Loading...
Minutes 09-22-98 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD MEETING r HELD TN COMMISSION CHAMBERS~ C~rI'Y HALL, BOYNTON BEACH, FLOR.~DA, ON TUESDAY~ SEPTEMBER 22, 1998 AT 7:00 P.M. PRESENT Lee Wische, Chairman 3ames Reed, Vice Chairman Mike Friedle nd Maurice Rosenstock Frances Cleary, Alternate [Voting Member) William Sherman, Alternate (Voting Member) ABSENT .1. Stanley DubA Pat Frazier Steve Myott 1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Chairman Wische called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m., and led the Pledge of Allegiance tc 2. INTRODUCTION OF MAYOR~ COMMISSIONERS AND BOARD MEMBERS Chairman Wische introduced the board members, Assistant City Attorney Lichtman, Hike Rur Recording Secretary. 3. AGENDA APPROVAL Vice Chairman Reed moved to approve the agenda. Mr. Rosenstock seconded the motion unanimously. 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Mr. Friedland moved to approve. Vice Chairman Reed seconded the motion that carried unan S. COMMUNICATTONS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS A. Planning and Zoning Report 1. Final disposition of the September 8, 1998 Planning & De~ Board meeting agenda items Hr. Rumpf reported the following City Commission action on items previously reviewed by the Development Board: The Habitat for Humanity variances were approved. The Orchard Landing variance for frontage was tabled to the November 4th meetin( allow for notification of property owners. Mike Rumpf, Acting Director of Planning & .~. ning Peter Lichtman, Assistant City Attorney Bulent Kastarlak, De ~elopment Director :he Flag. pf and the ~at carried ~ously. :lopment qanning & .'O MEETING MINUTES PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLOR/DA SEPTEMBER 22,:1998 The Original Pancake House items were approved with additional requirements to address the "sea of asphalt". The Semsco site plan was approved. 6. OLD BUSINESS None 7. NEW BUSINESS: A. PUBLZC HEAR/NG The Recording Secretary administered the oath to all who would test/fy during these proceedir Abandonment 1. Project: Ameritech International, Inc. Agent: R. Joseph Hulhern Location: SW 3r° Avenue, east of SW 8TM Street Description: Request for approval for abandonment of an alley loc 3~ Avenue, east of SW 8:" Street, to allow for ass~ adjacent lots and development of single-family homes 3oe Mulhern, 3096 Banyan Road, Boca Raton 33432, agreed with the condition of appro CHAIRMAN WISCHE ANNOUNCED THE PUBLIC HEARING. THERE WAS NO ONE PRESENT WH TO SPEAK ON THTS APPI TCATION. Mot on Mr. Rosenstock moved that we grant the request by Ameritech International, represented Mulhern, for approval for abandonment of an alley located at SW 3ra Avenue, east of SW 8th allow for assembly with adjacent lots and development of single-family homes. Vice Cha seconded the motion that carried unanimously. B. SITE PLANS New Site Plan ilandsCaping ted at SW imbly with I W~SHED py Joseph !Street, to Aan Reed 1. Project: Fidelity Federal Agent: Lindsey Walter Kilday and Associates, Inc. Location: 2505 Woolbright Road; northeast corner of Woolbright ',oad and Congress Avenue Description: Request for site plan approval to construct a 4,200 sc ~are foot bank building and Associated parking on a 1.02 acre )arcel of land. Lindsey Walter, 155:1 Forum Place, West Palm Beach, agreed with all of the conditions of approval. 2 MEETING MINUTES PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD BOYNTON BEACH`, FLORIDA SEPTEMBER 22,, 1998 CHAIRMAN WISCHE ANNOUNCED THE PUBLIC HEARING. THERE WAS NO ONE PRESENT WHO WISHED TO SPEAK ON THIS APPLICATiON. Motion Mr. Rosenstock moved to approve the Fidelity Federal Bank, located at 2505 Woolbrigh~ Road, the request for site plan approval to construct a 4,200 square foot bank building and associated parking on a 1.02 acre parcel of land subject to staff comments. Hr. Friedland seconded the motion. I Vice Chairman Reed pointed out that the plan indicates a dumpster enclosure suitabe f~r only one dumpster even though there will be a need for an additional dumpster for recycables. He explained that our rules require onlythe single dumpster encosure Mr. Rumpf e~plained th~;t our Code is ai ~tiquated. At Chairman Wische's request, the applicant agreed to rectify this s tuation In Vice