Loading...
Minutes 11-25-80MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING & ZONING BOARD HELD AT CITY HALL, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA, NOVEMBER 25, 1980 PRESENT Arnold Thompson, Chairman Sidney Bernstein Lillian Bond Simon Ryder Garry Winter Carmen Annunziato, City Planner Craig Grabeel, Asst. City Planner ABSENT Fred DiSalle, Vice Chairman Wayne Drew Following the Local Planning Agency Public Hearing, Chairman Thompson called the Planning & Zoning Board meeting to order at 8:20 P. M. MINUTES OF OCTOBER 28, 1980 Mr. Bernstein made a motion to accept the minutes as drafted, seconded by Mr. Winter. No discussion. Motion carried 4-0 with Mrs. Bond abstaining. ANNOUNCEMENTS Mr. Annunziato referred to distributing additional agenda material and advised it would be incorporated into the re- view. Also, there is a packet of zoning book new pages ,which should be incorporated into the zoning code. PUBLIC HEARINGS Zoning Ordinance Amendment Proposed amendment to Appendix A (Zoning Regulations), of the Code of the City of Boynton Beach, Florida, as amended, Section 11, "Supplemental Regulations" to provide for regu- lations for parking of automobiles for condominium recrea- tional buildings. Mr. Annunziato referred to submitting a proposal and advised it is the proposal as presented by the Planning & Zoning Board but the wording was changed for clarification and the substance is as originally proposed. This proposal is to add a new cate- gory in the offstreet parking section concerning parking re- quirements for condominium recreational buildings. He then read the following requirements proposed: 1. .'No parking spaces required for all units within 500 foot radius; MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD NOVEMBER 25, 1980 2. One space required for every four units within 500 to 800 foot radius; 3. One space for every two units outside the 800 foot radius; and, 4. Total required parking to be no more than one space for every four persons, based on a maximum occupancy of fifteen square foot per person for assembly area; however, a minimum of six parking spaces will be re- quired for each condominium recreational building. Chairman Thompson asked if anyone cared to speak in favor of these parking requirements for condominium recreational build- ings and received no response. He asked if anyone cared to speak in opposition to this proposed zoning ordinance amend- ment for parking requirements for condominium recreational buildings and received no response. He then declared the public hearing closed. Mr. Ryder stated that it has been called to his attention that the term "condominium" is limited. He suggests that "condo- minium'' be removed and this be parking requirements for recrea- tional buildings. Mr. Annunziato replied there may be some misunderstanding ~with just saying recreational buildings such as recreational buildings for profit may want to fit into this category. He suggests that it be stated: "Recreational build- ings for housing developments". Mr. Ryder agreed. Mr. Bernstein added that the last sentence in paragraph four would have to be changed. Mr. Ryder moved that this Board recommend to the City Council approval of the proposed amendment to Appendix A (Zoning Regulations), of the Code of the City of Boynton Beach, Florida, as amended, Section 11, "Supplemental Regulations" to provide for regulations for parking of automobiles for recreational buildings in housing developments. Mr. Winter seconded the motion. No discussion. Motion carried 5-0. Rezoning Applicant: Location: Request: Gulf Oil Company, U. S. (L. L. McDaniel, Agent) 1500 South Seacrest Blvd. To rezone from C-2 Neighborhood Commercial to C-3 Community Commercial Mr. Annunziato informed the Board that this is the existing Gulf gas station located on the northeast corner of Woolbright Road & Seacrest Boulevard. The request is to rezone from C-2 to C-3 based on an attempt to perform modifications. The applicant has requested this to perform modifications to up- grade the facility. Structural modifications cannot be made in accordance with the C-2 zone. -2- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD NOVEMBER 25, 1980 Chairman Thompson asked if anyone in the audience cared to speak in favor of this rezoning request and Mr. Bill Dube with Gulf Oil Company stated the main purpose for this re- quest for rezoning from C-2 to C-3 is to add a mansard roof to the existing facility. This change is requested in order to update the property and make it more aesthetically pleas- ing to the community. The lighting would also be improved. There would be no change in the operation. He showed photo- graphs of the existing building and of the type of roof pro- posed. The basic application is for beautification and modi- fication