Loading...
Minutes 03-09-82MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD HELD AT CITY HALL, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA, TUESDAY, MARCH 9, 1982 PRESENT Simon Ryder, Chairman Garry Winter, Vice Chairman Lillian Bond Ezell Hester Ronald Linkous Robert Wandelt Simon Zive Carmen Annunziato, City Planner Tim Cannon, Assistant City Planner Chairman Ryder welcomed everyone and called the meeting to order at 7:30 P. M. He introduced the members of the Board, the City Planner, Assistant City Planner, and the Recording Secretary. Chairman Ryder acknowledged the presence of Vice Mayor Walter "Marty" Trauger and Councilman Joe deLong MINUTE'S OF~EBRUARY 23, ~1~982 Chairman Ryder referred to the 'third paragraph on page 19 of the Minutes of February 23, and read: '~inally, Chairman Ryder said that un- less the new Council fails to act on constituting the new Board, the te~ms of the Members wouldnOt be concluded." Chairman Ryder said the word "not" should be deleted, It was noted that on page t, under "MINUTE~-w- and "COMMUNICATIONS", the vote should have been 7-0, not 5-0. Mr. Wandelt ~oved, seconded by Mr. Hester, to accept the minutes as corrected. The motion carried 7-0. ANNOUNCEMENTS Chairman Ryder announced that he was glad to see that the Board was still having full attendance and noted that the Board had a splendid record of attendance, In most instances, the Board has always had a full complement of se~en members. Chairman Ryder called attention to Sunday's Sun Sentinental (March 7, 1982) and said special reference was made in the Palm Beach section to the growth of Palm Beach County. Chairman Ryder noted that Boynton Beach leads the cities of the County in the rate of growth since 1970, Chairman Ryder particularly called attention to the fact that the article on Boynton Beach headed "Rampant Growth is the City's ~! Issue" was very informative. Chairman Ryder told the Board that the by-line was Steven Cohen of the Sun Sentinel, who was sitting with the press at the meeting, Chairman Ryder thought Mr. Cohen had done a great job~ He said reference was made to other cities in the article and extensive descriptions were made of Palm Beach County. Carmen Annunziato, City Planner, reported to the Board that the City of Boynton Beach was sued by Bethesda Memorial HOspital recently over the City Council's action to deny the request for MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MARCH 9, 1982 rezoning for the five or six lots adjacent to the hospital on the north. In addition, Mr. Annunziato advised there were two other Counts to the lawsuit, the Second Count being that the Court rezone additional property lying to the north of those six lots encompassing almost all of Benson Heights Subdivision and abandon the plat of that portion which the hospital has contracts for. Mr. Annunziato further informed the Board that the Third Count was a request to enjOin the City from abandoning S. W. 2nd Street. Mr. Annunziato said the City has now had one hearing temporarily postponed, and there was a hearing this morning (March 9), at which time the Judge ruled, based ~on the City's evidence, that the request for a hearing, was premature. The next hearing concerning the abandonment will be the 22nd o.f March, Mr. Annunziato advised. Chairman Ryder'asked if the.Council, at the last meeting, reserved any decision because of the upcoming hearing. He further asked if this meant that the Council would have to take more definitive action, Mr, Annunziato replied that at the last meeting, the Council conducted a public hearing~on~the request to abandon and then instructed the City Attorney to prepare a proper Resolution. Mr. Annunziato said the Resolution will come before the Council at the next meeting, COMMUNICATIONS None, OLD BUSINESS None. NEW BUSINESS PUBLIC HEARINGS: 7:30 P,' M. Chairman Ryder announced that there would be two public hearings of a similar nature. In both instances, Chairman Ryder said they were application's for rezoning, and they have been duly advertised and notices were sent out to the people in the immediate vicinity. Chairman Ryder repeated that they had been:duly advertised for the public hearings tonight for those who would want to appear .and be heard. Land Use Amendment & Rezoning James R. and Joan K, Bowen Applicant: Request: Location: James R. & Joan K. Bowen Land Use Amendment from Medium Density Residential to Office, and Rezoning from R-2 ~Single Family & Duplex Residential) to C-1 (Offices/Professional Commercial) 2304 South Seacrest Blvd., Boynton Beach, Fla. - 2 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MARCH 9, 1982 Proposed Use; Legal Description: Professional Offices Lot 65 (!ess E, 60' and return curve as in OR 2780, P765} CRESTVIEW, Boynton Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, recorded in Plat Book 23, Page 154, Palm Beach County Records. Tim Cannon, Assistant C~ty Planner, informed the Board that the Planning Department recommended that the request be den±ed~ Cannon Said the ~easons for denying the request are: 1, That the applicants' property is economically developable for duplex residences, which would be an allowable use in the R-2 district. The property is suitable for residential uses. 3. Development for offices or any other permitted ~use in a C~I district would have an adverse i~pact on surrounding residential propert±es. There is an adequate supply of C~i zoned land in the area, 5. There is a need for planned housing that the applicants' property could provide. Mr. Cannon presented a map of the property owned by the applicants and the surrounding area, He showed the Bowen property, Which presently contains a single family house, Mr~ Cannon also showed the Johnston property, 'which was the other'request before the Board tonight for rezoning, Mr. Cannon showed a lot co~taining a house and a vacant lot. To the south of the Bowen property was a dwelling unit, which was a duplex. Further to the south, on Sea- crest, Mr, Cannon pointed out an existing C-1 district. He said there was about' 1,000 feet or'vacant-frontage in the C-t district along Seacrest Boulevard and an additiOnal 300 feet that is vacant land along S. E, 23rd. Mr. Cannon also called attention to eight dwelling units along S. E. 23rd, which are~presently used for residential use ~but which could be converted to office use. Mr, Cannon further pointed to four or five dwelling units which had already been converted to office uses. East of the property in question was an R-2 zone, Mr. Cannon advised, consisting of mixed single family influxes, and all of the homes are presently maintained in good condition, To the north of the Johnston p~operty is a dwelling unit presently being converted to a duplex, Mr. Cannon continued. Further to-the north, Mr. Cannon showed a corner where there was a duplex built in 1980, and further to the north is Seaway Villas, which is a planned unit development that contains four duplexes along Sea- crest Boulevard built in 1980. Across Seacrest is the Squire Hill development, built in 197'3, and the High Point development, built in 1966, Mr. Cannon continued. Directly to the west is the recently approved Ridge Point Woods PUD, Mr. Cannon informed the Board. Mr. Cannon said all of the properties surrounding the - 3 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MARCH 9, 1982 applicant to the north, to the east, and to the west, are currently zoned residential. Mr. Cannon told the Board there were four major issues the Planning Department saw in-the request, as well as the Johnstons' rezoning request, which were as follows: 1. Does the proximity of these lots and dwellings to Seacrest Blvd. make them unsuitable for residential uses? Mr. Cannon explained that what they did was to measure the distance from~the applicants' dwellings to Seacrest and compare that to the distance of a number'of other dwellings along Seacrest. The Bowen house (~hich is the request being considered now) was 44 feet from the pavement