Minutes 04-22-80MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
HELD AT CITY HALL, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA, APRIL 22, 1980
PRESENT
Arnold Thompson, Chairman
Fred DiSalle, Vice Chairman
Lillian Bond
Wayne Drew
Marilyn Huckle
Simon Ryder
Garry Winter
Carmen Annunziato, City Planner
Chairman Thompson called the meeting to order at 7:30 P. M.
MINUTES OF APRIL 8, 1980
Mrs. Huckle moved that the minutes of the Planning & Zoning
Board meeting for April 8 be approved as submitted, seconded
by Mrs. Bond. Motion carried 7-0.
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Mr. Annunziato announced that next Wednesday, April 30, at
7:30 P. M., the City Council will conduct the second public
hearing on the zoning ordinance amendments. The first public
hearing was held last week and several people spoke express-
ing the same concerns which were brought before the Board.
NEW BUSINESS
Chairman Thompson referred to the public hearing not convening
until 8:00 P. M. and Mr. Annunziato suggested that he tell the
~oard about two projects he is working on right now. One pro-
ject is researching the recreational buildings and potential
development and he told about the study being performed to
analyze the situation as it exists in the City today. He ex-
plained how they were trying to come up with a ratio of unit
buildings compared to condominiums and homeowners associations.
They are researching the laws to determine who must conduct
meetings and under what circumstances for associations where
common property is owned.
Mr. Annunziato continued that the second project is analyzing
the western reserve annexation area regarding sewer and water.
He told about researching the background for the regional sewer
and water system and explained how regions were designated.
He told about the County preparing a growth management plan
with the intent to reduce or eliminate development west of the
turnpike with transferring development rights to east of the
turnpike. He explained how this required inter-governmental
coordination with determining the capacity of various services.
MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
APRIL 22, 1980
Discussion followed regarding the aspects of this approach and
how important consideration should be given to the available
utilities, capacity of schools, capacity of roads, etc. They
also discussed how this was not taken into consideration in
various areas and the result.
At this time, Chairman Thompson called for a five minute recess
and then reconvened the meeting at 8:00 P. M.
Public Hearing
Rezoning Request:
Applicant:
Location:
Legal
Description:
Use:
Request:
Joseph and Roberta Tomberg
1516 S. W. 2nd Street
Lot 9, Block 5, Woodcrest Manor
Professional Office
Rezone from R-1AA to C-1
Mr. Annunziato informed the Board this request is to rezone
from R-1AA to C-1 one single family lot located at S. W. 2nd
Street and S. W. 15th Avenue. He suggests conducting the pub-
lic hearing and he will reserve his comments until after the
hearing.
Chairman Thompson asked if anyone in the audience wished to
speak in favor of this rezonin~ request.
Mr. Jeff Tomberg, 66 S. E. 4th Street, referred to making this
request at several meetings and stated he has now submitted the
formal rezoning application for this property. He contends
that Woolbright Road is predominantly commercially zoned for
the entire length from the Intracoastal to Congress Avenue
other than this 1% blocks. There is a 7-11 store, church,
-cemetery, ball park, shopping centers, water plant, etc.
along Woolbright Road.
Mr. Tomberg referred to having a traffic survey prepared and
distributed copies to the Board members. He pointed out the
traffic count at the peak period is in excess of 20,000 vehi-
cles and the off-peak period, it is in excess of 15,000 vehi-
cles. The average vehicular traffic is 18,000 in a 24 hour
period. Their argument is this particular property is not
suitable for single family residence being located at a busy
intersection. When the house was first built, 15th Avenue
dead-ended just Past 3rd Street where 1-95 presently is. At
the present time, 1-95 is one of the major arterial roads
leading into Boynton Beach and there are only two entrances
into the City and this is one of them. The oth~ entrance is
2nd Avenue and there is commercial property located east and
west of 1-95, the same as on 15th Avenue with the exception of
-2-
MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
APRIL 22, 1980
this property. He feels it is arbitrary to zone this for a
single family residence. The area is bordered by 1-95 on the
west, Seacrest Boulevard on the east, 2nd Avenue on the north,
and Woolbright Road to the south and is almost completely con-
structed with single family homes. The incursion of profes-
sional buildings will not cause any problems to the single
family residences in this area. In addition, the traffic sit-
uation at the cQrner is highly dangerous for single family resi-
dences. He told about an accident happening in the yard when
a car lost control turning the corner.
