Architectural Review Board - Regular Meeting

So let's call the meeting to order. Let's stand for the pledge. I pledge allegiance to the flag of The United States Of America and to the

republic for which stands. One nation of God, indivisible,

with liberty. Okay.

The first item is approval of minutes. Does anybody have a motion or have any corrections?

No, I'll make a motion to approve minutes from the previous meeting.

September 2. September 6?

Second. meeting. Sorry.

Do we have a second?

I'll second.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

All those opposed? Hearing none, and they were approved.

I'm on. You guys have your mics on?

Testing. I'm good. Got

you. Thank you. Sorry. Hello?

Addition, deletions, reordering of agenda. The owner for Wild Cherry is not here at the moment, so we'll move them to the end of the agenda. And if they don't show up, then we'll just have to move them to the next agenda or call them to see if they're available for another meeting. Swearing in of the speakers, if you are planning to provide testimony tonight, can you please raise your right hand?

Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

I do. Do.

You are sworn in. Thank you. Ex parte communication. Does anybody have any ex parte communication on any of the items? Drive bys are also included ex parte.

I drove by 1148 Wild Cherry Lane.

And can you

be in fair and impartial?

Yes, I can.

Okay.

I drove by Wellington Green.

Okay. And you can be fair and impartial?

I can. Okay.

That's it.

Kelly, I went by 1148 Wild Cherry and 109 Pacer Circle as well.

Okay. And you can be in Yes. Fair and Okay. Okay. So we're going to move the Wild Cherry to the end, and then we'll start with Pacer Circle.

Good evening. My name is John Sandoval. I'm planning here for the village of Wellington. I now bring you petition number 2025Dash0020DashARB at 109 Pacer Circle for an alternative color on a rolling gate. The subject site consists of a 1.03 acre lot owned by Ronan Tisch.

Approval of an alternative color being a powder coated black that is not included on the ARB approved design fence designs and materials list is being requested by the owner. Now for some background on on the property. The site is located within Paddock Park 1 consisting of a single family home built in 1989. A building permit is associated with this property regarding the rolling gate itself. We now come upon the existing conditions at 109 Pacer Circle.

What you see are pictures from Pacer Circle showing the hedges and where the rolling gate will be placed between and behind them. Next we have the property survey. We have outlined the hedges along with the location of the gate on the property. Next to it is a proposed gate that will be placed. As per the staff analysis section six point four point one point five point x of Wellington's land development regulations is reference regarding ARB approval being needed for an alternative color.

Along with that, the staff analysis on the site. If ARB votes to approve the request for an alternative color, planning and zoning provides the following conditions of approval regarding the gate, its color and placement. That will be all for any further questions. Thank you.

And if the owner would like to add anything?

Okay.

I've got a few questions for staff. It looks like there's other sort of barriers that are black in color that would be approved under our normal standards in the village. Are there any requirements that tie sort of gate to trim, window trim or any other material elements color wise

to No. The

Okay. And so just so I understand, so the tracks and when the gate opens up and maybe the owners, if they want to come up and answer any of these questions when the gate opens up, it will be behind the hedge? Do I understand that correctly?

Yes. So if you look at the one of the pictures before the bushes there, it's going to roll behind it.

Okay. And look, I don't have any problems with it. I mean, we allow black barriers and further applications. So why black is not an approved color for a gate? But

And my I have trim on the house that is black. Okay.

I know your shutters are black, think, your

The windows post are in front of my house where the porch is all black. Okay. They do allow brown, and that, actually, believe it or not, is brown. It's just hard to tell on the computer, but it's a dark brown.

Okay.

But I'd rather have it black, not brown.

Sorry. Can you just state your name?

Oh, yeah. It's Ronan Tisch. Sorry.

Okay. That's actually all I had. I just didn't know if there was, you know, if there was a reason why we're excluding black from sort of the standards in our, you know

It just isn't in our, it's just not one of the approved colors for solid type fences. So, if we wanna add it in the future, that's something that we can

Okay.

We can look into.

Yeah. Otherwise, I've got no problem with the application. Yeah.

Thanks. And there there are a lot of people who do have black gates. It's just the solid one

is the problem. Right.

Mhmm. Alright.

Thank you. Yeah. Okay.

I'm good. Any further discussion?

If there's no further discussion, I will make a motion to approve 2020 five-twenty ARB as presented and on staff's recommendations.

I'll second that. All

in favor? Aye.

Any opposed? Motion passes. Okay. Good luck, guys.

Thank you for your time. Bye.

Sorry. I forgot that I was helping. So the next item is petition 2020Five-five ARB Wellington Green MUPDE Building A Expansion.

Good evening. Village of Wellington, Damian Lillian, Planning and Zoning. Petition number 2025Dash0025DashARB. Again, this is the Wellington Green MUPDE project located. The request is for amendments to the elevations, exterior color, materials, and wall signs.

Would include technical deviation for the existing building A expansion within MUPDE. The site is located south of the Forest Hill and State Road 7 intersection on the west side, which just north of the 441 State Road 7 and Lyme Drive. The overall MUPDE is 10.25 acres. The land use is regional commercial, LSMU. And the zoning is multi use plan development.

MUPDE, which is also known as the Plaza At Wellington Green, was developed with five buildings, totaling 57,250 square feet. And was developed in 2004 and 2006 for one of the buildings. Building A is the former office depot Building, Which is a subject building that they are requesting to amend. The site plan for this expansion that they're proposing is currently pending final approval. We're in that process currently.

They are expanding the building from 15,986 square feet to 18,480 square feet. ARB approval is required for the, again proposed modifications to the elevation, and the proposed wall sign for each of the tenant. They will have a total of four tenants within this building. This slide is illustrating multi tenant building that they're proposing. They will have a total of three tenant spaces, as shown here, for retail tenants.

And which is we be on the north elevation. And the medical office will be in back section. And the expansion location will be as shown in the red outline, which is the current loading area for the former office depot tenant. This slide is illustration of the north elevation, which reflects the location for the retail tenant. They are proposing to have three tenants along this facade, as shown on the renderings.

