HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes P&Z 081490•
•
•
CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
AUGUST 14, 1990
REGULAR MEETING
The Regular Meeting 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, FL and opened with the Pledge of
Allegiance to the Flag.
The roll was called by the secretary, and present were: Jeffrey
Ornstein, Chairman; Mike Rosen, Vice Chairman; Alan Strassler,
Joseph Hamzy, Domenick Lioce, Jack White, Members; Carl
Sabatello, Alternate Member. Rebecca Serra and James Leatherman
were not in attendance.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF JULY 24. 1990
The minutes of the meeting of July 24, 1990 were unanimously
approved.
SP -90 -10 - (Steeplechase Guardhouse) Site Plan review for con-
struction of a gatehouse at the Lake Park West Road and Haverhill
Road entrance of the Steeplechase PUD and the card gate entrance
at the Beeline Highway entrance. (23 & 26- 428 -42E)
Mr. Alan Strassler stated he has a conflict with this petition
and will not participate in the discu's4'1 ?o' ''br vote �z
Mr. Bristol Ellington, City PlarinF r, gave'a presentation of the
staff report, including eight condi %ior cf approval, dated
August 9, 1990. Mr. Ellington stated staff recommends approval
of the petition with seven of the eight conditions; condition
number 2 being stricken from the motion. In addition, condition
number 1 is reworded to read: "The homeowner's association shall
be responsible for adhering to Section 153.24 of the City's
Landscape Code, 'Vehicular Accessways through Perimeter Land-
scaped Strips', for a standard maintenance condition."
Mr. Jeffrey Ornstein asked how a car would turn around at the
Beeline Highway gate if there will be a sign there directing
• visitors without a card to the Northlake Blvd. gate. Mr. Steve
Mathison, agent for the petitioner, stated the turnaround is on
the inside of the gate because that is all they have control
over. Mr. Mathison stated the petitioner agrees with the condi-
tions of approval with some changes. Mr. Mathison suggested
instead of homeowner's association in condition 1, the Safe
Neighborhood District should be responsible for the maintenance.
Mr. Rich Walton, Planning and Zoning Director, stated he would
like to talk to the city attorney on the wording of this
condition.
Mr. Joseph Hamzy questioned the potential slowing of traffic on
Northlake Blvd. because there is no turn lane into the project.
• Mr. Mathison stated the traffic analysis showed that link was not
absolutely necessary.
Mr. Carl Sabatello suggested there be a structural post or column
between the curb and the guardhouse for protection.
Mr. Mike Rosen made a motion to recommend approval to the City
Council for the above - referenced petition with the following
conditions:
1. The Property Owner's Association will be responsible for
maintenance per Section 153.24 of the City's Landscape
Code, "Vehicular Accessways Through Perimeter Landscaped
Strips ", for a standard maintenance condition.
2. A signage plan using DOT specifications advising of a main
gate on Northlake Blvd. for visitors or deliveries shall be
erected at the Beeline Highway entrance.
3. High pressure sodium lighting shall be used for good
visibility.
• 4. A device such as a caution sign shall be used to keep
traffic slow upon entering from Northlake Blvd.
5. Prior to the issuance of the building permit, the petitioner
shall receive approval from the Police Department for the
security system proposed for the pedestrian access gate.
0
C
•
This access gate shall be installed in conjunction with the
electronic card gate system proposed at the Beeline Highway
entrance.
6. The concrete header curb at the turnouts off Northlake
Blvd. shall be increased to 35' radius.
7. The "concrete Curb" detail shall show a continuous No. 4
rebar.
Mr. Joseph Hamzy proposed an amendment to the motion which states
that a turnaround be provided at.the Beeline entrance to the
project recognizing that it can occur adjacent the commercial
area but that it could occur by moving the gate further into the
development and that a turnaround outside the gatehouse or a
right turn lane offering protection for someone trying to get out
of the project at Northlake Blvd.
Mr. Rosen seconded the amendment to the motion.
Mr. Sabatello asked if the guardhouse on Beeline Highway is
pushed to the north, what would happen to lot 1. Mr. Mathison
stated this would have to be examined.
The amendment to the motion was defeated 3 to 3. Mr. Sabatello,
Mr. Nick Lioce and Mr. Jeff Ornstein voting against and Mr. Alan
Strassler abstaining.
Mr. Hamzy made another an amendment to the motion which states
the Beeline Highway entrance gate be moved to the north suffi-
ciently so that a turnaround can be constructed south of the
gate.
Mr. Lioce seconded the amendment to the motion.
This amendment passed with a 5 to 1 vote. Mr. Sabatello voted
against and Mr. Strassler abstained.
The amended motion passed unanimously with a vote of 6 to 0. Mr.
Strassler abstained from voting.
PUBLIC HEARING: AS -90 -03 - Recommendation to City Council re:
(MacArthur Foundation Properties Annexation) Annexation, under
Palm Beach County Development Regulations, of 10,217± acres,
located, in general, north of PGA Blvd., northeast of Beeline
Hwy., south of the proposed Donald Ross Rd. extension, west of
the Florida Turnpike and east of "Caloosa" Subdivision (Area 1);
of 1,653± acres, located, in general, southwest of Beeline Hwy.,
• north of Lake Park West Road (a /k /a Northlake Blvd.), south of
the proposed North County General Aviation Facility (Area 2);
1.01± acres, located, in general, on the east side of Alternate
A -1 -A, between PGA Blvd. and Burns Rd. (Area 3); 6.62± acres,
located, in general, north of Lake Park West Rd. (a /k /a/ North -
lake Blvd.), south of the Earman River, between the C -17 Canal
and Alternate A -1 -A (Area 4); 28.31± acres, located, in general,
1,000 feet south of Lark Park West Rd. (a /k /a Northlake Blvd.),
east of the Interstate 95, immediately west of the C -17 Canal.
