Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes P&Z 111202CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS PLANNING A,ND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING November 12, 2002 MINUTES The Regular Meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Palm Beach Gardens, Florida, was called to order by Vice Chair Barry Present at 6:30 P.M. in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Complex, 1.0500 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 reported that since the last meeting, City Council had approved the Magnolia Bay project ana an amendment to the comprehensive plan deleting the requirement for minimum vertical integration of residential use within a residential mixed -use development. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Meeting minutes of October 8, 2002: Mr. Solomon made a motion to approve the minutes of the October 8, 2002 meeting as submitted. Mr. Ansay seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 7 -0 vote. Meeting minutes of October 15, 2002: Mr. Glidden made a motion to approve the minutes of the October 15, 2002 meeting as submitted. Mr. Solomon seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 6 -0 vote. Mr. Ansay abstained since he had been absent for that meeting. Meeting minutes of October 22, 2002: Mr. Glidden made a motion to approve the minutes of the October 22, 2002 meeting as submitted. Mr. Solomon seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 7 -0 vote. DISCLOSURE OF EX -PARTE COMMUNICATION Mr. Glidden reported he had met with the applicant for the Borland Center and that he had a conflict of interest on the Donald Ross project. Mr. Channing disclosed he had met with the applicant for the Borland Center. ROLL CALL Betty Laur, Secretary for the meeting, called the roll for the Board of Zoning Appeals, Planning and Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes November 12, 2002 Zoning Commission, and Land Development Regulations Commission: Present Craig Kunkle, Jr., Chairman — arrived at 6:40 p.m. Vice Chairman Barry Present Chairman Pro Tern John Glidden — arrived at 6:34 p.m. Joel Channing Dick Ansay Dennis Solomon Steven Tarr Alternate Ernest Volonte Alternate Douglas Pennell Absent Also present were Growth Management Director Charles Wu, Principal Planner Talal Benothman, Senior Planners Kara Irwin and Edward Tombari, Planner Natalie Wong, City Forester Mark Hendrickson, City Attorney Len Rubin, and City Engineer Sean Donahue. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Withdrawn: Petition VAR- 02 -03: Costco Variance for'- Increased Parking, Lighting Height, and Wall Sign Continued Public Hearing & Consideration _forApproval: Caney - Newhaus, Inc., agent for Costco Wholesale, is requesting approval for three variances to allow an increase in number of parking spaces allowed and light pole height, and a painted wall sign to remain for Costco Wholesale, an 11.14 -acre site located at 3250 Northlake Boulevard, -Y4 of a mile east of Interstate 95, on the south side of Northlake Boulevard. The City Attorney advised that no action was necessary. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION Workshop Petition PUD- 01 -13: Rezoning and Master Plan Approval for The Borland Center A request by Cotleur and Hearing, as ag.int for The Borland Center and RAM Development, for a property rezoning from Planned DevelopmentArea (PDA) to Mixed Use Planned Unit Development (MXD /PUD) to allow for the development of 218,500 square feet for a cultural center and church offices; 85.500 square feet for retail space; 12,000 square feet for restaurant space, 9,300 square feet for office space; and 217 rental apartments of 47.1 acres of land. The site is located along the north 2 Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes November 12, 2002 side of PGA Boulevard between Gardens Square Boulevard and Shady Lakes Drive. Casey Cummings, President, RAM Development, requested review of open items. Chair Craig Kunkle arrived at this point in the meeting at 6:40 p.m. Mr. Cummings showed the plan originally submitted in Spring, 1999, provided a chronology of subsequent meetings, and reviewed the November 2001 plan which had resulted from those meetings. Mr. Cummings reported that additional meetings had been held and additional changes subsequently made. Mr. Cummings reviewed the changes made by the applicant in response to community input. Mr. Cummings compared the distance of major features on the plan to nearest existing developments, both on the original plan and the latest plan. Kahart Pinder discussed traffic issues. Mr. Pinder reviewed the east -west connection and explained the built -in traffic calming. Mr. Pinder reviewed the exiting plan. Shady bakes Drive extension north to 117`h was discussed. Mr. Pinder indicated that the impact fees from the Borland Center would cover the cost of the extension. A shared parking analysis following the City's LDR's was presented. Mr. Pinder indicated that 2,144 spaces would be needed; with 1,917 provided. Valet parking was not included, which could provide additional spaces, and not scheduling multiple venues when an