They will have glass storefronts and entryway. Each of the tenants will have signage above their entrance. They are proposing also to have aluminum canopy awnings on the facades. Illustrated on this slide is the existing Building A, which is the again the former office depot building. And that's shown in the lower right hand corner.

This slide is an illustration of the, mainly the medical office facade, primary facade, with their principal wall sign. This is the the west elevation of the existing building. As you can see in the lower left hand corner, the existing building, the location of the the loading area, which will be the expansion of, which would now become the medical office location. This slide is to show the east elevation, which has frontage along State Road 7. They are requesting signage for the two tenants that do not have visibility along this frontage.

The two retail tenant. They are not requesting the medical office building to have signage along this this facade. The medical office building will have a secondary sign along the south facade, which is the access road Lime Drive within the site. This slide is illustrating the color palette, material palette that they're proposing, which is which provide as part of your packet to give you the actual color samples so you can take a look at it. Going back to the signage again, three tenants, retail tenants will have their primary wall signs along the north elevation, which is their principal access.

They are requesting signs that are either meet, either meeting the code requirements, or actually below the code requirements. As illustrated in the table. The medical office building, which is again on the west elevation, which is their primary entrance. Which they're requesting a principal wall sign. Also this signage is meeting the code requirement, so no deviation is requested for these signs, as shown on the table.

They are requesting to, again, as mentioned before, they are requesting to allow the retail tenant, which are Suites 101 And 102, to have signage along the frontage. Secondary signs are allowed for the tenants. Not for Tenant 102, but however for Tenant 101 is allowed to have a secondary sign. So the deviation here that they're requesting is for these two tenants with, which do not have visibility or have a side rear along this east elevation. They are requesting for the signage to be along this elevation.

But those tenants would not be allowed any additional secondary sign, based on the conditions of our recommended conditions of approval. As noted also the south elevation, which would be the medical office tenant space, is requesting us a secondary sign. And no deviation is needed for that sign. At this time staff does provide recommended conditions as listed in the staff report, if the ARB does approve this request. And at this time I'd like to enter this file into the record.

Thank you.

The applicant is also here with a presentation.

So Damien, just to be clear, so the signs that they're requesting would be on the east elevation, the additional signage?

JAMES Correct.

And those are for the tenants that would occupy where the facade of the previous office depot was?

JAMES Correct. The primary facade, which is the north facade.

JAMES So

if we're allowing sort of to parcel this structure out into two or three tenants, what's the justification or rationale from a staff standpoint about signage in terms of limiting those tenants to have proper signage? You're saying like one hundred one could have signage, but one hundred two can't?

Well, one hundred one is also having a sign. They are requesting signage, and they're they're gonna have signage.

But the two additional signs that would be on the east elevation, which under the code we're only allowed one sign, they want two additional. Those are for the tenants on the north facing?

Correct. Two of the tenants, which are, I'll show you on this slide. So looking at this slide, one hundred one is to your right. Right.

And there 101 is new? That's a new construction?

Basically, facade is existing. There's no The only thing they're doing is subdividing the space into

So all this 101 to 103 is the existing Office Depot? Correct. It's not the addition Correct. That's being okay. This

is north facade, correct?

This is the north facade.

This is the north facade. The expansion is along the The west side. West side, which is where the medical and it's on the if you look at this slide, it's on the right hand section.

So the request for additional signage is not for medical, it's for the tenants in the existing office depot building?

It's for the, correct, the tenants that are

Parceled off into three different tenants.

Right. And the main reason they're requesting the signage along the State Road 7 is because their tenant space technically does not have a side or a rear on that elevation. So the deviation is to allow them to have that signage on that. So let's take a look at Suite 103. Their side facade is along State Road 7.

So they are entitled to a sign, a secondary sign on that elevation, which they do have it as you look at this slide. In the upper right hand corner, it shows that Suite 103 is going to have the sign. So technical deviation is not needed for that. Only for the two tenants, which are the end unit and the middle unit, do not have any

Additional signage. The signs in the front, up by the door. Right. We'll have something over the building, but nothing on the side. No secondary signage.

Right. Because they don't have they do not have a wall or rear or a side elevation on that side of the building.

JAMES Have we ever had a scenario in any other development that we've run into this,

that we've made a decision? JAMES We have had somewhat similar at LOTUS II. If you recall, they came in recently this year requesting the office units to have signage on an elevation that they did not have access to. So it's a similar situation. And it's in situation, it's a secondary sign and not a principal sign.

Would these be standard signs, all sort of similar? Or are these going to be specific to I don't know if the tenants are known. If somebody wants to come up, maybe

Specific to their brand.

Yeah. Yeah. Are these gonna be just sort of a standard font, look, and feel to all the signage? Or are these gonna be specific to everybody's logo and personal?

Each tenant will have it based on their individual logos and and colors.

Could you, before we go any further, could you bring up the front of the building again? Yes. These three signs that say signage, those are for three separate tenants, or is this signage for one individual?

Correct. So above where it says signage, it shows you which Okay.

So which tenants? There's going to be three separate

Three businesses. Tenants. Tenants.

Those are the signage.

Those

are Okay. But the additional signage is for the medical suite, which is going to be closest to Forest to

JOSEPH No. The additional signage is for the secondary sign. So based on the code, you're allowed a principal sign, which is on your main entrance

JOSEPH Which is the front.

JOSEPH which is the front. And then you're allowed secondary signs, which could be on your side or your back of your building.

And all are requesting secondary signs, or just one or two out of All tenants are requesting secondary Correct.

But something that we have to remember is Retail Space one hundred three only has a wall to the east facing 441. So essentially, those other businesses don't have any other choice but to put their logo on that wall because it's the only wall that faces

No, one hundred three is occupying that whole space here. Correct. There's three tenants in front.

But wouldn't the two additional signs be attached to retail space 103 facing

Yeah, 444

this side, one and 102 will be slapped on the left side.