(The request includes the following sections in Township 41 South
and Range 41 East: 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 35 and 36. Sections in
Township 41 South, Range 42 East: 19, 20, 21, 28, 29, 30, 31 and
32. Sections in Township 42 South, Range 42 East: 5 and 6.
Sections in Township 42 South, Range 41 East: 1, 2, 11, 12 and
13. Sections in Township 42 South, Range 43 East: 7, 18 and
19.)(Adv. 7/30/90)(To be recessed)
Mr. Ellington stated due to an error in the July 30, 1990 news-
paper advertisement for this Public Hearing, the petitioner has
requested that the Public Hearing be postponed until August 28,
1990. The petitioner has submitted additional information for
• the readvertising of the Public Hearing. Chairman Ornstein
opened the Public Hearing and recessed it to the Planning and
zoning Commission meeting on August 28, 1990.
PUBLIC HEARING: AS -90 -02 - Recommendation to City Council re:
(Starwood Annexation) Annexation of a 81.9± acre site located
approximately 1,300 feet west of Prosperity Farms Road, immedi-
ately north of Frenchman's Landing and west of Crystal Pointe
residential subdivisions. (Adv. 7/30/90) (29- 42S -43E)
Mr. Ellington reviewed the staff report dated August 9, 1990.
Chairman Ornstein opened the Public Hearing. There being no
comments from the public, Chairman Ornstein closed the Public
Hearing. Mr. Lioce made a motion to recommend approval to the
City Council of the above - referenced petition subject to the
County zoning.
Mr.
Hamzy
seconded
the motion.
The
motion
carried
unanimously.
Continuation of 7124190 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting =
Recommendation to City Council re: Z -89 -09 (Wynfield PCD, F.R.A.
Millpond) Rezoning from Palm Beach County designation AR, Agri-
cultural Residential District, and RS, Single - Family Residential
District, to Planned Community District (PCD) for a 1,700 -unit
residential community and a 19 -acre village center on 595.26±
acres, located on the east side of Alternate A -1 -A, west of
Prosperity Farms Road, approximately one mile north of PGA Boule-
vard, and south of Frenchman's Creek and Frenchman's Landing.
(Recessed from 12/12/89, 1/23/90, 2/27/90, 3/27/90, 5/22/90
meetings and continued from 7/24/90 meeting.)(31 &32- 41S -43E)
Chairman Ornstein stated at the last meeting, the Commission held
a Public Hearing and closed the Public Hearing. This meeting is
an extension of the discussion within the Commission. Therefore,
there will be no public input.
Mr. Ellington reviewed the August 9, 1990 staff report. Mr.
Ellington stated staff is recommending denial of this petition
based on insufficient information submitted for the comparison of
the site plan to the City's Environmentally Significant Lands
• Ordinance. Additionally, staff questions the feasibility of
1,700 dwelling units assuming the cost of traffic improvements
required by the County's Traffic Ordinance. Granting approval of
this petition allows the project to move forward to a point where
road improvements prohibits further construction, leaving a
partially constructed development.
A discussion ensued regarding a school on the site, traffic and
environmental issues.
The Commission asked how this project compares to the new Palm
Beach Gardens' environmental ordinance even though the petition
is vested.
Ms. Sara Lockhart, from Urban Design Studio, agent for the Peti-
tioner, addressed the Commission and discussed environmental
issues.
Mr. Skokowski stated the petitioner is not sure how this project
compares with the new environmental ordinance because it depends
on how this ordinance is going to be interpreted and how it is
going to be applied.
• A discussion ensued regarding environmental issues.
Chairman Ornstein asked the petitioner if the 14.5 acre park site
was considered for a school site.
Mr. Skokowski stated that was not an option because of the size
of the parcel and limitations in terms of wanting to combine two
schools or expand the existing school.
Mr. Lioce asked the petitioner if they would be willing to give
the 14.5 acre park to the school board instead of donating it to
the City.
The petitioner replied they would not be opposed to the school
board getting the 14.5 acre park.
Mr. Skokowski stated Condition #10 on Ken Roger's list of traffic
• conditions is essentially the same as Condition #16 on staff's
list of conditions.
Mr. Skokowski stated he would like to delete Condition #33 of
staff's list of conditions.
The Commission agreed to delete Condition #10 on Ken Roger's list
of traffic conditions and Condition #33 of staff's list of condi-
tions.
Mr. Skokowski stated he would like to delete "perimeter buffers"
in Condition #21 of staff's list of conditions, or change it to
read "perimeter buffers A, B and D ".
The Commission agreed to the changed wording.
Mr. Skokowski stated he would like Condition #27 of staff's list
of conditions to be deleted.
Staff stated the condition would be changed to read: "If for any
reason the PCD concept plan is changed by any outside agencies as
determined by the City Administration, the proposed change(s)
•
•
must be reviewed by the City Council or their designee."
Mr. Rosen made a motion to recommend approval of the above- refer-
enced petition to the City Council with the 12 conditions from
Ken Roger's letter of August 9, 1990, 1 condition from David
Getz's letter of August 9, 1990 and Staff's list of 38 condi-
tions. In addition,, the Commission directed that the petition
will return to the Planning and Zoning Commission for full site
plan and zoning review if the site plan is revised in any way at
the City Council level. The combined list of conditions is as
follows:
MASTER PLAN CONTROL
Section 1. Maintain the following defined density designa-
tion:
LOW 0 - 4 du's /acre
MEDIUM 4 - 8 du's /acre
HIGH 8 - 12 du's /acre
The average of all high density PUD's shall not exceed 10
du's /acre.
