Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDocumentation_Regular_Tab 9-04_03/10/2005• VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA PLANNING AND ZONING ADVISORY BOARD ~VIEETING MINUTES JANUARY 19, 2005 I. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL The Village of Tequesta Planning and Zoning Advisory Board held a regularly scheduled meeting at the Tequesta Recreation Center, 399 Seabrook Road, Tequesta., Florida, on Wednesday, January 19, 200. The meeting was called to order at 6:32 P.M. by Chair Elizabeth Schauer. A roll call was taken by Village Clerk Gwen Carlisle. Board members present were: Chair Elizabeth Schauer, Vice Chair Steve Okun. Jeff Robbins, Leslie Cook, and William Wilder. Also in • attendance was Alternate Carl Blase, Clerk of the Board and Director of Community Development Jeff Newell, and Village Clerk Gwen Carlisle.. lI. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: Boardmember Okun moved approval of the agenda as submitted. Board member Wilder seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 5-0 vote. The motion was therefore passed and adopted and the Agenda was approved as submitted. III. APPROVAL OF PREVIOUS MEETING MINUTES MOTION: Boardmember Cook made a motion not to approve the minutes of the meeting of December 1 until a full set of minutes was received by the members of the Board. Vice Chair Okun seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 5-0 vote. MOTION: Vice Chair Okun made a motion to approve the minutes of the meeting of November 17, 2004 as submitted. Boardmember Wilder seconded the • motion, which carried by unanimous 5-0 vote. Planning and Zoning Advisory Board January 19, 2005 Meeting Minutes Page 2 • IV. NEW BUSINESS A. An application from Preferred Signs, Inc, representing Courtyard of Tequesta LLC doing business as Walker's Warehouse located at 304 Tequesta Drive is requesting a review of three (3) new wall signs for their building. Lydia Brack of Sign-A-Rama in Jupiter, advised their client would like to put two separate signs on the building, one on each side of the east elevation. The proposed signs were t,~~~~ti~~.i~~s~l~t~~~~,~~3:ti_~;:~~~, which would be 15" high x 15'6" long, and for the opposite side «~yi~.~~.tit+~~_:~r~~~ax~~1~~~~~G.~:~~~~~~, which would be 15" high x 24'-5" long. Ken Brack explained that the applicant wished to find out if these signs would both be approved and if they were approved they would like to change the front sign, which needed repair. Jeff Newell, Director of Community Development, confirmed that Mr. And Mrs. Brack were present tonight only for the east elevation, not the north elevation. Mr. Okun commented the applicant wanted to know if they could split up the square footage to have two signs. Chair Schauer expressed concern that would set a precedent. Since the individual who had been handling this was not present and Mr. Newell had only received the information that afternoon • and had not had a chance to review it, he asked if this could be delayed until a week from tonight, January 26. Ms. Brack responded they would be out of town then but could make the next meeting. Boardmember Cook stated she was not in favor of varying from the ordinance. Mr. Newell referred to the sign ordinance, which allowed a sign on each side of the building exposed to a street or shopping center. The applicant could move one of the signs proposed for the east side to the north, and it was confirmed that would eliminate the illuminated box sign. Ms. Brack explained that the customer had been hoping to get approval to put both signs on one side since the building was such a large square footage. Vice Chair Okun asked if the applicant really wanted to wait two weeks only to find out that would not happen, since he was hearing three people who did not want it. Mr. Newell commented it was pretty well understood one sign was allowed on each side of the building, and in order to have two signs on one side that would require a variance to the ordinance, which was a whole separate procedure. Mr. Newell asked if the individual who had been handling this had discussed this with the applicant, to which Mr. Brack responded yes, he thought that was what they were applying for and understood that they had to go before P&Z for a variance. Mr. Newell explained the variance process came first then P&Z would consider appearance, and might cost as much as $1,000 for a variance. Mr. Brack felt it might be better to go back to the • drawing board and have one sign on each side. Chair Schauer noted the Planning and Zoning Advisory Board .January 19, 2005 Meeting Minutes Page 3 dumpsters were not covered on three sides as required and asked that the sign company representatives inform their client. Mr. Newell asked that the client call him and he would explain the variance procedure and the cost. It was clarified that the sign company was Sign-A- Rama in Jupiter, and Preferred Signs, Inc. was the fabricator they used. Ms. Brack indicated thev would review the situation with their client. the client would make a decision. and contact Mr. Newell. Mr. Brack asked if he had to submit a whole new application package to come back, and pay the $75 fee again. Mr. Newell requested after the client had made a decision that everything would be discussed at a meeting in his office. Vice Chair Okun suggested that due to the misunderstanding, the fee might be waived. Mr. Newell commented the code allowed him to do that and he felt it was justifiable. Mr. Newell suggested tabling this to a future hearing so the application would stay in effect. MOTION: Vice Chair Okun made a motion to table the application for signage for the property located at 304 Tequesta Drive. Boardmember Cook seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 5-0 vote. • The applicant was asked to contact Mr. Newell. V. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Final Review of the Adult Arcade Ordinance Chair Schauer referred to page 2 of the ordinance, Section A, stating that comparing that with the Casselberry ordinance, they had been more specific in their location, and asked to take a hard look at ours because they went through the whole thing point by point. They were more detailed in location and hours of operation-only 9 a.m. to 9 p.m. Chair Schauer asked if the signage, use of graphics, was explicit enough: Mr. Newell commented it was limited in the last sentence, where use of strip neon was prohibited. Chair Schauer noted on page 3, C4, the number of machines was to be exhibited. Mr. Newell explained the number of machines would be listed on their occupational license. Fire Department, Code Enforcement and Community Development could check the machines licensed for the premises by using the information provided for the occupational license, which would require the number and serial numbers of the machines. Chair Schauer questioned No 3 on page 4 regarding the requirement to • provide registered machines, and that all records of prizes awarded were to be open to code enforcement at any time-if that was infringing on their rights. Planning and Zoning Advisory Board January 19, 2005 Meeting Minutes Page 4 • Mr. Newell responded it was not, because this had been the issue when they infringed on the Chuck E. Cheese law, so they would be held accountable for that record. Chair Schauer noted at the bottom of the page were listed ten requirements to which the adult arcade must conform, and no advertising was listed. Mr. Newell explained that would be limited by the sign code. Chair Schauer asked if they could advertise within the business such as over the Internet. Mr. Newell responded that would be a question for the attorney, and a legal opinion might be required for that. Vice Chair Okun commented the ordinance should be inclusive enough to recognize technological advances so if there became ahand-held device handed out to customers which fit the definition of what would happen in an adult arcade, and if that would be a violation of the ordinance, and if it could go outside, which would be a violation if the ordinance addressed that. Mr. Newell commented the occupational license limited the business to that premises, and he did not think the laws went far enough to control a wireless device. Mr. Newell explained that when the occupational license was applied for, the machines within that premises would be registered with the Village and bringing in something like a wireless router would go against that license and it could be voided and they would be out of business. The occupational license would apply to a designated leased space. Mr. Okun commented if you want to be able to define control of an activity which was supposed to be defined by the • attorneys, which was not only outside the leased space but also outside that particular zoning designation, if you identified it, then you had a place to send it and there was no legal challenge. Mr. Newell advised if the business was made a special exception use, for example to the C-2 district, that would have to come before this board and before Council, and it would be up to the Council to accept or reject the special exception. Mr. Okun commented he was going beyond that-once a footprint was established within the Village of that conduct happening within a specific commercial location, they had also defined that activity as it happened within the Village and gave a specific location within the Village where it was legal for that to happen. That location needed to be defined; then it would not be legal when happening outside that location. Mr. Okun commented in order for the Village police powers to be exercised, the location where it could happen had to be written down somewhere. Mr. Newell noted C-2 was the only district where this would be allowed and it would be confined to that district. What needed to be decided was whether it would be a permitted use or a special exception use, which would allow much greater control and granted Council the ability to limit activity. Vice Chair Okun commented you also could not exclude activity; you must provide space somewhere for the activity. If there was an activity it must be in the book and state where it had to happen. Mr. Okun stated he was requesting to clearly • identify that activity in all of its technological metes and bounds, so as not only to diligently stand over the person that was willfully operating a legal Planning and Zoning Advisory Board January 19, 2005 Meeting Minutes Page 5 • adult arcade, but somebody that was operating something else and then brought that little twist into his existing business. Mr. Newell gave an example that he was operating a legal adult arcade and how would Mr. Okun approach him. Mr. Okun responded he was talking about another business- the bar-b-que down the street-who was doing the same thing. Mr. Newell commented if they had aone-armed bandit in the bathroom, that was illegal and he could be prosecuted. Mr. Okun commented it was not aone-armed bandit-technology was such that you must start trying to blend in that technology, leaving a door open to that. Mr. Newell commented it was difficult to put a thumb down on it. Mr. Newell asked the board if they agreed