Loading...
Minutes 07-08-80MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ~ETING OF THE PLANNING & ZONING BOARD HELD AT CITY HALL, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA, JULY 8, 1980 PRESENT Arnold Thompson, Chairman Fred DiSalle, Vice Chairman Lillian Bond Marilyn Huckle Simon Ryder Carmen Annunziato, City Planner Craig Gr.abeel, Asst. City Planner ABSENT Wayne Drew (Excused) Garry Winter (Excused) Chairman Thompson welcomed everyone and called the meeting to order at 7:30 P. ~. He introduced the members of the Board, City Planner, Assistant City Planner, and Recording Secretary. He recognized the presence in the audience of Councilman Joe deLong, Councilman Marty Trauger, and City Manager Peter Cheney. MINUTES OF JUNE 24, 1980 Mrs. Bond moved to accept the minutes of the June 24 meeting, seconded by Mr. Ryder. Motion carried unanimously. ANNOUNCEMENTS Mr. Annunziato referred to distributing three handouts: the IDEA study of the downtown area, some additions to the zoning book, and additional memos concerning Item 7C1. COMMUNICATI©NS Chairman Thompson referred to some letters having been re- ceived and advised these will be read at the appropriate times during the public hearings. PUBLIC HEARINGS Mr. Annunziato announced at the r ~eq~ ~st of.-th~City Council, the first six public hearings were filed with the City being the applicant. These applications were prepared to make amendments to the comprehensive plan and/or zoning map to bring one or ~e other into conformity. These public hearings, if approved, will bring about changes which will complete implementation of the comprehensive planning procedure which was started approxi- mately two years ago. Amendments to the Comp.rehensive Plan Land Use Elemen~ MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD JULY 8, 1980 Applicant: Location: Request': Legal. . Description: City of Boynton Beach S. W. 15th Avenue at E-4 Canal,. Northwest corner (Area 68) Moderate Density Residential from Office Commercial See Notice of Public Hearing (Application #1) Mr. Annunziato showed a graphic representing the existing land uses and existing zoning for Area 68, which is a major portion of Parcel C of the 10th Section of Leisureville. He explained the colors denoting the existing land uses and noted the pre- sent zoning in the area. Chairman Thompson ascertained there were no queStions from the Board members re~arding this parcel. He asked if anyone in the audience ~ared t~ speak in favor of this rezoning request and received no response. He asked if anyone wanted'to speak in opposition to this rezoning request and received no response. Mr. Gene he repres~ always bec the compr~ commercial zoning im~ should gd was left plan. Mr previous!~ agreed. Board thai affirmati~ to this s propertie [oore then came before the Board and advised that ~nts the property owner to the south and this has ~n zoned C-2 or C-3. Mr. Annunziato clarified that ~hensive plan showed the parcel to be used for office · purposes consistent with C-1. At the time of the ,lementation hearings, the Council determined this to public hearing and did not change the zoning. It [-1AA which was inconsistent with the comprehensive Moore clarified that this Board and the planners recommended commercial zoning and Mr. Annunziato Ir. Moore asked if it was the recommendation of this i it should remain C-1 and Mr. Annunziato replied ely because of the use in this area and the access .re. Mr. Moore pointed out that the surrounding were zoned commercial. Mr. Ryder stat~ed with being a resident of Leisureville, he would like to give some of the back history of this strip. In recent years, the red area as shown on the map was changed t? C-2 from R-1AA and consequently it was developed with retail stores. Immediately to the east, there was a request o~ another ct mainder i~ recommend~ ally in ~t operation there wi] pr~fessi¢ felt C-1 was a good use. the part of the bank for additional parking, so ~ange was allowed to C-1 from R-1AA. Now the re- R-1AA; but according to the land use plan, it is id to be C-1. He knows many of the people, especi- ~e immediate vicinity, are disturbed because of the of the stores and are concerned if this goes to C-1 be additional retail stores. However, C-1 permits ~al offices. When the land use plan was studied, he This area is presently used for -2- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD JULY 8, 1980 unauthorized parking and dumping and the owners did not feel it was realistic to develop residential in this area. It appeared C-1 would be an improvement and eliminate more stores. It would mean development which would be quiet and orderly. He knows a lot of people are concerned and the Board members take into account the peoples' feelings. How- ever, he still feels C-1 is the best zoning for this area. Mrs. Huckle clarified that technically this property is zoned R-1AA, but cannot be used as such. Chairman Thompson ascertained there were no further comments from the audience and declared the public hearing closed. Mr. DiSalle moved that the property at S. W. 15th Avenue at the E-4 Canal, northwest corner, be approved as commercial~ which is a recommendation to deny this request. Mrs. Bond seconded the motion. Under discussion, Mr. DiSalle added that he thinks this should remain commercial as it seems to be the most logical step to take along the main avenue. It seems to be an appropriate location for office commercial. Mrs. Huckle asked if we have heard in any form from the owner of the property and Chairman Thompson replied negatively. Mr. Annunziato advised that the owner as listed is Roger G. Saberson, Trustee. Chairman Thompson asked if he was noti- fied and Mr. Annunziato replied affirmatively, that all the public hearings were carried out by notifying all the property owners by mail and the owners within 400 feet. Motion carried 5-0. Applicant: Location: Request: Legal Description: City of Boynton Beach 425-523 N. E. 4th Street (West side of N.E. 4th Street from 425 N.E. 4th Street north to N.E. 5th Avenue) (Area 49 in part) General Commercial from Local Retail Commercial See Notice of Public Hearing (Application ~4) Mr. Annunziato referred to this tract of land coming up several times for discussion through the land plan adoption procedures and advised this request is to revert part of that area from local retail commercial to general commercial and consequently allow the C-4 zoning remain to be consistent with the land use as proposed. Chairman Thompson asked if anyone in the audience cared to speak in favor of this rezoning request. -3- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD JULY 8, 1980 Mr. Lou Samyn, 151 S. W. 25th Avenue, stated that he owns property at 425 N. E. 4th Street, next to the dog pound. This property has been C-4 for a number of years. The City decided to change it to C-3 several months ago which created a hardship to himself and his tenants. He would like it to revert to C-4 as it was originally. Chairman Thompson asked if anyone cared to speak in opposition to this rezoning request and received no response. He then declared the public hearing portion closed. Mr. Annunziato informed the Board that this property, upon further review of the land uses in the area, is recommended by the planning staff to revert as noted in the application and as recommended by the City CounCil. The future impact this will have on the downtown is unknown at this time. The bordering land uses are the railroad to the west, dog pound to the south and C-4 to the north~ so it is questionable whether development would occur as C-3. He recommends this application be approved. Mr. Ryder stated he visited this site yesterday and it is not realistic to consider at any time that this could have any adverse impact on the proposed downtown area. In looking at this, he does not think it will damage our overall plan since it