Loading...
Minutes 08-10-76MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ~ETING OF THE PLfaNNING & ZONING B0~P2RD HELD AT CiTY HALL, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA, TUESDAY, AUGUST 10, 1 976 AT 7:30 P. M. PRESENT Joseph T. Kelly, Chairman Fred Kostner, Vice'Chairman Richard Lambert Simon Ryder Carmen Annunziato, City Planner ABSENT Garry Winter Louis Reiser Otis Walker (Excused) (Excused) Chairman Kelly called the meeting to order at 7:28 P. M., in order to hold the Public Hea~ing at 7:30 P. M. He welcomed everyone present and introduced the members of the Board and the City Planner. PUBLIC ~AR!NG Mi!nor Corporation Right-of-$Yay Abanaonmen Parcel #3 - Abandonment of Right of Way, more particularly described as follows: CommenCe at the Southeast corner of Tract 4, as shown on the plat entitled Golf View Harbour 3rd Section, City of Boynton Beach, Florida, accord-- ing to the plat thereof recorded in Plat Book 30 on page !~9, Public ~ecords of Palm Beach County, Florida; thence N. 2 2~' 36" W., along the East line of said Tract 4, a distance of 285 feet; thence N. 87° 38' 24~ E., a distance of 50 feet to the Point of Beginning of the abandoned right- of-way to be herein described; thence Easterly, Southerly, and Westerly, along the arc of a curve 8oncave to the West having a central angle of 180 0' 0':' and a radius 8f 5~ feet, a distance of 157,08 feet; thence N. 2 21' 36'~ W., a dis- t~uce of 100 feet to the Point of Beginning afore-described. Location - S. W. 13th Street (within that por- tion lying between S. W. 23rd Avenue and Lazy Lake ~aterway) Applicant--O'Brien, Suiter & O'Brien representing Milnor Corporation. ~. Norman Michael appears8 before the Board and stated his address as 1310 S. W. 27th Place. He pointed out the loca- tion of the requested abandonment on a plan. He informed the Board that the construction 6f a home brought about this MINUTES PLANNING& ZONING BOARD PA,3E ~0 ~T~ 1 976 AUguST 10, request to relocate the right-of-way. The relocation will enable Mr. Shortley, Lot 21, to have ingress and egress off of 13th Street. The cul-de-sac has not been built, but will give more depth to the present street. The members then viewed the plan. M~. Ryder asked if 25th Avenue to Congress Avenue had been abandoned and M~. Michael replied: yes. ~. Ryder asked if either of the abandoned streets were public streets and ~M. I~chael replied: yes, but they were abandoned in December, 1973. He clarified that they were now talking about moving the cul-de-sac, so both houses could have street access in and out of their driveways. Chairman Kelly asked if anyone in the audience was in favor of this application. ~. Michael then showed the men~ers of the audience the plan and explained the relocation of the cul-de-sac. A man in the audience asked if 25th Avenue would still be blocked off and M~. Michael informed him that the street had been abandoned for almost three years. This man questioned why the street was blocked off and added that it was a hazard to the area. Chairman Kelly requested ~uyone desiring to ask further questions to please come forward to the microphone. ~s. Kathleen Kirton appeared before the Board amd asked for clarification of the location. Mr. Michael pointed it out and informed her it was located at S. W. 13th Street off of S. W. 23rd Avenue. Chairman Kelly again asked if anyone was in favor of this application and the following appeared before the Board. ~4r. Mike Shortley stated his name mad informed the Boamd that he was building a home right next to the cul-de-sac proposed to be put in. He is in favor of the cul-de-sac. He added that a man had asked why 25th Avenue was blocked off and he understands i2 was done after a vote wa~ taken and the people requested that it be blocked off because of traffic racing through. Mr. Michael did what he was told on that. He was made to block that off. Chairman Kelly then asked if anyone was opposed to this ap- plication and received no response. Mm. Lambert referred to the Utilities Department and Build- ing Department noting they had no objections, but the City Engineer commented about the rededication of a 50 ft. radius cul-de-sac. ~. Annunziato informed him that to his know- ledge, a 40 ft. radius was proposed, but they are requesting the radius to be 50 ft. in order to be able to allow for the passage of emergency vehicles, etc. Other than that, the staff has no objection. MINUTES PI~NNiNG & ZONING BOARD PAGE THREE AUGUST 10, 1976 ~. Ryder asked if the City Engineer had formally approved changing the street system because the street is extended southward and Mr. Annunziato replied: yes, it was reviewed with the application. ~. Ryder referred to 13th Street being extended beyond the old cul-de-sac and asked if it had been accepted formally by the City and Mr. Annunziato replied that it would be when it was formally dedicated. Mr. Lambert made a motion to recommend to the City Council to accept the abandonment.and relocation of the 50 ft. radius cul-de-sac located on S. W. 13th Street. Mr. Kostner seconded the motion. Motion carried 4-0. from Norman and Elishka Michael Parcel #2 - Tract 4, Golfview H~bour, 3~d Section Recorded in Plat Book 30, Pages ~19 and 120 Palm Beach County Records Location - S. E. Corner 23rd Ave. & Congress Ave. Request - East 450 ft. to be rezoned to C-1 from R-~AA West 700 ft. to be rezoned to C-2 from Use - C-1 - Neighborhood Office C-2 - Shopping Plaza ~pplicants - Norman J. and Elishka Eo Michael Mr. Alan Sicklin stated his name and advised the Board that he was an attorney representing M~. & M~s. ~chael. He re- ferre~ to the petition previously being heard ~d stated that he would not go into detail. He advised that there was one change from the petition as previously heard which they feel will improve the development and enhance the petition. They have increased the C-1 part to 550 feet and decreased the C-2 part to 600 feet. He discussed this with the Assistant City Attorney and he is in agreement. Mr. Sicklin then showed the proposed plan and explained how they had increased the C-1 portion and d~ecreased the C-2 portion. He also pointed out thick buffering along the canal, so the four or seve~ lots along the canal would be unable to see this development. He referred to the purpose of development as set forth in the zoning ordinance and stated that this was their intent. He explained how it was a planned facility. He showed architectural renderings of different views of the proposed shopping complex. He re- ferred to people wanting to be assured that this is what will be built. He stated that the City code does not have a special exception provision to attach conditions, but he has prepared an affidavit which Mr. and Mrs. Micha&~ have sworn to under oath. He read the affidavit and advised that it MINUTES PLA~]~ING & ZONI~G BOARD PAGE FOUR~ AUGUST lO, 1976 would be made psat of the site plan. He added that it was properly sealed and executed. The purpose and inten~ of this is to show the intention and good faith of b~. Michael first of all and to commit the site plan to the ground. They are trying as best they can under the present code to do what they say and say what they mean. ~. and ~@s. Michael have been building in Boynton Beach for quite awhile and they are not going any place. Mr. Michael plans to have an office in the complex himself. He wants it as shown and it will be like that. He referred to the complex being comprised of basically light intensity uses and pointed out the various shops planned. He also explained how the parking was more th~n adequate. The foot bridge would go from the residential area into the development. It will be convenient for the residents and will also de~ease the traffic flow. The shopping center is extremely well planned and there is a definite need for it in the area. He explained how- he was not acquainted with anything in Palm Beach County comparable to this. P~. Louis Kushner stated his name and his address as 1301 S. W. 25th Avenue. He informedtthe Board that he was the President of a Consulting Engineering Firm mud a licensed contractor in the State of Florida. He stated that he would like to spe~4 both ways. He has three offices at the present time and they are all cubicles located in the Fort Lauderdale area. They need something like this here for professional people because of !