HomeMy WebLinkAboutDocumentation_Regular_Tab 04_08/11/2005 Minutes — I�lanning and Zoning Advisoxy Boaxd
J�p �, Zoos
Page 1 .
MINUTES
VILLAGE UF TEQUESTA
PLANNING & ZONING ADVISORY BOARD
THURSDAY, JULY ?, 2005
I. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
The Village of Tequesta Planning and Zoning Advisory Board held a regularly scheduled
�eeting at the Tequesta. Recreation Center, 399 Seabrook Road, Tequesta, Florida, on
Thursday, July 7, 2005. Chair Elizabeth Schauer called the meeting to arder at 6:38 p.m.
A roll ca11 was taken by Village Clerk Gwen Carlisle. Board �hembers present were:
Chair Elizabeth Schauer, Vice Chair Steve Okun, Board 1Vlember Leslie Cook, and Board
Member Jeff Robbiras. Absent were William Wilder, Board Member and Alternate Board
member Carl Blase. Also in attendance were Clerk of the Board, and Community
Development Director Jeff Newell and Village Clerk Gwen Carlisle. Chair 5chauer
wanted Village Clerk Carlisle to make a note that Board member VVilder was not in
attendance because he was on vacation.
II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Board member Okun asked for an addi�ion to the agenda. Board member Okun emailed
Jeff Newell concerning the noise issue that the Board should address with regards to
standby generators in the Village and could be discussed under Any Other Matters; b)
Boazd member Cook stated she had a couple of comments for Any Other Matters, but if
the meeting r.wns too long, she can hold them for another time. Chair Scha.uer asked �or a
motian to approve the agenda. with the addition of several items under Any Other
Matters. �
MOTION: Vice Chair Okun moved to approve the agenda, as amended; Board member
Robbins seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 4-0 vote. The motion was
therefore passed and adopted and the Agenda. was approved as amended.
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
a. MINUTES OF JUNE 2, 2005
Board Member Cook stated her email was not working properly sa she did not receive
the minutes. Thus, Cha.ir Schauer suggested tabling the approval of the June 2, 2005, �
meeting minutes until the next meeting of the Board. Chair Schauer asked Village Clerk
Carlisle to supply Board member Cook with a copy of the June 2, 2005, minutes.
Gonsensus of the Board agreed to table the minutes to the August Meeting.
Minutes — Planning and Zoning Ad�visory $oard
July 7, 20Q5
Page 2
IV. NEW BUSINESS
a. ORDiNANCE REVIEW: PARKING OF COMMERCIAL VEHICLES,
TRUCKS AND RECREATIONAL VEHICLES ON PRIVATE LOTS
Clerk of the Board Jeff Newell sta.ted that regarding the ordinance Section
78, Division Il, Administration directed Community Development to
revise some of the text in this ordinance. He noted it was before the Board
for review and comment. He mentioned on page 1, Section 7$-642, Item
B, this was a matter that the police department had spoken with him. He
noted there was a lot of confusion concerning the m�ed use district and
suggested adding in the ordinance the following language, "far purposes
of this division residential areas, include all areas within the Viilage other
than el, C2, C3 and ROP. Residential complexes within the mixed use
districts shouid not be excluded and should be defined as residential
areas." He commented the Village had run into problems, such as
Tequesta. Trace, Tequesta Cay where the police department wasn't able to
enforce this because they felt the substance wasn't there, and the grounds
that they needed. Chair Schauer reiterated the verbiage. Mr. Newell
explained that in the mixed use azea there would be residential and
commercial; and where the problem that the police were having was they
were looking at the mixed use as commercial. He stated the Police did not
know how to deal with the residential complexes within the district so this
was the request on their behalf to define it, so any residential complex
within the mixed-use district this would apply ta, because those were
residential areas within that district.
Chair Schauer clarified that some the residential areas within the mixed
use had governing documents, and suggested Staff look at Tequesta Oaks,
for instance. She felt they do not a11ow for pickup trucks. Mr. Newell
stated that this was the HOA documentation, which the Village could not
enforce. He sta.ted this was to get it into our ordinances, where they have
the ability to enforce the ordinances in those residential areas that are
within that mixed-use district. He stated the Village has not been able to
do the enforcement of pickup trucks and campers in Tequesta Trace and
Tequesta Cay because it was not found it in the ordinance. Mr. Newell felt
there was nothing in the code that addressed the prohibitian in the mixed-
use district. Board member Robbins felt there needed to be a Municipai
ordinance that would supersede the homeowner association rules. Chair
Schauer questioned what district she lived in. Clerk of the Board sta.ted
she lives in Rl. He also stated that the mixed-use district did not exist
when this code was written. Chair Schauer stated she was on the Village
Council when Tequesta Trace decided whether or not they allowed
commercial vehicles. Clerk of the Board Newell sta.ted they probably did
not a11aw them in their homeowner documents, but what the Village was
Iooking for was the need to have the ability to enforce it.
Minutes — Planning and Zoning Advisoxy Boaxd
J�� �, zoos
Page 3
Chair Schauer stated she is the president of her homeowner association
and pickup trucks aze a problem within her area. She noted this week one
of her board members sent out a letter to 4 individuals that had their
pickup trucks parked in their driveways. She indicated her HOA does not
a11ow them. Chair Schauer stated that if there were pickup trucks within a
section of the multi-use district that had governing documents, their board
should be enforcing it. Mr. Newell agreed with Chair Schauer but stated
the problem has been coming back to the police departrnent and they were
saying that the Special Master could not prosecute because they clid not
have the authority in the mixed use district. Board member Robbins stated
that the police department can't enforce homeowner association activity,
the courts do; so what the Board would be doing is redefining so that the
police department can take appropriate action, Village wide.