edge. Mr. Cannon put on a transparency of the area so ~the Board could actually see where the dwelling units are located. Mr. Cannon pointed to the Bowen house. Immediately to the north of the Johnston house is a duplex, which is 53 feet back from the pavement edge, Mr. Cannon continued. He indicated a duplex which is 45 feet from the pavement edge and duplexes which were 52 feet back from the pavement edge. The dwelling units in Squire Hill were between 55 and 60 feet to the pavement edge. Further to the north, Mr. Cannon pointed out Woolbright Road. He said there are about 80 dwelling units between Woolbright Road and N. W. 2nd Avenue, and the average setback in the dwelling units is 35 feet from the pavement edge to Seacrest Boulevard. Mr. Cannon advised that the average daily traffic flow on South Seacrest Boulevard is 12,000 vehicle trips per day between N. W. 2n~ Avenue and Bethesda Hospital. This is a far greater traffic volume than most residential Streets, ~Mr. Cannon informed the Board, however, South Seacrest Boulevard is still largely a residential street and continues to develop mainly for residential uses. Currently, 82~ of the frontage between N, W. 2nd Avenue and Bethesda Hospital is zoned residential, and 78% is developed as residential. In view of the large number of residential units along South Seacrest Boulevard and the setbacks from the pavement edge of the residential uses, Mr. Cannon said it did not appear that the applicants' dwellings are particularly unsuitable for residential use. 2. Are these properties economically developable for duplexes? Mr, Cannon said the Planning Department's answer was that "Yes, they are economically developable." Mr. Cannon noted there is a duplex south of the Bowen property, which appears to be maintained very well, and the dwelling unit to the north of the Johnston property is currently being converted to a duplex. Also, Mr. Cannon pointed out, five or six duplexes have been developed along an edge of SeacreSt (which he pointed to). Mr. Cannon noted that it may be difficult to sell the homes for single family~use. How- ever, the Planning Department could not see that there would be - 4 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MARCH 9, 1982 any problem with converting them to duplexes and renting them out or selling off the individual units. 3. Are these properties physically suitable'for office develop- ment? Mr. Cannon showed a transparency of the Bowen property, and it showed the setbacks that would be required by a C-1 zoning. He showed the 30 foot setbacks that would be required on all sides and the existing building. Mr. Cannon explained that the 30 foot side and rear setbacks are considered-necessary to buffer commercial uses from residential uses. In this case, Mr. Cannon said they would be residential uses.on the Sides of the property so in this light, Mr. Cannon said they did not~ consider~ the proPerties to be physically suited for office development or conversion to offices. 4. Would development of the properties in question adversely affect the residential environment and property values in nearby residential zones? Mr. Cannon told the Board the Planning Department believes C-1 zoning of the properties would increase the level of noise and congestion impacting surrounding residential properties. He pointed out the properties in question again and the ~xisting dwelling units"to the south and to the east. Mr. Cannon said there was also property that would remain residential property (which he indicated on the map~. Mr. Cannon advised that the level of nuisances would increase if the properties were rezoned to o.ffices. It would be less than you would expect from a retail store, Mr. Cannon continued. How- ever, there would sti~l be an increase in thelamount of traffic noise from people entering and leaving the~property, particularly from people traveling the side streets. For example, Mr. Cannon said if a vehicle would over shoot and have to eome back, or if someone was looking for parking, there would be an increase in parking on the side streets. There would also be an increase in noise and glare from parking areas and an increase in the number of people walking around and entering and leaving the property. Mr. Cannon pointed out that it would also be possible for any other use permitted in the C-1 district to be located on the Properties, including nursing homes, banks, and funeral homes, Because of the nuisances, Mr. Cannon said the Planning. Department believed rezoning the land would be a contradiction to the Compre- hensive Plan policies or preserving residential areas. One consequence of allowing the rezoning would be some deterioration of the residential properties to the east of Seacrest Boulevard, Mr. Cannon advised. He said the properties were already "boxed in" by commercial districts on the south and commercial districts on the east. Putting a commercial district on the west would increase the encroachment on the residential neighborhood. 5. What is the demand for these dwellings as offices as opposed to the demand for single family and duplex dwellings? - 5 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD M~RCH 9, 1982 As mentioned previously', Mr.' Cannon said there are about 1,.300 feet of vacant commerciai frontage, exempting C~i districts to the south. M~[Cannon presented themap again and showed that it~could not be concluded that there was a great deal of demand for-the applicants' property for office~use,~ ~He~said ther~e~was a demand for rental housing and, particularly, for rental housing that wou'ld be suitable for young families. The applicants' property would help to satisfy these demands, especially if .they were to-be converted to-duplexes, The Comprehensive Plan for the City ~of Boynton Beach has-several statements to this.effect, Mr.~ Cannon advised. The'Comprehensive Plan stated there is a need for rental housing in Boynton Beach and the City should increase the amount of rental housing, which is to attract younger segments to the population (as on page 11 ~of the ComprehensivePlan)~~. Fur.thermore, Mr. Cannon continned, the Comprehensive Plan states that because of the gap~between what people have to pay and what they can afford for~ housing, there are many young households in the single family market that have been forced out of the single family market ahd need other ~housing tha{ would be suita, ble for young families. Mr. Cannon said the Planning Department believed the applicant's property would help to satisfy that demand. 6~ Do these properties fit criteria established 'in the Comprehensive Plan for the location of commercial areas? In this respect, Mr. Cannon advised it could' set a precedent for strip commercial'development along SouthSeacrest Boulevard. There is an existing strip of C-1 land along South Seacrest Boulevard, Mr. Cannon said, and the rezoning would'only increase the length of that commercial strip. Mr. Cannon informed the Board that it might set a precedent for eventually rezoning all of South Seacrest up to N. W. 2nd Avenue as commercial. Mr. Cannon stated that the Comprehensive Plan also recommends that commercial uses be located "where impacts to residential uses are minimized". In this case, Mr. Cannon advised, it would, be better for commercial uses to be located in the C-1 property to the south next to a larger R-1AA District. This would 'be preferable to locating commercial uses next to the much smaller R-2 zone, which is already becoming surrounded by commercial uses. 7. Would rezoning these properties to C-1 be an instance of spot zoning? Mr, Cannon said the Planning Department believed rezoning the applicants' property to C-1 would be an instance of spot zoning, since it would create, an isolated C-1 District entirely for the benefit of two. p~operty owners. More importantly, Mr. Cannon added, rezoning Would contradict Compmehensive Plan policies, To sum up, Mr. C~nnon informed the Board that the Planning Depart-- ment believed the applicants' requests