-95. It would be a Benefit to professional people. It would bring in revenuw. In getting back to the points which may be a hazard, they think the foot bridge will be of no benefit to the neighbors and he explained. Also, consideration must be given to the security situation and lighting situation. They must look at the scale of the draw- ings, the height of the buildings, what type of businesses, etc. Also, they must check whether the cul-de-sac penetrates into the 40 ft. of the drainage canal. He thinks the cul-de- sac should be there for the convenience of the people there. M~. Michael informed him that the cul-de-sac did not inter- fere with the 40 ft. ~.~. Kushner continued that he could not see the low rises along 2~d ~e and two story build- ings on 23rd Avenue. He thinks it would benefit the area by bringing in professional peop!e. Mr. Sicklin informed him that as far as security and light- ing, they intend to have the area well lighted, but the lights ~il! not shine on the residential area. As fa~as the foot bridge, he believes Mr. Michael would leave it out if~neces- sary, but they would rather put it in and provide the proper precautionary measures ~ad he explained. They think it would be good, but if the community objects, it will be eliminated. They will go either way' the neighborhood desires. MINUTES PLANNING & ZONING BO~D P~GE FIVE AUGUST 10, 1976 Mr. Lambert referred to the lighting, security, etc. being questioned and informed them that if the zoning was changed, the building plans must go through this Board, the C.A.B., T.R.B., etc. The oublic at that time is welcome to make com- ments regarding the lighting, buffering, etc. M~. Kushner replied that he was trying to eliminate coming back every week. Y~. Lambert informed him that this was the procedure and it could not be eliminated. Chairman Kelly added that in the affidavit it stated all the regulations of the Build- ing Department would be adhered to. Mr. Kushner then referred to the construction along Congress Avenue being in the process for three years and told about the dirt, etc. the residents had to put up with. Chairman Kelly questioned whether this was germ~e to the question tonight and. Mr. Kushner replied that the longer this gets held up, the longer they will have bare ground where they are!living. ~. Annunziatc clarified that the request be- fore the Board was for rezoning an~ not an approval of the development plans. In reference to the foot bridge, he understands that this was part of the approval of the Golf- view Harbour Estates plat. In reference to building types, that information would come at the time when the development plans are submitted. In reference to the construction along Congress Avenue, the staff is reviewing preliminary plans for townhouses, but there are problems which are being worked out internally. Chairman Kelly then asked if there was anyone else wishing to speak in favor of this application. Mr. ~ke Shortley appeared before the Board and referred to speaking at the last time in favor and then the opposition was heard. He think~ the Board should have an open mind on this. He feels the opposition speaking against it should also have an open mind on it. He would like the opposition to speak first, so he could offer rebuttal. They should keep their opinions to the facts. He is for this development. He thinks the neighborhood needs something like this. He has been in the retail business for 15 years. They want to put some specialty stores in there and this is needed, as they now must go to Delray Beach or West Palm Beach for shop- ping. He thinks the people should be happy with this. There has been remarks about what Mr. Michael is going to do, but if he is going to sign an affidavit, he is sure this is-what he means. He is doing the best he can. What is proposed is good. With business offices, the hours are 9:00 to 5:00. He thinks what they are looking at will benefit the commun- ity. He will be very close to it and is very happy with these nice plans. He thinks what is proposed will be bene- ficial to the whole neighborhood. If they look at it with an open mind, he thinks they will agree it will be beneficial. MINUTES PLAIcE\TING & ZONING BOARD PAGE S~ AUGUST 10, t976 Mr. Robert Atkins stated his name and informed the Board that he lives within 400 ft. He has k~uown Mr. Michael for almost four years and thinks he is a man of integrity and is a good builder. He thin~ this would be an asset to anyone within 400 ft. He thinks it will enhance property. 13% are unem- ployed in the County and he thinks the people in the County will benefit financially from this. It is a good project and should be done. They Should let Mr. ~chael build a good place there. M~. Jack Vsmdermolen stated his name and his address as 2560 12th Street. He informed the Board that ~e is interested in the community he lives in and thinks Mr. Michael's project is great for this area. In the future, he think~s Congress Ave. will be commercial and he thinks this will be beautiful on this corner ~her than a gas station. He thinks this project is very good. ~. Harry Nissley stated his name and his address as 1251S.W. 25th Way. He stated that many people would like to see this stay as it is now as R-1AA, but many of these same people would not want to build a house on that corner. Both streets are going to be widened and it will become busier. They would not want to move there themselves. He thinks this concept is one of the best deals offered to the community. They know sometime this may be rezoned because people are $o~ going to build houses there and lose money. Also, if this new concept is built, it will bring the City more tax dollars to support the tax burden they have now. Mrs. Michael Gaiiaro sta~ed~her name and her address as 1280 S. W. 27th Place. She has Yanown Mr. Michael for 12 years and k~ows he will build what he says. This project is a wonderful thing. She thinks it will improve the neighborhood She is for it. ' Chairman Kelly then asked if anyone was opposed to this appli- cation and the following appeared before the Board. Mr. Wayne Upton stated his name and his address as 1401S. W. 25th Avenue. He advised that first he was speaking as the Vice President of the Golfview Harbour Homeowners' Associa- tion and at their August 4 meeting, it was decided they would take a poll of the people living within 400 ft. abutting