Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes_Community Appearance Board_3/26/2003I. II. 1XIA VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA � • C • DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Post Office Box 3273 250 Tequesta Drive • Suite 305 Tequesta, Florida 33469-0273 (561) 575-6220 • Fax: (561) 575-6224 VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA COMMUNITY APPEARANCE BOARD MEETING MINUTES MARCH 26, 2003 CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL The Tequesta Community Appearance Board held a meeting in the Tequesta Recreation Department at 399 Seabrook Road, Tequesta, Florida, on Wednesday, March 26, 2003. The meeting was called to order at 8:30 A.M. by Chair Vic Strahan. The roll was called by Betty Laur, Recording Secretary. Boardmembers present were Chair Vic Strahan, Vice Chair Steve Parker, Boardmember Richard Sterling, Boardmember Gerald Wenta , and Alternate Leslie Cook, sitting in for Boardmember Robert Stein, who was absent. Also in attendance were Carol Lux, Clerk of the Board and Jeff Newell, Director of Community Development. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Ms. Lux announced that item 3 by the Village of Tequesta had been withdrawn. Vice Chair Parker made a motion to approve the agenda as amended. Boardmember Sterling seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 5-0 vote. COMMUNICATIONS FROM CITIZENS There were no communications from citizens. APPROVAL OF PREVIOUS MEETING MINUTES This item was deferred to the end of the meeting in order for copies of the minutes to be distributed to the board. At that time, Vice Chair Parker made a motion to approve the minutes of the January 22, 2003 meeting as submitted Boardmember Wenta seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 5-0 vote. Recrded Paper COMMUNITY APPEARANCE BOARD MEETING MINUTES March 26, 2003 Page 2 V. NEW BUSINESS A. An application from Spencer Lloyd, representing the JIB Yacht Club & Marina for a property located at 46 Beach Road, Tequesta, Florida, to review the color changes for the bathroom and office facility at the marina. a. Swearing -In of Witnesses, if Required Clerk of the Board Carol Lux swore in all witnesses. b. Disclosure of Ex-Parte Communications: Each Boardmember reported no ex-parte communication. C. Testimony of Witnesses and Cross Examination, if any Director of Community Development Jeff Newell testified that this Board had approved a blue/gray exterior for the bathroom and the applicant had painted it yellow. Jupiter Inlet Colony had objected to the yellow but agreed to the blue/gray shade. No representatives from Jupiter Inlet Colony were present at the hearing. Ms. Lux stated she had not notified Jupiter Inlet Colony of this hearing, but it had been in the newspaper. Spencer Lloyd, owner of the JIB Club, apologized and stated he had not known it was required to come back before the board for a color change. Basically, it was painted yellow because his wife liked it and thought it would brighten up the building and give it a Bahamian look, and to identify the building as a marina. Mr. Lloyd stated their marina was open to everyone; people had stated they liked the color, but one person called it a Bahamian nightmare and wrote a letter. Mr. Lloyd stated the color had been muted from the sun and matched the color in the T-shirts he had brought from the club. The neighbor across the street, Beth, who wrote the letter, said the color needed toned down, and hers was the only complaint Mr. Lloyd was aware of, and if the board approved he would let her pick the color she wanted. Photos of the project were shown. Mr. Lloyd commented he wanted to keep the members happy. Chair Strahan commented it looked like the Bahamas. Ms. Cook commented it would fade. Vice Chair Parker recommended toning down the other sides as well so everything would match and stated he did not have a problem with the color. Boardmember Cook recommended Jupiter Inlet Colony install a COMMUNITY APPEARANCE BOARD MEETING MINUTES March 26, 2003 Page 3 couple of trees to make the view more pleasing for the people who lived in Jupiter Inlet Colony. Mr. Lloyd stated the hedge was theirs and they could allow it to grow higher, but some people wanted to be able to see the boats. d. Finding of Fact Based Upon Competent Substantial Evidence MOTION: Boardmember Cook made a motion to accept the application from Spencer Lloyd, representing the JIB Yacht Club & Marina for a property located at 46 Beach Road, Tequesta, Florida, to review the color changes for the bathroom and office facility at the marina as submitted with the proviso that if the owner could come to amicable agreement with the neighbor regarding toning down the Inlet Road side of the building the owner would do so. Boardmember Wenta seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 5-0 vote. Mr. Newell advised that the Village of Tequesta contracted his services with the Inlet Colony for plans review and inspections and he also attended their building and zoning meetings, and would deliver the board's decision to them at their meeting that day. Boardmember Cook requested Mr. Newell ask them to add a couple of trees; Chair Strahan suggested bushy ligustrums. 