Chairman Reed's opinion, the landscape plan needed a more suitable ground cover t m Lantana Camara, which is an invasive species. Karen Jansen, Landscape Architect, agreed to make a substituUon of the ground cover. Vi~ Chairman Reed recommended that native ground cover be substituted. Mr. Rosenstock reported that prior to this application coming before the board, he spoke wit[ tlr. Kilday about this project. Mr. Rosenstock pointed out to him that this project was on a very importal: corner in the City. Mr. Kilday verbally promised Mr. Rosenstock that he would over-landscape this roperty to provide a softer look. Mr. Rosenstock pointed out that the plans did not indicate over-landscar '~g. Ns. -lansen advised that additional foundation plantings were added. However, the applica t met the requirements with respect to the buffers. She offered !,o_ investigate increasing the amount c plantings in the landscape buffers. In response to tlr. Rosenstocks question, tls. Jansen and Mr. Walte~ agreed to commit to provide additional landscaping. The motion carried unanimously. Mr. Rumpf pointed out that the motion did not include the enhancements. When Mr. Rosenstock attempted to clar fy his motion, Attorney Lichtman explained that the rr >tion was made pror to any of the questions being raised. Therefore, the motion could not be amended. The vote was taken on the motion and the motion was approved. tlr, Rosenstock took exception to Attorney Lichtman's explanation and felt he and the secon ler could amend the motion. Attorney Lichtman advised Mr. Rosenstock to vacate the motion if thal was his desire. ,Motion Mr. Rosenstock moved to vacate the motion and make a new motion. Mr. Friedland seconded' that carried unanimously. motion MEETING M?NUTES PLANNZNG & DEVELOPMENT BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLOR.~DA SEPTEMBER 22~ 1998 Motion Vice Chairman Reed moved to approve the site plan modification for a sign program for the Auto Care Center subject to the following comments: That the proposed sign on Congress Avenue be reduced to an overall he of 20' and a 20% reduction of the overall signage; and That the sign on Woolbright Road be delayed until the site plan for future building ~s approved. Hr. Friedland seconded the motion. Hr. Rosenstock asked for clarification of the motion He pointed out that Vice Chairmar addressed the height of the sign. He questioned the width of the sign. Vice Chairman Reed his motion recommended a 20% reduction of the overall signage. ht P~eed only Jvised that Hr. Friedland pointed out that this is a temporary sign. lVir. Heise explained that the sign stiructure will remain in place, but the sign faces would be removed, The primary sign on the site is thepne for the building that is almost com~)lete. He could remove the sign for Woolbright Road from the p~ckage and include a sign package with the site plan for that site. k Mr. Rosenstock said that in accordance with staff's recommendation, the sign is oversized the sign were reduced, he might vote for it. He explained that the board is trying to make .~ Congress Avenue corridor a decent-looking place. rvls. Heise said most of the multi-tenant signs in this Cib/are this same size. ]'f the size ~s reduced, it would not be able to be read. Ms. Stauffer explained that a sign that cannot be read is pointlE ;s. Vice Chairman Reed reiterated that his motion was to approve the sign on Congress Avenu~ subject to the comment to lower it to 20'. The total square footage should be reduced by 20% because it is out of proportion with the other signs in the area, and the Wo01bright Road s gn shou d not be appE ~ved at the present time. He pointed out that every business has a sign on its own building facing Congr, '~s Avenue. He feels this is more than adequate. Attorney Lichtman recommended that Chairman Wische ask the applicants if they could accommodate this request prior to voting on the motion. Mr~ Heise is concerned about reducing the size of the sign. There is no letter size on this pr, that exceeds :~2'. Reducing the lettering to less than 12" will make it difficult to read. The apprOved this sign and they have signed the contracts for th s sign. He would rather deal He does not have a problem making it thinner. He further pointed out that there is a substar of