Loading...
Minutes 12-09-75MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING & ZONING BOARD N~LD AT CITY HALL, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA, TuESDA_~ V, DECEMBER 9, 1975 AT 7:30 ~. M. PRESENT Joseph T. Kelly, Chairman Mrs. Vicki Castello Mrs. Marilyn Huckle Enrico Rossi Simon Ryder ABSENT Walter M. Trauger, Vice Chman. Oris Walker (Excused) Chairman Kelly called the meeting to order at 7:38 P. M. Chairman Kelly announced they did not have anything on the prepared agenda and also did not have any recording unit and must depend upon the secretary,s accuracy, which is usually very good. Mrs. Huckle replied that they should have the meeting recorded officially on a tape recorder and asked why they did not have a tape recorder? Chairman Kelly informed her that the acting Building Official was not present and he brings the recorder. ~s. Huckle stated that she felt he should be present. Chairman Kelly stated that somebody in the administrative area of the City should make these provi- sions for the Boards. They should tell the chairman' of each Board to come to City Hall and acquire a recorder for the meeting. Mrs. Huckle stated she didn't know if it was re- quired by the Sunshine Law or not, but they should hs~e one. ~Ir. Rossi referred to the recording system in the Council Chambers and Chairman Kelly informed him that he was told by the City Manager that it was to be used by the City Council only. It is expensive equipment and they want it in proper working order for all meetings. ~. Rossi stated that it is a piece of equipment which cost a lot of money and gets the most use when used by people who have a need for it. He sug- gests that they inform the City Manager that this Board needs the public address system. If it is com.olicated, somebody should check it be~o~e we leave to make sure it ~ _~s working properly. Chairman Kelly referred to the memos he was requested to send at the last meeting and also Mrs. Huckle mentioning previously that M~s. Jackson expressed Confusion of what was going on. Mrs. Huckle clarified that she just wanted to know %%'hy there were so many minutes. Chairman Kelly continued that it was not his duty to have these memos xeroxed by his office, which he has don~. He has as~e~ d the Cmuy' ~ Hall office to send copies to members and has requested this previously. He added that he made this same request pertaining to correspondence re- ceived from people regarding public hearings. MINU~S PLANNING & ZONING BOARD DECEMB~ 9, 1975 Mr. Rossi suggested sending a memo to the City Manager indi- cating the Board has need for the recording system which exists right now in the Chambers. What they say must go on record, must be complete, and must be as accurate as electronic equip- ment can make it. He would like to get the per,mission to use this equipment. Chairman Kelly stated that he knows the City Council members read the~i~minutes and the message will get to them when they read the minutes. M~s. Huckle asked if M~. Kohl received a copy of the minutes and Chairman Xelly replied: yes and explained the distribution of the minutes. Chairman Kelly then informed the members that he heard from M~. Smoot yesterday for the first time since November 12. Mrs. Huckle pointed out that this was the meeting they were supposed to make their recommendations at. Chairman Kelly stated that Mr. Smoot informed him that he Was finalizing. He told Mr. Smoot that~he would not be needed tonight because of lack of material on the agenda, but requested him to be present at the meeting on December 23. Mrs. Huckle stated that they were supposed to make their reco~nendations tonight. Chairman Kelly read his memo to Mr. Smoot directed to be w~itten at the last meeting. Mr. Ryder stated they were hold- ing up ~. Conte's matter because of Mr. Smoot. Chairman Eelly stated that Mr. Conte was supposed to get together with the City Engineer. Mt.Ryder referred to the minutes of Novem- ber 25, Page 7, where Mr. Rossi made a motion pending consul- tation with the zoning consultant. Chairman Kelly questioned how they could control the zoning consultant when he did not answer his telephone calls. Mr. Ryder pointed out that Mr. Conte was anxious to go ahead and asked where they stood with this? Chairman Kelly replied they should just leave it as it is until he appears before the Board after consulting with the City Engineer and Mr. Smoot. ~s. Huckle stated that it should have been a tabled item on tonight's agenda. They keep pushing this point, but it does not appear on the agenda. Every time they table an item, it gets lost in the shuffle. Chairman Kelly stated that whoever prepares the agenda should read these minutes and make note of this. M~s. Huckle added that ~. Bushnell had nothing to do with the agenda and states it is jUst prepared by his office. Mr. Rossi stated that they have gone over this 15 or 20 times and it is a waste of time. Mr. Rossi