HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda P&Z 061008CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS
10500 N. MILITARY TRAIL PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA 33410-4698
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
June 10,2008
Planning, Zoning and Appeals Board Members
Growth Management Department
Planning, Zoning and Appeals Board Meeting
Tuesday, June 10,2008 - 6:30 P.M.
Enclosed is the agenda containing the items to be presented on Tuesday, June 10, 2008.
This meeting will be held in the Council Chambers, Palm Beach Gardens Municipal
Building, 10500 North Military Trail, beginning at 6:30 p.m.
Enclosed with this memorandum are the following items:
1. An agenda for the meeting; and
2. A Growth Management Department staffreport for the items to be heard.
3. Approval of Minutes: March 25,2008
As always, the respective Project Managers’ telephone numbers and email addresses
have been provided in case you have any questions or require additional information on
any petition. This will help us offer better staff support in the review of these
applications.
Nina Sorenson, Administrative Specialist II, Will call to mdhn your attendance.
Growth hgernent Administrator
AGENDA
CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS
PLANNING, ZONING AND APPEALS BOARD
TUESDAY, JUNE 10,2008 AT 6:30 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
CALLTOORDER
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLLCALL
REPORT BY THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT ADMINISTRATOR: KARA IRWIN
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: March 25,2008
PLANNING. ZONING AND APPEALS BOARD
Reeuiar Members: Alternates:
Craig Kunkle (Chair) JoyHecht(lS'At.)
Douglas Pennell (Vice Chair)
BarryPresent
Randolph Hansen
Dennis Solomon
Michael Pan&
Amir Kanel (Zd At.)
P~g,zoningandAppealsBoard
June 10,2008
1. Public Workshop:
Petition SPLA-08-01-000010: Steeplechase Research & Office Center
A request by Dodi Glas of Gentile Holloway 0’ Mahoney & Associates, agent for the
applicant, for a major site plan amendment to the Steeplechase Planned Unit
Development (PUD) to allow the construction of a three-story, 5 1,303-square-foot ofice
building. The subject site is located at the northeast comer of Steeplechase Drive and
Beeline Highway and is approximately 3.71 acres.
Project Manager: Richard Marrcro, Senior Planner rmarrero@ub&.com (799-4219)
Final Approval:
Ex Parte Communication (Public Hearing)
SPLA-08-01-000011: Burma Commerce Park
Consideration of Approval: A request by Gentile, Holloway, O’Mahoney &
Associates, Inc., agent, on behalf of Burma Properties, Inc., to permit a reallocation of
uses by eliminating the retail use to allow medical and dental uses and flex-space, which
includes warehouse and ofice/wsrehouse uses within Burma Commerce Park. The
2.293-acre site is located approximately 118 of a mile south of the intersection of
Northlake Boulevard and Burma Road on the east side of Burma Road.
2.
Project Manager: Jackie Hollomsn, Phajhol~oman@’pbgfl com (799-4237)
3. Public Hearing:
Petition LDRA-07-01-000012: Height Limitations
Ordinance 13, 2008-An ordinance of the City Council of the City of Palm Beach
Gardens, Florida relating to limitations on height waivers; amending section 78-1 58, code
of ordinances, entitled “waivers to planned development district regulations”; amending
section 78-1 84, code of ordinances, entitled “height of buildings” to impose limitations
on height waivers; providing for codification; and providing an effective date.
Project Manager Karn Invin, Growth Management Administrator kinvincnlphgfl.com (799-4242)
4. OLDBUSINESS
5. NEWBUSINESS
6. ADJOURNMENT
In accordonae with the Americans with Disabilitiea Act and Florida Statute 286.26, persons with disabilities needing apecial aawmmodaifons to
participate in this proceeding ahculd contact the Civ Clerk’s wce, no later than five days prior to the proceeding, at telephone number (561)
799-4120 for assistonce; if hearing impaired, telephone the Florida Reluy Service Numbers (800) 955-8771 OD) or (800) 955-8770 (T4OICE)).
for assistance. Ifa person decides to appal any decision made by the Planning, Zoning and Appeals Board, ha1 Planning Agency, w Land
Dewkyment Regulations Commisnion, 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 ensum that a verbatim record of the pweedings is made, which record includes the testimony and
evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. Exact legal description and/or su~ey for the cases may be obtainedfim thefiles in the Growth
Management Department.
Chmm~Ipz wda 06-10*2008.doc
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37 v.
38
39
40
41
42
43
CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS
PLANNING, ZONING AND APPEALS BOARD
REGULAR MEETING
MARCH 25,2008
The March 25, 2008 Regular Meeting of the Planning, Zoning and Appeals Board of the City of
Palm Beach Gardens, Florida, was called to order at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the
Municipal Complex, 10500 North Military Trail, Palm Beach Gardens, Florida, and opened by
Chair Craig Kunkle.
1. CALL TO ORDER
11. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
111. ROLL CALL
The Municipal Services Coordinato
Members Present:
wth Management Administrator
ard members on the dais.
IV.
roved signage for CVS pharmacy in the Prosperity Center.
APPROVAL OF, MINUTES
Motion
Dennis Solomon made a motion to accept the Planning, Zoning and Appeals Board minutes
from November 13, 2007, January 8, 2008 and February 12, 2008. Douglas Pennell
seconded. The motion was approved unanimously, 7-0.
PLANNING, ZONING AND APPEALS BOARD REGULAR MEETING
03 .25 .08
Page 1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
VI. RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL
Public Hearing
MISC-08-03-000041: Gander Mountain
A request by Brian Cheguis, of Cotleur & Hearing, Inc., agent on behalf of KTJ Limited
Partnership 167, for approval of a request to allow for an exception to Section 6-4, Code
of Ordinances entitled “Distance limitations between vendors, churches, and schools” and
the placement of logo medallions on the approved building. The Gander Mountain PUD
is located on the west side of Sandtree Drive, immediately south of the Northlake
Commons/Home Depot shopping center.
Chair Kunkle reques
conversation with J
Donaldson Hearing, Cotle
introduced Jay Moore and Doug Jandro.
project and noted administrative
February 1,2008. Mr. Hearing then r
be served in the restaurant. The secon
placed at points around the top of the build
Soft opening will be Marc
Chair Kunkle declared the p
hearing was closed and the matter broug
Discussion among Board m
Vice Chair Do
hing to speak, the public
VIII.
the screening for service areas at Downtown
t the Garde
pplication h
owth Management Administrator, reported that an
dressing the issues and it will be coming before the
Planning, Zoning and Apdeals Board soon.
(The remainder of this page intentionally Iefi blank.)
PLANNING, ZONING AND APPEALS BOARD REGULAR MEETING
03 .25 .08
Page 2
1 X. ADJOURNMENT
2
3
4
There being no hrther business to come before the Board, Chair Kunkle adjourned the meeting
at 6:43 p.m. The next regular meeting will be held April 8, 2008.
5 APPROVED:
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23.
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40 ATTEST:
41
42
43 44
45
46
47
48
49
50
Craig Kunkle, Chair
Dennis Solomon
'Jr, ' ail. Randolph Hansen
~
Michael Panczak
Donna M. Cannon
Municipal Services Coordinator
Note: These action minutes are prepared in compliance with 286.011 F.S. and are not verbatim transcripts of the
meeting. A verbatim audio record is available from the Office of the City Clerk.
All referenced attachments are on file in the Office of the City Clerk. Note: The Public Information Coordinator swore in those preparing to give testimony.
PLANNING, ZONING AND APPEALS BOARD REGULAR MEETING
03 .25 .08
Page 3
e
CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS
MEMORANDUM
TO:
DATE: June 4,2008
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Planning, Zoning, and Appeals Board Members
@+L Richard J. Marrero, Senior Planner
Steeplechase Research 81 Office Center
Please be advised that there is no staff report associated with the
Steeplechase Research & Office Center. However, the site plan amendment will
be presented by the applicant at a workshop during the June IO, 2008, PUB
meeting. The 3.7i-acre parcel of land is located at the northeast corner of the
Steeplechase Drive and Beeline Highway. Staff will be present to answer any
questions that the PUB may have.
ISSUES & CONCERNS
0 City Code Section 78-153, Nonresidential zoning district regulations, Table
12 Note 2, states that properties with a commercial neighborhood zoning
designation shall be the lesser of two stories or thirty-six feet. The
Applicant proposes a three-story office building and staff believes the
waiver for the additional story is not adequately justified and out of
character with the residential portion of the development.
e
Staff has serious concerns with the function of the ingress/egress to the
site via Steeplechase Drive.
0 The City Engineer has requested that the Applicant obtain the digital files
for the southern guardhouse located on Steeplechase Drive in order to
obtain a comprehensive view of the site and how it would function.
F
Q? f
I
r- ,/ ,' ,'
,' ,'
i
6 f2 rf: 0 3 -
7
3 nJ v
e
# #
0
9
h
8
~ b
J
I
Iv,
I-
F
a #
f
.. . . ... .- -- -:--:, -
. . ..
-. , rnltll
4r 9
I. 6
I
R
l-" I r
I c sr I I I 19
p: ct
I
P
c
p
c
I
I
I
ii- e
b f
A-
? $1
m
4-
I
R
1
PROPOSED PROFESSIONAL BUILDING
STEEPLECHASE RESEARCH & MEDICAL CENTER
PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA BEELINE HIGHWAY
c
-+
e
Ii :
%,\li'I I, '6 ,o' '0,
c "Z PROPOSED PROFESSIONAL BUILDING - - c L
1- - STEEPLECHASE RESEARCH & MEDICAL CENTER ,-.
si
~ , id
PROPOSED PROFESSIONAL BUILDING
STEEPLECHASE RESEARCH & MEDICAL CENTER
BEELINE HIGHWAY PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA
i
I Ill1
* PROPOSED PROFESSIONAL BUILDING . - - c c
I STEEPLECHASE RESEARCH & MEDICAL CENTER 12 - “.
e
11 1'
r T m !
I *, )c
PROPOSED PROFESSIONAL BUILDING c r
= - - -
+ %
L(
T $61. 178.8110 F 581.776.8168
fmm-Cab..RS)LII rn-mm
I:
yIDpWm.dIwmi ~icsn~~mx0709
STEEPLECHASE RESEARCH & MEDICAL CENTER
BEELINE HIGHWAY PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA
,I"'
'81, Ill\' 'I 'd,
i
'\
i:
I !
#e . r PROPOSED PROFESSIONAL BUILDING 1: I:
I=,
I Ihl-CMaR33LM --mn ,\*' '8,
c
e - ..
I % T W'I. 78. em F -1. ne
4mFGhWwd%hm Ua"MXDW7OO
STEEPLECHASE RESEARCH & MEDICAL CENTER
BEELINE HIGHWAY PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA
III, ,,I$' *I
.
1 PROPOSED PROFESSIONAL BUILDING
STEEPLECHASE RESEARCH & MEDICAL CENTER
BEELINE HIGHWAY PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA
re
~: ..
11 !I I1
I
'.* .
i
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
,/'
'e*
v, SCALE QESlGN ENGINEER: AS ,,g+- CONCEPTUAL MICHAEL D. SPRUCE
o -0c I 2i <+NE4 Fg STEEPLECHASE RESEARCH UTILITY
m w
'ITE PLAN
AND MEDICAL CENTER @ 2008 KIMLEI-HORN AND ASSWATES. INC.
PHONE (561) 330-2345
SMB -
52776 1690 S CONGRESS AK. SE. 100 DELRAY BEACH. n 33445
DRAW BY ss
FAX (561) 330-2145
MDS DAE Un DCVlClnMC "A_ 0, W KIMLEY-HORN.WU CA DWW696 gg PLAN CHECKED BY PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA
I
, 7 ?ea,
IO c m~ .I+ r> Ed
W 1 E g
AS NOTED DESCN ENGINEER SCALE
DESIGNED By MICHAEL 0. SPRUCE SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN CONCEPTUAL
AND MEDICAL CENTER
PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA
nM1IDA RECISTRAIION NUMBER:
52776 DRAW BY ss
STEEPLECHASE RESEARCH S IGNAGE
NO. REVISIONS DATE BY MDS DATE PLAN CHECKED BY
i ! !
;:
9 0 2 c <+ ' 5 8$ g
' ?)
t@
I
SCALE DEXN ENGINEER AS NOrrD 'ITE
STEEPLECHASE RESEARCH ROAD IMPROVEMENTS DRAWN
PALM AND BEACH MEDICAL GARDENS, CENTER FLORIDA
PLAN CONCEPTUAL ENTRANCE MICHAEL D. SPRUCE
@ 1008 KIMLEI-HORN AND ASSWATES. INC.