2. An application from Gentile, Holloway, O'Mahoney & Associates, Inc., representing PalmCorp, Inc for a property located at the northeast corner of Tequesta Drive and North Cypress Drive, Tequesta, Florida, to review the architectural elevations, landscaping, and signage. a. Swearing -In of Witnesses, if Required Clerk of the Board Carol Lux had previously sworn in those who planned to speak. b. Disclosure of Ex-Parte Communications: Each Boardmember reported no ex-parte communication. COMMUNITY APPEARANCE BOARD MEETING MINUTES March 26, 2003 Page 4 C. Testimony of Witnesses and Cross Examination, if any Jason Litterick of Gentile, Holloway, O'Mahoney & Associates, Inc. reported this project had received Village Council approval last month. Mr. Litterick described the site plan and commented that the Village Council had imposed a condition to plant bougainvillea on the fence and that Connie Fisher was trying to obtain a 5-foot easement from the FEC. Ms. Lux explained that Connie Fisher had been hired to do beautification, and it appeared that she had gotten an FEC easement on the side where the building was located. Discussion ensued. Chair Strahan clarified with Mr. Litterick that the applicant would not build a fence but would plant a hedge if the easement was officially received, and if there was no easement the applicant would provide a fence with a vine; however, Ms. Lux stated that the applicant must build a shadowbox fence either way; that it was required by code. Chair Strahan then clarified that at a very minimum the applicant would have a shadowbox fence with a vine, and if the easement was officially received then they would add a hedge. The board discussed the building style and colors. Boardmember Sterling pointed out that a 6' fence would not hide the prominent 10' high garage doors, to which Chair Strahan commented the garage doors would only be visible from the Old Dixie Highway intersection. Mr. Litterick pointed out there was an existing buffer that was not shown that was 12' high the entire length of their property and 15' wide, and although it was not on the applicant's property they expected it would remain. Chair Strahan commented that it was critical the 5' easement be obtained, and that as much buffer as possible was needed to benefit the people doing business in that building. It was noted that looking from Tequesta Drive the trees on the east side of the southeast part of the building would hide the garage doors from Tequesta Drive. Mr. Sterling suggested adding architectural embellishments on the side of the building that would be viewed when coming west on Tequesta Drive. During further discussion of the easement, Mr. Litterick noted it was almost certain but not yet in writing, and if it was received his client would provide a tree every 30' on center and a continuous hedge and fence to screen the bay doors in back of the building. Discussion ensued regarding the type of fencing, since a wood shadowbox fence would not look good in three years. Polyvinyl fencing was discussed, which was more substantial than wood, durable, and would not deteriorate. It was pointed out there was not room for a concrete wall. Mr. Newell commented there was polyvinyl fencing behind the public COMMUNITY APPEARANCE BOARD MEETING MINUTES March 26, 2003 Page 5 safety building and that was a good choice because it was very low maintenance and continued to look good over the years. Ms. Lux commented that since Connie Fisher was in the middle of the beautification process, she might want to coordinate the fencing for other properties, or perhaps the applicant might put in something cheap and coordinate later. Boardmember Cook commented this board should not consider money. Chair Strahan commented the board must make a decision on what was presented to them now, and the decision could be changed later if needed, but at this point they should go with wood shadowbox fencing. Boardmember Cook commented if the Village Council wanted a shadowbox fence for the beautification project this Board might not like it. Mr. Newell advised the board was not bound to approve a shadowbox fence if they felt PVC was a better material —the issue was screening the loading area, and although shadowbox had been mentioned by the Village Council the board had the authority to make decisions as far as material and colors. Discussion on tabling a portion of the application was discussed. Ms. Litterick questioned what exactly would be tabled and whether it would hold up construction. Boardmember Cook explained that the entire rear landscaping and fence would be tabled. Mr. Newell explained that since the easement was still in flux the applicant could proceed with the building construction and this would come back into play at time of final approval because the applicant would have to have the landscaping and fence done in order to occupy the building, but now could start construction and sometime during that construction process come back concerning the easement and what was going in. Boardmember Cook questioned if the buffer between the project and Georgetown place was enough, to which Mr. Newell responded the applicant had met minimum code requirement in that area. Chair Strahan commented he would like more than minimum landscaping there; suggested tabling the fence material on the north side also and Mr. Litterick suggested a condition that the fences match on both north and east property lines since his client would like the fencing to match. Mr. Newell confirmed the north fencing could also be tabled. Mrs. Cook questioned the oak and royal palm shown on the plans to be relocated as determined by the Village. Mr. Litterick explained that the applicant was proposing a driveway connection at the southeast corner of the development. Mr. Newell explained this had been done because fire rescue needed two access points. Discussion ensued regarding traffic concerns. The applicant, Mr. Palmeri, became upset and asked if the COMMUNITY APPEARANCE BOARD MEETING MINUTES March 26, 2003 Page 6 board was doing another site plan review, which had already been done by the Village Council. Mr. Newell noted this had been discussed at length with Chief Allison. Mr. Palmeri stated he had no problem with tabling the landscape buffer but did not want to be held up on his CO because this committee could not decide on the fencing. Mr. Newell confirmed the board did not want to delay the applicant and their action today would move the project along rather than delaying it. Mr. Palmeri questioned what would happen if the board or the FEC could not make up their minds for a year. Chair Strahan commented the board was trying to facilitate the applicant's building. Mr. Newell commented he did not foresee a future problem. Vice Chair Parker stated the landscaping around the building was well done and his only concern was along the east property line up front and across from the loading