is at the north end of Area 49 or the downtown area. He thinks we can safely revert back to C-4 Without damaging our concept. Chairman Thompson referred to not having a chance to read the report from the IDEA group which was received tonight, but stated that he realizes this was not part of their area con- sidered, but it was part of the downtown area considered in the comprehensive land use plan. He would like to hold off on this until seeing the plan for the downtown area to see if it would possibly have an adverse effect. If it did, it would be difficult to rezone to C-3. C-4 zoning includes some uses which he is not in favor of and to have them dose to the down- town area may have an effect on new plans for the downtown area. He is against it. Mrs. Huckle made a motion that the Board recommend for appro- val the changing of zoning of 425-523 N. E. 4th Street, the west side of N. E. 4th Street from 425 N. E. 4th Street north to N. E. 5th Avenue, from local retail commercial back to general commercial, C-3 to C-4. Mr. Annunziato clarified the motion is to approve the land use amendment and Mrs. Huckle agreed. Mr. Ryder seconded the motion. No discussion. Motion carried 4-1 with Chairman Thompson dissenting. -4- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD JULY 8, 1980 Applicant: Location: Request: Legal Description: City of Boynton Beach 320 ft. length along North Federal Highway on east side at northern City limits (Area 7) Community Commercial from Moderate Density Residential See Notice of Public Hearing (Application ~3) Mr. Annunziato informed the members that in the packet delivered in the mail, there is a location map which keys in the proper- ties in q~estion. There are two owners involved and all the property owners within 400 feet have been notified. The re- quest on the part of the City Council is to amend the land use plan to change the future land use element from R-1AA which provides for moderate density residential to C-3 which provides for community commercial. The property is bordered on the west by U~ S. 1 and on the east by undeveloped lands. Chairman Thompson requested anyone caring to speak in favor of this rezoning request to come forward. Mr. Gene Moore came forward and stated he believes this is a result of the hearings with the intent to carry the use into the adjoining properties on U. S. 1~ He is in favor of this. Mr. Robert Griffith, one of the owners of the property, ad- vised when this property was purchased by the present owners seven to eight years ago, it was all zoned C-3. Subsequently changes were made. The U. S. 1 piece reverted to the present zoning which rendered the property practically unusable. All of the rest of the U. S. 1 property is zoned commercial and he requests this be given favorable consideration as the City has requested. Chairman Thompson asked if anyone in the audience cared to speak in opposition to this rezoning request and received no response. He then declared the public hearing closed. Mr. Annunziato stated the planning staff recommends this application be approved since the properties to the south are zoned commercial and this lies on U. S. 1. Mr. Ryder added that after taking a second look at this pro- perty, he collaborates with the City Planner's recommenda- tion. There is C-3 zoning generally from the northern limit halfway into town on the east side. He doesn't see any un- favorable impact if we would convert this back to C-3 be~ cause it is consistent with what has come before. He does not necessarily agree in all instances about making changes in the plan; but with taking another look, it leads to chang- ing minds. He thinks this has a lot of merit to revert back to C-3. -5- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD JULY 8, 1980 Mrs. Huckle asked what depth was being considered on this par- cel and if it commensurates with the old zoning map? Mr. Annunziato replied that it does and Mr. Ryder added that the depth would be between 200 to 400 feet. Mrs. Huckle clari- fied that the remainder to the east would remain R-1AA and Mr. Annunziato agreed. Mr. Ryder moved that the request for zoning the 320 ft. length along North Federal Highway on the east side at the northern City limits to community commercial from moderate density resi- dential be approved. Mr. DiSalle seconded the motion. Under discussion, Mr. Ryder clarified this is an amendment to the comprehensive land use plan rather than rezoning. Motion carried 5-0. Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element & Rezoning Applicant: Location: Request: Legal Description: City of Boynton Beach S. W. 15th Avenue at E-4 Canal, Southwest Corner (Area south of 68) Rezone to R-1AA from C-4 Land Use Amendment - Moderate Density Residential from General Commercial See Notice of PubliC Hearing (Application ~2) Mr. Annunziato commented that as Mr. Ryder pointed out, as more information becomes available, we should re-adjust the plan wherever changes need to be made. This land has been zoned C-4 since 1976. It was related to him that this was to be a storage location for recreation vehicles for Leisureville. Upon information given at public hearings, he found that Leisureville does not own the land. This changes the use of the land. C-4 is totally incompatible with the surrounding land uses and he explained. This is the only pocket of C-4 zoning. He explained the color coding on the map of the existing zoning. Mrs. Huckle asked who JCF are and Mr. Annunziato replied that he is not prepared to answer that and this is the way the ownership appears on the tax roll. Mr. Moore advised that JCF stands for the three Cicione brothers, John, Connie and Frank. Chairman Thompson asked if anyone cared to speak in favor of this rezoning request. Mr. William Eddy, 1405 S. W. 17th Avenue, stated he lives adja- cent to this property in question. The property is surrounded by recreation area or single family dwellings. He objects to C-4 zoning and his neighbors do also. When he bought his ~ro- perty from Mr. Cicione, he understood this was part of Leisure- ville. Apparently it was sold sometime during the development -6- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD JULY 8, 1980 of Leisureville to the Cicione brothers; they sold it to them- selves. He has no objection to the R-1AA zoning~ He would object to multiple housing there. Dr. Carroll Kennedy, 1506 S. W. 17th Avenue, stated he is in favor of rezoning this to R-1AA from C-4. He thinks it is obvious to do so as Mr. Annunziato pointed out. He is sure all the neighbors are in agreement. Mr. Morris Boruck, 1505 S. W. 17th Avenue~ stated he agrees with the City to rezone this from C-4 to R-1AA. As C-4, there can be adult book stores and/or anything else. Most of the area is residential. To have an adult book store in that area would be disgusting. He recommends changing from C-4 to R-i~. Mr. Ben Uleck, 1507 S. W. 17th Avenue, stated, he objects the C-4 zoning. He would like to see it rezoned to moderate den- sity residential. He lives directly in back of this land. Chairman Thompson ascertained there were no others wishing to speak in favor and asked for those wanting to speak in opposition to come forward. Mr. Gene Moore, representing the owners, came before the Board and read the following letter submitted to the Board: "My office represents J.C.F. Partnership, the owner of the above captioned parcel. My client has received Notice of Hearing at which your Board will consider rezoning said parcel from C-4 to R-1AA. My client interposes strenuous objection to this proposed rezoning, and as base grounds therefore states: (a) This particular parcel has, since the inception of the land development, been designated as a commercial area, and subject parcel was purchased based upon the continued integrity of said zoning. (b) Said parcel is located on a heavily trafficked major arterial thoroughfare in the