PHONE (561) 330-2345
MDS -
1690 s. CONGRESS AK STE. iw DELRAY BEACH. n ~~14s 52776 SS
FAX (561) 330-2245
MDS W KIMLEY-HORN.COM CA WDW686 NO, REVlSlONS DATE BY DAE
TO STEEPLECHASE CnECKED By
E8 22 a I
d
\
I
I- I-
;D 0 > U
. . __ - . .. . .... - . .... --
-e- a' *
.
wing noms: K:\BCD~Ci~II\l44167001-Steepiechass\CADD\144167001\dwg\20080425-Submittai\C-06-PLAN-CONCEPT-PGO-SECTIONS.dwg C-06 CONCEPTUAL-PGD-SECTIONS Apr 28. 2008 1l:OQom by eric.waldron . -nt. top.thr ...... cangta ... *m pmmld hn.k. .... Instrunnl .. dn. ........ aly ..... 4nlls ....................... pmPmd. ............ r.llmc. ..... docvmnl wilhcxlt Wtln wthorimtion ............ Klmi.yHan .. A.*rlml-. .. .hdi ........ lbbllty .. ~hi.y~- .. ~.-i.i...
- p (D
d u A P d W N A A 9 0 - W N
? ? 8 ? ? 9 ? ? ? ? x
b
i
i
I
i
j
I
-
i
j
i
v) m 0 A 0 z
0 I 0
- v d m A P d w N x ? ? g ? ? 0.
v) m 0 A 0 , z !
m i
1
, d 6
i
!
!
!
!
;
i
y ?
i
I
i
'D
I P
I F
i-.
Y s
-
1 f
ln e.
1 I 1-
0 z
0 I 0
\
v, SCALE OESIGN ENGINEER AS NOTED 'ITE PLAN CONCEPTUAL MICHAEL 0. SPRUCE
@ 2008 KIMLEI-HORN AN0 ASSOaATES. INC.
1690 S CONGRLSS AVE STE 1W OELRAY BEACH. FL 33445
PHONE (561) 330-2345
WKIYLEY-HORN MH CA OWW696
- FLMIDA REGISTRATION NUUBER
52776
STEEPLECHASE RESEARCH PAVING, GRADING &
AND bEDlCAL Ef'JTER DRAINAGE DETAl LS CHECKED
oR*~ ss
FAX (561) 330-2245
MDS DATE: No. REVlSlONS DATE E\ PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA
rr
E
t
i
R
E
t CE
X c> 2 - 0 c co co
a
/'
SCALE AS NOTED DESlGN ENGINEER:
MICHAEL 0. SPRUCE ;; g SITE DEVELOPMENT PIAN
25 ?: STEEPLECHASE RESEARCH TRUCK TURNING FL~IDA REcismAnm NUMBER SMB
w+ Nd 86 ; AND MEDICAL CENTER @ 2008 KIMLEY-HORN AND ASZWATES. INC.
I690 5 CONGRESS AK. STE. 100 DELRAY BEACH. Ft 33445 52776 ss
PHONE (5611 330-2345 FAX (561) 330-2245
MOVEMENT PLAN
W KIMLEY-HORN.WM CA DWW696 NO. REUSIONS DATE BI MDS DATE CHECKED BY PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA
ACCESS EVALUATION
Tract A of Steeplechase PUD
Steeplechase Office Building
This is a review and evaluation of the access conditions for Tract A of the
Steeplechase PUD which is located in the northeast corner of Beeline Highway
and Haverhill Road.
PUD Amroved Access
According to the PUD access was to be provided via two points - one on Beeline
Highway and the other on Haverhill Road.
H
Beeline Highway is a state road, known as SR 710. It is a four lane
divided highway with approximately a 40-foot wide median. Access is
controlled by the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) which
has granted a permit for a right in, right out driveway at the extreme east
end of the site about 5 10 feet from Haverhill Road.
Haverhill Road access is shown on the PUD at the extreme north end of
the site on Haverhill Road approximately 250 feet from Beeline
Highway. The intersection of Beeline Highway and Haverhill Road is
controlled by a traffic signal. The current conditions are an undivided
street that would allow access into and out of the access driveway.
Gatehouse and median improvements planned by the Homeowners
Association have been incorporated, as well.
The two access points provided in the PUD access plan offer a high level of
ingress and egress for the site. Drivers entering and exiting Tract A will benefit
from the traffic signal at the intersection of Beeline Highway and Haverhill
Road.
a Entering traffic from the west on Beeline Highway can turn left at
Haverhill Road protected by the signal and turn right into the site. A
separate right turn lane is to be provided to separate this movement from
northbound traffic entering Steeplechase.
right onto Beeline Highway at the signal or turn right directly from the
site at the Beeline Highway access point.
site. A separate right turn lane has been required by FDOT to separate
this movement from high speed westbound traffic on Beeline Highway.
left onto Beeline Highway protected by the signal.
a Exiting traffic wanting to go west can exit onto Haverhill Road and turn
Entering traffic from the east on Beeline Highway can turn right into the
Exiting traffic wanting to go east can exit onto Haverhill Road and turn
a
The PUD access plan with two access points also allows good onsite circulation
within Tract A. There are benefits to having more than one access in that the site
traffic and onsite parking are better distributed and balanced across the site. Sites
with only one way in and one way out are more congested at the driveway and in
that portion of the site near the only driveway.
Taking away the access point on Haverhill Road would severely reduce the
quality of access to and from the site. Beeline Highway is a divided highway and
drivers entering from the west and those exiting to go east would be negatively
impacted by eliminating access to Haverhill Road and the signal at Beeline
Highway. In particular:
Drivers entering from the west would have to go through the signalized
intersection at Haverhill Road, pass the site on their left and go 2,600
feet farther east to the next opening in the median which is at Blue Heron
Boulevard, make a U-turn and go back 2,000 feet to the only driveway to
turn into the site.
driveway, cross three lanes of high speed traffic on Beeline Highway
(including the right turn lane), enter the left turn lane approaching
Haverhill Road (the fourth lane), make a U-turn and proceed back past
the site to the east.
Similarly, drivers exiting to go east would have to exit the only
This unnecessary and circuitous travel reduces the quality of access associated
with the site. The U-turns increase exposure to conflicts with high speed traffic
on Beeline Highway.
Therefore, it is my professional opinion that the PUD access plan is more
beneficial to the drivers entering and exiting Tract A and eliminating the
Haverhill Road driveway would be detrimental to safe and convenient access to
the site.
Proposed Gate Control Stratenv
Steeplechase Drive is a private road and the automatic gate that has controlled the
entrance from Beeline Highway is being converted to a manned gatehouse.
Residents will have an automatic control and visitors will have to stop at the
gatehouse both entering and exiting. The ofice building planned for the
commercial parcel will offer right in right out access directly onto Beeline
Highway. Access onto Steeplechase Drive is important to the project to provide
for eastbound left turns from Beeline Highway entering the site and for exiting
traffic wanting to go east. The limited spacing between Beeline Highway and the
project driveway and the proximity of the gatehouse can be managed with a gate
control strategy like the one outlined herein.
The attached graphic shows the three major movements through the project
driveway intersection at Steeplechase Drive.
A. Southbound exiting on Steeplechase Drive including
residents (Al) and visitors (A2)
B.
C.
Westbound exit from the office building project
Northbound on Steeplechase Drive approaching the gatehouse including
residents (Cl) and visitors (C2)
The intent of the control strategy is to manage potential conflicts among
Steeplechase residents and visitors and traffic from the office building. The exit
at B would have to be gate controlled at B1, but not at B2. But loop detection
may be needed at B2 and at C1 and C2. Some of the strategies may include the
following:
rn
rn
Only allow B 1 when A 1 and A2 are closed
Don’t allow A to open until B2 has cleared
Don’t allow B if C is queued past a certain point
In this was a gate control strategy can be developed to manage traffic movement
and meet the needs of drivers from Steeplechase and the office building.
P:\1441 I67001 \Access Evaluation Dec 2007.doc
.. ’
L
II
I
I ! B c
fl
I
I
I
I I I I
I I
I
I
I
I I
I
3 S
I
\
\
CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS
PLANNING, ZONING AND APPEALS BOARD
Agenda Cover Memorandum
Date Prepared: May 27,2008
Meeting Date: June 10,2008
Petition: SPLA-08-01-000011
FINAL ORDER-08-01
- SUBJECTlAGENDA ITEM
FINAL ORDER 08-01
SPLA-08-01-000011: Burma Commerce Park
Consideration of Approval: A request by Gentile, Holloway, O’Mahoney & Associates, Inc.,
agent, on behalf of Burma Properties, Inc., to permit a reallocation of uses by eliminating the retail
use to allow medical and dental uses and flex-space, which includes warehouse and
office/warehouse uses within Burma Commerce Park. The 2.293-acre site is located approximately
1/8 of a mile south of the intersection of Northlake Boulevard and Burma Road on the east side of
Burma Road.
~~
[ X ] Recommendation to APPROVE
[ ] Recommendation to DENY
Reviewed by:
Bahareh K. Wolfs, AICP
Approved By:
City Manager:
Ronald M. Ferris
Originating Dept.:
Growth Management:
Planner
[XI Quasi - Judicial
[ 3 Legislative
[ 1 Public Hearing
Advertised:
Date:
Paper:
[ ] Required
[ X 3 Not Required
Affected Parties:
[ ]Notified
[ XI NotRequired
FINANCE:
Finance
Administrator:
Allan Owens
NIA
Senior Accountant: 4
Tresha Thomas
Fees Paid: [ X ] Yes
Budget Acct.#:
NIA
PZAB Action:
[ ]Approval
[ ] App. wl conds.
[ 3 Denial
[ 3 Continued to:
Attachments:
Approval Order
PZAB Approval
Applicant Narrative
Tenant List
Zoning Map
Location Map
Site Plan
Traffic Conc. letters
DRCComments
Letter - July 28,2000
Date Prepared: May 27,2008
Meeting Date: June 10,2008
Petition: SPLA-08-01-000011
FINAL ORDER 08-01
EXISbNG USE
BACKGROUND
ZONING LAND USE
On June 27,2000, the Planning, Zoning, and Appeals Board (PZAB) approved a minor site plan for
Petition SP-00-01 - Burma Road Commerce Park. This project has been constructed and currently
includes two one-story buildings with 7,300 square feet of retail use and 15,430 square feet of office
use, totaling 22,730 square feet on 2.293 acres. The PZAB approval letter dated July 28, 2000,
included a condition (No. 1) that permitted those uses allowed in the General Commercial (CG-1)
zoning district, except for medical and dental offices because of the parking requirement of one
parking space per 200 square feet of gross floor area. Medical and dental office uses are a
“Permitted” use in CG- 1 zoning districts, provided parking and traffic concurrency requirements are
satisfied. With this current petition, the reallocation of uses will include warehouse office and
warehouse, which have less parking and traffic concurrency requirements.
~
Subiect Property
Burma Commerce Park
North
Northlake Executive Park
South VacantAJndeveloped Land Light Industrial Park
Palm Beach County (PBC)
West Multifamily Residential -
Re si den ti a1 Development (PB C)
East
Sports Authority
General Commercial (CG-1) Commercial (C)
General Commercial (CG-1) Commercial (C)
Industrial (PBC)
Residential (PBC)
Planned Development (PBC IL)
Medium Density (RM) (PBC)
General Commercial (CG-1) Commercial (C) -
- -
APPLICANT’S REQUEST
The site currently operates as office and flex space, as there are existing garage bays for interior
storage of vehicles and supplies. The previously approved retail use has never been utilized.
Therefore, the applicant is requesting a reallocation from 7,300 square feet of retail use and 15,430
square feet of office use to 9,000 square feet of medical and dental use, 3,000 square feet of general
professional office use, 5,365 square feet of warehouse office, and 5,365 square feet of warehouse.
The applicant has demonstrated that parking and traffic concurrency requirements have been met
for the new proposed uses.
Section 78-147(d)( 1) allows storage within a completely enclosed building provided not more than
30 percent of gross floor area (6,819 square feet) is utilized for storage of goods and merchandise.
The applicant is proposing 5,365 square feet for warehousing or storage of goods and merchandise.
LAND USE & ZONING
The land-use designation of the site is Commercial (C).
