MInutes 12-15-69DEC~MER 15, 1969, AT 7:30 P..L, CITY HALL, BO~T BEAiH., FLORIDA.
PP~SE~T
Stanley
James ~'tacAlpine
James Sarno
Leon Cloutier
Clyde Wor~el!
Maynard Wertz
Ray Allen
Stuart B. Fuller, BuJ~lding Official
Chairman called the meeting to order at 7:30 P.M.
Chairman asked fop motion to apporve minutes of meetings held:
Novembe~ 7, November 19~ Novembe~ 2~, Deeem,ber 1, December 3~ 1969.
N~. Sarno made motion that minutes he approved; seconded by ¥~. ~cAlp3ne.
M '
F~Tion u~anJm~usly carried.
OLD BUSIneSS: None.
~ BUSINESS
Parcel 1: See legal attached to minutes. (Sh~,.m as Parcel ?K~,~ on
dr~ng File No. TL-2~SSL~ Revised l%bvember 1969. )
R~quest: R=IAA with Special Exceptions to
Use: I'~ultiple Family Residential Apartments.
Applicant: Caldos Propemties, Inc. (Palm Beach l~isureville)
Chairman introduced Board ~n~er~ to the audience.
~. Weaver suggested that Parcel 2 be taken at the same time as Parcel
1, in ordem to save time.
Mm. Rossi, Engineer for Caldos, put map of the Par~e!s in view of the
Board and the audience. He explained the map to the audience, show~
Lng roads, canals and areas in relation to the portions n~J under con~
struction. Pie explained that the parcels up for rezoning were at one
time alloted for single f~mi!y c~;ellings, and the request was for re-
zoning of these areas for multiple family d~el]ings, ~ Story apart~
merits. He further expalined that the reason for the change was due to
a fumther exploration of the soil in these areas %_~ich revealed ex-
tensive layers of muck. He explained that it was not economically
feasible to put lots for single family d~e]~ngs onto areas which %~ould
require extensive removal of the muck.. Ho~ever~ it was economically
feasible to construct ap~ent buildings in this area, in this type. of
situation by use of piling. Demu~king operations would require reaoval
Of approximately 190,000 cubic yards of muck. .By going to apsmtme~nts,
piling can be used in the foundations.
~. Sarno requested that the Parcels be pointed out on ~e m~o as
Parcel 1 "~2' and Parcel 2 "L'~. I%. Sarno raised the question of
twenty foot road in front of ap~t circulation for traffic. Ques~
tiomed this for fire fighting purposes and for ~fic flow for
additional tmaffic.
M~. Rossi explained that this was approxi~ate!y same as others used.
57id~1 of the road parallel with smd r~nin~ along The ap~t build--
lug of Parcel 1 was discussed. "~
¥~. Sarno expressed ~at in his opinion the road did not have adequate
width to handle t~affic frc~..~ surrounding neighborhoods and traffic frc~
the apertments.
}~. Echamte came forward to explain that Caldos felt that the road
,~idth (20 Ft. ) was adequate to handle the traffic involved and The
parking had another 20 ft. road~ besides parking.
Mr. Rossi stated the proposed number of units in The apartment buildd~ng
is plenned to be 72 and ~uat the apazWmm~ts are planned to have a 30 ft.
backyard space.
ChaLrman asked for furTheP discussion on this parcel from The Board,
the audience.
It was stated that the street in front of the a~t parking site is
to be one.~ay. Brief discussion was held regarding the number of units
and cars in the apar~t area iD. relation to the parking.
~o. Cioutier suggested that the apartment building be pushed back some,
toward the lake, adding frontage to ~.e roac~ in front of the apart-
ment building site.
Mr. Weaver asked if the engineering c~ the lake had been done, and if
the lake had to be as large as indicated on the
~'~. Echarte answered that engineering had been done on the lake and
had sh~ that it was necessary that the lake be the size designated
by the map.
~. Rossi asked permission to vary this one foot, either way, according
to the design which will be used.
Chairman requested any others present, for or against, cce~ f~Tard
and be heard. There were none to come forward.
Chairmen called for further discussion and questions. .Then asked for
a motion.
Mr. Worrell asked for ~M. Sarmo's rec~dation regardiug the dis-
cussion about the traffic on the street in front of the apartwmnt
building.
Mr. Sarmo stated he would like for Caldos to either increase The road~
way area l0 ft. more and close off the three entrances to the road,
to increase the parking space in the area, and made motion that %he
Parcel he g~anted rezoning under this condition that one of these ~
things were done.