this project. The question asked was: Do you favor leaving R-1AA or changing the zoning to C-1 or C-2. The results were signed by 13 in favor of R-1AA, 2 in favor of changing the zoning, and 12 did not want to respond or were on vacation. He be- lieves letter, are on file from these people. In reference to the people speaking previously, one person lives outside of the 400 ft. area and there is a question on the tax rolls MI~TES PLANNING~ & ZONING BOARD P~.GE SEVEN ~UGUST 1 O, 1 976 regarding ~. Shortley. Chairman Kelly questioned what he was inferring and ~. Upton replied that he did not ~now legally what the question is and Chairman Kelly suggested that he not bring it up then. Chairman Kelly stated the correspondence received regarding this application were five letters in favor and five letters in opposition. M~. Upton continued stating that he would now like to speak as an abutter. He lives directly across the canal. One thing he is against is that he cannot see any commercial property enhancing his property. He does ~ot know of any time this has happened. He questions the plan showing parking along the hO ft. right-of-way. He thinks there is some question whether the approval has been granted for that land. r~. ~chael infor~ed him that the right-of-way is held by the Lake Worth Drainage District, but their policy is to allow parking on rights-of-way. He explained how this com- pared to the setback from a road. Mr. Upton asked if this decision had b~en completely agreed to and !~. ~cha~l re- plied: no. ~'~m. Upton continued stat&~gthat he questioned the dental - medical building directly behind him being a two story build- ing. He questions putting a two story building abutting a residential area. He believes the entranceway after the canal will create problems. He has some real concerns about this request being grouted and hopes it will not be granted. ~. Kelley Kirton stated his name and his address as 2526 S. W. l~th Court. He informed the Board he was opposed to this and questioned since a change in the petition had been made that they could hear this. Mr. Annunziato informed him that he discussed this with M~. Smodish, 'the Assistant City Attorney, and was informed that as long as the boun- daries of the land to be rezoned do not change amd the change is in a more restrictive nature, he felt it would not be un- reasonable to hear the application. However, any action taken by a third party, the City would, be held harmless. It means he can do it as long as he is asking for a more restrictive change,_but if anyone wanted to make a sUit against him, the City would not be held liable. ~. Kirton then asked if they were talking about zoning strictly or site plans and Chairman Kelly informed him that tonight they are talking about a zoning change only. ~. Kirton asked if the site plans were involved and Chair- man Kelly informed him that they were just presented to give a picture and he has presented an affidavit. Mr. Kirton referred to ~. Michael not being held responsible to build this and Chairman Kelly replied that the appli- cation had been changed, but it had been upgraded. ~. Kirton remarked that ~. Michael can lose 100 times, but if they lose one time, they are done for. He asked why MIAUJTES [~NING & ZONING BOARD -.u~ EIGHT AUGUST lO, 1976 this kept coming up and Chairman Kelly replied that the Chair could not agree with him on that Iaind of statement. Mr. Lambert stated that he noticed in some of the letters they received, they referred to losing their investment or lowering values. He questioned whe~ it was an accepted fact that just because there is a shopping center on two major roadsthat the immediate subdivision will decrease? From his experience, it increases because of the nearness to shops. In selling real estate, they always point out the location of stores in regards to the property for sale. He knows Go!fview Harbour and thinks it is unreasonable for the people in Goifview Harbour to think this complex will in any way, shape or form decrease property values. Why do the people think it will lower property values? M~. Kirton asked if he would like to have a 7-11 Store next to him and Chairman Kelly replied that Mr. Michael stated in the affi- davit, which is the only means available, as to what he would put in there and no 7-11 or gassstation is mentioned. Mr. Kirton stated that they were ta!~ng about changing the zoning and not talking about gas stations or 7-11 stores. If ~. Michael gets the zoning change, he is not bound to put anything in there. Chairman Kelly replied that h~ was bound by the limitations in C-1 and C-2. ~. Kirton stated that he was not bo~u~ to put i.n the medical center, etc. M~. Kostner stated that they were getting off base in talk- ing about the type of building, which may or may not be built. If the property is rezoned, then the applicant may present plans for this as proposed or something better. This comes later and all this talk about what building goes in there now is a waste of time. They are strictly talking about zoning. With all Mr. Michael's intentions, hopefully they will get that or even better. The reasonable and best use of that piece of property might be some type of business. ~ccording to C-2, they could get other than shown now. He referred to the possibility of something happening to ~. Michael or the property being sold. They must weight it very carefully, but this corner would ~obably be commercial property from an appraiser,s standpoint. There is no ques- ~ ~ would tion that a r~smaence .~ not be good on this corner. With good buffering and adequate planning, this could en- hance the property. They must stick with the zoning at this time. ~. A. J. Wolfert stated his name and his address as 1321 S. '~. 25th Avenue. He informed the Board that he lives exactly across the way of this canal. He has been here three or four times already stating his opposition. It will devaluate his property with commercialbbuildings across the ws$~. He has $55,000 invested in his house and had in- tentions to spend another $2,000, but stopped because he knows as soon as co~n~ercial is buil~ he will get out and MINUTES PLAh~i~G & ZONinG BOARD PAGE NI~ AUGUST 10, 1976 will not get the money he put into his house. The members of the Bos~d seem to stick up for the builder and don't want to hear him. Chairman Kelly disagreed. ~. Wolferi continued that it sounded this way from what he had heard and ~. Kostner declared him out of order. He stated that the Board has in- tegrity and an open mind. He requested him to stick to what he wanted to say and the Board will listen. They will not turn anyone down. Inferring against the Board is out of or- der. ~. Wolfert stated he was ~0~ against changing the zoning. M~. Edward J. Kloster stated his name and his address as 1135 S. W. 25th Avenue. He stated he was slightly embarrassed for being a citizen of Boynton Beach from the innuendo of this meeting. His personal feeling is that he would not like to see it rezoned. He thinks a lot of people against it are opposed to commercial property in that neighborhood. It sounded to him a lot were against it and some for it. He can understand ~. Michael,s interest as a businessman, but he is against it. ~. Richard Caldwell stated his name and his address as 1350 S. W~ 27th Place. He informed the Board that he was not officially within the 400 ft. radius. One question has come up and also came up at the last meeting in regards to sign- ing an affidavit regarding the intent to build a particular type building. He asked if the City Attorney felt this falls within the realm of contract zoning and M~. Annunziato replied that he would have to look very closely at the document. He requested the Board not to pay much attention to the affidavit, but just consider the rezoning request.