of the existing structure. Chairman Thompson ascertained there were no questions from the Board members for Mr~ Dube and asked if anyone else in the audience cared to speak in favor of this rezoning request and received no response. He asked if anyone cared to speak in opposition to this rezoning request and received no re- sponse. He then declared the public hearing closed. Mr. Annunziato stated he would like to see what the applicant proposes occur, but not with the zoning change. However, there is no other avenue to go since this is a Structural change. He explained that the only changes which can be made under the present zoning are those dealing with plumb- ing, electrical, and-improvements under 25% of the assessed value. It is a shame the applicant cannot make these improve- ments under the existing zoning. This would be spot zoning and contrary to proper planning principles. It is apparent with the right-of-way taking which has occurred, the gas station is deficient even though profitable. The western pump almost requires automobiles to encroach on the side- walk. His recommendation is this rezoning be denied since it is contrary to the Comprehensive Plan and would constitute spot zoning and he believes the station is deficient because of not enough area to properly have this kind of operation. Mr. Ryder commented that it is admirable to dress up a loca- tion, but in viewing the site, the north side is zoned C-2 with R-2 further north and it is apparent from the develop- ment taking place that it is in accordance with the zoning. The impact must be considered on the rest of the neighborhood and also on the Comprehensive Plan. He does not think it is in the public interest to consider this change, bearing in mind that in going to C-3, this is picking one corner and even though not much change is anticipated, what we are doing is making this C-3 subject to all permissive uses in the zoning regulations. He agrees this application should be denied. -3- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD NOVEMBER 25, 1980 Chairman Thompson added that in the recent past, we did change the C-3 zoning to allow a number of uses previously in C-4, which many would not be conducive to this corner lot. In the future, it could be sold and could be used for any existing uses permissable in C-3. He has reservations about this. He agrees what is proposed is a good idea, but cannot go along with it under the present circumstances. Mr. Bernstein asked whether the Gulf Oil Company can make the change under the C-2 provisions by asking for an exception to the C-2 regulations without a request for a zoning change and Mr. Annunziato replied this has come up whether a variance procedure would be an avenue acceptable to the zoning code. In his opinion, no variance avenue exists. A variance to structurally alter a non-conforming use is tantamount to a zoning change. Our ordinance has been interpretted not to provide for use variances and in his opinion, this is what this would be. Mr. Ryder moved that this Board recommend to the City Council denial of the application on behalf of Gulf Oil Company, 1500 South Seacrest Boulevard, to rezone from C-2 Neighborhood Com- mercial to C-3 Community Commercial. Mrs. Bond seconded the motion. Under discussion, Mr. Annunziato asked if he would like to include his reasons for denial and Mr. Ryder replied that primarily it is not compatible with the development that now exists in the immediate vicinity and it is an example of spot zoning. Motion carried 5-0. SITE PLAN APPROVAL Applicant: Location: Legal Description: Project Description: F & R Builders, Inc. (Serafin Leal, Agent) North Congress Avenue at LWDD Canal #20 Acreage Recreational Facilities Mr. Grabeel showed the site plan and explained the location. He pointed out that although a clubhouse was not shown on the original plan, it was required by the Board and the developer agreed and has shown the modifications for this. He explained the access to the building and pointed out the parking area. The zoning is PUD. The total recreation site is about 2½ acres. The building is 2,900 square feet. Parking was computed at 26 required spaces and the developer is providing 30 spaces. Mr. Ryder asked if the parking requirements are in accordance with the ordinance just discussed and Mr. Grabeel replied af- firmatively. -4- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD NOVEMBER 25, ~980 Mr. Grabeel continued that the recreational area will be con- structed with the first phase of units and the developer has stated their intent is as follows: Construction of the recreational facilities will be ini- tiated at the same time that the construction of the first group (not counting the models) of residential units is started. Ail recreational facilities planned for