Loading...
Minutes 11-12-91MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING & ZONING BOARD HELD IN COMMISSION CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA, ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 12, 1991, AT 7:00 P. M. PRESENT Maurice Rosenstock, Chairman Gary K. Lehnertz, Vice Chairman Nathan Collins Cynthia Greenhouse Marilyn Huckle Shirley Stevens ABSENT Murray Howard William Cwynar, Alternate (Excused) Efrem Hinson, Alternate (Excused Chris Cutro, Planning Director Jorge Gonzalez, Asst. City Planner Tambri Heyden, Senior City Planner James Cherof, City Attorney W. Richard Staudinger, P. E., Gee & Jensen Consulting Engineers CALL TO ORDER Chairman Rosenstock called the meeting to order at 7:00 P. led the group in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. He recognized former Mayor Carl zimmerman, former Mayor Ralph Marchese, and Commissioner Lillian Artis. M. and AGENDA APPROVAL There being no changes, the agenda was accepted as presented. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Ms. Huckle moved to approve the minutes of the Planning and Zoning Board meeting of October 8, 1991. Mr. Collins seconded the motion which carried 6-0. COMMUNICATIONS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS A. Current Development Pro~ect Update (Planning Department) Mr. Cutro advised the Board that the Planning Department is now the Planning and Zoning Department. His department will rectify site plans so that the Board will know what to expect at the next Planning and Zoning Board meetings. He strongly urged the Board members to join the American Planning Association. MINUTES - REGULAR PLANNING & ZONING"BOARD MEETING BOYNTON BEACB, FLORIDA NOVEMBER 12, 1991 OLD BUSINESS A. PUBLIC BEARINGS PARKING LOT VARIANCE (Continued October 8, 1991) 1. PROJECT NAME: Cross Creek Centre AGENT: Robert A. Bentz Land Design South OWNER: Denholtz Associates LOCATION: 1313 W. Boynton Beach Boulevard DESCRIPTION: Request for a variance to Section 5-142((m) Fire Lanes of Article X, Parking Lots. ~. Beyden announced the applicant has requested another thirty day postponement. Mr. Lehnertz moved to continue this request for a variance until December 10, 1991. Ms. Buckle seconded the motion which carried 6-0. NEW BUSINESS A. PUBLIC HEARINGS LAND USE ELEMENT AMENDMENT/REZONING/TEXT AMENDMENT 1. PROJECT NAME: AGENT: OWNER: LOCATION: DESCRIPTION: Boynton Beach Boulevard Rezoning Kiernan J. Kilday Kilday & Associates Tradewinds Development Corp. South side of West Boynton Beach Boulevard, approximately 300 feet east of Leisureville Boulevard Request to amend the Future Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan from "Moderate Density Residential" to "Office Commercial" and to rezone from R1AA/PUD (S~ngle-_amlly Residential) to C-1 (Office and Professional Commercial). Ms. Beyden made the presentation and stated this request for rezoning of a two acre parcel from R1AA to C-1 is accompanied by a Text Amendment for "Moderate Density Residential" to "Office Commercial" and a Text Amendment to Area 7.a of the Comprehensive Plan~ Future Land Use Element Support Documents to allow the requested land use on this two acre parcel. This parcel was sub- divided from a larger parcel that was dedicated to the City last year for public park purposes as a requirement of the amended Woolbright Place PUD master plan. However, this request is not - 2 - MINUTES REGULAR PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA NOVEMBER 12, 1991 connected with the Woolbright Place master plan or the Tradewinds settlement. An application for rezoning this parcel to C-2 was submitted last year and was denied. She discussed the eight cri- teria of the zoning code against which land use amendment and zoning requests must be evaluated. She said area 7.1 within which this property falls, states the property should be limited to either single-family residential use with a maximu~ density comparable to the adjacent portion of Leisureville, or to a low intensity institutional use. Policies 1.19.6 and 1.17.1, and language in the Future Land Use Element Support Documents discourages additional commercial acreage due to the demand for commercial land which can be accommodated by the designations that are already in the Future Land Use Plan. There are several exceptions which would permit additional commercial acreage. These exceptions are related to criteria b and c in the backup material on whether the rezoning would be contrary to the established land use pattern and whether changed.conditions make the rezoni~g desirable. Due to the park dedication of the approximate 3.7 acre parcel to the south after the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan which created the small two acre subject parcel, residential land use, which ~ou!d o~ly yield about seven units is no longer reasonable %%se of the p~oper%y. Therefore, as l~ng as the impacts on the adjacent sihgle~ family homes to the east and to t.he west are minimized, low intensity commercial uses would be suitable. The C~i z6ning