Commercial (CG-1). The zoning and land-use designations of adjacent properties are as follows:
The zoning designation is General
2
Date Prepared: May 27,2008
Meeting Date: June 10,2008
Petition: SPLA-08-01-000011
FINAL ORDER 08-01
USE
Medical Office (9,000 s.f.)
Professional Office (3,000 s.f.)
Flex Suace:
0 TRAFFIC CONCURRENCY
REQUIRED PARKING SPACES
45 spaces (1 space/200 s.f.)
10 spaces (1 space/300 s.f.)
The site previously received traffic concurrency approval for 7,300 square feet of retail space and
15,430 square feet of office space. With this current application, the applicant is proposing: 9,000
square feet of medical andor dental office use; 3,000 square feet of professional/general office use;
and flex-space consisting of 5,365 square feet of warehouse and 5,365 square feet of
warehouse/office. Palm Beach County Traffic Engineering, in a letter dated May 2, 2008, and
McMahon Associates, Inc., in a letter dated April 17, 2008, both confirm the project has received
traffic concurrency approval for the proposed uses based on a build-out date of December 3 1 , 2009.
Warehouse Office (5,365 s.f.)
Warehouse (5,365 s.f.)
Total Spaces Required
Total Spaces Provided 0
PARKING
22 spaces (1 space/250 s.f.)
3 spaces (1 space/2,000 s.f.)
80 spaces
81 spaces
Parking requirements for the proposed uses have been calculated, with 80 spaces required and 8 1
spaces provided, as shown below:
Included with the 8 1 parking spaces provided are four (4) required ADA compliant parking spaces,
In addition, two loading spaces and four bicycle spaces have been provided.
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE COMMENTS
The applicant has satisfied all Development Review Committee (DRC) comments. The site plan is
unchanged except for modifications to the Site Data Table to reflect the reallocation of uses and
parking requirements.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends APPROVAL of Petition PPUD-07-02-000013, including the special conditions
below, which shall supersede those conditions set forth in the previous Order Approving Minor Site
Plan (SP-00-01, dated July 28,2000):
1. The permitted uses for this site shall be 9,000 square feet of medical and/or dental office
use, 3,000 square feet of professional/general office use, and flex-space consisting of 5,365
square feet of warehouse and 5,365 square feet of warehouse/office. (Planning & Zoning)
Prior to issuance of building permits for interior renovation and prior to issuance of each
3
Date Prepared: May 27,2008
Meeting Date: June 10,2008
Petition: SPLA-08-01-000011
FINAL ORDER 08-01
occupational license, or upon request by the City, the Applicant, its successors, and/or
assigns shall submit to the City an updated tabular summary indicating the total square
footages leased for each approved use. (Planning & Zoning, Development Compliance,
Code Enforcement)
3. Both buildings on site shall have fire-rated walls and/or sprinkler systems, per the approval
of the City’s Fire Marshal. (Fire Department) PREVIOUSLY SATISFIED
4. Prior to construction plan approval, the applicant shall revise the plans to modify the “5-foot
Striped Access Aisle” between the two buildings to show the sidewalk crossing after the
stop sign. (City Engineering) PREVIOUSLY SATISFIED
5. Prior to the final certificate of occupancy, all structures within proximity of the drainage
system, including but not limited to landscaping and light poles, shall be field verified to
avoid conflicts. (City Engineering) PREVIOUSLY SATISFIED
6. Prior to construction plan approval, the applicant shall revise the paving, grading and
drainage plan to show the landscape berm on the western boundary of the site. (City
Engineering) PREVIOUSLY SATISFIED
7. Upon approval of the development order, the applicant shall secure a “Seacoast Utility
Authority Capacity Allocation Commitment for Public Water and/or Sewer Service,” which
shall be verified by the delivery of a hlly executed copy of the document to the Planning &
Zoning Division within 30 days of granting of the development order. (Planning & Zoning)
PREVIOUSLY SATISFIED
jh/case files/Burrna Commerce ParWStaff Report Burma PZAB Cons of Aprvl.doc
4
PLANNING, ZONING, AND APPEALS BOARD
CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS
FINAL ORDER-08-01
PETITION NO. SPLA-08-01-000011 - Burma Commerce Park
RE: A request by Gentile, Holloway, O’Mahoney & Associates, Inc., agent, on behalf of Burma
Properties, Inc., to permit a reallocation of uses by eliminating retail use and allowing
medical and dental use, professional/general office use, and flex space consisting of
warehouse and warehouse/ofXce.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
All of Burma Commerce Park, according to the map or plat thereof as recorded in Plat Book 79,
Page 42, Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida.
ORDER APPROVING MINOR SITE PLAN AMENDMENT AND USE CHANGES
THIS PETITION came to be heard after receipt of the above application, and the City of
Palm Beach Gardens Planning, Zoning, and Appeals Board, having considered the testimony and
other evidence presented by the Applicant, City staff, and other interested persons at a public
meeting, hereby makes the following findings of fact:
1. In accordance with Land Development Regulations (LDRs) Section 78-43, Review of
applications for development orderapproval, the Planning, Zoning, and Appeals Board
is the decision-making authority for Minor Site Plan Reviews. This project received
original approval by the Planning, Zoning, and Appeals Board (f.k.a. Site Plan and
Appearance Review Committee) at its meeting of June 27, 2000;
2. In accordance with LDRs Section 78-48, Site plan reviews, a Minor Site Plan review by
the Planning, Zoning, and Appeals Board is appropriate when a non-residential project
is less than three (3) acres in size and involves less than 30,000 square feet. This
parcel consists of 2.293 acres and the building square footage is 22,730 square feet;
3. Public notice is not required for a minor site plan amendment according to Section 78-
54, Public notice, Table 4, of the City’s Land Development Regulations.
4. In letters dated April 17,2008, Palm Beach County Traffic Engineering and McMahon
Associates, Inc., confirm that the project has received traffic concurrency approval for
the proposed uses based on a build-out date of December 31 , 2009.
5. The property, which is the subject of this application, is classified and zoned General
Commercial (CG-1) by the City’s Land Development Regulations and the zoning map
made a part thereof by reference. Section 78-147(d)(I) allows storage within a
completely enclosed building provided not more than 30 percent of gross floor area
(6,819 square feet) shall be utilized for storage of goods and merchandise. The
applicant is proposing 5,365 square feet for warehousing or storage of goods and
merchandise.
6. Under the provisions of such regulations, the Planning, Zoning, and Appeals Board
Planning, Zoning, and Appeals Board
Meeting Date: June IO, 2008
Petition: SPLA-01-01-000011
FINAL ORDER-08-01
has the right, power and authority to act upon the application herein made.
7. The City of Palm Beach Gardens Planning, Zoning, and Appeals Board has
determined that the request meets the criteria of the Land Development Regulations
previously referenced in this Order.
IT IS THEREUPON CONSIDERED, ORDERED, AND ADJUDGED by the City of Palm
Beach Gardens Planning, Zoning, and Appeals Board as follows:
Petition SPLA-08-01-000011 for Burma Commerce Park is hereby APPROVED to allow
the conversion of 7,300 square feet of retail use and 15,430 square feet of professionallgeneral
office use to 9,000 square feet of medical and dental office use, 3,000 square feet of
professionallgeneral office use, and flex space consisting of 5,365 square feet of warehouse and
5,365 square feet of warehouseloffice, with reference to the above-described property in the City of
Palm Beach Gardens, Florida.
THIS APPROVAL shall be subject to the following special conditions, which shall
supersede those conditions set forth in the previous Order Approving Minor Site Plan (SP-00-01,
dated July 28,2000). Satisfaction of and compliance with the subject special conditions shall be the
responsibility of the applicant, its successors, andlor assigns. (Note: The conditions no longer
applicable have been noted as “Previously Satisfied.”)
1. The permitted uses for this site shall be 9,000 square feet of medical andlor dental office
use, 3,000 square feet of professionallgeneral office use, and flex-space consisting of
5,365 square feet of warehouse and 5,365 square feet of warehouse/office. (Planning &
Zoning )
2. Prior to issuance of building permits for interior renovation and prior to issuance of each
occupational license, or upon request by the City, the Applicant, its successors, and/or
assigns shall submit to the City an updated tabular summary indicating the total square
footages leased for each approved use. (Planning & Zoning, Development Compliance,
Code Enforcement)
3. Both buildings on site shall have fire-rated walls and/or sprinkler systems, per the approval
of the City’s Fire Marshal. (Fire Department) PREVIOUSLY SATISFIED
4. Prior to construction plan approval, the applicant shall revise the plans to modify the “5-
foot Striped Access Aisle” between the two buildings to show the sidewalk crossing after
the stop sign. (City Engineering) PREVIOUSLY SATISFIED
5. Prior to the final certificate of occupancy, all structures within proximity of the drainage
system, including but not limited to landscaping and light poles, shall be field verified to
avoid conflicts. (City Engineering) PREVIOUSLY SATISFIED
2
Planning, Zoning, and Appeals Board
Meeting Date: June IO, 2008
Petition: SPLA-01-01-000011
FINAL ORDER-08-01
6. Prior to construction plan approval, the applicant shall revise the paving, grading and
drainage plan to show the landscape berm on the western boundary of the site. (City
Engineering) PREVIOUSLY SAT1 SF I ED
7. Upon approval of the development order, the applicant shall secure a “Seacoast Utility
Authority Capacity Allocation Commitment for Public Water and/or Sewer Service,” which
shall be verified by the delivery of a fully executed copy of the document to the Planning &
Zoning Division within 30 days of granting of the development order. (Planning & Zoning)
PREVIOUSLY SAT1 S F I ED
THIS APPROVAL shall be in accordance with the following plans on file with the City’s
Growth Management Department:
1. April 08, 2008, Site Plan SP-1 , 1 sheet, by Gentile, Holloway, O’Mahoney & Associates.
2. May 23, 2000, Site Detail Sheet, The Sun Group, Inc., Sheet SP2, I sheet.
3. May 23, 2000, Building Elevations, The Sun Group, Inc., Sheet AI, 1 sheet.
4. May 23, 2000, Floor and Roof Plans, The Sun Group, Inc., Sheet A2, 1 sheet.
5.
6.
June 9,2000, Landscape Plan, David W. Lockmiller, ASLA, Sheet LS-1, 1 sheet.
June 9, 2000, Landscape Details, David W. Lockmiller, ASLA, Sheet LS-2, 1 sheet.
0
7. June 5, 2000, Conceptual Drainage Plan, Jeff H. Iravani, Inc., Sheet C1, 1 sheet.
8. May 23, 2000, Photometric Site Plan, The Sum Group, Inc., Sheet MEI, 1 sheet.
9. April 2, 2000, BoundaryiTopographic Survey, Dailey and Associates, Inc., 1 sheet.
DONE AND ORDERED this IOth day of June, 2008.
PLANNING, ZONING, AND APPEALS BOARD
Craig Kunkle, Chair
ATTEST:
BY:
Recording Secretary
Jh/case files/Burma Commerce ParWFinal Approval Order Burma Uses PZAB.docx
3
CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS
10500 N. MILITARY TRAIL PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA 33410-4689
July 28, 2000
Richard Sun
The Sun Group, Inc.
900 East lndiantown Road, Suite I1 5
746-7706 fax: 746-7478
rsy‘t.t;eu- p( 33t7.7
RE: SP-00-01 - Burma Road Commerce Park
Dear Mr. Sun:
At the Site Plan and Appearance Review Committee’s June 27, 2000 meeting, the
Committee voted 6 to 0 to grant approval to petition SP-00-01 - Burma Road Commerce
Park. Said approval shall be consistent with plans filed with the City’s Growth Management
Department as follows, and shall supersede the existing site plans:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
9.
a.
June 6, 2000 Site Plan, The Sun Group, Inc., Sheet SPI, 1 sheet,
May 23, 2000 Site Detail Sheet, The Sun Group, Inc., Sheet SP2, 1 sheet.
May 23, 2000 Building Elevations, The Sun Group, Inc., Sheet AI 1 sheet.
May 23, 2000 Floor and Roof Plans, The Sun Group, Inc., Sheet A2, 1 sheet,
June 9, 2000 Landscape Plan, David W. Lockmiller ASLA, Sheet LS-I, 1 sheet.
June 9, 2000 Landscape Details, David W. Lockmiller ASLA, Sheet LS-2, 1 sheet.
June 5, 2000 Conceptual Drainage Plan, Jeff H. Iravani, Inc., Sheet C1, 1 sheet.