Section 2. Parcels B, C, H, I, J, K, and N designated as
low density, as indicated on the Master Plan dated 1 -3 -90
shall be maintained as single - family detached housing.
Section 3. Individual parcel development setbacks shall be
established at the time of PUD approval of each development
parcel. However, no PUD shall be located within the perime-
ter buffer.
TRANSPORTATION
Section 4. The Applicant shall maintain minimum City of
Palm Beach Gardens Road Standards on all interior right -of-
way, as defined. As a minimum, the development shall comply
with City Subdivision and Zoning Codes as to required right -
of -way and construction standards for on -site road and
drainage improvements.
Section 5. The Hood Road Extension from Alternate A -1 -A to
Prosperity Farms Road shall follow the existing east /west
• utility easement, as indicated on the Master Plan dated 1 -3-
90. If another alignment is required, the petitioner shall
amend the Master Plan by subsequent resolution.
Section 6. Prior to the issuance of certificates of occu-
pancy for any land uses other than model homes /sales center,
is
•
the applicant
Alternate AlA
construction
improvements:
shall construct two lanes
east to the project's main
shall include the following
of Hood Road from
entrance. This
intersectional
a. At the intersection of Hood Road and the project
entrance - Eastbound right turn lane.
b. At the intersection of Alternate AlA and Hood
Road:
1)
Westbound
left turn lane
2)
Westbound
through lane
3)
Westbound
right turn lane
4)
Northbound right turn lane
5)
Eastbound
through lane
6)
Southbound left turn lane
Prior to issuance of any certificates of occupancy for any
land uses other than model homes /sales center, the applicant
shall have constructed the above - listed improvements.
Section 7. The applicant shall conduct traffic signal
warrant study(s) to determine the need for signalization of
the Alternate AlA /Hood Road intersection. This study(s)
shall commence one year from the issuance of the first
certificate of occupancy for any land uses other than model
homes /sales center and shall continue for every year until
the signal is warranted and approved. This monitoring shall
be conducted yearly for a maximum of one year following the
issuance of the final certificate of occupancy or until such
time that the signal is installed.
Section 8. The applicant shall install a traffic signal at
the intersection of AlA and Hood Road when warranted and
approved by the appropriate governmental agency.
Section 9. Within six months of the platting of Parcel C2
or Parcel N, whichever is later, the applicant shall begin
construction of two lanes of Hood Road from the project
entrance eastward to Prosperity Farms Road. This construc-
tion shall include the following intersection improvements:
a. At the intersection of Hood Road and the project
entrance:
1) Westbound left turn lane
2) Northbound left turn lane
3) Northbound right turn lane
b. At the intersection of Hood Road and Prosperity
Farms Road:
1) Eastbound left turn lane
2) Eastbound right turn lane
3) Northbound left turn lane
These improvements shall be complete and open to the public
prior to the issuance of any certificates of occupancy for
more than 1,300 residential units.
Section 10. Following the completion of construction of
Hood Road from the project entrance to Prosperity Farms
Road, the applicant shall conduct traffic signal warrant
study(s) at the project entrance /Hood Road intersection to
determine when signal warrants are met. This monitoring
shall be conducted yearly for a maximum of one year follow-
ing the issuance of the final certificate of occupancy. If,
during this time frame, traffic volumes meet signal warrants
and a signal is approved, the applicant shall be responsible
for the installation of said signal.
If signal approval does not occur prior to the buildout of
the project, the applicant shall post a bond concurrent with
the approval of the last plat for construction of said
signal at the intersection of Hood Road and the project
entrance. This bond shall be in full effect for one year
following the issuance of the final certificate of occupancy
for any land uses within the project.
Section 11. Following the completion of construction of
Hood Road from the project entrance to Prosperity Farms
Road, the applicant shall conduct traffic signal warrant
study(s) at the Prosperity Farms Road /Hood Road intersection
to determine when signal warrants are met. This monitoring
shall be conducted yearly for a maximum of one year follow-
ing the issuance of the final certificate of occupancy. If,
during this time frame, traffic volumes meet signal warrants
and a signal is approved, the applicant shall be responsible
for the installation of said signal. If signal approval
does not occur prior to platting of the last development
parcel or prior to the buildout of the project, the appli-
cant shall post a bond concurrent with the approval of the
last plat for construction of said signal at the
intersection of Hood Road and Prosperity Farms Road. This
bond shall be in full effect for one year following the
issuance of the final certificate of occupancy for any land
uses within the project.
Section 12. In order to conform to the mandatory phasing
requirements of the Palm Beach County Traffic Performance
Standards Ordinance ( #87 -18), the applicant shall adhere to
the following phasing schedule:
MAXIMUM DU's PRIOR
TO COMMENCEMENT IMPROVEMENT
OF IMPROVEMENT REQUIRED ROADWAY LINK
195 DU's Add 2L (4LD) Prosperity Farms Road
Idlewild Ct. to PGA Blvd
305 DU's Add 2L (4LD) Military Trail
Indian Creek Pkwy to Hood Rd
• 380 DU's Add 2L (6LD) Alternate AlA
Gardens Blvd to PGA Blvd
MAXIMUM DU's PRIOR
TO COMMENCEMENT
IMPROVEMENT
OF IMPROVEMENT
REQUIRED
ROADWAY LINK
•
380
DU's
Add 2L
(4LD)
Donald Ross Road
Prosperity Farms Rd to US 1
(including Intracoastal
bridge)
390
DU's
Add 2L
(6LD)
Alternate AlA
Hood Road to Gardens Blvd.