· The question is zon- ing. A member of the audience clarified that the affidavit meant nothing and ~. Annunziato replied thathe was not sure. He referred to Mr. Michael promising to abide by the codes and regulations and this applies without an affidavit. His recommendation is to act on the zoning. ~. KOstner added that as long as the buildings met with the requirements of the C-2 zone, that is all the developer is bound by. The affidavit as proposed cannot be tied in as far as the zoning is concerned. They must consider whether it meets the zoning requirements. Mr. Caidweli continued with advising that many of the resi- dents in the area have come to him and there seems to be a negative approach in that Mr. Michael will sell the land after getting the zoning change. He k~ows ~. Michael builds a beautiful home. The question is not what type of stores will be built, but whether the stores should abut a high R-1AA neighborhood. As he sees it, there are three possi- bilities for this land. Commercial land thrives very well. If the zoning is approved, everyone hopes the co~nerciat businesses will do well, but they must consider if the busi- nesses do not do well, what will become of them? He referred MINU~ES PLANNING& ZONING BOARD PAGE TEN AUGUST 1 O, 1 976 to the possible unstable commercial atmosphere and explained. Chairman Kelly stated he was deviating from the point of zon- ing mud Mr. Caldwell disagreed. He continued that in the event the owner does get C-1 and C-2, he can build as in- tended, but they also must consider that ~. Michael will greatly appreciate the value of that land and could possi- bly sell it. He thinks the residents are concerned whether this land should go commercial. He thins they are negative about it going commercial and heopposes rezoning it to C-1 or C-2 as he does not feel it will be an asset to the resi- dential development. He thinks there is adequate commercial land being built with stores at 2nd and Congress. He does not think this particular shopping center will be able to re- ceive the financial support from the immediate neighborhood. Mrs. Kath!een Kirton stated her name and her address as 2526 S. W. 13th Court. She informed the Board that she was within 400 ft. She stated that nobody had brought up that if this land was to remain R-I.&&~, there is no reason why ~. M~chael could not sell homes. She thinks he could sell houses. She would not oppose him coming down to apartments along Congress Avenue to match what is supposed to be in front of where they live. M~. Lambert asked if she meant to extend R-3 north and ~s. Kirton replied: yes, because he is bound by a court or- der to put apartments in there. The building permits have not been issued because ~. Michael has not done things. She thinks apartments would look attractive. If he did what he said about the entrance, it would also look attractive. She does not think the people would object to this. She explained how she thought a neighborhood looked like the people who lived in it. She added that she would not have moved from Seacrest Avenue, if she thought she was moving into another commercial section. The neighborhood on Seacrest has gone down since it was made commercial. Commercial does not en- hance the appearance of a home. She did not build her home to make money. She does not see any reason why M~. Michael could not put houses in thare and apartments along Congress Avenue. She objects to these plans presented. She has grand- children that visit and wants them to continue to do so. She does not think it would be safe. She has checked the Police Department records and it is a known fact that crime~ goes up where there are commercial areas. She does not believe M~. Michael would lose any money by building homes, if he could not use the land for anything other than commercial, she would not object, but they bought their homes thinking this was a community in Boynton Beach that would have a high classification. She thinks he is getting opposition because he has promised things andes not done so. She still feels he could have built homes. 23rd Avenue is not scheduled to be widened. She wants to live in a residential area and thinks it would be enhanced with more attractive homes. MiArGTES PLANNING & ZONING BOARD PAGE EL~'EN AUGUST 10, 1976 2@. Ryder stated that they have a matter where they s~e con- sidering going from residential to commercial and this is normally considered downgrading. He is surorised to find people in accord with this change. He thin~ there is com- mercial area available in the vicinity. They are not talk- ing about a new area. They are talking about a development that is substantially complete. People came in on the basis that this was going to be a residential area. He thin~ it makes an impact on the people having bought on that basis and now finding it is not so. Because there is available commer- cial area in the vicinity, he feels this change is~not justi- fied and he would be opposed to any change. Mr. Kostner referred to giving a summation previously and agreed with Mr. Ryder in the fact that the subdivision was almost complete. However, a question was brought up that the property would possibly be applicable to the apartment type structures which are proposed for Congress Avenue and he be- lieves that may be an answer. With regards to the matter of downgrading zoning, he has always been opposed to it. He would certainly have to go along with M~. Ryder and would be opposed to any change in zoning on this ps~ticular land. ~. Lambert referred to the issue being brought up a number of times regarding what is and what is not a sufficient amount of commercial and he does not think they are qualified to say they have anough commercial zoning. He stated he fel~ the highest and best use of the west ~00 ft. was to rezone it as it would not endanger the health, value, etc. of Golfview Harbour. However, he is concerned with the east 5~0 feet with property owners across the canal and property owners on S. W. 13th Street. Across' the street, there will be residential homes. He is only opposed to that portion of this applica- tion in reference to the C-1 request for the east 550 feet. Of course, he k~ows they either accept or reject the entire application. He does not feel the west C-2 land would be ob- jectionable. Chairman Kelly referred to many people stating there was enough commercial property in the area; however, there isn't any C-1 to the best of his recollection anywhere near the area. At the i~st meeting, people said if ~. Michael would change to professional offices, they woui~ not be opposed. He thinks the best useoof the land would be in that particu- lar phase of zoning. t~. Ryder made a motion that the Planning & Zoning Board recom- mend to the City Council that the application from ~. and ~s. Michael changing the current R-1AA area to C-1 and C-2 be denied. M~. Kostner seconded the motion. Under discus- sion, Mm~. Lambert asked if it was possibl~ to make a recom- mendation other than the e~act application before them and M!