to the G2 and permitted use or special exception. Consensus was for special exception use. Mr. Wilder pointed out language on page 2 might need changing. Mr. Newell commented in Wedgewood in Stuart there was an adult arcade, but if you were not looking for it you would not recognize it, which told him Stuart had it regulated. Chair Schauer asked about a holiday party referred to in the minutes. Mr. Newell responded no cash or prizes were awarded and that fell within the • Florida Statutes and was permissible. Discussion ensued regarding how this all evolved. Mr. Okun asked if gambling on the intemet was gaming. Mr. Newell indicated Congress did not know how to deal with the whole Internet issue. Mr. Newell noted in a special exception, the Village could say, there shall be no data ports or wireless terminals; and setting conditions was the advantage of having special exception use. Chair Schauer asked if this addressed bingo and if it was allowed in the adult arcade, to which Mr. Newell responded no, it was only machines. Mr. Newell recommended keeping it as a special exception use. Boardmember Wilder asked if anything could be added to the ordinance under special exception, if new technology came up. Mr. Newell indicated that was right. In the case of the one-armed bandit in the bar-b-que business they would be told either remove the machine or go through the special exception process. Public Comment Tom Paterno asked if parking for this facility was referenced. Mr. Newell responded if you leased a space in Tequesta Shoppes the parking was already factored into the approved site plan. Mr. Paterno asked if it would be possible to have something tied to the machines for parking available to them because when he went to look at a building for sale where there was one of these adult arcades they were packed, and the parking lot was full, leaving no parking for • the other businesses. Discussion ensued regarding the procedure for the number of parking spaces for a shopping center site plan. Mr. Newell Planning and Zoning Advisory Board January 19, 2005 Meeting Minutes Page 6 • clarified a traffic study was not done for a special exception. Mr. Paterno asked if you could tie into a special deal of so many parking spaces per machine. Mr. Newell responded the only time there would be any control over parking would be if someone built their own building just for an adult arcade. Mr. Paterno commented he had not bought that building because he knew there would be parking problems. Chair Schauer noted if the other businesses complained to the Council, they could do nothing because it was legal and would recommend going to the landlord. Mr. Newell commented there was nothing the Village would be able to do if the management company restricted parking and it was always overflowing into other spaces. MOTION: Vice Chair Okun made a motion to insert the special exception provision in the ordinance for the C-2 zoning district. Boardmember Robbins seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 5-0 vote. Mr. Newell stated a final draft would be done with all the changes and he would bring a clean copy back. VI. COMMUNICATIONS FROM CITIZENS • There were no communications from citizens. VII. ANY OTHER MATTERS Mr. Newell reported he had an application from the Seaquesta project located on the southwest corner of Seabrook Road and Tequesta Drive for site plan review; and asked the board if they would be able to hear it a week from tonight on January 26, 2005. Mrs. Cook commented she could not attend, but agreed to review the packet and submit her comments before the meeting. MOTION: Vice Chair Okun made a motion to hold the next meeting on January 26, 2005 at 6:30 p.m. to replace the meeting of February 6~h. Boardmember Robbins seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 5-0 vote. Consensus was to restrict the agenda to the one item, site plan review for Seaquesta. Boardmember Cook reported she had written a letter to the Village Council regarding the 17 palm trees required in the CVS Pharmacy parcel, since she did not think there were that many, but she had not yet counted them. If there were not 17 palm. trees, Boardmember Cook asked that the developer be • required to put more on that property so there would be 17. Planning and Zoning Advisory Board January 19, 2005 Meeting Minutes Page 7 • Boardmember Cook asked why there was such a mess next to the railroad on Tequesta Drive, to which Mr. Newell responded that the Village had recently put a water line through there. Ms. Cook asked why it was not cleaned up and trash hauled away and asked that be done. Ms. Cook asked to keep as many palmettos as possible because it was a buffer for the train, it was natural, and did not have to be trimmed. Chair Schauer asked what would prevent advertising on the east side of the new building across the road from Walkers Warehouse. Mr. Newell advised there was to be a landscape buffer between the east side of that building and the railroad right-of--way. Chair Schauer expressed concern that Walkers Warehouse could advertise on the east side of their building if the board made them an exception. Boardmember Cook commented there was a landscape for that corner years ago, which was paid for and never used, and she did not like to see money wasted. Boardmember Cook was looking for plans for the Chevron station but could not find the landscape plan. • VIII. ADJOURNMENT Upon motion by Vice Chair Okun, seconded by Boardmember Robbins, and unanimously carried, the meeting was adjourned. Respectfully submitted, .. ,, -/ ~ ;. Betty Laur Recording Secretary