Mr. Tomberg referred to the City having the ball park across
the street and stated there is nothing wrong with that, but
the lights are on until 9:00 to 10:00 P. M. for people to play
baseball. The City also has a cemetery across the street. If
the City is going to have businesses along this street, then
individuals should have the same right. A commercial enterprise
is not necessarily an invasion into single family, as they plan
a law office. They will' be spending about $50,000 to improve
this property. If somebody is going to spend $50,000 for an
office, he does not see how the property values will go down.
The office will be run exclusively in the day time~ The busi-
ness would be 9 to 5 when the average person is working. The
increase of traffic on that corner will be minimum. There has
been no request for curb cuts, as they are not needed. As to
the neighbor directly adjacent, the City requires by ordinance
that a 6' retaining wall be constructed between commercial and
residential property and if approved~ they will comply with
this.
Mr. Tomberg stated that he submits with the traffic count,
noise and pollution from vehicles, it is impractical to have
a single family home in this area. Woolbright Road has be-
come commercial in nature and a single family home is not
practical right on Woolbright Road. The Planning & Zoning
Board should take into consideration those aspects which con-
stitute single family and whether the impact of 1-95 and Wool-
bright Road has not materially affected this parcel to such a
major extent that it is no longer feasible to be a single
family residence. It should be zoned C-1. He asked for the
Board to listen to the evidence from the people present and
not the fact there are large numbers. Approximately 40 fami-
lies were notified to be here and less than 20% have shown up.
He does not think the impact on the neighborhood will be that
great.
Mr. DiSalle questioned the size of this property and Mrs.
Huckle informed him it is 80 x 125 feet. Mrs. Bond asked if
they planned to tear down the present house or renovate it
and Mr. Tomberg replied they plan to renovate the building
with major improvements. Mrs. Bond asked if the entrance
would be on S. W. 2nd Street and Mr. Tomberg replied affirma-
tively.
-3-
MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
APRIL 22, 1980
Chairman Thompson asked if anyone else in the audience cared to
speak in favor of this rezoning request. Mr. Harvey Oyer, 227
S. W. 15th Avenue, stated his residence is on the property immed-
iately east of Mr. Tomberg's and their back door faces the side
of his property. This property was for sale, but it didn't sell.
The traffic pattern is going to be such that there will be tenant
occupied dwellings on Woolbright Road, which results in down-
graded appearance and maintenance of properties. He does feel
this use for the property will upgrade the area and the ordinances
in the City are sufficiently strong to protect the adjacent pro-
perty owners including him. He is not personally familiar with
the requirements for a retaining wall next to a residence, but
if it is required, he hopes it will be a wooden fence. He does
think this is a desirable use of the property and speaks in
favor of the zoning variance being requested.
Chairman Thompson ascertained that nobody else wished to speak
in favor of this request. He asked if anyone cared to speak in
opposition to this rezoning request and the following came be-
fore the Board.
Mr. James Moxley, 234 S. W. 14th Avenue, stated that he owns
the adjoining lot. In regards to the traffic pattern, anyone
who has driven on Woolbright Road will tell you to pull on and
off is almost an impossibility. He cannot see how commercial
property could be allowed on an 80 x 125 ft. lot. This same
rezoning request was made about two years ago and was turned
down. There is no room for parking on this size lot. He does
not see how it could be considered because the parking would
have to back out onto Woolbright Road. It will create a traffic
hazard with not having a large enough lot to park on. The re-
quest is for C-1 and it is spot zoning to have commercial pro-
perty adjoining a residential house. As far as the number of
people showing up, he didn't see the reason to come as this was
turned down once and he cannot see any reason for it.. He is
definitely against this. In regards to the comment about tenant
occupancy, is the sollution to make it commercial in a place
which is congested? The other houses against this property
may as well be zoned commercial and it will continue to Ocean
Avenue. He-is definitely against this.
