Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes P&Z 072302CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING July 23, 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 Craig Kunkle 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 DUtECTOR Growth Management Director Charles Wu reported that since the last meeting the following projects had been approved by City Council: Mirabella Clubhouse, Mirasol Parcel 13, Parcel 16 of Gables at Northlake, PGA Plaza, and Crossroads Plaza.. Workshops had resulted in the following direction from City Council: The City Council had directed staff to move forward city -wide with newsrack improvements, and had directed staff to make amendments in the cell tower ordinance. Mr. Wu welcomed new alternate member Douglas Pennell. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Meeting minutes of July 9, 2002: Mr. Channing made a motion to approve the minutes of the July 9, 2002 meeting as submitted. Mr. Ansay seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 7 -0 vote. ROLL CALL Betty Laur, Secretary for the meeting, called the roll for the Planning and Zoning Commission and Land Development Regulations Commission: Present Craig Kunkle, Jr., Chairman Vice Chairman Barry Present Chairman Pro Tern John Glidden Dick Ansay Joel Channing Dennis Solomon Steven Tarr Alternate Ernest Volonte Alternate Douglas Pennell Absent Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes July 23, 2002 Also present were Growth Management Director Charles Wu, Principal Planner Talal Benothman, Senior Planner Edward Tombari , City Forester Mark Hendrickson, and City Attorney Len Rubin. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Public Hearing and Recommendation to City Council (Continued from the meeting on June 25, 2002) Petition PDD- 02 -03: Planned Community District for Old Palm Golf Club A request by Samantha Gregory of Urban Design Studio, on behalf of Watermark Communities, Inc., to approve a rezoning and master site plan for a residential Planned Community District (PCD) known as Old Palm Golf Club, which consists of approximately 651 acres. The current zoning of the site is Planned Development Area (PDA), and the proposed rezoning is PCD with an underlying zoning of Residential Low Density-3. The subject site is proposed for 333 single - family residential units, including 34 cottages and casitas, and is bounded by PGA Boulevard to the south, Central Boulevard to the east, and the Florida Turnpike to the west. Principal Planner Talal Benothman reviewed the staff report. Henry Skokowski, agent for the applicant, reported all plans had been made more specific since the last meeting. Mr. Skokowski indicated that the wall was to be screened from view, the buffer would extend 100' from the roadways, and reviewed a graphic showing a wall location, jogs of the wall along Central Boulevard, ornamental fence panel locations, and 6' fencing. Mr. Skokowski indicated the applicant would like to have a sidewalk on only one side of the spine road and mitigate that by making the sidewalk wider. Mr. Ansay commented staff objected to the single sidewalk because of City Council direction and asked if their direction had related to a development such as this or a more open type development. Mr. Benothman responded that he would say it related more to open development that was not gated, but staff felt there was not adequate justification for only one sidewalk and that residents were owed a sidewalk on both sides of the road, which was good planning. Mr. Present requested that Mr. Skokowski review the additional right -of -way needed for the I -95 interchange. Mr. Skokowski presented a graphic which showed the right -of -way and stated that DOT had issued a letter that this would be adequate. Mr. Glidden requested and received clarification that golf carts would travel on the road. Mr. Glidden observed that since there was a wall around the entire community that the open fencing areas were a good way to open it up and asked for a design element such as architecture or a raised trellis, etc., to be located at the southeast comer in the middle of the 45- degree angle wall at the entrance. Mr. Skokowski responded that the applicant would have no objection to that concept. Mr. Glidden commented it was a great opportunity to provide tasteful signage, and Mr. Skokowski responded that signage would have to be on a tower in order to be seen because of the landscape screening. A poll of the Commission was conducted to see if they preferred to see signage or screening. Three favored complete screening; two indicated it could be left to the 2 Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes July 23, 2002 applicant, and one wanted more openings but not to see into anyone's back yard. Mr. Skokowski indicated depending on existing conditions when clearing was complete if the applicant had that perogative they would submit plans for approval for sonething to break up the wall. Chair Kunkle declared the public hearing open, continued from June 25. Hearing no comments from the public, Chair Kunkle declared the public hearing closed. Chair Kunkle commented that on Central Boulevard, the existing median landscaping contained bahia grass and the medians to be improved were to have St. Augustine, and asked that those be made consistent by using the same kind of grass in all the medians. MOTION: Mr. Tarr made a motion torecommend to City Council approval of Petition PCD -00 -03 with all conditions as recommended by staff except to allow the waiver for one sidewalk on the spine roads. Mr. Solomon seconded the motion. During discussion of the motion, Mr. Solomon asked if the maker of