Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes P&Z 021291CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 12, 1991 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, Domenick Lioce, Alan Strassler, James Leatherman, Carl Sabatello, Members. Mike Rosen and Joseph Hamzy, Members, and Rebecca Serra and Jack White, Alternate Members, were not in attendance. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF MEETING OF JANUARY 22, 1991 • Mr. James Leatherman made a motion to approve the minutes of the meeting of January 22, 1991 with no corrections or additions. Mr. Domenick Lioce seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously approved by a 5 -0 vote. 0 SITE PLAN AND APPEARANCE REVIEW Recommendation to City Council re: SP -90 -19 - (Blockbuster Video Awning) Site Plan Review for approval of a 3' X 166' awning around the Blockbuster Video store located within the Palm Beach Gardens Square shopping plaza, at 4252 Northlake Boulevard. (24- 42S -42E) Chairman Jeffrey Ornstein asked if the proposed awning would be back -lit. Mr. Charles Katz, agent, responded that it would be back -lit. Chairman' Ornstein commented that the back -lit awning would be ugly and garish. • Mr. Bristol S. Ellington, City Planner, reviewed the staff report dated February 6, 1991, 1 • stating that the awning was originally proposed to have signage, but the petitioner removed the signage after Building Official Jack Hanson determined that an awning sign is a violation of the City Sign Code. Chairman Ornstein asked whether a lit awning is addressed in the City Sign Code. Planning and Zoning Director Richard Walton stated that he did not believe the code addressed lit awnings. Mr. Alan Strassler asked how far the awning extended from the wall. Mr. Katz said 2 feet, 2 inches. In response to a question from Chairman Ornstein, Mr. Katz said the awning extends beyond the curb. Mr. Katz added that the backlighting and extended awning gives an additional security for the area. Mr. James Leatherman asked whether any other store in the shopping center has an • awning. Chairman Ornstein said there were no awnings at the center. Mr. Ken Lindner of Blockbuster Video said the lit awning is a proven method of attracting .business to the shopping plaza. Motion Mr. Domenick Lioce made a motion for approval of this petition with no conditions. Mr. Carl Sabatello seconded the motion. The petition was approved by a 4 -1, with Chairman Jeffrey Ornstein dissenting. WORKSHOP: SP -91 -02 - Recommendation to City Council re: site plan approval to construct an unmanned substation for the transmission, regulation and distribution of electricity. Located south of Donald Ross Road and west of Central Boulevard. (25- 41S-42E) (In conjunction with Petition Z- 91 -01) PREAPPLICATION REVIEW: Z -91 -01 - Recommendation to City Council re: (FPL Ross Substation) Rezoning a 4.1 -acre site from Palm Beach County's zoning designation of AR (Agriculture Residential) to the City's zoning designation of GU (Governmental Use) located on the south side of Donald Ross Road, west of Central Boulevard. (25-41S- 2 • 42E) (In conjunction with Petition SP- 91 -02) Mr. Ellington reviewed the staff report, dated February 7, 1991, stating that per City Forester Mark Hendrickson's recommendation, the City is recommending that the petitioner landscape the median strip on Donald Ross Road in front of the subject site. Mr. David Flinchum of Stanley Consultants, agent for the petitioner, stated that City Engineer David Getz was recently presented with drainage calculations for the site. Mr. Flinchum also distributed photographs of the site and the proposed temporary facilities. Chairman Ornstein asked if FPL could provide something other than a chain -link fence. Mr. Flinchum said the petitioner could not. Mr. Sabatello said he was concerned that the landscaping will not be at full growth until 15 years later. He added that he would not like this substation to resemble the FPL Monet substation. Mr. Flinchum "responded by explaining the landscaping plan for the • site. Responding to a questions from Chairman Ornstein, Mr. Flinchum said there will be lighting by the door of the relay vault and emergency lighting around the site. Mr. Lioce asked why FPL could not use something other than a chain link fence to surround the site. Mr. Flinchum responded that the chain link fence is used for security and cost considerations. Mr. Flinchum added that FPL does provide a wall when the substation is placed in a residential area. Mr. Lioce said that this substation will eventually be surrounded by residential uses. Mr. Lioce questioned the adequacy of the landscaping for the substation. He added that he would like `to see landscaping around the entire site or the installation of a wall. Mr. Strassler asked whether there will be a grade change