for rezoning would contra- dict~the Comprehensive Plan and, most importantly, it would have an adverse impact on the residential neighborhood. Consequently, Mr. Cannon said they were recommending that the request for re- zoning from R-2 to C-1 should be denied. - 6 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MARCH 9, 1982 Chairman Ryder asked if anyone was present to represent Mr. and Mrs~ Bowen or if anyone wished to speak in favor of the request. Joan K. Bowen, 2304 South Seacrest Bou~evard~ Boynton Beach, came forward. Mrs. Bowen stated ~that it did not look~like she was going to qet anywhere. She thought they were surrounded on the next street over, and pOinted out that it was' slowly being taken over by pro- fessional offices. She told the Board to look at what they were go- ing to have across the street. Seacrest took 40 feet of their property, and Mrs. Bowen said she felt like she was living in a fish bowl. Mrs. BoWen informed the Board that they could not open their windows and her ten year old could not go out and play unless she played in the baCkya~d. Chairman Ryder requested Mr. Cannon to p~t the slide back on to show what happens when~ey try to resort to C-1 regarding t/~e setbacks. Chairman Ryder told Mrs. BoWen' the affect~da' area had diminished so greatly that they probably could not come up with something decent anyway for commercial use. Because of required, setbacks when you are~ adjacent to a residentially~zoned property, the setbacks are greater, Chairman Ryde~ explained. He said the area showed what exactly would be availabl~ for development out of the entire plot. Mrs. Bowen asked about the homes along 23rd andwanted to know why they got rezoned. Chairman~Ryder agreed that they were rezoned but what they had' to be concerned about is the impact on what they have there now and~the'presently zOned properties. -Chairman Ryder noticed today (March 9) that th~-.lot to ~he~nort~h of the Johnston property o~ 21st Avenue, which he. thought was Lot 62, was undergoing extensive reconstruction for a duplex. He asked Mr. Cannon to show the map again. In ~he face of that, Chairman Ryder asked how the City coUld possibly say, "Go ahead." Mrs. Bowen asked Chairman Ryder if he had seen some of the duplexes along Seacrest and the way they are kept. Chairman~Ryder thought that they had heard from Mr~ Cannon that generally, they are well~kept. Chairman Ryder thought Mr. Cannon had pointed out that recently they had development there and it had all been residential. Chairman Ryder referred to Seaway Villas and Ridge Point Woods PUD. Chairman Ryder felt that was the way the development was going and that it was consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Going South, at 23rd Avenue, Chairman Ryder asked Mrs. Bowen to look along Seac~est. He adviSed her that both sides of Seacrest are zoned C-1 for~professional office use but, to a great extent, none of it has been developed as ye~. MOst of it is'undeveloped land, so Chairman Ryder did not think it was a question of whether the City needed C-1 zoning. Mrs. Bowen commented, "That's it. You can't fight City Hall." Chairman Ryder asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor of the request, Mr. Fain Weems, 47~27 ~alo Verde Drive, Boynton Beach, asked City - 7 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD M~ARCH 9, 1982 Planner CarmenAnnunziato if it was not often more feasible to re- develop Or redesign an existing structure rather than to start from scratch. He noted they said there was plenty of vacant land to build upon but, with interest rates as they are, he wondered if it was perhaps more feasible to change an existing structure. Mr. Wandelt' asked why the zoning should be changed when there is plenty of that available. Chairman Ryder explained that the crux of it is they are changing the zoning, and you are impacting the people there now. Mr. Annunziato answered Mr. Weems' question by saying it is more economical. He said you find a lot of people who are able to buy an existing home and convert it as opposed to constructing it themselves. Mr. Weems did not understand the draft that was shown of the~ property. He asked if there was not enough land for parking. In no.instance can you develop on the entire lot, Chairman Ryder replied, but in this case where you are going commercial and you have adjacent residential properties, the front, side and rear setbacks are greater than normal, and that diminishes the area. The extent to which the building could be reconstructed is limited severely because, in C-1 zoning, there is a thirty foot setback, and also, you have a thirty foot setback in ~esid~ntially zoned property,-Mr. Annunziato explained. He further explained that in this instance, with rights-of-way on two sides and residentially zoned property on two s±desr it severely restricts t~e building. Mr. Weems said Mr. Cannon noted the percentages of different uses currently on Seacrest, He wondered what they were ten years ago. It looked like ±t was more commercial to Mr, Weems, Chairman Ryder asked Mr. Annunziato if that was a fact, Mr. Annunziato informed the Board that between 23rd and Woolbright, ~here has not been any commercial construction, at least since 1976. He recalled there was Seaway Villas, which was a PUD. Mr. Weems asked what Mr. Annunziato meant when he said "PUD".. Mr. ~nnunziato answered, "Planned Un±t Development." Mr. AnnunziatO said it was all residential and, in this instance, it was all fee simple duplex. Mr. Annunziato believed they also built a duplex on Lot 4 or it may have been Lot 9, which was used as a model and then sold. He said there was some reconstruction at the water plant. Coming south, all they had were some conversions, Mr. Annunziato continued, Now there is a proposal, which has been accepted by the City Council, to rezone the 14 acres, which is called Ridge Point WOods, that will also be reSidential, Mr. Annunziato advised. He said the area was developing consistent with the Zohing Code and, apparently', quite successfully. Mr. Weems informed'the Board that he was bo~n in West PalmBeach and.brought up here. He did not remember anybody wanting Sea- crest to be commercial at all as.$eacrest wa~ developed and as time went by. He admitted that it did seem to be .the tren~, at least for the ".higher class professional buildings." For an example, Mr. Weems said when you are ~driving out of the hospital, the largest sign you see is Kiszka, P. A. Mr. Weems did n6t think of that as being an influence on the neighborhood because he considered it to be a "high class commercial use." Mr. Weems also did not - 8 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONINGBOARD MARCH 9, 1982 think that there would be a great deal of traffic there. Mr. W~mS-', ?noticed that reference was made to the block, there and the increased noise. He wondered if, in the higher class commercial use, assuming you are not talking about a bar or some- thing of that sort, you would probably'have less noise for ~people living in single dwellings or multi-families' Mr.. W~s pointed out that there would be less noise at night than there would be if they were duplexes. Mr. was any noise at all emanating from Ed Kiszka's'offiCe because he is not there'but somewhere else. Mr. that would be detrimental to a ho~e any more than a hospital is detrimental to a home. Mr. we~ms~ ~.. had a note which said the noise is probably as great in the daytime, if not greater, from the busy street. Mr. w~e~ .- predicted it would be busy, whatever is built there. How- ever, he thought it would be less at night if professional build- ings were built there. Chairman Ryder noted that Mr. weems~ posed the question as to what extent had there been new commercial development. Chairman Ryder informed him that it had been reStricted to the area that is now zoned C-l, south of Kiszka. Chairman Ryder said there was one across the street, one on the sou~_heas~~ corner of 23rd Street (again professi'onal), but they were built in areas that have been C-1 all along. Chairman Ryder pointed out there is still a lot of undeveloped area on both sides of the street Mr, Weems.