Loading...
11-09-1994 VC SP2-M' MINUTES OF SPECIAL SESSION OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF NORTH PALM BEACH, FLORIDA HELD WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 9, 1994 AT THE NORTH PALM BEACH COMMUNITY CENTER 1200 PROSPERITY FARMS ROAD, NORTH PALM BEACH Present: Gail H. Vastola, Mayor V. A. Marks, M. D., President Pro Tem Tom Valente, Councilman Larry Kelley, Councilman Dennis W. Ke11y, Village Manager George W. Baldwin, Village Attorney Kathleen F. Kelly, Village Clerk R(~T.T. ('.AT.T. Mayor Vastola called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. All members of Council were present. All members of staff were present. PROCEDURE FOR HEARINGS Village Attorney George Baldwin outlined the format for the ' presentation of appeals, as follows: Each appellant will have twenty (20) minutes to present their arguments and witnesses. Each member of the public who wishes to address the Council will be allowed two (2) minutes. The applicant will then be given twenty (20) minutes to present the argument for the Target Store. The second appeal will follow the same format. APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION'S APPROVAL OF CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR A TARGET STORE Benjamin School and Board of Trustees Alan Ciklin, Attorney for the Benjamin School and its Board of Trustees, was sworn in by the Village Clerk, as well as all witnesses who would be testifying in this appeal. Mr. Ciklin stated to the Village Council that the School and the Board of Trustees understood the legal parameters concerned, and thus had met with the developer of the proposed Target property in an effort to work out a plan. An agreement has been worked out, and Mr. Ciklin asked the Council to consider it. The agreement, as stated by Mr. Ciklin, includes the following changes: 1. No access points on Ellison Wilson Road 2. Out parcel to be relocated to other side of property ' 3. Garden Center relocated, as well as delivery site, unloading and loading areas, and dumpsters 4. Buffer between school and store, with landscaped berm and six-foot wall system with trees and ground covering; irrigation to be provided by developer on the school side ' Minutes of Special Session Held Wednesday, November 9, 1994 5. Access to Road) 6. Developer from U. S be closed on the west side (Ellison Wilson will establish a new One to Ellison Wilson road on the north side Road 7. Entrance to project at the most northerly point, with signage 8. Truck traffic cannot go south on Ellison Wilson Road 9. South side intrusion, as shown on plan, will be conveyed to the school; alternatively, the school will exchange a piece of property to allow parking 10. The store will close by 10:00 p.m. Mr. Ciklin stated that the Benjamin School would not have any objection to the Target Store if the developer meets the above conditions, and will withdraw their appeal if the approval incorporates these conditions. Appellants: North Palm Beach Community Action Association/PAC, Old Port Cove Property Owners Association, Crystal Tree Plaza ' Mr. Louis Timchak, 1201 U. S. Highway one, North Palm Beach, Attorney for the appellant North Palm Beach Community Action Association/PAC, told the Village Council that he was making the presentation for all three appellants, i.e. North Palm Beach Community Action Association, Crystal Tree Plaza and Old Port Cove Property owners Association, Inc. All persons testifying on behalf of these appellants were sworn in by the Village Clerk. Mr. Timchak stated that his client and the other appellants want the development to proceed in compliance and with input and correct due process, and that they would work with both the developer and the Planning Commission for the new site plan. However, Mr. Timchak testified that two site applications made at one time violates the Village Code, and asked that the approval of the Target be overturned on that basis. Mr. Timchak also cited the following as some of the reasons the Planning Commission's decision should be overturned: The site plan submitted to the Planning Commission was different than the one submitted to the County for traffic study No notice was given to the Public ' The Certificate of Appropriateness is not consistent with the purpose of the village Code 2 ' Minutes of Special Session Held Wednesday, November 9, 1994 Mr. Timchak stated that although the appellants do not object to Target by name, they do object to the way the property is being developed, specifically, the high density within close distance to the school, traffic impact, access, and lack of public participation. Further, he said, when the property was annexed and rezoned in 1988, it was understood to be a Planned Unit Development with mixed use of office and residential, as shown in the Minutes of the Planning Commission Public Hearing