distr~t, is such a Zoning district which has been Used .'e~f~ctfvely ~hr0Ugt~o~t the Cit~ as a transition z?ne between residential lan~ Uses a~d higher inten- sity commercial uses. She referred to criteria e of~ the backup material and said the impacts typically associated with commer- cial uses are things such aS glare and light from parking lots, no~se from trucks and from load~n~ areas a~d sanitation vehicles, odors from sanitation vehicles, an.d litter accumulation. However, with the appropriate l~m~tatlons and restrictions, office or low intensity Public or institutional uses would be compatable with the adjacent ~single-family homes since these uses gen~rat~ minimum truck traffic, paper type ~aste, ana usually ope~atel between the hours of e~ght to f~ve. Re~ardl~ng crltera h of the backup material, MS~ Heyden said there a~e adequate sites zoned C~I in the City that could be occupied by: most uses allowed. Policy .1,19.6 makes an exception to addit.iOnal commer- c~ial acreage f~r infill parcels, which this parcel i~. With r~spec~Tto these issues and arguments, the Planning Department recomm~hds that~ these requests be approved suS]ect to the following conditions and limitations: (1) that the uses be limited to pro~essional/med~¢al o~fices or low intensity public or ins,titutional uses; (2] that right-of-wa~ be dedicated for Boynton Beach Boulevard sixty fee~ from the cen~erline; and (3 - 3 - MINUTES - REGULAR PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA NOVEMBER 12, 1991 that the amendment to Land Use Conflict Area 7.a be prepared by the Planning Department, which is printed in the staff report and which limits the uses. on the site to those already mentioned and res%ricts development of the parcel to minimize the impacts on the adjacent single-family land as follows: (1) that the building heights be limited to one story; (2) pole-mounted lighting be provided to shield glare; (3) screening and noise mitigation be provided f0r~mechanicai equipment;- and (4) a six foot high concrete block~buffer wall be provided along the east and west property boundaries and that trees be planted along that wall twenty feet on center with canopies above the six foot high buffer wall. She continued to say if the Planning and Zoning Board and the City Commission decide they do not want to approve this request with these conditions, she recommends the request be approved subject to the amendment to 7.a which is the last page of the staff report. Chairman Rosenstock asked what the applicant's response was to the suggestions of the Planning Department. Ms. Heyden said the applicant was supplied with a copy on Friday, but she has not heard from him. Kiernan Kilday was present on behalf of the applicant. He said this parcel came before this Board two years ago requesting a C-2 use of the property. He referred to a site plan to refresh the B~ard's memory. At that time he was told that the location of this parcel negates its being used for residential use. The C-2 use would be too intense because of the various retail sales pro- visions that are allowed in that district. That is why he came back with the C-1 proposal. He felt the C-1 district is a severely limiting district and finding a use for this site is going to be a difficult task. He stated that while ~here have been some large C-1 parcels and large buildings being a two acre site~ it is easier to find a single type tenant use who would come in and build their own building to be situated on the prop- ertyo With regard to the conditions, Mr. Kilday stared all but two are entirely acceptable. One of them was regarding the limi- tation on land use. He was concerned about the use of the word "intensity". He believed the restrictions in the C-1 district are goinq to take care of intensity. He read the permitted uses in the C-1 district and requested the Board to consider allowing him the full range of C-1 uses. The second condition Mr. Kilday had a problem with was regarding the building height being limited to one story. He said he is - 4 - MINUTES - REGULAR PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA NOVEMBER 12, 1991 entitled to build up to twenty-five feet, which would be a two story building. In the C-1 district there is a limitation which limits all buildinqs except hospitals to two stories, no more than twenty-five f~et, which matches the existing zoning on the property. He believed that two stories could continue to be allowed. He did not think a two story building would negatively affect the neighbors. He said a two story building could be important to the applicant because the site is small and because of the need to provide adequate parking on the ground level. Ms. Greenhouse asked Ms. Heyden for feedback~ regarding ~4r. Kilday's comments regarding building height and ~ses. Mr. Cutro said th~ the uses was that~there are some uses that are in tha~ s ~ he thinks wo~ld not fit on that site. His ori¢ tions With the applicant were to try to set him up with an office .type use. He felt the elimination of the uses would be acceptable. He