Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes P&Z 032602• CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING March 26, 2002 MINUTES The Regular Meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Palm Beach Gardens, Florida, was called to order by Chair Dennis Solomon at 6:30 P.M. in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Complex, 10500 North Military Trail, Palm Beach Gardens, Florida, and opened with the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. REPORT BY GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIRECTOR Growth Management Director Charles Wu announced that since the last meeting, the City Council had approved the following projects: Laser & Surgery Center, Northcorp Lots 4 & 5 with driveway access changed because of conflicts, a 125' cell communication tower at Westwood Gardens with the stipulation to revisit the size of the flag 60 days after completion of the project, and the Alta Pines project with some minor site plan adjustments. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Meeting minutes of March 11, 2002: Mr. Kunkle made a motion to approve the minutes of the March 11, 2002 meeting as submitted. Mr. Ansay seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 6 -0 vote. Mr. Glidden abstained since he had not been present at that meeting. The City Attorney swore in all those who wished to speak on Petition VAR- 02 -02. The following exparte communications were reported: Mr. Tarr reported he had driven by the site (agenda item 1). Mr. Kunkle reported he had spoken to Mr. Harvey about Mirasol (agenda item 3) CITY COUNCIL LIAISON City Council Liaison Carl Sabatello commented that the staff's presentation of City Council actions was concise and to the point, and he was present only to answer any questions, which he planned to do once a month. Mr. Glidden reported the Design Review Committee was wrapping up their work and contemplating having the guidelines reviewed by planners. Mr. Sabatello was invited to attend the final meeting of the Committee. Mr. Tarr commented that at Mr. Sabatello's last visit he had been asked a question regarding density and had responded that he felt density should not be criteria for a waiver. Mr. Tarr explained that most waivers were for setbacks for single family homes, which he felt were requested because of density, and the Board was seeing a lot of 2 -story homes on small lots. Mr. Sabatello explained that the waivers must stand on their own merit and it was not correct to say all would be granted or denied, that several areas in the code were behind the curve and staff was working to make • Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes March 26, 2002 adjustments. Mr. Sabatello explained that if a person was asking for a front setback and was able to come up with a better interest or floor plan that was one thing but if just placing the largest box on the smallest lot, the answer was no. Mr. Sabatello advised that the Board had to be open minded and look at waiver requests on a case by case basis, and he could not and should not give a black and white answer how the Board should rule. Mr. Channing commented that lot coverage came up a lot, that in PUD's they might have a huge amount of space overall with low density but high lot coverage for individual lots, and some Boardmembers were concerned that the City was giving away something they should not give away. Mr. Channing stated if there was more open space in one area and less in another he thought it should be okay and the Board should get over that. Mr. Sabatello responded that staff had provided to the City Council a lot of information on the Evergrene project so that the Council was then comfortable after seeing the larger picture and not just a number for lot coverage, since the project had low density overall. Mr. Sabatello explained that the lot coverage percentage number was the worst case —the largest unit on the smallest lot and the Board should be considering an average lot size and an average of the homes to be built. Mr. Sabatello commented the number could be shocking, but if it was only a small percentage that was different, and the Board should not become locked on a number that did not mean much and would not allow planners and architects to be free and creative. This Board should understand the charts provided by staff which contain so much information and were very helpful. Mr. Sabatello suggested that the Board not lock to a number and ignore everything else because that would affect their decision. Mr. Glidden commented the Board had difficulty dealing with the number of • waivers requested because the City did not have codes for zero lot line homes. Mr. Sabatello advised that was one of the things staff was working towards, but the Council wanted the Board to be more involved in the review process to approve waivers for zero lot line projects, and recommended working on precedence of prior approvals. Mr. Channing commented that the City