the site will be completed within 12 months from the starting date. Mr. Bernstein asked how many units this building will serve and Mr. Bill Pitts replied 184. Mr. Annunziato added this facility is intended to serve part of Phase II and Mr. Pitts agreed that it will serve a portion, but other facilities are planned. Mr. Bill Pitts, F & R Builders, informed the Board that this first phase of this development consists of 184 units. This recreational facility is designed primarily for this phase. The second phase is site planned for 350 units with additional recreational facilities. The recreational facilities as planned will be more than adequate and will be adaptable to the use of the people. Mrs. Bond clarified that the residents can use any of the recreation areas and Mr. Pitts agreed this was correct. Mr. Annunziato added this is in direct response to the concerns raised by the Planning & Zoning Board. Mrs. Bond asked how many square feet will each unit have and Mr. Pitts explained there will be three different model types with the smallest being 1,015 square feet, then 1,050 square feet and the third size will be 1,250 square feet. Mr. Grabeel referred to the staff comments and noted that the Utility Department required water service to be shown, and the Police Department noted subject to sidewalk on N. W. 34th Avenue and lighting plan for the recreational and parking areas. It is recommended this be approved subject to staff comments. Mr. Pitts stated this is the first time he is aware of these staff comments, but does not see anything to cause concern on their part. They will provide lighting and submit sidewalk detail. Mr. Bernstein asked if these are condominium units and Mr. Pitts replied negatively, but are fee simple. Mrs. Bond made a motion to approve the site plan for the recreational facilities for F & R Builders on North Congress Avenue with staff comments. Mr. Bernstein seconded the mo- tion. No discussion. Motion carried 5-0. -5- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD NOVEMBER 25, 1980 Applicant: Location: Legal Description: Project Description: Lee A,~ Walker Company N. E. 17th Avenue and N. E. 4th Street Acreage 44 two bedroom, two bath units in 8 build- ings plus meeting room and recreational facilities Mr. Grabeel explained the location, plan and access to the proposed buildings. He also pointed out the clubhouse and pool. The total number of units is 44 for an overall density of 10.47 per acre on 4.2 acres. The total building area is 30,880 square feet. 88 parking spaces are required and the developer is proposing 98 spaces. Mr. Lee Walker, 758 N. E. Harbor Drive, Boca Raton, stated he feels this will be a nice addition to the City. This property has been hampered with foreclosures. He thinks it would be good for the City to approve this site plan. They are prepared to move ahead as quickly as they can, now they have decided to go ahead with a separate association instead of being involved with Four Sea Suns. There is a need for housing in this area. Chairman Thompson clarified that this is to the west of Four Sea Suns and Mr. Walker agreed. Mr. Ryder referred to no park- ing being provided for the clubhouse and Mr. Annunziato pointed out that eight parking spaces are provided to the west of the clubhouse. Mr. Annunziato stated he would like to give the historical background of this property. A site plan was presented for this as an addition to Four Sea Suns, but there were several problems. However, two buildings were completed. This is similar to the original site plan, but some change,was made along the south border. The building locations have not changed. The difference is this proposal is separate from the Four Sea Suns. ~t shares no recreational facilities and stands on its own. However, the road system does tie into the Four Sea Suns and he explained how primary access will be from 4th Street crossing the Four Sea Suns Convalescent Home. Through Mr. Walker's attorney, an attempt has been made to re- search rights of access through parts of N. E. 3rd Court as it projects north of S. Circle Drive and serves properties not part of Four Sea Suns. There is free passage through Four Sea Suns. Mr. Walker's attorney has not been able to produce a legal document granting that access, but hopes to have it for the City Council. He pointed out how there does appear to be access to the west. -6- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD NOVEMBER 25, 1980 Mr. Bernstein asked if we have gotten an opinion from our City Attorney on this and Mr. Annunziato replied negatively as he asked Mr. Walker's attorney to research the record. Mrs. Bond asked how many square feet per unit there would be and Mr. Walker replied about 1,050 square feet. Mr. Grabeel referred to staff comments and read the following comments listed by the City Engineer: 1. Does survey show all existing structures? 