880
DU's
Add 3L
(5L)
Prosperity Farms Road
Lone Pine Rd to Idlewild Ct
975
DU's
Add 2L
(6LD)
Alternate AlA
Donald Ross Rd to Hood Rd
1,010
DU's
Add 2L
(5L)
Prosperity Farms Road
Burns Rd to Northlake Blvd
1,025
DU's
Add 2L
(4LD)
Hood Road
Military Tr to Alternate AlA
1,060
DU's
Add 1L
(8LD)
PGA Blvd
I -95 to Alternate AIA
1,240
DU's
Add 2L
(6LD)
US 1
Marcinski Rd to Donald Ross
•
1,270
DU's
Add 2L
(6LD)
Alternate AIA
Fred Sm Rd to Donald Ross Rd
1,350
DU's
Add 3L
(5LD)
Prosperity Farms Road
Hood Road to Lone Pine Rd
1,375
DU's
Add 2L
(6LD)
Alternate AlA
Indiantown Rd to Fred Sm Rd
1,400
DU's
Add 2L
(6LD)
Donald Ross Rd
Alt AlA to Prosperity Farms
1,460
DU's
Add 2L
(4LD)
Prosperity Farms Road
Donald Ross Rd to Hood Rd
1,490
DU's
Add 2L
(4LD)
Hood Road
Alternate AlA to site
NOTE:
This plan
assumes that the Hood Road extension
from Alternate
AlA to Prosperity Farms Road is
built in
the initial phases of the development.
Section 13.
In order
to comply with the assured construc-
tion provision
of the
Palm
Beach County Traffic Performance
•
Standards Ordinance
(
#87 -18), the applicant shall provide
the
construction
plans,
provide suitable surety to guarantee
the
construction
of,
and construct the following roadway
sections:
IMPROVEMENT
ESTIMATED
REQUIRED
ROADWAY LINK
TOTAL COST
Add
2L
(4LD)
Prosperity Farms Road
$
267,000 **
Idlewild Ct to PGA Blvd
Add
2L
(4LD)
Military Trail
$
4,336,000
Indian Creek Pkwy to Hood Rd
Add
2L
(6LD)
Alternate AIA
$
1,535,000 **
Gardens Blvd to PGA Blvd
Add
2L
(4LD)
Donald Ross Road
$33,006,000
Prosperity Farms Rd to US 1
(including Intracoastal bridge)
Add
2L
(6LD)
Alternate AlA
$
2,700,000 **
Hood Road to Gardens Blvd
Add
3L
(5L)
Prosperity Farms Road
$
644,000
Lone Pine Rd to Idlewild Ct
Add
2L
(6LD)
Alternate AlA
$
1,149,000 **
Donald Ross Rd to Hood Rd
Add
2L
(5L)
Prosperity Farms Road
$
2,268,000
Burns Road to Northlake Blvd
Add
2L
(4LD)
Hood Road
$
667,000
Military Tr to Alternate AlA
Add
1L
(8LD)
PGA Blvd
$
445,000
I -95 to Alt AIA
Add
2L
(6LD)
US 1
$
895,000
Marcinski Rd to Donald Ross
Add
2L
(6LD)
Alternate AlA
$
814,000
Fred Sm Rd to Donald Ross Rd
Add
3L
(5LD)
Prosperity Farms Road
$
760,000
Hood Road to Lone Pine Rd
Add
2L
(6LD)
Alternate AlA
$
1,594,000
Indiantown Rd to Fred Sm Rd
Add
2L
(6LD)
Donald Ross Rd
$
1,007,000
Alt AlA to Prosperity Farms
Add
2L
(4LD)
Prosperity Farms Road
$
1,668,000
Donald Ross Rd to Hood Rd
Add
2L
(4LD)
Hood Road
$
858,000
Alternate AlA to site
•
* INCLUDED IN COUNTY FIVE YEAR ROAD PROGRAM
** PROPOSED BY THE REGIONAL CENTER
NOTE:
This plan assumes that the Hood Rd. extension
from Alt.
AlA to
Pros. Frms. Rd. is build in the initial
phases of
the development.
Section 1.
Alternate
• road, the
Alternate
a.
b.
C.
4. As part of the widening of Hood Road from
AlA to the project entrance to a four lane divided
applicant shall construct at the intersection of
AlA and Hood Road:
Westbound dual left turn lanes
Westbound two through lanes
Westbound right turn lane
Section 15. The project's entrance road shall be designed
to allow for northbound dual left turn lanes at the Hood
Road intersection and the guarded entrance shall have a
minimum of three (3) southbound approach lanes.
Section 16. The requirement for turn lanes on internal
roads shall be addressed at PUD approval.
Section 17. Prior to the issuance of building permits for
any uses other than model homes /sales center, the applicant
shall dedicate the required right -of -way for Alternate AIA,
Hood Road, Prosperity Farms Road and an expanded intersec-
tion at Hood Road and Alternate AlA.
Section 18. In the event that all PUD's in the Wynfield
development and one building permit in each are not approved
in eight (8) years from the date of the PCD approval, the
City may at its sole discretion review and /or modify these
conditions based on the current regulations in place at the
time including, but not limited to, transportation, drain-
age, water and public facilities. Existing PUD approvals
that have received building permits will be vested.