immediate vicinity of the S.W. 15th Avenue / 1-95 Interchange, and under the cir- cumstances, no other reasonable use than commercial de- velopment could be placed on the property. (c) That the owner has spent substantial sums, including architectual fees, land planning consulting fees, survey- ing charges, and finance charges in connection with contemplated development of the parcel for commercial usage, and under the circumstances, has a vested interest in the continued commercial zoning of the property. That since the initial commercial designation of my client's property in connection with the approval of master site plan for Palm Beach Leisureville Community by the City, -7- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD JULY 8, 1980 all subsequent comprehensive plans promulgated through the Planning & Zoning Board and the City Council have continued designation of the parcel as a general commer- cial site, up to and including the most recent comprehen- sive plan approved by this Board and the City CounCil in the latter part of 1979, after extensive public hearings in connection therewith. "Under all of the above circumstances, it does not appear that any reasonable justification exists which would indicate a change of circumstances in the area involved that would authorize, justify, or dictate a change of zoning in subject property to residential usage which would materially and ad- versely effect the intrinsic value of the parcel, and be con- trary to existing law. "On behalf of my client, it is respectfully requested that the proposed zoning change be recommended to the City Council unfavorably." Mr. Moore continued that this property fronts on S. W. 15th Avenue. He questions the advisability or feasibility of anyone trying to build any type of single family dwellings on that parcel. This would be taking away the use of the property. If rezoned, it would lay fallow. Mr. Moore referred to the owner having an invested interest on the continuing zoning of this property and stated since the conception of the land use plan, it has always been zoned C-4 and the people should have been aware of it. Throughout the entire zoning procedures, this has always been C-4 and there has never been any secret about it. He thinks it is ridiculous to think there will be an adult book store there. All the way back to the adoption of the existing land use plan, there has been no other recommendation except C-4 with no objection. He does not understand Mr. Annunziato changing his opinion at this late date just because a few residents don't like it. There was reference to the property across the street and some people joined in to get this property changed. At some point in time, the people have to rely on the zoning this City has, The work must be maintained which has been done over the years. It makes a joke out of what has been done to wipe this out. The location, traffic, and size of the parcel must be considered. It is entirely sur- rounded by commercial. He thinks the planning officials of this City ~should look at the situation from the property owners' standpoint. There has to be some comm. ercial zoning. He requests vehemently that the owners' rights be protected. The owners have been continuously preparing plans and plan to proceed as soon as financially possible. They request the previous zoning to be maintained. -8- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD JULY 8, 1980 Mr. DiSalle a~reed that it is true this property has been commercial for a long time, but he understands the property owners were told this property would be used for the exclusive use of the Leisureville residents. Mr. Moore replied that he cannot verify that fact. He has the original master site plan of Leisureville and sees nothing indicating that it is a residential parcel. Anyone could have come to City Hall to find out the zoning. There are no deed restrictions on the land. Mr. DiSalle asked if the residents in the audience had this understanding and Chairman Thompson stated there is no real benefit to this as it is only hearsay and if there is any documentation, it can be submitted for consideration by the Board. Mr. Ryder agreed that this has not been addressed by the Plan- ning & Zoning Board or City Council and stated in his opinion, it was an oversight. There has been concern regarding this parcel over the years. Any development of this area as C-4 would be totally Unacceptable and would have a serious impact on the area.. There is no valid reason for zoning this C-4. He does not agree with Mr. Moore's statement that this cannot be developed residentially. The people owning this land have been active in developing Section 10 and along Woolbright Road to the west are residential buildings backina up to the street, which could be done on this land. If the development has been turned over to the unit owners and it seems this piece is not a part of Section 10, the only access would be through a dedi- cated street. He can see this being developed residentially. It is not comparable to what is across the way. There is no valid reason for anything else here than residential develop- ment. Nothin~ commercial has happened all this time. He thinks it would be a serious consequence if this area is developed with C-4 uses. Mr. DiSalle moved that the property at S. W. 15th Avenue at the E-4 Canal, sOuthwest corner, be reZoned to R-1AA from C-4, including rezoning and the land amendment. Mr. Ryder seconded the motion. Under discussion, Mrs. Huckle commented that she doesn't believe either zoning is really compatible. She does not believe R-1AA at that location is accurate zoning in view of commercial across the road and the canal, but believes C-4 is too general a commercial for that area. She believes C-1 or C-2 could be compatible, especially C-1. Motion carried 4-1 with Mrs. Huckle dissenting. Mr. Moore referred to Mr. Ryder and Mr. DiSalle being residents of Palm Beach Leisureville and questioned if it was. fair for them to vote on this and Mr. Ryder replied that neither of them live in Section 10; he lives in Section 7 and Mr. DiSalle lives in Section 9. -9- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD Applicant: Location: Request: Legal Description: JULY 8, 1980 City of Boynton Beach Along East Side of FEC Railroad from S.E. 8th Avenue to S.E. 10th Avenue (Area 73) Rezone to R-2 from C-3 See Notice of Public Hearing (Application ~5) Mr. Annunzi~to stated at the time of the zoning implementation hearings, there was one proposal prepared by the staff to re- zone this land from C-2 to R-2 and when this request was heard by the City Council, several questions were raised and an addi- tional study was requested by the City Council. This area was restudied to determine if the recommendation by the staff was accurate. He explained the current land uses and showed a graphic of the existing zonings. Mr. Annunziato continued that several questions were raised as to the staff recommendation whether it was restrictive or in- compatible with the existing land uses, etc. There was refer- ence to the M-1 area directly across the railroad tracks and the problem the property owners talked about were obvious and the area is in need of code enforcement. Another problem in this area is access since the lots front on undeveloped Rail- road Avenue. There was another question whether people would want to live in this area and according to building records, two houses and one duplex were constructed in the area in 1979. The recommendation of the staff to the City Council was to change the zoning consistent with the comprehensive plan. It was referred back to the Planning & Zoning Board for additional study. These two actions were advertised and he suggests con- ducting both hearings and then closing the public hearings. The second request would be to amend the comprehensive land use plan element and change the