~JTES PLA~ING & ZONING BOARD PAGE 5%~,~ELVE AUGUST ~0, 1976 Chairman Kelly replied that he didn't believe so. ~. Annun- ziato added that in his experience, it had not been done. The application ~ ~ ~ or~sen~ed and altered at this meeting is what they should vote on. They cou!d~ suggest to the City Council that possibly something might be more in order and possibly this could be worked through the applicant. ~@. Kostner stated the reason he seconded the motion is the fact that he is not happy as he pointed out. As ~u appraiser, he realizes there is a potential value there other than single homes, especially on the corner. In reference to apartments being there, he came from an area with apartments on the ma~or highways and those people were happy. This could possibly be an answer. The property should be utilized for some purpose. Just for the record, he w~uuts to point out even though he voted no insof~ as the application, he still feels eventually some- thing goo~ can come out of this. Mr. Lambert suggested an amendment to the motion to recommend that the City Council look into commercial possibly in the west half and buffer it down to the residential area. Mr. Ryder replied that he would not consider such an amendment. They have a clear cut issue and it is not up to them to get into a realm of conjec- ture. ~. Lambert clarified that it was in the form of a compromise after listening to the audience that there does not seem to be that much objection to the property closer to Congress Avenue being commercial. The problem seems to be the tract of land im~mediately next to the canal and on 13th Street. it is their duty to make a full report to the City Council on their findings. At this time, M~. Sick!in requested to speak and Chairman Ee!iy informed him there was no discussion from the audience once a motion had been made. M~. Sicklin referred to request- ing to speak previously and Mr. Ryder replied that he thought they had ~fforded this cuestion a lot of time and they should move along. ~h~. Lamber6 stated he felt ~. Sicklin should be able to speak. ~. Kostner stated that Mr. Sicklin had his day in court and has given a lengthy summation of the proposal and once a motion is made, there should be no more participa- tion from the floor. Chairman Eel!y agreed. Mr. Sick_lin stated that he only asked because it may be germane to the question ~. Lambert raised about an amendment. M~. Lambert stated that he knows the City and residents of Golfview Hat- bout are tired of kicking this around. Everyone is tired of all this and they must get everything out on the table. Chair- man Kelly agreed and called for a vote on the motion. The v~te was 2 - yes and 2 - no; motion tied. A member of the audience asked if the motion was denied and Mr. A~nunziato informed him that the aDolication would be for- wardem to the City Council with no cle~ cut decision. The text will be forwarded along with the minutes. MINUTES ~LANNING & ZOI~_YNG BOARD PAG~ THIRTEEN AUGUST 10, 1976 At this time, Chairman Kelly declared a five minute reCess. He called the meeting back to order at 9:25 P. M. Rezoning Request from Muro and Sommons Parcel #1 - Lot 27, Block 4, Lake Addition Recorded in Plat Book 11, Page 7t Palm Beach County Records Address - 613 N. E. 8th Avenue Applicant - LaVance G. Muro and Hazel F. Sommons Request - Rezone to R-2 from R-lA Use - Construction of Duplex Chairman Kelly ascertained that all the members had received the necessary papers. LaVance Muro stated her name ~ud her business address as 3912 Congress Avenue and her residence address as 3344 Plaza Place, Lantana. She informed the Board that she was the joint o~ner of this property. They are requesting this lot to be rezoned to a duplex zoning which is R-2. The reason for their request is that it is surrounded by commercial property and explained what commercial properties were located on the west, north and south. It is the only single family block surrounded by com- mercial usage. The members checked the location on the map. Chairman Kelly referred to there being a t5 ft. alley on the west side of this lot and Ms. Muro agreed and added that there was also an alley to the north. ~. Lambert checked the survey and asked the square footage of the lot. Ms. Muro replied that she was not sure and ~. Lambert calculated it to be over 9,000 sq. feet, which is more than enough for a duple×. M~. Muro added that it was one of the largest lots in the sub- division. ~. Lambert asked if the property immediately to the east was being used as residential property and Ms. Muro replied that it was a single family home. ~. Ryder asked if anyone was present from 6~7 and received no response. Chairman Kelly addedtthat no correspondence had been re- ceived in reference to this application. Chairman Kelly asked if~anyone in t~_e~ audience was in favor of this application and ~ '- ~ r~cemve~ no response. He then asked if anyone was opposed to this application and received no response. Mr. Ryder stated he was familiar that the existing develop- ment surrounding this area was commercial; however, possibly there .should be a buffer instead of going from C-4 toR-1A. He questions whether this should be generally considered in a particular area. He does not like to single out one lot and depa~t from the existing plan. Chairm~ Kelly agreed that noneof them liked to spot zone and must consider the general area. MI2~UTES ~ANNING & ZONING BOARD PAGE FOURTEEN AUGUST 10, 1976 ~. Lambert explained how he had researched this quite a bit. The property to the north, west and south is absolutely with- out Question C-4 zoning. He would recommend that the property all ~he way to the east to the intracoastal be R-2 or R-3. For that reason and for the reason ~. Ryder touched on, he thinks a buffer could be used and he doesn't think the Board could turn down a natural buffer which R-2 would create for that ps~ticular area. He thinks it would be a good idea in this particuls~ one instance. ~. Kostner and Chairman Kelly agreed. Chairman Kelly then asked for the City Planner's input and ~. Annunziato replied that his reco~endation would be in the negative. He feels rezoning of one lot, regardless of the surrounding uses, constitutes spot zoning. He would like to think that C-4 zoning is a temporary thing and possibly the Board should review that. He thinks C-4 is too loose a zone for anywhere in the City. This land was just recently rezoned to R-lA fostering non-conforming uses. He would like to feel that C-4 might be cham_ged to make it more me~uingful to single family zones rather than making spot zoning. Mr. Lambert made a motion that the Planning & Zoning Board recommend to the City Council the changing from R-lA to R-2 on this particular application. M~. Kostner asked if R-2 permitted duplexes only smd Mr. Annunziato replied: yes and single family homes. Mr. Kostner then ~econded the motion. Under discussion, ~. ~ostner stated the reason he concurred with ~. Lambert is that all the businesses located in this area, even though grandfathered, may be in existence for a very long time and he does not feel any great hardship would be enhanced by permitting duplex property on this land. Chairman Kelly agreed and stated he thought it would be a good buffer between C-4 and R-lA. M~. Ryder stated