held April 5, 1988. Mr. Timchak submitted a copy of these Minutes, and asked that they be made part of the record, as well as the attachments to the those Minutes, i.e. Minutes of Village Council Meeting held April 14, 1988, Planning Commission agenda for April 5, 1988, and Palm Beach County Planning Division correspondence dated December 31, 1987. All documents submitted were made a part of the record. Mr. Howard Ostrout, of Howard F. Ostrout, Jr. & Associates, 1851 West Indiantown Road, Jupiter, gave testimony regarding Section 6- 32 (Intent) and 6-56 (Participation) of the Village Code. Mr. Ostrout gave the following opinions and recommendations: ' Increased truck traffic on Ellison Wilson Road is a conflict, and the access points on that road should be eliminated. Entrance and exit on U. S. Highway One without a traffic signal is not compatible, and a signal should be required. A continuous screen between the school and the project site should be created, using a landscaped wall. An architectural style compatible with neighboring sites such as Crystal Tree Plaza should be utilized. A visual screen along property lines, using trees, should be used, similar to Toys R Us on PGA Boulevard. Property line along U. S. One should be screened with Palm trees Mr. Brian Idle, Vice President of Peacock & Lewis Architectural firm, addressed the Village Council on behalf of Old Port Cove Property Owners Association and North Palm Beach Community Action Association/PAC. Mr. Idle distributed a handout listing the issues and solutions, which was accepted as part of the record. Included in Mr. Idle's recommendations were screened parking area, and that ' the parking be rotated 90 degrees, as shown on his drawing. He also recommended that access to the main parking lot off the entrance drive be eliminated, and that a network of sidewalks be Minutes of Special Session ' Held Wednesday, November 9, 1994 incorporated for safe pedestrian access by enlarging planting islands. In his summation, Mr. Timchak told the Council that he had reviewed the project with the proposed changes, but did not have enough time to review it properly with his client. Mr. Timchak asked the Council to evaluate and make a decision on the original site plan, not the revised site plan. He also asked that the residents on Ellison Wilson Road be considered, even though they are not part of the Village of North Palm Beach. Mr. Timchak asked the Village Council to grant the appeal and reject the Target project, or to send it back to the Planning Commission with the proposed conditions. Mr. Timchak said he would work with the Planning Commission on this issue. A11 handouts submitted in this appeal were accepted as part of the record. APPLICANT CONRAD DSSANTIS, AS TRUSTEE: ' Mr. Raymond Royce, 4400 PGA Boulevard, Palm Beach Gardens, Attorney for the property owner and applicant, Conrad Desantis, was sworn in by the Village Clerk, as were all witnesses testifying on behalf of Mr. Desantis. Mr. Royce asked that the booing of his witnesses by the audience be reflected in the Minutes. Since opponents of the Target store collectively used an hour and a half to present their arguments, Mr. Royce asked that Council allow him longer than twenty minutes to state his case. The Council extended Mr. Royce's time to thirty minutes. In his presentation, Mr. Royce told the Council that Section 6-35 and Section 6-56 of the Village Code is clear in setting forth the parameters of the appeal process. Mr. Royce stated that according to the Code, "use" isn't required to be compatible, but "appearance" is to be compatible. Mr. Royce asked that the Planning Commission Minutes of September 13, 1994 and September 20, 1994 be accepted as part of the record, as well as the staff report by Village Manager Dennis W. Kelly, entitled "Special Report - Target/Wal-Mart Appeals" dated ' November 4, 1994. 4 Minutes of Special session ' Held Wednesday, November 9, 1994 Mr. Royce further requested that 4, 1994 Special Report by Villag the record, as follows: Page 3, 51 & 2 certain excerpts from the November e Manager Dennis Kelly be read into "It is appropriate to stop at this point and provide additional background on the applications from Wal-Mart and Target. For the record, this area under consideration is zoned C-1 Neighborhood Commercial District. The covenants regulating C-1 Neighborhood Commercial District are found in Section 45-33 of the Zoning Code (Appendix C to the Village Code). To date, as submitted, both the Target and Wal-Mart meet the zoning criteria and appear to be permitted uses..." "It is the appearance code that provides the provisions that allow the appeals and calling for the intervention of the Village Council into the decision making process". Page 5, 52 "...the Council needs to understand that the project is within the ' four corners of the zoning code