event was sold out could help. Mr. Pinder offered to monitor the parking as the project became more successful and when utilization reached 90% to come back to the City to request permission to build an additional deck on the parking garage. Donaldson Hearing discussed Garden Square Boulevard and offered landscaping improvements to provide visual focus. Mr. Hearing discussed the MXD concept, that the site had been chosen because of accessibility, location in the center of the city, placement of the buildings to locate them as far as possible from existing developments, addition of substantial buffers, addition of a berm with very dense landscaping, treatment of the theatre to break up its mass, and compared nearby buildings for height and distance from residential. Mr. Hearing indicated that setbacks, buffers, and architectural design would mitigate building height. Mr. Hearing reviewed the revised master plan. Mike Nissen described the architectural elevations. Mr. Cummings requested feedback on the site plan changes and the architecture. Mr. Glidden commented that in general the Board would feel more comfortable if staff and the City Attorney would provide legal information. Mr. Glidden commented that the uses blended for this site better than for a project with commercial office and retail, and he would like staff feedback for a benchmark on the hypothetical project. Mr. Glidden commented this project would have a big impact on trips, that the idea of a cultural center in the City was a big plus, but critical issues were traffic control, parking, and some of the architecture. Mr. Glidden commented that a traffic light at Shady Lakes and PGA Boulevard was essential and he would like staff confirmation that warrants would be met. Mr. Glidden recommended extension of Shady Lakes Boulevard northward, and access through the residential area to relieve traffic during major events peak load discharge. Mr. Glidden indicated moving three buildings to front along PGA Boulevard was a big plus, but he did not like the roof connections between buildings along PGA Boulevard and suggested gazebos. Mr. 3 Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes November 12, 2002 Glidden suggested the pedestrian versus vehicular connection proposed between buildings B and E on the south side should either be a driveway or cut out the vehicular connection. Mr. Glidden commented the idea that the parking count was under a shared parking formula concerned him, and favored adding another level to the parking garage at the beginning of the project. Mr. Glidden was concerned for residents of Shady Lakes during exiting, and recommended language that traffic control at the northwest corner near the parking garage must be timed and regular during an event, and suggested the possibility of permanently closing the curb cut at the northwest corner of the substation. Mr. Glidden recommended that Building K be moved to accommodate deliveries and dumpsters in the service area. Mr. Glidden indicated he met with Mark Weiner regarding the architecture and perspectives were critical in order for the Board to understand the project. Mr. Glidden advised the applicant that the sketches were helpful but only showed certain elements, and that the main street perspective was the most helpful graphic that had been provided. Mr. Glidden discussed other architectural features which needed improvement, but the applicant was making good improvements. Mr. Glidden requested a comprehensive roof plan to allow the Board to see the project in a whole different light. Mr. Glidden commented parapet walls were too low to screen rooftop equipment, and some buildings still had no roof plans. Mr. Glidden liked Building C split as it had been before the last change. Mr. Charming commented that the north elevation of the theater which was 84' high was a large flat surface too high for trees to cover, and it would look oppressive to residents. Mr. Channing requested an elevation of the entire street including the theater, to compare the scale of the buildings along PGA Boulevard to the theater. Mr. Channing commented that the corridor overlay needed to become the City's main street, and this project along PGA Boulevard was like the La -Z -Boy site, and the main street had been created within the project instead of on PGA Boulevard. Mr. Channing requested more attention to architectural detail as shown on the perspective sketches carried throughout the entire project, and expressed concern that parking spaces were short and under shared parking. Mr. Charming noted portions of the project seemed to be designed by two different architects and a happy medium between the two types of design needed to be found. Mr. Charming commented the roof should be a unifying element of the project. Mr. Channing did not care for the parapet detail of reverse curve molding since it did not seem appropriate for that use. The perspective of the theatre from PGA Boulevard did not blend architecturally and was too massive. Mr. Charring commented larger scale plans, more detail. and how the buildings fit together were needed, and the same quality of architecture as in the theater — proportion, scale, and composition — needed to be throughout the project. Mr. Channing did not agree with Mr. Glidden regarding cutting out traffic through where the fountain was located, and stated he did not understand the narrow spaces around the garage. Mr. Solomon indicated the project chronology presentation had been helpful. Mr. Solomon agreed with Mr. Channing not to cut off the east -west traffic by the fountain and agreed with Mr. Glidden's proposal to build another parking garage level now. Mr. Solomon indicated this plan would do a lot for PGA Boulevard, and the light at Shady Lakes and PGA Boulevard should come as soon as possible. Mr. Solomon agreed with Mr. Glidden that the walkway roof was not needed; and commented that the roofs were flat and repetitious, and requested some elevated roofs. Mr. Present commented he understood the presentation of the many meetings on this project, but this was about 5 -6 projects together and M Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes November 12, 2002 holding many meetings was justified. Mr. Present requested focus on the core of the project, indicated he had seen nothing to allow understanding of the relationship between the residential buildings and the parking garage, and commented that the west side of building G looked stark. Mr. Ansay commented that he agreed with Mr. Channing and would like to see the applicant follow the PGA Boulevard overlay, that creating a second main street was not what the City was looking for, that he felt strongly that the parking garage should be built to its fullest extent at the beginning of the project, and that he concurred with Mr. Charming and Mr. Glidden regarding the architecture and felt the Board should be given more information in order to evaluate it thoroughly. Mr. Tarr commented he liked the project but not at this location, and he liked the covered walkway. Mr. Tarr commented that The Commons had set the tone for this area of PGA Boulevard, and more buildings should be out on the road. Mr. Tarr liked the architecture but commented that some buildings could be more articulated, and suggested adding banding to the large stucco walls of the main cultural center. Mr. Tarr indicated he was okay with the main street buildings look, but would like more variety on G and H, that the residential was okay but he would like higher quality on the residential for this project, and that he would like the site plan changed so that the cultural center was on the east side to make more shared parking and to place the large building closer to the existing shopping center buildings. Mr. Tarr agreed that another floor should be added to the parking garage at the beginning of the project. At Mr. Tarr's request, the applicant indicated they would provide a view of the smaller parking garages for the apartments. Mr. Tarr commented that Garden Square Boulevard had been designed to service the back of Publix and the other shops and requested that ingress /egress for that roadway be studied. Mr. Tarr indicated he would like the site plan to be a mirror image of the project. Mr. Tarr commented that the issue of this project was the size of the theater, and he had researched other cultural centers in the State of Florida and found that with this plan the Borland Center would be the largest performing arts center in the State, would be the only one in the State that was not in a central business district, that others not located in central business districts were much smaller. Mr. Tarr commented the new Palm Beach County Convention Center and the arena on 45`h Street could handle large events. Mr. Tarr requested his study be added to the record. Mr. Tarr commented that if the City had a central business district it would be near the mall, which was where he felt a cultural arts center should be located so as not to affect residential areas. Mr. Tarr listed outstanding issues which he believed should be addressed in the staff report: compatibility (which had not been addressed adequately), LDR issues, comprehensive plan issues, parking issues, ingress /egress issues, architectural issues, site plan issues, and how to place conditions to enforce scheduling of events. Mr. Tarr reported an article in the CAN newspaper asked how the Commission members felt and how the community felt about the project, and quoted Casey Cummings that RAM development had extensively redesigned the project so that the community was pleased and all concerns had been eliminated. Mr. Tarr commented he would find out at the public hearing if the community was pleased and if all concerns had been eliminated. Mr. Tarr advised the applicant that this process had taken so long because every comment by the Board tonight had been made at least two times previously and the applicant had not made all the requested changes in the last year and a half, and although the applicant had made changes they had not taken into consideration what the Commission had requested in the way of changes, and he would look for 5 Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes November 1292002 that at the public hearing. Mr. Pennell commented that overall