he was opposed because they are acting on one lot, which would constitute spot zoning. Mr. Lambert replied that he disagreed and he doesn,t think the property owners immediately abutting the C-4 properties in the whole C-4 strip should be penalized because a proper buffering setup was not originally put in this zone. He would strongly consider further buffers from C-4 to residential property. Chairman Kelly added that no correspondence had been received relating to this applica- tion. Motion carried 3-1, with Mr. Ryder voting against. Chairmsm Kelly asked if anyone present in the audience was here in reference to the public hearings on the zoning ordi- nance amendment~ and received no response. ~. La~£oert made a motion to proceed to the development plans listed on the agenda, seconded by Mr. Kostner. Motion carried 4-0. MINUTES PLANNING & ZONING BOARD R~GE FiFTEEN AUGUST 10, 1976 DEVELOPi~NT PLAN REV ~,¥ Bowling Center Congress Avenue & Charter Drive Rep. John A. Pagliarulo, _Pres. Sands Point Homes Mr. John Pagliarulo appeared before the Board and informed the me~oers that their intention was to go ahead and put up a 32 lan~ bowling center in the vicinity of Charter Drive and Congress Avenue. The bowling alley will face Congress Avenue. Chairman Kelly asked if this piece of property was covered by a court order going back to 1973 and M=~. Pagliarulo replied: yes. Chairman Kelly asked if he received a favorable recep- tion if it was ~is intention to remove any question of use of the land as proposed by the court order and ~. Pagliarulo replied that as far as he knew, the court order ±mm=ted the usage of the subject property. Chairman Kelly stated that he understood that it was li~.~ted to a motel and M~. Pagliarulo informed him that this was coming before the City Council at the next meeting to have the restricted covenants released. Mr. Annunziato clarified that with regards to the court order, this approval will not affect the court order. Agreements must still be made between the City and Sands Point Homes. In either way, it must go before the Planning & Zoning Board. ~. Lambert referred to the zoning permitting a bowling alley, but the court order refers to a 200 unit motel. He asked if they were approving this as a site plan or concept and ~. Annunziato replied that this will be the site plan approval. Mr. Lambert asked if this was a preliminary review and Mr. Annunziato informed him it was site plan approval. He added that if the Planning & Zoning Board deemed the plan ws~ pro- per, they should approve it subject to the court order. ChairmanKelly asked if the plans would come before this Board again and Mr. Pagliarulo replied: no. ~. L~bert clarified that these were the final development plans. He asked if they had received all the departments' input&m~d Chairman Kelly advised that all the stamps and signatures were noted. The members then studied and discussed the plans. ~. Lambert made a motion that the Planning & Zoning Board reco~end to the City Council the approval of the site plan for the Bowling Center located at Congress Avenue and Char- ter Drive subject to the T.R.B. recommendations and subject to the change of the court order. Mr. Ryder seconded the motion. No discussion. Motion carried 4-0. MINU~S PLA~iNG & ZONING BOY~qD RAGE S ~XTF~N EUGUS~ 10, 1976 Florida Pneumatic - Addition High Ridge Road, Lantana Rep~..?ri~ Cities Construction ~ Supply Co. M~. ~nnunziato noted that apparently ~. Taylor had left and advised that he would present the plans to the Board. He then gave copies to the members. He informed them that it was on High Ridge Road and it is in the City. They plan an addition to the existing building. Under his comments, he has recuired an access easement to the adjoining property to the rear. ~. Lambert asked him to point out the exact location on the zoning map and Mm. Annunziato did and noted that it was zoned M, 1. P~. Lambert asked if this was also a final plan and not a preliminary and ~. Annunziato in- formed him that nothing required preliminary ~evelopment plans to be presented to the Planning & Zoning Board, but some builders do it as a courtesy. Mr. Lambert questioned the notations on the plan and Mr. Annunziato explained how they were requirements of the other Boards. He added that it was the staff's responsibility to see whatever recommenda- tions are approved or changes required are implemented on the final plan. If it does not occur, then it is a staff downfall. ~. Lambert questioned why they even looked at these and ~. Annunziato informed him that he felt it was the responsibility of the Planning & Zoning Board to moni- tor zoning and he explained further. ~. Ryder expressed his agreement. ~. Lambert agreed also and referred to how previously they had checked parking, etc. and he was glad to hear now that it was just a matter to see what is going on. Mr. Annunziato informed him that plans ~n the future will not include structural plans and he added that he was work- ing on changes in the procedure. ~. Lambert agreed they should see what is going on~ but not go into these details. Chairman Kelly suggested that from now on when recommenda- tions are made, they should always be subject to the appro- val of the other Boards. M~. Lmmbert moved that the Planning & Zoning Board recom- mend for approval to the City Council the Florida ~aumatic development plan subject to the appropriate boards' recom- mendations. ~. Kostner seconded the motion. No discussion. Motion carried 4-0. D ZS CUSS ION Section 6 (~) (1) "Permitted Uses" in C-4 Zoning Request to include light cabinet manufacturing as perr~itted use Re?_~ Robert Nutter MINU~$ PLANNING & Z~?~iNG BOARD AU~$~ 10, 1976 M~. Robert B. Nutter stated his address as 111S. W. 8th Evenue and added that he owns a business in Boynton Beach, Architectural Craftsman, inc., located a2 221S. E. 6th Avenue. He informed the Board that he has had a problem and doesn't know how to go about it. He has been to the Board of Adjustment. He has a problem inasmuch as a City Official approved the use in C-4, but then they were recom- mended to go to the Board of Adjustment. They appeared be- fore them twice and last night, they were turned down be- cause it was the general consensus they would not have the authority to act. This is being handled through the courts. This will be a new building at 234 N. E. 6th Avenue. The zoning is C-4, The conflict is in the definition as to what ms manufacturing. He explained how he thought of something big when manufacturing was mentioned. He does light manu- facturing and has done work for members of this Board. The most employees he has had was during the ~970's when he had 12 employees with sales smd the office. His machinery takes up most of the space. He is fortunate to have some sophisti- cated machines which you don't have in the normal operation. His problem is in the definition. The Building Department feels that when anybody takes a product and assembles it, it is manufacturing and belongs in M-1. Right across the street is a picture framing shop and it is zoned C-2 mud he ex- plied how the frames were actually manufactured. Also, there is a drapery place across the street and he explained how they actually manufactured draoeries. He referred to other businesses and how they should be classified as manu- facturing. Mm Annunziato ~ ~ . as__e~ if he manufactured furniture and Nutter replied that he makes one p=ece of furniture per order. He caters to the individual people and not to projects or tract~nones.