agreed with /4r. Kilday that some of those uses are probably not going to locate there anyway because of the natU're of the ownership. The item regarding building height is a -reaction to Leisureville in trying to miti- gate~ Mr. cutro ~f~tt that Mr. Kitday's arg~men~ regarding having to make the site w(~rk with a two sto~y building was valid, and said/these use.s are not presently in the Compre~he~nsive Plan and he was not anxious to D.ut these conditions ~n tt~e Comprehensive Plano This zone was o~iglnaily designed to work ~exactly in the ~nstance the appllcant applied for, as a buffer between residen- tial rather than a heavier c~mme'rcial. He said ~t was written from a conservative point of v£~w, however, he is willing to be flexible. Ms. Greenhouse asked.Mr. Cutro what he meant by low intensity, public or institutional use. Mr. Cutro said he was looking for something that could overpower other uses, such as a school, which generates more traffic. Low intensity public use is something that could be p~oposed to the Planning Department. He wants to try to keep the ~se at a very low intensity. Ms. Greenhouse asked Attorney Cherof if he felt the language was too subjective. Attorney Cherof thought it was; however, he felt the board's focus should be on the code section that governs what the Board's action is, which requires that if the Board is going ~o impose any conditions on the rezoning, that the Board must have a specific finding that the l~mitations and the requirements are necessary for consistency with the Comprehensive Plan. He said that qu~stilon really should be addressed by the Planner as to whether or not that condition bears a relationship to con- sistency with the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Cutro said that at this point in time it does not. - 5 - MINUTES - REGULAR PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA NOVEMBER 12, 1991 Mr. Lehnertz asked Mr. Cutro if this was developed R1AA as the zoning stands right now, what would the minimum size lots be. Mr. Cutro answered that it is a minmum lot area of 8,000 square feet with a minimum lot frontage of 75 feet, which makes it approximately 110 to 120 feet deep, and that most of the platting over there is 50 by 105. Chairman Rosenstock question if the City wanted to see more resi- dential housing in that area. Mr. Cutro said the site does not make sense for residential. Because of the dedication that has taken place, there is a~very isolated parcel. The Planning Department made a recom~endation that the C-1 is acceptable. The o~1¥ q~est$on would be if conditions should be placed on this. There is nothing in the comPrehensive Plan to base those con- ditions on other than on other parcels of land, those conditions were placed on them. Mr. Lehnertz asked Mr. Cutro if he was saying that this parcel was not able to be developed under current R1AA. Mr. Cutro said it would be very difficult to do so because of the dedication and because accessing would be very difficult. It does not go with the existing land use pattern which has a park on one side, a potential office on another side, and then on top of that commer- cial on the other. It seemed to him that this sets itself up very well. There is a buffer between single family and the com- mercial development on the east. What can be generated from this project in terms of impact would be virtually the same, and in some cases it would be less, because it would be at only certain times and not spread out over the entire day like residential would b~. In response to Mr. Lehnertz' comments, Mr. Cutro said in the market now we have enough single-family lots out there that are off the main arterials. Most of the development that takes place on main arterials now is not of a slngle-family nature. It tends to be either multi-family, office or commercial. It Ks very hard to maintain those properties because they get a lot of abuse, such as noise and trash. Be did not see how that development would really be successful here. Ms. Stevens asked if it would be feasible to develop this parcel as multi-family. Mr. Cutro said the requirements that exist for multi-family would make it virtually impossible. In addition, residential development is the highest generator of traffic. Mr. Cutro said the highest generator of traffic allowed on this site is a medical office. Multi-family and single-family units generate almost as much traffic, if not more. A single- MINUTES BOYNTON - REGULAR PLANNING & ZONING BEACH, FLORIDA BOARD MEETING NOVEMBER 12, 1991 family house generates trips. Residential developments are usually fairly large. Eugene Casey of N. W. 10th Court, back yard of his property, and he parcel. He would rather see more instead. said this parcel borders the spoke against rezoning this single-family homes there In answer to Chairman Ro~entstock, Mr. Cutro said drainage problems would have to be addressed at another time. Motion Mr. Collins moved to recommend the request to amend the Future Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan from "Moderate