~. MacAlpine questioned closing up the three entranoes to the roadway
in reference to creating a hazard in gettinp~ a fire ~ack to the area
in ease of fire.
Mm. Weaver replied ~%at there would be sa~le access to the area in case
of fJ~e.
Motion was seconded by Mr. MaeAlpine.
Mr. Worrell asked Mr. Rossi if the condition proposed fop rez~ning grant
by t~. Sarno was a feasible one.
l~. Rossi replied that he did not think that it ~-~uld be a problem..
~. Womreil asked if this was a realistic approach to the problem.
~. Rossi stated that he felt that it was.
Motion that parcel be gran~d rezoning on condition proposed was
~nanimously carmied.
Parcel 2: See legal attached to minutes. (Sh~m as Parcel ~'~L" on
dma~ing File No. TL~2~SL~ Revised November 19~9. )
Request: R-1AA with Special ExcePtions to R-3A.
Use: k~ltiple Fsmily Residential Apardm~nts.
Applicant: Catdos Properties, Inc. (PaLm Beach Leisureville)
Chairman called fo~ discussion or questions from the Board.
Mm. Sarno stated that he felt that the same adjustment should be made
for Percet 2 '~L': as made for Parcel 1 "K~' in reference to the parking
and roadway.
Mm. Weaver pointed out that the ~,~o areas were not the same on ingress
and egress. Double traffic flow is already ~zisting in these pamking
Board discussed this area.
Mm. ~'~aver suggested only one dividing s~rip be used in order to increase
~raffic fl~.
Chairman called for anyone for or against, to come fo~ard. There was
no response.
Chairmen ~%en called for a moticn.
Motion made by Mr. Cloutier to g~ant zoning, provided access openings are
enlamged and pamking access redesigned, in accorcl3nce with Board's
suggestions~ i.e. = to use one diVider fora tmaffic flm~ control.
Seconded by Mm. Worrell. All voted aye except ~. Sarno. kbtion
carried 6 to 1. ~
Parcel
South 92 feet of Lot A, I~{a~bor Estates Sub~
diVision as recorded in Plat Book 21, Page 98,
Palro Beach County records.
Request: C-1 to C-2
Use: I".!iniature Golf Course
Address: 1~18 ~
~or~kb ~Federal ~ig.hway
Applicant: Ralf E. ~eier
Chairman read sevePal letter~ opposed to the rezoning. He offered ~at
he had seen ~e applicant at an ea~lieP date snd had been told ~at
the person who had proposed to put in the golf course fo~ the applicant
was not sure that they would do so. Letters ~ade par~ of the record.
Board discussed subject property.
Chairm~n called fop any in audience, fo~ oP against, to eo~ forward.
There was no response.
C~/rman called fo~ a moi~ion. F~. Wer~z made motion tha~ the request
be denied, as ~ felt it was not prope~ location fop su~ an under~ak~
ing, in relation to the suProunding area ~nd businesses in that area.
~'~tion seconded by ~. -~%eA1pine. I~:btion Un~usly ear,led. Request
denied. (No one was present to represent the applicant fop the zornng
change request. ) '
'Request:
Use:
Parcel 4
Request:
Use:
Applicant
for Parcel
4(a) and (b)
(a) Lots 1 thru 7~ Block 2; lots 1 thr~ 7, Block 3~
Lots ! thru 7, Block a., Congress GYove Subdivision,
as recorded in Office of the Circuit Court, in
Plat Book 15, Page 6~, Palm Beach County records.
Also Lots ?8, 79, 84~ 8S~ 86~ 114, 115, 116~ 117,
;rden Psmk Subdivision, as mecorded in Plat Book 2,
Page 96, Palm Beach County records.
R~i to
Ltltiple family apart~ents as rentals.
(b) LOts 81, 82~ 83~ 87, 88~ 89, 118, 119, 120,
Arden Pap]< Subdivision, ~s recorded in Plat Book 2~
Page 96~ Pa~ Bead~ County records.
P~2A to
~'~ultiple femily apamtments as rentals.
Vanguard Development
~. ~/te and .~',~. Shaw came forward to represent V~nguard Development
and to explain their requests. Pie sh~d proposed plan to Board and
audience. 'Wants to use subject proper~y fop multiple housing undeP
F.H.A. progmam for 1~.~, rent supplemental housing. Present sketch sh~m
1~4 units in %mo story building, playgrounds, pool~ shuffleb~, etc.
all in a complex. ,
City has been asked procedur~ necessary to abandon existing rights~-of-
way in subject a~ea. ~nis abandonment will be requested. Vanguard
Development Proposes to use Dempster Dumpsters on Perimeter of
cc~plex fo~ garbage pickup° Pa~king will be around the Peri~eter only.
