Minutes 06-25-74MI~TES OF THE R~GULAR ~m~TiNG OF THE PLA~ING & ZONING BO~qD
T ~ . .... W'T ~'~'~Tr~ TUE~D~V JUNE 25
~LD AT CITY HAL~, BOYNTON BE~CH, ~ ...... ~ .... , ~
1974 AT 7:30 P.M.
I~ESENT
Joseph Kelly, Vice Chairman
~s. Marilyn
Otis Walker
Walter M. Trauger
Jack Barrett, Bldg. Official
ABSENT
Fred J. Kostner, Chairman (Excused)
L. R. Btacketer (Excused)
Mrs. En~iy Jackson (Excused)
Vice Chairman Kelly called the meeting to order at 7:40 P.M.
He welcomed everyone to the second monthly regular meeting
of the Planning & Zoning Board. He announced in the absence
of ]~. Kostner, he would be presiding as Chairman. He then
took roll call.
MINU_~ES
The _Minutes of June 11 were read. ~s. Huck~e referred to
Page 5 and questioned where Mr. Barrett explained about the
PUD Ordinance and what "15 maximum' referred to. Mr. Barrett
stated it meant t5 unit density. Mrs. Huc~e then referred
to the last page where the Board moved on abandonment of roads
in the Gulf Stream Estates and ~. Kelly's first motion was
to recommend abandonment of roads. The motion was just for
abandonment and not replat. She had questioned the replat
and that was what the discussion was about. Mr. Barrett
stated this was Just a preliminary review and should have
been stated as such. It is scheduled for the July 9 meet-
ing as a regular ~
_ _uem of discussion. ~s. Huckie questioned
if this was a preliminary review as it was brought up on May
28 and the Board looked at the replat and realized they could
not consider it, as they had not received a request for the
abandonment of roads. She had asked if they should consider
the reptat and not just abandonment. She asked if this would
come up again and ~'~. Barrett replied: yes, the first time
it was considered, it was for an abandonment of roads without
the replato When it came back the second time~ he had olatted
out the roads. It should have come back as a replat and
abandonment. It was a preliminary review the last time and
it is now scheduled for a final review. ~s. Huck~e continued
that she had asked about a 'oublic hearing on this and was ad-
vised they only had a public hearing for zoning changes~
Barrett advised that
vn~s was his error. Mr. Kelly referred
to Page 6 and stated it actually was a ~centrifuge~, change
S to G. Mrs. Huc~e referred to this page where it stated
they had checked a plat book and she questioned ~f they had
checked this. Mr. Barrett replied: yes, he did show the
book to the Members.
MINUTES
PV~^~'T~'T~'w~ & ZONING BOARD
PAGE
JUNE a~, ~ 974
Mr. Walker moved to adopt the Minutes of June 11 with the
necessary corrections. Col. Trauger seconded the motion.
Motion carried 4-0.
PUBLIC A~ARING
GuifstreamMarina
Mr. Walker stated this was not supposed to be on the agenda
for this meeting, but is scheduled for the meeting of July 9.
M~. Barrett stated this was correct s3nd requested that it be
stricken from the agenda. ~. Walker added they did have a
sketch showing what they planned to do and the public hearing
will be on July 9. Gol. Trauger questioned if this was the
place that had the fire and Mr. Barrett replied it was, but
since it has been stricken from the agenda, we should not
talk about it now.
PLAN REVI~~
No. I P~at of Palmland
Sections t, 17 and 18
M~. Barrett showed the Members the plan smd stated Palmland
would be developing it section by section. He explained the
layout of the roads. This plan shows the location of Parcel
#1 with relationship to Congress Avenue. ~nis is the devel-
oped road pattern of what they plan. All they are applying
for is Phase 1 and he showed which buildings. In order to
grant a building permit, they must show the entire parcel.
~' four units to a building. Col.
They will be o~ngle stories,
Trauger questioned the density anm Mm. Barrett mnxo_med him
it was 6.5. ~. Walker asked where it was located in refer-
ence to Charter ~orld and M~. Barrett advised him that this
was Charter World. He showed the easements for sewer, water
and ~ ~
~affmc. He pointed out they were not looking at the
requirements for zoning, ~ust that it met the requirements
for density. Mrs. Huc~e questioned if this was just their
first phase and ~. Barrett replied: yes, it is noted Par-
cet t, ~-~ase 1.
