Minutes 10-10-73MINUTES OF TM PLANNING & ZONING BO_~D I~ETiNG HELD AT CITY
HALL, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORi~A ~ WEDNESDAY ~ OCTOBER 10, 1 9?3
AT ?:30 P.M.
PRESENT:
Fred J. Kostner, Vice Chairman
L. R. Blacketer
~s. Marilyn Huckle
Oris Walker
Joseph Kelly
Jack Barrett, Bldg. Official
ABSENT:
Richard B. Vastine, Chairman
Col. Albert J. Wehrell
Mr. Kostner called the Regular Meeting of the Planning &
Zoning Board to order at 8:05 P.M.
Mr. Kostner announced that there were people present interested
in the ~blic Hearing, so as not to held them up, the Board
would take this up first. He then read the published notice.
Parcel #1 - Lot 6, Sam Brown Jr. Subdivision
Recorded in Plat Book 1, Page 81
Palm Beach County Records
Address: 2280 N. Federal Highway
Applicant:Gulfstream Marina Restaurant
& Motel, Inc.
~¢~ners: Beth Boffey, Thomas & Louise Boffey
Request: Conditional Use - To screen in
existing patio to provide addi-
tional area for outside dining.
M~. Thomas Boffey stated his name and his address as 2280 N.
Federal Highway and that he is the owner and operator of the
Gulfstream Marina Restaurant & Motel, Inc. He informed the
Board that he would like to screen in a concrete patio at the~
~ of the restaurant. It will give people the opportunity
to sit on the patio right on the waterway. It would be a very
nice addition to the restaurant and marina~
~. Walker referred to the address stating Federal Highway
and questioned that it was on the lake front. M~. Boffey
replied: yes, the property extends to the lake front. ~s.
Huck!e questioned the present zoning being R-3. Mr. Barrett
informed her that it was and had been granted the conditional
use, since the restaurant is part of the motel. This will be
granting a continuation of the continual use. Mr. Kelly
added that he had been at this restaurant and the slab for
the patio is in existence and all he wants to do is screen
MINUTES
PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
PAGE ~YO
OCTOBER 10, 1973
it in. Mss. Huckle questioned whether there was a roof
there and ME. Boffey replied that he planned to build a
complete screened enclosure. Mr. Blacketer asked how
many people would be seated on the patio and ~,~-. Boffey
replied that the enclosure would be 20 x 40 feet and would
seat possibly 20 to 25 people. They will have plenty of
room in the area. ~J~. Barrett added that the liable capa-
city would be 53 people. Mrs. Huckle questioned the cover-
age of serving food outdoors. Mr. Barrett assured her this
would be covered by ~u application to the health department
subsequent to your approval and prior to the granting of a
permit. It will be fully screened and protected. This is
just an extension of the conditional use. Mrs. Huckle asked
if the residents of Los Palmos Park had been Contacted. Mr.
Boffey replied that he had talked to them and none had ob-
jected. He showed the Board a letter from one resident giv-
ing the okay. He added that he had contacted the Board of
Health and they had issued a permit contingent to the Board's
approval. M~. Kostner added that the Board had gone into
this prior to this meeting and found no serious objection.
Mm. Kostner then announced that he would like to correct an
oversight now and introduce the members of the Board. He
then stated that the Public Hearing was scheduled for 7:30,
but we were unfortunately delayed because the hall was being
used by another Board.
It was then ascertained that nobody was present to object
to ~. Boffey's application.
Mr. Kelly made a motion that the applicant's request be
granted by this Board and it was seconded by M~. B!acketer.
~. Walker stated that an addition to the motion should be
that the applicant's request for extension of conditional
use be granted. Mr. Kelly and Mr. Blacketer agreed. Motion
carried 5-0.
M~. Kostner announced that the regular meeting would now be-
gin at 8:~6 P.M.
M~. Barrett asked the members to strike the Refield Construc-
tion application on Ocean Avenue from the agenda, as they were
not prepared.
~. Kostner announced that the Board would consider the re-
quest of Lehigh Portland Cement Company, High Ridge Road Ext.
Mr. Burt Smith stated his name and that he was from the law
firm of Jones, Paine and Foster and represented Lehigh Port-
land Cement Company. He asked whether he was to make a
MINUTES
?~,~NNING & ZONING BOARD
PAGE THREE
OCTOBER lO, 1973
presentation or just be questioned by the Board. ~. Kost-
her replied that it was his understanding that he was follow-
ing the court order by coming be£ore this Board. Mr. Smith
replied: yes, we have received an alternate writ-and must
come be£ore this Board before obtaining ou~ permits. Mr.
Kostner informed him that at the present time there was no
provision for a cement plant in M-1 zoning. ~. Smith re-
plied that he was aware o£ this. We are trying to obtain a
building permit. Lehigh Portland Cement Company acted on
the previous M-] zoning~ which allowed this on this parti-
cular site. We are coming be£ore this Board based on the
zoning that was in e££ect prior to the October ~ ordinance.
Mr. Kelly stated that it appeared to him that their hands
were tied at this moment without consultation with the city
attorney. We must be guided by the ordinance and should
seek counsel. ~. Blacketer added that we also should be
guided by the court order that says we must consider this.
~. Walker stated that this came up some time ago and he
didn't exactly remember when~ but we should have the previous
minutes and notes to see what was decided previously. ~.