the motion intended to include Mr Glidden's suggestion that the southeast corner be open for the option discussed. Mr. Tarr stated he did not want to approve the issue with the corner but with the way it was planned - -to be screened. Mr. Solomon indicated he had assumed the corner option was included when he had seconded the motion. Mr. Ansay stated he would second the motion. Mr. Solomon commented the sidewalk on one side was justified because along the turnpike there was residential development on only one side of the road, that along the spine road two sidewalks were not needed because this project was not laid out like a typical community, and one 8' sidewalk should be sufficient, however, he appreciated staffs constraints. Motion carried by unanimous 7-0 vote. Public Hearing and Recommendation to City Council Petition PUD- 12 -06: Rezoning & Planned Unit Development Master Plan for Prosperity Center A request by Hank Skokowski of Urban Design Studio, on behalf of Equity One Realty and Management, to allow for the construction of a 9,600 square foot addition and additional parking to an existing 121,000 square foot shopping center known as Prosperity Centre, located on 11.92 acres, and to rezone 0.6 acres of the site to a Planned Unit Development with underlying zoning of General Commercial CG -1. The Prosperity Centre shopping center is located at the southeast corner of Prosperity Farms Road and PGA Boulevard Senior Planner Ed Tombari presented the project. Staff recommended denial without an additional right turn lane. Mr. Present indicated he would not like to impose parking at the rear unless employees wanted to park there. Staff clarified that the City Engineer had reviewed the turn lane plan and recommended that it be installed even at a cost of $113,000. Mr. Glidden indicated he preferred option 2 of the turn lane proposals but did not feel strongly. Mr. Tombari indicated a significant number of centers had 9' parking spaces; however, in this case the applicant could not meet 10'. Mr. Glidden recommended that in the near future a change be made to consider 9' commercial and 9 -1/2' residential parking spaces. Other locations on PGA Boulevard with turn lanes were pointed out. Mr. Skokowski explained that land had previously been annexed with the intent to expand the T.J. Maxx store and 3 Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes July 23, 2002 described the proposed addition and the landscaping. Mr. Skokowski reviewed the requested waivers and discussed the traffic analysis. It was pointed out that in condition 5 there was a typo and both numbers should be the same, 12,100 square feet. Mr. Skokowski expressed concern regarding condition 1 asking for signs indicating employee parking since that was a safety concern. Mr. Tarr commented that this center already had a bad parking problem and raised questions regarding a back entry for employees and enforcement. Mr. Tarr felt this piece of land was already over capacity, did not think an employee decal program would work, and felt 9' spaces were unrealistic. Mr. Benothman confirmed that the major concern of staff was not enough parking on the site and a parking plan was needed to meet minimum requirements at the required dimensions. Mr. Skokowski advised the applicant would provide a parking plan and that they had provided calculations, and that only 18 spaces were being added. During discussion of a decal plan, Mr. Tarr questioned if an employee did not display his or her decal on their car, how the City would know they were an employee. Mr. Benothman responded that the applicant would have to provide a plan. Mr. Ansay asked about access to the property at the gas station. Mr. Tombari explained that did not work out because it would limit parking spaces in the center. Mr. Present indicated this was an older center where it would be hard to redo parking, and owners and store managers should provide a decal program. Mr. Tombari clarified that only 12,100 square feet was allowed for restaurant use and most was being used, so another could not go in. Mr. Solomon stated his opinion the Commission should approve this without requiring turn lanes, and it was not reasonable to redo the parking in the whole parking lot. Mr. Solomon was not in favor of decals, and indicated the stores should take steps to ensure their employees parked in the rear. Mr. Glidden leaned toward leaving parking as is but would like to require the applicant to allow a cut from the gas station if the gas station property was reconfigured in a way so that would not be unsafe. Mr. Skokowski commented that access would violate the lease with Barnes and Noble. Mr. Channing commented the rear of the project was the most attractive part and he would like this center to improve their landscaping. Chair Kunkle asked if the restaurant valet service could use rear parking, to which Mr. Skokowski stated he did not know but indicated that probably could be done. Chair Kunkle declared the public hearing open. Kathleen Smith, 11355 West Teach Road, explained that she lived in the adjacent Pirate's Cove area and because of differences in grade her property had flooded. Ms. Smith suggested a footer wall to keep water from spilling over into her property. Mr. Skokowski described proposed trenching below grade to prevent blowout from under the wall as had happened in the past. Mr. Skokowski stated the applicant would provide a footer wall in that section. Mr. Charming commented the applicant needed to work with staff to ensure they solved this problem. Hearing no further comments from the public, Chair Kunkle declared the public hearing closed. MOTION• Mr. Glidden made a motion to recommend to City Council approval of Petition PUD -01 -06 with conditions as set forth by staff except to delete 12 because of existing conditions and to delete 13 and replace them with the following conditions: 12. The applicant shall agree to a future access location at the northwest corner of the site just 4 Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes July 23, 2002 north of Barnes & Noble bookstore abutting the adjacent gas station at some time in the future if staff determines that based on any site reconfiguration of the gas station that conditions exist and a cut is desirable. 