DRAINAGE
Section 19. The Applicant shall provide a salinity control
structure along the tidal canal at the south boundary line
of the Maheu Subdivision and that a Unit of Development be
created with the Northern Palm Beach County Water Control
District for the operation and maintenance of the drainage
system. Prior to the first Certificate of Occupancy for any
residential unit all criteria by law to assess, operate, and
maintain said unit, must be met.
Section 20. The drainage for Hood Road between Alternate A-
1-A and Prosperity Farms Road shall be accommodated in the
design of the project's drainage system.
Section 21. The applicant shall obtain the additional
right -of -way for Hood Road extension between Frenchman's
Creek and Frenchman's Landing.
COMMUNITY IMPACTS
• Section 22. The Applicant shall be subject to the Palm
Beach County Aggregate Impact Fee Ordinance and any Palm
Beach Gardens' ordinances in effect at the time of building
permit application.
LEGAL /PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Section 23. Development of the Planned Community District
• shall be as Planned Unit Developments under the procedures
and requirements of Palm Beach Gardens Code of Ordinances.
Section 24. During the construction of this project, the
Applicant shall, annually from the date of this Order, pro-
vide the City of Palm Beach Gardens and the County of Palm
Beach a written summary of completed construction to the
project to date, anticipated amendments, and a schedule of
proposed construction through the remaining years of con-
struction.
Section 25. The Applicant shall, annually from the date of
this Order, meet with the City Manager and any other govern-
mental agency so designated by the City Council, for the
purpose of informing the City of the present status and
updated growth projections of the development. The City
Manager may, from time to time, require such other project
information that may be necessary to conduct the administra-
tive fiscal affairs of the City.
Section 26. A Property Owner's Association shall be estab-
lished prior to construction permit of any dwelling units in
the project. This document(s) must include the legal frame-
work as well as the design guidelines (i.e., landscaping,
etc.) Said document must be approved by the City Attorney.
• Section 27. In the event that the construction of any im-
provements which are specified in the conditions herein are
not undertaken by any other entity, the Applicant may, at
its sole option, undertake to construct any or all said
improvements in accordance with the terms and conditions of
an agreement to be entered into by and between the Applicant
and applicable governmental bodies or agencies. In the
event the Applicant undertakes to construct said improve-
ments, the City may, to the extent legally possible, use its
powers of eminent domain to assist in acquiring all neces-
sary rights -of -way for the construction thereof at the sole
expense of the applicant.
Section 28. The term "Applicant" shall include Wynfield, the
developer and /or successors and assigns, in whole or in
part.
SITE PLAN REVIEW /PUD
Section 29. No land clearing or tree removal will be allowed
without written approval of the City or Urban Forester. No
excavation will be allowed without written approval of the
City Engineer.
In addition, pursuant to the submitted Master Plan, the
applicant may remove existing trees in common areas not
subject to PUD review and approval, only upon field inspec-
tion and approval of the Urban Forester.
Section 30. As a part of the application for each PUD ap-
proval, the following shall be submitted:
• a. Horizontally controlled aerial.
b. Tree inventory and tree analysis prepared by a
registered landscape architect or similarly quali-
fied professional, which for trees with a caliper
of 3 inches or more describes type of trees,
location and caliper.
C. A perimeter buffer design in accordance with
buffer Exhibits
d. An inventory of endangered, threatened, and rare
species and species of special concern both plant
and animal.
e. All jurisdictional boundaries of all agencies with
jurisdiction over the project site (i.e.
S.F.W.M.D. and Army Corp of Engineers) shall be
defined.
Providing in any event that the petitioner, prior to filing
a PUD application, shall meet with the Planning and Zoning
Director or his designee to review the site and surrounding
areas pertaining to existing shrubbery and vegetation on
site.
• Section 31. If a multi - family project is developed in a PUD
parcel abutting a landscape buffer shown as an easement on
the concept plan, the landscape buffer shall be dedicated to
a homeowners' association for common ownership and mainte-
nance.
Section 32. For those PUD's submitted for site plan review
that abut an upland or wetland preservation /common area, the
site plan shall include the entire portion of the preserva-
tion area that abuts the PUD's boundary.
Section 33. The applicant shall provide a minimum setback
of 40 feet for ALL structures from all environmental juris-
dictional areas of the FDER, SFWMD and US ACOE. Further,
lot lines will not extend into environmentally designated
jurisdictional areas, perimeter buffers along public road-
ways, residential pathway parks or other preserve areas.
Section 34. The applicant shall submit to the City copies
of all permits applied for and subsequently approved by the
applicable environmental agencies.
Section 35. Prior to the issuance of the first building
permit for each PUD, the applicant shall selectively remove
the invasive tree species of Australian Pine, Brazilian
. Pepper and Malaleuca from within the PUD and abutting pres-
ervation areas and buffer areas unless these trees are prop-
erly managed to reduce their invasive character per the
advise and written approval of the City.
Section 36. Motorized boat access and use shall be prohib-
ited from all fresh water bodies.
• Section 37. With regard to wildlife species that are rare,
endangered or of special concern on the property, the appli-
cant shall prepare a management plan 150 days after the PCD
approval and shall receive approval from the Department of
Natural Resources (DNR) prior to any clearing, grading or
PUD submittal.
Section 38. With regard to preservation areas, lakes, wet
lands, pathways, and buffers, the applicant shall prepare a
management plan (i.e. tree protection, maintenance, etc.)
150 days after the PCD approval, acceptable to the City
administrative staff, that shall be a part of the homeowners
association documents.
Section 39. If for any reason the PCD concept plan is
changed by any outside agencies as determined by the City
Administration, the proposed change(s) must be reviewed by
the City Council or their designee.