Mm. Walker made a motion to recommend approval of this plat,
Parcel 1~ of the Palmland and/or Charter World Plat. Col.
Trauger seconded the motion. Motion carried 4-0.
~. Barrett then showed the plans for Parcels 17 and 18. He
expl!ained they wanted to erect the golf and tennis club in
conjunction with the general grounds maintenance building.
Those outlined in deep black are the ones they want to do now.
MINUTES
PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
P.~GE THeE
JUNE 25, 1974
M~s. HucLu!e questioned if the parki'ng was adequate and ~.
Barrett replied: yes and added there would be additional
p~rki._g in other areas. Mrs. Huc~le remarked that it looked
acceptable to her.
Col. Trauger moved to recommend acceptance of Parcels 17 and
t8 of Palmland anc~/o~ Charter World as presented on the maps.
~. ~alker seconded the motion. ~ovmon carried 4-0.
No. 2 - ~est Boynton Bank
333 N. Congress Avenue
Boynton Beach, Florida
~. Barrett showed the Members the plans and stated it had
been reviewed previously for the temporary site ~ud he showed
where it was located on the plan. The landscaping is in.
He showed where the drive-ins would be located. Col. Trauger
questioned if this was ~u independent bank and a representa-
tive from the bank stated they were a member of the First
Bank Shares. Col. Trauger remarked that it was going to be
a nice looking building. M~. Barrett pointed out that it
would be one story at this point. The bank representative
stated after they moved in, the modular trailer would be
moved and the parking extended. Mrs. Huckle remarked that
it looked very nice.
Cot. Trauger moved to recommend approval of the plans as
presented for the ~¢~est Boynton Bank at 333 N. Congress Ave.
M o ~alker seconded the motion Motion carried 4-0.
No. 3 - Bethesda Hospital - Phase No. 10 Addition
2815 So Seacrest Boulevard
Boynton Beach~ Florida
~. B~rett showed the Members the plans and pointed out
where the present administration wing was, which is being
demolished. He showed the additions planned. Mrs. Huck!e
questioned if they were just adding a second story and Mr.
Barrett replied: no, a brand new building. Col. Trauger
asked how many stories it would be and ~!~. Barrett informed
him it would be two stories and a basement. It will be a
54 bed addition and the administration offices will also be
in this building. Temporary quarters for administration are
,in a trailer now. Mrs. Huck!e remarked that the front of the
hospital would have a whole new look. Mr. Barrett explained
further that the dotted lines showed what was existing, the
cross hatched were future plans and the parched or shaded
section was what they planned now. I~s. Huck!e questioned
if the dark blue was existing or proposed and ~o Barrett
clarified that it was proposed.
MINUTES
PL~N~ILG & ZONING BOARD
PAGE FOUR
JUNE 25, 1974
Col. Trauger moved to accept the additions as presented in
the plan for Bethesda Hospital for recommendation to City
Comucil. ~s. Huckle seconded the motion. Motion carried
4-0.
ABANDON~NT PETITION RE~
Chairman Kelly read a letter from the Four Sea Sores Condo-
minium community. It requested review of an attached peti-
tion for abandonment by the City and with the Board's
aploroval to be forwarded. It stated the petition contained
58 signatures and the community had a total of 94 owners,
but many were away on vacation and they did have powers of
t ~ ~
at orney~o~ several but didn't use them. The letter was
signed by Herbert W. Ranke.
Chairman Kelly read the petition requesting the abs~dOnment
of the right-of-way of N.E. 17th Avenue as shown on the
attached plan. It is requested as it will better serve the
residents for a reason of public safety if it were not a thru
street. Chairman Kelly noted that 59 signatures were on it,
but the plan was not attached° M~. Barrett agreed that he
also had not seen a plsmo Chairman Kelly noted that a $50
check was attached.
~. ~aiker made a motion to refer this to the City Manager
for the necessary action along with the attached check in the
amount of $50 payable to the City of Boynton Beach for an
application fee. Col. Trauger seconded the motion. Motion
carried 4-0.
CONSIDERATION OF ~03~OSED PUD ORDiN~CE
~. Bsmrett stated that at this late date, they received to-
night the HUD pamphlet No. 7 which outlines in detail the
operation and formula for the L.U.I. ratings. He suggested
going through the Coconut Creek. ordinance, ~hmcn is the same
as they would adopt, with the changing of some wording.