Mr. Gus Kartman, 306 S. W. 14th Avenue, stated he has lived at
this corner of 14th Avenue and 2nd Street for seven years and
in Boynton Beach for 16 years. This is a residential district
and always has been. When Mr. Tomberg lived on this property,
he pretty near wrecked it with parking cars all over the front
yard. Now, he wants a variance for the same reason, so cars
could be parked all over the front yard. It will be a hazard
and eyesore. He is 'opposed to it and knows a lot of the neigh-
bors are. A law office will bring in a lot of people 'who are
undesirable citizens and after seeing the neighborhood, they
might decide to come back afterwards. There are a lot of
things the neighborhood should be protected from and spot
zoning should definitely be avoided. This property should re-
main single family.
-4-
MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
APRIL 22, 1980
Mr. Casimir Sikon, 1511 S. W. 2nd Street, stated he is directly
across the street from this property in question. He asked if
the letter he submitted to Mrs. Padgett was received and Chair-
man Thompson replied affirmatively. Mr. Sikon requested this
letter to be considered and read. He then stated that R-1AA
zoning is considered prime residential and don't they have the
right to have a buffer between commercial? There are stringent
regulations regarding the construction of homes and they have
abided by the rules and the neighborhood is something to be
proud of. He cannot see putting commercial in their back yard.
He also would like to know who owns the vacant lot next door.
That gentleman is waiting for a precedent to be set so the
commercial zoning can be continued.
Mr. John Fenesy~ 219 S. W. 14th Avenue, stated this lot is on
2nd Street and Woolbright Road, but the legal address is 2nd
Street which doesn't put it on Woolbright Road. This is defi-
nitely in a residential zone. It was mentioned there would be
no curb cuts, so the entrance and exit will be onto 2nd Street.
He told about his experience with having a vehicle stop in
front of him when turning off Woolbright Road and how he was
stuck out in Woolbright Road with vehicles bearing down on him.
With the size of this lot, vehicles would have to back out onto
2nd Street which would create a hazard. He feels those points
should be considered. He is definitely against this request.
Mrs. Marion DiPasquale, 1510 S. W. 2nd Street, stated she lives
next to the property in question. Her neighbor.s have about said
everything. It ms a little hard for a lay person to speak
against a lawyer and real estate person. She lives next door
and likes her home and wants to keep it residential.
Chairman Thompson ascertained that nobody else wanted to speak
in opposition. He announced that four letters have been re-
ceived. He read a letter from Casimir S. and Dorothy K. Sikon,
1511 S. W. 2nd Street, objecting to this request because it is
a residential neighborhood~ this is spot zoning, and would
create a traffic hazard. He read a note from Anne Catherine
Turner written on the notice stating that she objects to this
request. He read a letter from Myron L. and Margaret G. Davis,
242 S. W. 13th Avenue, opposing this change. He read a letter
from Joseph and Christine Mullins, 301 S. W. 14th Avenue, list-
ing six objections to this request.
Mr. Jeff Tomberg requested to comment further. He doesn't know
how many people are familiar with their law office, but not all
their clients steal~ people do come in for wills, real estate,
etc. The second misconception is the amount of traffic gener-
ated by a law office. They seldom have more than four vehicles
pulling into the property on any one day. Most of the traffic
will be the employees or owners. Most of the practice of law
is done on paper. There is a large misconception of the amount of
-5-
MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
APRIL 22, 1980
space needed for parking; it is not like a hardware store or
7-11. He explained how their clients have scheduled appoint-
ments and one is leaving when the other is arriving. He be-
lieves there has been a misconception about the amount of traf-
fic. It is true there may be five or six cars there, but they
are for the people who work there. People are misguided to the
amount of traffic generated by a law office. These people have
raised a point about this being an incursion. He thinks it
should be stopped on Woolbright Road, but don't exclude those
on Woolbright Road. To stop one owner because of being afraid
of the others following suit is capricious and arbitrary. Urban
growth develops around spurs or arteries. The biggest spur to
the west~is Woolbright Road and 2nd Avenue. The traffic along
major arteries is generated other than commercial means and
the commercial people flock there to benefit from the traffic.