~ He explained further about his business. Annunziato agreed that it was a problem in the definition in t~a, uses permitted in M-I,~ the manufacture of fu~nm~ure is one of them. it is permitted in M-1 and excluded in C-4 by the way the ordinance is written. Mm~. Nutter stated that there was nothing for cabinet making in the code. ~. Kostner referred to the uses permitted in C-4, Page 29, and noted that upholstery was listed and referred to how this would be similar to furniture m~ing requiring the same identical equipment. Mr. Nutter agreed. M~. Annunziato pointed out that "Upholstery Supplies" was listed and this was different. Chairman Kelly stated that certainly the type of business ~. Nutter is operating is not any more objectionable than paint and repair shops and his inclination would be to make a recommendation to add this to the uses permitted. ~. Nutter agreed, but added that he would like to see it limited MINUTES PLANNING & ZONiN~ BOARD PAGE EIGHTEEN AUGUST lO, 1976 for the protection of the City and he explained. Annunziato suggested limiting it by the nu~er of employees such as furniture manu£acturing with less than ten employ- ees. Chairman Kelly asked the average number of employees ~. Nutter had and M~. Nutter replied that the most he has ever had was ~a~ but the aYerage is around six which includes the office staff. Mr. Kostner asked how many employees could be put in his new place of business and Chairman Kelly asked if ten would, be sufficient? M~. Lambert stated that he per- sonally felt the type of establishment Mr. Nutter runs would very well fit in the C-4 definition and as long as the work is done entirely within an enclosed building. He has not seen an establishment tied to a number of employees any~here in the book. Mr. Annunziato informed him that he had seen done that way. M~. Lambert stated he thought it was. arbitrary. Mr. Kostner suggested limiting the amount of floor space. ~. Lambert explained how they possibly needed a storage area. ~. Kostner suggested limiting the floor area to the whole thing. Chairman Kelly asked the size of the land and the contemplated size of the building and ~. Nutter in- formed him it was 18, 270 sq. ft. of land and the building size would be 5,500 sq. feet. I~. Lambert asked how much was dedicated to the actual machinery? He also asked if there was room on the propertY to erect a larger building? Chairman Kelly pointed oult that with the 4~$ coverage factor, it would allow a building over 7,000 sq. feet. ~. Nutter explained how the property abutted an R-2 zone and a 30 ft. buffer was Fequired on the west side of the property. Mr. Annunziato referred to having seen figures on work area for employees in other related industries and asked if he felt an employee needed 100 sq. feet to be functional? ~. Nutter replied that he needed more than that and explained how the employees worked on various sizes of wood. He added that they were not talking about one conditional use, but changing the category and they must be concerned for everyone. M~. Annunziato replied that they were working towards a solution. M~. Ryder suggested considering the number of employees as previously mentioned and this would limit a tsa~ge place to M-1. Mr. Kostner stated it was pos- sible to limit the amount of square feet. M~'. Annunziato informed them that it was Y~. Nutter's opinion that it takes ap~oximate!y 400 to 500 sq. feet average per employee. ~. Lambert stated it was his oers'onal opinion they should limit it to square footage. In Mr. Nutter's particular case, he would say he would probably have as large a shop as ~u in- dependent cabinet maker would have before going into manu- facturing. He suggested sta't~under C-4 something like a cabinet shop asLlong as the operation is within the confines of a building not to exceed 6,000 sq. feet. If it exceeds MINUTES PLA~!NG & ZONI~G BO~2°~D PAGE ~ ih~TEmN AUGUST 10, 1976 6,000 sq. feet, it would require the Board's approval. Mr. Nutter informed them that the actual square footage he would use himself would be approximately 3,200 sq. feet and he is going to rent out the rest. If they had 6,000 sq. feet, it would protect his competitors though. The old C-2 permitted heavy commercial and light industrial. There s~e people in the C-2 and C-4 zones which are grandfathered. If they should ever want to remodel, he does not know if the grand- father clause would cover them. This would help them out though. He would hate to see one of his competitors have to move because they were non-conforming. ~. Annunziato clarified that 6,000 sq. feet protected ~. Nutter and his competitors. If anything is added, he would like to see no outside storage. 6,000 sq. feet should be the maximum including storage. ~L~. Lambert made a motion to recommend to the City Council that Custom Cabinet and Furniture Construction in premises with a m&ximum of 6,000 sq. feet of building (operation to be confined entirely within enclosed building) to be per- mitted in the C-4 zone. Mr. Kostner seconded the motion. No discussion. Motion carried 4-0. M~. Annunziato informed M~. Nutter that this recommendation would go to the City Council and they would prepare an ordi- nance to permit these uses in C-4 and then it will come back to the Planning & Zoning Board and City Council for a public hearing. Mr. Ryder moved to revert back to Items 4 and 5 under ~b!ic Hearing, seconded by M~. Lambert. Motion carried 4-0. PUBLIC HEf~ING (Continued) Zoning Ordinance Amendments to Sections 6(A) (5), 6(B) (5), 6(C) (5) and 6(D) (5) of A. ppendix A regarding ~"Protective Buffers.) Chairman Kelly read the published public hearing notice. M~. La~oert requested to ask a question regarding the word- ing and Chairman Kelly i~formed him that this was debated back and forth between the City Planner and the City Attor- ney. Mr. Lambert referred to this repealing the sections stated, but did not repeal the sections under Industrial on Page 34. ~. Annunziato agreed this should be included and repealed also. He advised that this would be an additional Item L to Section 4. This will be a general requirementsin- stead of a listing in each zone. MINU~S PLAi~,~±~ & ZONING BOARD PAGE ~$~'ENTY AUGUST 10, 1976 Mm~. Lambert questioned why this was not mentioned in OP and Chairman Kelly informed him that OP is supposed to be a zon- ing all by itself nowhere near residential zoning. He read the OP definition. Mr. Ryder made a motion that this Board recommend to the City Council for approval this amendment to the zoning regulations which substantially requires the installation of a solid masoo_ry wall at least six feet high between commercial and/or indmstriat distDi~ where it abuts a residential disctrict or use. Mr. Kostner seconded the motion. Under discussion, Lambert stated that he felt after considerable thought and research that this absolute requirement that it be a six ft. high masonry wall was economically and in a lot of cases physically un~ ~e~asonable. He has tried to take the existing zonin$~ map and go over ~nere tn~se commercial zonings touch on residential zonings. He thinks the protective buffer the people would need is adequ~t~!y~ ~ covered in the existing word- ing. First of all, he would like to know if there