13. Applicant shall agree to construct the wall that separates the adjacent residential property in the middle of the property on its southern boundary using a solid masonry wall with a spread foundation and stucco finish and subject to inspection and review of the condition by the City Engineer to confirm if the wall would be proactive to eliminate flooding to the adjacent property; however, if review indicated water was entering anyway because of the topography the City Engineer shall make a recommendation. Mr. Glidden commented that an alternative parking plan was not feasible for this location. Mr. Channing seconded the motion. During discussion of the motion, Mr. Solomon asked if the correction in condition 5 to make both figures 12,100 was included in the motion, to which the response by the maker was yes. Mr. Glidden clarified that the language he proposed for condition 13 was suggesting the City Engineer inspect and enact a spread foundation wall if that solved the problem or if there was no problem it was in the City Engineer's hands. Mr. Glidden stated he was not requiring this applicant to correct existing conditions. Mr. Channing commented condition 13 should be worded to say if there was a condition that exists where grades were higher on the shopping center and dumping water on the neighbor's property and it could be a curb or wall and should be left to the City Engineer. Mr. Present recommended reconsidering using access from the gas station as that might create a larger problem. Mr. Glidden responded the gas station had already agreed to it but the center did not agree. Mr. Ansay agreed with strengthing the agreement to require the access, and favored the center sprucing up their landscaping by working with staff. Mr. Ansay indicated he did not believe the employee parking could be implemented and worked out. Mr. Glidden commented any landscaping on the original PUD approval should be reviewed and if it was not up to size it should be improved Mr. Tombari indicated the City Forester would inspect the landscaping. Mr. Tarr asked how 10,000 square feet could be added to a center with inadequate parking with all 9' spaces and inadequate access, and expressed his opinion if employee parking was left up to the stores the employees would not park in back. Mr. Tarr stated his opinion that this was a disservice to the residents of this City. Mr. Kunkle agreed with Mr. Solomon this was not great but was what was there. Mr. Glidden commented parking was tight but in the northeast corner spaces were always available. Mr. Channing commented he had never failed to find a parking space and recommended an amendment to condition 13 to add "curb or other device". Mr. Glidden stated he had no problem with language stating "construction of a wall including curbing or other device ". Mr. Ansay commented he had never had a parking problem in this center. Mr. Tarr commented he would wager parking in the back would not be used. Motion carried by vote of 6 -1 with Mr. Tarr opposed. 5 Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes July 23, 2002 Recommendation to City Council Petition SP- 02 -14: Site Plan for Evergrene Parcel 3 A request by Hank Skokowski, Urban Design Studio, on behalf of Community Finance Company (a subsidiary of Watermark Communities, Inc.), for approval of a 12.25 -acre site for 78 "Cluster Homes" within Parcel 3 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. Senior Planner Ed Tombari presented the project. Mr. Tarr asked staff's opinion regarding 1/3 of the homes not having parking in the driveway. Mr. Wu responded this was a cluster home product and indicated that staff felt it acceptable to locate one space outside in the case of a third bedroom Mr. Solomon recommended a pathway to get to offsite parking behind lot 17. Mr. Skokowski reviewed the site plan and the parking, identified garbage pickup areas, guest parking, and signage stating that if a vehicle was not parked properly it would be towed. Mr. Glidden expressed his opinion there was ample parking and trash vehicles would be okay. Mr. Solomon requested a walking path to get to the parking area next to lot 17, to which Mr. Skokowski agreed. Mr. Solomon indicated signage for towing was needed and the first time should be a warning and the second time the vehicle should be towed. Mr. Solomon indicated the rear elevation of the Italianete model was too plain, to which the architect responded that details on the front, such as shutters, could be incorporated on the rear. Mr. Glidden noted 2 -story models would be more prominent and if any faced the street details should be done on the upper part. Mr. Present indicated the changes worked well and it looked great. Mr. Ansay asked about garbage pickup locations. Mr. Skokowski explained that special pavers along the edge of the road would indicate the areas where residents were to place their garbage for pickup, which would be indicated on the site plan. Mr. Skokowski explained that consequences for putting garbage out too early would be addressed in the homeowners documents. Mr. Tarr