~~ admitted, it has been some time since he has had much study or experience in what ~m~y~__or not be< considered blighting influences, but he Wondered if the typical rental, single family home would not usually be cons~der~'d more detrimental in terms of it being a blighting influence because they are not owner occupied than would be professional commercial buildings. He said some men~ion was made, "We do not want to take away the homes for people to live in," Mr. W~Si.~as~.i~ot~~unles~-~ .... there was some incentive, that typically you'have the owner occupant~'s desire to maintain ~he home. In fact, Mr. weems ~ ~ thought the Board would find the area around Bethesda (which he always considered to-be a very ni.ce area) to be d~opping down some (Mr. Weems referred to Chapel Hills,. as well as the south of Bethesda) because they think it is all turning commercial on Seacrest. Mr. Weems said it was turning commercial on Seacrest and the hospital has to be there because you have to have .a place to make people get well. Mr. ~e~s said it did not'make people want to build half a million dollar homes there. Chairman Ryder reminded the Board they were talking about instances where it was proposed to establish commercial surrounded by residential .units. Currently, that is considered downgrading, as far as the neighbors are concerned, Chairman Ryder advised. Mr. W~e~ms aSked what was downgrading. Chairman Ryder replied, "Go- ing commercial from residential." Chairman Ryder explained that when you pick two parcels like that, it very much comes under the - 9 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MARCH 9, 1982 area of spot zoning, which the City generally tries to avoid. Chairman Ryder told Mr. W~$~ ~ the implication of spot zoning is when you are doing something that may favor the particular individual but would impact unfavorably On the neighborhood. That was something Chairman Ryder thought %hey all should be concerned about. Mr. Weems ~ wondered'if the demand in the area (if he made a market study or feasibility study.) has really dictated that there is not a demand for commercial use in the area. Chairman Ryder replied that ~they have been.building commercial un~%s and a new one is going, up right across the street. Mr. Weems asked why the undeveloped area was not going ahead and being built commercially. As'Chairman Ryder said~, lately, there has been some activity alOng those lines, immediately opposite the hospital, down 23rd and again on the west side, just south of the hospital. Chairman Ryder pointed out that Ridge'Point Woods PUD was just recently approved, and.that will be residential, and it is across the street. Mr. Weems~-~ thought multi-family fitted in very well, particularly where they are large enough to have their own identity, and whether it be by a wall, a tree or buffer zones, they worked out very well. He noted Chairman Ryder talked'about the benefit of a particular property owner. Mr. Weems said if the demand is there for a commercial use and.the use of it as- a single family dwelling is disappearing, he wondered about the demand or the highest and best use for the general public. Chairman Ryder observed that the City is going through peculiar times anyway. He knew of instances where approvals have been granted and nothing has hapPened. Obviously, Chairman Ryder noted nothing is happening here because of the high interest rates and the financial picture in general. Mr. Weems ~ ~ told the Board he did not know Mrs. Bowen and he never saw her before in his life but he appreciated her predic~.a~m~.~ He said if that was a blight influence and the Board approved it, ~nd if there were the proper setbacks and provision was made that you had to have Australian pines of a certain height as a buffer for sound, that would certainly be a nice th~ing. Chairman Ryder reiterated that the Board was faced with. a specific problem, which was the matter of rezoning, that impacts on a residential, neighborhood and that was what they had to conSider. Mr. Weems _. asked Chairman Ryder if he thought the neighborhood was better now or not as well as it was five years ago. Chairman Ryder thought they were getting away from the matter. He did not know if they could make a judgment that way. Mr. -Hester interjected that there are other uses f~r C-1 zoning besides just use for professional offices, and that was what bothered him. Mr. ~eems~ replied, "Don't those have ~to be approved?" Mr. Hester answered that they did, but C-1 also included funeral homes and nursing homes. Mr. Weems asked if each of those had to be approved on their own~.i~dividual merit. - 10 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD ~RCH 9, 1982 Chairman Ryder advised that once the zoning is established, any permissive use is allowed. Mr. ~Weems remarked~ ~hat~.~.t~e~ best'~interest ofmos~/of the people is the welfare of the public at large. Chairman Ryder asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor of the application, Julie Monahan, 304 Venice Drive, Boynton Beach, bought the house at 2206 South Seacrest, Boynton Beach. She told Chairman Ryder it was the one he thought was being remodeled for a duplex, Chair- man Ryder asked if the one in the corner of 21st~was hers. Mrs. Monahan replied that it was, and she was not remodeling it. Chair- man Ryder asked her what she was doing. When Mrs. Monihan bought the house, she called and asked about having it rezoned. ~She asked Mr. Annunziato his name, and then said he told'her it could not be used as zoned at the present t±me. Mrs. Monahan said she was told she could work there if she did not conduct business there. Mrs. Monahan said currently, she is making it an apartment and, hopefully, an office. The only reason Mrs. Monahan was not with Mrs. Bowen and Mrs. Johnston was because she did not buy the house fast enough. Mrs. Monahan informed the Board that she has a nursing service that she started two years ago, and it is booming, That was the only way Mrs. Monahan knew how to say i%~ She said her nursing service was the only one in Boynton Beach. There is one in West Palm Beach and one in Boca Raton but not one in Boynton. Mrs.. Monahan repeated that her nursing service has done very well. Mrs. Monahan bought the house with the idea %.hht it was two blocks from Bethesda, which she thought would be terrific. She was sitting at the meeting thinking, "This makes me sick. It really does." Mrs. Monahan said she felt like it was going to stifle Boynton Beach. When she goes out the front door of her house and looks, she can see Bethesda Hospital two blocks away and she says, "Spot zoning! Which way?" That was Mrs. Monahan's feeling, Chairman Ryder asked her if she did not take a lot for granted by assuming she could do-what she wanted to in spite of the present zoning. Mrs. Monahan replied that she did not take a lot for granted because Mr. Annunziato told her' she could use it as an office. Mrs, Monahan informed the Board that she has another office but.she has already outgrown it. She said she could stay there, and~she has a three year waiting list, so it was not like she was taking a lot for granted. -It could still be converted into a duplex very easily. What Mrs. Monahan did was separate it with the idea of making it into an apartment for herself and office. That was what she hoped to do. She said it may not happen tonight or this year, but she keeps cOming back, and the Board keeps seeing her because she did believe that it was unfortunate. Mr. Annunziato hoped Mrs. Monahan was not violating the zoning - 11 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MARCH 9, 1982 ordinance. He advised Mrs. Monahan that she could use the building for a home occupation, subject to some very restrictive criteria. Mrs. Monahan retorted that she checked all of that. Mr. Annunziato determined that she was u~ing the building