Mr. Newell reviewed Page 2, which affected the Rl, R2, and R3 districts,
noting the cha�ge in paragraph 2. Chair Schauer read for the record the
revised language: "The location for such parked equ.ipment sha11 be in the
rear yard or side yard to the reaz of a line established by the front building
line, adjacent to the side yard where the equipment is located, provided,
however, that such equipment is effectively screened on no less than three
sides against direct view from abutting properties and from public
roadways not to exceed �he eave/soffit height of the garage andlor main
structure, for two story homes the height shall not exceed eight (8} feet."
Mr. Newe11 pointed out that item 2) referred to everything that was listed
in the first paragraph, "construction equipmen#, trucks, pickup trucks, etc.
He felt the problem was largely to due the boats. He e�lained there were
now 25 and 30-foot boats being parked on these properties with towers
that could not be hidden. I-Ie noted one of the tasks given to the
Department of Community Development was to lower or create a height
limit on these boats and the other equipment. Board member Cook
clarified it stated 8. feet for a 2-story boat. Mr. Neweli noted if a
homeowner did have an eave on that side of the wall, it could go up to 16
feet; what it originally was saying was the soffit height. He felt this was a
loophole. Baazd member Cook felt this was too low. Chair Schauer asked
what the limita.tion was for a fence. Clerk of the Board Newell stated 6
feet but they can use a live hedge with could cover the additional 2 feet.
He cornmented if someone has a smali l4-foat baat they will have no
problem concealing it from sight. Chair Schauer agreed. Chair Schauer
sta.ted the Village had a height limita.tion as faz as fences but did not have
a height limitation for hedges. She explained if you drive around in same
areas the hedges are quite lugh, 10-12 feet. She noted a ladder was needed
in order to trim them. Boazd member Cook felt $ feet was too low, that it
shauld be maybe to the roof. Clerk vf the Board Newell explained there
were issues in the Country Club area because of this problem. He noted
the ordinance says it has to be hidden from view from roadways, golf
Minutes — Planning and Zoning Advisory Board
July 7, 2005
Page 4
courses and waterways. He stated if someone had a 20-foot tower it
prabably could not be hidden, and the goal of the ordinance was to limit
that height o� the boat to conceai it from sight.
Vice Cha.ir Okun asked if they could discuss this item last because there
were people in the audience that would like to speak on other issues, and it
seemed that the Board was going to be discussing this item for a while.
Board member Cook suggested giving this item a time limit. Mr. Newell
sta.ted this item was just for comment that no actian would be taken this
evening. He indicated the Board was reviewing in case they wanted to
make changes before it goes to Village Council. He pointed out this was
their opporhinity to review and make comments, and hear public
comments. Board member Cook suggested a 30-minute time limit
regarding this item. Mr. Newell noted the language was the same for Rl,
R2, R3, and RlA. Board member Okun asks if this was created to address
the Country Club residents. Clerk of the Board Newetl stated no; that
there was an issue in the Country Club but it was for the entire Village.
Board member Cook asked Chair Schauer if she had a lot of problems
with boats in her neighborhood. Chair Schauer responds one, but they
came to a mutual understanding. She noted if you drive through the
Village, you could see boats. Board member Okun commented Chair
Schauer's community does not have a dock and a launching facility.
Chair Schauer commented her neighbors keep their boats in their garage.
Board member Okun pointed out that if you have a community that has an
active boating community with a place to launch boats, you have an
invitation to live here, bring your boat, and enjoy that community. Mr.
Newell felt that in the beginning most people had smaller boats, canoes,
and kayaks; and now the 25-30 faoters were making�their way into the
Village with 15 foot towers. He noted that was wha.t was generating this
issue. Board member Okun felt the Village should make an effort to hear
those people who have these boats and a11ow them to give their input.
Clerk of the Board Newell mentioned he has gotten several phone calls an
this issue.
Chair � Schauer noted the ordinance also inctuded commercial vehicles,
trucks, trailers, and motor homes, etc. Chair Schauer noted in her
community several people were calling her or a boazd member when
someone brought a motor home and parked in it in her neighborhood. She
commented they park it there so they can load it, and wash it. Clerk of the
Boazd Newell noted further in the ordinance there was a time Iimit, and
that it was allowed to be there for so many hours. Mr. Newell stated they
actua.11y have 3 da.ys or 36 hours. Board member Robbins sta.ted he lived
in R1A along with Board member Cook. He asked the Board to consider
1) the fact that we live in South Florida, and there are goitng to be boats;
and 2) the Board needs to be careful that they do not �vant to create
another can of worms by someone being creative to their property to "hide
Minutes — Planning and Zoning Advisoxy Board
Julp 7, 20Q5
Page 5
the boat" so they conform to this issue. He felt the Village could be
creating an even worse problem that a tower on a boat. Chair Schauer
agreed and stated that you could have a hedge that up to 25 feet. Boazd
member Cook responded she was in favor of hiding the tower but she felt
8 feet was too low. Chair Schauer stated she has a problem with a 12-foot
hedge. Mr. Newell mentioned the issue was not the hedge.
Ms Betty Nagy, resident of Shay Place was upset regarding the 8-foot
height limit. She mentioned during the hurricanes last year, a lot of the
residents in her neighborhood lost their trees, which gave them the privacy
from Tequesta. Gardens. She commented a lot of them put up hedges and
they're hoping to let them grow to at ieast 10 feet so tha# they ha.ve a little
privacy in their yard. She did not think it was fa.ir to ask them to remove
them as long as they take care of them. Board m�mber Robbins agreed
with Mrs. Nagy. Mrs. Nagy stated it cost her $1500 to have trees removed
because it was interfering with the lines. She says if there was an 8-foot
limit on hedges, it's punishing her for being a govd neighbor. Clerk of the
Board Newell reitera.ted there was not a limit on the size of the hedge but
the size of the tower. Mrs. Nagy felt that it was the Special Master that
caused this problem as faz as the Country Club. Mr. Newell asked the
Board to go to Page 2, the last half of pazagraph 2. He mentioned the area
that had the strike out, was what the Speeial Master was allowing and
that's why it was being eliminated. Mrs. Nagy felt the Special Master was
the one that advised them to do a screening or something like that so tbat
they could still keep their big boat on their properly.