2. Existing paving is not shown on survey and is not clear on the site plan. 3. Easements will be required for the City maintained utilities. 4. Architect's site plan should show pavement width of 22 feet. The private roadway easements should be shown and documented. Access to existing private streets is assumed but documentation is desirable. The connection of the existing parking lots north of the private street is recommended for the use of service vehicles such as garbage trucks, etc. Mr. Grabeel continued that the Utilities Department noted to relocate the water lines out of the pavement; the Police De- partment noted subject to lighting plan; the Public Works Department noted to relocate the dumpster; and the Planning Department noted sidewalks on N. E. 3rd Court where the street is public. The recommendation is approval subject to comments. Chairman Thompson asked if Mr. Walker had any comments regard- ing the staff recommendations and Mr. Walker replied that he feels there are no comments which would hinder. They will have the letter from their attorney for the City Council meet- ing. They will comply with staff comments. Mr. Bernstein moved to recommend that the City Council approve the application of the Lee A. Walker Company for apartments on N. E. 17th Avenue and 4th Street subject to staff comments. Mr. Winter seconded the motion. No discussion. Motion carried 5-0. -7- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD NOVEMBER 25, 1980 Applicant: Location: Project Description: Boynton Interchange Plaza Daniel J. O'Brien, Agent S. W. 15th Avenue at 1-95, southwest corner Proposed subdivision which provides for the parcelization of two commercial tracts Mr. Annunziato informed the Board this application is the result of a requirement on the part of the zoning code to plat property when there is a zoning change. An extension to the time to plat requirement was granted by the City Council. The applicant has gone forward with the pre-application which the Board approved and is now in the master plan stage. Mr. Annunziato then explained the location and added the pro- perty to the south and which bisects this development is the Boynton Central Park Planned Industrial Development. He then explained that this plat cannot stand on its own, but relies entirely on the construction of the planned industrial develop- ment for sewer, water and street construction. It could be made to stand on its own if that was the intention of the developer. Mr. Annunziato continued that several items came up in staff review which should be brought to the Board's attention. One concerned our normal procedure for drainage which is to for- ward the plan to the Water Management District for cursory re- view to determine if the master plan as submitted can be con- structed. The application did not include two parcels and this has been rectified. There is a communication from the consult- ant that drainage can be taken care of on site, but the compu- tations are not prepared at this time. Mr. Annunziato referred to the staff comments and read the following comments listed by the Engineering Departments: 1. A drainage plan should be submitted showing drainage areas. Computations should be identified. 2. Drainage plans and computations should be signed and dated and sent to the Water Management District for conceptional approval. 3. Only section D-D should be shown on Sheet PD-1 or other sections marked "OMIT" 4. Paving and drainage plans should be clarified to show that off-site drainage construction is included in the construction for this plat or that it will be included in the construction for Boynton Central Park. Limits of paving and transition information should be shown. -8- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD NOVEMBER 25, 1980 5. Cross-section D-D should be corrected to show a mini- mum of 8 ft. of shoulder stabilized to 50 p.s.i., F.B.V., and should be drawn symetrical. 6. Two different sheets are identified as PD-2. This should be corrected. 7. Section I-I for driveway construction should be con- structed according to current City standards. Drive- way is pitched 1/8 inch to the foot from the edge of the pavement to the "swale centerline" 8. Section F-F is not identified on the plan sheet PD-1. 9. Flush headers or curb and gutter are required on S.W. 15th Avenue. 10. Limits for water line .and sewer line construction should be added to water and sewer plans. 11. Details not required should be removed from drawings or noted with "OMIT". 12. Since the roadway construction is also included in Boynton Central Park, a clarification is required. 