consistent with the zoning. Mrs. Monahan stated she would not violate Code, but she was at the meeting and was being very fair, blatant and open with the Board, Mrs. Mon~h~a~~ told the Board she felt, quite frankly, they were stiflin~ B0ynton Beach. Mrs. Monahan felt that way because she was born in Boynton Beach and lived here for 42 years. She said that area was going commercial, and predicted it may not be this year but it will get there. Chairman Ryder asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor of the request. T~ere was no response. Chairman Ryder asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition to the proposed request. Robert Foot, 2400 S. W. 1st Street, Boynton Beach, showed the Board on the map where he lived with his wife, Ginny. Mr. Foot thanked the Board for all the work they did this year, and said they appreciate it where they are and in the various interests they have, Mr. Foot respected the applicants' wishes to enhance the values of their properties. He told the Board they were considering the values the people have and the properties they have in existing C-1 areas, the properties people may have bought knowing they were C-1 areas that may have some value because of that particular zoning on S, E. 23rd. Mr. Foot said he and'hfs wife know that the prOper~y behind them, facing on Seacrest between 23rd Avenue and the hospital, wii1 be used for a professional building somewhere along the way. They consider also the possibility that that property can be used for a nursing home, a funeral home, or a bank~branch, Speaking of the Bowen property, Mr. Foot noted that spot zoning does have a problem that rides with it. It is not'just a matter of concept. If the Bowen property should be zoned C-l, Mr. Foot informed the Board that the people '±nbetween the Bowen property and the p~operties facing on $', E. 23rd would have good basis for asking for C-1 zoning for their property also. You would %hen have a very sizeable piece of property which coUld be developed into a bank branch facility, funeral home, or nursing home, which could become a detrimental factor in the neighborhood. Mr. Foot did not thinx you could .look at a particular piece of property and think it stands alone. Mr. Foot would not stand behind that approach. What Mr. Foot was concerned about was Seacrest as an avenue. Although'professional buildings are fine, Mr. Foot said the City did not have a C-lA for professional offices or a C-lB for funeral homes and a C-lC ~or bank branches or whatever. Mr. Foot told the Board they were looking ata very broad category in considering the request tonight. Mr. Foot and his wife felt where there is - 12 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MARCH 9, 1982 adequate space for development (not only undeveloped places on Seacrest, but also homes on S. E. 23rd can be converted at this time within the existing planning) there is not a basis for use of these particular-properties at this time for business. Mr. Foot said Mrs. Monahan spoke of stifling business in the community. Mr. Foot said he was very concerned about business in the community and what it does for bank accounts and loans and his associations otherwise. Mr. Foot felt Boynton Beach had plenty of property that is appropriately zoned at this time where people have bought, expect- ing that zoning will be recognized. Chairman Ryder asked if anyone else wished to speak in opposition to the proposed application. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Mr. Linkous was sympathetic to Mrs. Bowen, as he was in the same situation. He s~id he has been on both sides of the fence. Mr. Linkous had a piece of property at 1005 S. E~ 4th Street zoned exactly the same way, and he sure would have liked to have it zoned C-1 but they would not do it because it would violate the Comprehensive Plan;and a fortune was spent in compiling the infor- mation. Mr. Wand-ett moved to accept the recommendation of the Planning staff and reject the rezoning from R-2 to C-1. Mrs. Bond seconded the motion. The motion carried 7-0. Land Use Amendment & Rezoning Robert H. and Theresa E. Johnston Applicant: Request: Location: Proposed Use: Legal Description: Robert H. & Theresa E. Johnston Land Use Amendment from Medium Density Residential to Office, and Rezoning from R-2 (Single Family & Duplex Residential) to C-1 (Offices/Professional - Commercial) 2214 South Seacrest Blvd., BoYnton Beach, Fla. Professional Offices Lot 60, less the east 100 feet thereof, and all of Lot 61, CRESTVIEW, according to the Plat there- of on file in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court in and for Palm Beach County, Florida, recorded in Plat Book 23, Page 154. As stated in the beginning, Chairman Ryder reminded the Board that the nature of this request was similar to the one just discussed. He informed the Board that this property lies to the north and the presentation just made would apply again, in most instances, to what was presented b~efore. Tim Cannon, Assistant City Planner, showed the transparency of '- where the Johnston property was located. He Showed a lot above it - 13 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MARCH 9, 1982 that had single family occupancy and one below it which was presently undeveloped. Mr. Cannon showed what the property looked like on the aerial ~iew, He said the Planning Department recommended that the request for rezoning and for land use amendment by Robert H. and-Theresa Johnston be denied. Mr. Cannon said their reasons for recommending deniai were basically the same as the reasons for recommending denial on the Bowen re- zoning. In this case, Mr. Cannon advised there was an additional factor in that the applicant owns a through lot to S, E. 1st Street. Mr. Cannon said he could always"open up an entrance to the rear of his property. Most likely, Mr. Cannon observed, parking would be provided on the vacant lot; however, the lot could be divided and the parking put in a place (indicated by Mr. Cannon on the map~ where traffic could flow in a residential area, Mr. Cannon said it would, of course, increase the level of noise to dwelling units on the side of Si E. 1st Street from traffic circling back plus the traffic coming up from 23rd to avoid the light, In connection with the intersection, Mr. Cannon said there would be an increase i~ traffic. As mentioned befOre, Mr, Cannon reiterated that there has been successful development of duplexes along that str.etch of Seacrest. He said the Johnston property is set back 53 feet from the pave- ment edge at Seacrest Boulevard. He showed a duplex set back 41 feet from the pavement edge and other duplexes set back 50 feet, so whatever noise level the Johnstons are experiencing a~re also ~eing~ experienced by the duplexes up there which were built in 1980. ~he Johnston propert~ ~ha~scme bufferingin front o'f it, like trees and shrubs. Mr. Cannon said the Squire Hill development parking was set back fr~m 55 to 60 feet to Seacrest Boulevard with no buffering whatsoever. Mr. Cannon repeated that the reasons for requesting denial of this rezoning were potentially the same as the Bowen application. He said that both rezonings were addressed in the report that he prepared so any recommendations that would apply to the Bowen property would also apply to the Johnston property. Chairman Ryder asked if a reprssentative for Mr. and Mrs. Robert JOhnston was present. Theresa E. Johnston, 2214 South Seacrest Boulevard, Boynton Beach, came before the Board. She began "with the land not being used on 23rd, which is already C-i", Mrs. Johnston informed the Board that most of those parcels are too small for an office or a very small office. She said they are right next to each other. Mrs. Johnston stated further that 23rd was rezoned not too many years ago. It backs right up to a residential area, and so does South Seacrest. Right in front of the hospital and right in back of it, Mrs. Johnston said there are homes, and there was no talk then of funeral homes,~ banks~ or anything, else being put in. Mrs. Johnston said it was rezoned. They did not spot it; they did the whole street, Mrs. ~JohnstOn continued. - 14 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MARCH 9, 1982 Mrs. Johnston emphasized that no one could tell her that Golf Road is a better street for commercial than Seacrest Boulevard. She said you could not even walk on 23rd~ as it is a narrow, two laned street. As far as her hOuse being 58 feet back, Mrs. Johnston said the other homes they were talking about do not have an entrance or an exit into High Point. Mrs. Johnston informed the Board that they'constantly hear cars going north and the screeching of brakes because the people in back of them do not have the sense to see that they are going to make a left turn and turn into there. With reference to the Comprehensive Ptan, Mrs. Johnston_noted they were allowing 9.68 units per acre. She told the Board she owns 2/10ths less than one acre and was told all she could put on the land was two duplexes., one on her lot and one where the house is now, She asked Mr. Annunziato if that was right. Mr. Annunziato assumed it was. She told M~. AnnunziatO he told her that. Mr. Annunziato explained to-Mrs. Johnston that that is the maximum density permitted under the R-2 zoning classification. The way they arrived at ~thkt is they took the figure 4,500 square feet and divided it into 43,560. That maximum density is arrived at without the benefit of streets and given a- perfect situation, Mr. Annunziato continued, He said you still need 9,000 square feet for a duplex. As far as traffic cutting through 21st, Mrs. J~hnston said they have more traffic now cutting east on 21st Street to avoid the 23rd Street light than they could imagine. They all shoot down there and then shoot down 2nd, Mrs. Johnston told the Board, in order to get out. Mrs. Johnston stated they should have different zonings for offices, banks, funeral homes, or whatever because the C-1 takes in all of them. As far as spot zoning goes, Mrs. Johnston informed the Board they could rezone the whole thing because there is a water treatment plant, and a cemetery. ~he'repeated that they could rezone the whole thing and make it all C-1 on Seacrest, Mrs. Johnston could see no reason why it could not be done and advised it should have been done when 23rd was done. The whole thing should have been done, Mrs, Johnston reiterated. Talk about rentals, Mrs. Johnston told the Board they put in the PUD up ih Seaway. They were sold, and there were no-rentals except what he could not sell. Mrs. Johnston asked the Board if Ridge Point built rentals or if they were going to be sold. She told the Board they were not accomplishing what they say they are going to accomplish. Mrs, Johnston expressed the need for rentals but they are not putting in rentals. They are putting in condominiums, that is all they are putting in, Mrs. Johnston exclaimed, and the young people still cannot buy them and they still do not have places to rent. Mrs. Johnston referred to "Discussion and Conclusions" on page 3 - 15 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MARCH 9, 1982 of the Report and Recommendations from the Planning Department, She called attention to paragraph 1 and read: "Currently, 82% of the frontage betweenNW2nd Ave. ~nd BethesdaHospital is zoned residential , , ~" Mrs. Johnston said she was not interested in N, W. 2nd Avenue, She wanted from Wootbright south. She advised .that most of the traffic was from Woolbright south to the hospital~not from Wool- bright north to 2nd. If that were the true figure, Mrs~ Johnston said it would be down to about 30% not 82%. As far as discriminating, 'Mrs. Johnston remarked, ',Yes, discrimina- tion.'' Mrs. Johnston noted that there were houses at the hospital that were abutted by families right in back of them. A new building was just put up on the west side of Seacrest that has a house right in back of it. If you are talking about discrimina- ting, Mrs, Johnston said there was a building right there. Mrs. Johnston agreed that there is nothing wrong with offices. She was told she could not have an office there because she refused to let anybody exit on a side road. Mrs. Johnston said Dr. Weatherford put his place in and has an exit on 24th. Bethesda has a place and exit on 25th but Mrs. Johnston is told, "Oh, no, because they will exit on 22nd." She asked the Board if that was not discriminating, To Mrs, Johnston, it was. As she said before, Mrs. Johnston repeated, "If there is no reason to spot zone, zone from Woolbright down to Golf Road," She could see no reason to not spot zone. Chairman Ryder asked if anyone wished to speak in favor of the application. There was no response. Chairman Ryder asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition to the proposed request for rezoning, Robert Foot, 2400 $. W. 1st Street, Boynton Beach, again said that he did not think it enhanced the community by expanding the C-1 zoning area to include these particular spots. Certainly, Mr. Foot said, the rest of the~strip would go, and he 'did not think the City needed to assemble another area of that size ~h&t could be used for less desirable uses. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Mr. Linkous moved to accept the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Board and deny.the rezoning from R-2 to C-1. Mrs. Bond seconded the motion, and the motion carried 7-0. SUBDIVISIONS None. - 16 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD ~MARCH 9, 1982 SiTE PLANS Project Name: Agent: Owner: Location:~ Description: Boynton Leisureville Maintenance Sh.ed Taynton Services - Mark Taynton BoYnton Leisurevitle - Rudy Fisher, President Clubhouse ~ SW 18tk St~, Boynton Beach Storage Shed at Clubhouse - SW 18th Street Tim Cannon, Assistant City Planner, said the application was for a site plan approval for a 360 square foot storage shed. Mr. Cannon said the~application came to the Planning and Zoning Board with a positive recommendation from the Technical Review Board. Mr. Cannon sho~ed where the shed would be located, which was on the northern end of the recreation building in the Boynton Beach Leisurevitle Recreation Area. He said it showed~-~a~concrete pad, and the shed is a prefabricated metal she~ which will be located on a concrete slab. Mr. Cannon informed the Board it was a minor modification to the Boynton Beach Leisureville PUD. However, since it is located with planning and development, Mr. Cannon said it required site plan review. Mr. Cannon advised it woutd'be a permitted use in the recreation zone. The recreation site is .in an REC district, Mr. Cannon '- informed the Board, and the~use would be a peHmitted use in a recreation zone. The Technical Review Board reviewed the appli- cation. Mr.C~nnon~ said it came to the Planning and Zoning Board with no comments. Chairman Ryder wished to add some input to-the application for members of the Board. He told the Board Members that the structure has been up for six months. In Chairman Ryder's opinion, it is an~abomination and has no business being~there. Chairman Ryder said it was put up without a request for a permit. No one came to the City so subsequently, they were cited by the Cod.es Enforcement Board, Chairman Ryder continued, and they were given time to secure a permit. Up to now, Chairman Ryder thought they were about $3,000.00 in arrears on the lien. Chairman Ryder asked if the Homeowners' Association was repre- sented at the meeting. He informed the Board that he lives in the older Leisureville. Rudy Fisher, 2104 S. W. 22nd Court, Boynton Beach, came forward and Gold the Board he was the Past President of Boynton Leisure- ville. He noted Chairman Ryder said this had been going on for six months. Chairman Ryder remarked, "Approximately that." Mr. Fisher informed the Board that he was the man who engineered the deal, and that was the reason he was still involved'in, it. They bought it from Ted's Sheds with the stipulation, "To be installed." Mr. Fisher said they sent down a contractor that was going to check it. He said he would go to City Hall, get the permit; and then he would take care of it, Mr. Fisher advised, Mr. Fisher continued by saying the weeks went by and Mark Taynton came down and said he would take the job. - 17 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MARCH 9, 1982 When they first talked about it, Mr. FisheY, with o~e' of the other Board Members, went to the Building Department and said, "OK, we probably need a permit." Of course, Mr. Fisher said Ted's Sheds said they would install it, so they had nothing to do with that part of it. When the inspector checked it, he shopped by Mr. Fisher's house and said, "Hey, you guys didn't get a permit." Mr. Fisher told the'inspector that was no problem and he would go and get the per- mit, so Mr. Fisher went to the Building Department and asked what they would need. He asked if they wanted a slab, concrete, steel in it, or what. The Building Department told him they did not know and told him ~to get a certified architect to give him a drawing. In the meantime, Mr. Fisher continued, they sent Mark Taynton down, and he took it over. Mr. Fisher admiHted there had been several delays. He agreed that six months was ridiculous to get a permit for a shed. Mr. Fisher said they came down, installed it, and tied it down like they do a house trailer for people who live in it. Mr. Fisher told the Board they did not build a new shed, they replaced a shed. The old shed was taken out, so they replaced a shed. Mr. Fisher told the Board there had been a shed there ever since Boynton Leisureville has been there. Chairman Ryder reminded Mr. Fisher that they were talking about the shed that is up there now. Mr. Fisher said they tried to get the permit for six monHhs. Chairman Ryder said that was all "over the dam." Chairman Ryder's point was that it is ugly, unsightly, and he did not know why the unit owners had not appeared in opposition to it.. Mr. Fisher said it would not be that way as soon as they get the permit. Chairman Ryder told Mr. Fisher, as a member of a homeowners' association and an official and a President, he ShiQ~Rld~t~ to preserve the integrity of the residential complex. Chairman Ryder said it was ruined by what Mr. Fisher put up there. Mr. Fisher disagreed, saying they were going to shrub the thing. Chairman Ryder adv£s~d that would not help a bit. It would not take it away, Chairman Ryder remarked that it was not engineered. There is no seal on the plan, and. he did not think it was engineered. Chairman Ryder advised that no attempt was made to try to make it compatible to what had been~built, It is a metal shed, and no attempt was made to try and fit it into what they had, The reason Chairman Ryder felt so strongly about it was because he liveS in a similar community, and'he certainly would not want to see anything like that in his community. Chairman Ryder did not think any of the Unit owners should be subjected to that kind of thing. Mr. Fisher retorted to Chairman Ryder that he believed the people where Chairman Ryder lived keep their equipment out in the open. Chairman Ryder admitted that right now, it is in the open. Mr. Fisher asked' ±f Chairman Ryder thought that appeared~better. Chairman Ryder replied, "No, it doeS not appear better." Mr. - 18 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MARCH 9, 1982 Fisher reiterated that they just replaced a shed, build a shed without anything being there. They did not Chairman Ryder told Mr. Fisher that under the Comprehensive Land Use Plan, the City adopted a new zoning category for recreation. The intent there was to insure that dwellers like Mr. Fisher and the other Leisureville where they have open space and golf courses would remain as open space', unencumbered by buildings from now on. That is the reason why they are recreation, Chair- man Ryder continued. Now, Chairman Ryder told Mr. Fisher, you are coming ahead and putting up a structure. Chairman Ryder said, "You claim it'is part of your recreation facility, but then again, the point is this. What you have done, what I see there now, you have damaged the appearance of your recreation complex. I would not see that as a precedent in any other case." Mr. Fisher could agree if there had been no shed %here, but he stated there was a shed there for years ready to fall apart. Chairman Ryder exclaimed it was a cheap shOt. It was a metal shedt and no attempt was made to make it conform with what they had. Chairman Ryder observed that it stands out like a sore thumb. Mr. Fisher retorted that when they shrub it, it will not stand out like a sore thumb. Chairman Ryder remarked, "Shrubs will not take it away. Will they?" Mr. Fisher informed the Board they would put in Australian pines and different flOwered shrubs, so it would look much better than it did before. He added that there was no shrubbery around it before. There was nothing but a tree, and it will look a lot better, Mr. Fisher assured the Board. As far as the people objecting to it, Mr. Fisher advised this was for the good of the people.. Chairman Ryder asked, "Is it for the good of the people who live on the street across the street from that? Is that good for them~to have that staring them in the face?" Mr. Fisher argued that it was as good for them as it was for everybody else. Chairman Ryder thought it degraded their property, It did not enhance it. Mr. Fisher said When they bought there, they knew they bought on the golf course. Chairman Ryder informed Mr. Fisher that they Knew they bought on the golf course but they were not confronted with what they have now. Chairman Ryder said, "That's-what I am after." Chairman Ryder told Mr. Fisher he WaS adding something that was not there before and is not compatible to what was there before. Mr. Fisher repeated that they were not adding, they were just replacing. Chairman Ryder exclaimed that he would not like to see anything like this adopted as a precedent because he thought it was bad. He further advised Mr. Fisher that his responsibility was to watch out for the unit owners and not go along and take the easiest way out. Possibly, Chairman Ryder said, they need a shed~ but that was not the way to do it. That was Chairman Ryder's opinion. Mr.'Fisher 'agreed with Chairman Ryder but reiterated that they did not add, they replaced a-.'shed. He did not know where people got the idea that they added. Mr. Fisher repeated again that it was a replacement for a shed that had been there for years. ~ - 19 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MARCH 9, 1982 Chairman Ryder said they were talking now about what was put there now. Mr. Fisher again said it was a replacement for a shed. Chairman Ryder said that was what he was talking about, what is there now, and in his opinion it did not belong there. Mr. Fisher 'informed ~he Board that he was not the President any more but he got involved in it and that was Why he was staying with it, until it is resolved one way or the other. He told the Board if they had any questions they wanted answered, he had all the answers. Chairman Ryder wanted to meet the man who said he engineered it. He alsu wanted to know to what extent it was engineered. Mark Taynton, State Certified General Contractor, Agent, 428 - 44th Street, West Palm Beach, advised the Board that what they had was a piece of recreation property zoned that way by the City. What they were asking for was an accessory use to that to store equip- ment for ~the maintenance of the property. Mr. Taynton said what they have is a ~lab engineered by a State Certified Architect to tie down a building which is designed by a State Engineer. Chair- man Ryder interjected that there was no seal on the plan. Mr. Taynton informed Chairman Ryder there are two pl-ans in the Building Department, both with raised seals, from Armin Wessel, Certified Architect, State of Florida, Mr. Taynton said the building itself is designed by a State of Florida Certified Engineer. Chairman Ryder interrupted to say 'they were like Butler buildings, and he knew how they were designed. He told Mr. Taynton, "You take them off the shelf. That's how they are designed." Chairman Ryder asked why an attempt was not made to not have it stand out like a "bump on the log" and why was it not a CB. He asked why it was not designed in keeping with the building and the shuffle- board courts and what is in the immediate vicinity. Chairman Ryder commented that,-'?~ou just take this factory made thing and you stick it out there, and that's it~" Mr. Taynton told Chairman Ryder his factory made building, by the time it is landscaped and put in place, will not be seen as an eye sore. Chairman Ryder retorted that it had to be seen, as there are two garage doors on it. Chairman Ryder reiterated that he had two garage doors facing north, so it had to be seen. He asked if they were going to put trees in front of the driveways, as they apProach the garage doors. Mr. Taynton replied, "No. Of course not." Mr. Taynton~pointed out that what they were asking for is an accessory use to a recreation zoning, which Mr. Taynton thought the Board would find allowable under the City's zoning. Chairman Ryder said there was a diff~erence in opinion. He felt that the overall objective was to retain open space as open space and not put any buildings on it. Chairman Ryder reminded everyone that - 20- MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MARCH 9, 1982 was the reason for the recreation category. Chair~n'Ryder belabored the fact that no decent attempt was made to put up something that was presentable. Again, Chairman ~yder was surprised that no one from Section 10'came out and said, "Hey, wait a minute! What are you doing?" Mr. Taynton informed~ Chairman Ryder there'was absolutely no way they could put a building up on that particular location for the use ~maintenance equipment that would ha~e a garage door. Other than that, Mr. Taynton retorted, there ~ould be no reason why the building would not be socially acceptable in the neighborhood, other than the garage door. Mr. Taynton emphatically asked, "How many houses that are built across the ~street have garage doors?" Mr. Fisher said every single~house~'does. Chairman Ryder retorted, "Wait a minute. They are not trying to hide their houses, You are saying to hide this building, you are going to ~ut trees up. They are not going to put trees up in front of garage doors." Mr. Taynton argued that' they would land- scape it similar to ths way you would a house. Chairman Ryder asked if any Members of the Board had any questions. Mr. Winter advised that they were not voting on what kind of shed is on ther~e, as that is strictly up tc the homeowners themselves. The application was "intended use of the site for ~ storage shed," Mr. Winter pointed out. If it is true that therelwas a shed on there or a prior oneand they are replacing ~t wit~a'big~'~r~one, Vice Chairman'Winte~ advised .the Board that it was~nOt~their~ ~ responsibility to determine whether or not the Board will like it or not. That is the responsibility of the homeowners and the Building Department to see to it that it £s what the homeowners want to do. Chairman Ryder could see what Vice chairman Winter was driving at, He stressed that the Board was'Planning, and Chairman Ryder could not see.- going along with something like the she~, which is flagrantly wrong. Chairman Ryder di~ not care aboUt the fact that the Board was not supposed to be in that area, He thought they were supposed to be in that area. Chairman Ryder had something ~imilar to that happen, and he did not want to see it be a precedent elsewhere. Chairman Ryder thought the unit owners should be aware when~ changesaare ~ade. Chairman Ryder said that no doubt, they have been told, "W~ need this. We have this equipment and have to put it some place." What Chair- man Ryder's point was, it was not the way to do i~. Vice Chairman Winter told Chairman Ryder what he would have liked to ha~e seen was a building u~ constructed in such a manner as to be in harmony with what is there now. Chairman Ryder agreed ths% was exactly~ right. Vice Chairman Winter repeated that it was not the Board's responsibility. Chairman Ryder still felt it was something that had to be addressed. Mr. Linkous noticed that it only covered 34% of a lot, so he felt a lot could be done. Chairman Ryder told Mr. Linkous they use it as a golf course. Mr. Linkous noted 648 square feet was allocated. - 21 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MARCH 9, 1982 Mr. Linkous said that compared to 360 feet. Chairman Ryder did not know what the allocation meant because they had the open area. He said it was contiguous to the club house, and they use it for a golf course. Chairman Ryder did not think it was subdivided in any 'way, and he said it was immediately adjacent to the club house and on the north side of the shuffleboard courts. Mr. Wandelt noted that apparently, they want to landscape around it to hide it. Chairman Ryder recalled that they talked about shrubs. He said the nature of its construction was such that he thought it was detrimental. Mr. Fisher- said it was approved construction as far as they were concerned. That was all they could go on. Mr. Linkous asked how many people lived in the units in Section 10. Mr, Fisher said there were 878 homes, so you would figure roughly that you had two to a 'home. Mr. Linkous assumed they had acquiesced to what was being put there. Mr. Fisher stated, "Of course. Every- thing is done with their approval. We don"t do anything arbitrarily." Chairman Ryder remarked that he wished he could say that about his Board of Directors, that they do not do anything arbitrarily. Mr. Fisher was just telling the Board what they do. He said they have no 'problems at all and a lot of harmony there. If there were that many people involved, Mr. Linkous assumed the people were looking over Mr~. FiSher's shoulder. M~. Fisher said if the people did not like it, they would have ~had h±'s thr.oat. Mr. Linkous asked Mr. Cannon if he understood him to say it was approved by staff. Mr. Cannon re~lied, "Yes." Mr..Wandelt asked if there were any comments, Mr. Annunziato answered that staff found no problems with the application. He explained that the aesthetics were separate from the technical. Chairman Ryder commented that up to this time, it was built prior to getting permission, so the Building Official and the Codes Enforcement Board were~involved in it. Mr. Fisher i~formed the Board that Ed Winch, Chief Inspector, Building Department, said there was no problem with it. Mr. Wandelt asked what kind of structure was there prior to this. M~. Fisher replied that it was a tin shed. He told Mr. Wandelt the shed is tin period. Mr. Fisher explained it was wood frame with metal on it. He said it was a tin shed and was not tied down. A breeze could come along and take it away over night. Mr. Fisher said Mr. Taynton came down and installed it like a house trailer. Chairman Ryder remarked that he saw the plan and the tie-downs. Mr. Fisher said the plans are differ.ent. What they originally installed was tied down like a house trailer, which~was something he could not understand. Mr. Fisher said a lot of people would live in a place tied down with four anchors and here is a shed which would only have mowing equipment in it, and it has tO be tied down like a four' story building. It did not make sense to Mr. Fisher. He said there was a tin shed there that would blow away at the first breeze to come along. - 22 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MARCH 9, 1982 Mr. Hester moved to apprQve the Boynton Leisureville Maintenance Shed. Mr. Linkous seconded the motion, and the motion' carried 6-1 with Chairman Ryder voting against the motion. ADJOURNMENT Mr. Wandelt moved, seconded by Mr. Zive, to adjourn, Motion carried 7-0, and the meeting properly adjourned at 8:55 P. M. Respectfully submitted, 'Patric~a Ramseyer ~ Recording Secretar t / ('Two Tapes) ~ - 23 -