loaded garages. Mr. Ellington stated those elevations have been received. Chairman Ornstein asked if there are any other duplex projects like this in the any of the communities like JDM. Mr. Ellington stated Monterey Pointe in PGA National is a mixture • of duplex and zero lot line single family. Chairman Ornstein asked Mr. Hank Skokowski, agent for the petitioner, if the Commission would be able to get a copy of the design guidelines for JDM Country Club. Mr. Skokowski responded the Commission has asked for this several times and they have resisted making those a matter of public record for a number of reasons. The means by which the project character is established and by which the quality is controlled is in their opinion proprietary information. It was developed at great cost and it is unique to this project. Secondly, those are guidelines and the developer has the discretion to deviate from those guidelines. In addition, that has not been a requirement from the City. Chairman Ornstein stated he does not have a problem with the density proposed. However, he said he does have a problem with the appearance of the buildings - -it's all garage doors. A discussion ensued regarding the front -entry garages. Mr. Skokowski presented elevations • of the variations of the duplexes. Mr. Walton stated he preferred that anything the Petitioner was going to submit, particularly these elevations, be left with the City so staff can review it and give comments. Mr. Carl Sabatello, asked the Petitioner if they were going to assign the elevations to the different lots. Mr. Skokowski explained 31 lots are able to have a side - loaded garage. What they would agree to is that they would provide, at a minimum, 25 side - loaded garages. Mr. Domenick Lioce asked if the roof materials and colors would be the same. Mr. Bob Frein stated roof materials will be the same three -color blend and the houses will be three separate colors. The Commission expressed concern with the closeness and small size of the duplexes and suggested variating the height of the buildings. A discussion ensued regarding the calculation of lot width. • Mr. Skokowski stated they would like to eliminate lots 9 - 32 from the condition of staggering setbacks of the units. A discussion ensued regarding the design of the units. Mr. 2 • Sabatello questioned whether the screen enclosures will be the exact same size and expressed concern due to the "pieing" effect of the units. Mr. Frein explained what ever odd angle was created by enclosure would create additional deck space for the unit. A discussion ensued. Chairman Ornstein asked if Parcel 11 across the street from this project had any problems with this proposed change. Mr. Nader Salour,, representing Hansen Properties, stated they do not have a problem with this proposed change and they have not provided a letter as such, but there is a signed contract. The Commission asked if the residents from the Hunt Club have commented on this proposed change. Mr. Skokowski stated they are not required to inform them of this proposed change and they have not made any comment. Mr. Sabatello requested the Petitioner provide a typical of what the screen enclosure will • look like so the Commission can see how the enclosures join together. A discussion ensued regarding the building design and landscaping. Mr. Joseph Hamzy expressed concern with the floor plan design, unit spacing and the appearance of the screen enclosures from the back. Mr. Hamzy suggested the Petitioner take a look at the species of plant material and the density of the plant material to screen the buildings. Mr. Hamzy stated the Petitioner needs to intensify the landscaping along BallenIsles Drive so the rest of the community does not see this project. Mr. Hamzy stated lot 58 needs more landscaping also. Mr. Hamzy expressed concern with the rear elevation of lots 59 - 62. A discussion ensued regarding the landscaping along Ballenisles Drive. Mr. Lioce what it is that the Petitioner is trying to market with this project. Mr. Frein explained the marketing objective for this project. Mr. Lioce questioned the marketability • of this project. A discussion ensued. Chairman Ornstein requested the Petitioner provide the City with elevations of the two south -end units, going clear across the cul -de -sac. K' • The Planning and Zoning Commission directed the Petitioner to return for the December 22, 1992 meeting and requested the following: 1. Revise the site plan to provide for a visual barrier along the perimeter of the PUD, particularly adjacent to BallenIsles Drive and the unnamed road. The Commission suggested increasing the quantity and quality of the perimeter landscaping or installing a landscaped perimeter wall. 2. Submit front and rear elevation plans (straight on) depicting a series of 3 or 4 duplex clusters. The units should illustrate the various roof treatments proposed (with at least one side - loaded garage). In addition, the rear elevations of the units should include the screen enclosures. 3. Revise the site plan to accurately show the real screen enclosure conditions. Also, indicate whether the enclosures will have a rectangular shape or will affix to the 6- foot wall along the non -zero property lines. 4. The site plan should be revised to show a spur road access to Lots 103 through 106. 5. Revise the acreage, open space and gross density calculations noted under the Site Data on the site plan to reflect the deletion of the buffer strip (Buffer C) and the • 8.2 -acre lake along the southern boundary of the PUD. These areas are already calculated into the overall open space calculation for the PCD. 6. Will elevations be preassigned to lots? If not, what is the selection process of the elevations proposed. 7. Prepare an elevation plan (section view) of Lots 58 and 59, with landscaping, from BallenIsles Drive. • 8. Provide the color numbers and brand names on the elevation plans. 9. Revise the typical lot landscaping plan (Sheet No. 6 of 7) to reflect the FP &L transformers, the removal of the secondary garage door access and the relocation of the air conditioning units. 10. Clarify whether the 31 lots capable of accommodating a side - loaded garage will all be required to be constructed same. 11. Clarify whether the "68' foot" wall along the non - property line will always line up with the 13 -foot wall along the zero property line. 4 • ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 9:30 P.M. The next meeting of the Planning and Zoning-Commission is scheduled for • • December 22, 1992. ORNSTEIN, Chairman JWPH IAMZY) CARL. SABATELLO DIANE CARLINO GISELE FOSTER, Secretary 5