zoning to provide general commercial noting the industrial uses and the railroad to the west. Mr. Ryder clarified that the property fronts on Railroad Ave- nue and there is no public street to the east and Mr. Annunziato agreed this is correct. Mr. Ryder clarified that the only means of access would be Railroad Avenue and Mr. Annunziato agreed, but some of the parcels are owned by the same owner all the way through. Chairman Thompson opened the public hearing and announced that the Board would first like to hear comments on this being rezoned to R-2 from C-3. He asked if anyone cared to speak in favor of this request and received no response. He asked if anyone cared to speak in oppositiOn to this re- zoning request and the following came before the Board. -10- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD JULY 8, 1980 Mr. Jeff Tomberg informed the Board that he represents Mr. Thompson, one of the property owners, and has been in personal contact with Mr. Hinson, another property owner. Also, Mr. Hinson lives on one of the lots abutting this property. It is Mr. Hinson's feeling since he owns four lots in the resi- dential area that the property remain the old M-1 it was. Mr. Tomberg stated tha~ he would also like to point out when this rezoning request was discussed at the workshop meeting by the City Council, it was brought up by Vice Mayor Harmening that perhaps a new zoning classification such as M-2 or C-5 should be considered to make this consistent with the property in the area. This new category would cover light industry and would fit the existing uses. Based upon the information from the City Council, he feels R-2 is totally incompatible for this property. The only access to the property is right along the railroad tracks. On behalf of Mr. Thompson, he requests this zoning be denied from C-3 to R-2. Mr. Roger Barr, 1241 S. W. 27th Avenue, referred to operating a business on this property and stated if it is rezoned to R-2, his business would not be legal and he would be put out of business. He realizes he could operate awhile, but if there was a fire, he could only build a duplex. His business looks as decent as any of the homes and does not create any problems. There are people living in houses adjoining this property and they have never complained. Mr. Ryder asked what kind of busi- ness he has and Mr. Barr replied that it is a ceramics opera- tion and there is no noise. He then showed pictures of the buildings across the railroad tracks from his property.This was zoned M-1 when he moved in. Mr. Tomberg stated that the Council felt with creating a new zone, it would be ideal for the present property owners. That is why Vice Mayor Harmening suggested setting up a separate zoning classification for clean light industrial businesses. This would provide a buffer between the railroad tracks and the residential homes to the east. This is why a C-5 cate- gory should be added to the comprehensive plan, especially for this particular area. Mr. Barr referred to the residential property being totally surrounded with commercial and Mr. Tomberg agreed that it is a pocket zoning of residential. Mr. Tomberg continued that the size of the lots are inconsistent with any type of zoning classification except M-1. He pointed out how the lot sizes decrease as they go along the railroad. Mr. Barr added that most of the lots could not be used for building duplexes. These are all 50 ft. wide lots. Mrs. Huckle commented that the current zoning of C-3 requires a 75 ft. width. Mr. Barr replied that he was not aware it was C-3. Mrs. Huckle asked when it was M-1 and Mr. Barr replied that it was M-1 when he purchased it. -11- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD JULY 8~ 1980 Mr. John Weiss stated he owns the property adjoining Mr. Barr's property. His family purchased it in 1960 when it was zoned M-1. When it was changed to C-3, he never received a notice. As far as the businesses there, they are nice and quiet. He lives on his property adjoining the building. The businesses could not be better neighbors. Mr. Mike Keane, 301 $. E. 10th Avenue, referred to having a business in this area and stated at the City Council meeting, they asked for M-l, but the notice was sent out for R-2 or C-4. He couldn't believe it was done like this after the people requested M-1. Mr. Annunziato stated the staff re- sponded as instructed by the City Council. Mr. Keane stated the City Council works for the people, so why don't they make the decisions and Chairman Thompson informed him that the City Council will make the final decision. Mr. Keane continued that as far as zoning to C-4, a lot of businesses have been there since it was M-1 and will still be illegal in C-4. It is mostly M-1 in this area. Mrs. Huckle referred to ceramic shops being allowed in C-3 and Mr. Annunziato informed her the actual manufacturing is not allowed. Mr. Keane stated when the people bought the property, it was M-1 and this is creating a hardship on them. The businesses don't seem to bother any of the neighbors. The building has not been improved during the past three months because of the decision by the Planning & Zoning Board.. Mrs. Huckle referred to manufacturing not being allowed in C-4 and Chairman Thompson suggested possibly tabling this until the Council considers a new zoning classification. Mr. Keane remarked that it would just go on and on. Mr. Ryder stated with considering M-i, there are other resi- dential units there and it would be a drastic change. Mr. Keane stated the businesses are already there and the neigh- bors are not complaining. Mr. Annunziato stated one of the primary concerns in planning is to re-inforce existing neighborhoods. Any steps taken to undermine residential areas would be inconsistent with the comprehensive plan. Things should be done to improve a neigh- borhood. Mr. Keane stated the residential is the pocket area and the commercial area should have the preference. He added there is one house worse looking than any of the manufacturing buildings. Chairman Thompson stated the commercial towards the east fronts on U. S. 1, so it is not creating pocket zoning. Mr. Tomberg pointed out that the pocket exists with the resi- dential zone. -12- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD JULY 8, 1980 Mrs. John Weiss, 306 S. E. 10th Avenue, stated she lives in the house beside the ceramic plant. There is a nursery across the street and there are no other houSes. This was changed from commercial to residential, but it is not a residential area. As far as building houses along the railroad tracks, she doesn't know who would want to live there. Mr. DiSalle referred to R-2 being spot zoning in the middle of commercial and Mr. Annunziato disagreed and stated it is a pocket of residential development. It is not an area of young homes, but we must realize everyone cannot afford homes costing $70,000 to $100,000. He thinks the value and care of homes will increase if it is rezoned to residential. The Board must decide how to treat this older neighborhood. Do we take actions to make it less habitable or protect it? Mrs. Frank DuBois stated she has lived here since 1943 and her house is right on the deadend of 8th Avenue at the rail- road on the east side of White Aluminum. She does not see how duplexes could be built on these lots. She is speaking for the neighborhood and they don't want to be pushed out or have any more noise the~e. Chairman Thompson clarified that she is speaking in favor of rezoning to duplex zoning and Mrs. DuBois replied that she doesn't want any more noisy manufacturing concerns there. Mr. Brian Koening, 301 S. E. 10th Avenue, referred to the existing houses in the area and stated the lots are very small and there is no room for additions and they are rather dilapidated and have been like that for 15 to 20 years. There are no objections to the existing buildings. Chairman