13. Show width of FP&L easements on plat. 14. The Subdivision Ordinance requires contours on the topo map. 15. A subsoil investigation is required for Parcels 1 and 2. Mr. Ryder referred to a motel being mentioned in one of the memos submitted and questioned if this is what would be located on one of these parcels and Mr. Annunziato replied negatively and advised no site plans have been submitted. He added that traffic was calculated on the contemplation that a 100 room motel will be constructed. Mr. Ryder clarified that some of the details are predicated on an actual improvement and Mr. Annunziato replied that the recommendations will accommodate any kind of construction. He clarified that we are just aware of the zoning at this time. Mr. Annunziato then read the memo from the Utility Department stating that the plans as presently shown on this instrument cannot be executed until such time as the P.I.D. plat is bonded and recorded. The reason for this is that there must be a lift station built to' serve both pi~es of property. He pointed out the location for the proposed lift station. This lift station is contemplated to have a gravity system which serves the commercial property and pumps back into the exist- ing force main. Also, the water line is presently in a pro- posed street in the P.I.D. and therefore, the Boynton Inter- change Plaza has no easements to connect onto the existing -9- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD NOVEMBER 25, 1980 water line. He clarified that the water line, which we believe we have an easement for, is located in the proposed entrance road. We know of no easements tieing east or west onto the water line although provisions have been made to serve these parcels in the water line. Mr. Annunziato continued that he commented that the developer is to participate in the cost of traffic signalization at the intersection when warranted by traffic counts. If this develop- ment does not generate traffic exceeding warrant for a light, then the developer will have to share proportionately. The entrance road is to be four lanes and not three lanes as pro- posed. He prepared a memo for the Board in which he tried to ~address several of the items which came up for discussion at the staff meetings and were discussed with the applicant. It also takes into account the comments of the Traffic Engineer with respect to County systems. He then read the following memo addressed to the Board: "This memo pertains to the traffic impact analysis and development plans which accompanied the above mentioned ap- plication. "As noted in Mr. Clark's memo, it will be necessary for clarification purposes to determine where the responsibility for public improvements lies because water, sewer and streets are shared with the Boynton Central Park Planned Industrial Development. In faCt, this plat cannot be recorded in the form that it is in unless the plat for the PID is bonded and recorded. Concerning drainage, the plans that were initially submitted to the City did not include the two commercial tracts. Mr. Clark's memo notes that conceptual approval of the proposed drainage system from the Water Management District is required in connection with the approval of this master plan. Appropriate drainage plans and calculations are sup- posed to be submitted with the filing of the application. "In connection with the traffic resulting from this dev- elopment, please be advised of the following: 1. As noted in the traffic impact analysis, 80,000 square feet of commercial square footage and a 100 room motel are proposed. This results in 8,000 trips per day (TPD) for the commercial and 1,500 trips per day for the motel (the analysis submitted assigns 10 TPD per motel room but the Palm Beach County Fair Share Ordinance assigns 15 TPD per motel room). 2. This Traffic Impact Analysis was reviewed by the Palm Beach County Traffic Engineer and his comments are noted in the attached letter to Craig Grabeel, Assistant Planner, dated November 20, 1980. Concerning Mr. Walker's letter, -10- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD NOVEMBER 25, 1980 be advised that Item No. 2 should be modified to the extent S. W. 7th Court can be addressed only. through this proposed master plan and that the impact fee should be $118,750 as op- posed to $142,150 because Mr. Walker inadvertently included the PID traffic in his calculations. If the impact fee is imposed, it should be in connection with the court's finding that the Palm Beach County impact ordinance is legal. "With respect to access to the surplus 1-95 right-of-way, real but expensive access is available from S. W. 23rd Avenue. This access would require that a ramp be constructed from the overpass at 1-95 and S. W. 23rd Avenue into the 300 feet of State Road 9 right-of-way that was dedicated to the State by Palm Beach County. Therefore, I do not recommend that the City require any public