May 23, 2000 Photometric Site Plan, The Sun Group, Inc., Sheet MEI, 1 sheet.
April 2, 2000 BoundaqdTopographic Survey, Dailey and Associates, Inc., 1 sheet,
Said site plans shall comply with the following conditions:
1. The permitted uses for this site shall be those permitted in the General Commercial
(CG-1) zoning district except for dental and medical offices. No dental or medical
offices shall be permitted on this site. (Planning & Zoning)
2. The total amount of retail space on this site shall not exceed 7,300 square feet.
(Planning & Zoning)
3. Both buildings on site shall have fire-rated walls andlor sprinkler systems, per the
approval of the City’s Fire Marshal. (Fire Department)
4. Prior to construction plan approval, the applicant shall revise the plans to modify the “5-
foot Striped Access Aisle” between the two buildings to show the sidewalk crossing
after the stop sign. (City Engineering)
5. Prior to the final certificate of occupancy, all structures within proximity of the drainage
system, including but not limited to landscaping and light poles, shall be field verified
to avoid conflicts. (City Engineering)
6. Prior to construction plan approval, the applicant shall revise the paving, grading and
drainage plan to show the landscape berm on the western boundary of the site.
(City Engineering)
7. Upon approval of the development order, the applicant shall secure a "Seacoast Utility
Authority Capacity Allocation Commitment for Public Water andlor Sewer Service,"
which shall be verified by the delivery of a fully executed copy of the document to the
Planning & Zoning Division within 30 days of granting of the development order.
(Planning & Zoning)
This officially documents the approval of the Burma Road Commerce Park.
aforementioned plans will be on record in the Planning and Zo
Division of the Growth Management Department.
The
gqohn: spOOO1 .approval.doc
4 a
. GENTILE
HOLLOWAY '
O'MAHONEY \
' & A550ClAIt5 ltli e Landscaoe Architects
Planner; and Environmental
Consultants . CC-0000177
\ PROJECT NARRATIVE
Burma Commerce Park ' I
, January 14,2008
Updated: March 19,2008
George G Gentile, FASLA
M Troy Holl~ay. ASLA
Emily OMahoney. ASLA ..
1
, RequestILocation I.
On behalf of the applicant, Gentile Holloway O'Mahoney & Associates, Inc., acting as
agent; is requesting the revie& of' an application for site plan amendmerit to include .
medical office as a permitted use on this property. At the time of the original approval
retail and office were, only permitted uses due to the traffic. Typically today we would be
permitted to alter the blend of uses as long as an equivalency for traffic and parkingis
provid d. We respectfully request that we be permitted to habe uses as permitted by such
, equivLy.,
- The site currently operate; as office including flex space as there are existing garage bays
for interior storage of vehicles,and supplies. The subject site is located 1/8 of a mile
south of Northlake Boulevard on Burma Road, within the City of Palm Beach Gardens.
The site has a future land use of commercial and zoning designatian of,,General
Commercial (CG-1).
I
\
I I Proposed Amendment .
The site is currently operating. Although the site was originally approved for both office
and retail, the retail use was never utilized. Meanwhile the site isnow being soaght to
have some medical tenants and typically that requires traffic and parking equivalency. At
the time of this approval, medical was not permitted as a use. Under today's code,
medical would be permitted as long as the traffic and parking meets code. Typically such
projects are conditioned to provide equivalency statements to staff to permit changes in
uses on the site.
The proposed change to add this use is permitted under the current land use and zoning
categories. However, due to a condition placed on the approved site plan by the Site Plan
P
,
and Appearance Review Committee (July 28, 2000), medical office use was not
1907 Commerce Lane Suite 101
Jupiter Florida 33458
561-575-9557
561-575-5260 FAX
wwwlandscapd-architects corn
4 -. .. .
1
0 .‘
I
0
Burma Business Park
Project Narrative
Jan’ub 14,2008 .
Updated March 19, ‘2008
Page 2
permitted on the site. Therefore it is required that the applicant go before the board to
request the use to be permitted.
Concurrency \
The site is currently operating and has received concurrency for the approved uses of
7,300 SF of retail space and 15,430 SF of office space. The applicant is requesting, with
this application, an equivalency for 9,000 SF of medical office, 3,000 SF of professional
office, and 10,730 SF of flex space. Parking equivalency is provided in’the site data
tabular of the submitted site plan. Please note the use of indoor storage is permitted
within the CG.1 zoning designation provided that it does not exceed 30% of the gross
floor area (Sec. 78-147.d.1). Unfortunately at this time the City’s parking calculations do
not specifically identify flex use but does provide a ratio under business supply (which is
often a flex space user.) This calculation parks the indoor storage as warehouse.
Surrounding Uses
.Existing Zoning, and Land Use Designations
, I ZONING
~~ SUBJECT.PROPERTE 1- General Commercial (CG-1)
~ CG- 1 TO THE NORTH ;
Northlake Executive Park
TO THE SOUTH : Vacant Development (IL)
TO THE EAST :
Sports Authority
Light Industrial Park Planned -
CG- 1
TO THE WEST: Multifamily Residential-
Residential Development Medium Density (RM)
Industrial
Residential
I
Burma Commerce Park: Current Tenant List
9000 Burma Road
March 19, 2008
Rear building: total SF 7,445
Suite 100: Office- 1,564 SF- Interiors By Dawn
Suite 101: Warehouse -5,881SF- Sabatello Construction
Front Buildinn: Total SF 15,210
Suite 101: 1456 SF-office- David Brooks Enterprises, Inc.
Suite 102: 1050 SF-office -Contemporary Community Concepts Corp
Suite 103 : 14 12 SF-office -Vacant
Suite 104: 1412 SF-office -Vacant
Suite 105: 1050 SF-office -Vacant
Suite 106: 1225 SF-office -Anesthetix Management, LLC
Suite 107: 1225 SF-office -Anesthetix Management, LLC
Suite 108: 1050 SF-office/warehouse-Brinks Home Security
Suite 109: 141 2 SF-office/warehouse-Brinks Home Security
Suite 1 10: 1412 SF-office/warehouse-Brinks Home Security
Suite1 1 1 : 1050 SF-office-Sabatello Construction
Suite 1 12: 1456 SF-office/warehouse-Sabatello Selection Studio
Site originally approved for 15,430 SF of Office space and 7,300 SF of retail space.
I
Burma Business Park
Palm Beach Gardens, Florida
Landuse Map
11/27/07
:
e
Burma Business Park
Palm Beach Gardens, Florida
Zoning Map
0
/37/n7
. .., I,,
Burma Business Park
Palm Beach Gardens, Florida 11; 37 /"7
Location Map
I
Department of Engineering
and Public Works
P.O. Box 21 229
West Palm Beach, FL 33416-1229
(561) 684-4000
www,pbcgov.com
Patm Beach County
Board of County
Commissioners
Addie L. Greene. Chairperson
ff Koons. Vice Chair e Karen T. Marcus
Robert J. Kanjian
Mary McCarty
Burt Aaronson
Jess R. Santamaria
County Administrator
Robert Weisman
"An Equal Opportuni&
May 2,2008
Ms. Jackie Holloman AlCP
Planner - City of Palm Beach Gardens
10500 N. Military Trail
Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410
RE: Burma Business Park - Revised Plan
Project #: 080421
TRAFFIC PERFORMANCE STANDARDS REVIEW
Dear Jackie:
The Palm Beach County Traffic Division has reviewed the revised development plan of
the previously approved project entitled Burma Business Park, pursuant to the Traffic
Performance Standards in Article 12 of the Palm Beach County Land Development
Code. The project is summarized as follows:
Location:
Municipality:
PCN#:
Existing Uses:
Prev. Approval:
Proposed Uses:
New Daily Trips:
New PH Trips:
Build-Ou t:
East side of Burma Road, south of Northlake Boulevard.
Palm Beach Gardens
15.430 SF General Office and 7,300 SF General Ret.ail.
9,000 SF Medical Office, 8,365 SF General Office, and 5,365 SF
Warehouse.
9,000 SF Medical Office, 3,000 SF General Office, and 10,730 SF
Flex OfficeNVarehouse.
None - Trip Reduction
13 AM and Trip Reduction PM.
End of Year 2009
52-43-42-1 9- 14-000-0000
Based on our review, the Traffic Division has determined the revised development plan
for the previously approved project meets the Traffic Performance standards of Palm
Beach County. No building permits are to be issued by the City, after the build-out date,
specified above. The County traffic concurrency approval is subject to the Project
Aggregation Rules set forth in the Traffic Performance Standards Ordinance.
if ilave ar~y yueslior is regardhy this determination, please contact me at b84-4U'Ju
Sincerely,
Masoud Atw \ TPS Admini or, Municipalities - Traffic Engineering Division
MA:sf
cc: Jeff H. Iravani, Inc.
McMahon & Associates, Inc.
File: General - TPS Mun. Traffic Study Review
F~\TRAFFIC\ma\Adm1n~pprovals\.2008\08042 1 .doc
@ printed an recycled paper
hlrMXHON AhSOClATES, INC.
7741 N. Military Trail I Suite 5 I Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410
www. rncrntrans.com
P 561 -840-8650 I f 561-840-8590
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
TO: Kara Irwin, Growth Management Administrator
Leo Giangrande, P.E., Assistant City Engineer
City of Palm Beach Gardens
cc: Dan Clark, P.E.
Jackie Holloman, AICP, Planner
City of Palm Beach Gardens
FROM: .E.,PTOE, Senior Project Manager
SUBJECT: Burma Business Park
SPLA-08-01-000011
McMahon Project No. M06344.38
DATE: April 17, 2008
1’1; IN c 1 t’ A LS
Joseph W. McMahon, P.E.
Rodney P. Ptourde, Ph.D., P.E.
Joseph J. DeSantis, P.E., PTOE
John 5. DePalma
William T. Steffens
ASS 0 C I ATBS
Casey A. Moore, P.E.
Gary R. McNaughton, P.E., PTOE
John J. Mitchell, P.E.
Christopher J. Williams, P.E.
John F. Yacapsin, P.E.
Thomas A. Hall
McMahon Associates, Inc. (McMahon) has reviewed the revised traffic statement prepared by
Jeff H. Iravani, dated April 11, 2008. The applicant has sufficiently addressed the previous
comments and the project can be approved for City traffic concurrency. A summary of the
project is provided below:
Location: 9000 Burma Road
Existing Use:
Proposed Use:
New AM Trips 13
PCN#: 52-43-42-19-14-000-0000
15,430 sq. ft. General Office
7,300 sq. ft. Commercial Retail
13,730 sq. ft. General Office
9,000 sq. ft. Medical Office
New PM Trips: 0
Traffic Concurrency Expires: December 31,2009
Comments from the Palm Beach County Traffic Engineering Division are not yet available. The
City should verify that the parking requirements for the proposed development program are
met. Please feel free to contact me with any questions or concerns you have regarding this
project.
F: \FL\06344M\06344M-38-Burma\Admin-MCM\Docs\Burrna Business Park Tech Memo 041708.doc
bl.4 Boston PA Fort Washington I Exton I Mechanicsburg Nl Yardville FI Palm Beach Gardens I Fort Lauderdale 1 Fort Myers I Miami
BcIsI/LE Engineering Excellence Since 1942
3550 SW Corporate Parkway Palm City, Florida 34990
772.286.3883 Fax 772.286.3925 www.boyleencineerina.com
Employee Owned
Memorandum
TO: Jackie Holloman
FROM: Leo Giangrande, P.E.
f
DATE: April 24,2008
File ## 17150
SUBJECT: Burma Commerce Park
Site Plan Amendment
SPLA-08-01-11
We have reviewed the following plans and information for the referenced project received March 21,
2008:
0
0
0
Response to April 11,2008 DRC comments
Traffic impact report dated (revised) April 08,2008 prepared by Jeff H. Iravani, Inc.
Site Plan (Sheet SP-1) dated (signed) April 10, 2008 prepared by Gentile Holloway O’Mahoney &
Associates, Inc.
We have the following comments:
0 The applicant proposes modify the current permitted use of the project, which is 7,300 sq ft of retail
and 15,430 sq ft of office space, to permit 9,000 sq ft of medical office, 3,000 sq ft of professional
office and 10,730 sq ft of flex space.