Thompson then read a letter received from Mrs. Lorraine Vicki stati~ she do~ not object to changing the zoning from C-3 to C-4, but does object to changing it from C-3 to R-2. She doesn't think any kind of residential build- ings should be built that close to a railroad. Mr. Ryder stated in regard to building in proximity to the railroad, we have two railroads running through the City and several developments back up to the railroad tracks, but this is different with having frontage only on Railroad Avenue. Having to face the railroad with what is across the tracks is kind of dismal. He doesn't think it is feasi- ble to rezone this area to R-2. Mrs. Huckle questioned why C-3 was not acceptable and Mr. Annunziato informed her that C-3 is inconsistent with the comprehensive plan which indicates C-3 should be located at intersections of arterial roads. This would be improperly located. Also, C-3 is retail commercial and requires a trade area of more than one neighborhood. -13- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD JULY 8, 1980 Mrs. Huckle referred to this being zoned C-3 and stated this strip along the tracks is not complimentary to the designa- tion. However, if C-3 is not appropriate, what was the rea- soning for C-47 Mr. Annunziato informed her it was felt C-4 would form a more appropriate neighbor considering the railroad and industrial areas to the west. C-4 does not demand the advertising that a C-3 area would. Mrs. Huckle replied that she wasn't sure if she agreed with this. Mr. Annunziato con- tinued that C-4 uses are more general in nature and could possibly survive in this location. Mrs. Huckle stated she can understand the confusion of the public with a jump from C-4 to duplex zoning. There pro- bably is no perfect zoning for this area. Did anyone ask the planners what they thought about these buildings facing the tracks? Mr. Annunziato replied this was addressed, but possibly not specifically. There was a choice to be made whether to have the area sustain as residential or promote changes. As far as facing on Railroad Avenue, it is more a decision question. Duplexes do have parking lots on the street with the living areas oriented to the rear. Mrs. Huckle commented that they would look across to M-1 and Mr. Annunziato explained how they could be designed around the negative features. He continued that as far as non-conform- ing lot sizes, they are non-conforming under C-3 and it is a matter of co-joining lots to make developable lots. Mrs. Huckle stated the ceramic shop is non-conforming because it is manufacturing and Mr. Annunziato agreed. Mr. Keane asked if a duplex could be built on a lot 49 feet wide and Mr. Annunziato replied negatively~ but lots would have to be joined to be developed. Applicant: Location: Request: Legal Description: City of Boynton Beach Along east side of FEC Railroad from S.E. 8th Avenue to S.E. 10th Avenue (Area 73) Rezone to C-4 from C-3 Amend land use to general commercial from medium density residential See Notice of Public Hearing (Application ~6) Chairman Thompson asked if anyone wanted to speak in favor of this application. Mr. Jeff Tomberg stated he believes Mr. Ryder brought out a good point in that this is a unique parcel and doesn't fit into a clear cut category, so possibly this should be tabled to see if the Council is willing to enact a category for this. -14- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD JULY 8, 1980 Mr. Tomberg continued that Vice Mayor Harmening suggested a separate category and it should have been the intent of the public notice. On behalf of his client, he requests this matter to be tabled and sent back to the City Council to let them determine if this is in the best interest of this parti- cular unique parcel. Mr. Thompson's building won't be con- forming even if zoned C-4. These people want to conform and could develop a nice looking buffer between the railroad and residential property. It would be beneficial for residents and property owners. If the Board does not agree with his suggestion, his client would prefer C-4, but it would still be non-conforming. Mrs. Huckle questioned how many light manufacturing businesses were in this area and Mr. Barr explained that the whole build- ing is different manufacturing uses. Mrs. Huckle asked if there were any retail uses and Mr. Tomberg replied negatively. Mrs. Bond asked if C-4 would be a better use for the manufac- turing businesses in the event they want to expand and Mr. Annunziato informed her that C-4 does not provide for manufac- turing or industrial uses. The prospect of M-1 is something the Planning Department would not recommend. It would be ex- tending the M-1 uses across the railroad and this may be an even greater disruption to the area. The C-4 zoning' would fit these lots, but the uses would be non-conforming. Uses in C-4 such as a contractor's office may be appropriate and would create a buffer. Any development in that area, whether resi- dential or commercial, would be responsible for extending roads, sewer and water. Mrs. Bond asked how they can protect themselves since they have established their businesses for quite a number of years and Mr. Annunziato replied they could only protect themselves if the land use element would be rezoned to industrial which would be inconsistent with many elements. By changing the zoning to M-l, it would be spot zoning to accommodate a pro- perty owner. Mrs. Bond stated she could not understand this being spot z~oning since it has been there for a number of years. Mr. Barr added that M-1 next to M-1 is not spot zon- ing. Mr. Tomberg again referred to Vice Mayor Harmening suggesting a separate classification and Mr. Annunziato replied that he does not think that would be the appropriate action. The City Council is looking for a recommendation from the Plan- ning & Zoning Board. Mrs. Huckle referred to a great deal of area being vacant and stated this does not concern blocks and blocks of established uses and Mr. Barr referred to the businesses across the tracks. -15- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD JULY 8, 1980 Chairman Thompson clarified that no matter what recommendation is made by the Planning & Zoning Board, the City Council makes the final decision. Mr. Brian Koening commented that the City Planner keeps refer- ring to the comprehensive plan, but no plan is perfect and that is why these hearings are held. Mr. Roger Barr stated at the time this area was rezoned in 1975, not one property owner in the area was notified. They only found out recently that the properties were changed from M-1 to C-3. The businesses have been operating as M-1. Equip- ment is stored consistent with M-1 zoning. Any other zoning is inconsistent with the land use. Mr. Ryder informed him that when there is a general rezoning, like there was in 1975, not everyone receives personal notification. Notice is sent only when it is specific rezoning. Mrs. Huckle added that she was on the Planning & Zoning Board in 1975 and notice was sent regarding the rezoning on every water bill. Chairman Thompson added that there were also legal notices in the newspaper and all state and local laws were complied with. Mr. Mike Keane stated the Board should make a deCision whether it should be C-4 or M-1 and Chairman Thompson replied that only two requests are being considered and unfortunately, M-1 is not one of them. The requests are for either C-4 or R-2 from C-3. This is what has been advertised and this is all that can be considered. Mr. Keane asked what the owners could do to have it changed to M-1 and Mr. Annunziato replied that an applica- tion would have to be made by the property owner. At this time, Chairman Thompson declared the public hearing closed. Mr. Ryder moved that consideration to rezone to R-2 from C-3 be denied, seconded by Mrs. Huckle. No discUssion. Motion carried 3-2 with Mrs. Bond and