landscaping below the sign. Making it narrower and longer and closer to the ground woul~ bottom signs unreadable. Vice Chairman Reed feels that perhaps it is a mistake to have multiple tenant names on might be better to have only the name of the center on the sign with the understanding that has a sign on the building. Mr. Heise said that if the tenants would have been allowed a front of each building, this large sign could have been reduced. Chairman Wische confirmed with Hr. Heise that he was not amenable to the 20% reductio~ would be very substantial and make the sign ineffective. Vice Chairman Reed explained posed sign ~ants have designs. iai amount render the ;ign and it )ch tenant )all sign in because it :hat if the MEEI'/NG MTNUTES PLANNTNG & DEVELOPMENT BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLOR/DA SEPTEMBER 22, 1998 applicant agreed to the 20% reduction, it would reduce the sign to the same size as that Woolbright Road. Ms. Stauffer explained that the sign on Woolbright Road would accom three tenants as opposed to the one on Congress Avenue that would accommodate 10 renan1 Vice Chairman Reed explained that there are a lot of really bad signs in the City, One o~ things about many of the signs was the listing of multiple tenants. Those signs do not look a what we want on Congress Avenue. Ms. Stauffer said that was the reason why the appli~ the same letter style and color. The only differences are the Goodyear sign which is a na~ and is allowed its logo under the Code. The lettering for the Lube Connection is the sa appear for the future tenant. Vote on Motion When the applicant did not agree to reduce the sign by 20%, Mr, Friedland withdrew his sE motion, Ms. Cleary seconded the motion, Chairman Wiscbe called the question on the r~ Vice Chairman Reed voted in favor of the motion, All other members were opposed to the m~ This will be passed onto the City Commission. Vice Chairman Reed requested that the record reflect the willingness of the applicant to hold the Woolbright Road s~gn. roposed on lodate only the terrible rful and not it proposed onal tenant le that will :ond to the ~tion. Only :ion. abeyance Hr. Rosenstock requested that the record reflect that this was a subjective decision to made in accordance with the previsions provided of what our obligations are for the Planning & Zonin Board and the Sign Appearance Board. Based upon subjective opinion with regard to the comments m de by staff on Page 3 of Memorandum PZ 98-277 ns follows: "...the primary pole sign should ~)e reduced in width and the tenant names be aligned vertically." Tn addition, "as indicated in the original a ~lysis, staff recommended that in addition to max m z ng cons stency with project architecture..." th; reduction should be made. Vice Chairman Reed asked Mr. Heise his reaction to the comment made by staff. Hr. Heise would not work because some of the names would be on the ground. d that this Mr. Kastarlak said there ~s a "line of vision" and an "angle of vision". These are ~all sensory measurements. Having the sign 20' high does not increase or decrease the perception of the ~mage. Tf it is lowered to eye level, the sign can still be read. When discussion ensued, Attorney Lichtman advised that this issue should have been discu: This issue was now closed. B. OTHER None 9. COMMENTS BY MEMBERS Mr. Friedland expressed surprise about the new sign that has appeared in Sunshine Squar~ the Iogos of a number of stores in the center, The sign contains red, orange, yellow and blu~ his opinion, it is a garish and ugly sign, He questioned whether or not this is a new sign ant staff investigate this issue and report back to the board, 9 ~ed earlier. containing colors. In asked that ME~- i~.NG MZNUTES PLANNI'NG 8t DEVELOPMENT BOARD BOYNTON BEACH~ FLORIDA SEPTEMBER 22~ 1998 Vice Chairman Reed reminded the members that a workshop was going to be scheduled to~ discuss the Sign Code. Since there are problems with signs in this City, it is important to find a way to deal with this issue. Chairman Wiscbe suggested that Mr. Rumpf recommend to the Commission that th~ Planning & Development Board would like to have a workshop meeUng on the Sign Code. ~ Mr. Rumpf explained that Vice Mayor Jaskiewicz is putting together an ad hoc committee tO, study signs and