We have no engineering issues remaining in this site plan amendment application. 0
Certification Issues:
1. Satisfied. The applicant shall revise the development application description under “Site Information
- Proposed Square Footage by Use”, the project narrative under “Concurrency” and the traffic
impact report, for consistency as to the proposed use. The development application indicates the use
is proposed to be 10,730 sq ft business supply and 9,000 sq ft medical; the project narrative indicates
the proposed use is 9,000 sq ft of medical office, 3,000 sq ft of professional office and 10,730 sq ft
of flex space; while the traffic impact report indicates that the proposed use is 9,000 sq ft of medical
office, 8,365 sq ft of general office an 5,365 sq ft of warehouse.
a. The applicant has submitted a revised traffic impact report with the correct square footage. e. Previously Satisfied.
C:\Documents and Settings\jholloman\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\44VOA9SE\17150 - 20080424 - Burma Commerce Park -
SPLA-08-01-1l.doc
BOWL€ Page 2 of 2
Burma Commerce Park
File #I7150
3. Satisfied. The applicant provided required stacking distance dimension on the site plan (SP-1) for
the south drive entrance to reflect the city’s requirement that stacking distance be measured from the
right-of-way line, not the curb line for conformance with Section 78-344 of the LDR.
a. While the applicant indicates there are no site changes proposed by this application, therefore
due to the nature of this proposal stacking distance indicated on the site plan is not required.
4. Satisfied. The applicant indicated the required stacking distance for the north drive entrance on the
site plan (SP-1) for conformance with Section 78-344 of the LDR.
a. While the applicant indicates there are no site changes proposed by this application, therefore
due to the nature of this proposal stacking distance indicated on the site plan is not required.
5. Previously Satisfied.
6. Satisfied. The applicant shall revise the Site Data table on the site plan (SP-1) to correctly reflect the
parking requirements. The office use under Flex Space should be 22 spaces and the warehouse use
should be three (3) spaces, with the total required being 80 spaces. Therefore, the bicycle required
parking should be four (4) spaces (80 required x 5% = 4 space required), versus the five (5) spaces
shown.
a. The applicant has revised the site data table.
Waiver Requests :
1. The applicant has requested no waivers with this submittal.
Non-Certification Issues:
1. Satisfied. The applicant indicates there are no site changes proposed by this application.
The applicant shall provide a written response to all comments, indicating acknowledgement of
each comment and how each comment has been addressed. Compliance will expedite the
subsequent review. It is suggested that the applicant clearly identify all changes to theplans by either
%lauding': or highlighting, the location of all changes to further expedite the review.
The applicant is reminded that all submittals are to be made to the City of Palm Beach Gardens
Growth Management Department.
LDG/klm
cc: Kara Irwin - Palm Beach Gardens (kinvin@pbafl.com)
C:\Documents and Settings\jholloman\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\44VOA9SE\17 150 - 20080424 - Burma Commerce Park -
SPLA-08-01-1l.doc
I -95
0 c, I 2
'.
4
/ i
n -
4
/
I
-l v:
n
5.
CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS
PLANNING, ZONING, & APPEALS BOARD
Agenda Cover Memorandum
Date Prepared: June 5,2008
Meeting Date: June 10,2008
Ordinance 13,2008 / LDRA-07-01-000012
SubjedAgenda Item:
Ordinance 13, 2OOS/Petition LDRA-07-01-000012: Amendment to the Land Development
Regulations Relating to Height Restrictions
First Reading: A City-initiated request to amend the Palm Beach Gardens Land Development
Regulations providing limitations to height waivers for single-family and multi-family residential
buildings located within all zoning districts in the City and non-residential buildings located west of
Interstate Highway 95.
[XI Recommendation to APPROVE
Reviewed by:
Development
Compliance N/A
Bahareh Keshavarz-Wolfs,
AICP
Administrator
Approved By:
Ronald M. Fenis
City Manager
Originating Dept.:
Growth Management
Adminisirator
Action:
[ ] Quasi-judicial
[XI Legislative
[ 3 F’ublicHearing
Advertised:
Date: May 30,2008
Paper:
[XI Required
[ ] NotRequired
Affected Parties:
[ ]Notified
[XI NotRequired
FINANCE: N/A
Costs:$ N/A
Total
$3
Current FY
Funding Source:
[ ]Operating
M Otherm
Budget Acct#:
NIA
City Council Action:
[ ]Approved
[ ] App. w/ conditions
[ ]Denied
[ ] Rec. approval
[ ] Rec. app. w/ conds.
[ ] Rec. Denial
[ ] Continued to:-
Attachments:
Ordinance 13,2008
Date Prepared: June 5,2008
Meeting Date: June 10, 2008
Ordinance 13,2008
Page 2 of 14
BACKGROUND e
In 2007, the City Council directed staff to draft an ordinance to the City’s Land Development
Regulations that provided for a limitation to the height waivers for residential development
throughout the City. DraA Ordinance 8 , 2007, provided for specific limitations to residential heights
of buildings located within all zoning districts that permitted residential uses.
At its meeting on February 13,2007, the Planning, Zoning, and Appeals Board (Board) held a public
hearing to review the subject ordinance. The Board voted 7-0 to recommend denial of the subject
ordinance for the many reasons, which are specified on page 13 of this report. On March 1 , 2007,
the City Council approved Ordinance 8,2007, on first reading, but decided to table the adoption of
the ordinance until the return of the City’s seasonal population.
During the interim, the City Council directed Mayor Joe Russo to work with the Palm Beach
Gardens Resident’s Coalition (Coalition) to discuss providing acceptable limitation to non-
residential height waivers. The agreed upon language was written into the existing ordinance that
provided a limitation to residential height. Due to the substantial changes to the ordinance, staffwas
required to take the proposed text amendment back through the Land Development Regulations
Committee for a recommendation to City Council. The ordinance was assigned a new number
within the 2008 year, Ordinance 13,2008.
RESIDENTIAL HEIGHT LIMITATIONS
During the December 7,2006, City Council meeting, David Barth, of Glatting Jackson, presented the
final report from the Interactive Planning Session that evaluated ‘Height Issues’ for future
development and redevelopment in the City of Palm Beach Gardens. The Interactive Planning
Session (Session) was held in the City Council Chambers on Wednesday, October 25, 2006, and
Wednesday, November 1,2006. David Barth and Allison Crnic, of Glatting Jackson, facilitated the
Session on behalf of the City.
The report for the Charrette documented input from all of the residents present at the meeting and the
facilitator reported on consensus items that were expressed during each of the two evenings. There
were several items related and unrelated to height, which repeatedly arose at each meeting that
residents reported were important to maintain in future development and redevelopment. Overall,
one of the major consensus points brought up during the Planning Session involved limitations on
strictly residential areas within the City to low-rise buildings. Many residents were concerned about
the possibility of height waivers allowing high-rise buildings within adjacent residential areas.
In response to this concern, staff is providing a draft ordinance to the City’s Land Development
Regulations (LDRs) that would provide for limits to height waivers for single and multi-family
residential buildings in all zoning districts in the City. The City’s LDRs only permit height waivers
for residential buildings within Planned Unit Development (PUD) Overlays and Planned Community
District (PCD) Overlays. The amendment prohibits waivers to the height restrictions in excess of
25% of the height limit where height is measured in feet and no higher than one additional story
Date Prepared: June 5,2008
Meeting Date: June 10,2008
Ordinance 13,2008
Page 3 of 14
where height is regulated by number of stories. Currently, residential uses are limited to four stories
within the Mixed-Use land use category, but no maximum height limit has been established within
the Code. The City’s Comprehensive Plan does not permit height waivers for residential
development within a Mixed-Use land use designation, which has been verified within the current
amendment and a maximum height has been proposed consistent with the maximum height
established within the Residential High (RH) zoning district.
The proposed LDR text amendment was presented to City Council during the City Manager’s Report
during the City Council meeting on January 18,2007. During the meeting, the City Council directed
staff to evaluate the following issues:
0
0
0
Providing a requirement for a super majority vote of City Council to change the proposed
code revision
Provide for the height limitation in the City’s Comprehensive Plan
Address the need for providing provisions for tiering heights with adjacent developments
Provide a definition and height limitation for a story within the City’s Mixed-use land use
category
Provide an exception for Transit-Oriented Development
Super Majority Vote
Unless otherwise specified, the adoption of an Ordinance or Resolution is accomplished by a
majority vote of a quorum present at a meeting. Section 166.041, Florida Statutes, and Section 18-1,
Code of Ordinances provide that a majority of the members of the governing body shall constitute a
quorum, and that an affirmative vote of a majority of the quorum present shall be necessary to enact
any ordinance or adopt any resolution, except that two-thirds of the membership of the board is
required to enact an emergency ordinance. While the City cannot lessen or reduce the procedures for
the enactment of a municipal ordinance, the City may add additional requirements or prescribe
procedures in greater detail than contained in Section 166.041.
0
The addition of a super-majority voting requirement to modify a particular provision of the Code of
Ordinances is, however, not prohibited by state law, and is sometimes used when a local governing
body identifies an issue which is of such import to the community that a simple majority requirement
to change the provision is perceived as inadequate. For example, some local codes contain such
limitations on the sale of city property, so that a super majority vote is necessary to approve such a
sale.
While a super majority is a legal mechanism, there can be certain unintended consequences of such a
requirement that the council should be aware of. A super majority vote essentially places the
ultimate decision-making in the hands of a minority of the council. For example, if three (a majority)
of the elected officials wish to take a certain action, they can be prevented from taking such action by
two (the minority) of the council. A further complication can arise in the event there is a vacancy on
the council or one or more members are absent or have a voting conflict. An example of this
situation was recently reported concerning the Village of Wellington where on councilmember was
required to abstain, thus necessitating a unanimous of the remaining four members for passage of an
Date Prepared: June 5,2008
Meeting Date: June 10,2008
Ordinance 13,2008
Page 4 of 14
item.
Staff does not recommend including a requirement for a super majority of City Council to amend the
Code Section in the hture.
Provisions for Tiering and Compatibility
The City’s Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Regulations (LDRs) provide language
requiring compatibility of design and use with adjacent existing and hture uses. In addition,
Planned Unit Development (PUD) Overlay districts and Planned Community District (PCD)
Overlays provide opportunities for City Council to place conditions of approval relative to
compatibility to adjacent development.
The following are examples of sections of the City’s LDRs that address design guidelines for
building height and height transition for development.
Section 78-154. PUD - Planned unit development overlay district.
Section 78-154(g) (10):
(10) Building height limit. The maximum building height in a PUD shall be established in the
development order approved by the city council. Final determination of maximum building height
shall consider the following:
a. the proposed uses of the structure;
b. the bulk, mass, and context of adjacent structures or proposed structures;
c. the compatibility with adjacent existing or proposed uses;
d. the relationship to the adjoining uses and the surrounding development; and
e. the provision of open space in the proposed PUD.
Section 78-22 7. Architectural elements.
Section 78-227 (a) (5):
(5) Facade/wall height transition. New developments that are located within 150 feet of an
existing building, and are more than twice the height of any existing building within 150 feet shall
provide massing elements to provide an appropriate structure transition.
a. The transitional massing element can be no more than 100 percent taller than the average height
of the adjacent buildings.
b. Facades shall have architectural articulation at the pedestrian level and at the roofline.
Height Limits for Mixed-Use (MXD)
Staff has provided a maximum height limitation for single-family and multi-family buildings within
a mixed-use development that is consistent with the maximum height limit for buildings located 0 within the Residential High (RH) zoning district. The provision reads as follows:
Date Prepared: June 5,2008
Meeting Date: June 10,2008
Ordinance 13,2008
Page 5 of 14
0 (4) In MXD zoning districts, no height waivers may be approved for such residential buildinm,
and no such residential building, regardless of the number of stories, shall exceed (56) fifty-
six feet in height.
The proposed language does not set a height limit for individual stories of a residential building, but
it does provide an overall maximum height for the building consistent with the residential high
zoning district, which addresses the issue raised by a resident that there is no maximum height limit
for a residential building within a mixed-use development.
Transit Orien led Development (TOO)
On June 7,2007, Kim Delaney of the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council (TCRPC) made a
presentation to City Council on the benefits of planning for transit oriented development (TOD) due
to the potential location of a tri-rail station in the North County. During the meeting, City Council
directed staff to provide language to exempt Transit Oriented Development from the height
restriction so that City Council could discuss including the language in the text amendment.