expressed his opinion the applicant had done a good job of making the project marginally acceptable and the homeowners documents and conditions of approval should require that resodents continue to use the garbage areas as a safety issue. The applicant was requested to have very good signage, beginning at the first intersection, with signs noting units 2 -12 this direction, for example, in order to avoid backing up, because there were approximately 12 dead ends. MOTION: Mr. Tarr made a motion to recommend to City Council approval of Petition SP -02 -14 with staff recommendations and requested waivers and conditions, adding garbage paver requirements into the homeowner documents and specific signage, requiring changes to the site plan for identification and location of where the garbage would be set, and adding a walkway to the parking by lot 17. Motion was seconded by Mr. Ansay and carried by unanimous 7 -0 vote. Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes July 23, 2002 LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS COMMISSION Public Hearing and Recommendation to City Council Petition LDR- 00-03: Amendment to the Land Development Regulations to adopt a Roadway Beautification Plan A request by the City to consider approving a text amendment to the City's Land Development Regulations. The proposed amendment is to add a Roadway Beauti,twation Plan in order to include standards for landscaping rights -of -way. City Forester Mark Hendrickson presented the request and clarified it had been advertised on 7/12/02. Mr. Hendrickson noted that on page 6 of the staff report items had been added that were discussed at the last meeting and also with Vice Mayor Sabatello, and the proposed amendment had been sent to 40 people and companies in development for their comments. Three letters had been received and the only concerns were regarding maintenance. The most negative responses were received regarding planting within 6 months of the clearing. Chair Kunkle noted that applicants had the ability to ask for relief from that 6 month requirement. Mr. Tarr commented that he had the impression that grass in narrow areas was difficult to maintain, but he would like to see grass on wider medians. Mr. Tarr noted references to height of trees and advised that he was interested in circumfrence. Mr. Hendrickson explained every species had different circumfrence depending on height. Mr. Tarr requested setting circumfrence for canopy trees only such as oaks and pines. Chair Kunkle noted it was a difficult standard to measure because of variance between species and adding "spread" and "Florida Number One or better" would provide a safety net. Mr. Tarr requested a percentage of grass depending on median size. Chair Kunkle noted this was a starting point and he was trying to save water and grass was very water consumptive. Mr. Tarr commented these were guidelines, not requirements, and commented the City's overall plan was to have canopy trees along streets but palms had been included as acceptable and he felt they should only be interspersed. Mr. Ansay commented this was a starting point and there would be changes once it was implemented. Chair Kunkle declared the public hearing open. Hearing no comments from the public, Chair Kunkle declared the public hearing closed. MOTION: Mr. Channing made a motion to recommend to City Council approval of Petition LDR- 00 -03. Mr. Ansay seconded the motion, which carried 6 -0 with Mr. Tarr out of the room. OLD BUSINESS PUD Checklist Revisions — Mr. Glidden indicated he had a number of comments. Chair Kunkle 7 Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes July 23, 2002 requested the comments be submitted to Planner Jackie Holloman for another draft. Discussion ensued, including other suggestions made by Mr. Solomon regarding property ownership authorization language for PUD's, which he was requested to provide to Jackie. Mr. Solomon explained that item Dl called for someone to agree to something in the future that they did not know what it would be, and owners had a right to drop their petition if they did not agree. Chair Kunkle was requested to review the landscaping and give comments to Jackie. When to call for photometric plans was discussed, because if it was too early in the process money and time were wasted, so the proper time might be just before a final vote. Mr. Glidden noted there were several similar interpretative issues which he would provide to staff. Mr. Wu advised that waivers for drive throughs should be reviewed by the Commission. Mr. Glidden commented regarding the accuracy issue on perspectives that 3 -d perspectives helped everyone see how building masses and helped determine if the design was good or bad, and the issue was not to let the shape exaggerate landscaping. Mr. Solomon questioned what happened with the design guidelines. Mr. Wu explained they had been sent to 40 professionals and two responses had been received, and after one more committee meeting the guidelines would be presented to the Commission. Mr. Solomon requested staff check to see if traffic coming out of Wendy's on Northlake making a left turn could be a potential traffic problem and whether staff had approved it that way NEW BUSINESS Mr. Present commented regarding an article in last Monday's newspaper regarding roads around gated communities. Mr. Wu noted copies had been made for everyone, and advised that this supported connectivity. '3 Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes July 23, 2002 ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:50 p.m. The next regular meeting will be held August 13, 2002. An APPROVED: Betty Laur, ecretary for the Meeting D