tried to write a code encouraging creative development yet the code would not allow it. Mr. Sabatello commented that the numbers should be considered as guidelines and the Board should look at the rest of the reason for the waiver request and be open minded. Mr. Ansay commented that initially the City Council did not approve several pods in Evergrene because of density and lot coverage, but approved it after staff provided more research. Mr. Ansay requested that in the future staff follow a format as to percentage of lot coverage so that the Board could further evaluate the amount of overall open space. Mr. Sabatello responded that he believed that was already taking place, and that now the Board could compare to prior approved pods. Mr. Ansay commented that it was good the City Council had eliminated the dead ends. ROLL CALL Betty Laur, Secretary for the meeting, called the roll for Board of Zoning Appeals, Planning and Zoning Commission, and Land Development Regulations Commission: Present Absent Dennis Solomon, Chairman Craig Kunkle, Jr., Vice Chairman • 2 • Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes March 26, 2002 Chairman Pro Tern Barry Present John Glidden Joel Channing Dick Ansay Steven Tarr Alternate Ernest Volonte Also present were Growth Management Director Charles Wu, Principal Planners Talal Benothman and Steve Cramer, Senior Planners Edward Tombari and John Lindgren, Planner Kara Irwin, City Attorney Len Rubin., and Code Enforcement Administrator Kelvin Wise. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Public Hearing and Consideration ofAnnroval Petition VAR -02 -02 - Variance for 10840 Magnolia Street, PGA Golf Club Estates Gary and Claudia Douglass, as the property owners, are requesting a variance from Sec. 78 -141, Table 10, of the City Code, which requires a 25 foot front setback for residential properties located within Residential Low (RL -2) zoning districts. The petitioners are seeking an 8.6 foot variance to allow for a 16.4 foot front setback at 10840 Magnolia Street within the PGA Golf Club Estates. Planner Kara Irwin presented the petition and explained that one person who was identified as Sally had called to state opposition, two callers requested information, and one neighbor came in and requested information and expressed his support. Mr. Douglass testified that in 1967 when he bought the house, one -car garages were the norm. Mr. Douglass indicated the next door house had a 25' setback and was close to their 10' side requirement. Mr. Channing suggested pushing the garage addition back and not making it so wide. Mr. Douglass explained that would shut off the bathroom window and ventilation. In response to a question from Mr. Tarr, Mr. Douglass explained he was planning to move the oak tree and would be glad to make that a condition, and that would necessitate removing the mango tree. Mr. Douglass reported he had had no negative responses from neighbors, and had only learned about the one negative response that day. Mr. Douglass submitted 20 signatures from neighbors who were not objecting, which he stated he had obtained that day after learning of the one negative response. The list of signatures has been attached to and made a part of these minutes. Chair Solomon declared the public hearing open. Lynn Huber, 4365 Hickory, commented she could not view this home from her property but was concerned that this could set precedent and reduce property values. Kenneth Eland commented he took exception to those comments since this would only increase the value of this house and the surrounding homes. Hearing no further comments from the public, Chair Solomon declared the public hearing closed. 3 Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes March 26, 2002 Mr. Glidden commented it was good there was support from neighbors; however, a 14' x 22' garage could be placed on the site, and he had difficulty with this request because Mr. Douglass could achieve a rectilinear garage design without a waiver. Mr. Glidden, Mr. Channing, and Mr. Douglass discussed alternative designs. Mr. Channing indicated he would be in favor of granting a variance for a design that was moved back if it still encroached. Mr. Douglass explained that his design duplicated the size of the existing garage, and he would be glad to look at an alternative design. Mr. Glidden noted that a 14' x 20' garage would work and would be a better architectural solution. Mr. Kunkle stated he had no problem with the application as submitted, and he was not sure how the encroachment was granted but it should be limited to the actual square footage that actually encroached so there was not a perpetual 8'6" encroachment variance with the property. Mr. Ansay asked if the neighbor to the right of Mr. Douglass who was most affected had signed the petition placed into the record by Mr. Douglass. Mr. Douglass explained he had not because they were out of town but he would be glad to obtain his signature and he knew they were in