referred to the hiring of a new Building Official. He stated he has never talked to him and there is a consider- able amount of work required of him. Chairman Kelly informed him that the new Building Official would start this Monday. I~. Rossi said he hoped the man selected will have the duties explained to him,~including the duties required by this Board, preparation of the agenda~ etc. Chairman Kelly informed him that when he came aboard the Planning & Zoning Board, he made these same remarks. ~. Ryder suggested asking the City Mana- ger to request the Building Official, at his earliest conven- ience, to be present at one of the Board's meetings so they can get ~ogether mud present their needs. M~s. Huckle pointed MINUTES ~ANNING & ZONING BOARD PAGE THREE DECE~'~ER 9, 1975 out that there would be a new Board soon. The City Council announces their new appointments at their first meeting in January. There could be PeOPle on the Board, who have never sat on a Board before. Mr. Ryder replied that this was very interesting. He ~ked if they all served the same terms and added that he was appointed to the end of 1976. ~Lrs. Huckle replied that she and Mrs. Castello were terminating and she didn't know about Chairman Kelly. Chairman Kelly stated that he didn't know, but has been trying to find this out. Mr. Ryder stated that about half the Board was up for renewal or replacement. ~@s. Huckle added that she believed that Cot. Trauger's term was also expiring. There will be a lot of new faces, plus the Building Official and they will have these things to assume. Mr. Ryder stated he thought they should have the Building Official meet with the Board as soon as possible and they can tell him what they want. i~. Rossi stated he thought the proper time to meet would be with the new Board and after several meetings, they could outline standard procedural things. ~s. Castello asked if they had gotten anything from Mr. Smoot regarding re-zoning and Chairman Kelly replied only what M~. Smoot gave them on November 8, which was a proposed plan for processing re-zoning applications. He thinks his November 29 memo to him covers this. At this time, ~. Rossi suggested proceeding w~tn~ ~ the agenda items. Chairman Kelly introduced the members of the Board and an- nounced that Mr. Walker was excused. He also acknowledged the presence of ~. and M~s. Kessman in the audience. ~±NUTES Chairman Kelly referred to the agenda listing the ,~reading~, of the minutes and pointed out that they never actually did this. M~s. Huckte suggested possibly changing this to review- ing. She added that she remembered old meetings when they were read wor~ for word. Minutes of ~ovemb~r 25~. 1975 M~s. Huck!e requested that the ~minutes show that she asked why the abandonment hearing was not heard as advertised and in essence, Chairman Kelly responded that it would be done later and to stick to the agenda, as he had worked all day with the Building Official and they would take it up later. Also, it was a public hearing being shown on the agenda as New Business. MINUTES PLAI~¢ING & ZONING BOARD PAGE FOL~ DECE~w~ER 9, 1975 Mrs. Huckle then referred to Page 6, second paragraph from the bottom, and stated that she read the "subdivision' ordi- nance. She added that the man supplied a copy of this to the Board and she read it. She would like it to show'that it was a ~'subdivision" ordinance. Mrs. Huckle referred to Page 4 and suggested a change of word- ing in the first ps~agraph where Col. Trauger stated it does not meet the setback~ of the Planning & Zoning Code, which she remembers was actually said and was going to correct him at that time. It is really the Zoning Code and "Planning &~ should be stricken. This was not a mistake, as it was said by Col. Trauger. Mrs. Caste!!o moved to accept the minutes of November 25 as amended, seconded by Mr. Ryder. Motion carried 5-0. ~.~nutes of the Workshop Meetin~ of November 29, 197~ I~. Rossi referred to Page 2, third paragraph, where he stated they actually don't kmow if they are acting within the districts given to them by the City Council and he meant to say within the "limits" given to them by the City Council. M~s. Huckle suggested that possibly he meant directions and ~. Rossi re- plied that he guessed ~directio~' would be correct. M~s. Huckle moved that the workshop minutes of November 29, 1975, be approved as amended, seconded by M~s. Castelio. Motion carried 4-0, with Mr. Ryder abstaining since he was not present at this meeting. Minutes of the Special Meeting of November~~ Chairman Kel!y read paragraph two on Page 1 and reported that he did meet with the City Manager as requested in this para- graph. M~s. Huckle referred to Page 1, next to bottom paragraph, and stated after "applicant's statement~, should be added: ~'of the current County zoning on this parcel'~. Mrs. Castello asked if she meant just this parcel, as she thought she was making a