Section 40. All protected trees, "preserves ", and buffers
shall be flagged and protective barriers erected prior to
construction of any infrastructure or building as the
project progresses from phase to phase or PUD to PUD.
Section 41. The 14.5 -acre Park shall be designated as a
parcel and subject to review by the City Council or donated
• or deeded to the School Board of Palm Beach County as a
school site at the City Council's determination. The de-
veloper shall be required to work with the School Board in
supplying any additional lands that would be needed to make
the school site viable and such actions would not change the
total number of units on the property.
Section 42. The Applicant shall maintain the 14.5 -acre
parcel in its present condition pending the annexation of
Cabana Colony into the City. In the event Cabana Colony is
annexed into the City within three (3) years, the applicant
shall dedicate the parcel, cleared, seeded and irrigated, to
the City for park purposes. In the event such annexation
does not take place within three (3) years, the Applicant
may make application for a residential PUD on such site and
utilize the property for
density. However, in no
units exceed 1700 units.
the applicant shall post
ation fees in accordance
Ordinance which shall be
described above after wh
recreation use.
development purposes at a medium
event shall the total number of
Within six months of PCD approval,
a bond for the total cost of recre-
with Palm Beach Gardens' Recreation
in force for the three (3) years as
ich time it shall be cashed for City
Section 43. Parcels F1, G, and L shall not have lot frontage
• on the main lake.
Section 44. Within the village center, no commercial devel-
opment shall be constructed until 170 units of residential
have been approved and 100 units of Certificate of Occupan-
cies have been issued.
MISCELLANEOUS
• Section 45. The Applicant shall promote the use of water
saving fixtures throughout the development, as this measure
could reduce potable water and waste -water loads generated
by the projects. As PUD plans are submitted, any revised
Palm Beach Gardens code relative to the above shall apply.
Section 46. In the event that an archaeological site or
sites are found, proper protection to the satisfaction of
the State of Florida Division of Archives, History and
Records management (Division of Archives), shall be provided
by the Applicant. In the event of discovery of archaeologi-
cal artifacts during project construction, the Applicant
shall stop construction in that area and notify the Division
of Archives. Proper protection to the satisfaction of the
Division of Archives shall be provided by the Applicant.
Section 47. The final approval of any on -site and /or off -
site plan for improvements shall require the applicant to
deposit with the City Manager a Performance Bond, or a
Letter of Credit, or an Escrow Deposit in a sum of money in
the amount prescribed by the City Engineer, in accordance
with industry standards for the purposes of assuring the
completion of all improvements. The required documentation
thereof shall be in requisite form and approved by the City
Manager in accordance with industry standards. The amount
• of the Performance Bond, Letter of Credit, or deposit shall
be in an amount to be determined by the City Engineer to be
sufficient to assure the completion of the required improve-
ments. From to time, as improvements are completed and
approved by the City of Palm Beach Gardens, the City Manager
may reduce the amount of the Performance Bond, Letter of
Credit, or deposit by a proportionate amount.
Section 48. The Developer is obligated to include or cause
to be included the Wynfield property ( "Property ") in any
unit of development, special district, community development
districts or local unit of special purpose government creat-
ed by a duly constituted governmental entity ( "Special
District ") for the purpose of planning, establishing, ac-
quiring, constructing, reconstructing, enlarging, extending,
equipping, operating or maintaining water management or
roads and associated facilities, benefiting the Property and
all or part of the City of Palm Beach Gardens, Florida;
provided, however, that all assessments for such facilities
shall be imposed on a uniform basis applied pro -rata to all
property benefited by the Special District (i.e., acre by
acre or residence by residence) and shall be determined in
accordance with the applicable laws, ordinances, rules and
regulations of the State of Florida, County of Palm Beach
and the City of Palm Beach Gardens. Provided further, that
upon creation of any Special District it must be demonstrat-
ed by the Special District that direct benefit is accrued to
the Property and any costs to the Property must be assessed
commensurate with the direct benefit to the Property as
determined by the Circuit Court of Palm Beach County, Flori-
da, and any costs incurred by the Property by reason of
other sections of this Ordinance that may be duplicated by
any Special District requirements shall be credited to the
property by such Special District. The owners of the
Property shall be given not less than 120 days prior written
• notice before formation of any Special District and shall be
entitled to participate in all proceedings relating to
Special District including the right to appeal any determi-
nation of benefit to the Property.
Section 49. Applicant will comply with all requirements of
the Roadway Beautification and Enhancement Plan once same is
established by the City of Palm Beach Gardens.
Section 50. The petitioner shall revise the phasing plan
attached as "Exhibit 1" to be consistent with the rest of
the project. Further, prior to any revisions made to the
phasing plan, the plan must be submitted to the City for
review and administrative approval.
Section 51. In lieu of paying Fire Impact Fees, the peti-
tioner shall pay to the City $150,000 payable in three
installments with the first within thirty (30) days after
the approval of the PCD, the second, six (6) months after
the approval, and the third, one (1) year after the approval
date.
Mr. Lioce seconded the motion.
The motion carried unanimously with a vote of 7 to 0.
• PREAPPLICATION REVIEW: PUD -90 -14 - Recommendation to City Coun-
cil re: (PGA National Spa Complex PUD) Amendment to the PGA
National Resort Core PUD, created by Resolution 49, 1980 and
amended by Resolution 32, 1989, to relocate the spa facility, to
increase the square footage, and to replace the restaurant with
an aerobic building. Located within the PGA National Planned
Community District. (10- 42S -42E)
Mr. Lioce stated he has a conflict with this petition and will
refrain from voting.