That's what they're requesting. Yeah, But this what you're seeing here, this signage, this whole thing this whole suite on the east side

Faces

4 So 41. They get this plus an additional signage. So one hundred two doesn't get additional signage and one hundred three doesn't get or I'm sorry, one hundred one doesn't get They additional

all are going to get additional signage.

Where is one hundred two's additional signage going to go?

102 additional sign, if you look here in the, it's the second sign over from the left.

Well, that's what they're requesting. But under the code, they don't have the option at this point for additional signage. Correct. Only one of the cast does.

Correct. Based on the code, they would not be allowed that additional sign. Because they do not have a rear or a side.

So this additional signage that we're looking at, the proposed additional signage, that would be viewed from cars pulling into the mall itself. And it would be on their right hand side.

This the east elevation is along State Road 7.

There's no door front there. That's just Right. The side of the building.

Right.

The other thing, this side is there's like a berm, and there's also like a bunch of oak trees.

Yeah, they have landscape

around So that can you even see the building

right now? Do you who the tenants are? Do you have tenants lined up already?

Michael Rem from the applicant. So we've got two tenants signed up right now. The medical office user will be Tenet Healthcare, like the hospital chain in Florida. And the middle tenant so I guess that's 102. This is the retail tenant that does not have any rear or side.

Right.

That's Yoga Joint, which is a kind of higher end yoga studio.

And 103? Do have anybody in 103?

We don't have anyone under contract for 101 or 103.

So this right side of 103 is existing. That's not the expansion of the medical?

Correct. Correct.

Okay. So everything we're looking at here on this facade, this main retail principal facade, is the existing office depot. We're now looking at the medical. So everybody's getting secondary signage except for 102?

No, 102 is also getting secondary signage. Well,

they're requesting it?

They're requesting it, yes.

But one hundred three is entitled to it, unless they get secondary signage because they have the front and the side. One hundred two doesn't have a side, so they're asking for additional signage. And one hundred one does not have additional signage?

Excuse me. One hundred one

Should have the right to

the secondary sign on the west side. You're correct.

Correct.

Okay. So we're asking for, I guess, a change in location, so to speak.

So we want to advertise 101 on that east facade?

Correct.

Yes,

sir. As well. And that's medical?

That is retail. 101, 102, and 103 are all retails.

I'm sorry. So tell me, so 101 is the tenant? Is the medical?

No. We can pull up a few

I apologize, guys.

No, no, no.

It's fine.

If you want go to the where the loading dock is.

So here. This is a good view of it. Ah, Okay. So the existing Office Depot footprint is more or less what you see on the screen. And that dash line outline, that is a screened loading dock right now.

And so it's got a cantilevered wall that screens it from view from Lime Drive. Our request is to enclose that, not expand the footprint of the loading dock at all, but just to enclose that and make it interior space, fold that into the medical office space, and then subdivide the now larger building to be three facing retail tenants I'm sorry, three north facing retail tenants, and a single medical office tenant on the south side of the building. And so the medical office tenant, their principal signage will be facing interior to the property over their main entrance. And they have rights to a secondary sign, I suppose, And on the rear or the we're proposing to put it on Lime Drive, which would be on your right hand side as you're pulling into the property off Lime Drive. The retail tenant in the top left corner, I.

E. The Northeast corner, they have rights for a primary sign over their main entrance on the north facade. And then on the SR7 side, the tenant in the bottom left corner, the retail tenant in the bottom left corner, they've got rights for a primary sign over their main entrance and a secondary sign facing interior to the property. And so our request is to take that secondary sign and change its location so that it's visible from SR7, kind of where the office depot sign is right now, or I guess was until a couple months ago on SR7. And then the retail tenant in the center, which is Yoga Joint, doesn't have a side or a rear. They have no rights to a secondary sign. And so we're asking MACHT:

for a secondary sign and for that to be on

Okay. So Suite 101 would have their front sign that faces north. And you would eliminate the west facing sign, which they would have by right under the code. And to just transfer that from the west side to the east side. That's exactly right. Okay. And so really so aside from so that in itself, I don't necessarily have an issue with. So the only big ask is really the center tenant, the 102, since they have no sign on the side, would be to add that Okay. All right. So it's really beyond what the code would normally allow. We're really only adding one sign because we're relocating one that Correct.

Relocating one that they're entitled to, correct? Correct.

And obviously, all the same conditions in terms of size and square footage, square inches, whatever we measure Yes, we'll through all

of that.

Okay. All right. I have a better understanding of what we're doing here.

A lot of signs.

There's a lot of signs. Look, I sort of believe personally that when you're looking for a place, your yoga studio, you either know where it is. I understand the need for people wanting to advertise. It's just the way the business works. You want your brand out there, and you want it to be as visible as possible. But I've got to balance that against sort of our code and what we want to set in terms of precedent and how much signage do we want. I mean 441 is becoming very congested. There's a lot of traffic and a lot of distractions. And does more signage contribute to more distractions? I don't know.

I guess maybe it does, which is why staff has restrictions on the number of signs that are permitted. I mean, most of the time, if someone's trying to find a location, it's in your GPS, turn right on Lime Road, destination is on the right, you've arrived. So anyway, I'll let other members of the Board kind of weigh in and share their thoughts. Let's try to

look at the size and the dimensions.

I can, but if you're not interested in it,

that's also fine.

He has a presentation,

but don't need to

Go for it, please.

That's fine. Wouldn't hurt.

Great. There we go. So my name's Michael Rem. I'm with JBL. We're the applicant. I'm going to try not to I'm going to do my best not to repeat what Damian already went through.

I'm sorry. You missed the arrows.

Right here. Okay. So this shopping center, lovingly referred to as MUPDE, this is a five building complex. We own four of the buildings. The fifth is owned by a proprietor of the medical office just to the left.