Board member Okun questions if there was a limitation in the Village for
a flagpoles. Clerk of the Board Neweil stated there was no limitation for a
height of a flagpole. Board member Okun questioned i€ a boat owner had
a flying mast and they decided to display a flag on it, it would become a
flagpole. Clerk of the Board Newell questioned whether or not it would
become a flagpole because the mast was attached to that boat. Board
Member Robbins sta.ted he only had those 2 concerns. Mr. Newell
mentioned the Village had a case on River Drive, that the resident had
wire trellises, to shield the vehicle, and the Special Master accepted this as
a reasonable attempt. Board member Cook recalled another time on
Fairway East. Board member Okun suggested that the recommendations
they make do not interfere with any additional guidelines that homeowner
associations itnpose on. Clerk of the Board Newell stated, for e�mple,
the Country Club no longer has enforceable covenartts. Board member
Cook noted they never did.
Board member Okun mentioned coneerns with the legislation, not being
universal across the Village. Chair Schauer referred to page 2:
"construction equipment". Chair Schauer suggested that it be included
that if you have a vehicle that doesn't have a license plate.
Minutes — Pla,jnn.ing and Zoning Advisary Board
July 7, 2005
Page 6
Clerk of the Board Newell responded in the International Property
Maintenance Code adopted a year and a half ago, the new code
enforcement off cer found a section in there that addressed this item; that
if there was a vehicle parked there without proper licensing and
registration, its in violation. He stated this was not in the Village's
ordinances but was adopted by the maintenance code.
Chair Schauer asked if there were any additional public comments. Ms.
Lorraine Rogers, resident, and president of the Tequesta Country Club
Association, asked if this was the first part of the codes being addressed by
Council to upda.te the code book. She noted they were in the process of
daing a survey to determine what the residents of the RlA district wanted
from these code revisions. She felt a Iot of the local residents were
pushing for these changes. She commented she did not know why it had to
address a11 of these vehicles; and that boat tawers did not seem to be the
issue, it was more an RV issue because of that happened on River Drive.
She stated there were a lot of people who live in her community that have
boats and if the only issue was the height of the tower, then why did the
whole ordinance needed to be amended. She stated it costs also $11/foot
and that's the cl�eapest estirnate I could find to keep a boat in a marina.
She commented if you have a 22-foot boat, you're looking at $250/month
to store your baat. She did not feel that was fair to residents. Ms. Rogers
commented even though the property values have gone up everyone in the
Country Club was not rich. She felt tlus would be a lot of money for
residents to pay, and tha.t screening the boats or vehicles on 3 sides was
sufficient. She believed there should be a limit on commercial trucks and
RVs and things that are unsightly but questioned a tower in a boating
� community, Board member Cook agreed with Ms. Rogers, and asked if
there would be any way to pull out the boats and then group those other
vehicles in the ordinance. Chair Schauer asked Ms. Rogers when her
survey was going to be done, and the responses returned. Mr. Newell
reiterated that if the Boazd was not done with this item tonight, then it
would be scheduled for another rneeting. Chair Schauer wanted to knaw
if the survey addressed the boat issue. Ms. Rogers responded the surveys
should be back by the end of July. Chair Scha.uer ask that Ms. Rogers
come baek to the next meeting and give the Boazd the results; and if she
provided the residents with a stamped envelope for them to return the
survey. Resident Rogers responded they did supply a return envelope.
Chair Scha.uer ask that they table this issue until Ms. Rogers could report
back to the Board with the results of the survey. Mr. Newell stated tha.t he
has to have materials to the Board one week priar to the meeting. Chair
Schauer suggested they postpone this item to the September meeting. Mr.
Newell asked if Ms. Rogers could expedite the survey. Board member
Robbins felt at the same time that the other homeowner associations be
given ample opportunity to give their input.
Minutes — Pla.nning and Zoning Advisory Board
Julp 7, 2005
Page 7
Chair Schauer commented the other communities should be notified that
the Board was loaking at this issue and ask them how they €eel about it.
Boazd member Okun stated it would be embarrassing if a resident showed
up at a Council meeting and wondered why they were not made aware of
the issue. Chair Schauer confumed with Ms. Rogers that she could get all
of her information ready for the September meeting. Ms. Rogers felt she
could get the information to Mr. Newell by mid-August. Boazd member
Okun asked that the other homeowner associations be notified as well.
Board member Cook asked who gave direction to look at tizis issue. Mr.
Newell staxed the Village Manager asked the Department of Community
Development to address this issue. Board member Okun suggested they
table this issue for a future meeting, during "in-season" when more people
will be here. Chair Schauer suggested possibly even holding off until
November to d.iscuss item. Board member Qkun stated that it would give
the Village time to put something out in the newsletter, the Smoke Signals
to let residents know this will be discussed. Mr. Newell indicated a letter
to a11 HOAs would be sent. Boazd member Okun stated every resident
should know as well, and that he didn't think the results would be a big
swrprise. He believed there would be a"packed house", and should not
center on one community; that they need the input of the entire
community.
