Loading...
MInutes 05-28-74MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ~ETING OF THE P~ANNiNG & ZONING BOARD HELD AT CITY HALL, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA, TUESDAY, MAY 28, 1974 AT 7:30 P.M. PRESENT Fred J. Kostner, Chairman Joseph Kelly, Vice Chairman L. R. Blacketer M~s. Marilyn Huckle Oris Walker ABSENT Mrs. Emily Jackson Walter M. Trauger (Excused) (Excused) Jack Barrett, Building Official Chairman Kostner called the Regular Meeting of the Planning & Zoning Board to order at 7:30 P.M. Ee introduced the Members of the Board, the Building Official and the Recording Secre~ tary. MIBUJTES The Minutes of the Regular Meeting of May 14 were read. Mrs. Huc_kle moved that the N~nutes of the Regular Meeting of May t4 be approved, seconded by Mr. Blacketer. Motion carried ~0 The Minutes of the Workshop Meeting of May 14 were read. Mr. Kelly referred to Page 2, Paragraph 1, where ~. Barrett stated he ~alked to several attorneys and he questioned whether he talked to attorneys or planners. M~. Barrett stated that he had talked to planners; therefore, change attorneys to planners. ~. Kelly then referred to Page 3, Paragraph 3, where Chairman Kostner stated they would have clarification of everything said at the meeting. He contin- ued that he thought the word recording was used and would be proper instead of clarification. The Members discussed the intent of what was said and Chairman Kostner then requested that the word '~clarificatio~~ be stricken and the words~'a recording~' be inserted. ~. Walker moved to approve the ~nutes as corrected, seconded by Mr. Kelly. Motion carried 5-0. AGEAnDA DISCUSS ION Chairman Eostner asked ~. Barrett if at this time it would be desirable to go into New Business as noted on the Agenda or take care of Old Business. N~. Barrett requested that they consider New Business as one visitor was present for the Replat, Item #2 on the Agenda. Chairman Kostner replied they would take this matter first then in order not to delay the gentleman. MINUTES REGUL ~R .MEETING PLAI~ING & ZONING BOARD PAGE %l~JO MAY 28, 1974 I~W~~ BUS !AqESS Replat: BlOck No.'s 8 thru 13 Gulfstream Estates No. 2 ~. Barrett explained ,#here this was located smd explained what was existing and what was planned. Mr. Blacketer ques- tioned the size of the lots and Mr. Barrett informed him that some were 90 x 101'. Mr. Kelly remarked they were plan- ning larger lots than shown originally and it looked better to him. Mr. Barrett added that he has a request for the abandonment of roads which will go to the City Clerk, Mrs. Huckle questioned if all homeS were plagued and Mr. Barrett pointed out that part was zoned R-2, so some would possibly be duplexes. The Members discussed the abandonment of' the roads. Mr. BS~rrett informed them that the abandonment must be applied for, advertised, etc. first. The recommendation for replat could be made to the City Council. This recom- mendation could be made and held in abeyance until the aban- donment is approved. ~. Kelly moved that this Board after reviewing the prelimi- nary replat layout recommend to the City Council the approval of the preliminary plat and further recommend advertising for the abandonment of the roads be embodied in the action. Mr. Blacketer seconded the motion. Under discussion, Mrs. Huckle questioned if an application for abandonment should be made before recommending abandonment. ~. Kelly then withdrew his motion and Mr. Blacketer withdrew his second. Mr. Kelly then made a new motion to recommend approval of the replat in a preliminary review. ~. Blacketer seconded the motion. Motion carried 5-0. Lake View Haven - Annexation Chairman Kostner read a memo from lit. Frank Kohl dated May 28 and ascertained that each member had a copy together with 7 pages and a map indicating the parcel under consideration. ~. Barrett requested the Members to strike the zoning of R1AAB and nots that it will be R1AA. He then explained the map and the exact location. M~s. Huckle euestioned the exist- ing zoning in the adjacent area and M~. B~rrett informed her it was R1AA. Mr. Walker made a motion to recommend a~nnexation of the Lake View Haven Subdivision under the zoning of RI~. Mr. Kelly secon~d the motion. Under discussion, ~r. Blacketer asked MINUTES REGUL~R ~ETING PLANNING & ZONING BOARD R&GE ~qREE M~_Y 28, 1974 if any questions regarding rezoning would be raised and Mr. Barrett replied: no, the annexation and zoning are carried on in one ordinance. We are taking something in and annex- ing and zoning at one time. Mrs. Huckle questioned if the City Council had approved annexation, since Mr. Kohl's memo stated the application was approved. Mr. Barrett clarified that they approved and accepted the application only. After their approval of the , it comes to this Board for study and Mr. Blacketer