Density Residential" to "Office Commercial". Ms. Huckle seconded the motion which carried 4-2. Mr. Lehnertz and Ms. Stevens cast the dissenting votes. Motion Mr. Collins moved to recommend the request to rezone from R1AA/PUD (Single-Family Residential) to C-1 (Office and Professional Commercial) with the conditions that the comprehen- save plan language in the backup be amended on page 6 to limit the use of the site based on the number of trips that could be added to the roadway as noted in the letter from the Palm Beach County Engineer, and to remove letter (a) on page 7 of the backup material. The Board finds the limitations and requirements are necessary for consistency with the Comprehensive Plan. Ms. Huckle seconded the motion which carried 4-2. Mr. Lehnertz and Ms. Stevens cast the dissenting votes. B. SUBDIVISIONS ~STER PLAN MODIFICATION PROJECT NAME: AGENT: OWNER: LOCATION: DESCRIPTION: The Meadows, Tract "L", Heatherlake William Turner Earl Brown/President, Lakeshore/Heatherlake Homeowners' Association Meadows Boulevard at Heatherlake Drive Request for approval of an amended master plan to allow for a reduction in the rear setback from 25 feet to 15 feet for all interior lots and lots with rear yards abutting Meadows Boulevard, for the put- MINUTES REGULAR PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA NOVEMBER 12, 1991 pose of constructing screened enclosures with hard roofs. Ms. Heyden made the presentation. She said applicant is requesting approval to reduce the rear setback from 25 feet to 15 feet for all interior lots and all lots with rear yards abutting Meadows Boulevard, for the purpose of constructing screened enclosures with hard roofs. At the November 5, 1991 City Commission meeting, the City Commission made a finding of no substantial change for the requested modification. The Technical Review Board and Planning Department recommend approval of this request, subject to staff comments. William Turner, agent for and resident of Heatherlake Homeowners' Association, said the request is to cover an existing screened patio with a roof. He said permits were pulled and the requested documents already exist. Ms. Heyden said the documents the applicant is referring to were submitted in 1987 and were not satisfactory at that time. Mr. Staudinger said the setbacks on Tract L are written on the face of the plat. In order to change the face of that plat, every owner of record has to agree. Mr. Cutro said he would work with the applicant to set up the necessary documents. Chairman Rosenstock asked Attorney Cherof if on this case now and have staff take care of Attorney Cherof answered in the affirmative. the Board could move the details later. Motion Ms. Huckle moved to approve the request of the applicant subject to staff comments. Mr. Collins seconded the motion which carried 5-1. Mr. Lehnertz cast the dissenting vote. C. SITE PLANS SITE PLAN MODIFICATION 1. PROJECT NAME: AGENT: OWNER: LOCATION: Bethesda Memorial Hospital Jim Bellucy Assistant Director of Engineering Bethesda Memorial Hospital Bethesda Memorial Hospital 2815 South Seacrest Boulevard - 8 - MINUTES - REGULAR PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MEETING BOYNTON BEACB, FLORIDA NOVEMBER 12, 1991 DESCRIPTION: Request for approval of an amended site plan to construct a 93 space parking lot expansion. Mr. Gonzalez made the presentation. The applicant is requesting approval of an amended site plan to construct a new parking lot immediately east of the driveway onto Golf Road. The new parking lot consists of 93 employee parking spaces. The Technical Review Board and Planning Department reco~%mend approval of this request subject to staff comments. At this point in the meeting, Chairman Rosenstock and Ms. Stevens left the room. Bruce Mandigo, Director of Engineering at Bethesda Memorial Ho~spital, spoke on behalf of applicant. He said he is proposing 93 additional parking spaces to alleviate the traffic and parking congestion at Bethesda Memorial Hospital. Ms. Buckle asked Mr. Mandigo if he had any problems with the staff comments, to which Mr. Mandigo answered in the negative. Motion Mr. Collins moved to approve applicant's request subject to staff comments. Ms. Buckle seconded the motion which carried 4-0. Chairman Rosenstock and Ms. Stevens had not yet returned. At this point in the meeting, Ms. Stevens returned. 