broad statement of annexation in general? ~s. Huckle re- plied that her intent was to refer to that specifically. ~s. Castello stated she thought they were talking about the annexa- tion guideline. ~. Rossi stated that they did mention they needed tha current County zoning. ~rs. Huckle referred to the City Ag~O~m~stating in order to consider everything, they must amend the application to include the current County zoning. She added that she thought Col. Trauger may ha~e been talking in broad generalities. MINU~S PLANNII~G & ZONING BOARD PAGE DEC~ER 9, 1 975 l~s. Huck!e referred to the next paragraph where Col. Trauger clarified they needed an annexation procedure, etc. and stated she was a little mixed up about this. She believes ~unexation procedure outline is one phrase. ~. Rossi stated he thought he was trying to find out and asked for a guideline. He was not sure at what point a public hearing was needed. ~s. Huckle stated that they needed a tape recorder, so they could check what he said, since he is not present. Col. Trauger is not here to check:what he meant to say. ~s. Huckle referred to Page 2, second paragraph, and offered the same continuation of the ~applicant's statement of the current County zoning on this.~parcel.~ Chairman Kelly referred to Page 2, third paragraph, and pointed out that this was a repetition of what Mr. Rossi said earlier. However, some of their discussion was left out here regarding the requirements for the Building Official. ~. Rossi at that time made reference to seeing qualifications established for the Building Official. ~s. Castello added that she stated they should see the job description. Chairman Kelly referred to Page 4 and stated there was a bit of ambiguity and it is born out of what he put into tonight's record earlier. He read the paragraph referring to ~s. Huck!e asking that a memo be written to Mm. Simon. ~s. Huckle agreed that where it stated "it,s~, should state: at Planning & Zoning Board next regular meeting on December 9. She added that this same correction would also apply on the next paragraph. M~s. Castelio referred to doing a lot of thinking at that special meeting of what they wanted to accomplish tonight, but now they are not able to do it. Mr. Ryder stated this was on the agenda for the City Council, but they were aware they could not act after reading the minutes. Mr. Rossi asked how ~t was disposed of from the agenda and Chairman Kelly informed him that it was tabled. Mms. Huckle moved that the minutes of the special meeting of November 29 be approved as corrected~ seconded by Mms. Castello. Motion carried 4-0, with Mr. Ryder abstaining since he was not ~re~ent. ~s. Huckie state~ she would like to make another comment in regards to the material covered at this particular meeting. P~. Kohl called her after he received a copy of the memo ad- vising they had never received a copy of the application. He said he never received a request like this before. The Build- ing Department is supposed to be handling this. He called Mr. Bushnell and asked why a copy of this application was not sub- mitted. He did not tell her what the conversation was. He MINUTES PLANNING & ZONING BOARD PAGE SE DEC~.~R 9, ~ 975 wanted to know why we are having problems. Usually he does not have to attend to Boards; it is not usually in his realm. M~s. Castello remarked that this is the only way probably that they can get action. Chairman Kelly handed a copy of his memo to ~. Kohl dated November 29 to Mrs. Huckle. She read i~ as follows: "Please be advised that the Planning & Zoning Board has discussed the Cogen annexation dUring the last three meetings, but the Board has not received a copy of this application. Further, the City Attor- ney has advised that the application should be amended to include~i~ a statement from the applicant of the existing County zoning on the property.~ M~s. HuCkle stated that they still have not received a copy of the applicant's application. Mr. Rossi read the last paragraph on Page 5 stating the motion made by him. He stated apparently they were asking the City Council to take some action, but apparently it was not on the agenda at the last meeting. Chairman Kelly replied that they could look forward to some action from the City Council. He added that they tabled the Cogen deal because of this para- graph. Mr. Rossi pointed out that this addresses itself to a very important thing. The moratorium was lifted on re-zoning and applications are coming in and there is no procedure which has been adopted. Chairman Kelly replied that he gave a memo to Mr. Kohl regarding this. Mr. Rossi asked if it would be on the agenda for the next City Council meeting ~ud ~s. Huckle pointed out that it would be in these minutes. ~s. Castello asked if Mr. Kohl had answered this memo and Chairman Kelly replied: no. ~. Ryder stated that in looking at the guidelines for annexa- tion prepared by Mr. Smoot together with