Chairman Thompson dissenting. Mr. Ryder moved to rezone to C-4 from C-3 and amend the land use element, seconded by Mr. DiSalle. No discussion. Motion carried 3-2 with Mrs. Huckle and Chairman Thompson dissenting. Chairman Thompson announced the recommendation going to the City Council will be to rezone to C-4 from C-3. He then de- clared a five minute recess. The meeting was reconvened at 9:40 P. M. Chairman Thompson announced that he made an oversight on Application ~2 regarding Parcel D in Leisureville as two letters were received which he did not read. He read a letter from Margaret Keever in opposition and a letter from John & Irene Lew in favor. -16- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD JULY 8, 1980 Abandonment Request Applicant: Location: Request: Orlan Homes Corp. (Paul Orlan, Agent) Tracts C and D, Charter World (Chanteclair Villas) Abandonment of dedicated special purpose easement Mr. Annunziato informed the members this application comes to the Board in order to bring Tracts C and D into a develop- ment mode. The request is to reduce in size and in some in- stances dedicate additional easements in order to provide for development on Tracts C and D. The concept of development has changed somewhat from four unit to two unit buildings. In order to develop the duplex design, it became necessary to decrease in size and dedicate additional easements. Mr. Annunziato advised this application was reviewed by the City staff and letters were sent to the utility companies. The Planning Department noted no objections and the Director of Public Works noted approval. Mr. Cessna submitted a memo concerning the site plan and abandonment with no objections to the abandonment. Southern Bell responded they do not ob- ject provided additional easements are secured to cover their proposed cable design. Teleprompter Cable TV notes no objec- tions. Chairman Thompson asked if anyone in the audience wanted to speak in favor of this abandonment request. Mr. Paul Orlan, 1700 Palmland Drive, advised that he is re- questing this in order to create new easements conforming to the project so it can be developed like the existing section. Chairman Thompson asked if anyone cared to speak in opposition to this abandonment request and received no response. He then declared the public hearing closed. Mr. Annunziato advised the staff recommendation is this be recommended for approval subject to the dedication of proper easements to cover utilities and the Southern Bell cable loca- tions. Mrs. Bond moved to recommend approval of this request from Orlan Homes Corporation for Tracts C and D, Charter World, Chanteclair Villas, to abandon the dedicated special purpose easement, subject to the applicant dedicating the appropriate easements. Mr. Ryder seconded the motion. No discussion. Motion carried 5-0. -17- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD JULY 8, 1980 SITE PLAN APPROVAL Applicant: Location: Legal Description: Project Description: Orlan Homes~ Inc. (Paul Orlan, Agent Congress Avenue (Chanteclair Villas) Tract 1, Sections C & D, Charter World 102 Villa Type Dwelling Units on 14.25 acres Mr. Grabeel stated this is s the abandonment was granted loped. Section C is compris Section D has one additional previous court order, the zc zoning. The area is about 1 Parking has been provided at are looped off Palmland Driv western edge of Tract C. Ut Drive. He pointed out the r Mr. Ryder asked if Charter D streets and Mr. Annunziato r out that Charter Drive is pu turns south. Mrs. Bond questioned what wi Mr. Annunziato inform, sd her that property is limited to hotel or motel. Under the c recommended that restriction effective. He understands t go±ng through the legal step restriction. Mr. Grabeel referred to the ing comments from Mr. Clark: site plan for the same project as to. Tracts A and B have been deve- ed of 50 duplex villa units and building with 52 units. Per a ne is R-2A which is multi-family 4.25 acres with a density of 7.14. two spaces Der unit. The streets e and connect to Section B at the ilities are provided from Charter ecreational facilities. rive and Palmland Drive are public splied affirmatively and pointed blic to about the part where it L1 be developed to the east and that according to a court order, the development of a 200 room Dmprehensive plan, the Board be removed and C-3 zoning be hat Guardian Mortgage Company is to remove that court ordered taff comments and read the follow- 1. Drainage Computatio~ 2. A Water Management 3. Plans for street ii 4. A plan showing traf~ etc.) is required. 5. The loop road const: traffic including gl roadway could be id< subdivision regulat: tions are recommend~ crete, 8" of shellr¢ lized to 50 p.s.i. ~s are required. )istrict permit is required. rhts are required. !ic control devices (stop signs, :uction will have considerable ~rbage packers. Although this ~ntified as a driveway under the .ons, minimum street specifica- id, i.e., 1½'~ of asphaltic con- ~ck, and 12" of subgrade stabi- 'lorida Bearing Value. MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD JULY 8, 1980 The abandonment of the easements for a new easement should not be a problem since this was done with Tracts A and B. Comments have been requested from the utility companies concerning this. Mr. Grabeel then read the following memo from Mr, Cessna: "As discussed, the developer should be required to make an appropriate sized tap and cross the private streets to the far side of the road and then set up a manifold for the appro- priate number of meters required for that particular area, "The length of some of the lines from the meter to the house seem exceptionally long to me; the Building Department should check to make sure a significant pressure drop does not occur because of line size and length of the plumbing, Cleanouts and APC markers on sewer laterals must be at the easement line." Mr. Annunziato requested the members to refer to Page 2 of the site plan for clarification of this memo and pointed out in several locations, there is a bank of meters, some which serve to the east and some to the west. What the Utility Director is proposing is the line be tapped on the east side of the street and brought under the road and have the water bank off the line on the opposite side of the street at the edge of the easement. In reference to the long lines, such as in the southeastern tier of units, there was feeling this may cause some reduction in pressure. It is requested that the applicant work 'thi~ out with the Building Official. Mr. Ryder commented that with these long lines and particu~ larly if the pipes have a small diameter, there will be a drop in pressure. He thinks what is required is confirmation from the manufacturer of the meters of what pressure drop there would be according to the distance and length of pipe. Mr. Perry Cessna came before the Board and stated he wants to get this across the street because the City's responsi- bility ends at the meter. There can be significant problems with a multitude of small meters running across a street, The second thing is there is substantial head loss when a lot of people are pulling water off small lines, The Build- ing Department is checking to see what the head drop is when getting 100 to 200 feet away, Mr. Grabeel continued with the staff comments and read the Public Works Department has noted no underground garbage cans. The Police Department has noted subject %o proper lighting and signs. The Planning Department has noted lighting on public streets. -19- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD JULY 8, 1980 Mr. Paul Orlan came before the Board and pointed out on Tracts C and D~ there were supposed to be 120 units built and this has been reduced to 102 units. The open area referred to is actually for a clubhouse. Mr. Annunziato informed him that a clubhouse will require site plan approval