right-of-way through this proposed master plan." Mr. Annunziato then read the following letter from Mr. Walker: "As you requested, we have reviewed the master plan and traffic impact analysis for the subject development and would like to offer the following comments: 1. At the intersection of Woolbright Road and this develop- ment's access road (S. W. 7th Court), the following improvements should be required: a. Lengthen the existing left turn lane on the east approach. b. Construct a right turn lane on the west approach. c. Construct 2 lanes on the south approach (a right turn lane and a left turn lane). d. Pay the cost for the installation of a traffic signal, if and when warranted, as determined by the County Engineer. 2. Provide four lanes on S. W. 7th Court from Woolbright Road to S. W. 17th Lane. 3. Any yield or stop sign at the intersection of S. W. 7th Court and S. W. 17th Lane should be located on the north approach. 4. In order to off-set this development's direct and identifiable impact on the public road system, a fee of $142,150 should be paid to Palm Beach County. "If you have any questions on these comments or if we can be of further assistance, please contact me. The opportunity to comment is appreciated." -11- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD NOVEMBER 25, 1980 Mr. Annunziato added that we are currently assessing but not collecting the traffic impact fee when not a part of the re- zoning application. For this master plan, the fair share ordinance, which is currently being contested, did require at the time of permit, an impact fee of approximately $119,000 after subtracting P.I.D. traffic. Mr. Ryder referred to access from 23rd Avenue instead of Woolbright Road and asked if it makes sense to require an additional 30 feet here and Mr. Annunziato replied that he was not aware of the access from 23rd Avenue, but it is real and probably can be permitted. With that in mind~ it becomes inappropriate to require right-of-way from this developer. Mr. Ryder commented from his recollection to come in from 23rd Avenue would require a high level ramp which poses pro- blems of visibility and would be expensive. Since we have half of the road from the P.I.D. with better access coming in at a natural grade, he doesn't know why we are trading it off for this. Mr. Annunziato stated he doesn't think our position is as strong with respect to this proposal as it was with the P.I.D. In the P.I.D., we were being asked to Solve a problem which the developer bought with the property. This would be trying to solve the problem of the P.I.D. by action with another developer. Mr. Ryder commented that it might be advantageous for a motel to have a street at that point on the common boundary line. Mrs. Bond added that she thinks a street from 23rd Avenue would create a problem. Chairman Thompson added in reference to this alternate access, there could be a right-of-way overpass constructed up to the 1-95 overpass between the railroad and 1-95. However, there may be a problem with this if 1-95 is widened. Mrs. Bond referred to the access onto 23rd Avenue creating a lot of traffic in the Leisureville area where it is a two lane road and Mr. Annunziato agreed and explained this access is real, but would be expensive. He explained how this additional right-of-way would actually be givi~ a second access, plus two lanes could be constructed in the 30 ft. Mr. Ryder asked if the City accepts a street 30 ft. in width and Mr. Annunziato replied they do not for public purposes. Mr. Annunziato re- quested the applicant to comment. Mr. Stephen J. Jarvis came before the Board and asked if they had heard from Mr. O'Brien and Mr. Annunziato replied nega- tively. Mr. Jarvis stated that he had not heard from Mr. O'Brien either and apparently is at a disadvantage. He has not even seen the drawings. He can make a few broad state- ments. When the property was zoned, he was told it had to be platted. It was decided when the traffic impact analysis was proposed, there would be one motel. He missed the money market for a motel. This cannot be assured unless financing is lined up. MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD NOVEMBER 25, 1980 Mr. Ryder referred to this being tied in with the P.I.D. and Mr. Jarvis replied that this property was all owned by him at one time and all the plans were made at one time. Mr. Ryder stated there are recommendations from the staff that this can- not be recorded until the P.I.D. is bonded and recorded and certain easements are required and Mr. Jarvis requested this to be approved based on the plat being recorded. However,. this plat cannot be involved in the 30' road. It cannot be made incumbent upon him to satisfy an adjacent owner's desires. Mr. Ryder referred to the streets in the P.I.D. originally