landscaping. In response to Chairman Wische, Mr. Rumpf said he was not awarelof who the members of the committee would be. However, Mr. Rumpf was asked to sit as a member of the committee. Mr. Rosenstock feels ad hoc committees are nothing more than a committee without any aut ability to do anything other than to get public opinion. He feels that since the Planning, Engineering Departments plus the Planning & Development Board and Qb/Commission are the responsibilities of seeing that this City looks ,good with regard to signs, those are the should have the authon~:y to make some changes. Mr. Rosenstock felt that considering application for Auto Care Center, the sign mentioaed by Mr, Fdedland, the fact that Mr. received, the plans for Auto Care Center ~)n Friday and Mr. Rumpf is unaware of the comme done anything about the comments regarding reducing the sign, Vice Mayor ]askiev committe~ isn't going to solve the Problem. He recommended that ~he City Manager attend & Development Board to discuss this situation. Mr. Rumpf offered to investigate whether or not a permit was pulled to replace the sign Square. Mr. Rosenstock asked if once a sign is permitted, it can be changed to any color without con a permit to make the changes. ~ority or any ~uilding and narged with people who ne previous starlak only ~ts, or hasn't 'icz' ad hoc he Planning ~n Sunshine ng back for Mr. Rumpf explained that if every s~gn change on every shopping center came before the board, staff would be so inundated that there would be little time for anything else. Sign changes ~)n shopping centers on buildings is one issue and signage is another. Both are probably handled ~imilarly. A determination is made with regard to the characteristic of the change that is occurring If it is a predominant change in color or form, it should be the Permit Administrator's responsibility t inform the Planning Director, or permit Planning staff to review it. Mr. Rosenstock advised that the City of Boynton Beach had a color code. We did not allc yellow signs. The City grandfathered in those in existence and gave them an allotted peri( change them. Mr. Kastadak explained that it is not the purpose of the Planning & Developm design signs. Mr. Rosenstock requested that he be provided with the parameters of the right Appearance Board. black and of time to .~nt Board to of the Sign Mr. Kastarlak pointed out that this is a subjective matter to be handled by a designer in graphic forms. Words Cannot exPress visual design. The designers do not have the necessary sensitivityj toward the qUality the City is looking for. The applicants for Auto Care Centers will return to the board ~vith another conCept. They qUestioned whether or not they Could bring a totally different concept jto the City Commission meeting. Mr. Kastarlak explained tt~at if they have a major mod ficat on, the~y could not bypass the board and go directly to ~the CommisSion. However, f t is a m nor modification~ they could proceed to the COmmission. Mr. Kastarlak said good taste cannot be legislated, He furtherjpointed out that this board cann°t do the applicant's job for them. The burden must fall on the applican[t. They will wOrk oUt the Problem. ~ 10 M EEI'~NG MTNUTES PLANNZNG & DEVELOPMENT BOARD BOYNTON BEACH~ FLOR.tDA SEPTEMBE~ 22, 1998 Hr. Rosenstock felt the board was obligated to provide guidelines to the applicants. Mr. Kastarlak pointed out that the applicant stated his proposal satisfied the Code. This is the reason why Hr. Kastadak recommended that if a plan meets the Code, the board should say it meets th~ Code, but subjectively, the board does not agree with the appearance of it. The application should then be passed onto the Commission for final determination. Although this application is scheduled to g0 to the City Commission, Mr. Kastarlak does not believe it will go forward. He advised that he would contact the board chairman to let him know if the application will move forward to the Commission, Vice Chairman Reed feels it is important for projects to meet the Codes and be compati,ble with the surrounding community. / Chairman Wische expressed the board's dissatisfaction with the Sign Code. The members ~1o not want 20' signs on major roads. He feels there is a need to address this Code to make signs more a~ppealing. If the