because it is not included on this plan. Mr. Orlan referred to the comments listed from Mr. Clark and stated that No. 1 is okay. In reference to No. 2, a letter was submitted from the South Florida Water Management District covering the whole plan. In reference to No. 3, they have decided to put a lattern in front of each house with a flores- cent light, so ~it is extremely well lit. There is no problem with No. 4 as these will be installed. He has discussed No. 5 with Mr. Clark and these are private secondary roads and he would like to discuss this further with Mr. Clark. Mr. Annunziato explained that Mr. Clark's concern was to have the construction standards provide a suitable road to accommodate trash trucks, emergency vehicles, etc. Mr. Orlan clarified that they will meet the requirements, but there is one point he would like to discuss further with Mr. Clark. He added that No. 6 is all right. Mr. Orlan stated in reference to the Utility Department's request, it should be noted on the plan that the long indiv- idual lines are to be 1~' and the pressure will be sufficient. To cross the road as suggested is all right with him. One other way to solve this problem would be to provide a single meter for the project, but he doesn't think the people would like it as much. It will be done to City satisfaction. He clarified that all the comments are fair and managable, except the roads which he.will discuss further with Mr. Clark. Mr. DiSalle moved to approve the site plan for Orlan Homes, Congress Avenue (Chanteclair Villas), Tract 1, Sections C & D, Charter World, per staff comments. Mrs. Bond seconded the motion. No discussion. Motion carried 5-0. Applicant: Location: Project Description: Genevieve & James Rollyson/United Technolo- gies Metal Products, Inc. (revision) George Wasser, Agent 2950 High Ridge Road Warehouse/Manufacturing/Office Facilities Mr. George Wasser informed the Board that the plans submitted have very little change as far as the site plan. They have only added a few more parking spaces based on the occupancy and changed the handicapped ramps to conform to the occupancy of approximately 20,000 square feet of this building for -2G- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOAPD JULY 8, 1980 United Technologies Metal Products Company. They will be operating a process called Gator Gard, which is a metal coat- ing process which is totally clean. This does not compare in any way to paint. It is a patented process developed by United Technologies Metal Products Company. There are repre- sentatives present to explain the process. There will be no pollution and it is a completely clean process with no noise. Mr. Wasser then explained the site plan and showed a render- ing of the proposed building. Mr. Annunziato clarified that the question requiring recommen- dation here deals only with the site plan and not the use. The use will be subject to a licensing submission at the time United Technologies Metal Products Company occupies the building. Mr. Grabeel informed the Board when this plan was previously submitted, the building was internally open with a different floor plan. Now, the north 20,000 square feet will be leased to United Technologies Metal Products Company. The remaining 30,000 square feet to the south will be used for storage by the owners. United Technologies Metal Products Company plans to use 5,000 of the 20,000 square feet for office. The building area is 50,000 square feet with the indication of some future expansion at an unknown time. The building height is 16 feet. One story is under construction. He explained how the parking was calculated for each use in the building. The utilities are to be served with temporary wells until water is available from Miner Road. There is a 6" water line shown running along the north and west sides of the building and a staff comment will be forthcoming to provide a 10' easement. There will be a septic tank, but an easement will be required to accommodate tie-ins. The drainage will be provided by an open retention area across the access road. Mrs. Huckle referred to the application noting 68 parking spaces being required and Mr. Grabeel informed her this was revised during the review process and 86 will be required. Mr. Ryder referred to the previous submission dealing with the manufacture of aluminum windows and asked what happened to that and Mr. Wasser informed him that unfortunately, the company made arrangements during the previous approval pro- cess to expand their Ohio plant. Mr. Ryder asked what would be stored in this building and Mr. Wasser replied that it will be vacant space. Mr. Annunziato clarified that the indi- cation of the remaining 30,000 square feet as storage gives a firm definition of the use of the building, but only at this point in time. It was felt it was necessary to get written indication of the use for the 30,000 square feet to calculate the parking requirements. Any other use will result in an application back to the Board. -21- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD JULY 8, 1980 Chairman Thompson questioned the access to this site and Mr. Annunziato replied that as far as the plans on file, there are no improvements to High Ridge Road or an access road to this property. There has been some indication from the builder that he may do some paving. Mr. Wasser stated that he was surprised the plans are not on file as it is their intention to pave the access. A roadway will be built to High Ridge Road. There is a problem in that they do not own right-of-way to the west, so they can only pave half the road. They will pave the half they have access to, Mr. Annunziato clarified that no requests have been made to issue any permits for the private road or review the plans in final form. If it is their intention to do this, it is suggested these plans be forwarded to the City Engineer. Mr. Wasser stated this will be done post haste. Chairman Thompson questioned what the developer plans to do with sidewalks and on-site utilities and Mr. Wasser informed him they will extend the water line to Miner Road to service the building; so when the water line comes down Miner Road, they can connect. They are also extending the sewer line to Miner Road. They presume these services will be forthcoming quite quickly. In the meantime, they will put in a well and septic tank, so there will be temporary facilities. Mr. Annunziato clarified that dry lines will be constructed on the site in the proper easements anticipating tie-in. Mr. Wasser added that a sprinkler system is also being installed which cannot be taken care of by a well. Mr. Ryder asked if the septic tank is for the entire building and Mr. Wasser re- plied affirmatively; it is the largest allowed on a tempoary basis. He added that fire hydrants will be located within 500 feet so hoses can go around the building. Mr. Annunziato added the fire hydrant must have a public easement for main- tenance purposes. Chairman Thompson asked if they planned on-site sidewalks and Mr. Wasser replied that with being an industrial building, they don't anticipate pedestrian traffic, but do have a walkway to the office from the parking area and driveway access to the building on all sides. Chairman Thompson asked if on-site drainage has been taken into account and Mr. Wasser replied there is a three acre lake and the South Florida Water Management District has approved. Mr. Ryder asked where the access is from High Ridge Road into the plant and Mr. Wasser pointed this out on the plan. Mr. Ryder clarified this is laid out to provide access for future development and Mr. Wasser agreed. Mr. Ryder commented that -22- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD JULY 8, 1980 the access is going through the tract when it could come from Miner Road. Mr. Wasser informed him this was investigated, but there were questions regarding access from Miner