Mr. ~a!ker pointed out that three members were absent smd he
suggested discussing the proposed ordinance, but preferred
to wait until they had a full Board before acting. Chairman
Kelly stated he could see the logic for his reasoning, but
at the Same time they did no~ know when Mrs. Jackson would
be back~ but Chairman Kostner and M~. B!acketer will be back
around the first of July. ~rs. Huck!e stated that Mr. Black-
eter did say at the last meeting he was very well satisfied
with the~contents of this. Mr. Barrett added that he thought
Chairman Kostner had also stated the s~me.
MINUTES
~A~!NG & ZONING BO~D
PAGE F=V~
JUh~ 25, 1974
~s. Huck!e stated she had some questions before taking amy
action. Col. Trauger stated that as he read through this,
he o~bs~mtu,em the words of Boynton Beach for Coconut Creek
and did fine until he remembered the ordinance. M~~. Barrett
informed him they would revise the sections to fit their own
particular ordinance requirements. Mrs. Huck~e pointed out
that in all the instances in this ordinance, they talked
about rezoning to a PUD and she questioned how they covered
taking a parcel in on annexation and giving a PUD and not
rezoning. !~. Barrett stated it could be changed to zoning
instead of rezoning, it could apply either to zoning or re-
zoning. This is a change we c~n make.
The Members then discussed the ordinance page by page and
decided on the following changes:
M~. Barrett suggested crossing out Orm_nance 4!9-00 and
letting the attorney do this. He requested that within the
City of ~Coconut Creek~ be crossed out ~d ~Boynton Beach~
substituted. He thought from the standpoint of articles,
they could leave them alone and correct them as they correct
the rest of
~n~ ormmnan~e The Members agreed that the b~l-
ance of Page 1 would remain as it is.
~,~. Barrett re~erred to Section 301 where it stated boundaries
of land ~rezoned~ ~md stated they should take out ~re~. Mrs.
Huckie stated this is what she meant aud then Mr. Barrett ad-
vised striking out the prefix ~re~ in every case.
Col. Trauger referred to Section 50t and questioned why the
particular circumstances justify such reduction should be
underscored. M~o Barrett clarified that the topic is the
reduction and you are justifying the reduction and not the
circumstances. ~s. Huckle questioned why~thing should
be underscored and stated she thought it should be removed.
The Members then agreed the underscoring should be removed
entirely. Mr~ Barrett then read the poor typing area on the
bottom for clarification.
Col. Trauger stated that since the LUI ratings were passed
out with the scale, etc.~ should this not be incorporated
as part of the ordinance? M~. Barrett replied: no~ as this
was a solution to the formula. If you incorporate all that,
you would be confusing a lot of people. Col. Trauger sug-
gested that possibly it should be foot noted with a reference
MiNU~S
PLANNING & Z,~J~NG BOARD
~GE SIX
JU_~ 25, 1974
to this document and Chairman Kelly and M~s. Huckle agreed.
~. Barrett stated a foot note to Table I as indicated and
referred by HUD publication No. 7. Mrs. Huckle questioned
whether an asterisk should be on there and M~. Barrett in-
formed her it would be an'added sentence. He added he thought
they should leave the LUI ratings in as part of the table.
Mr. Barrett referred to where it stated ~Southern Florida
Building Code~ and stated ~t should be caangem to: ~Southern
Standards Building Code".
Mr. Barrett pointed out they had discussed some questions
about multi-family dwellings. They decided under "C" it
should read: multi-family dwellings, town houses~ garden
apartments and cluster houses.
~. Barrett and the Members then discussed the reference to
recreational facilities. It was agreed to state: private
parks, tennis courts, playgrounds, putting greens, golf
courses and driving ranges and other recreational facilities.
M~. Barrett referred to '~G" and stated they should t~ke out
c~m~_~ care centers~ and insert ~nursery schools~ kindergar-
tens and hospitals~.
~s. Huckle referred to prohibitive uses stating any struc-
ture more than 45 feet in height limited to 4 stories. The
Members discussed this further and the sequence in which it
should appear, it was dec~ded that ~'?ermitted Uses~ would be
"J~' and ~'Prohibitive Uses~ would be ~K~.
It was agreed that this page was~,ekay.