area, but that would be resolved in the future. Chair Strahan asked if there would be individual tenant signs in the building. Mr. Litterick noted that was on the signage plan and pointed them out showing that there were 11 tenant signs on the first and second floors, none on the rear of the building facing the railroad, only on the west and south sides of the building, and the signage on each of those sides met or was below what was required for maximum signage square footage. Ground lights were proposed to illuminate first floor tenant signs and landscaping; soffit lighting was proposed for lighting the second floor tenant signs. The only internally illuminated sign was the entrance signage and the freestanding sign at the corner of Tequesta Drive. Pole lighting would be used, and locations were conceptually shown on the plan; however, a photometric plan would be done for correct placement. Vice Chair Parker noted the uplights were not bronze and suggested they be changed to bronze or green to match the landscaping. Mr. Parker noted plants were not specified as Florida No. 1, which the applicant agreed to adjust at the end of the project. Ms. Lux advised Mr. Litterick to make sure the sign people specified 150 mph rate when they applied for their permit, since that was not noted on the plans. Vice Chair Parker commented the building color might be too bright yellow for so large a building. The architect produced a color board. Boardmember Cook commented the yellow would fade. Vice Chair Parker noted the address would not be visible on the Tequesta Drive sign since it would be hidden by the landscaping which might affect marketing. Mr. Litterick indicated he appreciated that comment and would look into it. COMMUNITY APPEARANCE BOARD MEETING MINUTES March 26, 2003 Page 7 d. Finding of Fact Based Upon Competent Substantial Evidence MnTInN- Vice Chair Parker made a motion to approve the application from Gentile, Holloway, O'Mahoney & Associates, Inc., representing PalmCorp, Inc., for a property located at the northeast corner of Tequesta Drive and North Cypress Drive, Tequesta, Florida, for the architectural elevations, landscaping, and signage as submitted with uplight fixtures to be changed from white to bronze or green, and to table the issue of east and north property lines until the Board could understand about the easement and the fencing. Boardmember Sterling seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 5-0 vote. VI. ANY OTHER MATTERS Boardmember Cook commented she was going to call Connie Fisher to ask her to use palmettos in the beautification project. Mr. Newell provided an update on the landscaping project at the intersection of Tequesta Drive and Old Dixie Highway would be delayed by the Northern Palm Beach County Improvement District's drainage project on north Cypress Drive. Mr. Newell reported on the northwest section of the intersection the Village would be running a 12' water line from a well at 357 Tequesta Drive to the water plant, which was why the landscaping project had been delayed.. Mr. Newell reported Alterra had gone bankrupt but The Crossings now had new owners so the property and that building would be completed. Mr. Newell indicated he would recommend it stay an ACLF and there were preliminary discussions now regarding the use which did not lend itself to condominiums, as had been suggested. Mr. Newell reported Mrs. Zanio's property had not sold because when prospective owners found out what they would have to do to it they were not interested. Mr. Newell explained that either the shell would have to be completed or the Village would have to look at condemnation, and the Village was working closely with Mrs. Zanio. Boardmember Cook suggested updates on such projects be placed in Smoke Signals. Mr. Newell indicated that information needed to come from Community Development Department and he would make an effort to see that type of information was in the COMMUNITY APPEARANCE BOARD MEETING MINUTES March 26, 2003 Page 8 newsletter. Chair Strahan noted there had been an ad in today's Jupiter Courier for this meeting, signed by Carol Lux, but the agenda was not listed and listing items to be on the agenda might create interest. Mr. Newell commented agendas would be posted on the web site, but there had been a lot of difficulty getting the site going. Chair Strahan commented the agenda for Village Council meetings used to be in the newspaper but was no longer there and requested it be in the paper. Mr. Strahan also commented he came into the Rec Center the afternoon of the last council meeting to get an agenda and there were none; that he had asked to have a copy faxed to him but that had not happened, and this Board had come into their meeting completely ignorant of what had been discussed at the Village Council meeting. Chair Strahan commented on following up on quality of plants, which Mr. Newell indicated was in regard to Tequesta Trace and Centex would correct that. Ms. Lux was working on following up and Barrett Cruse of Jupiter was helping with that. Mr. Newell explained that when the project end was in sight the landscaping would be reviewed to see if what was supposed to be there had been planted and was off to a good start. Mr. Parker commented there was no landscaping around the signs at Tequesta Terrace ACLF on U.S. One, and Mr. Newell indicated he would look at the final plan. Mr. Sterling commented their sign text was not what this Board had approved. Mr. Newell stated he would check. Boardmember Cook complained about trash along Old Dixie Highway when driving to the post office; and about the Zuccarelli property not being cleaned up. Chair Strahan suggested she take that up with Code Enforcement. VII. ADJOURNMENT Upon motion by Vice Chair Parker, seconded by Boardmember Wenta, and unanimously carried 3-0, the meeting was adjourned at 10:16 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Betty Laur Recording Secretary COMMUNITY APPEARANCE BOARD MEETING MINUTES March 26, 2003 Page 9 ATT j cC�4 Carol Lux Clerk of the Board DATE APPROVED: y- /6 - 0-3