favor of the request. Mr. Tarr verified with staff that a normal 2 -car garage was 20' wide and this request was for a 16' addition to match the existing garage, which he commented was almost a 3 -car garage. Mr. Douglass explained there was a concrete column at 16' so the garage must be wider to accommodate that so that a car could clear it. Mr. Tarr commented he was okay with the variance request but if it could be less as a result of Mr. Glidden's and Mr. Chanriing's ideas, he thought that would be a good idea. Chair Solomon commented in order to grant a variance the • Board must follow strict criteria, and what had come up through discussion called into question item 5, minimum variance. Chair Solomon noted there was general agreement the addition could be made smaller and stepped back a little; therefore, it seemed to him that the application as presented would have to be denied, and asked if the applicant wanted the Board to vote tonight. Mr. Douglass requested postponement, but explained that there was existing structure going to the point of his request since there was a wall and gate, a hedge, and a chain link fence there. MOTION: Chair Solomon re- opened the public hearing. Mr. Glidden made a motion to continue the public hearing for Petition VAR -02 -02 to a date certain of April 23, 2002, requesting the applicant to re- study the minimum variance necessary and ways of achieving the addition without a variance request; and that the applicant bring something better for the Board to look at. Mr. Ansay seconded the motion, which carried by 6 -1 vote with Mr. Kunkle opposed. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Recommendation to City Council Petition MISC- 01 -22: Siknaze Prowam for Legacy Place Apartments A request by Henry Skokowski of Urban Design Studio, agent for The Beztak Land Company and • 4 Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes March 26, 2002 PGA Gateway Ltd., for approval of a signage program for Legacy Place Apartments at the northeast corner of RCA Boulevard and Alternate A-]-A. Principal Planner Steve Cramer presented the request. Marty Miner, Urban Design Studio, described the proposed monument signs that exceeded 10' height and indicated that it was more architecturally interesting by keeping the addition which exceeded the height requirement and that at this size the lettering and the water feature could both remain. Mr. Kunkle and Mr. Present supported staff's suggestion to scale down the overall sign size so that it would meet the height requirement. Mr. Glidden commented that the applicant could just build a plain rectangular 10' high sign, and he thought this design was superior, and that only part of the sign was above 10'. Mr. Channing commented he thought the sign could be scaled down. Chair Solomon asked if the taller sign would be a safety hazard in terms of vision, to which the response was that it was more aesthetics than a safety factor. Mr. Miner advised that at a scaled down version at 10' would not keep the same proportions. Chair Solomon commented that with this sign on a corner, no safety factor, and with the aesthetics, he deferred to the applicant and would be in favor of the request. Mr. Channing commented that the size of the lettering was not too large for a project sign. Mr. Tarr asked if the height was measured from the ground to the top or just from the bottom of the sign. Mr. Cramer explained that the measurement was from the average grade of the property and if dirt was built up a foot that would count for the height. Mr. Channing commented he would prefer to always go below standards instead of going over and would • like that as a principle. Mr. Cramer advised that the lettering on the sign was in compliance, and that only the height of the structure was too high. Mr. Kunkle agreed with scaling down the sign. MOTION: Mr. Kunkle made a motion to approve Petition MISC -01 -22 with staffs recommendations: Conditions: 1. The three proposed ground signs shall be reduced from 11.25 feet and 11.75 feet in height to a maximum height of 10 feet. 2. A root barrier shall in installed for the southernmost Royal Palm tree located next to southwest ground sign because it does not meet the standard separation requirements from a proposed water main. The landscape architect of records shall provide a written certification of compliance with this condition prior to the final landscape inspection for this proposed ground sign. Waivers: 1. A waiver from Section 78 -285, which requires a minimum setback of 15 feet for ground signs next to a public right -of -way, in order to allow the north entry sign to have a setback of approximately ten feet. 2. A waiver from Section 78 -285, which limits the width of ground signs to 15 feet, in order to allow the east entry ground sign to have a width of 23.08 feet. 3. A waiver from Section 78- 186(b)(8)a, which limits the height of walls in residential areas to six feet, in order to allow two eight- foot -high wall sections at the southeast corner of the site • M Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes March 26, 2002 and at the southeast corner of the intersection of the project's north entrance to shield dumpster enclosures. 