Chair Schauer asked to table this issue until November so that all HOAs
can discuss the issue. Board member Okun reiterated it should be done
Village-wide; not just for HOAs. Chair Schauer suggested sending a copy
of the ordinance so that residents know how the ordinance will be
changing. Mr. Newell stated it might be easier to provide residents his
contact information if they have questions. Baard member Cook stated
there were a lot of verbiage changes, but the bottom line was they could
not have big boats.
MQTI4N: Board Member Cook moved to table the ordinance review of parking of
commereial vehicles, trucks and recreational vehicles on � private lots to the Navember
meeting. Vice Chair Okun seconded the motion. T'he vote on the motion was 4-0.
b. SITE PLAN REVIEW OF BALDINQ'S RESTAURANT EXPANSIOIV
Mr. Jeff Newell, Clerk of the Board and Community Development
Director asked the board members to turn to page 10. F�Ie asked if
everyone was familiar with Baldino's. He reviewed Section 78-333 of the
Site Plan Review, and the contents of the applieation. He noted on Items 1
and 2, the applicant had provided a copy of the warranty deed and is the
owner af the properiy, and stated his intent was to expand the e�sting
building by approximately 947 square feet. .
Ms. Debra Norsey, Landseape arehitect and representing the owner
discussed the colors for the buildtng. Chair Schauer felt the whole Viilage
Minutes — Planning and Zoning Advisory Boaxd
J� �, zoos
Page 8
was starting to look the same color, and nated it was nice to have a little
bit of a variety. Debra Norsey reviewed the roof tiles, and color.
Mr. Newell reviewed Items 3-4, He noted the applicant had submitted
building elevations, and because af the size of the property a traffic study
was not necessary. He reviewed the Item (d) noting the off-street parking
and off-street loading areas, He mentioned the parking was figured one
space for every 3 seats, which equals 18 spaces, to give the site the best
arrangement and aliow the maximum devetopment and use of the site. He �
noted Baldino's has met their parking requirement. He noted that the site
was separa.ted by a service alley from the residential area located on the
east side of the property, known as Jupiter Heights, which is in
unincorporated Palm Beach County. He mentioned the properly will not
be able to fully comply with landscape Ordinance 377 due to its existing
configuration, and that the applicant was requesting Council consider a
waiver to Ordinance 377 noting that every effort was made to comply.
Boazd member �ook asked what the applicant has to do to comply. Mr.
Newell responded Ordinance 377 required a perimeter landscaping. He
presented a rendering of the proposed building, including the addition.
T'he Board discussed the coco plum hedge that was on the praperty. Board
member Cook asked if there was enough room to put a buffer there to
separate the a11ey from the parking lot. She asked where the people would
be entering the parking lot. Mr. Newell stated that when Baldino's was
annexed in, that part of the alley was also annexed in. Discussion was
made as to whether or not the Village was respousible for the a11ey. Mr.
Newe21 cornmented the alley was owned by the Village, and that this
would be limbo, until Council decideci what to do with it. Chair Scha:uer
asked why Baldinds could nat buy the public alley and make it a part of
their parking lot. Mr. Newell stated the Village would have to do an
abandonment of the alley. Chair Schauer asked if this was easier. Mr.
Newell felt there would be difficulties in doing this. He stated there was a
� residential home line there, and it was the only way to some of the
residents garages. He stated there was also a dra.inage ditch there as well.
He stated that Phoenix Health had access to the alley as well.
Mr. Newe11 reviewed Items (g), (h), (i) and (j). F�e indicated Baldina's has
met all af the requirements. He summarized the drainage requirements for
the site, noting the Village has a statement from ENCON that he made
sufficient capacity there. Chair Schauer confirmed on sheet 1 of the plan,
how the infiltration trench was done. Mr. Newell reviewed Item 7 and
Item 8, noting the Architectural elevations for buildings and the
landscaping plans had been submitted for review. Board member Cook
asked that since they added to the plan, does the Board need to give them a
special exception on ttie landscaping.
Minutes — Planning and Zoning Advisory Board
J� �, aoos
Page 9
Mr. Newell responded not if they put the hedge in. He mentioned the
perimeter landscaping is now in place. Board member Okun felt they had
actually enhanced the property. Mr. Newell responded the site was now
controlling the runofF.
Chair Scha.uer questioned why the agenda package did not include plans.
Mr. Chuck Malone, Planner wifih Moyle Flanigan, and representing the
applicant responded that the sign has been in place for quite some tirne.
Chair Schauer wanted to make clear that they were going to keep the same
sign. Mr. Malone agreed they were going to keep the sign just as it is.
Boazd member Cook asked Mr. Malone if the sign sits in a landscape bed.
Mr. Malone responded that in addititon to the hedge; there would be
landscape material pla.nted around the base of the sign. Vice Chair Okun
stated the motivation here was not to touch the sign so as to not preserve
the grandfather benefit. Baard member Cook stated she loves the building
but questioned if they were keeping the same roof from the old building.
Mr. Malone responded that the e�sting roof would remain; the only thing
they were going to do was paint it the same color as the existing structure,
so the roof would be the same color. Board member Cook quesrioned why
the adclition was going to be a tile roof, not metal. Mr. Malone respond�d
because of cost. Chair Schauer noted the architecture was to achieve the
Ttalian restaurant look. Board member Cook disagreed, and f�lt it did not
go with the original roof She asked if there was any space between the
new building and the addition to put some single palm trees for a
transition. Mr. Malone noted it was a small site, and felt they had done the
best they can do with the existing site and to do the expansion that NIr.