Area will be under corporate managesmnt supervision.. Developers ~.~ll
furnish lights ~ere needed, fop after dark play, etc.
Chairman called for anyone in audience for or aga/nst to come fo~,Tard.
I¥~. Cecil Jones came lombard with a petition, with 74 names, objecting
to this rezon/ng. Most are ne~khoz~ to the South. 0bjecticm is to
down-grading both pieces of property as sh~,~.
Chainr~n informed ~-~. Jones that this petition would go in record.
M~. ~lzite then came forward to fur~e~ e~plain tha~ it was their in-
tention to build a good building and that they ~ould meet F~H.A.
specifications. Pbintenance would be under F.H.A. on co _rpomate chart~.
These buildings would not be de~imental to ~e conm~mity and ~ould
add to City tax roll. This ~ld be under F.H.A. Entitlement, Section
~236. This is set up on an income facto~ basis and apartments would
be fr~m one to three bedrooms. Income must be approximately $5,800.00
pep yea~ for one bedlx~m, $8,210o00 per yeap for %%~ bedroom, $7,500.00
pep yea~ for thr~e bedrooms. %~ould have to have steady empl~t
record to qu81~fy. RenTo~s must put in at least 25% of thei~ total
income toward rentals, if a supplement is ~ven. Government could
supplement up to one-third ~of rental costs for individuals.
Questions asked, such as '%~at guarantee that the project ~uld be kept
up if only half rented?,~ _
Developer stated that this was not anticipated and could see no danger
.of this happen/rig.
Board, develope~ and audience had genema! discussion, pro and con.
According to developer, this would not be a lc~ rent housing development
such as F.H.A. 221 program.
Chairmen Weav~ compared this type rental ~zith modula~ units and mobile
homes and stated that ~ need more type 1~ cost housing very badly.
Finances would dictate the desirsbility of such a project.
Uevelopem was a~<ed if Pights-.of-way possibly contained a reVerter
clause, in case of street abandonment? Developem said he'd have to
cheek into this subject.
Chairmmn called fo~ a motion.
MOtion was made by ~
~'~. %,~orrell to table for further information on
s~t rights-of-way, construction program, etc. Seconded by ~.~. A_ll~.
;ll voted aye, and subject was tabled.
Mr. Sarno then suggested that developer and interested parties in
audience get together and go over facts on proposed developn~nt.
Possibly even get an F.H.A. consultant up to talk with them.
-5-
Parcel 5:
tots 6 thz~ 10 Block 71~ Beverly ~:!ills ;~.dition #9
ubo~vls!on~ as recorded in Plat Book 13 Pag~e 6~
Palm Beach County records. ' ~
Request: R-1 to C-1
Address: 469 N. W. 1st Avenue
Applicant: Reginald Kitching
Use: For Sale or Resale.
Dr. Kitcking c~me fozward ~nd e~l~_ned that he had seen 1-95 map ~nd
that his access from N. W. 2nd Avenue ~muld be cut off when 1-95 was
built. Department of Transportation will fence him. off ~en %his takes
place. His lots run thru~ but those on N. [~. 1st Avenue~ sre zoned R-1
~nd he Wouldn't ~e ~ble to use th~m. Had sevemal c~nces to sell th~s
property~ but couldn't ~ecause of the above re~sons.
Board and Dr. Kitching discussed subject further.
Chairman called for anyone in ~udienee for or ageinst to come fozward.
There w~s no further response.
Cheizm-~n called for motion.
K~tion to table for ftmther information from Dapartment of Tn~nsportation
m~de ~y ~. Cloutier. ~tion died for lack of second.
M~tion to demy made by Mr. ~[ertz and seconded by Mr. Alle~. Motion to
deny made on b~sis that rezor~[ng request was pr~ma~ until might-of~
~y and off r~mps established. Ail vOted aye and reze~ing denied.
Meeting adjourned at 9:~0 P.M.
Stanle~~ !
pages of minutes
pages of legal description attached.
-6-
Parcel 1:
A Parcel of Land in Section 32, Township 45 South, .Range 43 F~_~t,
City of Boynton Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, more particularly
descr/bed as follows:
F£~-~ the Northwest ~ of Section 32, Township 45 South, Range 43
East, Palm Beach County, Florida, said corner being on' the centerline of
the 100 foot wide Right-of-Way of Congress Avenue as now /aid out and in
use and also being an angle point in same, run North'88° '00' 52" East (for
oonvenience, the West T.~ne of Section 29, Township 45 South, .Range' 43 East,
Palm Beach County, Florida bears North 0° 58" 29" West co-linear with said
centerline of Congress Avenue, and all bear'.u~s recited' herein'are relative
theretO) along the North'Line Of said Section '32 a distance Of 3754.89 feet
to a point, said point being on the West Right'of-way rHne Of the Lake Worth
Drainage District's 155 foot Equalizing Canal ET~; thence along said West ..~.
