Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDocumentation_Regular_Tab 06E_4/11/2002I. II. IV. W VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNrl Y 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 DECEMBER 5, 2001 CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL 0C. The Tequesta Community Appearance Board held a meeting in the Village Manager's Office at 250 Tequesta Drive, Tequesta, Florida, on Wednesday, December 5, 2001. The meeting was called to order at 9:35 A.M. by Chair Vic Strahan. The roll was called by Betty Laur, Recording Secretary. Boardmembers present were Boardmember Richard Sterling and Boardmember Robert Stein. Vice Chair Steve Parker and Boardmember G Jr, Wenta were absent from the meeting. Also in attendance was Clerk of the Board era Jeff Newell. Alternate Karen Flint arrived at 9:45 A.M. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Boardmember Stein made a motion to approve the agenda as submitted. Boardmember Sterling seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 3-0 vote. COMMUNICATIONS FROM CITIZENS Wade Griest inquired if the Wendy's project had been approved by this Board, to which the response was yes. APPROVAL OF PREVIOUS MEETING MINUTES Boardmember Stein made a motion to approve the minutes of the October 10, 2001 meeting as submitted. Boardmember Sterling seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 3-0 vote. Recycled Paper COMMUNITY APPEARANCE BOARD MEETING MINUTES December 5, 2001 Page 2 V. NEW BUSINESS 1. An application from Boca Signs to install new image signs and new tenant signs as follows at the Mobil Station located at 764 U.S. One North: 1. Disclosure of Ex-Parte Communications: Boardmembers Stein and Sterling reported no ex-parte communications. Chair Strahan reported he had visited the site but had spoken to no one. 2. Swearing -In of Witnesses, if Required Clerk of the Board Jeffery Newell swore in those intending to speak. 3. Testimony of Witnesses and Cross Examination, if any Cindy Strohmeyer, representing Boca Signs, explained that their client wanted a new image that would be more appealing, and that the sign would be the same size as existed or smaller, with only the face changed. Ms. Strohmeyer described the requested changes as provided in the application. Chair Strahan commented that before the Board made a decision, he would like to point out that some landscaping had died or never materialized, and there were gaps in the hedge. Alternate Boardmember Karen Flint arrived at this point in the meeting, at 9:45 A.M. but did not participate in this application. Clerk of the Board Jeff Newell commented that a CO had not been requested, and that he would check the landscaping so that changes could be made before issuance of a CO. Boardmember Stein stated he was okay with the sign changes as submitted. 4. Finding of Fact Based Upon Competent Substantial Evidence Boardmember Stein made a motion to accept the application from Boca Signs to install new image signs and new tenant signs at the Mobil Station located at 764 U.S. One North, as submitted. Boardmember Sterling seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 3-0 vote. COMMUNITY APPEARANCE BOARD MEETING MINUTES December 5, 2001 Page 3 2. An application from Tamwest Realty, Inc., owner of County Line Plaza, U.S. One North, to resurface the existing exterior concrete walkways with Granitogres Casalgrande Padana tile. Boardmember Karen Flint joined the Board. 1. Disclosure of Ex-Parte Communications: All Boardmembers reported no exparte communications. 2. Swearing -In of Witnesses, if Required Clerk of the Board Jeffery Newell swore in those intending to speak. 3. Testimony of Witnesses and Cross Examination, if any Ginny Prohaska was present representing the applicant, and described the tile samples presented for consideration, which consisted of multicolor patterned tiles, and a more subdued color tile. Ms. Prohaska indicated that the applicant wished to place the tiles on top of the existing concrete sidewalks, but not to extend to K Mart since if the tiles were in front of K Mart they would not want the shopping carts on the tile. Chair Strahan commented that under the original approval, K Mart was not allowed to park their carts outside, and he did not know if they had later obtained an easement to allow that, but if not, the carts should not be outside now. Ms. Prohaska explained that she did not know if the curb would be redone or if the lip would be tiled. Boardmember Stein recommended the applicant get drawings done of what would be done and bring back the exact tiles they wished to use with a pattern layout and with K Mart included, and to let the Board know if they wished to do a front face or not. Mr. Stein stated he thought the curb should be done, and that the tile color needed to be shown with the pattern on a layout, and also show whether there were any columns or any deviation from a flat squared -off surface. Boardmember Sterling stated he wanted to see a sample of the building color. Discussion ensued regarding how the edge of the curb could be treated, whether there were any transitions to K Mart which would cause a problem, and that there could be a problem on the access ramp levels. Ms. Prohaska stated that the applicant would withdraw the multicolor patterned tile and questioned whether there were any comments aside from that such as concern regarding slip resistance, etc. Chair Strahan responded COMMUNITY APPEARANCE BOARD MEETING MINUTES December 5, 2001 Page 4 that was a Building Department problem, and not an issue for the Community Appearance Board to consider. Chair Strahan indicated to Ms. Prohaska that he understood from her comments that when she went back to the owner the patterned tile would be dropped