he liked the project, and saw from the historical presentation that strong changes had been made. Mr. Pennell commented the project engaged PGA Boulevard except on the east side, that he felt the architecture needed tweaking, and the parking could work because of events being at off -peak times; however, one could never have enough parking. Mr. Pennell commented the project would work, the question was how well it would work. Chair Kunkle stated his comments would be repetitive, so he would not make them, but wished to discuss traffic, which had been his struggle. Chair Kunkle commented the question was how much longer trips would take after completion of this project, which depended on many factors, and the traffic consultant had done some calculations at Mr. Kunkle's request. Chair Kunkle commented he was trying to envision cars at this project and how many there would be on different days at different times of the year and at different times of day. The traffic consultant provided her calculations. Mr. Present commented that it would be helpful to compare this to other shopping centers on PGA Boulevard. Discussion ensued. Mr. Charming expressed his opinion that it was not that important to compare in detail but only whether the traffic was comparable. Chair Kunkle summarized that a couple of the commissioners wanted more information, a couple wanted to get to the staff recommendations, that he was inclined to proceed to public hearing in order to get staff's information, that a public hearing could extend over 2 -3 meetings if needed, and called for consensus. Consensus of the Board was for the public hearing. Mr. Benothman advised that this project was not certified yet for upland pr(-.servation, traffic concurrency, or shared parking , and staff would work that out. Chair Kunkle directed the applicant to work with staff, to which Mr. Cummings responded that on some items the applicant disagreed with staff. Mr. Benothman commented these were technical issues that the applicant must satisfy and under the code the applicant could not even go to P &Z until they were certified, but numerous workshops had been held because the City was willing to work with the applicant. Attorney Raymond Royce commented this was like the chicken and the egg and was going in circles since staff would not certify the project, and requested the applicant be told and the Commission be told exactly what the issues were. Mr. Benothman indicated certification was required for all projects and outstanding issues had been given to the applicant in writing. Discussion ensued. Mr. Hearing commented the applicant could address the technical items, that they could work on equivalency, and if they were not close on that they would like direction on when the City would complete their analysis so that they could complete theirs. Mr. Hearing commented that they had made a proposal to staff regarding the upland preserve and if staff did not agree with them that was not a technical issue and they needed to be sure that did not hold them up. Mr. Hearing indicated the applicant would take care of engineering issues, but there were a lot of issues that this Board and City Council needed to decide, and those were not technical issues, and the applicant did not want to be delayed over those. Mr. Hearing requested that if there was something the applicant needed to know about equivalency that they be told. Mr. Benothman commented staff was not holding the applicant up. Chair Kunkle commented that the Board's position was to proceed to public hearing as soon as possible and requested that staff and the applicant work things out. Following a short break, the meeting reconvened at 8:55 p.m. 2 Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes November 1292002 Public Hearin PUD -01 -14 Donald Ross Village Mixed -Use Planned Unit Development A request by Hank Skokowski of Urban Design Studio, on behalf of Donald Ross and Military L.C., to allow for the development of a mixed -use Planned Unit Development (PUD) consisting of 75,500 square feet of retail space, 9,000 square feet of office space, a 3,236 square foot gas station /convenience store, a 4,000 square foot financial institution with drive - through, 19,500 square feet of restaurant space, a 101 -room hotel and 156 multi family residential dwelling units located on 45.37 acres on the south side of Donald Ross Road, between Military Trail and Central Boulevard. The PUD approval would include a re- zoning from the existing zoning designation of Planned Development Area to Mixed -Use Planned Unit Development Overlay Zoning District. Mr. Glidden stepped down due to conflict of interest. Senior Planner Edward Tombari presented the project and advised the public hearing was being continued due to three outstanding comments from the traffic engineer so that the project could not be certified. Chair Kunkle declared the public hearing open. There were no comments from the public. Hank Skokowski commented he hoped that this week the certification issue would be resolved. MOTION: Mr. Solomon made a motion to continue the public hearing for Petition PUD -01 -14 to November 26, 2002. Mr. Ansay seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous vote. Mr. Glidden re- joined the Board. LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS COMMISSION Workshop Petition LDR- 02 -08: Zero Lot Line Regulations A City- initiated request to create zero lot line development regulations in the Land Development Code. The objective of the amendment is to establish practical design guidelines to allow for single-family zero -lot line units to be developed as a specific development within a PUD, PCD, or MXD overlay district. Planner Natalie Wong presented the request. Mr. Kunkle requested screen enclosures be coincidental with the waters edge or not, because people would ask for variances. Chair Kunkle asked how much landscapable area would be available with back to back units, to which Ms. Wong responded each would have 4'. Mr. Tarr asked what could be done in 4', to which Mr. Kunkle responded there would be room for sabal palms and some other plants. Mr. Tarr objected to homes 7 Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes November 12, 2002 with small rear setbacks being too close to the golf course, and he believed it was dangerous. Mr. Tarr reported he had played golf with a developer who had not agreed with him until during play a couple of his balls went into area designated for homes. Mr. Tarr commented some homeowners would need helmets just to sit in their own back yards. Mr. Ansay felt 40% for zero lot line units was too low because additional costs would be added and requested it be changed to 50 %. Ms. Wong explained these regulations would only address single family zero lot lines and in the future staff anticipated addressing zero lot lines specifically for double Z and other plans. Mr. Pennell favored 40% to lessen the cookie cutter effect. Mr. Charming questioned the zero or 3 -foot or more choices for pool decking on one side of a pool. Mr. Charming commented a lot of the lots in Abacoa were 40'. Ms. Wong indicated staff had looked at that but determined lots at 50'. Mr. Charming requested wall heights be measured from the inside floor of the house. Mr. Charming commented with a front - loaded garage it was a very good idea to have another room project out farther by 5, 10 or 15 feet, which would make a big difference in perception when looking down the street. Mr. Charming questioned the 40% rule; Ms. Wong indicated a developer could build townhouses on the other 60% and that a provision could be added to control the economics. Mr. Glidden commented the word "footer" was not used correctly; expressed his opinion it was not safe to have a zero edge on a pool and requested staff check on pool regulations that precluded that; commented that the 40% rule would have knocked out a DiVosta project; that it was great to have this ordinance but requested the 5 best projects in the City be analyzed with the proposed regulations and also the 5 worst projects to see how many waivers would have been needed, etc. Ms. Wong indicated the proposed draft would be sent out to developers for their feedback. Mr. Solomon indicated this was really helpful but requested another section be added for double Z instead of adding that later. Mr. Solomon noted some existing projects would not have complied. Mr. Solomon commented with the 40% rule in small PUD's that would not allow developers to build all the same product type and he felt they should have that right. Mr. Solomon requested language be clarified regarding the wall location, and that language be changed in paragraph A on page 4 to add "not less than" 6' -11 ". Mr. Channing requested Villa D'Este should be added to the study of worst projects. Mr. Glidden commented if the interior floor of a house was jacked up then language should be found to address that when measuring the height of the wall. OLD BUSINESS Mr. Tarr indicated the LDR's referred to in his report on Donald Ross Village did not match the changes that had been made to the LDR's and commented everyone should have the same version. NEW BUSINESS There was no new business to come before the Board. Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes November 12, 2002 ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:35 p.m. The next regular meeting will be held November 26, 2002. APPROVED: Craig Kunkle, Jr., Dick Ansay Alternate Ernest Volonte Alternate Douglas Pennell Betty Laik, Secretary for the Meeting 0 Borland Center Broward Perf. Arts Tampa Bay Perf. Arts Bob Carr Perf. Arts FL Center for Arts* Kravis Center Jax Center Perf. Arts U of F Perf. Arts Coconut Grove Play. Winter Park Perf. Arts* Cultural Centers - Florida CitV PBG Ft. L Tampa Orlando Orlando WPB Jax G'ville C. G. W. P. * denotes under construction Local under contruction: P.B. Convention Ctr. WPB D.K. Arena 45th St. Seats Type Setting Surrounding Uses 3,000 Res. Suburban Resid /Comm. 2,700 CBD Downtown Intense Comm. 2,557 CBD Downtown Intense Comm. 2,500 CBD Downtown Intense Comm. 2,200 CBD Downtown Intense Comm. 2,193 CBD Downtown Commercial 1,800 CBD Downtown Intense Comm. 1,754 School University Campus 1,069 Res. Suburban Resid /Comm. 700 Res. Suburban Resid /Comm. 5� UU �' 1 u; tpL