4. A waiver from Section 78- 563(e), which prohibits improvements within lake maintenance easements, in order to allow a building directional sign of approximately 7.25 square feet within the lake maintenance easement at the northeast corner of the western part of the lake. Mr. Present seconded the motion. The vote on the motion was 5 -2 with Mr. Solomon and Mr. Ansay opposed. Recommendation to City Council Petition SP- 02 -03: Site Plan Review for Mirasol Parcel 12 A request by Anne Booth of Urban Design Studio, on behalf of Taylor Woodrow Communities, to approve a site plan for 38 custom homes on 80 by 142. S foot lots. The 1 S. S -acre pod is located within the Mirasol Planned Community District (PCD), which is bounded by PGA Boulevard to the south, Hood Road to the north, Florida's Turnpike to the east and the C -18 Canal to the west (01- 42S -42). Senior Planner Edward Tombari presented the project and reviewed amended language for condition 3 • which would allow access to rear yards to apply to the entire project. Mr. Kunkle commented some landscape sections showed the relationship to utilities and asked if those complied with the new Seacoast regulations. Mr. Tombari responded that the City had Seacoast's draft language, which was a major policy shift because it would severely limit the ability to have street trees within the City, and which staff had not yet had time to address. Mr. Kunkle advised that Seacoast was already enforcing things which were different than shown on this plan, and the City needed a way to protect what they had approved in order to get what was approved. Mr. Kunkle offered to help in any way with this situation. It was stated that the requested waivers were consistent with other approved pods. Anne Booth, agent for the applicant, described the project, and indicated the developer had made a conscious decision to combine as much open space as possible into common area open space which met code in providing for clustering of development on upland areas. Ms. Booth explained that this common area open space was developed around each parcel within this project, so that open space that would otherwise be in the parcel was adjacent to the parcel. The developer would maintain, plant, and control the open space areas. Ms. Booth explained that pools would be a part of the original construction, which would substantially reduce the need for access to the rear yards. Additional buffers were described. Ms. Booth explained that the original Mirasol plan was approved with 70% open space provided in the overall PCD, and the applicant had only been required to provide 20 %. The original approval had been for only 33% of the potential dwelling units that could have been constructed based on comprehensive plan allowances. Ms. Booth explained that the PCD had been written in such a way so as to allow flexibility in the application of the land development regulations. Ms. Booth noted the is requested waivers were consistent with those reviewed and approved previously and this was a continuation of the product on parcel 2, which was now under construction. Ms. Booth indicated the 0 . Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes March 26, 2002 applicant agreed to conditions 1 and 2 and had worked with staff on revising condition 3. Ms. Booth stated she was aware of some terms of the Seacoast Utility modifications, that it was her understanding those were draft comments, and she would work with Seacoast to resolve their issues since the applicant wished to move forward with a street planting program. Mr. Tarr requested clarification of what the Board was approving. Mr. Tombari responded these were custom homes so what was approved tonight would be what was applied for under the building permits. Ms. Booth described for Mr. Tarr the product, which was a single family custom home and could be any design, but had to go before the Architectural Review Board within Mirasol before coming to the City. Mr. Tarr indicated he was concerned with size. Ms. Booth responded they would be limited by the requirements established on the site plan, and the same lot coverages as in the other parcels would be maintained. Ms. Booth added that the requirement for open space within the parcel was 35 %; however, the applicant was providing 45 %, even though the bulk of the open space was adjacent. Mr. Tombari clarified for Mr. Tarr that the revised condition 3 would provide access through the golf course if unable to access between the homes, and that the various governmental entities had agreed to coordinate to allow that access. Mr. Tarr noted the landscaping was so dense between homes already built there was no way to even walk between the homes, and urged the other Boardmembers to actually drive through