being public streets and Mr. Jarvis replied that he had nothing to do with that. Mr. Jarvis clarified th&t he was before the Board because under zoning, they are forced to plat. He added when not subdividing property, it is ridiculous to plat when not knowing what is going on it. .He had to spend money for the traffic analysis and it is ridiculous. Mr. Ryder stated he feels what is coming here is important. We cannot act without knowing. He asked what Mr. Annunziato recommended and Mr. Annunziato replied that his recommendation is this be approved subject to staff comments and the applicant can go forward with a preliminary plat. If that is found to be acceptable, recommendations will be made. Until the P.I.D. is bonded and recorded, final approval cannot be recommended unless this proposal separates itself from the P.I.D. Mr. Ryder re- ferred to qualifying any approval given and Mr. Annunziato stated the comments are clearly clarified. Mr. Ryder referred back to,the street and asked if it was logi- cal to require 30 ft. to get the additional width here and pro- ceed in that direction? He feels access may never be developed from 23rd Avenue because of the costs involved and the location being so close to the top of the 1-95 overpass. Mr. Annunziato informed him there would be no problem with ramping, but they must secure a crossing from the railroad. Whether securing a crossing over the railroad or a ramp off 23rd Avenue, both appear to be long range proposals. He has been told the cost would be about $200,000. There is a passing track at this location. If there is public demand and need to cross the railroad, they will eventually get the crossing. Mr. Ryder referred to requiring a 30 ft. easement from the P.I.D., but stated we did not establish any requirement for a public street and Mr. Annunziato replied that it was understood it was public right-of-way. Mr. Ryder commented that physically there is no construction and Mr. Annunziato stated if right-of-way appears on the plat, there is the question of need, setbacks, etc. and whether constructed or not~ there is some bearing. Mr. Ryder commented that it may be desirable when seeing what is planned. -13- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD NOVEMBER 25, 1980 Chairman Thompson stated he feels if we are reluctant to ask for the additional 30 feet, then we should eliminate the exist- ing 30 ft. right-of-way and go back to the original plan giving this to the railroad for the City's use. We will have limited accessibility to our well field unless the City paves it. We will have defeated the purpose of what we intended with the P.I.D. If we are not going to ask for this 30 ft., we better approach Mr. Hamilton and re-establish what was originally in- tended. The public still will not have accessibility to the tract to the east of the railroad. If the City does not estab- lish public right-of-way to this property, then there is only one group having accessibility and use and that would be the landowners to the west of the railroad. If we do not intend to acquire this land for recreational purposes, we should deter- mine that and ask for the 30 ft. right-of-way or forget it. He cannot see the City paying for it for access to the well fields or foot the bill from the interchange which may not be feasible. We must come up with some answers or ask for this 30 feet. Mr. Jarvis referred to having access from 23rd Avenue and asked if it would be preferable to have a grade crossing over the railroad or a ramp? He questioned if they were still saying that access through this property to the south was required and public access to get to property the City doesn't own when there is access from 23rd Avenue? He stressed that it is not legal to require, another property owner to give this right-of- way. There is a letter from the County stating they will give access when and if it is needed and asked for. Since this is available, is access still required through the P.I.D. and Mr. Annunziato replied the P.I.D. is a separate issue. He clari- fied that the City is requiring access to surplus right-of-way. Mr. Jarvis stated he was the first one who asked for access from the railroad long ago and has a letter stating they will not grant a crossing. To put a crossing over the railroad will cost about four times more than an earthen ramp to 23rd Avenue. Mr. Ryder referred to the height being about 20 to 25 feet and Mr. Jarvis advised that the clearance is 22 feet. Mr. Ryder explained how a ramp would have to be built. Mr. Jarvis clarified that there is access and Mr, Ryder questioned whether it is practical. Chairman Thompson referred to the possibility of discussing this all night and Mr. Jarvis requested an answer that since they have access to the property, is access still required on the