Mms. Huckle referred to changes in ~'C'~ in parking and Mr.
Barrett agreed that it should be 2 spaces. They also dis-
cussed off~street ps, king and off-street loading. [~.
Barrett suggested striking out '~a combination of useage
shall be permitted if tn~ same is justified~. It w~s
agreed to leave the top line as a cavtion and take "off-
street loading,~ out of the second li~e.
Col. Trauger referred to ~B~ where it stated it is governed
by Table 1~ Section 40~ smd he questioned if it should be
80~. M~. Barrett advised they would have to change these
sections to cover their particular useage.
MINU~S
i~ANNING & ZONING BOARD
PAGE S~IEN
JUNE 25~ 1974
The Members then discussed underground utilities ~ud whether
the statement could be applicable in all phases and whether
it should be a requirement, it was agreed to add to the
sentence ~underground utilities to the maximum extent prac-
ticable~.
Col. Trauger questioned what the legal documents for unified
control were and Pk. Barrett advised him it was a deed stat-
ing ownership.
~s. Huckle questioned whether they automatically referred
any project of 200 acres or more to an environmental impact
study? This was discussed by the Members. ~L~. Barrett then
stated it should read: ~required by the Area Planning Bos~d
(cross out and zoning board and projects of 200 acres or
more) an environmental impact study shall be supplied~.
Tn~ wording of "City Planning ConsuitantTM was discussed and
it was also noted that an article number was needed at the
bottom of the page.
Page_ _. 9
Col. Trauger quest~onem the underscoring of deviations and
it was decided to t~e out the underscoring.
Mrs. Huc}~e referred to the last paragraph and ~s. Jackson's
suggestion. Mr. Barrett stated they wanted it to read that
it shall not remain on the land~ but shall be void. Mrs.
Huck~e stated that it should revert back to the original
zoning. Mr. Barrett suggested stating the LUI rating shall
revert to the original zoning. Mms. Huckle questioned what
it would revert back to if they had a new piece of property
that didn,t hs~e a zoning. Mr. Barrett replied it would be
t~e highest zoning. Col. Trauger suggested starting a ~_ew
sentence with: ~A new pl~u~ etc?.
Commencement witb~-~
__n 18 months was then discussed. Mm. Barrett
~aved it should be if the preliminary deve!bomentp~ia~_~ and
final development plan have not commenced within 18 months
after the date of filing. ~e are not talking about construc-
tion commencing within the I8 months. There could be a 12
month engineering delay. It should be as long as a plat is
filed.
Chairm~ Kelly stated the addition of: ~shaii have the
effect of increasing the LUi rating as previously applied~.
MINU~S
~ANNING & ZONING BOARD
PAGE EIGHT
JUNE 25, 1974
Chairman Xetly stated the following words shall be added at
the bottom: '~shall be within the sole discretion of the City
Council~,.
~Ars. Huc~e questioned if it was usual to issue a building
erm~t before the zoning was a~oplied as stated. M~. B~m~rett
suggested crossing out the last p~t, as they did not agree.
~. Barrett read ~
Sec,_on 1301 He pointed out it was in oppo-
sition to the Charter.
~e suggested crossing out everything
after Article 11 after ~these zoning regulations~, as we have
separate provisions for this.
The Members agreed this completed consideration of the ordi-
nance~ M~. Barrett stated he would rewrite it and get it
ready for presentation to the Board, so they could all study
and read it and come back for a special meeting on this for
presentation to the Council. Mrs. Huckle questioned whether
fees should be included and I~. Barrett explained they were
covered under a separate item. i~s. Huckle referred to other
papers submitted from Coconut Creek and read sections referr-
ing to fees being included. M~. Barrett informed her that
fees for everything would be covered by a separate ordinance.
M_r. Barrett continued that they were satisfied ~that it was
now ironed out and in accordance with the requirements. He
stated again he, would rewrite the whole thing and get it
ready for this Board to present to the City Council. He
suggested having a special meeting before July 9 if it was
ready.
Chairman Kelly announced there was no Old Business or Other
Business to discuss. He announced the next regular meeting
would be held on July 9.
Col. Trauger made a motion to a 3ourn, seconmed by M~ Huckie.
Motion carried 4-0~ ~ud the meeting was properly ~ -
am~ourned at
9:55 ?. M.