A law office will not generate traffic of a major impact.
Mr. Annunziato stated at this point, he would like to extract
one or two paragraphs from the Comprehensive Plan. This area
was addressed at the time of the Comprehensive Plan as Area 19.
The recommendation was residential based on the statement:
"The rationale for permitting commercial use derives from the
increased market potential of the property for commercial use
due to the increased traffic capacity along Woolbright, as well
as to the negative impact of this traffic upon low density resi-
dential use. While both arguments are valid, other substantial
negative impacts would result from the use of this area for
commercial purposes. The high traffic volumes, while acting to
create a market for commercial uses would impact the vehicular
ingress and egress characteristics of small commercial proper-
ties thus duplicating the traffic safety problems which presently
exist along portions of N. 2nd Avenue. In addition to the pro-
blem associated with numerous arterial street curb cuts is the
impact of commercial reuse on the stability of the low density
residential neighborhood immediately to the north. Therefore,
it is recommended that present land use regulations remain in
effect."
Mr. Annunziato stated the policies governing this issue are
clear. Residential Use - Encourage the preservation of exist-
ing single family neighborhoods and discourage conversions to
higher densities. Commercial Use - Discourage the expansion
of strip commercial development.
Mr. Annunziato stated what Mr. Tomberg referred to as develop-
ment along arteries has long since passed and everyone is aware
of the results with strip commercial. There is no question
about it being spot zoning since there is residential on three
sides and a park. The high traffic counts do not justify the
need for rezoning, There will be incursion into the single
family area. For all these reasons and the inconsistency with
the Comprehensive Plan, he recommends this application be denied.
MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
APRIL 22, 1980
Mr. Ryder referred to this being discussed when the Comprehen-
sive Plan was under consideration and stated the Board took
negative action in response to this request because of the
reasons mentioned of spot zoning, strip commercial zoning, etc.
He thinks from what was said tonight, it justifies the position
we took before. There is also the impact on the surrounding
area to consider. He certainly doesn't see this as a classic
example of how to start the Comprehensive Plan which has just
recently been adopted. In all these cases, we must consider
what happens to people in the immediate vicinity. Now after
hearing from some of the neighbors, he certainly feels the stand
taken before and the stand to take tonight is to deny this re-
quest.
Mr. DiSalle added that in addition to the spot zoning, he would
have to object to this request because it does not provide an
adequate buffer between commercial and residential.
Mr. DiSalle made a motion to deny this rezoning from R-1AA to
C-1 for Lot 9, Block 5, Woodcrest Manor. Mr~ Winter seconded
the motion. Under discussion, Mr. Annunziato suggested includ-
ing some reasons and Mr. DiSalle stated some of the reasons are
spot zoning, and no adequate buffer between commercial and resi-
dential areas. Mr. Ryder added that it is contrary to the Com-
prehensive Land Use Plan as it exists. Mrs, Huckle questioned
what he meant by no adequate bUffer and Mr. DiSalle replied
there is not adequate area there and the residential would be
contiguous to the commercial. Motion carried 7-0.
Mr. Annunziato announced this will be heard by the City Council
at their meeting on May 6.
ADJOURNMENT
Mr. Ryder made a motion to adjourn, seconded by Mr. DiSalle.
Motion carried 7-0 and the meeting was properly adjourned at
8:45 P. M.
Respectfully submitted,
Suzanne M. Kruse
Recording Secretary
(One Tape)
-7-
DATE:
TIME:
PLACE:
Apri~ 22nd, 1980
7:30 P.M.
Council Chambers
City Hall
AGENDA
PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD
Regular Meeting
2.
3.
4.
Acknowledgement of Members and Visitors.
Reading and Approving of Minutes.
Announcement.
Communications. ~'
"Citizens Awareness" Presentation:
(Canceled to be rescheduled)
6. Old Business:
7. New Business:
Al Public'Hearing:
REZONING REQUEST
Applicant:
Location:
Legal
Description:
Use:
Request:
Joseph and Roberta Tomberg
1516 S.W, 2nd Street
Lot 9, Block 5, Woodcrest Manor
Professional Office
REZONE from R1AA to C'i