Road. Then the owner of the rest of the tract offered to participate in the paving of this road, so it could be used for future development. A preliminary plan was submitted showing the road pattern for the entire 30 acres. Chairman Thompson clarified that at this time, the plans are to pave a one lane strip from the present paving on High Ridge Road south of Florida Pneumatic and Mr. Wasser agreed because they only own half of the road. Mr. Annunziato added that 40' is dedi- cated for public purposes and it is possible to pave 40' for two lanes. Mr. Grabeel read the memo from Mr. Cessna: "A 10' easement is reauired for the 6" water line now shown on the plans on the west and north side of the building. This is in addition to the previous easements shown. "Further, it should be called to the attention of the developer that he or his tenants, as they may agree among them- selves, shall be responsible for all fees, capital facilities charges, and other charges as required by the ordinances of the City of Boynton Beach." Mr. Grabeel added that the overall recommendation is approval subject to comments. Mr. DiSalle moved that the site plan be approved for Genevieve and James Rollyson/United Technologies Metal Products, Inc. at 2950 High Ridge Road for warehouse/manufacturing/office faci- lities, subject to staff comments. Mrs. Huckle seconded the motion. No discussion. Motion carried 5-0. Mr. Annunziato stated if the Board wishes, several representa- tives from United Technologies Metal Products, Inc. are present who have a slide presentation and will answer any questions on the chemical aspects of the process. Since the hour is getting late, it is up to the Board regarding the presentation. The staff did review the presentation and the result was the memo submitted by the City Manager. Chairman Thompson stated since the representatives are present, he would like to have the presentation given. The representatives of United Technologies Metal Products then gave a slide presentation and thoroughly explained the process. A question and answer session followed with further discussion. -23- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD JULY 8, 1980 Applicant: Location: Project Description: Village Royale on the Green/Owners' League, Inc. N. E. 1st Court Maintenance Building Mr. Grabeel referred to there being a question regarding the use of this being a maintenance building and advised the appli- cant did submit a letter clarifyinq this is to house landscap- ing equipment and other items necessary for the general main- tenance of their condominium complex and there will be no use or storage for any individual unit owner. The zoning is Recreation. The area is 5.37 acres with the building being 2,009 sq. feet. It will be surrounded with a 6' fence. The parking required is three spaces and they have proposed seven. The access is from a 20' driveway running east of N. E. 1st Court. The water and sewer will be served and tied in south of the parking lot and drainage is on-site into swales. The applicants are present to answer any questions. Mr. Mike Rubin referred to the three parking spaces required and advised they exceeded the requirement just to be sure. He clarified that this is a maintenance compound. The building consists of a closed area and open shed to store fertilizer. There will be a work bench in the closed build- ing with a parts room and restroom. There has been a lot of vandalism and a building is needed to store their equipment. It is being built away from the side line to give the build- ings to the south some privacy. Mr. Ryder clarified this will be in back of the private homes and Mr. Rubin agreed, but there is a 6' high redwood fence and the building will be positioned behind the fence. Also, there will be vines to cover the fence. Mr. Grabeel referred to the staff comments and read the Build- ing Department noted to coordinate the open floor storage area w~th the Building Official. The Police Department noted subject to lighting on all driveways and the windows are to have grates to prevent entry. The Public Works Department is to be consulted regarding dumpster location. The Planning Department noted that barbed wire is not per- mitted on the fence. Mr. Rubin questioned barbed wire not being allowed and Mr. Annunziato informed him that it is not allowed in residential zones. Mrs. Bond moved approval of the plan for the maintenance building for Village Royale on the Green, N. E. 1st Court, with the staff comments. Mr. DiSalle seconded the motion. No discussion. Motion carried 5-0. -24- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD JULY 8, 1980 OTHER Mrs. Huckle requested a retroactive excuse for her absence at the last meeting as she was supposed to be back from vacation on June 22f but her father was very ill and she was not able to return until June 28. ADJOURNMENT Mr. Ryder moved to adjourn, seconded by Mr. DiSalle. Motion carried 5-0 and the meeting was properly adjourned at 11:10 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Suzanne M. Kruse Recording Secretary (Four Tapes) -25- DATE: TIME: PLACE: A G E N D A PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD Regular Meeting July 8th, 1980 7:30 P.M. Council Chambers City Hall 1. Acknowledgement of Members and Visitors. 2. Reading and Approving of Minutes.' 3. Announcement. 4. Communications. 5. "Citizens Awareness" Presentation: None (rescheduled due to public hearings) e Old Business: New Business: PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element Applicant: Location: Request: Legal Description: Applicant: Location: Request: Legal Description: 3. Applicant: Location: Request: Legal Description: City of Boynton Beach (Area 68) S.W. 15th Avenue at E-4 Canal,Northwest corner Moderate Density Residential from Office Commercial See Notice of Public Hearing (Application %1) City of Boynton Beach 425-523 N.E. 4th Street (west side of N.E. 4th Street from 425 N.E. 4th Street north to N.E. 5th Avenue) (Area 49 in part) General Commercial from Local Retail Com~ercial See Notice of Public Hearing (Application %4) City of Boynton Beach -' 320-ft. length along No. Federal Highway on east side at northern City limits (Area 7) Community Commercial from Moderate Density Residential See Notice of Public Hearing. (Application #3) B. Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element and Rezoning 1. Applicant: -~ L~cati~: Request:~ Legal Description: City cf Boynton Beach (Area south of 68) S.W. i5th Avenue at E-4 Canal, Southwest Corner REZONE to R-tAA from C-4 LAND USE ~END~ENT - Moderate Density Residential from General Commerical See Notice of Public Hearing (Application ~2) ~lanning & Zoning Board Agenda Page 2 July 8th, 1980 Applicant: Location: Request: Legal Description: C. ABANDONMENT REQUEST City of Boynton Beach Along east side of FEC Railroad from S.E. 8th Avenue to S·E. 10th Avenue (Area 73) REZONE to R-2 from C-3 OR REZONE to C-4 from C-3 LAND USE ~4END~,~NT - General Commerical from Medium Density Residential See Notice of Public Hearing (Applications 95 & 6) Applicant: Location: Legal Description: Request: Orlan Homes Cor~. (Paul Ortan, agent) Tracts C and D, Charter World (Chantectair Villas) See Exhibit 'A' Abandonment of dedicated special purpose easement SITE P~AN APPROVAL Applicant: Location~ Legal Description: Project Description: 2. Applicant: Location: Legal Description: Project Description: Applicant: Location: Legal Description: Project Description: Orlan Homes Inc (Paul Orlan, agent) Congress Avenue (Chanteclair Villas) Tract t, Sections C & D, Charter World 102 Villa Type Dwelling Units on 14.25 acres Genevieve & James Rollyson/United Technologies Metal Products, Inc (revision) (George Wasser,agent) 2950 High Ridge Road acreage Warehouse/Manufacturing/Office Facilities Village Royale on the Green/Owners' League Inc N.E. 1st Court See Survey Maintenance Building