And we acquired this property in 2018, about the same time that we acquired the Burlington Shopping Center, just up the road in Royal Palm. And so in all, we have about 5,000,000 square feet of retail space in Central And South Florida and Texas mostly. So I think we've got a pretty good handle on what it takes to make tenants successful and also to add the right tenant mix so that they're successful in the community. The shopping center, I'm sure you probably know it. It's got Flanagan's and Men's Wearhouse and Bethesda Health and, until recently, Office Depot.

The building in question, this Office Depot building, was purpose built in 2003, I think the plans were approved. And remember, at the time, Office Depot was doing big business, high volume turnover, pushing a lot of product through their stores. And so it included a purpose built, recessed, kind of sunken loading dock in the back right hand corner of the building. And so the one thing that we're asking to do is increase the building size from roughly 16,000 square feet to 18,500. So that's about 15% bigger by enclosing that space.

Oh, sorry. By enclosing that space that you see here. And so a bit of it is square footage, albeit it's we're not really we're not pushing the building any closer to Lime Drive, because the loading dock is already screened by a 15 foot tall cantilevered wall. But really what it allows us to do is get four rectangular spaces that tenants can truly use and occupy. So you can see it here.

This is kind of you're standing on Lime Drive, kind of in the back corner, just at the entrance to the property. In the top right hand corner, you can see that loading dock. And the plan is basically to just build that wall straight up and then build a wall right in front of you and put a storefront entrance. That will be the entrance to tenant health. And then there's a companion application that expands and reconfigures the parking a bit to allow more parking and easier access to that side of the building as well.

And then here, again, I'll do my best not to repeat what Damien said. But remember, Office Depot, those are big buildings with really not a lot of visibility into the buildings. It's like grocery stores, too, are very big buildings with not a lot of windows. Modern tenants are really demanding more windows and more glass. And so our plan Office Depot had a single storefront entry door in the center of that canopy flanked by a pair of windows on each side, and that's all the glass in the entire building.

And so what we would like to do is repurpose that center entry door. That will be Yoga Joint's door. Those two windows, or the windows on either side, we'll repurpose those into storefront entry doors for the retail tenants on the left and the right, and then add windows on that north facade outboarded that, and then also going around the corner on each side as well. So there'll be new windows on the SR7 side and on the interior of the building. So that's my piece. Bob's here to talk a bit about the architecture, too.

Just a one question. Or we can just fast forward. Just from living in the area. So that whole side that faces State Road 7, if you look at your previous one: picture, there's so much foliage. You can't see any signs anyway. Keep going back. Yes. It's overgrown. SPEAKER So are you going to re landscape that?

Yes, sir.

Okay.

Or because it would be like no no purpose right now to put us on.

Yeah. We have

a Okay.

Full landscaping plan that goes from kind of Lime Drive all the way up Okay. Halfway through the property and and kind of revamps and and freshens up the landscaping as well.

Any other questions?

Oh, you've concluded. Yeah, I'm sorry. We've got a bit more. We're happy to keep going through it. If you've got questions, you can feel free and

jump in.

No, please.

Good evening. I'm Bob Weber from MWA Architects Room, 1701 West Hillsboro Boulevard, Deerfield Beach. And I hate to restate whatever else has already stated and I think you you folks have a good understanding of what we're proposing here today. But the intent is to update the the look and the color scheme of the Office Depot building to make it more consistent with the the existing other buildings. We're replacing the kind of yellow dated color scheme with a more neutral tan color scheme shown, let's say by those materials there.

Adding some stone accents to provide additional warmth and pedestrian feel. And that's I mean, we've already discussed the requested deviations for the signage on the east facade facing State Road 7. And I think that's I can answer any questions regarding the architecture if you have any.

I think you guys have done a nice job with the architecture. I think it's gonna be a nice improvement. I like the colors scheme. Thank you for not painting it gray. The awnings are nice. I think it's going to really update and elevate the look of that plaza. You've got great visibility. I know when I go from north to south down 441, see the big Office Depot sign on the north facade. It's very visible. I probably see that more than I would see a sign on the east facade facing 441.

So your center tenant, which is the one that really is requesting to have additional exposure, has tremendous exposure on that north facade. And I mean they're right there in the center. It's going be this beautiful new building. I think they're going have tremendous exposure. I don't have a problem necessarily with the tenant on the right moving from the west facade, moving that to the east facade. But I'll be honest, I'm struggling a little bit with the additional signage for the middle tenant because I think they get great exposure to the middle, kind of the anchor tenant, if you will, probably in this plaza. They're taking up a fair amount of space. And I think they're going to get great exposure on that front. I get concerned about trying to change the way we've got code written. I mean we've got strong staff and people that have worked really hard to make sure that we've got standards that we can apply equally to businesses and to development.

And so I get a little bit concerned about coming in and trying to make exceptions to standards that I think have worked very well for, you know, thirty plus years.

Well, if I can say I mean, I can understand the approach from the north, but I think the intent is obviously is from the south. And I think that corner is a little bit open on the on the building. So I think the sign would certainly enhance that exposure of that tenant, you know, other coming from the other direction.

That's fair. Question

about the style of sign. So there's some very aesthetically modern signs that are kind like back, you know, it'll be like a letter, but the light comes from the back. It's just a look more subtle. My concern is I don't want it to look like a wall of billboards. You know, it it can look kinda messy. So can the secondary signs be a little bit smaller than the main sign or something, you know, to make it aesthetically

Well, think I the ordinance, the secondary signs are like limited to 50% of the approved sign. So they're already a little more diminutive. So I mean, as far as the style of sign, it it I guess it's gonna depend on the tenant and Okay.

What time. So, you know, we're we're pretty demanding on our tenants in terms of the quality of the signage just because we think it makes a statement about the, the quality of the community that we're in and the quality of the shopping center that they're going into. So we don't allow kind of the big pan lexan signs with the kind of three ms spray paint on it. Generally, we require are individually mounted channel letters that are front lit through the front. And also generally, we allow the tenants to come in with their own corporate branding, especially if they're a franchise or a national tenant.