the community. Mr. Tarr commented he thought it was a shame to have such nice homes squeezed on small lots, particularly when there were two 2 -story homes side by side, with lack of frontage and side setbacks and so close to the golf course. Mr. Tarr commented he thought this was a function of putting too large a home on too small a lot and that although Mirasol was beautiful and an asset to the City, the waivers were providing nothing more than putting as much product on as small a lot as possible and in ten years he would at least be able to say he had voted against it. Mr. Tarr commented the City did not get the golf course as originally planned, which he also thought was a shame. Mr. Ansay indicated in requesting waivers, that an illustration with dimensions of the adjacent open space that would be accessible to the property owners would be helpful to the Board. Ms. Booth commented that condition 3 would provide alternate access along the lake maintenance easement or the golf course along the rear of the lots and explained that these were requested only if there was no way to get from the front to the rear on a resident's own property. Permission to use these access points would have to be obtained from the Homeowners Association and there must be agreement for any damage to be repaired, and to only access during specific times of day, and the restrictions would be in the HOA documents. Mr. Kunkle noted that the 45% lot coverage did not include the lots around the lake and dark green areas shown in the yards and road right -of -way, which Ms. Booth verified. Mr. Kunkle commented that although Seacoast had not yet imposed their guidelines on this project, they were doing so in other projects, commented this was a severe problem in his opinion, and asked staff to please pay attention. Mr. Kunkle advised that the result of this would be less trees, less bushes, and more grass, which not what the City wanted. Mr. Kunkle asked if the City didn't own half the utility and volunteered whatever help he could offer. Mr. Glidden commented in regard to Mr. Tarr's comments that this was exactly what had been discussed early in the meeting, that this was a project that had set aside massive amounts of open space, resulting in housing more urban in nature with larger homes on smaller lots, but that was the tradeoff for having huge set asides. Mr. Glidden commented that it comes with this product, which was successful and 7 . Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes March 26, 2002 selling for big dollars and sophisticated people liked it, so he had no problem. Ms. Booth verified that sidewalks would be on only one side, and explained the location. Mr. Glidden recommended running the sidewalk right up to the cul -de -sac if not around it, so people could walk all over the community. Ms. Booth indicated to Chair Solomon that the applicant and staff had resolved the wording for condition 3 which would be incorporated into the PCD development order which was still open, and that the HOA documents for the master community would contain language disclosing risk of having a home adjacent to the golf course. Chair Solomon stated he had no problem with the staff recommendation. MOTION: Mr. Ansay made a motion to recommend to City Council approval of Petition SP -02 -03 with the following conditions: 1. The petitioner shall provide all homeowners association documents language for review and approval by the City Attorney and City Forester, including language designed to protect a designated shade tree on each lot for a formal street tree community program. 2. Prior to scheduling for City Council review, the applicant shall adequately respond to the questions raised by the City Engineer in the memorandum dated March 18, 2002. 3. At no such time shall access be restricted from common areas, road rights -of -way or any other non - fee - simple properties owned or maintained by the Mirasol Property Owners Association or Homeowners Associations to the rear of fee - simple lots. Free and clear access shall be provided on golf courses, lake easements and common areas adjacent to preserves with the written consent of the Mirasol Property Owners Association and /or relevant Homeowners Associations. Motion was seconded by Mr. Kunkle. The vote on the motion was 6 -1 with Mr. Tarr opposed, who stated he thought there was a lot more house on a lot less land. Recommendation to City Council Petition SP- 01 -26: Site Plan Review for Evergrene Parcel 4A A request by Urban Design Studio, on behalf of Community Finance Company (a subsidiary of Watermark Communities, Inc.), for approval of a 24 -acre site for 109 single-family "Paired Z" homes and 69 "Mansion" home units (contained in 23 "Mansion" buildings) within Parcel 4A of the Evergrene Planned Community District (PCD), which is bounded by Donald Ross Road to the north, Alternate AIA to the east, Hood Road to the south, and Military Trail to the west. (25136- 41S -42E) Senior Planner John