on the site. He said he was 3 • afraid that the slash pines would die. Mr. Flinchum added that there will be barricades to preserve the pines. Mr. Strassler recommended that the petitioner place trees at the entrance to make the entrance road more attractive. Mr. Flinchum questioned why FPL was being asked to screen for speculative land uses. Mr. Lioce and Chairman Ornstein both stated that the area is in a residential district and all petitioners are now being asked to screen their projects. Mr. Flinchum explained the three - tiered landscaping approach FPL was using for the site. Mr. Flinchum said FPL has resisted using irrigation at substation sites because of vandalism and maintenance. He said the petitioner are using landscaping materials which do not waste water. Chairman Ornstein asked if the petitioner would post a landscaping bond. Mr. Flinchum • said he would check on that. Mr. Ellington stated that Mr. Hendrickson is recommending that an irrigation be placed on site. Concerning the above - mentioned median plantings, Mr. Flinchum stated that FPL is investigating the matter as the utility is restricted by the Public Service Commission on what it can spend on substations. Mr. Walton stated that the 55 -foot greenbelt program, which the City has adopted, requires that the median strip be landscaped. He added that he will provide Mr. Flinchum with documentation on the greenbelt. The Commission decided that this petition will be scheduled for a Public Hearing on February 26, 1991. • 4 • PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING: PUD -90 -23 - Recommendation to City Council re: (Gardens Hunt Club) Amending the Planned Unit Development (PUD) to request a two -year extension of time (to December 3, 1992) for the completion of construction of the Gardens Hunt Club (a /k /a Northridge) PUD, created by Ordinance 18, 1987. This property is located one quarter (1/4) mile north of Lake Park West Road (a /k /a Northlake Boulevard) and immediately east of Gibson Road. (14- 42S -42E) (Adv. 12- 24 -90) (Recessed from 1 -8- 91 and 1 -22 -91 meetings) Mr. Ellington reviewed the staff report stating that the petitioner has requested a postponement. Chairman Ornstein, with the Commission's agreement, directed staff to write the petitioner a letter informing him that all of the following needs to be submitted to staff before 4:30 P.M., February 19, 1991: 1. Submit a composite project site plan including all buffers, landscaping and irrigation. • 2. Provide a narrative summarizing all changes since the originally approved site plan as referenced in Ordinance 18, 1987. 3. Evidence of notification of the Public Hearing scheduled for February 26, 1991 to the Hunt Club property owners and neighboring property owners within 300' of the subject property. 4. Evidence to support the claim that only the infrastructure was required to be completed within the three (3) year time limit as specified in Ordinance 18, 1987. If the information is not submitted before the deadline, the Commission will strongly recommend denial of this petition, Chairman Ornstein said. - He told Hunt Club residents attending the meeting that the February 26, 1991 meeting will be the last Planning and Zoning Commission meeting this petition will be heard. The Commission directed staff • to FAX the above - referenced letter to the petitioner on February 13, 1991. 5 Recommendation to City Council re: PUD -90 -24 - (PGA Devonshire PUD) Amendment • to Devonshire PUD, a 337 -unit life care facility, to modify the site plan and add a fourth story on six of the buildings. Located within PGA National, a Development of Regional Impact, generally south of PGA Boulevard, west of Florida's Turnpike and north of' Northlake Boulevard. (16- 42S -42E) Ms. Kimberly K. Glas, City Planner, reviewed that staff report dated February 5, 1991. She provided the Commission with additional information that the height difference between the proposed three and four -story buildings is about 10 feet. Ms. Glas added that the entrance roadway on the northern property line can be combined with the adjacent Northern Palm Beach County Water Control District access road. Responding to a question from Chairman Ornstein, Mr. Hank Skokowski, agent for the petitioner, said the roadway will be on the petitioner's land. Mr. Skokowski said the petitioner sent notices to surrounding property owners about this meeting. The petitioner also held an information meeting on the site, which was • attended by one person. He read a letter into the record from O'Neil Bardin of the Northern Palm Beach County Water Control District, which confirmed the proposed joint use of the project entranceway. Mr. Skokowski reviewed the project and proposed that the landscaping along the new entrance road "mirror" the landscaping along the entrance road to The Island