If it helps get you folks more comfortable, what we could do is require the tenants, I guess, all the secondary signs so that it kind of stays consistent. We could require them to be a consistent color. And we could go with I think front lit is important because it gives it the crisp visibility from the street. But we could also What you do is you make the rear of the sign translucent so that the light also bounces out the rear and it makes this halo effect on the facade behind it. And I think that looks very nice, and we can restrict that to be a uniform color for all four tenants in the building so that it kind of looks proud from from the main street and consistent and if, you know, if that's what gets you guys comfortable with it.

Yeah. Because I think the rest of the the decor and the color scheme looks great. I think it looks much higher level of, know, wooden floors. But then you have a bunch of billboards on it just kinda takes away. I think I'm okay with the signs per se, but it's it's just like I just don't want to look like a big wall of billboards

Sure.

For the street.

So

The the yoga company is the company that's looking for the additional sign that's going to be facing 441? That's correct. All right. You currently have them under contract?

Yes. Yes. They're in

And is the contract, if you don't mind me asking, contingent on whether or not you get that additional sign?

I think it's also important to note that on that elevation, you are going to have landscaping, which will help to break up that facade of the building and break up the signage.

Yes. Look, think you've touched on some interesting points, though. I mean, if there can be some continuity and some standards applied to all the signage, I mean, to your point, I mean, if we're going to wrap this building, I think you guys have done a really nice job of elevating the design. But if then we're going to wrap it with all these different signs, it's sort of counter to the intent of trying to create a quality experience for shoppers and for tenants. So if we can try to standardize that,

But we don't I have to to try to

can kind of find that middle ground that makes tenants happy, makes you guys happy and satisfies this Board.

That would be great. Thank you.

So how do we go about doing that, Damian? What do we from a motion standpoint, approve this with following conditions that standards, I don't know who's going to work out those standards and what that design is going to look like. Is that going to be between staff and the applicant? Or does that come back to us, obviously, for final approval, I would imagine?

Or It depends on how the board approves it. You could approve it with the condition that the signs along the east elevation be same color, same, I'm assuming, also?

Size to be determined

or halo effect or whatever.

Yeah, think the size is already in the approval, or the maximum size is already in the approval. Okay. But you you know, you could word the approval to be, I think it's called halo lit, is when the light comes out the back. And so, you know, uniform uniform appearance, front and halo lit.

If I'm driving north on 441 and I see I don't care what color it is. It says yoga. I know it's yoga studio. There's only one in the whole. It's more

like wayfinding is the way that we see it, right? And to your point, the lease is not contingent on the approval of the sign for sure. But we do see when tenants have tasteful signs that work for everyone in the community, but also allows folks to understand where the business is, They're more likely to be successful, and it kind of reduces turnover and dark spaces in the suburbs.

Look, we appreciate the investment in Wellington. We want our businesses to be successful. We're here to try to make that easy, but we do want to maintain certain standards that separate Wellington from other municipalities that may allow whatever kind of sign you want, however big you want it. That's just not Wellington. That's why you guys get the rents you get in Wellington.

How do you figure out the size of the sign and the lettering? Has that already been determined?

Yes. Secondary signs are already determined in terms of number of square inches.

Yeah. We have the square footage that's allowed, which is 50% of the principal. So that's already noted in a deviation. The only condition that we'd have to add to this is mentioning that the signs along this facade would need to be uniform in color. So I would assume that a white Color illumination as well. Right. So a white panel face for the sign, and illumination would be also in white.

Are you guys comfortable with that?

Yes.

And it's only along the east facade.

In the front, you can do whatever your sign is, the logo and

all that. Yeah, think we're talking about the secondary signs

here. Yes. Yes. Secondary. Any other discussion, guys? Or we want to try

to think that's Did you write that down?

I've got some notes. I'll let Everybody Damien

correct me if we're

Somebody who speaks earlier.

I think you wanted to mention this.

Just to note, the white is only for panel.

For the second.

The trim around the signage to give it some contrast would leave black.

SPEAKER If there's one thing that I can add. Bob was just mentioning the same thing, too. I think that the white front and the white halo will look quite nice at night. But during the day on the it's the heron plume facade. It's going to be hard to stand out. And so what we could do is I could work with one of my signage vendors over the next week. We could get a few schematics put together, send it to Damien for his review and approval. And then he can kind of lock us into that for better use of it. But they have plenty of products that they appear black or That's kind of what I'm looking. Yeah. Yeah. Or red during the day, but then they glow white at

I like that.

Yeah, that was attractive. So that's the halo effect essentially. Yeah, with

the white background.

With the black lettering

and Exactly, that's back. That's halo lit only, right? So there's no light coming out the front of it.

You call it halo lit?

Halo lit is when it's on the back, kind of on the facade. But what we would also prefer is if it's also front lit. So the light comes out the front as well as bounces off the facade.

Yeah. During the day, you're not going get much impact from it. But at night, I think it's Exactly.

Yeah. Yeah.

Okay. And it'll have a black sort of trim contrast.

Sure.

So for clarification, the front face of the sign in the day, what color would would that be? What I'd like

to do is come up with a few color studies and run one by you for approval. But it seems that what we're most concerned about is the evening. And so I'm happy that it can it can glow white in the evening. No problem.

SPEAKER So this is the color. This is what you're talking about here, front lit and back Exactly. So it's okay. As long as it's not like crazy yellow and

green. Has black frame Yeah.

Essentially. Yeah.

So if the if the board direction is for it to have in the day the same color, Is there

I think he's going to have probably a designer give him like five options. And then, I mean, is like dark lit with white background and a white wall. I mean, there's Instead only options

of yeah. Why don't they come back to you? And would it be a big pain in the butt if it comes before us again?

Do you need to? I think we've got sort of direction here that I think we can I mean, really, approval that you're seeking is really, do we need can we even put the sign up? So we get that done. I think we've got pretty good consensus here on from a design standpoint. We kind of know the parameters that we're working with. We're not deviating from the sign where code allows. We get something sort of along that look. I think we're comfortable signing off on it tonight and being done with it.