Ms. Kim Glas, City Planner, addressed the Commission and reviewed
the staff report.
Mr. Michael Swisher, agent for the petitioner, addressed the
Commission discussing the intent of the petition.
Chairman Ornstein asked if the petitioner was in agreement with
City Forester Mark Hendrickson's conditions.
Mr. Swisher stated they are in agreement with Condition #2.
is The Planning and Zoning Commission directed the petitioner to
return for a Recommendation to City Council on August 28, 1990.
•
•
•
PREAPPLICATION REVIEW: PIID -90 -15 - Recommendation to City Coun-
cil re: (PGA National M -30 PIID) Creation of a 152 zero lot line
unit (3.34 du /ac) residential Planned Unit Development on Parcel
M -30 within the PGA National Community. (15 &16- 42S -42E)
Chairman Ornstein stated Mr. Lioce has a conflict of interest
with this petition.
Mr. Ellington addressed the Commission with a presentation of the
staff report dated August 9, 1990. Mr. Ellington stated staff is
concerned with the setback for screened enclosures having zero
feet for non -zero and zero sides. Staff is concerned this may be
a continuous row of screened enclosures.
Mr. Skokowski, agent for the Petitioner, addressed the Commission
stating this petition for 152 zero lot line units is consistent
with what has been done in this area known as Eagleton Cove.
Chairman Ornstein asked how deep the lots are.
Mr. Skokowski stated the lots are 125 feet deep.
Mr. Hamzy stated he would like a condition of approval that the
side setbacks be no less than 10 feet and that no two -story
buildings occur adjacent to each other.
Mr. Strassler asked what the length of the dead end travel is on
the eastern portion of the property.
Mr. Skokowski replied it is approximately 1200 feet.
Mr. Strassler expressed concern with the screened enclosures,
stating theoretically, with the zero setback, the enclosures can
be abutted one to the other across the entire back of the proper-
ty.
Mr. Skokowski stated that was not the intention of the project.
Mr. Ornstein made a motion to postpone discussion of this peti-
tion to the next meeting and directed staff to prepare a list of
conditions.
Mr. Strassler seconded the motion.
The motion passed with a vote of 4 to 2. Mr. Sabatello and Mr.
White voted nay and Mr. Lioce abstained.
• It was the consensus of the Commission to direct the petitioner
to return for a Recommendation to City Council on August 28,
1990.
PREAPPLICATION REVIEW: PUD -90 -13 - Recommendation to City Coun-
cil re: (Oakbrook Corporate Center PUD) Amendment to the Oak-
brook Corporate Center PUD to consolidate the Financial Centre
PUD and the Flame PUD, to modify the approved site plan, to
redistribute the square footage of retail and office space and
add two bank teller drive- through lanes, and to incorporate
previous modifications to the approved site plan. (23 & 26-428 -
42E)
Mr. Ellington addressed the Commission with an overview of the
staff report dated August 9, 1990.
Mr. Rosen asked Mr. Ellington if the Planning & Zoning Department
signs off on a Certificate of Occupancy prior to it's issuance.
Mr. Walton stated the Building Department handles the issuance of
Certificates of Occupancy, however, if there are any concerns, he
• will call someone from the Planning and Zoning Department.
Mr. Larry Smith, agent for the petitioner, stated this petition
is submitted to construct phase three which includes developing
the concourse. No change is being proposed to the office tower
and the parking garage and the retail parking garage. The circu-
lar rotunda will remain the same also and the concourse plan has
been developed to reflect that. The only change to the square
footage is in the phase three curved building to eliminate 7,700
square feet of retail space and substitute the same amount of
space for a bank and in conjunction with that, ask for approval
to add two drive -in tellers.
Mr. Dave Bardt, civil engineer for the petitioner, explained the
• differences in parking and entrances to the project from the
originally approved site plan and what the petitioner is current-
ly proposing. A discussion ensued.
Mr. Jeff Blakley, landscape architect for the petitioner, ex-
plained what is proposed for the project instead of the original-
0 ly- proposed arched entryways.
Mr. Noe Guerra, architect for the petitioner, explained proposed
architectural differences between the originally approved site
plan and what is being proposed currently, and reasons why the
originally proposed arches at the entrances are not being pro-
posed now.
The Commission expressed concern over the significant changes to
the project from the approved plans and the fact that the peti-
tioner no longer plans to build the arches at the entrances.
The Commission reviewed with the petitioner the modifications
listed in the August 9, 1990 staff report.
The Commission reviewed with the petitioner the modifications
listed on the August 3, 1990 "List of Requested Changes for
Oakbrook Corporate Centre PUD" submitted from the petitioner.
The petitioner will return for a workshop on August 28, 1990 and
is scheduled for a Public Hearing on September 11, 1990.
There being no further business to discuss, the meeting was
adjourned at 11:55 P.M. The next Regular Meeting of the Planning
and Zoning Commiss -be held Tuesday, August 28, 1990.
Vi11 "�
I
ISM /L' N/
3w;E!'�'� W'
GISELE FPSTER, SECRETARY
•C
P .
JEFFREY A. ORNSTEIN, ARCHITECT
9799 DAISY AVENUE • PALM BEACH GARDENS, FL 33410 (407) 622 -7701
•
g 10
August 29, 1990 Y'- !j
City of
w Palm Beach Gardens
City Council All 2 q 1990
City of Palm Beach Gardens LO PLANNING
10500 North Military Trail ZONING ,L
Palm Beach Gardens, F1 33410 S
7 E�
Re: Wynfield PCD Z -89 -09
Planning and Zoning Commission Approval
Dear Members of the City Council:
At the August 14, 1990 meeting of the City of Palm Beach
Gardens Planning and Zoning Commission the Commission
• unanimously voted to recommend approval of the above
referenced project with fifty one (51) conditions.