2. PROJECT NAME: AGENT: OWNER: LOCATION: DESCRIPTION: Motorola P.I.D. Kevin J. Kelly Schwab, Twitty & ~anser Architectural Group, Inc. Motorola, Inc. Congress Avenue at N. W. 22nd Avenue, southeast corner Request for approval of an amended site plan to construct phase III of the planned industrial development to include 83,564 square feet of additional office space, changes to the existing parking lot layout and design and the addition of 112 parking spaces. Mr. Gonzalez made the presentation. Applicant is requesting approval of an amended site plan to construct a two-story, 83,564 - 9 MINUTES - REGULAR PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA NOVEMBER 12, 1991 square foot office addition (Phase III). The request also in- cludes the renovation and expansion' of the existing parking lot for a net increase of 112 parking spaces. The Technical Review Board and Planning Department recommend approval of this request subject to staff comments. At this point in the meeting, Attorney Cherof left the room. Kevin Kelly of Schwab, Twitty and Hanser Architectural Group, agent for applicant, was present. Mr. Lehnertz asked him if he had any problems complying with the staff comments. Mr. Kelly said he had a problem with the landscaping requirement, and that he sent for a waiver and understands it would be discussed further at TRB. Mr. Cutro interjected that landscaping is not part of the Code, and that the Board could approve this request without that condition. At this point in the meeting, Attorney Cherof returned, followed by Chairman Rosenstock. Ms. Buckle moved to approve the applicant's request, subject to staff comments. Mr. Collins seconded the motion which carried 6-0. OTHER A. CONSISTENCY REVIEW (pursuant to Chapter 163.3194 F. S.) 1. Proposed amendment to Appendix A-Zoning, to amend the regulations governing service stations. Mr. Cutro reported that the City Commission concurred with the findings of the Planning and Zoning Board and remanded the infor- mation to the Board for a consistency review. He reviewed how the present ordinance would be amended, as well as some loca- tional items that need to be addressed, such as T intersections, incomplete intersections at grade separated roads and local streets that are improved to four lanes or more. There was discussion regarding why the Code needs to be changed, and about gas stations being 1,000 feet apart. Martin Perry, a resident of West Palm Beach, said an analysis he had done showed there are presently 25 service stations in Boynton Beach. Eighteen of them violate the 1,000 foot rule, 10 - MINUTES - REGULAR PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA NOVEMBER 12, 1991 and only seven actually meet the Code. Twenty-two additional sites have the appropriate zoning and can meet the 1,000 foot requirement. Of those twenty-t~o, eighteen would disappear under thelp~oposed ordinance. He felt the status quo is not in the best interests of the City. At this point in the meeting, Mr. Lehnertz left the room. There was discussion about the techniques of measuring frontages. ~r. Cutro proposed he do an analysis, meet with Mr. Perry to com- pare maps, and report back to the planning and Zoning Board at the next meeting. He will also structure the ordinance with Attorney Cherof. Ralph Marchese of 1901 S. W. Roma Way, felt developers were inconsiderate of residents. Be had no objection to some of Mr. Cutro's recommendations and felt the City should be kept looking neat and in order. He was in favor of the 1,000 foot separation of service stations. At this point in the meeting, Mr. Lehnertz returned. It was the unanimous consensus of the Board to table this matter and the Planning Department was requested to do further research based upon discussion at this meeting. e Proposed amendment to Appendix A-Zoning, to include limitations on restaurants located in the C-1 zoning district, subject to conditional use approval. Mr. Cutro said at the last meeting, the Planning staff proposed five conditions for restaurants in the C-1 zoning district. He said a sixth one should be added limiting the number of spaces. Ms. Buckle asked Mr. Cutro replied structured first. if this has been that it had not; passed by the City Attorney and that the ordinance had to be Ns. Buckle said she wanted to limit restaurants as a conditional use in the C-1 zoning district so that they would be accessory to a permitted use. Mr. Cutro said it will be put in as an accessory use. Mr. Lehnertz moved to recommend approval of this amendment and forward it to the City Commission with a finding of consistency. Ms. Buckle seconded the motion which carried 6-0. 11 - MINUTES - REGULAR PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA NOVEMBER 12, 1991 DISCUSSION 1. Towing companies as a permitted use in district. the M-1 zoning Mr. Cutro said at the September meeting, Chairman Rosenstock raised a question regarding vacant land to the M-1 zoning district. The City Commission asked staff to review the potential for rezonings of vacant land to the M-1 zoning district and report those findings to the Planning and Zoning Board. Mr. Cutro said he could not find any parcel that he would recom- wend changing at this time, the main reason being that the M-1 oning distric~ is meant to be placed on isolated parcels of land. In addition, there is nothing in the Comprehensive Plan that would allow this change. He asked the Board to recommend to the City Commission that it does not wish to amend its findings on allowing towing in the M-1 zoning district. ADJOURNMENT A motion was made by Ms. Huckle to adjourn the meeting. Mr. Lehnertz seconded the motion which carried 6-0. The meeting properly adjourned at 10:00 P. M. Eve Eubanks Recording Secretary (Three Tapes) 12 -