property that he is the mortgagee on nd Mr. Annunziato replied that 30 feet has already been required for access on the P.I.D. Mr. Jarvis stated his signature is required on any recorded plat as mortgagee. This has been pushed around for two years since he gave the property for water wells and the City is pumping, but he has not been able to start yet. -14- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD NOVEMBER 25, 1980 Mr. Ryder referred to plans for a motel being favorable and Mr. Jarvis replied that he doesn't propose a motel, but was forced to say that. Mr. Ryder commented that this is a good location for a motel and Mr. Jarvis replied that he is not opposed to that, but is opposed to having to plat acreage as a requirement to retain the zoning. Chairman Thompson asked if the City feels favorable to do a study to clarify access to this property and Mr. Annunziato replied that this surplus right-of-way will probably result in some type of public use at some time in the future. ~The City has indicated possibly putting in water wells on that property. This would be a good location for a park and ride lot. The Comprehensive Plan indicates' this property should be developed for recreational purposes. As an interim use, a greenbelt makes sense. If the situation changes in the future and the property needs to be developed, it could be addressed as an amendment to the plan. He believes this property will come into public use in the future. Access is the key. There are differing views on the best access. Probably neither access is the best whether too close to the railroad or with the ramp off 23rd Avenue and the cost. It possibly needs to be re- searched how willingly D.O.T. would be to give access. The County has requested that right-of-way. According to Mr. Jarvis, D.O.T. may be willing to give back the State Road 9 right-of-way. Access is the real question. He thinks we have access. In the P.I.D. as modified, we have a 30 ft. public road, not to be constructed by the developer but pro- viding access to the surplus right-of-way where two lanes can be constructed. Access from 23rd Avenue probably can be pro- vided for. His recommendation is to approve subject to staff comments. Mr. Winter made a motion that the subdivision master plan for Boynton Interchange Plaza at S. W. 15th Avenue and 1-95 be approved subject to staff comments which does not include the 30 ft. right-of-way. Mr. Ryder referred to clarifying the recommendation and Mr. Annunziato stated the recommendation as made does not include the right-of-way. Certain clarifi- cations must be made as they go forward with this and this is included in the comments. Mr. Bernstein then seconded the motion. No discussion. Motion carried 4-1 with Mr. Ryder dis- senting. ADJOURNMENT Mrs. Bond made a motion to adjourn, seconded by Mr. Ryder. Motion carried 5-0 and the meeting was properly adjourned at R:55 P.M. 'Suz~nne M. Kruse, Re~rding Secretary (iThree Tapes) -15- AGENDA PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD Regular Meeting November 25th, 1980 TIME: 7:30 P.M. PLACE: Counci 1 Chambers ' ~ V C1L3 Hall i. Acknowledgement of Members and visitors. 2. Reading and Approving of Minutes. Announcements- Communications. "Citizens' ' Awareness" Program: (None Scheduled this Meeting) 6. Old Business: 7. .New Business: ke PUBLIC HEARINGS: PROPOSED ENERGY ELEMENT The local Planning Agency (P & z Board) will conduct a public Hearing on a proposed energy element to be considered as an amendment to the Boynton Beach Comprehensive Plan. ~ ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT Proposed amendment %o Appendix A (Zoning Regulations), of .the code of the City of Boynton Beach, Florida, as amended, Section 11, ,,Supplemental Regulations" to provide for regulations for parking of automobiles for condominium recreational buildings. 0 · RE ZONING Applicant: Location: Request: Legal Description: GBlf~O~!.~Compgny, U.S. (L. L. McDaniel, Agent) 1500 Seacrest BlVd. To rezone-from C-2 Neighborhood Commercial to C-.3 community Commercial See Survey B. SITE PLAN APPROVAL: Applicant: Location: Legal Description: Description: Applicant~ Location: Legal Description: Project Description: F & R Builders, Inc. (Serafin Leal, Agent) North Congress Avenue at LWDD Canal ~20 Acreage Recreational Facilities Lee A~ Walker Company N. E. 17th Avenue and N. E. 4th Street Acreage 44, 2B/2BR units in 8 buildings plus meeting room and recreational facilities. ~g a:nd Zoning Board Agenda Continued: ~SUBDIVISION MASTER PLANS Applicant: :~Location: Legal Description: Project Description: Boynton Interchange Plaza (Daniel J. O'Brien, agent) S. W. 15th Avenue at 1-95 S. W. corner Acreage Proposed subdivision which provides for the parcelization of two coimmercia! tracts Irving Bol ot~n SeniOr Vice ~resident