questioned if a public hearing was necessary for this annexation and ~. Barrett informed him that this Board was just a recommend- ing board. Motion carried 5-0. OLD BUS INESS M~. Barrett referred to the study of L.U.I. ratings and asked to forego this, as it is quite apparent that one page is missi~ug. He stated he had been trying to secure this, but had been unsuccessful. He continued that this being the case, there would be no need for a wor~hop meetirg. Chair- man Kostner stated that he believed this matter was tabled at the last meeting and should be left on the table then. ~. Barrett stated that canceling the workshop meeting would leave it on the table. M~. Barrett referred to the M-1 zoning and the inclusion of casting and smelting operations as prohibitive uses. He stated it was brought to his attention that there is a small casting and smelting operation that makes small castings. He stated he thought they were referring to ledge ssmd cast- ing operations. We have had a request for investment type casting. Investment type casting is a liquid or wax type casting. A machine mold is made and the wax i~ injected into the mold and goes through an oven. There is no du~t or smoke. He stated he wanted to Ymow if it was the Board's intention to exclude this type of operation. Mr. Kelly answered that he didn't think so. Chairman Kostner stated he was personally f~miliar with this type of work and agreed there is no smoke or dust involved and it is strictly used for machine shop~ work. He asked the Members of the Board to consider this and include this in the ordinance, but to be careful to make sure there is a breakoff so an appli- cant cannot argue that it is foundry work. ~. Barrett con- tinued that if a small machine shop needs a small part, they m~ke castings to make the part. We might mention that it was not meant to include all smelting and casting operations, that some could be included providing they make application to the Planning & Zoning Board. M~. Kelly recommended that the Board ask ~. Barrett to formulate under the allowed activitieS. He recommended wording so they could consider MINUTES REGUL~M MEETING PLANNinG & ZONING B~.RD P~GE FOUR 28, 1974 it and ~ke the change in the proposed M-1 zoning. Mr. Blacketer questioned if this could be included under light metal production and Mr. Barrett replied that they didn't intend to include casting in that category. Mr. Barrett continued that before he formulated anything, he would like to meet with the City Attorney to make up an amendment. Mrs. Huckle questioned if it would be possible in order to avoid difficulties to include this under machine shops and Mr. Barrett replied that he thought the proper route to go is the same as they have done in stating that any use not herein above mentioned, specifically enumerated or categorized may apply to the Planning & Zoning Board and City Council for use. This would not discriminate. We actually categorize a light industry instead of heavy. Mr. Kelly made a motion to recommend to the City Council that it was not the Planning & Zoning Board,s intention to arbi- trarily say any and all casting operations should be included as a prohibitive use because there are certain desirable smaller operations which could be included in the M-1 dis- trict providing the proper amendment is made. ~. Blacketer seconded the motion. Under discussion, ~ ~lk~r referred to other prohibitive uses under M-1 and asked what would pre- vent the Board at a later date from taking another plant if it came within the pollution control. ~. Barrett stated he would like to discuss this with the attorney. M~. Walker stated that he thought this motion would be premature. Mrs. Huckle referred to the particular sentence stating any use not herein above mentioned, specifically enumerated or cate- gorized~ etc. and stated she felt it did not belong under prohibitive uses, but allowable uses. Mr. Barrett stated that he would check this with the attorney. Mr. Kelly stated he still thought they should give Mr. Barrett the privilege to recommend to City Council ~ud have him get together with the City ~ttorney to see what way they should go. ~s. Huckle added that she thought he should explore this whole situation. Mr. Barrett stated that he did plan to do this. Motion c~ried 5-0. Mrs. Huckle referred to M-1 zoning, under #9 and asked if residences and trailer parks was correct. ~. Barrett clar- ified that it meant any type of residence. ~s. Huc~e. asked if there was anything f~ther on the screen enclosures and ~. Barrett replied: no, that he must still go through it to find out. Mr~ Walker made a motion to cancel the wor~hop meeting, seconded by Mro Kelly. Motion carried 5-0. Mr. Walker made a motion to adjourn, seconded by Mr. Kelly. Motion carr_e~ 5-0 and the meeting was properly adjourned at 8:35 ?.~.