Baldina needs. He felt the only way someone would notice the clifference
was if they were driving southbound on U.S.1. Board member Cook
suggested softening the building by adding more trees by the buffer; and
get rid of the oaks and load up with sables. Discussion was made as to
how big the oak trees were in height. Mr. Malone stated that they could
piant materials, but that was outside of Mr. Baldino's property line, which
he does not own. Chair Schauer sta.ted it would be a problem with DOT
guidelines. Mr. Malone commented a permit would be needed from the
County to plant those trees on the County right-of-way. Mr. Malone
stated that was one reason why they have annexed into the Village,
because they didn't want to take a long time going through an approval
process with the County. Vice Chair Okun was concerned about asking a
property owner to go off of their property to plant something. Bvazd
member Cook states this isn't the case, they won't be going onto someone
else's property; they would be on their properly line. She felt that it would
not be that much more of an e�ense to get some sable palms and that it
would look better. Chair Schauer confirmed with Mr. Malone that they
would remove the oak trees and place three sable palms in their place. Mr.
Malone agreed they would do this.
Minutes — Planning and Zoning Advisory Board
J� �, 2oos
Page 10
Mr. Sal Baldino, owner felt there would not be much difference in the
roofs when you someone was driving by. He commented eventually they
would do something on the side. Chair Schauer asked if there will be
dining out on the covered terrace. Mr. Baldino responded no, it will be a
waiting azea and there will be bands out on the terrace. Vice Chair Okun
clarified they were taking out the oak trees and adding the sable palms;
also there will be a hedge along the west side of the property, east of U.S.
Qne.
MOTION: Vice Chair Oku.n made a motion to approve the site plan for the expansion
to Baldino's Resta.urant; subject to the conditional mod�cations in the landscaping plans.
Board member Robbins seconded the motion, which carried unanimously 4-0 (vote). The
motion was therefore passed and adopted. .
a SPECIAL EXCEPTION REVIEW OF "ATLANTIS" LOCATED ON US
O1VE
Chair Schauer questioned whether the property needed to be posted with a
notice. She mentioned she drove by the site and there was no signage
posted on property for the Special Exception use. Mr. Newell indicated he
wou}d review the posting requirements, but noted the property must be
posted for the Special Exception Use public hearing before Council. Chair
Schauer suggested in the future if a property owner wants a Special
Exception that should ha.ve proper signage. She felt that should be
addressed in a Village ordinance for the fitture. Vice Chair Okun noted the
Planning and Zoning Board was not going to penalize this applicant.
Mr. Newell mentioned the Boazd should ha.ve a memo that Planning and
Zoning Boazd Attorney Karen Roselli wrote regarding Special Exceptions.
Mr. Newell reviewed the criteria. He read for the record Items 1-4. He
noted the proposed use was a pernutted Special Exception in the C-2
Community Commercial District. He explained the residential and
commercial configuration was permissible under the Planned Commercial
Development (PCD), and the intended use of the proposed complex was
compatible to the surrounding properties. He reviewed Items 5-7, noting
the landscape plan had provided the necessary screening on the perimeter
boundaries, and the minimum parking requirements had been exceeded.
He pointed out the majority of the parking would be located on two
underground parking levels, and t1�e site had only Qne main entrance. He
mentioned the applicant was requesting five stories with a building heigbt
of 70 feet. He mentioned the underground pazking levels as it reiated to
the overall building height was being researched. He noted the code
appears to count the underground parking levels as building stories.
Mr. Newell reviewed Section 78-363. Findings required for approval. He
explai.ned Item 1-4, noting the level of service, as required by the
Minutes — Planning and Zoning Advisory Board
July 7, 2005
Page 11
comprehensive plan e�n be met, and the safety of ingress a.nd egress will
occur after the approval of the Special Exception. He mentioned the site
has a main entrance and a perimeter drive that creates a loop around the
project. He nated this loop would a11ow access by emergency vehicles. He
reviewed Items 5-7, noting the nuisances would be limited and would not
affect the general azea, the utilities were ayailable to the serve the project,
and the landscaped perimeters wouid serve as screening and buffering. Mr.
Newell reviewed Items 8-11, mentioning there would be one entry sign at
the main entrance of the property, and the required open spacs
requirements have been met.
Mr Newell read for the record Item 12. Cha.ir Schauer stated Item 12
should read 5 stories with a building height of 70 feet. Mr. Newell agreed.
Board Member Cook questioned when the maximum height and floors
were changed. Mr. Newell indicated he had received an email a few da.ys
ago, and he forwarded it to the Boazd. He noted the email sta.ted the
developer would come into compliance with Sfloors/buiding height 70
feet. Vice Chair Okun questioned why the basement area would not be
viewed as an enhancement. He felt it was a sufficient plus as far as land
utiliza,tion. Mr. Newell explained out on the Island, Tequesta Towers and
Clivton have subterranean pazking on their sites, but also svme surface
parking. Chair Schauer mentianed the Island has a different code.
Mr. I*Tewel reviewed Section 78-364. Imposition of additional conditions
and safeguards. He indicated the section lists the criteria that would be
taken under consideration. Mr. Newell introduced Mr. Gentile. Chair
Schau�r questioned whether the site plan wvuld be reviewed this evening.
Mr. Newell responded no, only the special exeeption. Chair Schauer asked
whether the Board could make any suggestions to change the plans. Vice
Chair Okun felt the developers would want input. Mr. Newell agreed.