was any comment made by the Police or Fire Department regarding the kind of proo_em this would create getting into properties. Also, problems will come up when you cannot build a struc- ture on easements. There will be strips of land created be- tween residential areas ~ad co~nercial areas. They will not be able to get in and2out of properties by the rear or sides. What would happen when the City or County goes in to put in a line and finds a concrete wall with a foundation? These concrete walls are ~ar in. They have had buildings collapse many feet aws~ from a hole and who would pay for this ~ aamage. He is -~ery much opposed to this particular ordinance and feels the e×isting wording is more than adequate. ~ Ryder informed him ~ ~ · t~a~ this matter of a solid masonry wall came to the attention of the C.A.B. when the bowling alley was proposed in the Leisurevil!e area. He fully ex- plained this situation and how it was the request of the people to have the masonry wall instead of a vegetative buffer. However, in this case, they finally had to exclude the masonry wall because it would cause damage to the Aus- tralian Pines. This is the way it sts~ted. From the stand- point of expense, it is not that expensive. From the stand- point of foundations, that is also not a problem as only 2 feet is needed and it would not present a problem to the uti- lities. }~. Lambert questioned digging along the wall and }~. Ryder replied that you don't do that or it would slide. M~. Lambert referred to the easement usually being adjacent to the wall and ~. Ryder disagreed and they discussed this further. Chairman Kelly then read the wording of the last two lines and stated that it a~ea_ed-~ ~ ~ ~' to ~_~m~ that this would exclude already built buildings and M~. Annunziato agreed. Mr. MINUTES ?LANNING & ZONING BOARD PAGE ~ ~v ~ ~' E~_ ~- ONE AUGNST ]0, ]976 Lambert stated that they~must get in and out of the easements. Mr. Annunziato informed him that they were tal~ng about this going into effect when the ordinance is approved. He referred to 50 years ago when Boynton Beach did. not have a~master uti- lity or sewer plan, but now before ~my wall is built, the master utilities will be in. Mr. Lambert asked about the telephone lines and ~. Annunziato informed him they did not dig ]0 feet down ~or the telephone and the major things are the sewer and water which will be in. Mr. Ryder added that if the permits were issued on the basis that the buffer wall has to go in, the builder will be sure everything is in be- fore the wall is built. ~. Lambert statedz~that this should be worded that the wall shall be built prior to the certifi- cate of occupancy being issued. M~. Lambert then gave the example of it being at the end of the !in~. He stated again that he would like to find out what the Police and Fire Departments and possibly what the ~R.B, has to say about this particular ordinance. He thinks it is valid to !~uow what the Fire Department feels. He re- ferred to the zoning map showing many commercial and residen- tial properties abutting. Chairman Kelly asked if he wanted this input before t~ing action and suggested tabling this. Mr. Lambert made a motion to table this item until further research can be done. Chairman Kelly requested that the ori- ginal motion be rescinded and ~. Ryder questioned for what purpose and Chairman Kelly replied to get input. ~h~. Ryder referred to occasions when everything becomes a problem and there is an inclination to pass it on to somebody else and he does not see what validity that would have. He does not agree. ~. Annunziato stated that in his opinion, he does not feel it will interfere with the Police and Fire Depart- ments. He explained how the Planning & Zoning Board s~ould provide access with driveways, etc. M~. Lambert referred to the possibility of having a 600 ft. wall and stated again that he felt the existing wording was sufficient. Mr. Annunziato informed him that the wall could be behind the easements and it was not like they were going to make alleys all over the City. Mr. Lambert disagreed and stated this is what they would end up with and M~. Annu~ziato disagreed. They discussed further just where the wall would be built. ~. Kostner finally requested them to resolve the matter as it was getting late. They then discussed whether the motion.to table was in order and finally agreed that it was. M~. Lambert again made the motion to table this item until further reses~ch can be done. Chairman Kelly laid aside the gavel to second the motion. The motion tied with a vote of 2-2. Chairman 'Ke!iy then called for a vote on the original motion and the motion carried 3-I, with ~. Lambert voting against. ZONING BO~D PAu~ ~ ~NT_ AUGUST t0, 1976 Zoning Ordinance Amendments to Section 6(8) (l) (k) of Appendix & regarding Residential uses in a C,~ zone ~. Ryder referred to the copy of a letter ~. Reed sent to M~. Kohl regarding the Golden Sands Inn matter and apparently as a result of this, it is the reason this change is proposed. Mr. Annunziato clarified that this would give the Bo~d peri- meters to judge residential in a commercial zone. ~. Lambert asked if they were taking the total residential uses and Chair- man Kelly informed him that it referred to the C-3 Community Commercial District. ?~. Lambert clarified that they were only changing the wording of (k) and Chairman Kelly read the amendment as proposed. ~. Lambert moved that the Planning & Zoning Board recommend to the City Council that Section 6(C) (1) (k) of A$~endix A of the codified ordinances of the City of Boynton Beach be amended to read as follows: (k) multi-family residential dwellings are authorized as a special use in said district, subject to the building and site regulations set forth in Section 5 (G) (2) (a) of Appendix A of this code. Mr. Ryder seconded the motion. No discussion. Motion carried 4-0. MINUTES Minutes q~ Jul¥_~?_z~1976 Mr. Kostner referred to Page 6 and prior to the second p~ra- graph from the bottom, he recommended that the word ~New" be added to the motion. Mr. Lambert referred to Page 7, last paragraph~ and stated he thought it should be clarified that when Chairman Kelly took a poll about schools in residential zones that he did not agree with that. He was not against schools in any zoning. Chairman Kelly suggested stating that the majority agreed. ~. Kostner stated thst the question was whether schools should be permitted in R-1AAA and the way it reads, it would be excluded from all residential areas. Chairman Kelly sug- gested noting it as R-1AAA and the majority agreed. ~. Annunziato stated he thought there was reference to any resi- dential district and ~. Lambert agreed. Chairman Kelly sug- gested ~ ' ~ ~ . scra~chmno R-I~A ~. Lambert stated that he did not agree. Chairman Kelly clarified that they should state the majority agreed. i~'. Ryder refe~rem to Page 7, second paragraoh, and the motion made by M_~ ~mnter and stated that this refer_em to use and not the zoning category. ~. Kostner moved to approve the Minutes of July 27, t976, as corrected, seconded by Mr. Lambert. Motion carried 4-0. MINUTES PI~NNING & ZO~Ii~G BO~RD ~m ~3~ENT¥- THREE AUGUST 10, 1976 Adjournment ~. Kostner moved to adjourn, seconded by ~. Lambert. Motion carried 4-0 s~nd the meeting was properly s~djourned at ~I~30 P. M. Respectfully submitted, Suzanne Kruse Recording Secretary (Four Tapes)