PUD. He added that the petitioner agreed with all staff conditions except for Condition # 4, which reads, "Prior to issuance of the first permit, the landscaping and buffer treatments on the northern, southern and eastern perimeters of the project shall be in place." He said he would like the time frame for the condition to be within 30 days after the issuance of the first permit for a building. • Chairman Ornstein suggested that the condition wording be allowed to remain as it is. 6 • Mr. Walton said that staff would not be able to enforce the condition after a building permit is issued. Mr. Strassler expressed his concern about the view of the "wall of buildings" from Ryder Cup Boulevard. Mr. Sabatello said the project was an improvement and he questioned whether the project's water features will stay. Mr. Skokowski said the features would stay. Motion Mr. Lioce made a motion for the approval of this petition with the following conditions: 1. The support services within the central facility be available for use only to residents of the life care facility. 2. No external signage regarding the support services as referenced in the first condition shall be allowed for the uses within the central facility. • 3. Barriers shall be placed around the vegetation to be preserved (prior to and during the construction phases) for protection. 4. Within 30 days after the issuance of the first permit for any building, the landscaping and buffer treatments on the northern, southern and eastern perimeters of the project shall be in place. 5. Twenty -five (25) sabal palms shall be preserved through relocation on site. These palms shall be tagged and protected prior to and during construction. The relocation site for these palms will be coordinated with the City Forester prior to issuance of any construction permit. 6. The removal of all exotics (malaleuca, brazilian pepper and australian pine) from the site and assurance of their elimination in perpetuity through the project's • landscape maintenance program. 7 • 7. To the extent that the density of the buffer area is diminished when the exotics are removed, the developer will replace same with additional foliage of some type to the satisfaction of the City Forester so as to maintain the buffer area. _ 8. The site plan for this petition shall be modified to depict the new entrance road being shared with the Northern Palm Beach County Water Control District. The landscaping plan shall be modified to depict the landscaping along the new entrance. Mr. Sabatello seconded the motion, adding to Condition # 8 to indicate that the landscaping and trees along the north side of the new entrance road shall mirror the landscaping along the entrance road to The Island PUD development. The motion was approved by a vote of 4 -1, with Mr. Strassler dissenting. Recommendation to City Council re: PUD -90 -26 - (PGA Commerce Park Nursing Home) c • Amendment to the PGA Commerce Park Lot 1 PUD to approve a five -year time extension for the completion of the PUD, a 77 -bed community or sheltered bed nursing home and a 56 -bed adult congregate living facility (ACLF). Located within PGA National, a Development of Regional Impact, generally south of PGA Boulevard, west of Florida's Turnpike and north of Northlake Boulevard. (15- 42S -42E) is Ms. Glas reviewed the staff report for the above - mentioned petition. Mr. Skokowski, agent for the petitioner, presented the wording for a condition for the time extension. The proposed wording states, "The owner /developer shall be issued a building permit within four years of the effective date hereof and the owner /developer shall be issued a C.O. within one year of the issuance of the building permit." Chairman Ornstein said he believed that four years was too much. He said that this project should be completed in three years. If not, then the petitioner can come back to the City for another time extension, Chairman Ornstein said. Mr. Charles Trammell, who represents the nursing home, said that time frame is not realistic. He proposed that the petitioner be allowed to pull a building permit within three years and receive a Certificate of Occupancy with 15 or 18 months. Mr. Lioce said that would allow the project five additional years which is too long. Chairman Ornstein said Mr. Skokowski could make his argument to City Council. Motion Mr. Lioce made a motion to approve the above - referenced petition with the following condition: 1. The above - referenced PUD agreement will be extended by three years from the time of City Council approval. During the three year time extension, the development shall be completed. Mr. Strassler seconded the motion. Mr. Trammell stated that they will have to receive a Certificate of Need. Mr. Lioce said • they were told earlier that there will not be a Certificate of Need required. Mr. • Trammell