Mr. George Gentile, Landscape Architect, and President o€ Gentile,
Hollovvay and O'Mahoney and Associates, mentioned #he firm was the
Planners for the project. He noted Attorney Terry I.ewis was also present
representing the client. He commented what was before the Board this
evening was the PCD, Special Exception. Mr. Newell indicated the
applicant would be bringing back a site plan after Council had. reviewed
and approved the Special Exception use. Mr. Gentile reiterated the
develop�r has met all the criteria by staying with the 5 floors above grade,
and within the 70 feet heigh�, and meeting the density requirements of the
PCD district on the project. He felt the residential component of the
project was a great bene�t to the Village, because that would be a great
revenue source. He indicated the resxdential units tv $700,000.00- $1.2
million range, and until after site plan approval. He noted the applicant felt
that was a significant benefit to the Village. He felt the concept they were
providing was a great benefit to the U.S. One Corridor. He reviewed the
Minutes - Planning and Zoning Advisory Board
Ju1p 7, 2005 �
Page 12
benefits of the project: 1) A Commercial component; and 2j Provides a
very attractive front entrance on U.S. 4ne. He noted there would be an
open space area (retention area) in the front of the building, but the water
� would not stay long in the retention area. He connrnented because of the
drainage potential of the sandy soils, it would drain very quickly. Vice
Chair Okun commented the open space area would be a detention azea,
instead of a retention area. Mr. Gentile agreed.
Mr. Gentile indicated the entrance to the garage would be in the circle
azea, and goes underground. He noted the underground pazking allows for
a significantly greater amount of open space on the property, instead of
putting surface parking everywhere to meet the pazking requirements. He
felt that was a be�efit, and noting when the Village goes through their
code revisions. He stated the applicant does not feel "parking garages"
meet "basement" requirements. He felt it was an enhancement to the
project to put it totally under grade, and not ha.ve it visible to the public.
He stated they want�d to lude the cazs. He commented the applicant was
requesting the Board consider allowing the applicant to go with the
Special Exception use, with the pazking two levels under ground, and have
the 5 floors above it, and stay within the height limitation of the code. He �
mentioned the applicant has worked with the fire department to provide
� for the access loop, which allows for access to the entire site, by Fire
Rescue. He noted they also provided amenities and an e�ensive landscape
plan, which would be reviewed at site plan review.
Attorney Terry Lewis, Lewis Longman & Walker, Legal Counsel and
representing the applicant noted he attended the June 9, 2005 Village
Council Regular Meeting where the project was discussed in£ormally. He
felt the consensus discussion amount the Council was clear to him that any
applicant should come into campliance with the Village code. He
indicated tha.t was the advice that he gave to this client. He commented the
applicant was attempt�ng to do that to the letter. He felt the Village code,
as he reads it, was amb�guous. He commented the oniy underground
structure that was counted toward building height is the "basement". He
noted basements were counted in calculating the altogether building �
height, and it sa.ys nothing else regazding the ma.tter. Chair Schauer asked
Mr. Newell why the Planning and Zoning Board Attorney did not address
this issue regarding the code in her mema on Special Exceptions. Vice
Chair Okun questioned what the definition was for a basement. Chair
Schauer felt that was the question. Mr. Newell agreed with Attorney
Lewis that the code was ambiguous in a sense. He stated the code sta.tes:
"From grade to mean height", which was very clear. He noted all of a
sudden we have this other thing, but then it is left wide open. He felt this
was something that the Village Attorney, Mr, Hawkins vYOUId have to
r�view. He felt the code leaves the Village in a very gray area, He stated
our code this was how to measure the building, then it iurns around and
Minutes — Planning and Zoning Advisory Board
July 7, 2005
Page 13
says it this would be the averall building height, but does not give a
solution how does the Village apply this. He felt that was where the code
lacks, and suggested it was a situation for Council to deal with. Vice Chair
Okun commented the only down side was the potential of a public safety
issue with the subterranean area. Mr. Newell noted these were the issues
the Fire Chief reviewed. Vice Chair Okun sta.ted he sees it as a great
enhancement. Attorney Lewis stated in his practice, whieh deals with
extensive land txse, it was normal for governing boazds, or advisory baards
ta actually provide incentives to land developers if they provide something
like underground parking. He noted in many cases the underground
parking grea.tly diminishes the amount of impervious surface that tias to be
created, which is just about always about a benefit. He commented when
he looked at the plan for the first time, he felt the underground parking
was a positive aspect of the Qverall development. He pointed out in many
code it was c�mrnonty something that the applicant could get some kind of
density bonus.
Chair Schauer felt this was the only piece of property where the
subterranean parking would be an issue. Mr. Newell stated the question
was how to deal with it. Chair Schauer felt when Publix moves out of the
Tequesta Shoppes to County Line Plaza, it will leave a blighted area along
U.S. One. She asked what would stop the property owner from selling the
property and to go into a residential condominium, the same type of thing
tha.t was proposed for this project, but with the underground parking. She
explained this pazking issue needs to bc addressed, and felt the Village
Attomey's needed ta review the code. Mr. Newell noted the code was
specific on how to deterrnine the building height, and it talks about
basement levels, which vt�ould be figured into the overall building height.
He noted a building height of 70 feet, overall ultimately becomes 90 feet,
but the measurement from finished grade to the fi�ushed height would be
70 feet. Vice Chair Oku� noted in this instance it would not nearly have
the potential impact as others that come in the future. He felt this would
not be the only one, but the fi�st one, because of the cost of real estate, this
type of development made a lot of sense. Board Member Robbins
mentianed this development would set a precedent. Chair Schauer
reiterated the Village Attorney should review, and direcrion given for the
future for Planning and Zoning and Council to address this issue. Mr.
Newell indicated on a PCD Council has the ability to dep�rt from eertain
uses. He felt Council may want to allow for the subterranean parking at
mean grade, but still stay with the finished height at 70 feet. He noted that
was acceptable. Board Member Cook stressed the Village did not want a
Village with ta11 buildings. Chair Schauer felt that underground pazking
needed to be addressed, because it probably happen somewhere else
within the Village.
Minutes — Planning and Zoning Advisory Board
July 7, 2005
Page 14
Mr. Newell mentioned when Tequesta. Towers development was approved
he did not work for the Village. Chair Schauer felt it was not an issue
because the project was built on the barrier island, and have a different set
of codes. She commented the issue was before them now, but in twenty
years no one will know what the commercial properties will be like, and a
developer may come in with a project that might not be as nice as this one
and have underground parking. She felt underground parking should be
addressed by Community Development Staff, and the Village Attomey.