and the prospect of rejecting the project outright brings to bear serious legal considerations in which the Village Attorney needs to be consulted". Page 7, ~4 "Section 6-33 links the appearance plan to the appearance code. The code gives the Council the powers to make the decision and the appearance plan (Appendix A of the Village Code) provides the framework and the parameters by which that power is exercised. Therefore, at this stage it is important to focus on the appearance plan to determine what the Council's limitations are in providing preliminary consideration to the certificate of appropriateness". Page 10 "...In discussions with the representative and the Old representative, Mr. Louis T Mr. Mort Levin on October discussed among the parties old Port Cove Home Owners Association Port Cove Political Action Committee imchak, Attorney, Mr. Ira Brichta and 3, 1994, the following issues were involved: 1. Traffic analysis 2. Economic feasibility ' 3. Procedural correctness of two site plans being submitted at the same time 4. Appropriate retail plaza/office alternative 5 1 Minutes of Special Session Held Wednesday, November 9, 1994 5. Elevation/topography of site 6. Rooftop exposure 7. Landscaping 8. Emergency aspects in regard to traffic circulation 1 Based on staff's review of the appearance plan and the appearance code, items 5, 6, 7 & 8 above would be appropriate for consideration by the Council as it relates to the appearance plan. As to items 1, 2, 3 & 4, nothing can be found in the appearance code that warrants stipulating these particular items as a condition for preliminary approval of a certificate of appropriateness. However, there are requirements for circulation patterns within the proposed development and impacts on U. S. 1 as it relates to the appearance of the building. The other elements must all be linked in some fashion to the appearance of the building in order to effectively become a legitimate stipulation to the preliminary approval". Mr. Royce entered a standing objection to any objection being raised outside the criteria stated in the Village Manager's November 4, 1994 Special Report, and requested that this objection be entered into the record. Mr. David Woodward, Landscape Architect and Land Planner, 601 21st Street, Vero Beach, of Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc., Vero Beach, testified before the Council that according to his firm's analysis, a certificate of appropriateness for a Target store should be granted. Mr. Woodward presented the report issued by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc., and asked that it be made part of the record. record, as follows: He quoted Page 14 of the report entitled "Evaluation of the Planning Commission's Decision to Grant a Certificate of Appropriateness for Target", and asked that it be read into the "In summary, the Target store application presented at the September 13, 1994 meeting of the Planning Commission complies fully with the criteria set forth in Article III "Appearance Code" of Chapter 6 "Buildings and Building Regulations" of the Village of North Palm Beach Code. The Target Store, as proposed, will be completely compatible with the character of the surrounding neighborhood. We urge the Village Council to uphold the Planning Commission's decision to grant a Certificate of Appropriateness for this project". Minutes of Special Session ' Held Wednesday, November 9, 1994 John Underwood, Appraisal & Acquisition Consultants, Inc., 3199-A Lake Worth Road, Lake Worth, presented his analysis of the Target project to the Village Council. Mr. Underwood said his study shows that the Target store would not have a negative impact on surrounding property values when completed and operating, and using another analysis made of the Twin City Mall and surrounding developments as comparison, would not negatively impact residential condominium values even if the store were to be vacant". Mr.Underwood's report was accepted as part of the record. Mr. Robert Vansavage, Store Team Leader for Target Store in Boca Raton, Florida, addressed the Village Council on behalf of Target Stores. He said that Target currently operates 600 stores nationwide, and is the largest division of the Hudson Corporation. He testified that a Target store has never closed in its 32-year history, and they try to involve themselves in volunteer charity causes in many communities. Their policy is to treat customers as guests, and as a consequence, have been welcomed with open arms in communities such as the village all over the country. Mr. Vansavage stated that they are looking forward to being "good ' neighbors" in North Palm Beach. Mr. Royce, in his closing remarks, said he agreed with the solutions discussed by Mr. Timchak and Mr. Ciklin, and as shown on the revised drawings. Mr. Royce asked the Council to uphold the Planning