board keeps denying petitioners who meet the Code, they will sue the City. Mr.I Rosenstock disagreed and said this is subjective, ~ Attorney Lichtman advised that the board can make a subjective decision on how it .fe~.ls about a particular site plan. That says nothing about the egality of it once it gets to the Commission. If the Commission were to deny the site plan based on non-conformity with the Code, it would b~ illegal and they would be sued. The Code sets forth criteria. If the site plan meets the criteria, someone could have an argument in a court of law upon appeal. Ms. Cleary inquired about a question raised by Mr. DubA about the fact that the original plan Care Center was different from the one that is in effect. She questioned who approved ti Chairman Wische advised that the Planning & Development Board made certain recommer the Commission incorporated and others that were omitted such as the archway, and the that no doors face a major public road. These changes never came back to the board. Mr. Kastarlak reminded the members that they make up an advisory board to the Commissio~ br the Auto new plan. Jations that 'equirement Mr. Rosenstock said that a number of years ago, when the board approved a site plan or ar~ything else, the plans were given to the chairman who signed a block stamp at that very meeting. He r~omm~nded reverting to that procedure so that staff knows exactly what happened at the meeting. Mr. Rosenstock feels there is a possibility that someone substituted a set of plans and the Commission let it slide through. By s~gning the plans, there would be no question as to what was approved. Mr. Kastarlak pointed out that the board approved 45 other plans that were exactly transn~itted to the Commission. He does not feel staff is to blame here since they do a professional job. Mr. Friedland questioned why the Auto Care Center sign proposal came back to the board since the only things that changed were the colors. Mr. Rumpf pointed out that Mr. Rosenstock made a comment that staff should not have let tJhis proposal come forward at this time. Over the years, the TRC has felt that they wanted to hold up certain projects. At that time, the City Attorney made the determination that staff could not hold up a projectlthrough the review CyCle unless there were substantial deficiencies in the applicatiOn contents. Attorney Lichtman agreed that it is true that staff must only interpret whether or not the site plan conforms CC!th Code as described~ and is ConsiStent with their mandate to review the site plato it is the board's ,~bligation to interpret whether or not to approve those site plans. That is an honor given to the board. Their decision is recommended to the CommissiOn. 11 MEETING M:[NUTES PLANNZNG & DEVELOPMENT BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLOi~DA SEPTEMBER 22, 1998 Mr. Rosenstock feels there are a lot of ways of doing business. One is following the textbook verbatim. Another way is to let the applicant know that although the plan meets the Code, there is a i~ ssibility the board may not approve the plan unless certain things are done as enhancements. Mr. Roser~stock wants to know staff's opinion. Mr. Kastarlak explained that in the case of Auto Care Center, staff could not sit down and r~design their plan. If an applicant submits an incomplete or unacceptable plat, it goes back to the dr~tfting board. Staff will not do the work,for the applicants. He suggested that the board act in the same ~anner. If it does not meet the board~ standards, it should be sent back. Tf the board chooses not t01approve an application, they may reject it or pass it onto the Commission with your reservations fc~r their final determination. Staff tries to solve problems before it Comes to the board. If the board does not agree with staff, the board is free to exPress its subjective judgment and pass it on for final determiration. L Vice Chairman Reed reminded everyone that there is a requirement in City Ordinances that site plans be compatible with the surrounding community. 10. AD3OURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Planning ex Development Board, the meeting properly adjourned at 8:35 p.m. M. Prainito Deputy City Clerk (Two Tapes) j:\shrdata\cc\wp\rninutes¥~Jb\092298.doc jrnp 9/24/98 10:31 AM 12