Lindgren presented the request. Mr. Tarr commented he did not see justification for the requested waivers in the staff report. Mr. Lindgren explained that justification from the applicant had been attached that the uniqueness of the design would justify the waiver requests; and that the justifications were the same as for previous parcels. Mr. Channing inquired about condition 3 regarding posting security prior to issuance of building permit for model homes and to remain in effect until the • Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes March 26, 2002 plat was recorded. Mr. Lindgren explained that this was a compromise to allow the developer to get models started since it would take some time to get the plat approved. Growth Management Director Charles Wu explained this had been discussed previously, and because of the time it took to get a plat reviewed and then recorded, the developer was willing to take a risk and proceed with starting the models. Henry Skokowski, agent for the applicant, described the paired zero lot homes which would create diversity. Mike Seymour, Landscape Architect, described customized landscaping plans assigned to the different home styles , intended to prevent "cookie cutter" landscaping. The street trees were described as live oaks and laurel oaks only. Mr. Glidden noted he had no elevations. It was verified that this was site plan review and included architecture. Mr. Skokowski provided Mr. Glidden with an elevation, which he indicated had been submitted to the City. Mr. Glidden expressed his opinion that the architecture would be so diverse that colors would not matter, and stated that it was hard for him to evaluate and he believed it might be too diverse, but he would go along with the rest of the Board, and from a distance it felt like it was quality design. Mr. Channing commented this was a beautiful project, but he did not receive a full submittal, and he was uncomfortable moving this petition along. Mr. Seymour explained changes in landscaping and commented sidewalks were changed and there were less plantings on the handout than on the plan. Mr. Kunkle commented there were fewer plantings, but the sidewalk change was significant because it had been road, trees, sidewalk, house, plants; which had now been changed to road, grass, sidewalk, trees, house, plants so that the street feeling was changed with sidewalks closer to the street and the benefit of a typical street tree sidewalk road alignment. Mr. Kunkle speculated the reason this was done was a water main problem, which the applicant confirmed. Mr. Kunkle stated that the detail on the planting plan for root barrier dimensions for large trees and Royal palms was not being accepted today by Seacoast in other projects in which he was involved for the county, and Seacoast's answer to compliance was not to turn on the water. Mr. Kunkle stated again was a big problem. Mr. Kunkle indicated he agreed the Board needed elevations. Mr. Skokowski confirmed that the colors were the same as previously approved. Discussion ensued regarding moving on or requiring the applicant to come back after a full package was provided. Chair Solomon, Mr. Present, and Mr. Ansay indicated they were not in favor of moving on. Mr. Tarr indicated he would be comfortable moving on. Mr. Glidden stated he had seen these elevations at a past meeting with the developer plus in the past he had reviewed the drawings at a meeting, and therefore he had no problem moving this along. Chair Solomon commented the Board had not seen all the elevations. Mr. Skokowski commented the applicant had been under the impression that the large drawings were submitted to the Board, and the applicant had submitted full sets. The applicant had not provided full sets of reduced drawings, which was what the Board received. Mr. Channing agreed with Chair Solomon that the project was too important not to be reviewed by the architects on the Board. Mr. Glidden recommended that 3- dimensional drawings be submitted before the City Council presentation. Mr. Wu advised this could be brought back to the next meeting. It was the consensus of the Board to place this item on the April 9, 2002 agenda. Mr. Lindgren explained the procedure. Z Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes March 26, 2002 LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS COMMISSION Workshop Petition LDR- 01 -07: Zoning Text Amendment for Newsrack Ordinances A city- initiated request to amend City Code Sections 78 -221, entitled "PGA Boulevard Corridor Overlay," and 78 -231, entitled "Parkway Overlay District," tore quire the use ofmodularnewsracks and prohibiting the use of individual newsracks in these areas, and repealing City Code Section 78- 701, entitled "Newsracks, " and creating a new Section 78 -701, entitled " Newsrack Regulations." Code Enforcement Administrator Kelvin Wise presented the petition. Chair Solomon asked how Mr. Wise had determined that the Delray model had been successful, to which