and they would do the solid color; and commented that the Board had the color of the tile but did not have the color of the building. Chair Strahan commented that this tile manufacturer might or might not have colors more suitable to go with the building, and that he had driven by the building and looked at the sidewalk, some of which was plain concrete and some was painted concrete. Mr. Stein asked if the applicant wanted to use a patterned tile if it could be a larger scale, to which Ms. Prohaska responded no, that these were special tiles from Italy with the color all the way through so the color would not be worn away with use. Boardmember Sterling commented that the pattern scale was too small. Mr. Stein requested the applicant provide the color they wanted to use. Ms. Prohaska responded the owner had said they would withdraw the patterned tile and that all of the other tiles by this manufacturer were darker, not lighter. Boardmember Stein requested that when the building color was provided that other samples of the tile be provided also. Boardmember Sterling asked for a depiction of the proposed treatment at the base of the columns. Ms. Prohaska commented that re -roofing would begin in a couple of weeks, and stated she was pushing for the building to be repainted also, and would love for those things to be done before the tile was installed, but the owners' answers were very ambiguous. Chair Strahan commented the Board needed to know whether the columns would be done straight down to the ground or if there would be some type of base or molding to tie into the tile surface. Chair Strahan indicated to the applicant that this application would be tabled until they could come back with answers and more detail of how to tie the tile into the existing sidewalks; that the Building Department would require public safety; and if the tile color was changed it must be presented. Boardmember Flint requested a color sample of the roof, to which Ms. Prohaska responded that it was a flat roof and not seen. Chair Strahan commented the Board needed an overall picture of the shopping center. Boardmember Stein questioned whether wheelchair ramps could be changed to have straight sides, and if not, how could tile be used. Mr. Newell commented he would check ADA guidelines to see if that was addressed. Ms. Prohaska indicated she could also check the ADA guidelines. It was noted COMMUNITY APPEARANCE BOARD MEETING MINUTES December 5, 2001 Page 5 to the applicant that if ADA did not allow tile they might need to use a sprayed on texture. The applicant indicated they would consider paint if tiles could not be used. Boardmember Stein commented that the whole shopping center should be done, including K Mart, so everything would look the same, and that the sloping sides of the ramps might be required to remain to keep wheelchairs on the ramps. The issue of the owner excluding K Mart was discussed. Ms. Prohaska indicated she was new there and there was also a new maintenance director, and they had both recommended that the entire center be done for continuity. Chair Strahan commented that some of the sidewalk had been painted green, to which Ms. Prohaska responded that had been done by Winn Dixie at their site. 4. Finding of Fact Based Upon Competent Substantial Evidence Boardmember Stein made a motion to table the application from Tamwest Realty, Inc., owner of County Line Plaza, U.S. One North, to resurface the existing exterior concrete walkways with Granitogres Casalgrande Padana tile with direction to the applicant to provide the following items and the recommendation that the whole shopping center needs to be the same: 1. Revised application 2. Sample of exact tile to be used 3. Sample of exact color of building 4. ADA specifications 5. Tile layout 6. Other options and colors of other options Boardmember Sterling seconded the motion. During discussion of the motion, Boardmember Flint requested that this process be efficient so that a tenant could be found to occupy the old Winn -Dixie building. Ms. Flint requested roof tile color samples also be provided so the Board could see the whole picture. The applicant was advised if the intent was to repaint the building that color sample could be submitted also which would save an extra application. Motion carried by unanimous 4-0 vote. COMMUNITY APPEARANCE BOARD MEETING MINUTES December 5, 2001 Page 6 VI. ANY OTHER MATTERS Clerk of the Board Newell reported he was still waiting for a response from the Village Attorney regarding the application form for historical trees, as well as an opinion on a letter received from an individual who wanted to designate a 100+-year-old oak which was located on private property in order to preserve the tree. Discussion ensued, with several questions such as moving the tree, who would bear the cost of moving, what happened if someone pruned it, etc. Chair Strahan commented that restrictions could be placed in the deed to the property. Clerk of the Board Newell indicated that the Village would have the responsibility of making sure the tree was trimmed and cared for properly. Boardmember Sterling confirmed with Mr. Newell that a permit would be needed to move the tree from private property. Boardmember Sterling suggested enforcing through the permit process if someone wanted to cut a tree by identifying the tree and its age before they were issued a permit for cutting. Mr. Newell commented that the Board needed to wait for the legal opinion before going further with this matter. VII.. ADJOURNMENT Upon motion by Boardmember Stein, seconded by Boardmember Sterling and unanimously carried 4-0, the meeting was adjourned at 10:10 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Az;z:�' 4".11L Betty Laur Recording Secretary AT -EST: