Loading...
Minutes 01-26-82MI,MUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE .PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD HELD AT CITY HALL, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA, TUESDAY, JANUARY 26, 1982 PRESENT Simon Ryder, Chairman Garry Winter, Vice Chairman Lillian Bond Ronald Linkous Ezell Hester Simon Zive Robert Wandelt (Excused) 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, Councilman deLong, and their wives. MINUTES OF JANUARY 12, 1982 On page 20 of the above minutes, it is reported that Mr. Hester voted "No, because of the Planning Department." Mr. Hester said that what he said was that he voted "No" because the Planning Department said it would not conflict with the Comprehensive Plan. Chairman Ryder asked if this was in connection with the vote pertaining to Bethesda Memorial Hospital. Mr. Hester replied that it was. Mrs. Bond moved that the Minutes of January 12, 1982 be approved as corrected, Mr. Hester seconded the motion, and the motion carried 6-0. ANNOUNCEMENTS None. COMMUNICATIONS None. OLD BUSINESS None. NEW BUSINESS PUBLIC HEARING: 7:30 P. M. MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD JANUARY 26, 1982 Ridgewood Villas Planned Unit Development - Rezoning Applicant: Request: Location: Proposed Use: Ridgeway Builders To rezone from R-2 Duplex Residential to PUD with LUI of 5.2 NW corner of Golf Rd. and Seacrest Blvd, 100 one story dwelling units, plus recreational facilities Legal Description: Acreage (~See survey) Chairman Ryder announced that this matter had beenduly advertised for public hearing since it involves a request for rezoning. The applicant's name is Ridgeway Builders, but the current name of the development is Ridgewood Villas Planned Unit Development. Chairman Ryder advised that Planned Unit Development was not an entirely new category in the city. Many larger developments in the city came into the city on that basis. Chairman Ryder said it was intended basically to provide a sizeable development with a more regulated plan with regard to layout, recreation features, and that kind of thing~ Chairman Ryder read from the Code so the audience would have an idea of what.~PUD meant, He read: "Regulations for planned unit developments are. inte~_ded to accomplish the purposes of zoning, subdiviSion regulations, and other applicable City regulatiOns to the same degree t~at they are intended to control development on a lot to lot ~asis.~ In view of the substantial advantages, of Planned Unit Development, it is the intent of PUD regulations to p_ _r~ot.e and encourage development in this form where tracts suitable in size, location and character for the uses ~and structures proposed to be planned and developed as unified and coordinate units," Chairman Ryder further read that the definition of a planned unit development is "land under unified control, plan~ed a~d deve!oped as a whole in a single development, operation, or an approved program series of developmental operations for dWelling units and related uses and facilities. It includes a program for full pro- vision maintenance and operation of such areas, ~mprovements, facilities, and unit development, but will not be provided, operated or maintained at public expense. Tim Cannon, Assistant City Planner, presented a ~ocation map of the project. He pointed out a shaded Part, which he said was presently vacant except for a large number of trees to the north and to the west lining High Point Condominium Development~ to the east ~s Seacrest Boulevard and a number of single family homes and vacant lots, and to the south~n~ several'platted lots. Mr. Cannon showed - 2 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD JANUARY 26, 1982 where a nursery school was located. He explained that further to the south are platted lots and immediately across Golf Road, there is vacant property. Mr. Cannon informed the Board that the master plan came to the Board with~ a positive recommendation from the Technical Review Board. The applicant's master plan would put 100 apartment units on a site occupying approximately fourteen acres. There would be a total of 21 buildings on the site, with eight buildings containing six dwelling units each and thirteen buildings containing four dwelling units each. Mr. Cannon further advised that all of the buildings on the site would be one story buildings., with a maximum height of fifteen feet. The overall density of the development would be 7.2 units per acre, which would be below the 9.68 units per acre permitted under the existing R-2 zoning, Mr. Cannon continued. The setbacks on permimeter are all forty feet, which is consistent with the setbacks required for multi-family housing. Mr. Cannon said.most of the buildings are set back 25 feet from the streets and are set back 25 feet from each other. This is consistent with the front and side setbacks for the higher density residential district. Mr. Cannon told the Board that traffic circulation would be by means of a figure eight loop. They would all be two way roads.~ All of the roads would be privately owned and mainta±ned..~ Mr, Cannon pointed out the one entrance, which he said.was about 600 feet west of the intersection of Golf Road and Seacrest~ It Would be a divided entrance, meaning it would have a median strip in the middle. The streets will have street lights about every 160 feet, Mrl Cannon further said. Mr. Cannon showed an intersection where a stop sign would be and also where a stop sign would be at Golf Road. Mr. Cannon continued by saying that the water lines would be looped through the proposed development and would tie on 'to existing water mains, which he indicated on the plan. He also showed where the sewer gravity lines would exitifrom the development. Mr. Cannon advised that South Florida~Water M~nagement District reviewed and approved plans for storm water drainage. Storm water would be contained on site by means of grass swales around the perimeter of the site. Mr. Cannon said road elevations woutdl b~e a minimum of 16.5 feet, and housing pads would be a minimum of 18 feet above sea level in order to meet the South Florida Water Management District's criteria and the City's requirements. Recreation facilities would consist of five facilities, Mr. Cannon continued. He pointed out a shuffle board court, a community recreation building, swimming pool, and ~a barbeque area, and said there would be a jogging trail around the perimeter of the develop- ment. Mr. Cannon said the Planning Board found the rezoning of the planned unit development and the master plan to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The Technical Review Board, after meeting with the applicant, recommended approval of the maste~ plan, subject to the following comments, Mr. Cannon continued: - 3 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD JANUARY 26, 1982 "Police Dept. Subject to the installation of appropriate traffic control signs. Public Works Dept.: No underground garbage cans to be permitted. Recreation and Parks Dept. Recommend 1/2 credit against recreation and parks dedications requirements based on proposed package of recreational amenitie~ Planning Dept. 1. Dedication of the access easement in the northeast corner of the property to the High Point unit owners if possible. 2. Changing of the name of the proposed PUD to one which is not similar to any existing development. 3. Construction of a standard bike path on Golf Road." Mr. Cannon further advised that there were comments from Mr. Charles Walker, Palm Beach County Traffic Engineer, as follows: "1. Construct a seventy-five (75) foot left turn lane at the west approach on Golf Road with a thirty to one foot taper and a seventy (70) foot shadow. 2. Dedicate fifteen (15) feet right-of-way for'Golf Road. 3. Secure a permit from the County for any work in the right~of-way." Mr. Annunziato added that concerning the dedication and accessing, it would be desirous of the developer to dedicate the access ease- ment to the High Point unit owners, but the City ca~nnot make the High Point unit owners accept it; so it~would~be pr'edicated upon the unit owners' acceptance of the access easement'which serves their development. Cha£rman Ryder understood that the access easement contains the southerly entrance into High Point. Mr. Annunziato' said that was correct. Mr. Linkous asked Chairman Ryder if there were any street-s connect- ing that with High Point~ Chairman Ryder replied n~'~other- streets was correct. The only means of access would be the one on Golf Road. John Sanford, Landscape Architect, Planning Design, Inc., 2000 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard, West Palm Beach, Florida, stated that Ridge Point Woods Villas is the new name for the proposed develop- ment. Mr. Sanford called attentio~ to the c~ntinued work his clients, Mr. Roy E. Nickels and Mr. Arnold A. Moretto, have done in talking to the people of High Point and coming up with a workable plan that is good for all concerned in the area. - 4 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD JANUARY 26, 1982 Mr. Sanford said they were concerned about some of the setbacks on the property boundaries. They had a minimum of forty foot setbacks all the way around, with sixty feet at Golf Road. Chairman Ryder asked Mr. Sanford .if he meant from ~e right of way line when he said 40 foot setbacks. Mr. Sanford replied, "From~the right of way line. on Golf Road, we have sixty foot setbacks." He told Chairman Ryder it was forty feet on Seacrest, and also forty feet on the north property line, Mrs. Bond asked if the utility easement was included in that forty feet. Mr. Sanford answered that it was included and part of the forty foot setback. On the recreational facilities, Mr. 'Sanford informed the Board that a jogging path around the facilities was provided. Also, there will be four shuffleboard courts with a pool deck area and recreational center with a meeting room that .has a capacity of holding 150 people. Mr. Sanford further advised that the develop- ment will be a fee simple ownership with the homeowners maintain- ing all of the common areas. Like Mr. Cannon said, Mr. Sanford~told the Board they wouldall be one story buildings in clusters of four and six units, Mr. Sanford stated that they had no problem at this time with any of the conditions that were set upon the development as far as the turn lanes and the ultimate right-of~way that was requested on the Golf Road border. Everything has been discussed, Mr. Sanford continued, and the applicant has consented to al-1 of these conditions. Chairman Ryder asked Mr. Sanford.'if he was talking about the County Traffic Engineer~and also the City, Mr. Sanford replied that he was~ He said he was talking about the left turn lane for the.City, and the ultimate right-of-way requested by the County Engineer. Chairman Ryder asked Mr. Sanford if he was in accord with what the City Planner set forth. Mr. Sanford replied, "Yes sir." Mr. Sanford said he would be glad to answer any questions anyone had. Chairman Ryder advised that the normal procedure was to hear those in favor of the rezoning and then hear the people in opposition. Chairman Ryder asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor of the rezoning. Kenneth H. Kruger, Professional Engineer, Vice President of Wantman & Associates, Inc,, Consulting Engineers, 2328 South Congress, Suite 2A, West Palm Beach, Florida, wished to clarify the turn lanes on Golf Road. Mr. Kruger believed the City received a letter from Charles Walker, County Traffic Engineer. Mr. Kruger informed the Board that Golf Road is a County road. Mr. Kruger's~¢lient had no problem with meeting the Conditions the County put on them. In a discussion with the County, Mr~ Kruger said they'did not feel that a left turn on Golf Road was necessary. They did feel a right turn lane on Golf Road was necessary. The right turn would be for the traffic coming from Seacrest. Mr. Kruger said the County had mentioned a left turn lane coming from the west. Mr. Kruger did not feel that traffic was going to be sufficiently heavy to warrant that. In any case, Mr. Kruger said that would have to be proved to Charles Walker, the County Traffic Engineer, and he would have to file a decision. Chairman Ryder replied that the City would have - 5 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD JANUARY 26, 1982 to accept Mr. Walker's recommendation, Chairman Ryder noted that a deceleration lane was shown on the plans on the approach from the east, and nothing coming from the west at {he present time. Mr. Kruger advised that they will try to show Mr. Walker, County Traffic Engineer~ (through an engineering study) that nothing is necessary coming from the west. Chairman Ryder asked where the access was with relation to First Street. Mr. Annunziato, City Planner, replied~that First St.reet was much further east. Concerning the County Traffic Engineer's~comme~ts about a left turn lane off of the west approach, Mr. Annunziato commented that independently of Mr. Walker's-ability to arrive at that conclusion, it was talke~ about at the meeting of the Technical Review Board. Mr. Annunziato advised that he would rather not leave that issue hanging, from a staff point of-view, as it would' be something the City would not know about in the future. Mr. Annunziato preferred to come to some conclusive resolution tonight. Chairman Ryder repeated that the City would have to go along with the County. He pointed out that left turns are important when the roads are so narrow, because otherwise, traffic is held up behind you, and it causes accidents. Chairman Ryder said that was why there are deceleration lanes and why, in this instance, a left turn is needed to ~get traffic out of the way. Mr. Annunziato commented that another reason was that in the fore- seeable future, Golf Road will probably not be improved aS anything other than it is today, so it would be a condition of no left turn, which would persist for an unknown length of time. Mr. Annunziato pointed out that it was also an approach for emergency traffic from the west to the hospital. Mr. Kruger said at the Board's discretion, as~engineers,-they felt it was-necessary and they will bring it up with Charles Walker, County Traffic Engineer. Certainly, Mr. Kruger con-tinued, the City will have a contract with Charles Walker in the future and will not be left hanging. Chairman Ryder reiterated that the City would go on the basis of Mr. Walker's recommendation. He told Mr. Kruger he was free to pursue it further if he wi'shed, but it would have the Board's endorsement. Chairman Ryder asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor of the rezoning request. Roy E. Nickels, 4677 Ellwood Drive,'Delray Beach, one of the developers, asked if any ~embers wished to see any of their house plans at this time, Chairman Ryder indicated that going from an R-2 to a PUD is up- grading rather than downgrading, There is a difference of two units per acre dens~ty between them, the lower density being in the PUD. Rather recently, Chairman Ryder commented, another development just to the west, also adjoining High Point and on the west side of 23rd, - 6 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD JANUARY 26, 1982 was approved as a PUD. Chairman Ryder informed the Board that it was Bethesda Park. Chairman Ryder remarked that both were low profile developments and could hardly be constituted as having a downgrading effect. Chairman Ryder asked if anyone wished to appear in opposition to the rezoning request. Someone in the audience stood up and said he wished to speak IN FAVOR of the request. Chairman Ryder told him to come forward, as he did not realize-anyone'else wished to speak about it. Julian Patrick, 2585 S. W. 10th Street, Boynton Beach, owner of the property immediately adjacent to the planned PUD, which is a little school called Boynton Academy, came forward. He highly recommended approval of the PUD, as laid out. However, Mr. Patrick told the Board if they would look at the rendering of the planned development, they would notice that his property (which was in the northwest corner, just south of the PUD) and Grace Schraut~s property (which is the two lots £mme~iately in front and east of S. W. 1st Street) are being placed in ~a position of being in a small pocket of R-2 zoning, Mr. PatriCk said even though he and Mrs, Schraut agreed With the PUD concept, they wanted to plac9 the Planning and Zoning Board on notice that they collectively intend to make a request to upgrade their three lots to professional use only. Mr. Patrick told the Board that if they had a larger map, they would see that to the east, on S. E. 23rd (more to the east on Seacrest Boulevard), on both sides of the street, backed up to residential property on both sides, C-1 zoning' has been declared and is in effeCt for professional use only, To the south and on the west side of Seacrest, all the way down to Bethesda Hospital~ it is again Professional'Use only, Mr. Patrick pointed out. Mr. Patrick and Mrs. Schraut wished to support PUD, because they thought it was a low profile development, They enjoy and like the left turn plan and the traffic decongestment that is going to be occurring there, so Mr. Patrick said he and Mrs. Schraut would have no objection to what Ridgewood Developers were proposing. Mr. Patrick said he and Mrs. Schraut would anticipate and appreciate the Board's consideration.of the fact'that the total piece of property that he referred to and the three owners have a community or a common interest in what happens in that area. Mr. Patrick wanted to make a request, and said the three owners are in the preparation of making a formal request, and want the Board to understand that it is forthcoming, as they have a narrow strip there. Mr. Patrick told the Board they do not want any high rises, 7~lls, or U-Tote~Ms there, but they want consideration when they present the formal petition for that strip to be zoned C-1 Professional Use only. Chairman Ryder informed Mr. Patrick that when he presents the petition, he will get due consideration. Ben Uleck, Vice President, Boynton Leisureville Association, - 7 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD JANUARY 26, 1982 reminded the Board of then.water shortage, He asked the Board if there would be enough water to supply the new developments. .Mr. Uleck understood there will be a rationing of'water. Chairman Ryder replied that presently, there is no problem. If that is a consideration, Chairman Ryder said we may have to stop giving water to people outside of the city. Chairman Ryder did not feel that was a valid consideration. Mr. Uleck reiterated that he understood there will be a shortage of water. Mr. Annunziato advised that the City 'has an ongoing~capital improve- ments program~ and it is in the Comprehensive Plan to locate an additional water treatment plant somewhere in the area of Military Trail and 2nd Avenue, although there is no specific location. The City is constantly in the position of upgrading its capacity~well- wise, and the plant capacity is now 16 million gallons. Mr. Annunziato said the water situation is going to continue to grow. Grace Schraut, 2424 Nor-th Federal Highway, Boynton Beach, the owner of LOts 44 and 45 '(the two corner lo~ts), noted that the planner said he was going to'~ut the seWage through ~here.~'-~ 'Mrs. Schraut said he pointed to her lot. Mr. Annunziato asked'Mr. Cannon to point out the dedicated right- of-way. Mr. Annunziato explained that it was the developer's intention, consistent with the City's plans, to construct a gravity line in that publicly dedicated right-of-way. Mrs. Schraut asked if that would be a road or covered. Mr, Annunziat© replied that the nature of the restoration will be equal or better. Mrs. Schraut was not against the program but was against being cut off in that manner. She commented that it'would be taken care of later on. Bob Foot appeared before the Board and said he and his wife live at 2400 S. W. 1st Street, Boynton Beach~ and they were in favor of the PUD as delineated exactly-here- tonight. Mr. Foot spoke in concern of emergency vehicles coming over the hill eastbound if there is not a left turn lane for traffic waiting to turn north into the development. As Mr. Foot and his wife look from their kitchen window, Mr. Foot said theY could see prospects of rear end collisions on that section of~Golf Road. Mr. and Mrs. Foot urged the Board to consider, from the point of view Of the hospital's needs or ambulances, a need for a left turn lane at that point. Mr. Foot felt the density proposed for the propertY was certainly in keeping with the neighborhood and they favored the clustering of the villas as p~oposed. Mr. Foot said they look good to them. They also appreciated the consideration that was given to drainage on the property. The density is very low, and Mr. Foot said it appeared that they had tried to contain the water on the property. Chairman Ryder pointed out that out of the little over 13 acres, 75% will be open area, which is a high figure. He asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor of the request and received no - 8 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND !s respo e. ZONING BOARD JANUARY 26, 1982 Chairman Ryder asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition to the proposal. Should *Bert Peter, unit owner~ in Section 4, High Point, who lives~ at be Bert 165-A High Point Boulevard North, Boynton .Beach, wished to bring ....... Peter, the Board"s attentio~ to~ the drainage' and water problem which now Pro- exists at the south entrance of their community. Mr. Peter fess- revie'~ed the drawings this morning in the Engineering Department ional and fDund that the level from the west side to the' east was from Engi- 28.55 down to 17.77. Chairman Ryder agreed that there was a neer. steep grade going westward. The area Mr. Peter was talking about See is a~ ~orner which is marked ingress and egress~'easement. Chair- / ~ 2/9/ man R zder explained that was the entrance. 1982 Minutes Mr' P ~ter saidi%¥~K~s~~>asl6.,1 elevation, which he said meant they ~ere about one foot below the grading, Since they ~.i = have a water problem already because water stays in the area of the entrance for eight hours with no seepage, Mr. Peter asked the BDard to consider that they have some kind of retaining' wall, because of the elevation being 1-1~2 feet higher on the villas' property, so High Point will not get any more water. Mr. Peter was c~ncerned that water would actually get into the first build- ing, as they are very low on that corner. Mr. P told six f openi Speak Board water it wa own p eter further said that when Squire Hill was put up, they were the drainage was.not blocked~an~way, but it was built up eet, and they have conditions where they do not have many ngs in the ground to get rid of the water. ing for High Point Section 4, Mr. Peter requested that the consider his comments informing the Board that there is a problem right now. Chairman Ryder' informed Mr. Peter that s totally up to the developer to contain the water on his roperty. Chairman Ryder asked to hear from the applicant in that regard. Mr. L the p to th to th north Mr. Z inkous asked Mr. Peter if Section 4 was directly north of roposed development. Mr, Peter answered thmt it'was adjacent e north boundary line. Mr. Linkous asked if he was referring e northeast entrance. Mr. Peter said he was referring to the east corner. Mrs. Bond said it would be the south entrance. ive wanted to hear from the developer. Kenne conta Ryder where Ryder Mr. K be ke going by gr All t Kruger advised. th H. Kruger, Professional Engineer, stated that they are ining all the storm run off directly on the site. Chairman asked what the situation was where you meet the driveway, Mr~ Peter talked about the grading being about 16. Chairman asked if they were about the same level there or higher. ruger replied that by grading around that corner, they would eping the water 'inside. Chairman Ryder asked how they were to do that, by gutter or curb. Mr. Kruger said it would be ading or dirt. No more would be run towards the corner. he run off would be toward the center of the project, Mr. Mr. Annunziato wondered where the water was - 9 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD JANUARY 26, 1982 draining to now, or does it drain at all. Mr. Kruger was not sure, as he had not studied the corner, Mr. Kruger said they were not doing anything to the existing corner there, only just lately keeping the.water away from that corner within their project. Chairman Ryder said that was what Mr. Peter was conerned abQut. Mr. Annunziato was curious as to whether the access easement was draining southward or westward. Mr. Kruger asked if Mr. Annunziato meant'naturally now, and Mr. Annunziato replied, "Yes." Mr. Kruger said he would have to double check. Ghairman Ryder asked if they had any paved area at that point, or if it was sodd~ed over. Mr. Kruger said there was a deadend. Mr. Annunziato asked how far that would be from the pavement of the driveway that exists. Mr. Kruger was checking the plans. Chair- man Ryder asked if there was any catch basins in the i~mediate vicinity~ Mr. Kruger informed the Board that ther.e were no catch basins, The grading plan calls for compressed areas to run the water in. Chairman Ryder asked if they were all sodded areas. Mr. Kruger replied that they were grassed, Mr. Kruger further said there would be no street inlets per se. Chairman Ryder told Mr. Kruger that the Board would have to have his assurance that they will not cause any water to go into the adjacent areas, Mr. Kruger told the Board they had that assurance, Mr. Kruger answered Mr. Annun'ziato's question by saying it looked Bike a lower pocket compared to'the rest .of the site at the corner where the access easement is. The rest of the site is around elevation 17. Mr, Kruger said they did.'not have the elevations right on the access easement itself, but it looked like it was probably around 16 feet, Chairman Ryder suggested they study the possibility of a low curb, if there would be a possibility that it would flow over. Mr. Kruger added that their lowest'areas ~might be depressed down to elevation 15, so there is the possibility that some of the water may be able to percolate away from that access easement. Rather than isolating the access easement, Mr. Kruger thought it may be incorporated into the drainage. Chairman Ryder recommended they study it further. Mr. Linkous asked Mr. Kruger if he was saying ~t~Ywould alleviate some of the water, Mr. Zive asked Mr. Kruger if he would give assurance that he would take care of~it. Mr. Kruger could not say that they would.take.~care of an existing condition. Chairman Ryder agreed that the Board could not expect them to take care of an existing condition but he said the Board could expect that all of the water on the development is contained~within the development. Mr. Kruger assured the Board of that. Mr. P~e~i 'failed to mention that the problem was that the exit is lower than Seacrest Avenue. When Seacrest Avenue was finished, the entrance to High Point was below Seacrest Avenue, so there is no possibility for the water to get out when it'gets flooded. - 10 - MI~NUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD JANUARY 26, 1982 Mr, Peter further said that it takes eight hours for the water to sink in. Mr, Peter informed the Board that the unit owner who has the corner lot would testify to that, Since there were some questions on the elevations, which~Mr. Peter reviewed in the morning of January 26, Mr. Peter' suggested that the Board table it until they could see what he was talking about. Chairman Ryder advised.'that it was a condition of where the drive- way meets the roadway; and where the driveway of High Point meets the roadway, there was nothing the Board could expect the applicant to do~.about it. Mr. Peter repeated that what he did not say in his first presentation was that SeacrestAvenue is higher than the point where the situation is, so there is no"drainage. Mr. Peter liked Chairman Ryder's suggestion where there would be a gutter or something to prevent the water fro~ going further, or a retaining wall. Chairman Ryder advised that it should be only to the extent that the applicant can accomplish what they have to do any- way. He told Mr. Peter the Board cannot ask the applicant to do something to correct a situation that has been there all along, but the Board could insist that they make sure that none of the water on their property goes on Mr. Peter's property. William Coleman, 200 High Point Boulevard, Boynton Beach, asked the deVeloper why the property was all excavated before they got their OK from the City, Carmen Annunziato, City Planner, answered that the developer had to seek a tree permit in order to cut the lines to get the topographical elevations in order to prepare the drain- age that was required for submittal of the master plan. Mr. Coleman said after the property was bulldozed, he had some visitors one night from 23rd Avenue. Mr. Coleman said "they ~id quite a job" on his property and his house, "as far as taking stuff that really did not belong to them." Chairman Ryder told Mr. Cole~an.~the City has a Tree Ordinance at the present time, which is fairly new, and studies are made as to what extent trees can be saved. Mr. Coleman asked why it was done so far in advance. The property was all bulldozed last October. Chairman Ryder replied that the City requires that. Mr. Coleman asked if it was required six months~ ahead of time. Chairman Ryder answered, "Not necessarily, but the study has to be made to see what trees can be spared." Mr. Annunziato said the trees were cut in certain areas so that the survey teams could go in and prepare a topographic map, which was required in order to prepare the drainage, as a part of the.master plan submission, so the development is a long %i~e in'the making. Mr. Annunziato explained that .developments generally are a long time in the making. Mr. Coleman wanted to see some of the trees saved. Chairman Ryder informed Mr. Coleman the plans go before the Community Appearance Board and they insist on proper landscaping, Chairman Ryder said the Community Appearance Board always does a good job. - 11 - MINUTES - PLANN!N~ AND ZONING BOARD JANUARY 26, 1982 Mr. William H. Humphreys, 143 S. W. 24th Avenue, Boynton Beach, said the request sounded'like an improvement over the present R-2. He thought it looked as though it was well planned. Mr. Humphreys noted that the traffic situation had been discussed with turn lanes, etc. He said no matter wh~t is done, it will be a critical area, because even though the speed limit is 35 ~.p.h., cars are usually doing 15 to 20 m.p.h, in excess of that. Mr. Humphreys hoped the turn lanes would take care of the situation. Mr. Hu/nphreys felt'the turn lane out of High Point would take some of the load off of that entrance. Someone shouted out, "Oh no, nothing doing." Mr. Humphreys said he just pointed out. it might help if it is accepted. Mr. Humphreys wondered why that particular entrance was chosen as opposed to going' out onto'$ea'crest as most of the.developments are. Mr. Humphreys said the turn lane will take some of the area, possibly the easement on 23rd. Mr. Humphreys heard that 23rd w~s not planned to be changed in the future, but he thought that was a serious conslderatlo . Mr. Humphreys asked the developer if the community ~o~ld be an adult community. Mr. Kruger said it-~would, Mr-'Humph~eys~said-'s~meday the families around here would reach the bt'caking point because he did not know where they were going to live. Mr. Humphreys~aid the properties at the corner which' 'are undeveloped at this point and the nursery school ~where the owners intend to ask for professional use of the property) were brought up this evening. Mr. Humphreys noted that one thing is happening in'Boynton Beach that he has seen over the years. ~i~That is, that sometimes the rezoning happens, and along 23rd and Seacrest things are rezoned to professional buildings and then they get away from some of the buffer areas that are talked about in zonings, Mr. Humphreys stated he would hate to see several two story professional build- ings go up on the corners that would affect this new development. Chairman Ryder reminded Mr.~Humphreys'tt~at the Cityis not confronted with that at the present time. Chairman Ryder added that right now the Board is not required to consider anything until a formal application is made. James Warnke, 617 Lakeside Harbor, Boynton Beach, asked the applicant if any study had been made on the increase in the public utilities, fire, pOlice, water, ~sewer, and garbage on the taxpayers as to the amount of new utility costs generated as opposed to the new taxes that would be collected from this neighborhOod in detail. Chairman Ryder remarked, "That's ~ broad field, isn't it Mr. Warnke?" Mr. Warnke replied, "It certainly is." Mr. Warnke said when new developments go in, they speak in generalties and they say, "Wonderful! We"re going to have all of these new taxes, but will the new taxes generated by a spot zoning change in our Master Plan be sufficient to take care of the costs of the increased'utilities?" Mr. Warnke wanted to see that the applicant put that out in detail as to what they have on record to offset the cost to the City and to the taxpayers and what benefit a spot z~ning change would be to the citizens of Boynton Beach. Chairman Ryder told Mr. W~rnke the City has - 12 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD JANUARY 26, 1982 never asked anyone else to do it in the past, and he did not see that the City would ask what Mr. Warnke is asking at this time. Mr. Warnke thought it.'was certainly in line to ask that. Chairman Ryder observed that Mr. Warnke called it "spot zoning" Chairman Ryder thought he made the point, and felt other people recognized the fact, that it is not spot zoning~but upgrading. Chairman Ryder asked if anyone else.wished to speak. There was no response. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Mrs. Bond moved that Ridgewood Villas Planned Unit Development be rezoned from R-2 Duplex Residential to~ PUD with LUI of 5,2, subject to staff coImments and subject to the connnents of Charles Walker, County Traffic. Engineer. The motion was seconded by Mr. Linkous, and carried 6-0. SUBDIVISIONS None. SITE PLANS Project Name: Agent: Owner: Location: Description: Burger King Restaurant~Modification Rafael Pena Burger King Corporation SE 18th Avenue at U. S. 1 (SW corner) Addition of outdoor cooler Mr. Tim Cannon, Assistant City Planner, presented a blueprint showing the modification to the site plan, which he said was very simPle. On the original site plan, Mr. Cannon said the applicant failed to indicate where their cooler would be. On the modifica- tion, the applicant showed the cooler. Mr. Cannon informed the Board that the cooler is about 10x20 feet and is on the rear of the building. He showed where the cooler woUld be located, and told the Board that the site plan comes to the Board with a positive recommendation from the Technical Review Board with no comments. Mr. Annunziato said he had no comments, as it is a very minor modification (somewhat of an afterthought on the part of the applicantl. Mr. Rafael Pena, Site Engineer for Burger King, had nothing to add. There were no questions from the Board. No discussion. Mr. Hester moved to approve the site plan, seconded by Mr. Linkous. The motion carried 6-0. Discussion and Recommendations Proposed Ordinances relating tO a Referendl!m on Heiqht RestriCtions - 13 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD JANUARY 26, 1982 "Ordinance No. 82-1 "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA, PNDPOS1/gS 'THE ADOPTION BY REFERENDUM VOTE OF THE ~.FCTORS OF THE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH BY ORDINANCE OF APPENDIX A !ZONING', S~CTION 4 'GENERAL PROVISIONS' (F) 'HEIGHT L//~ITATIONS AND EXCEP- TIONS' OF THE ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES." "Ordinance No. 82-5 "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CI~Y COUNCIL OF 'THE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA, PROPOSING THE AME%~MENT BY REFERENDUM VOTE OF THE ELECTORS OF THE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH BY ORDINANCE OF APPENDIX A 'ZON/NG', S~CTION 4, 'GENERAL PROVISIONS' (F) 'HEIGHT LIMITATIONS AND EXCEPTIONS', SUBS~IONS 1, 2 AN~ 3, OF THE ORDIBIANCES OF THE CITY OF BOYhIII~ BEACH; TO PROVIDE THAT T~ EXISTING HEIGHT LIMITA- TION OF 45 FEET SHALl. APPLY TO ALL ZONED DISTRICTS OF THE CITY AREA, WHICH IS COMPOSED OF LAND NOW WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS AND OTHER lANDS WHICH MAY BE ANNEXED INTO THE CITY AT A FUTURE DATE; PROVIDING AN EFFSL~IVE DATE A5~ FOR OTHER PURPOSES." Chairman Ryder informed the Board that this item related to two pending referendums, which he thought everyone was f.a~niliar with. Chairman Ryder explained that since the referendums constitute a land development regulation, it becomes incumbent upon the local planning agency or the Planning and' Zoning Board (~the Board wears both'hats) to review these proposals f~om that stand- point and make suitable recommendations. Chairman.Ryder mentioned that bo~k Ordinances have appeared before public hearings and City Council. They have both had their first reading. Chairman Ryder advised the Board that it was not their objective or obligation at this time to go into the merits of the referendums. It was merely their obligation to determine to what extent they are land development regulations and that they are not in conflict with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. Chairman Ryder told the Board 82-1 was the Ordinance for.the referendum which is equivalent to an existing Council Ordinance limiting the height of all structures in the City of Boynton Beach to 45 feet. Chairman Ryder advised that Ordinance 82-5 again has general limitation of' 45 feet with the. exception of two areas (downtown and in the reserve annexation area, possibly where the DeBartolo Mall will be constructed). Chairman Ryder said the~ordinanees did not require any further public participation at this meeting. Chairman Ryder told the Board they had to make a determination as to whether one or the other or both ordinanceS would appear on the ballot. He advised that, again, was up to the City Council and there would be a Special Council Meeting on Friday, January 29, in that regard. - 14 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD JANUARY 26, 1982 Mr. Carmen Annunziato, City Planner, read from'pa~agraPh-~.2~ Chapter 163.3194 Legal status of comprehensive plan, Florida Statutes 1981, as follows: "(2) (a) After a cc~prehensive plan for the area, or element or portion thereof,- is adopted by the governing body, no land develop- ment regulation, land development code, or amendment thereto, shall be adopted by the governing body until such regulation, code, or amend- ment has been referred either to the local planning agency or to a separate zoning commission created under the authority ~f s. 163.183 for review and recc~m~endation as to the relationship of such proposal to the adopted c~mprehensive plan or element or portion thereof..." "(b) For purposes of this subsection, 'land development regulations' or 'regulations for the development of ~land' include any lOCal government zoning, subdivision, building and c~nstruction, or other regulations controlling the development of land ..... " It appeared to Mr. Annunziato that the review that is required of the Planning and Zoning Board is for consistency of %he proposed Ordinances with the Comprehensive Plan, not necessarily the merits of the proposed Ordinances. Since Ordinance 82-1 has been in existence all along, Chairman