the application, there should be a statement from the applicant regarding the existing present County zoning and it is not included. He referred to Resolution 74-L and Mr. Smoot's draft for guidelines for annexa- tion. He is talking about annexation. There is no reference to what the present County zoning is. M~s. Castello replied that they were asking that this application be amended. ~s. Huckle added that they were saying it was inadequate. Mrs. Castello continued that they were hoping to suggest a proce- dure like re-zoning would be made for annexation. They were hoping to get this tonight, but it doesn't look like it is available from Mr. Smoot. Chairman Kelly informed them that he had called Mx. Smoot several times. ~s. Castello asked if any explanation was given and Chairman Kelly informed her that ~. Smoot told him that he did not know where he would be, etc. ~. Rossi stated that they must take action. Chair- man Kelly stated he thought the Board has gone as far as it can. M~s. Huckle suggested to i~. Rossi that they could refer MINUTES PLANNING & ZONING BOARD PAGE SEVEN D.~CEi~R 9, 1975 to and quote the ~minutes stating they cannOt act as they do not have proper procedures. They do not'have to take actiOn. Mr. Rossi asked if there was any business to come before the Board tonight and Chairman Kelly informed him that Mr. & ~s. Kessman were oresent under Old Business. M~. Rossi asked if this was adde~ to the agenda and Chairman Kelly replied that this was discussed at their meeting on November 25. OLD BUSINESS~ Chairman Kelly referred to the meeting of November 25 when Mr. Rossi asked I~. Kessman for a survey showing the existing structures on his property. Mr. Eessman obtained it just this morning and he came to see ~s. Padgett. They discussed the agenda tonight and Mrs. Padgett suggested that he see him at his office, which he did. He suggested to ~. Kessman that he appear tonight and submit the survey, so it can be processed and possibly it can be on the agenda for the next meeting. Mrs. Castello stated that the Board previously suggested that a site plan be submitted to the Building Department. Chairman Kelly replied that they extracted from M~. Bushnell that all future papers submitted would have a survey and M~. Kessman is at the beginning now. Mr. Kessman appeared before the Board and stated that when he was at the previous meeting, he waited until 11:10 P. M. to talk and he is glad tonight that it is much earlier. The Board asked him to have a survey made with the existing struc- tures located on the survey. At that time, he asked to build a triplex and Mrs. Huckle stated that density was 10.8 units per acre. Mrs. Huckle informed him that this was required in the R-3 zone. ~. Kessman continued that his property is C-3 and he did not ask for a zone change. Mrs. Huckle explained that there was no allowance for residential in C-3. Mr. Kessman referred to the code stating under Article K, multiple residen- tial in a C-3 zone. Where his property is located, it is zoned C-3. He could go 45 ft. high, but doesn't want that. He just wants to build an apartment for himself and two to rent. He has plenty of parking space. He doesn't see why he can't build a triplex since the code calls for this. M~s. Huckte asked where~the code called for this? It does not state this in C-3. Residential is not allowed in C-3. Mr. Kessman informed her that the houses have been there since 1948. ~s. Huckle explained that they were grandfathered, but now he wanted to make additions. She added that in re- viewing multiple family requirements, there is a density. ~. Kessman replied that there wasn,t in C-3. ~s. Huck~e explained how it referred back to where there was density. ~. Kessman replied that he could show them an acre of ground with 16 families. This paragraph is unconstitutional. He doesn't want to take the City to court though. Two attorneYs MINU~S PLANNING & ZONING BOARD PAGE EIGHT DECEMBER 9 , t 975 have stated it is unconstitutional. Mrs. Huckle pointed out that the Board had the prerogative to tell him no according to the parenthetical phrase. Mr. Kessman stated that he is asking permission to build a triplex. Mrs. Huckle explained that they were trying to work within the way the code is w~ttten now, not the way it should have been written. She then read the parenthetical phrase~: "upon review and recom- mendation by the Planning& Zoning Board and approval by the City Council? She added that these are the only rules they have to go by. Mm. Kessman stated that his neighbor can do it, but the Board won't allow him to do it. M~s. Castel!o asked if his neigh- bor was going to do it and Mr. Kessman replied that it was done during the last three months. He built three quadplexes and he is sure the City approved the plans. Chairman Kelly suggested writing a memo to the City Manager with the contents of this discussion. It will convey to him and the City Co~mcil that