I think it's actually going to make the building look better than having a bunch of box signs.

I just want to see you guys do work that's counter to you're doing a nice job of elevating the design elements of this building, making it look more relevant today than designs twenty years ago. You guys bought well in 2018. Congratulations. So yes, we want to make sure that it does represent the standards of your tenants in that community as well. So all right, let me try to make a motion if we can here, guys.

Motion to approve $2,000,000,250,005 ARB for the additional signs with the following conditions. That the signs on the east elevation will be uniform in color illumination to be halo lit with a black border or contrasting border, whether that's bronze or black or, you know, with that, we've got agreement to move forward with the additional signage on the east elevation. What am I missing, honey? Including staff's recommendations. Oh, that wasn't staff's recommendations.

There's That wasn't. Adjustments to staff's recommendations. Anything else we need to add to that, Damian, Kelly, anybody?

Did you include the elevations as well? Is it signage and the elevations?

So signage on the north facade, east facade. I've got no problem with anything else that was presented Okay. Per staff's recommendations. So the only conditional approvals would be to the signs on the east elevation of the building, which would be uniform in size, color, and illumination.

Not in size, in color. In The

size is whatever the code is, so we won't have to worry about that. So that's already set. So color, illumination, to be halo lit with a contrasting border. And if we're good with that, that's my motion.

I second that.

All in favor?

Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes. Thank you, guys. Thank you.

Okay. Next up is Petition twenty twenty five-twenty one ARB. And this is Cantor Orange Point PUD. Damien will be

Damian Newell again, Planning and Zoning Division, petition number 2020Five-twenty1 ARB. This is the Cantor project, pod I, which is within the Orange Point PUD. You may be familiar with this project. They were recently before the board to get approval for the overall project, site amenities, signage and so forth. They are back requesting additional approval for a new model.

So they're requesting elevations, colors, and materials. The site is located on the Southeast Side of the Lake Worth and 120th Intersection, just below the existing church site. This is a new pod that they are approved to allow 42 single family units. It's a 22 acre parcel. The land uses residential C, and the zoning is planning development.

As mentioned before, again this is a new pod, pod I. And the parcel is approved for 42 acres. ARB did approve the overall project at the 2024, and they came back on January 2025 for the signage, which is the entry feature and the tower feature, if you recall. This slide is illustration showing the overall site plan, showing the lots, Showing the entry feature and proposed access with a roundabout at this location. So again they are requesting a new model with two elevation options for this model.

They are also requesting the exterior colors, which are consistent with the prior approval. And as mentioned, two models are coastal and farmhouse. The two elevations for the same model consist of either coastal or farmhouse. Model have to meet a certain minimum points. The minimum points required for a single family is 80.

This is showing how each of the elevation options are meeting and exceeding the point system that we currently have in the code. This slide is of elevation. One of the options. They are showing the different way that this, you know, including the elements of the, architectural elements, are included. One of the renderings shows that they are proposing one of the options to have a stone veneer.

And the other without the stone veneer. As we go through these different slides. Is the other elevations of the coastal option of this model, showing the sides and the rear. This is the farmhouse elevation. Again, similar to the coastal, they do have a stone veneer option.

And one without the stone, which is shown on the rendering. And again, the side and the rear elevations. This slide is just showing the prior ARB approved color palette for the development, which they are continuing that color palette. Staff did provide a list of recommended conditions within the staff report, if the board does approve this request. At this time I'd like to enter this file into the record.

And the applicant is, and staff is available to answer your question. I believe the applicant also has a PowerPoint presentation.

The only question I've got at this point would be, you you kind of go through all of your materials for these homes, but nothing specific to the hardscape driveway, at least on this. So I don't necessarily have a problem with your materials, your color choices, and whatnot, but it depends on what the driveway is. So if you're doing a terracotta driveway but of that detail is listed. So

Okay. Yeah. Thomas Chomeleski with Insight Studio. We also have the applicant here from Pulte Homes. I think you can answer that question.

Hi. I'm Meg Carlson with Pulte. We do pavers. I believe it's a gray tone that we've made a selection for here. But it's not required as part of the ARB's medals, so that's why we didn't have it on I the color

schemes yet. Appreciate that. Just from our perspective, I'd like to know what my colors are, what are matching up, hardscapes to roofs and facade and whatnot. Oh, I'm sorry. JEAN Anyway, sorry to interrupt, but you had a I clarification or

think Damian did a very thorough job. I guess a couple of things just to highlight. This is an addition to the already three that are that have been approved back in January called the Ellington, which is a nice name, utilizing the same colors and materials from the previous approval as well like we just mentioned. So if you have any more questions.

Would you be opposed to incorporating that into the record as far as the hardscape driveway, that they would be of a gray tone paver system to match the other materials and color choices?

I would be okay with incorporating that they are pavers. I would like to be able to confirm that that was the selection before adding I believe it is a gray tone, but I'd like to confirm that. JEAN Okay. Yes. I mean, it's not I can tell you it's not a terra cotta, if that's the concern.

I just I mean, you understand where I'm coming from, though. It's, you we've got all these materials that you've provided. It looks nice. The market's going to decide they like the product. I'm sure they will. But just again, from our standpoint, when I'm looking at things, I don't like to look at it in a bubble. I want to see what the entire picture looks like. And your driveway hardscape is a significant part of that color scheme of the entire home. So I just want to make sure look, you guys are pros at this. But I live inside Palm Beach Polo, we get applications that come through all the time. And somebody's putting on a new roof. And we go, oh, the roof looks great. Yeah, but they have a terracotta driveway. And so you've approved this gray metal roof, and it just architecturally, which is our job, it doesn't look good. So

JULIE Yeah.

And I mean, my concern is just I wouldn't want to say something that then the color, it's going to be a grayish type thing. But maybe it's called white gray versus gray tone. And I just don't know that off the top of my head. But I am very confident that it is not a terracotta Florida Med color scheme. I'm 100% confident.