Ryder said, apparently, it is part of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. He stated that the question then would be whether Ordinance 82~.5 wOuld fall into that category. Chairman Ryder did not see how the Board could find that Ordinance 82-5 did not fall into the category because he thought both Ordinances were equal in regard to land development regulations. Mr. Zive asked if there were any suggestions the Board should give to the City Council. Chai~man'Ryder asked Mr. Zive if he meant in favor of one or ~the other. Mr. Zive replied that was right, Chairman Ryder advised him, "No." Chairman Ryder explained that'Council had already acted on it and had their first reading. The second readings on both ordinances would be on Friday,~January 29, and the Council is 'in the process of considering it at this point, so.there was no .point in the Board making a recommendation. Mr. Zive asked what the Board was voting on. Chairman Ryder said She Board~was.voting~on whether both of the amendments constitute land development regulations consistent with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. Mr, Winter noted they were speaking of height limitations, He asked if it was incorporated in the ordinances the number of stories a~ibu±lding could have. Mr. Annunziato replied that the text of the two ordinances was almost the same except for 82-5, which has two areas (a downtown area and a western area) in which the effect of the referendum, if approved, would not be applicable. Neither ordinance suggests, at this point, any change, so the regulation which is in the Zoning Code right now would be applicable, Mr. Annunziato advised. He added, "That would be 45 feet, or 4 stories." Mr, Winter asked if that would also apply in 82-5. Mr. Annunziato - 15 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD JANUARY 26, 1982 answered that would be 82-5. Mr. Annunziato advised that 82.1 proposed that the effect of the referendum would be for every zoning classification over the entire City. 8 -5 exempts two areas but those two areas, at this point and t-ime, would still be regulated by 45 feet or four stories. Mr. Zive asked if the Board voted that 45 fee~ and the Board wants that to stay, would the r~ they only had 45 feet to vote on. Mr. Annunz was speaking on what concerned the merits of or the other, Mr. ~Annunziato advised that Co~ spoken, in that both of the ordinances have goI hearing procedure% and both have'been approve~ Mr. Annunz[ato said the administration is not the merits of each'because this is city polic~ is on the books ~ferendum state that .ato thought Mr. Z ire .~ither one ordinance ,ncil has already ~e through public [ at first reading. going to discuss Mr. Hester asked Mr. Annunziato if he was say~ feet area, as it is now, referendum passed, al go higher than 45 feet would st~ill have to coi Council to get approval. Mr. Hester~ said he 82-5. Mr. Annunziato replied that under 82-.5~ situation. The Council would have the prerog~ areas (the downtown and the westward commerci~ the land development regulations. Mr. Winter referendum would not prevail over those two a~ said that was correct. .ng that if the 45 ~yone that wanted to ~e through the ~as talking about that woul.d be the [tire ouer those two ~1 area) of changing remarked that the ~eas. Mr. Annunziato Mrs. Bond observed that there is a lot of. land that eventually will be built as residential that is still in the County. She asked what will happen if a developer comes along and builds five or six stories in that area and then, in the future, decides to be incorporated into the City, She could not see where the ordinance would make any difference in that event. Chairman Ryder thought the Board was going far afield, probably because he attended all of the Council meetings and heard public input and input from the Council. He said th Board was not confronted with at this time. motion to the effect that in each instance th~ a land development regulation and is in keepil Comprehensive Plan was in order. Mr. Linkous was any doubt about the fact that they were i~ Comprehensive Plan. Chairman Ryder pointed o~ Board was required to do at this time, and th~ do it by Florida State Statutes. ~se were things the ~hairman Ryder said a referendum concerns ~g with the ~ did not think there keeping with the ~t that was all the y were required to Mr. Linkous asked if the Board of Adjustment ~ould have the authority to counteract in any~way,~.i. Mr, Annu~ziato replied that with respect to either ordinance, for tho'se a~eas'that'would be affected by the referendum,' if it were approved, City ~ttorney Vance indicated that the Board of Adjustment Would still have the authority to grant va'riances, ~owever, Mr. Annunziato thought it woUld be difficult to secure a variance. Mr. Linkous was concerned that twenty or thirty~years from now, should something occur like a fifty foot tower, there could be a leeway through the Board of Adjustment. Chairman Ryder said that had been the procedure in the past. - 16 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD JANUARY 26, 1982 Mr. Linkous moved to approve Ordinance 82-1 as being consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Hester seconded the motion. No discussion. The motion carried 6-0. Mr. Linkous moved that Ordinance 82-5 be accepted as being consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Hester seconded the motion. No discussion. The motion carried 4-2, with Mr. Zive and Mr. Winter voting against the motion. ADJOURNMENT Mr. Zive moved, seconded by Mr. Linkous to adjourn. was properly adjourned at 8:45 P? M. The meeting Respectfull itted, Patricia.Ramseye~ Recording'Secretary (Two Tapes) - 17 -