Barrett corrected him that this matter had never come be-
fore the Planning & Zoning Board and they were not issued
permits, l~Lr. Kostner stated that actually the sole ques-
tion is the matter of whether the cement plant can come
within the city limits under the present zoning o£ M-~ and
there is no way this Board can grant this request, since as
of October ~ the law prohibiting cement plants took place.
i cannot see where we can be the judge and jury in granting
this request and agree with M~. Kelly that we must seek
legal counsel. Mr. Smith stated that previously the City
o£ Boynton Beach has been somewhat embroiled with the
Lehigh Portland Cement Company and i think it is time for
this Board to make a decision in granting or denying this
and don~t think it should be postponed. Legal counsel is
aware of this meeting. I would request at this time that
the Board make its decision and state on what grounds. This
decision should be based solely on the time we initiated
our original application under the old ordinance. A tem-
porary plant is waiting for delivery and can only be put on
this particular ground. Lehigh Portland Cement Company has
gone to a great deal of expense and the city changed the
ordinance after they had gone to all this expense. We wish
you would go on and act on this matter and state your grounds.
~. Blacketer stated that he was not sure the Board had a
legal question, as we are only approving site plans.
Huckle sta~ed that it appeared to her that since this is the
first time it has come before the Planning & Zoning Board
and since we have an ordinance prohibiting cement plants,
we have no other alternative than to deny this application.
Mr. Smith replied that it was their understanding of the
Mi~JTES
PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
PAGE FOUR
OCTOBER 10, 1973
facts surrounding the court order, that our plans are to be
considered as submitting to the City of Boynton Beach as of
June 12 of this year. This should allow the Board to rea-
lize the nature of this petition. They had submitted their
plans as of June 12 and now four months later, we find we
now have land which was not rendered for the reason it was
sold. Assuming you must consider the M-1 ordinance as it
now stands, but also consider the old ordinance where we
were allowed tocome in the city. Mrs. Huck!e stated that it
is usually left to the discretion of the Planning & Zoning
Board to make a recommendation to the City Council as to what
we think is best for the city. If this was found to be good
for the city, we would recommend to allow that use. By de-
fining our code now, it leaves us with a little less ~or~yT ~ as
it defines what is allowed. Mr. Kostner stated that he would
like to point out the sole question tonight as far as this
Board is concerned is not the court action, not the prior
zoning, but we are bound by the new ordinance. Mr. Kelly
agreed that the Board was bound by today's date, October ~0,
1~973, and by the ordinance in effect. We should have the
city attorney's legal opinion in reference to the applica-
tion being submitted on June 12. M~. Smith replied that in
reference to the court order, I believe you will find that
you are bound by the court order and you are bound to rule
under the old M-1 zoning. Since this Board is acting upon
this, it should be noted that our plans as submitted to the
T.R.B. were approved by them as a result of a committee meet-
ing with them this morning. They approved and we are now
coming before this Board. I would like this Board to either
approve or deny our petition. You are not ruling according
to the prior ordinance. Mr. Kostner stated that it was his
understanding that the judge ordered them to come back and
go through legal channels. Based on that, you are re-apply-
ing for the placing of a cement plant within the city limits,
for which there is no zoning for at this ~_me i would point
out to you that I cannot for myself approve this request.
The prohibition of a cement plant within the city limits took
place as of October 4 and I must go by' that. M~. Smith stated
that the court ruled that the City of Boynton Beach in their
M-1 zoning envisioned this type of use and this could not be
done. The right as granted ordered the city to issue a build-
ing permit as of the old M-1 zoning. The court did not grant
the right to any Board to keep us out of this zoning. Mr.
Kelly stated that in light of what was just said, I don't
doubt your word, but think it best that we seek the guidance
of our attorney and table this. ~. Smith replied that he
thought this Board is bound to act tonight. M~. Kostner
agreed and that it could not be tabled. The members then
looked at the plans. M~. Smith informed the Board in order
that they could determine exaCtly where their parties were
and assuming you are acting on the present M-1 zoning and
MIN u TES
PLANNZNG & ZONING BOARD
PAGE FIVE
CTOBER 10, 1 973
deny our peumt_on, we will come back before this Board at a
fnture time Mr Y
· · ~.ostner reminded him that they were only a
recommending board.
Mr. Kelly made a motion that this Board considering that we
are operating under the amended ordinance amended on October
4, 1973, and in view that the applicant is asking for a deci-
sion, ! move that the apolication be denied, t~s. Huckle
seconded the motion. Mr] Walker reminded the Chairman that
the Board had not heard from any opponents. ~. Kelly then
withdrew his motion and Mrs. Huckle withdrew her second.
Mrs. Melba Bruce stated her name and her address as 1820
Thomatoe Road. She added that she was not a resident of
Boynton Beach, but would be a close neighbor of this cement
plant. This cement plant has been of considerable concern
to our area. The whole question of annexation and zoning
has. This industrial park has taken the highest grade of
land. We are close to it and we do object. They are using
our road. Lehigh Portland Cement Company entered into an
~g~eement with ~. Taylor and Mr. McLaughlin an~ they bought
six or seven acres and it was for control to access on High
Ridge Road. This will not carry this traffic and will damage
the neighborhood and property value, it is a difficult pro-
blem. They have already put in a railroad spur and ordered
supplies and they don't have roads, water or sewers and are
not even prepared. We have a court order that they cannot
use High Ridge Road.
Mm. Smith s~ated that they objected to this objection, as she
was not a resident of the city.
Mm. Kelly made a motion to make the original motion stand
and it was seconded by Mrs. Huckle. Motion carried 3-2.
Mr. Smith requested a roll call Vote and it was taken as
follows: -
~. Kelly - Yes Mm. Blacketer _ No
[~s. Huckle - Yes Mr. Walker - No
M~. Kostner - Yes
Mr. Kostner stated there wasn,t any old business to be dis-
cussed, nor minutes to approve.
~r. Walker made a motion to adjourn and it was seconded by
i~s. Huckle. Meeting adjourned 9:00 P.M. ~