Once they've confirmed that color, we will include it in the approval.

I'm very happy to do that.

I personally don't have any other comments or concerns about the application.

JAMES Discussion? Gentlemen?

Just another model that gives variability so you don't have every house looking the same. That's good to me.

Yeah. Thank you.

CHRISTIAN Ready for a motion?

We are. Before we get to that, just if we can, just my own sort of knowledge base here in Wellington. When do you guys break ground? Are you doing a sales gallery on-site? Can you tell us more about the project? You've dozens of people watching probably.

Yes, which is actually pretty exciting because we just got land development permits, and we're actually going to be starting the site work pretty soon. So very exciting.

When do you expect to start breaking ground then? And are sales started? Or are you not at the sales stage yet?

Have not started. As Thomas mentioned, we did get the land development permit this week, so we've started site work this week. We have two models that are planned here. I would anticipate that we would start the models probably at the beginning of the 2026, as soon as we can

get

some

building

permits kicked out of the village here.

How big is each site in terms of was it like onethree acre or onetwo acre? How big are the sites? That it's not new

to Lot size.

Each hump size.

Lot size is sixty nine and seventy nine by 150.

Okay. Okay.

Sounds like half a Price points starting at?

Upper 1 millions. Yeah. Yeah.

Okay. He's a realtor, man. He needs to know this one.

I doubt. Look at this.

There's no conflict at all.

Don't worry

about that.

He may help you.

So That was

a great it's a great spot.

I'm gonna keep my hands clean.

It's great spot. Good luck over there. Looking forward to seeing the results.

We're very excited. And and, you know, we appreciate WOOD: the diligence that staff and the advisory boards and counsel made in reviewing this and helped to elevate the project.

We're I'm still trying to find out what the church did with

that money. That's all. That's a good answer. I don't know.

Alright. Let's make a motion, guys.

I'll I'll make a motion to approve 2025Dash0021 ARB Cantor Orange PUD, according to staff's recommendations, including what Damian mentioned about the driveways

Color. Including

the The color of the driveways being consistent with the materials and the building of the homes.

I'll second.

All in favor?

All in favor? Aye. All opposed?

Passed four to zero.

Thank you,

guys. Good luck, guys. Thank you. You. Thanks, Jamie.

How many square feet was were those houses, like 3,000, 20,000?

Such a nice tuck away spot.

Oh, okay. The homes? It's a

pretty good size. Kelly,

don't believe we sworn it.

Sir, if you want to just come up here. Next up is petition number 2020Five-nineteenARB 1148 Wild Cherry Lane, Hedge height. Prior to you arriving, we sworn anybody that was going to have to provide testimony. So if you could just raise your right hand. Sure. Do you swear to tell the truth,

the whole truth and nothing but the truth?

Of course. Okay. You're sworn in. Thank you. And Jonathan will be making the presentation. Good

evening again. My name is John Zanibel, a planner what's that? Oh, sorry. A planner here for the village of Wellington. I bring you petition 2025Dash0019DashARB at 1148 for a hedge height waiver.

The subject site consists of a 0.3 acre lot owned by Georgette Berndt approval of a waiver to maintain a hedge above the maximum permitted heights of three feet is being requested by the owner Now for some insight on the property, the site is located within Emerald Forest consisting of a single family home built in 1990. A code a code case is associated with this property regarding the maintenance of their hedges and surrounding landscape. We now come upon the existing conditions at 1148WildCherryLane. What you see are pictures from Wild Cherry Lane showing the hedges on the front plane of the property. As per the staff analysis, section six point four point one point a point five point b of Wellington's land development regulations is referenced regarding the property owner's ability to request a waiver from ARB to maintain a hedge above its permitted maximum height.

Next we have a survey of the property. We've outlined the hedges, the pool, the patio area, home to best show the unique structure of the lot as the pool and the patio area are to the side of the home rather than typically in the rear. If ARB votes to approve the request for the hedge height waiver, planning and zoning provides the following conditions of approval regarding the hedge near the garage along the main hedge running across the front oh, and the hedge running across the front plane of the property. That will be all. Thank you.

But I'm going to leave the pictures of the hedges.

Thank you, John.

Yep.

Does the owner want to just add anything before they ask questions?

Sure. I'm Paul Behrendt. George, that's my wife. Yeah. When we purchased the property, it was like this. And I just looked at Google Maps, And the hedge was that height fourteen years ago. So it's been like that. So it's been like that the whole time.

Mr. Byrne, I drove by your house. And by all means, I understand your request to provide cover for pool area. Otherwise, you'd have people 10 feet away watching you in the pool. The problem I had when I drove past the house was it seemed like you have three or four different type specie bushes all along your property line.

And it was kind of an eye for me, it was kind of an eyesore with the conditions of the hedges, the different types of hedges. I did see the collusius on one side of the house. Can a proposal be made that the hedges be one consistent type instead of the three or four different types? And it looked like some of them were definitely struggling as far as I could see through some of the hedges where it didn't seem like they were healthy at all. And if you owned the house for fourteen years, are these the same hedges that were there fourteen years ago?

No. I just purchased a house, I think, three years ago. I'm just saying the hedges were that high.

It looks like those hedges are fourteen years old, to be honest with you. And I'm just I'm kind of concerned with the neighbors. I mean, it's a focal point of that block. I understand he wants the privacy. I'd be all in favor of giving him the height requirement. But I truly think that the hedges should be one consistent hedge

to I have a question for Staff John. Aren't you speaking to that and finding facts, line In items,

the staff analysis, correct.

You're speaking to the fact of the inconsistency of Correct. Materials.

D.: Clothing staff is really only concerned about maintenance. You're not talking about the species have to be consistent. I don't think that the challenge that we're dealing with is, you know, various species of vegetation. It's the lack of maintenance, that there's secondary growth within some of those bushes, whether he's got calusia or another species. I really don't care. It's my personal opinion. I'm just concerned. And look, I want make sure he's not being unfairly targeted. And I know that's not what you guys are involved with. But I drove around that neighborhood today.