said the Certificate of Need is automatic because it is tied into the adult life care facility. The motion was adopted be a 4 -1 vote, with Mr. Sabatello dissenting. PREAPPLICATION REVIEW: PUD -91 -01 - Recommendation to City Council re: (The Oaks Guardhouses) Amendment to The Oaks Planned Unit Development, adopted by Ordinance 31, 1989, for the construction of guardhouses at the project drive -ways to the single - family and multi - family developments.,. Located east and west of Gardens East Drive, north of Burns Road. (7- 42S -43E) Mr. Ellington reviewed the staff report for the above - referenced petition, stating that no guard gate is proposed at this time. He added that staff recommends that the gate, if proposed, come back to the City for review. Mr. Sabatello asked if the gatehouse would restrict traffic to the proposed City park. 0 Mr. Ellington stated that it would not. Mr. Charles Hathaway, vice president for the petitioner, DiVosta and Company, said the roadways into the residential communities have been designed to accommodate a guardhouse. He added that he would like to delay the decision for the gate system until the homeowner's association is formed. Mr. Hathaway said he does not prefer to come back to the City for approval of the gate system once the decision to build it has been made. The approval for the optional gate system should be tied with the approval for the guardhouse. Chairman Ornstein stated that the City Council usually does not like for the Commission to allow options for development. He added that the petitioner can always come back to the Commission for approval of the gate system at a later time. Mr. Hathaway said he does not want to waste time coming back to the Commission, • when the issue could be decided now. Mr. Lioce said the optional gate system was a minor issue. He asked the petitioner to return to the Commission with plans of the optional gate system. The Commission directed staff to advertise this petition for the March 12, 1991 meeting. WORKSHOP: AX -91 -01 - Recommendation to City Council re: (DiVosta Annexation) Annexation of a 1.826 -acre site located west of U.S. Highway One and 700' south of PGA Boulevard. (4- 42S -43E) WORKSHOP: LU -91 -01 - Recommendation to City Council re: (DiVosta Land Use Change) Amendment to the City of Palm Beach Gardens' Comprehensive Land Use Map and Plan to Commercial from Palm Beach County Land Use designation of CL /5 - Commercial (Low Intensity), in part, and Residential 8, in part, of a 1.826 -acre site located west of U.S. Highway One, 700' south of PGA Boulevard. (4- 42S -43E) WORKSHOP: Z -90 -02 - Recommendation to City Council re: (DiVosta Rezoning) Rezoning a 1.826 -acre site from Palm Beach County's zoning designation of CG /RH (General Commercial and Residential High) to City of Palm Beach Gardens' zoning designation of CG -1 (General Commercial). Located west of U.S. Highway One, 700' • south of PGA Boulevard. (4- 42S -43E) 10 . Mr. Ellington reviewed the staff report for these petitions, stating that the subject property would add to the City's Coastal area. Mr. William E. Shannon, agent for the petitioner, said that the subject property would square off the municipal border of the City as it is a pocket of land surrounded by City land. Mr. Shannon added that the petitioners currently do not have a plan for the site. Chairman Ornstein said that Council has established a policy to not approve any rezonings until a site plan is submitted. He asked Mr. Shannon why couldn't the property be annexed and then rezoned later when a site plan was ready. Mr. Shannon said the land use plan should be changed because the County has a split land use designation on the small property. He added that if the land use is changed, then the zoning would need to be changed. • Mr. Lioce said he would not have any trouble with changing the land use if the Commission knew what was the best use for the site. However, the Commission does not currently know what that use will be, he added. Mr. Shannon said he would like for the land use to be change concurrently with the annexation, since land -use changes are only heard twice a year. The Commission directed staff to advertise all three petitions for Public Hearings on March 12, 1991. NEW BUSINESS Mr. Sabatello expressed his concern about the lack of landscaped median strips in the City. Mr. Lioce said some communities put up the money for the median landscaping and then make the developer contribute to the landscaping fund. 11 ' 1 LI Mr. Walton stated that the City has a Roadway Beautification Plan, which was never adopted because no funding source was ever identified for it and liability questions. There being no further business to discuss, the meeting was adjourned at 9:45 P.M. 12 James Leatherman Marty R.-A.- Minor, Secretary C • 13 / l- Carl Sabatello