Mr. Wise responded that there had been positive comments from the public and print media, and no negative comments. Mr. Kunkle commented that Mr. Wise had made a nice presentation and the Board should go with it. Chair Solomon commented the approach was good; that individual units were an eyesore. Mr. Glidden asked if the newsrack would be in full view of the public, to which the response was, yes. Mr. Glidden commented the only thing missing was screening. Mr. Wise explained that a third party vendor would charge the occupants a rental fee. Mr. Channing indicated he liked the way that newsracks had been handled in PGA National and questioned if a location inside a hedge or wall would be acceptable to the newspaper vendors, which Mr. Wise indicated had not been discussed. Mr. Ansay suggested a concept to have a news center, adding benches to create an atmosphere. Ron Gary, Palm Beach Post representative, indicated he had no comments pro or con because the specifics were not yet known; however, the draft ordinance looked pretty good right now, and landscaping would be fine as long as it did not conceal the fact that this was a news rack. Mr. Glidden suggested a universal symbol to be placed so that people would know this was a newsrack. Chair Solomon suggested that landscaping could be used at the sides and back to soften the rack. Chair Solomon asked that anyone who had comments to get them to Mr. Wise by next Tuesday so that Mr. Wise could revise the draft with the changes highlighted and then the Board could revisit the draft. Mr. Tarr expressed his opinion there should be absolutely be a screening requirement which should be maintained by the party maintaining the newsracks. Mr. Tarr commented that he thought Palm Beach Gardens should be held to a higher standard. Mr. Present commented this was a good job and agreed the PGA National area was nice but the idea was to put up newsracks for the convenience of the people . Mr. Present asked how the free papers got to the racks, and commented they might not be able to afford space. Mr. Present stated he was not in favor of universal landscaping because these racks needed to be in strategic locations to serve people and some locations might not lend themselves to landscaping. Mr. Wise commented that the free periodicals were a mystery, but the same publishing company did 4 -5 different publications. Mr. Wise commented regarding universal landscaping that there might be security issues if the racks were completely blocked off. Mr. Wise reported Juno Beach had their newsracks completely blocked off with fencing, and expressed his opinion that would not be what the City wanted. Mr. Present cautioned that locations should not be changed that the public was depending upon. Mr. Wise responded that the City would work with the media to establish strategic locations. Mr. Present indicated that the goals of 10 • Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes March 26, 2002 serving the news people, service the public, and cleaning up the City should be met. Mr. Wise suggested a 3 -year trial in PGA Boulevard and the parkway district. Mr. Present asked that the Northlake Boulevard corridor also be included. Mr. Channing indicated there should be landscaping on three sides. Consensus of the Board was for members to forward to Mr. Wise comments regarding specific wording, and then to hold another workshop. Mr. Glidden requested a site plan showing the units, landscaping, and walkway. Staff recommended using the racks in certain corridors for at least three years to determine success and then to make City -wide. Better, closer pictures of the Delray units and anything Mr. Wise felt would be helpful were requested. Mr. Wu commented that landscaping would deteriorate with lack of maintenance from a third party and would then become a problem for public works, and asked the Board to think very carefully regarding that issue. Mr. Wu advised staff would research other cities who had done landscaping around newsracks. Mr. Wu commented if a wall was placed in front of the newsracks that would serve no purpose, and asked the Board to proceed cautiously. OLD BUSINESS There was no old business to come before the Board. 0 NEW BUSINESS Cl The City Attorney verified that Mr. Kunkle, the Vice Chair, would become Chair; and Mr. Present, Chair Pro Tem, would become Vice Chair, so that only a Chair Pro Tem needed to be elected. MOTION: Mr. Kunkle made a motion that Mr. Glidden become Chair Pro Tem. Mr. Channing seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 7 -0 vote. It was announced that the new appointments were effective immediately. Mr. Present complimented Mr. Solomon on doing a good job as Chairman over the past year. II • Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Tuesday, April 9, 2002 s 2. ecommendati n to City Coun it SP- 01 -38: No hmil Plaza Ban Future Development Area #1 A request by H Skokowski of Urban Design Studio, agent for Northlake Partners Joint Ventur , Lt , for a s' plan amen ent to permit the construction of a 3,600 square -fo bank ith a ive through. a proposed bank site is located in the far northwest r of the Shopping Center site, adjacent to Military Trail. The Northmil Plaza. Shopping Center is generally located at the northeast corner of Military Trail and Northlake Boulevard (19- 42S -42E). Project Manager: Edward Tombari, Senior Planner (799 -4243) — etombari(a)ci.palm- beach- gardens.fl.us Public Hearing and Recommendation to City Council Petition MISC- 01 -26: Covered Parking in Village Square Professional Park Phase H A request by Glenn Weller, agent for PF Park, Ltd., for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) amendment to allow for 15 covered parking spaces in the second phase of the Village Square Professional Park, which is located at the southwest corner of RCA Boulevard and Prosperity Farms Road. (8- 42S -43E) Project Manager: John Lindgren, Senior Planner (799 -4243) — jlindgrengci.palm- beach- gardens.fl.us 4 Hearin nd com!��o Ci'y Co ncndati il Petition MISC -02 -01 an chel Minor PUD Amendment A request by Urban Design Studio, on behalf of Forest Lake Associates, L.C., San Michele -Palm Beach Limited Partnership, and Gordon Homes, 'Inc., for 012 val of 6i—nor amendment o the size, location, and confi uration o amage easement and 1 es a rova of q tem orary sales center and modification of side and front setbacks for selected lots wrt the San Michele PUD, which is located at the northwest corner of Central Boulevard and Hood Road. (25/36-41S-42E) Project Manager: John Lindgren, Senior Planner (7994243) — jlindgmp_ci .palm- beach- gardens.fl.us 2 • • Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Tuesday, April 9, 2002 0- 5Recommendation to City Council Petition SP- 02 -04: Site Plan Review f r Miraso S Maintenance F A request by Anne Booth of Urban Design Studio on be o Ta lor- Woodrow Communities, to allow for the construction of olf course maintenance facilit and a community storage area on a 2.09 acre site 'thin t e iraso anne ommunity of PGA PGA Boulevard to the Road to the north, Florida's Turnpike to the east an e - na o the west (01- 42S -42E). Project Manager: Edward Tombari, Senior Planner (799 -4243) — etombariAci.palm- beach- ¢ardens.fl.us LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS COMMISSION ROLL CALL: Regular Members: Alternates: Craig Kunkle, Chairman Ernest Volonte Barry Present, Vice Chairman Vacant John Glidden, Chairman Pro Tern Dick Ansay Joel Channing Dennis Solomon Steven Tarr 6. Workshop Petition LDR- 01 -12: o 'n Text Amendment fo Temporary Mobile Homes, Construction Trailers, Sales Trailers and Other Modular Units A City - initiated request to amend the Palm Beach Gardens Code of Ordinances by amending Chapter 78, "Land Development," Section 78 -159, Permitted Uses, Conditional, and Prohibited Uses, note (67), entitled "Mobile Home, Temporary "; by creating a new use (70) entitled "Trailers or Modular Units, Temporary "; by amending Table 21, "Permitted, Conditional, and Prohibited Use Chart"; and by amending Article VIII, "Definitions," Section 78 -751. Project Manager: Jackie Holloman, Planner (799 -4245) — iholloman@ci.pgM- beach- gardens.fl.us 3 • • Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Tuesday, April 9, 2002 7. OLD BUSINESS 8. NEW BUSINESS 9. ADJOURNMENT In accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act and Florida Statute 86.26, persons with disabilities needing special accommodations to participate in this proceeding should contact the City Clerk's Office, no later than five days prior to the proceeding, at telephone number (561) 799- 4120 for assistance, if hearing impaired, telephone the Florida Relay Service Numbers (800) 955- 8771 (TDD) or (800) 955 -8700 (VOICE), for assistance. If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Planning and Zoning Commission, Local Planning Agency, Board of Zoning Appeals, or Land Development Regulations Commission, with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing, they will need a record of the proceedings, and for such, they may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. Exact legal description and /or survey for the cases may be obtained from the files in the Growth Management Department. 4 • Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes March 26, 2002 ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:35 p.m. The next regular meeting will be held March 26, 2002. APPROVED: Craig Kunkle, Jr., Chair �L7- ���Lfz Dick Ansa Alternatefikliest Volonte jtzn4- A-±� Betty LaurAecretafy for the Meeting 12 • I have discussed the variance request from Gary W. and Claudia D. Douglass at 10840 Magnolia Street, Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33418 and support their request for this variance to the set back requirement. NAME n �i . I* eD• 1"10'r-14 1/121 • ADDRESS I'l-L �') M aG Na j, — C IIA5C� P 9� 11 ' ST S/-- S� M4Sn'� /Iu S Sr ' 305 H(-? C1i7 DATE S12- 4 az 1-4 4�' � L ai 0 2- 3