And I could tell you, anybody that's got Calusia, these are eight, ten feet tall. So either we're going to open up Pandora's box here and set a precedent. Every one of his neighbors that gets a code case is going to come and say, well, got a variance, I want a variance. Or we're going to have standards that this village has worked hard for, for a number of years. That we want to hold everybody to the same standard. But I mean, there's a lot of homes in this neighborhood that have vegetation that exceeds the maximum allowed height. So I'm going to personally take myself out of it and rely on staff to deal with this. This is a code case and the standards. The driveway is a safety issue that you don't have a good sideline. You've got an eight foot hedge there.

They want a three foot hedge there. So personally, I'm going to not inject any of my personal feelings and just let staff deal with this the way it's recommended. Bottom line is, I don't have anything to add more than what staff has already reviewed and recommended.

JULIE So in this instance, I think it's the height is definitely warranted just because only on the side where pool is, not on the other side. I think on the other side, the line of sight is definitely

Could you give the overhead picture? Like, so we

can see

the top, the bottom,

some sort But of on the the other I think that if any other house came in, they would have to justify how they are similar to if they said that this house was a precedent, they'd have to justify how they're similar in layout. Because this house has the pool on the side, where in their instance, pool may be in the back. So they don't need that height in the front to screen anything. I mean, this property owner really doesn't have a backyard. He has a side yard.

And he's not putting anything in the front plane of the house. He's putting it on the side of the front of the house. So I think that the intent is that you don't want the height the hedge height higher than three feet in the front plane of the house, which he does not. So I think that in this instance, this is something that staff supports.

Staff doesn't have, and the village doesn't have an issue with three or four different types of species making up

As long one as the bottom edge? Is there's a standard where the bottom portion can't be bare for more than 18 inches. So as long as and it has to be neatly maintained and not hungover encroaching the sidewalk. So as long as those things are all met, it really doesn't matter what Okay. Species they are.

I appreciate that. I I was unaware of that. I figured it would be to be

in full meeting. I did I did touch up on that on on the findings of facts. I spoke with some of our vegetation professionals and to to speak about the the different species in the in the edge. Okay. So we recommended a plan in the conditional approval to try to try to infill that that bush because, like you said, it's very patchy. Yeah. So we did include a plan in there for the for the findings, in fact. So if approved, then we'll go ahead and speak with the owner on that.

Okay. Again,

I mean, don't have a problem. The six foot around the pool my bigger issue was the eight foot hedge on the left side of the driveway. I'm less concerned about the pool. My personal opinion would be I don't see code driving around just arbitrarily with a tape measure saying if you're six feet or seven feet. If you want seven feet, probably no one's going to value you. Keep it well maintained, and you're going to stay off the radar. So I think when things start to look a little bit unkempt is when you start to draw a little bit of attention from code enforcement. There's a lot of concerns in that neighborhood that probably is keeping code enforcement busy, I would imagine. But my primary DELL: concern would be the driveway and the safety aspect of that, somebody coming down the sidewalk, not seeing a car moving or a

car backing up, not seeing a pedestrian, because you don't have a good sight line.

So we include the No, red see. GREGORY Okay.

GREGORY So that's why I said I'm comfortable with the recommendations staff has made. And I don't know if I need to add more to that, to be honest.

JAMES I have just a question on the condition. It says the secondary plant material growing within the subject hedge. Which material is the secondary material?

It sounds like there's some plants growing in the existing hedge, If and maybe there's some

you looked in on it, it just

There's one that's like a silver I'm not a plant

expert, The one where to the right a long side.

Yeah, to the right, you can see The

right side, it looks different than that.

Is it growing within

the So are saying that he has to remove, like, the gray tone smaller leafed plant and keep the one the more green one? Or just the weeds that are growing on the bottom?

The ones that are well, there's some that are growing within, growing even in the middle of it to the point where it gets a little patchy in the bottom, so it's not fully grown. It's kind of to weed out what's

more Well, it's you the two different species that has to remove. It's just the stuff, the extra stuff.

It's the extra stuff. Okay. Kelly, because the way he's reading is that there's secondary plant material growing within the subject edge. Okay. So to remove that will promote healthy growth

of It's the vineyard.

Whether it's a weed or some other kind of, know, something fell, it is just growing.

Yeah, so

to remove that, a six month period for it to feel unhealthy or at least show signs that it's going, that it's turning in the right direction is kind of what we're looking for. Okay.

That's just another suggestion for you have a lot of space in your yard between Yeah. The hedge and your Probably, I don't know how many feet, probably like fifteen, twenty feet. Some of the things you can you get your six feet. But beyond that, if you want more privacy, could put inner layer of plants. One of the plants I suggested was called a mast tree, an arsilica tree, mast tree. And that grows tall, like looks like a evergreen, but it's actually tropical. And it's hurricane resistant, and it's gonna grow tall, but it's not actually the edge. Like a tree inside. So I've done that with my yard. I've lined like three or four. It looks awesome spaced out. And that can be a way better even screen for your pool. Okay.

As I said, I don't really have more to add than what staff is recommending. So I will make a motion to approve petition number 2020Five-nineteenARB with staff's recommendations.

I'll second.

All in favor defined.

Any opposed? Motion passes for nothing.

All right. Thank you. Thank you. So

this concludes our meeting. I do not have we don't have any items coming up. Our next two meetings are the day before Thanksgiving and then I think So right before we will not be having those two meetings. So if we wind up getting something in the meantime, then I will be asking for dates for you from all members.

And there's no public remarks from

There's no public Nobody here, so

They're all at the

Shall we adjourn?

What's going on next week? If

I don't

see you, happy holidays.

Thank you. Happy Happy holidays. Thank you. You do

we have food truck and then a concert.

What is it?

There's a word adjourned. Thursday

night. Yeah.

So I was walking. There's little word. It's like, there's gonna be a crowd.

Adjourned.