In 2005, the Metropolitan Planning Organizations in Miami-Dade, Broward, and Palm Beach
Counties partnered with the Florida Department of Transportation to initiate the SFECC Study. This
multi-year analysis is evaluating the potential reintroduction of transit on the FEC railroad along the
82-mile stretch of railroad from downtown Miami North to the northern Palm Beach County line,
The SFECC Study initially identified 60 potential “station areas” among the three counties, generally
located along roadways with 1-95 access and/or in proximity to town centers, major employers, and
residential populations.
The northern segment contained relatively lower station area ratings when compared to the central
and southern segments, due in part to land use patterns in northern Palm Beach County. Therefore,
greater emphasis has been placed upon land use planning along the northern segment in an effort to
bolster ratings, improve anticipated system success, and increase the segment’s competitiveness to
secure federal funds.
Typically, a site evaluation rating for potential Tri-Rail station locations includes the ten issue
areas listed below:
(1) Ability to Accommodate Station
(2) TOD Potential at Station
(3) Potential of TOD District (TOD District has %-mile radius; TOD Area has
1 .5 -mile radius)
(4) Density & Scale of Potential TOD District (existing and future)
(5) Proximity to Major Destinations
(6) Multi-Modal Interconnectivity
(7) Station Visibility and Accessibility
(8) Consideration of Comprehensive Plan Regulations
(9) Consideration of Land Development Regulations
Date Prepared: June 5,2008
Meeting Date: June 10,2008
Ordinance 13,2008
Page 6 of 14
(1 0) Other Planning Considerations
The limitation of height for residential development would not permit the City Council to waiver
height regulations for any residential development, including development that would be a part of a
TOD, thereby limiting development densities for TODs, which is a key component to site
evaluations for Tri-Rail.
The following amendment is proposed to provide an exemption for Transit Oriented Development:
Sec. 78-184. Height of buildings.
@)(&Exceptions.
(1) The height limitations of this section shall not apply to church spires; barns, silos;
monuments; antennas; penthouses and domes not used for human occupancy; nor to
chimneys, water tanks, and necessary mechanical appurtenances usually carried above the roof
level. These features, however, shall be erected only to a height as is necessary to accomplish
the purpose they are to serve and shall not exceed 20 percent of the ground floor area of the
building.
(2) In the event that the City adopts amendments to the Land Development Regulations which
establish a Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Overlay, certain properties may be eligible
to apply for rezoning to apply the Overlay to the property. The limitation on height waivers
established in this section shall not apply to any property which is rezoned to TOD Overlay.
@@J-Obstructions. All obstructions, as defined by the Federal Aviation Administration, shall be
marked and lighted in accordance with applicable federal or state regulations.
...
The intent of the TOD land use is to provide a mixed use development pattern within a !A mile from
a fixed rail premium transit stop that encourages pedestrian activity and achieves the vision of a
Regional Transit Corridor; strives to deter urban sprawl; and lessens the dependence on automobile
trips. This development pattern is an alternative from traditional parcel-based development, and
shall allow for a wide range of functionally integrated commercial, employment center, institutional,
and mixed-income residential uses. Functional integration is achieved through urban design that
encourages pedestrian and bicycle modes of transportation to access complementary uses within
close proximity to the fixed rail premium transit stop. The proposed changes would allow City
Council the opportunity to plan for Transit Oriented Development (TOD) and determine during that
evaluation whether or not height limits should be enforced.
Date Prepared: June 5,2008
Meeting Date: June 10,2008
Ordinance 13,2008
Page 7 of 14
Proposed Residential Height Limitations
The effects of this proposed amendment are as follows:
NON-RESIDENTIAL HEIGHT WAIVER LIMITATIONS
During various meetings with representatives of the Palm Beach Gardens Residents Coalition
(Coalition), Mayor Joe Russo and Coalition representatives came to an agreement on a proposal to 0 provide height limitations to future non-residential development in the City. The proposed changes
to the City Land Development Regulations were consistent with Ordinance 8,2007, which provides
for limits to the maximum height of residential buildings within the City, so additional language was
added to the ordinance limiting non-residential height waivers for non-residential development
located west of Interstate Highway 95. After the additional language was added to the text of the
Ordinance, the title was changed to Ordinance 13,2008, since it is being processes during 2008.
Limitations on Maximum Height West of I-95
As discussed during negotiations with the representatives from the Coalition, the following
parameters are proposed to be part of the amendment:
a All zoning districts located west of Interstate Highway 95 shall be limited to a
maximum building height of 25% in excess of the height limitation in the applicable zoning
district.
This applies to all development and redevelopment that occurs in the geographic areas of the City
that lie west of Interstate Highway 95, regardless of land use or zoning.
[The remainder of this page intentionally left blank]
Date Prepared: June 5,2008
Meeting Date: June 10,2008
Ordinance 13,2008
Page 8 of 14
-
Commercial (CN, CG-1, CG-2, CR)
Professional Office (PO)
Industrial (M- 1, M- 1 A, M-2)
Public Institutional (PA)
Mixed-Use (MXD)
~ ~~ ~
36 feet 45 feet
36 feet 45 feet
50 feet 62.5 feet
NMT 45 feet 56.25 feet
4 floors, (waivers only for
employment center uses located at
intersection of two Arterials)
~ ~ ~
5 floors, ONLY for employment
center uses located at
intersection of two arterials
This proposed language will provide for a limitation to City Council’s ability to grant a non-
residential height waiver west of 1-95. It limits the overall height of the building, as well as the
geographic location where the waiver can be applied.
Limitations on Maximum Height East of I-95
No further limitations are being proposed for development located east of 1-95 in order to preserve
future economic viability for the City. All fbture Planned Development located east of 1-95 is
limited by the Planned Development process and all waivers are required to be approved by City
Council.
Underlying 2
Commercial (CN, CG-1, CG-2, CR)
Professional Office (PO)
Industrial (M-1, M-lA, M-2)
Public Institutional (PA)
Mixed-Use (MXD)
36 feet
36 feet
50 feet
NMT 45 feet
4 floors, (waivers only for
employment center uses located at
intersection of two Arterials
As determined by City Council
with the Planned Development
process
As determined by City Council
with the Planned Development
process
As determined by City Council
with the Planned Development
process
As determined by City Council
with the Planned Development
process
As determined by City Council
with the Planned Development
process
Date Prepared: June 5,2008
Meeting Date: June 10, 2008
Ordinance 13,2008
Page 9 of 14
PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS
Currently, the following amendments are proposed to the City’s Land Development Regulations to
provide for limitation to height waivers for single-family and multi-family residential buildings.
Section 78-158, Code of Ordinances, entitled “Waivers to planned development district
regulations” is hereby amended to read as follows:
Sec. 78-158. Waivers to planned development district requirements.
(a) Purpose and intent. The purpose and intent of this section are to encourage applicants for
planned development, PUD, andj PCDS approval to propose residential and nonresidential projects
that are innovatke, creative, and utilize planning, design, and architectural concepts that will be of
benefit to the city. The use of innovative and creative techniques and concepts may require one or
more waivers to the development standards applicable to such projects. The city council may grant
one or more of the requested waivers, provided community benefits such as architectural design,
pedestrian amenities, preservation of environmentally-sensitive lands, provision of public parks and
open space, or mixed uses which reduce impacts on city services are demonstrated.
(b) Waivers permitted. An application for development order approval for a PUD or PCD may
include a request for waiver of one or more requirements of this chapter. Requests for waivers shall
comply with the requirements contained herein. For the purpose of this section, a waiver is defined
as a reduction in a development standard or other land development requirement normally required
by this chapter.
0
(c) Purpose and intent. The purpose and intent of this section are to encourage the use of PUDs
and PCDs, as provided in sections 78-1 54 and 78-155, in order to achieve the benefits to the city and
the property owner as described in those sections.
(d) Prohibited waivers. The waivers listed below shall not be granted by the city council.
(1) A waiver from the requirements of division 2 of article V, establishing the PGA overlay
district.
(2) A waiver from the minimum requirements for preservation of environmental sensitive lands
as provided in division 4 of article V.
(3) A waiver from any requirement associated with the city’s concurrency management
requirements established in division 3 of article 111.
(e) Grant ofwaivers. Waivers from requirements applicable to planned developments, including
PUDs and PCDs, shall be granted by the city council, following an advisory recommendation by the
planning, zoning, and appeals board. 0
Date Prepared: June 5,2008
Meeting Date: June 10, 2008
Ordinance 13,2008
Page 10 of 14
(f)
indicated in Table 20.
Waivers established. For the purposes of this section, the city council may grant waivers as
Building Height (as limited bv Sec. 78-1 84)
~ ~
sign Regulations
Table 20: Waivers to Planned Developments
TABLE INSET:
J
J
Development Standard or Requirement
Landscaping
Open Space
I City Council I
Waiver
J
J
Standards Applicable to Planned Developments, PUDs, and PCDs
Architectural and Design Standards
J
J
Engineering Standards
Permitted Uses within PUD or PCD
Development Standards Applicable to Permitted and Conditional Uses
J
I/
J
Minimum PUDPCD Size
Supplementary District Regulations
Number of Required Parking Spaces and Size of Parking Spaces
J
J
J
Building Setbacks (front, side, side comer, and rear)
Lot Coverage, Size, Depth, and Width
(8) Residential variances. Any reduction to a PUD or PCD development standard or requirement
applicable to an entire residential use or project shall occur only as provided in this section.
However, the owner of a single-family dwelling may apply for a variance to the applicable
development standards, rather than apply for a waiver. The purpose of this section is to allow an
owner or tenant to request a modification without the time, effort, and expense associated with an
application for a development order amendment.
J
J
(h) Application. All requests for a waiver shall be submitted in writing and shall accompany a
development application for planned development, PUD, or PCD approval. Each waiver to planned
development requirements or standards utilized in a development application for approval of a PUD
or PCD shall be identified by the applicant.
~
Height of Buffering and Screening Walls
Others as provided by these land development regulations
J
J
Date Prepared: June 5,2008
Meeting Date: June 10, 2008
Ordinance 13,2008
Page 11 of 14
(i) Criteria. A request for the city council to approve a waiver from one or more of the
standards and requirements applicable to a planned development, PUD, or PCD shall comply with a
majority of the criteria listed below.
(1) The request is consistent with the city’s comprehensive plan.
(2) The request is consistent with the purpose and intent of this section.
(3) The request is in support of and furthers the city’s goals, objectives, and policies to establish
development possessing architectural significance, pedestrian amenities and linkages,
employment opportunities, reductions in vehicle trips, and a sense of place.
(4) The request demonstrates that granting of the waiver will result in a development that
exceeds one or more of the minimum requirements for PUDs.
(5) The request for one or more waivers results from innovative design in which other minimum
standards are exceeded.
(6) The request demonstrates that granting of the waiver will result in preservation of valuable
natural resources, including environmentally-sensitive lands, drainage and recharge areas, and
coastal areas.
(7) The request clearly demonstrates public benefits to be derived, including, but not limited to
such benefits as no-cost dedication of rights-of-way, extensions of pedestrian linkages outside
of the project boundaries, preservation of important natural resources, and use of desirable
architectural, building, and site design techniques.
(8) Sufficient screening and buffering, if required, are provided to screen adjacent uses from
adverse impacts caused by a waiver.
(9) The request is not based solely or predominantly on economic reasons.
(10) The request will be compatible with existing and potential land uses adjacent to the
development site.
(1 1) The request demonstrates the development will be in harmony with the general purpose and
intent of this section, and that such waiver or waivers will not be injurious to the area involved
or otherwise detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare.
li,
established in Section 78-184 (b).
Waiver limitations. All waivers of the height of buildings shall be subject to the limitations
Section 78-184, Code of Ordinances, entitled “Height of Buildings” is hereby amended to read 0 as
Date Prepared: June 5,2008
Meeting Date: June 10, 2008
Ordinance 13,2008
Page 12 of 14
Underlying Zoning designation within Planned
Unit Development (PUD) and Planned
Community District (PCD) Overlays
Residential Low (RL-1, RL-2, & RL-3)
Residential Medium (RM)
Residential High (RH)
Residential within Mixed-Use
Sec. 78-184. Height of buildings.
Maximum Height
Current Height Limit wl Waiver
Restriction
2 stories or 36 feet, whichever is 3 stories136 feet
the lesser
2 stories or 36 feet, whichever is 3 stories136 feet
the lesser
NMT 45 feet 56 feet
4 stories 4 stories 156 feet
(a) Height. A building or structure shall not be erected, constructed, reconstructed, or altered to
exceed the height limits established in the property development regulations for the applicable
zoning district.