She mentioned when the other development on Beach Road wanted to
come in and be approved in the summer, she commented it was postponed
to the winter seasan so the residents could be present.
Mr. Gentile noted there were elements of the proposed plan that were far
beyond the code requirements, such as the plazas, €ountains, and the
retention area,. He commented the developer could go to surface parking,
but the building will still be 5 stori�s, 70 feet, that was allowed by code.
He asked for Planning and Zoning board to make a recommendation of
whether the underground parking was desirable or not desira.ble. He felt if
the amenities were deleted they could meet the surface parking. He noted
the underground parking was done for two reasons: 1) In residential
situations the people who buy want to have their parking secure inside the
garage, and 2) also a benefit to the Village because there would not be a
expansive parking lot. He noted the developer could allow for 49%
greenspace on the pro�rly, instead of the 25% that was required.
Chair Schauer felt it looked like a hotel. She asked what would stop the
developers, af�er a11 the approvals were granted, from making it a hotel.
Mr. Newell noted the Village couid require a developer's agreement that
restricts that use to Residential or PCD use. Boazd Member Cook felt if
the Village wanted a low building town, the code should not ha.ve allowed
anything above three stories, but the code as written daes not help the
height issue. Vice Chair Okun comment�d this corridor was where a good
portion of the commercial development was going to occur in the Village.
He felt this project was a good model for future developments of this type,
and doing it right the first time would make it a lot easier in the future. Mr.
Neweli noted anyone wanted to change the use would ha.ve to come back
for Council approval. Council Member Robbins asked if someone wanted
to do a commercial hotel, would the comp plan and zoning need to be
changed on the property. Mr. Newell indicated he would need to review
the C�2 requirements to see if it would be a permitted use. Board Member
Robbins commented he felt this was a nice plan, and the underground
parking was much more aesthetically pleasing.
Chair Schauer asked if the elevators had push button, or card access. Mr.
Gentile noted they did not know at this time. She mentioned that was one
of her concerns with the Cliveton building. Vice Chair Okun indicated
Minutes — Planning and Zoning Advisoxp Boaxd
J�ty �, zoos
Page 15
techaalogy will drive the market as to what would be installed for security
purposes.
MOTION: Board Member Cook moved to recommend approval of the Special
Exception as submiited; seconded by Vice Chair Okun.
Public Comments
Ms. Beriy Nagy, resident of Sha.y Place commented other developers have bought
property in the Village, and were waiting to see what was going to ha.ppen with
this development approval. She mentioned the residents were hoping the Planning
and Zoning Board was very careful in making their decision because there were
other developers waiting behind. She noted the comments that were made
regarding checking with the lawyer, should be followed up on so there would be
no question that everything that would be done was legal.
Mr. Gary Van Brock, business owner on U.S. One and resident of Tequesta
acknowledged that the Planning and Zoning Board was very concerned about
other developers or other property in the area. He comrnented he was very
familiar with the property in the development area, and the project was very good,
and the height Iimitation of 5 stories was not an objective issue. He noted this
praperty has an elevation of 1 U feet over the road, and there were very few
properties in the Village that was anywhere nea.r this height limitatiQn or height
level. He cautioned the Tequesta. Shoppes Publ� was probably 10 below the level
of the road, and the water table will happen to many of these properties. He felt
mast of the properties could not ha�e a basement. He noted underground parking
would�probably not hagpen on other properties, and felt this development would
. be an asset to the Village and well worth pursuing.
1Lfotion passed 4-0.
II. COl��]MUNICATIONS FROM CITIZENS - NONE
III. ANY OTHER MATTERS
Vice Chair Okun distributed an article from the Pa1m Beach Post regarding noise
limits and generators. He felt this needed to be reviewed in anticipation of it
becoming a problem. He noted more affluent people would be buying an in-
ground generator that runs on propane, and felt that wcsuld be the moc�el for
future.
Ms. Betty Nagy, resident of Shay Place commented her and her husband bought a
generatar because he was a diabetic, and they had to use it. She mentioned she
called the fire department to see if they could take her husband down for dialysis
and they were not allowed to lea�e the Village. She mentioned her neighbors were
good enough to know it was being used for health reasons. Vice Chair Okun felt it
was a responsible trend. He noted the Village will see developers come into the
Minutes — Planning and Zoning Advisory Board
Julp 7, 2005
Page 16
Village and generators will be part o€ their package. He noted it would be
important to where the urtit was placed. He mentioned he was also talking, about
the little portable ones. He indicated the larger units would have to be powered up
at least every two weeks, or monthly. He felt the issue needed to be addressed by
the Village. Board Member Cook suggested turning the issue over to the Building
department and let them figure out something. She noted the Village could not
absolutely say the residents could not have a generator. Vice Chair Okun noted
the people were becoming more and more dependent of 24 hour/ 7 days a week
power. He felt a11 future housing would have some sort of backup power. $oazd
Member Cook noted the generator that connects to the house does not make as
much noise. Board Member Robbins agreed, and noted the cost was very
expensive. Vice Chair Okun commented these issues needed some type of
structure, because in many situations it b�cornes a life threatening situations.
Board Member Cook stressed the generators were only run for a short period of
time, when the electrically was out. Chair Schauer commented she knows there
are many residents in Riverside Oaks, off Riverside Drive that have put in those
big generators. Board Member Robbins explained the big generators sit on a
concrete slab, and they ha.ve a propane tank, or natural gas lines, to run a full
house. Board Member Cook commented she did not care if someone had a
generator that she could live with the noise five days or 10 days. Board Member
Robbins cornmented the trend was everyone was going to impact glass and no
shutters, and the generators. Chair Schauer �oted at St. Jude they have a generator
that has been sitting there over a year, and no one will come to replace it or fix it.