Upon review of the minutes of the meeting the Commission was
concerned that our intent in three areas did not properly get
reflected in the motion and therefore need to be clarified
for your review. Our review process became a little confused
as we were trying to get the project before the Council to
review the major policy issues; which is contrary to the
normal deliberations of the Commission.
It is the desire of the Commission that if there are any
changes made in the master PCD plan for any reason, either
within the City of Palm Beach Gardens or from any outside
agency, then the petitioner would come back to the Planning
and Zoning Commission for review and approval.
The Commission understands that the project is vested in
consideration of the City's new environmental ordinance,
however it was the Commission's desire that since this was a
PCD the City had the right to request that a program of
environmental sensitivity be constructed to effect the
ordinance and have that review available to the City Council.
The final clarification concerns the 14.5 acre park. If the
• developer reaches an agreement with the School Board, and
turns over the park as their contribution to the School
Impact, it does not relieve the developer of their
8
August 29, 1990
City Council
Palm Beach Gardens
• Wynfield PCD
Page Two
responsibilty for the City's Recreational Impact. It will
just shift it to another area of the Site.
If you have any questions please contact me and I will try to
clarify the above.
.F1u11yFSubmitted,
Jeffre *4 Ornstein, Architect
Chairm Planning and Zoning Commission
JAO /d
Mr. John Orr, City Manager
Mr. William Brandt, City Attorney
Mr. Rich Walton, City Planner
Members of the Planning and Zoning Commission
U1
•
~- F. M 8B MEMORANDUM OF VOTING CONFLICT FOR
C6UNTY, MUNICIPALl AND OTHER LOCAL PUBLIC OFFICERS
LAST NAME —FIRST NAME— MIDDLE NAME
Strassler, Alan M.
I1,114C, AL)PRE55
8895 N. Military Tr., 201D
CITN COUNFN
Palm Beach Gardens, Palm Beach
iiAt E ON WHICH VOI L OC'CUItRk D
8/14/1990
NAME OF BOARD. COUNCIL. COMMISSION. AUTHORITY. OR COMMITTEE
THE BOARD COUNCIL, COMMI55I9N, AWH®RITY, 49 CQMMITTlik ON
WHICH I SkNYIJ IS A UNIT Of!
('I I V COUNTY (7rHER LOCAL AGENCY
NAML OI- POt ITIC'AL SUBDIVISION:
City of Palm Beach Gardens
MY POSITION IS:
ELECTIVE PPOINTIV
WHO MUST FILE. FORM aB
I his form is for use by any.Person serving at the county, city, or other local level of government on an appointed or elected board,
council, commission, authority, or committee. It applies equally to members of advisory and 'non-advisory bodies who are presented
with a voting conflict of interest under Section 112.3143, Florida Statutes. The requirements of this law are mandatory; although
the use of this particular form is not re luirt:d by iah', y06 arc encouraged : o use �t i,^ ak in, the disclosure required by hw.
Your responsibilities under the law when faced with a measure in which you have a conflict of interest will vary greatly depending
on whether you hold an elective or appointive position. For this reason, please pay close attention to the instructions on this form
before completing the reverse side and filing the form.
INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 112.3143, FLORIDA STATUTES
OELECTED OFFICERS:
A person holding elective county, municipal, or other local public office MUST ABSTAIN from voting on a measure which inures
to his special private gain. Each local ufficer also is prohibited from knowingly voting on a measure which inures to the special
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 on
which you are abstaining from voting; and
WITHIN 15 DAYS AFTER THE VOTE OCCURS by completing and filing this form with the person responsible for recording
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 which
inures to his special private gain. Each local officer also is prohibited from knowingly voting on a measure which inures to the
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 must
disclose the nature of the conflict before making any attempt to influence the decision by oral or written communication, whether
made by the officer or at his direction.
IF YOU INTEND TO MAKE ANY ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION PRIOR TO THE MEETING AT WHICH
THE VOTE WILL BE TAKEN:
•• You should complete and file this form (before making any attempt to influence the decision) with the person responsible for
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 interest.
ILK \I �B Itl•xh PAG
IF YOU MAKE NO ATTEMPT 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 15 days after the vote occurs with the person responsible for recording the minutes
of the meeting, who should incorporate the form in the minutes.
DISCLOSURE OF LOCAL OFFICER'S INTEREST
1 Alan M. Strassler hereby disclose that on 814 - -, 1920__:
(a) A measure came or will come before my agency which (check one)
inured to my special private gain: or
xx inured to the special gain of Steeplechase Property Owners'Assn. , by whom t am retained.
(b) The measure before my agency and the nature of my interest in the measure is as follows:
I am the Architect
in the discussion
presentation by a
for the Gatehouse
or vote. My office
staff member.
August 29, 1990 _
Date Filed
Improvements. I did not participate
was represented for the
Signature
NOTICE: UNDER PROVISIONS OF FLORIDA STATUTES §112.317 (1985), A FAILURE TO MAKE ANY REQUIRED
DISCLOSURE CONSTITUTES GROUNDS FOR AND MAY BE PUNISHED BY ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING:
IMPEACHMENT, REMOVAL OR SUSPENSION FROM OFFICE OR EMPLOYMENT. DEMOTION, REDUCTION IN
SALARY, REPRIMAND, OR A CIVIL PENALTY NOT TO EXCEED $5.000.
E FORM 88 - 10.86 PAC