(b) Limitations on height waivers for single family and multifamily residential buildings.
(1) No waiver in excess of 25 percent of the height limitation of the applicable zoning district may
be approved for such residential buildings in any zoning district (other than MXD) where
height limitations are measured by feet.
(2) No waiver in excess of onestoryof theheight limitation ofthe applicable zoning district may
be approved for such residential buildings in any zoning district (other than MXD) where
height limitations are measured by number of stories.
(3) In zoning districts (other than MXD) where height limitations are measured by both feet and
stories, no waiver in excess of one story may be approved for such residential buildings, and in
no event shall the waiver exceed the height limitation measured by feet.
/4) In MXD zoning districts, no height waivers may be approved for such residential buildings,
and no such residential building, regardless of the number of stories, shall exceed (56) fifty-six
feet in height.
/5) Residential height waivers may be requested within Transit Oriented Development.
(6)
TABLE INSET:
The provisions of this section may not be amended by the city council without a vote of at
least four city council members.
O[c) Limitations on height waivers-for non-residential buildings. All non-residential buildings in
all non-residential zoning districts located west of Interstate Highway 95 shall be limited to a
maximum building height of 25% in excess of the height limitation in the applicable zoning district.
Date Prepared: June 5,2008
Meeting Date: June 10,2008
Ordinance 13,2008
Page 13 of 14 I
~ Underlying Zoning Designation Existing Height Limit
Commercial (CN, CG-1. CG-2, 36 feet
~ ~~ ~ ~~
CR)
Professional Office (PO) 36 feet
TABLE INSET:
Limitations on Non- Residential Development West of 1-95
Mixed-Use (MXD) 4 floors, (waivers onlv for
employment center uses located at
intersection of two Arterials)
pndustrial 04-1, M-1A. M-2) I 50 feet
1 Public Institutional (P/I) I NMT 45 feet
Maximum Height w/ Waiver
Restriction of 25%
45 feet
45 feet
62.5 feet
56.25 feet
5 floors, ONLY for employment
center uses located at
intersection of two arterials
@@Exceptions.
(1) The height limitations of this section shall not apply to church spires; barns, silos;
monuments; antennas; penthouses and domes not used for human occupancy; nor to
chimneys, water tanks, and necessary mechanical appurtenances usually carried above the roof
level. These features, however, shall be erected only to a height as is necessary to accomplish
the purpose they are to serve and shall not exceed 20 percent of the ground floor area of the
building.
(2) In the event that the City adopts amendments to the Land Development Regulations which
establish a Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Overlay, certain properties may be eligible to
apply for rezoning to apply the Overlay to the property. The limitation on height waivers
established in this section shall not apply to any property located east of Interstate Highway
95, which is rezoned to a TOD Overlay.
(dj&Obstructions. All obstructions, as defined by the Federal Aviation Administration, shall be
marked and lighted in accordance with applicable federal or state regulations.
PLANNING, ZONING AND APPEALS BOARD
At its meeting on February 13,2007, the Planning, Zoning, and Appeals Board (Board) held apublic
hearing to review Ordinance 8, 2007. The Board voted 7-0 to recommend denial of the subject
ordinance for the following reasons:
Date Prepared: June 5,2008
Meeting Date: June IO, 2008
Ordinance 13,2008
Page 14 of 14
0 The Board expressed their objections to the restrictive limits set forth in the ordinance. They
felt that the limits were arbitrary in that they would only be applied to new development in
the City, as opposed to previously approved development that was able to request a height
waiver.
The Board expressed their concerns with eliminating flexibility within the planned
development districts of the City. By eliminating a major component of the City’s flexible
design standards, the ability for the implementation of flexible design is severely limited
within a PUD or PCD. The Board felt that the limit would reduce the creativity of future
development within the City.
The Board felt that the limits did not reflect the ‘findings of the Interactive Planning
Session.’ The Board was of the opinion that a majority of City residents felt that taller
buildings were permissible within certain areas of the City, specifically adjacent to major
roadways or within the City’s Regional Center corridor. The Board also expressed their
opinion that a majority of residents were satisfied with the development within the City.
Finally, the Board felt confident that specific guidelines were in place that provided City
Council with the discretion to determine if any height waivers were in the best interest of the
City’s future development.
0
0
During the Boards discussions, Amir Kanel (Alternate member) expressed his support of the
ordinance, but represented that the proposed ordinance did not reflect the comments set forth at the
City’s Interactive Planning Session that taller buildings are appropriate within certain areas of the 0 City.
Overall, the Board recommended denial of the proposed ordinance, based on their strong feelings
that the City has developed responsibly and maintained a high standard of development, which has
maintained the City’s superior quality of life. The Board felt strongly that the flexibility and
creativity of planned development districts encouraged the higher standards of development in the
City.
CITY COUNCIL
On March 1,2007, the City Council voted 5-0 to approve Ordinance 8,2007 on first reading.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of Petition LDRA-07-01-000012 and Ordinance 13, 2008 with the
proposed amendments relative to Transit Oriented Development (TOD).
1
Date Prepared: June 5, 2008
ORDINANCE 13,2008
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM
BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA RELATING TO LIMITATIONS ON
ORDINANCES, ENTITLED “WAIVERS TO PLANNED
D EVE LO P M E N T D I S T R I C T RE G U L AT I 0 N S ” ; AM E N D I N G S E C T I 0 N
BUILDINGS” TO IMPOSE LIMITATIONS ON HEIGHT WAIVERS;
PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION; AND PROVIDING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
HEIGHT WAIVERS; AMENDING SECTION 78-158, CODE OF
78-184, CODE OF ORDINANCES, ENTITLED “HEIGHT OF
WHEREAS, on October 25, 2006, and November 1, 2006, the City Council
conducted two community planning sessions to discuss and address the issue of height
for future development within the City; and
WHEREAS, the process included research and analysis of current height
regulations, two public workshops for resident input, and a report to City Council; and
WHEREAS, approximately 95 people attended the October Workshop and
approximately 107 people attended the November workshop; and
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
WHEREAS, the findings of the sessions reflect the general consensus that
building height waivers should be limited for residential and non-residential building; and
WHEREAS, Staff recommends that Sections 78-158 and 78-184 of the City’s
Land Development Regulations be amended to accomplish this purpose; and
WHEREAS, this Land Development Regulations amendment was reviewed by
the Planning, Zoning, and Appeals Board at a duly noticed public hearing on June IO,
2008, and the Board recommended approval/denial by a vote of - to -; and
WHEREAS, the City Council deems approval of this Ordinance to be in the best
interests of the residents and citizens of the City of Palm Beach Gardens.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF PALM BEACH GARDENS, FLORIDA that:
SECTION 1. The foregoing recitals are hereby affirmed and ratified.
SECTION 2. Section 78-1 58, Code of Ordinances, entitled “Waivers to planned
development district regulations’’ is hereby amended to read as follows:
I a
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23 e 26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
Date Prepared: June 5, 2008
Ordinance 13, 2008
Sec. 78-158. Waivers to planned development district requirements.
(a) Purpose and intent. The purpose and intent of this section are to encourage
applicants for planned development, PUD, and; PCDs approval to propose residential
and nonresidential projects that are innovatke, creative, and utilize planning, design,
and architectural concepts that will be of benefit to the city. The use of innovative and
creative techniques and concepts may require one or more waivers to the development
standards applicable to such projects. The city council may grant one or more of the
requested waivers, provided community benefits such as architectural design,
pedestrian amenities, preservation of environmentally-sensitive lands, provision of
public parks and open space, or mixed uses which reduce impacts on city services are
demon st ra ted .
(b) Waivers permitted. An application for development order approval for a PUD or
PCD may include a request for waiver of one or more requirements of this chapter.
Requests for waivers shall comply with the requirements contained herein. For the
purpose of this section, a waiver is defined as a reduction in a development standard or
other land development requirement normally required by this chapter.
(c) Purpose and intent. The purpose and intent of this section are to encourage the
use of PUDs and PCDs, as provided in sections 78-154 and 78-155, in order to achieve
the benefits to the city and the property owner as described in those sections.
(d)
co unci I.
Prohibited waivers. The waivers listed below shall not be granted by the city
(1) A waiver from the requirements of division 2 of article V, establishing the PGA
overlay district .
(2) A waiver from the minimum requirements for preservation of environmental
sensitive lands as provided in division 4 of article V.
(3) A waiver from any requirement associated with the city's concurrency
management requirements established in division 3 of article Ill.
(e) Grant of waivers. Waivers from requirements applicable to planned
developments, including PUDs and PCDs, shall be granted by the city council, following
an advisory recommendation by the planning, zoning, and appeals board.
(f) Waivers established. For the purposes of this section, the city council may grant
waivers as indicated in Table 20.
2
Date Prepared: June 5,2008
Ordinance 13, 2008
Development Standard or Requirement
Building Height (as limited by Sec. 78-1 84)
Sign Regulations
Landscaping
1
0:
~~
City
Council
Waiver
J
J
J
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
I1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
Open Space
Standards Applicable to Planned Developments, PUDs, and PCDs
Architectural and Design Standards
Table 20: Waivers to Planned Developments
TABLE INSET:
~~
J
J
J
Permitted Uses within PUD or PCD
Development Standards Applicable to Permitted and Conditional
Uses
Minimum PUD/PCD Size
J
J
J
Engineering Stand a rd s IJ
Height of Buffering and Screening Walls
Others as provided by these land development regulations
J
J
Supplementary District Regulations IJ
Number of Required Parking Spaces and Size of Parking Spaces I J
~~
Building Setbacks (front, side, side corner, and rear) IJ
Lot Coverage, Size, Depth, and Width I -J
(9) Residential variances. Any reduction to a PUD or PCD development standard or
requirement applicable to an entire residential use or project shall occur only as
provided in this section. However, the owner of a single-family dwelling may apply for a
variance to the applicable development standards, rather than apply for a waiver. The
purpose of this section is to allow an owner or tenant to request a modification without
the time, effort, and expense associated with an application for a development order
amendment.
(h) Application. All requests for a waiver shall be submitted in writing and shall
accompany a development application for planned development, PUD, or PCD
approval. Each waiver to planned development requirements or standards utilized in a
development application for approval of a PUD or PCD shall be identified by the
applicant.
3
Date Prepared: June 5, 2008
Ordinance 13, 2008
1
0:
4
5
6
7
8
9
IO
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23 62 26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
(i) Criteria. A request for the city council to approve a waiver from one or more of
the standards and requirements applicable to a planned development, PUD, or PCD
shall comply with a majority of the criteria listed below.
The request is consistent with the city's comprehensive plan.
The request is consistent with the purpose and intent of this section.
The request is in support of and furthers the city's goals, objectives, and policies to
establish development possessing architectural significance, pedestrian amenities
and linkages, employment opportunities, reductions in vehicle trips, and a sense
of place.
The request demonstrates that granting of the waiver will result in a development
that exceeds one or more of the minimum requirements for PUDs.
The request for one or more waivers results from innovative design in which other
minimum standards are exceeded.
The request demonstrates that granting of the waiver will result in preservation of
valuable natural resources, including environmentally-sensitive lands, drainage
and recharge areas, and coastal areas.
The request clearly demonstrates public benefits to be derived, including, but not
limited to such benefits as no-cost dedication of rights-of-way, extensions of
pedestrian linkages outside of the project boundaries, preservation of important
natural resources, and use of desirable architectural, building, and site design
techniques.
Sufficient screening and buffering, if required, are provided to screen adjacent
uses from adverse impacts caused by a waiver.
The request is not based solely or predominantly on economic reasons.
The request will be compatible with existing and potential land uses adjacent to
the development site.
The request demonstrates the development will be in harmony with the general
purpose and intent of this section, and that such waiver or waivers will not be
injurious to the area involved or otherwise detrimental to the public health, safety,
and welfare.
[j)
limitations established in Section 78-1 84 (b).
Waiver limitations. All waivers of the height of buildinqs shall be subject to the
4
Date Prepared: June 5, 2008
Ordinance 13, 2008
1
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
SECTION 3. Section 78-1 84, Code of Ordinances, entitled “Height of Buildings”
is hereby amended to read as follows:
Sec. 78-184. Height of buildings.
(a) Height. A building or structure shall not be erected, constructed, reconstructed, or
altered to exceed the height limits established in the property development regulations
for the applicable zoning district.
(b) Limitations on heiqht waivers for single familv and multi family residential
buildings.