Board Member Cook asked what Vice Chair Okun suggested the Village come up
with an ordinance to have people block off the noise of the generator. Vice Chair
Okun suggested there would be two Ievels of development in the Village: 1)
residential standby generators, with standazds, and 2} developments, such as a
food store, gas station, if you want to build in the Village they would be required
to have a standby generator. He felt there were certain essentia3s that a
community needs in order for it to not to fa11 into crisis. Board Member Cook
suggested it should be left up to the development. Vice Chair Okun disagreed, and
feit it was up to government to be responsible. Board Member Cc�ok asked why
they would want to lose food. Vice Chair Okun noted because they have
insur�.nce to cover it. He questioned how does the Village provide the highest
level of public safety, welfare and benefit for the public. He noted when the need
arises the residents can say they live in Tequesta, and do not have that problem.
Board Member Cook asked if he was addressing the noise issue. Vice Chair Okun
indxcated he would make it a noise and public safety issue. Board Member Cook
suggested Vice Chair Okun address this issue before Council. Vice Chair Okun
explained he wanted to bring it up at Planning and Zoning Board and see how
they felt. He commented he had a problem convincing Council as to the benefit
of a back up generator for the Municipal Public Safety Building. Mr. Newell
indicated Public Safety has a backup, tha.t he must be addressing the new Village
Hali. Vice Chair Okun noted they had the opportunity to ha.ve a backup unit, and
the two units, could interface with each other. He pointed out instead they chose
to have a diesel-powered unit, which violates the code. He felt someone would
Minutes — Planning and Zoning Advisory Board
July 7, 2005
Page 17
ask the Village to quiet down the unit. Boaxd Member Cook noted no one
complained during the hurricanes on the noise. Chair Schauer commented it was
very annoying when the windows were open. Vice Chair Okun felt people will be
a little less tolerant after the first few storms. Board Member Co�ok explained she
was so happy when ENCON brought over a generator to power the lift station,
because her street smelled like sewage. She commented she did not care how
much noise it made, that it was better then having sewer in the streets. Vice Chair
4kun not�d there were lift stations that clid not have backup power. Board
Member Cook noted someo�e �vould have to speak to ENC4N about that. Vice
Chair Okun felt the Village needed to have control over municipal lines. Board
Member Cook commented the Village could not control ENCON. Mr. Newell
mentioned ENCON was a governmental utility. Chair Scha.uer commented she
' woutd review the codes, and asked Mr. Newell for the website. Mr. Newell
indicated the codes were on the Municipal Code Corporation website.
Board Member Cook commented on the Bank of America sign. She asked if the �
Planning and Zoning Board agreed to have the sign paiuted gray. She asked if the
sign had to match the building. Mr. Newell indicated he would need to review the
approval. Boazd Member Cook asked if the color of the sign had to match the
color of the building. Chair Schauer indicated Baldino's sign did not match the
building. Chair Schauer asked if Board Member Cook ever found the landscape
plan for the Citgo. Board Member Cook indica.ted the owner of the Citgo had
already completed the landscaping, Board Member Cook mentioned the people on
Bridge Road ha.ve never brought their groperiy in compliance with Ordinance
377.
Mr. Newell asked if the Village Center Master szte plan included a streetscape
plan for Bridge Road. Board Member Cook, and Chair Schauer stated no. Boazd
Member Cook recollected that she was on the Community Appearance Board, and
the Board made them put curbing and a bed of landscaping. Mr. Newell noted Ms.
Emily O'Mahoney, Gentile and Associates were working on it, and there also was
a charette on U.S. One. Chair Schauer agreed there was a charette on U.S.
I�ighway One. She noted the Travel agency was the only one that came into
compliance with Ordinance 377. Chair Schauer commented the developers of .
Bridge Road had a certain amount of time to agree. Boazd Member Cook noted if
there was a problem, the Village had a Master Plan, and they were not enforcing
the plan. Mr. Newell noted it came to a stop and they had to redesign the site.
Chair Schauer mentioned the property owners were told that once that entire site
was brought up, that whole street had to be pedestrian friendly, and be brought up
to Ordinance 377. Mr. Newell questioned whether that was dependent on the
north side of Bridge Road being complete, because the south side was losing
some pazking spaces. Chair Schauer stated no, it was the entire site, and they did
not ha.ve to wonry about that until the other building was done. She sta.ted the
other building is not there, so they do not have to meet the code. Mr. Newell
. indicated he saw another rendering where the angle parking was on the north side
of Bridge Road, but on the south side had some entrance islands.
Minutes — Planning and Zoning Advisory Board
July 7, 2005
Page 18
Cha.ir Schauer sta.ted it was not all on Bridge Road. She noted at the book store
there was enough greenspace for angled parking, but the Budget Tire could not
have angled parking. She indicated the bookstore does not have to meet the
angled parking requirement until the Center was completed. Board Member Cook
noted the bookstore had enough parking so they were ok. She mentioned the
owners on the south side of Bridge Road were asked only to do curbing and
landscaping. Chair Scha.uer indicated they did not meet that requirement until the
entire azea was developed. Mr. Newell asked if the business owners were going to
pay for it. Chair Schauer agreed it was the business owners that were going to pay
for it in the late 1990's.
N. ADJOURMENT
MO ION: Vice Chair� Okun moved to adjourn the meeting; seconded by Board
Member Robbins; motion passed 4-0.
The meeting was adjourned at 9:04 P.M.
Gwen Cazlisle
Village Clerk