Mm. Kessman has apparently consulted with attorneys smd they have stated that this part of our code is unconstitutional. We need counsel whether this atti- tude is correct. Mrs. Huckle stated that since they ~ave a code and have nothing else to go by, they are reading it as they interpret it. We feel that any multi-family residential should conform to the existing multi-family residential re- quirements. That is as far as they are allowed to go under this code. Perhaps this code is not extensive enough. They are willing to explore it to satisfy I~. Kessman and keep it within legality. ~. Kessman replied that he didn't want to do anything illegal. Mrs. Huckle stated she didn't think there was anything further they could do, but they are willing to go further to explore it. Chairman Kelly agreed and that they should consult with the City ~ttorney, M~s. Huckle agreed this would be part of the exploring. M~. Ryder asked if there was any prohibiZion of building a structure in the rear yard? Mrs. Huckle asked if this fronted on a public street? Chairman Kelly replied, there was no pro- hibition that he knew of. Mrs. Huckle clarified that there were three separate houses there now and Mr. Kessman replied this was correct and explained. Right now, the three buildings cover 2,055 sq. ft. combined. The square footage of the lot is 18,5~2. According to the code, 4~ would be 7,404. He just w~uts to build about a 3,200 sq. ft. building. If it will make the Board happy and if they are going to stick to density, he will abandon the house in the back and use i~ for a garage. His~married son is living in it now. It is 20 x 30 ft. He will let his son live in one of the new apartments. He is trying to throw $50,000 into the economy of Boynton Beac~ using Boynton Beach labor. With the economy like it is, he thinY~ the contractors would be tickled to death to get $50,000 worth of business. MI}YJTES ~ANNiNG & ZONING BO~D PAGE NINE DECE~ER 9~ 1975 Mr. Rossi pointed out that he would be exceeding the density. Mm. Kessman replied that he has been told that he wouldn't. Chairman Kelly suggested finding out about this. Mms. Huckle referred to him having three houses now and asked where he pl~ned to build the triplex and ~. Kessman pointed out on the survey. Mss. Huckle clarified there would be six dwelling units and Mr. Rossi added on a half acre. ~. Kessman in£ormed him it was 178 x 104 ft., two lots. He added that if he is forced to, he will close the one house and revert it back to a garage. He does not want any preferential treatment, but expects the same as his neighbors are allowed to do. Mms. Huck!e referred to Page 27 of the Zoning Code and stated they must admi~ where they have multi-family residential with the parenthetical phrase, they do not say specifically that it has to conform to multi-family residential setbacks and regu- lations. They should probably say this, but she doesn't know how it will be interpreted. There is no place that they have residential regulations, but they should. They have to go to highe~Tzoning. Ail the C zones are expressly commercial zones, except if approved by this Board. Chairman Kelly stated that he third~s the proper source of information on this question is the City Attorney and asked if the members were in agreement? ~s. Huckle replied that she thinks the planner should be con- sulted also, because she thinks there is room for improvement on the wording here. They should have interpretation from the planner on what the intent is. For instance, you would never consider putting in a residential use with no minimum side yard. ~. Kessman referred to it stating 15 ft. [~s. Huckle referred to it stating none on interior lots. ~. Kessman re- plied that he didn't want to build on the property line. His intentions are to set back 5 or 6 ft. from the property line, put in a nice pavement, etc. Mms. Huckle pointed out that the whole category was designed for commercial uses and not for anything residential. When they put in multi-family residen- tial, it was the full intention to abide by the setbacl~s of the residential code. Chairman Kelly pointed out that it did not state this. ~. Kessman asked if it would be more appropriate for him and more beneficial to the City if he wanted to build a four story building with a 7/]1, liquor store, etc. on the first floor, and offices upstairs~ etc.? This would block his neighbors' view and would be legal? Mrs. Huck!e replied: yes, according to the code, but people wouldn't be living there. ~. Kessman replied that people could live above it and there would be robberies downstairs. ~. Rossi stated the question arises when you make an area C-3 where there is residential. The intent is that the land is more properly used as C-3 and if there is residential, it will MINUTES PM&NNING & ZONING BOARD PAGE TEN DECE~BER 9, 1 975 be phased out. If a site plan is submitted meeting all the requirements of C-3, they would have to act on it. If he feels possibly the zoning should be residential and the neigh- bors agree, he could get a petition and request re-zoning. This would be another matter. Mr. Ryder pointed out that they still have the problem of density. He asked if M~. Eessman contested the change in zoning and Mr. Kessman re- plied: no, he did not know it was changed. I~s. Huckle pointed out that commercial zones did not provide as much safety, etc. as residential zones. M~~. Kessman stated that when he bought it, it was R-3 and he never knew it was changed. Mrs. Huckle continued that there were different site regula- tions for residential to protect people. When they designed site regulations for cor~ercial, it was strictly for business. ~. Kessman informed her it was all residential. They are all set~back plenty. He has a little boy and is concerned with this. M~s. Huckle asked ig he would be satisfied with five dwelling ~uits as a second choice and Mr. Kessman replied that he would not be satisfied, as he wants a triplex. He added that the one house was originally a garage in 1948 and one of the sub- sequent owners made a one bedroom house out of it. Zf he builds a triplex, he can put his son into one of the new apartments, but doesn't want to do this. ~s. Huck!e moved to table this item and seek counsel, advice, and input from the acting Planning Consultant and City Attor- ney, as to what direction they should pursue this to and advise Mr. Kessman. Mr. Ryder seconded the motion for ~iscussion purposes. Under discussion, ~. Rossi stated it does fall within the Board's prerogative as to what is the best use for this thing, but they are relegating it asking for advice. ~s. Huckie replied that they are trying to explore it. She thinks it is ambiguous in the code. Mr. Ryder added that they are contend- mng that R-3 applies. Mrs. Huckie added that it is just left wide open. M~. Rossi referred to i£ stating multi-family resi- dential an8 only one district states this. Mrs. Huck!e replied that it pyramids. She thinks it should be defensible and a legal opinion will be helpful. ~s. Castei!o remarked that in the end, ~. Eessman ~ght have to take it to court and fight it. Mr. Ryder stated that three factors are involved. Do they re- vert back to R-3 requirements and in that event what happens to density? They have a problem because this is in C-3. Will he have to adhere to all setback, restrictions in R-37 Mrs. Huckie asked if he~meant on each unit being built and !~. Ryder replied that he was referring to the new one and having to adhere to the normal setbacks. M~. Kessman informed them that he would. 5@. Ryder continued that basically it ties it MINUTES PLANNING & ZONING BOARD PAGE E~UVEN DECE~ER 9, 1975 with what extent they can deviate from C-3. apply the R-37 ~hat way can they Mss. Huckie pointed out that they did not have input from TRB. Chairn~an Kelly informed her that it would be processed. Mrs. Huckle asked if oncs they give their recommendation to the City Council, it will start back over again? Chairman Kelly re- plied that after getting this input, they can decide whether it is legal and give it to the Building Official. They only have this because Mr. Bushnell wasn't available today. Mr. Kessman informed them that he would be way within the set- backs. He will have more than 15 ft. on the side. Mr. Rossi ues.tioned the existing buildings and Mr. Kessman oointed out ha~ he ham ~7.8~ft. ~. Rossi stated he was trying to visual- ize what the intent was to do on the plot of land not fronting on a public street. He must meet the setbacks required. The minimum is 20 ft.'~? Mr. Kessman replied that it was 15 ft. in C-3. ?~s. Huckle added that it was controlled by residential setbacks. Me. Kessman asked who approved putting the building there, if it was not the Planning & Zoning Board? Mr. Rossi informed him that there were a lot of buildings non-conforming. When the zoning was changed to C-3, it was made non-conforming and additions cannot be made to non-conforming. He is asking for all this to be considered under R-~. x ~. Eessman replied that he is C-3. M~s. Huck!e informed him that they must work with R-3 setbacks and requirements. ~. Kessman replied that the City changed it to C-3. Mrs. Huck!e asked if he complained and M~. Eessman replied that he didn,t k~ow about it. M~s. Huck!e informed him that it was in the newspaper and notices were sent with the water bills. M~. Kessm~u informed the Board that the buildings were there when he bought the property. There was an addition put on the building before he bought it. The bedroom was added on to 7.4 ft. from the property line. Somebody issued a permit for this. If it conformed then, it ms not his fault it does not conform now. Mrs. Huckie stated that they were still in discussion of the motion and the Board should discuss this only. It will re- main on the agenda as a tabled item. Mr. Kessman must be