(I) No waiver in excess of 25 percent of the height limitation of the applicable zoning
district-may_beapproved for such residential buildings in any zoning district (other
than MXD) where height limitations are measured by feet.
12) No waiver in excess of one story of the height limitation of the applicable zoninq
district may be approved for such residential buildings in any zoninq district (other
than MXD) where height limitations are measured by number of stories.
(3) In zoning districts (other than MXD) where height limitations are measured by both
feet and stories, no waiver in excess of one story may be approved for such
residential buildings, and in no event shall the waiver exceed the heiqht limitation
measured by feet.
/4) In MXD zoning districts, no height waivers may be approved for such residential
buildings, and no such residential building, regardless of the number of stories,
shall exceed (56) fifty-six feet in height.
(5) Residential height waivers may be requested within Transit Oriented Development
(5) The provisions of this section may not be amended by the city council without a
vote of at least four city council members.
JThe remainder of this page intentionallv left blank1
5
Date Prepared: June 5, 2008
Ordinance 13, 2008
Current Height Limit
1
Maximum Heiqht
w/ Waiver
Restriction
TABLE INSET:
2 stories or 36 feet,
whichever is the lesser
2 stories or 36 feet,
Residential Heiqht Limitations
3 storied36 feet
3 storied36 feet
Underlyinq Zoning designation within
Planned Unit Development (PUD) and
Planned Community District (PCD)
whichever is the lesser
NMT 45 feet
Overlays
Residential Low (RL-1, RL-2, & RL-3)
Residential Medium (RM)
56 feet Residential Hiqh (RH)
Existinq Height Limit
36 feet
~~ Residential within Mixed-Use
Maximum Heiqht w/ Waiver
Restriction of 25%
45 feet
36 feet
50 feet
NMT 45 feet
4 floors, (waivers only for
employment center uses
located at intersection of two
Arterials]
~ ~ 45 feet
62.5 feet
56.25 feet
5 floors, ONLY for
employment center uses
located at intersection of two
arterials
4 stories 4 stories ~/ 56 I feet 1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
ole) Limitations on height waivers for non-residential buildinqs. All non-residential
buildings in all non-residential zoninq districts located west of Interstate Highway 95
shall be limited to a maximum building height of 25% in excess of the height limitation in
the applicable zoning district.
TABLE INSET:
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Limitations on Non- Residential Development West of 1-95
Underlying Zoninq Designation
Commercial (CN, CG-1, CG-2,
CR)
Professional Office (PO)
xdustrial(M-I, M-IA, M-2)
Public I ns t i tut iona I ( P/I ]
Mixed-Use (MXD)
@ij@ Exceptions.
The height limitations of this section shall not apply to church spires; barns, silos;
monuments; antennas; penthouses and domes not used for human occupancy;
nor to chimneys, water tanks, and necessary mechanical appurtenances usually
carried above the roof level. These features, however, shall be erected only to a
height as is necessary to accomplish the purpose they are to serve and shall not
exceed 20 percent of the ground floor area of the building.
6
Date Prepared: June 5,2008
Ordinance 13, 2008
I e:
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
I1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23 3.s 26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
12) In the event that the City adopts amendments to the Land Development
Regulations which establish a Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Overlay,
certain properties may be eligible to apply for rezoning to apply the Overlay to the
property. The limitation on height waivers established in this section shall not
apply to any property located east of Interstate Highway 95, which is rezoned to a
TOD Overlay.
(cQMObsfrucfions. All obstructions, as defined by the Federal Aviation Administration,
shall be marked and lighted in accordance with applicable federal or state regulations.
SECTION 4. This Ordinance shall not be construed or held to affect the rights of
any existing building to continue in a use or structure that may otherwise become a
legal nonconformity as a result of the passage of this Ordinance or any building
specifically approved by a development order granted by the City prior to the effective
date of this Ordinance.
SECTION 5. Codification of this Ordinance is hereby authorized and directed.
SECTION 6. This Ordinance shall become effective immediately upon adoption.
[The remainder of this page intentionally left blank]
7
Date Prepared: June 5, 2008
Ordinance 13. 2008
1 e:
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
I1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23 e 26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
3%
39
40
41 42
PASS ED this day of , 2008, upon first reading.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of , 2008, upon second
and final reading.
CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS FOR
BY:
Eric Jablin, Mayor
David Levy, Vice Mayor
Joseph R. Russo, Councilmember
Jody Barnett, Councilmember
Robert G. Premuroso, Councilmember
ATTEST:
BY:
Patricia Snider, CMC, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND
LEGAL SUFFICIENCY
BY:
City Attorney
AGAINST ABSENT
8
COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC Request to Address City Council Please Print > Members of the public may address the City Council during the “Comments by the Public” portion of the agenda and during “Public Hearings”. This Request to Address the City Council must be delivered to the City Clerk prior to the commencement of the meeting. The time limit for each speaker is limited to three (3) minutes.
v COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC Request to Address City Council Please Print Name: yxh- -- 6- -LT - - Subject : \ Members of the public may address the City Council during the “Comments by the Public” portion of the agenda and during “Public Hearings”. This Request to Address the City Council must be delivered to the City Clerk prior to the commencement of the meeting. The time limit for each speaker is limited to three (3) minutes.
COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC Request to Address City Council Please Print Name: City: Subject : W I Members of the public may address the City Council during the “Comments by the Public” portion of the agenda and during “Public Hearings”. This Request to Address the City Council must be delivered to the City Clerk prior to the commencement of the meeting. The time limit for each speaker is limited to three (3) minutes.
Please Print COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC Request to Address City Council J Members of the public may address the City Council during the “Comments by the Public” portion of the agenda and during “Public Hearings”. This Request to Address the City Council must be delivered to the City Clerk prior to the commencement of the meeting. The time limit for each speaker is limited to three (3) minutes.
COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC Request to Address City Council t’ Subject : , Members of the public may address the City Council during the “Comments by the Public” portion of the agenda and during “Public Hearings”. This Request to Address the City Council must be delivered to the City Clerk prior to the commencement of the meeting. The time limit for each speaker is limited to three (3) minutes.
COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC Request to Address City Council n/ , \f Subject: - Members of the public may address the City Council during the “Comments by the Public” portion of the agenda and during “Public Hearings”. This Request to Address the City Council must be delivered to the City Clerk prior to the commencement of the meeting. The time limit for each speaker is limited to three (3) minutes.
COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC Request to Address City Council J Please Print Name: &fO.?L VdLkku uu/I ‘ Members of the public may address the City Council during the “Comments by the Public” portion of the agenda and during “Public Hearings”. This Request to Address the City Council must be delivered to the City Clerk prior to the commencement of the meeting. The time limit for each speaker is limited to three (3) minutes.
COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC Request to Address City Council Name: Members of the public may address the City Council during the “Comments by the Public” portion of the agenda and during “Public Hearings”. This Request to Address the City Council must be delivered to the City Clerk prior to the commencement of the meeting. The time limit for each speaker is limited to three (3) minutes.
COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC Request to Address City Council J Please Print Members of the public may address the City Council during the “Comments by the Public” portion of the agenda and during “Public Hearings”. This Request to Address the City Council must be delivered to the City Clerk prior to the commencement of the meeting. The time limit for each speaker is limited to three (3) minutes.
COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC Request to Address City Council J Members of the public may address the City Council during the “Comments by the Public” portion of the agenda and during “Public Hearings”. This Request to Address the City Council must be delivered to the City Clerk prior to the commencement of the meeting. The time limit for each speaker is limited to three (3) minutes.
COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC Request to Address City Council Please Print Name: I /en; c 0”f t“ Members of the public may address the City Council during the “Comments by the Public” portion of the agenda and during “Public Hearings”. This Request to Address the City Council must be delivered to the City Clerk prior to the commencement of the meeting. The time limit for each speaker is limited to three (3) minutes.
COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC Request to Address City Council J Members of the public may address the City Council during the “Comments by the Public” portion of the agenda and during “Public Hearings”. This Request to Address the City Council must be delivered to the City Clerk prior to the commencement of the meeting. The time limit for each speaker is limited to three (3) minutes.
/ COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC Request to Address City Council Please Print I Name: City: Subject: .-L Members of the public may address the City Council during the “Comments by the Public” portion of the agenda and during “Public Hearings”. This Request to Address the City Council must be delivered to the City Clerk prior to the commencement of the meeting. The time limit for each speaker is limited to three (3) minutes.
COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC Request to Address City Council J Please Print Subject: Members of the public may address the City Council during the “Comments by the Public” portion of the agenda and during “Public Hearings”. This Request to Address the City Council must be delivered to the City Clerk prior to the commencement of the meeting. The time limit for each speaker is limited to three (3) minutes.
COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC Request to Address City Council /’ Please Print Name: Members of the public may address the City Council during the “Comments by the Public” portion of the agenda and during “Public Hearings”. This Request to Address the City Council must be delivered to the City Clerk prior to the commencement of the meeting. The time limit for each speaker is limited to three (3) minutes.
COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC J Request to Address City Council Please Print Name: 9u+ TILA4 Address: G-24 /cca/‘2-h./ go City: I Subject: <f&&k’Lk-di%ks&.- jG 0 Members of the public may address the City Council during the “Comments by the Public” portion of the agenda and during “Public Hearings”. This Request to Address the City Council must be delivered to the City Clerk prior to the commencement of the meeting. The time limit for each speaker is limited to three (3) minutes.
Members of the public may address the City Council during the “Comments by the Public” portion of the agenda and during “Public Hearings”. This Request to Address the City Council must be delivered to the City Clerk prior to the commencement of the meeting. The time limit for each speaker is limited to three (3) minutes.
COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC Request to Address City Council Please Print Members of the public may address the City Council during the “Comments by the Public” portion of the agenda and during “Public Hearings”. This Request to Address the City Council must be delivered to the City Clerk prior to the commencement of the meeting. The time limit for each speaker is limited to three (3) minutes.
Please Print COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC Request to Address City Council Members of the public may address the City Council during the “Comments by the Public” portion of the agenda and during “Public Hearings”. This Request to Address the City Council must be delivered to the City Clerk prior to the commencement of the meeting. The time limit for each speaker is limited to three (3) minutes.
COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC Request to Address City Council Please Print Name: ,-\ \ FA%+-i? i,r Address: 4B3kl s+rDbPbvy’ ‘W City: w ’ h - i Members of the public may address the City Council during the “Comments by the Public” portion of the agenda and during “Public Hearings”. This Request to Address the City Council must be delivered to the City Clerk prior to the commencement of the meeting. The time limit for each speaker is limited to three (3) minutes.
COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC Request to Address City Council Please Print P.4 G , City: Members of the public may address the City Council during the “Comments by the Public” portion of the agenda and during “Public Hearings”. This Request to Address the City Council must be delivered to the City Clerk prior to the commencement of the meeting. The time limit for each speaker is limited to three (3) minutes.
COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC \ Request to Address City Council Please Print Name: Subject : Members of the public may address the City Council during the “Comments by the Public” portion of the agenda and during “Public Hearings”. This Request to Address the City Council must be delivered to the City Clerk prior to the commencement of the meeting. The time limit for each speaker is limited to three (3) minutes.
COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC Request to Address City Council Please Print Members of the public may address the City Council during the “Comments by the Public” portion of the agenda and during “Public Hearings”. This Request to Address the City Council must be delivered to the City Clerk prior to the commencement of the meeting. The time limit for each speaker is limited to three (3) minutes.
I. COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC Request to Address City Council Please Print Name: R#f- St/A/-/ Address: C&/R pY/: 5- -7-y r / 52 ’C1,/ KO - City: P 6., c /-L- ?-d-//5? .1 Subject: L<7/: C&f f- P FY 2d-T P- Members of the public may address the City Council during the “Comments by the Public” portion of the agenda and during “Public Hearings”. This Request to Address the City Council must be delivered to the City Clerk prior to the commencement of the meeting. The time limit for each speaker is limited to three (3) minutes.
COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC Request to Address City Council J Please Print Members of the public may address the City Council during the “Comments by the Public” portion of the agenda and during “Public Hearings”. This Request to Address the City Council must be delivered to the City Clerk prior to the commencement of the meeting. The time limit for each speaker is limited to three (3) minutes.
Members of the public may address the City Council during the “Comments by the Public” portion of the agenda and during “Public Hearings”. This Request to Address the City Council must be delivered to the City Clerk prior to the commencement of the meeting. The time limit for each speaker is limited to three (3) minutes.