Commission's decision, or recess the meeting to another time to allow more time to work out agreements. STATEMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC Residents of Old Port Cove, Lost Tree Village, and White Sails Trailer Court stated their opposition to the Target store being built in the proposed location. Parents of children attending the Benjamin School also objected. Commission Karen Marcus, who arrived late due to a conflict in meetings, asked that it be made part of the record that there be no access point on Ellison Wilson Road, and the County would support that. MOTION BY VILLAGE COUNCIL With no further public comments to be heard, Councilman Valente moved to remand the revised site plan for the Target Store back to ' the Planning Commission with all considerations discussed tonight, with the conditions of approval added, and directing the Planning Commission to work with all groups concerned, and to bring it back 7 ' Minutes of Special Session Held Wednesday, November 9, 1994 to the Village Council for final approval no later than January 17, 1995. President Pro Tem Marks seconded the motion. During discussion of the motion, Dr. Marks asked that the motion include direction to the Planning Commission to consider the traffic and its impact on the bridge, exits and entrances, elevation, appropriate architectural plans in keeping with other buildings in the area, and all points listed on the "Conditions for Approval" list as submitted by the Benjamin School. Mayor Vastola asked that the Planning Commission also be directed to incorporate the "Conditions for Approval" list and the point brought forth by Commissioner Marcus that there be no access on Ellison Wilson Road. Additionally, that consideration be given to the new drawings with the Spanish-style motif, the increased landscaping, relocation of loading and unloading areas, and sidewalks for the project. Councilman Valente agreed to these specific additions, and thereafter the motion passed 4-0. APPEAL OF THE PLANN ING COMMISSION'S DENIAL OF CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR A WAL-MART STORE Appellant: Applicant Conrad DeSantis, Trustee Mr. Raymond Royce, 4400 PGA Boulevard, Palm Beach Gardens, Attorney for the property owner and applicant, Conrad DeSantis, stated that the application for the Wal-Mart Store was denied by the Planning Commission on the basis that it was inappropriate for the neighborhood. Mr. Royce told the Council that the wrong criteria was used, that the Planning Commission did not make their decision based on appearance, and the decision should be reversed, or overturned, or sent back to the Planning Commission for approval. However, Mr. Royce added, the Council having taken the earlier action regarding the Target application, he would suggest, in the interest of time, that the Council remand this back to the Planning Commission by similar motion. STATEMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC Several members of the public addressed the Council regarding their opposition to the Wal-mart project. ' President Pro Tem Marks moved to uphold the Planning Commission's decision to deny a certificate of appropriateness for a preliminary 8 Minutes of Special Session Held Wednesday, November 9, 1994 site plan of the Wal-mart Store. Councilman Valente seconded the motion for the purpose of discussion. During discussion, Village Attorney George Baldwin opined that although the Village Council legally has the right to uphold the decision of the Planning Commission, a problem exists legally regarding the Planning Commission's decision, since they denied it summarily without using the criteria stated in the appearance code. Mr. Baldwin told the Village Council that to deny a person the right to use their land would open them up for inverse condemnation. Therefore his legal recommendation was to remand it back to the Planning Commission and ask them to do the job according to the process established by the appearance code and then send it back to the Village Council for final approval. President Pro Tem Marks withdrew his motion to uphold the Planning Commission's denial, and Councilman Valente withdrew his second. President Pro Tem Marks moved to remand this back to the Planning Commission for reconsideration, with the same specific items to be considered as set forth by the Village Council in the Target appeal, and with the same date of January 17, 1995 for return to the Village Council for approval. Councilman Kelley seconded the motion. During discussion, the Council, by consensus, agreed to direct the Planning Commission to send the Wal-Mart issue back to the Village Council for final disposition by March 17, 1995, instead of January 17, 1995. Thereafter, the motion, as amended, passed 4-0. There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting adjourned at 10:50 p.m. 9