advised when they receive information. They need advice and input from the City Attorney and Planner. The City Attorney was their guide on improving the wording of the Zoning Code and it must be decided if the intent is clear enough. Also, the Planner must advise as to how this should apply to the code. This parenthetical phrase allows it by the code. If they are going to make a clear decision, she thinks they need a clear interpretation. It is not usually an allowable item under C-3. When they were writing this code, M~. Barrett sug- gested they not have a lot of things in this code, but some things are not specifically spelled out. They suggested having the Planning & Zoning Board review things. He suggested not MINUTES PLANNING & ZONING B.OARD PAGE ~.fELVE DECEi~ER 9, 7975 having allowables for this particular reason, as it allows for ambiguity. M~s. Caste!lo added that this was left be- cause if there is residential in a certain area, they can decide whether they want to leave it residential. She does not think the intent was to let the residential go under these regulations though. Mrs. Huck!e stated that this is the pro- blem with the code, it is not clear enough, it does not state they have to go back to residential. 3@. Rossi stated the overall intent was to make it commercial with the residential phasing out, but now they have to contend with new residential. M~s. Huckle stated they wanted to allow it occassionally with the possibility of allowing multi-family, such as a complex with small shops to go with the neighborhood. They did not want to completely eliminate multi-family residential, but wanted to govern it with their review and recommendation and approval by the City Council. They wanted to see how it went with the plan of the area. It leaves them with a lot to con- sider and they need professional input. At this time, Chairman Kelly asked for a vote on the motion. Motion carried 3-2. ~. Rossi then continued that he didn't think it was the in- tent to use C-3 setbacks for residential. Mr. Kessman asked what he was referring to in reference to C-3 setbacks? Chair- man Kelly advised them not to beat a dead horse. Mr. Kessman will not do anything until he hears from the Board when we get input and take it off the table. ~. Kessman asked what were the C-3 setbacks? ~'~. Rossi re- plied that his own opinion for that is when they put multi- family in upon recommendation of the Board, he thinks it would be the intent that multi-family setbacks are intended to be applied. Mrs. Huckle agreed. Mr. Kessman asked what he meant by C-~ ~ setbacks? ~s. Huckle replied that they would go by the R-3 setbacks. We will probably have to stand on that. ~'~. Kessman asked again what were the setbacks? M~s. Huckle showed him in the regulations. ~. Ryder stated they must also decide the matter of density. Mrs. Huckle added that there was not any density in C-3 and they only have density in residential zones. ?.~. Ryder stated that they must go ahead with considering this under R-3, but he still feels they need further information. Chairman Kelly stated, that they have taken their action for tonight on this matter and in view of the fact, they do not have any New Business, a motion to adjourn is in order. Mr. Kessman stated he was not of the opinion that the Board was trying to mislead him~ but...Mr. Rossi interrupted that this came as a bit of surprise. He owns a piece of land in MINUTES ~ANNING & Z0~_I~G BOARD PAGE THIRTEEN DECE[~ER 9, 1975 C-3, which is highly sought after zoning. M-~~. Kessman asked if he knew of anyone who wanted to buy it? Mr. Rossi contin- ued that if he felt so strongly against C-3 he thinks someone , should have come about this. Mr. Ryder asked about the widening of 23rd? ~. Kessman in- formed him that he went to the Engineering Department and asked how wide 23rd would be and one gentleman said 120 ft. He re- plied that this was good to hear. He hopes he is right, as it comes right through his son's bed. Ms. Rossi asked who gave him this information and ~L~. Kessman replied that he didn't kmow. Mr. Kessman continued that another man said he was wrong and stated it was 102 ft. He informed him that according to the map in the Building Deps~tment, it was 50 ft. and proposed for 80 ft. Mm. Rossi remarked that this was more like it. Mrs. Huck!e added that Golf Road was samething else. M~. Kessman continued that they told him that Golf Road would be 120 ft. from Military Trail to Route ~. ~. Ryder remarked that this could happen. ADJOUR~@]NT Mrs. Huckie made a motion to adjourn, seconded by Mrs. Castello. Motion carried 5-0 and the meeting was properly adjourned at 9:~7 P. M. CORRECTED :A' G-E N D A Regular Planning and Zoning Meeting Time: Date: Place 7:30 P.M. DeceJrber 9 , 1975 Council Chambers, City Hall 1. Acknc~ledgement of members and visitors. 2. Reading and approving of minutes. Co~nunications: 5. Old business: 6. New business: NONE