Right-of-Way South 0° 22' 42" West a distance of .1325:.65' to the '.Point'of -.- "-~..~
Parcel K; thence along the boundary of-Parcel K ~as .follc~s. 'South 00 22' 42".
"61.0.00 feet:' to a point~ ~e cl~ rrm r, akt .Right"of-wa7 l.,ino ,g~:x~ ' ' ,.~
87° 34' 32" West a d,.~~ of 670o~2 foot: to a po:h~t~ then~ along tho a,~.,~ ~ ~¢ ..~: ..~ :~.ilI ....
to a point; thence al .egg a tad/al 1/ne-to the last describe~ curve North . .
64o 08' 47" East a distance of 125.00 feet to a point; thence North
· 87° 34' 32" East a distance of 294.32 feet to a point; thenc~ North 0° 22'
42" East a distance of 478.89 feet to a point; thence North 87° 34' 32" East
a distance of 300 feet more or less to the Point of Beginn/ng of the herei~
described Parcel of T~nd, Parcel K, oonta~. 5.3 acres of lar~, more or
Parcel
Request: R-1AA with Special Exceptions to R-3A
Parcel to be used for Multiple Family Residential Apartments.
Applicant: Caldos Properties~ Inc. (Palm Beach Leisureville)
2:
A Parcel of Land in Section 32, Township 45 South, Range 43 East,
City of Boynton Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, being mot particularly
described as follows:
From the Northwest Corner of Section 32, Township 45 .South, Range
43 East, City of Boynt0n Beach, Palm Beach County, .Florida, run South '
1.°-02'-40'' East (for convenience, the West 'Line of Said Section 32 is assumed
to bear North 1°-02;'-40'' West and all bearings .recited herein are relative
thereto) alOng the WeSt Line of said Section 32, said West Line being also·
the centerline of the 100-foot wide Right-of-Way of .Congress Avenue as now -.
laid out and in use, a distance of 1251.17 feet to a point; thence, l~arallel to'
the North 88°-00'-52', East a distance of 649.24 feet to !a point; thence
South I°-02'-40'' East a distance of 30. 00 feet to the Northwesterly corner .-.
and Point of Be~;inning. of the'herein described Parcel of ~nd; thence along
the boundary of said Parcel of Land with the following coursesand dlstan'ce~:' '~ '
North 88°-00'-52'' East a distance of 130.02 feet to a point; thence South ' ~
1°-02'-40'' East a distance of I79.93 fee: to the beginning of a cur',;e concave'
to the East having a radius of 135.00 feet and a central angle'of 18°-0i'-55";
thence southerly and south-southeasterly, along the arc of said curve, a
distance of 42.49 feet to a point of compound curvature ending said curve
and beginning a curve concave to the northeast having a radius of 260.50
feet and a central angle of 47°-57'-18"; thence south-southeasterly and
southeasterly along th~.. arc of said curve a distance of 218.03 feet to a .point
of compound curvature ending said curve and beginning a curve .concave to the
north-northeast having a radius of 550.00 feet and a central angle of 25°-23'-3,5";
thence southeasterly and easterly, along the arc of ~aid curve, a distance, of
243.76 feet to the end of said curve; thence North 87°-34'-32'' East a distance
of 44. I5 feet to the beginning of a curve concave to the south-southWest having
a radius of 696.06 feet and a central angle of 16°-4i'-35"; thence easterly and
east-southeasterly, along the arc of said,curve, a distance of 202.80 fee~ to
a point of reverse curvature-ending said curve and beginning a curve concave
to the north having a radius of 77.80 feet and a central angle of 86°-16 -v_ :,
' RzL"'
thence east-southeasterly, easterly and northeasterly, along the arc of said '
curve, a distance of 49.26 feet to the end' of said Curve; thence radial to said
curve, South 22°-00'-56'' East a distance of 118.71 feet to a point on a curve
concave to the southeast having a radius of 912.. 75'feet and whose local tangent..~
'
at said point bears South 28°-34 '-20" West; thence southwesterly along the
arc of said curve a distance of 60.32 feet, (which subtends a central angle of
3°-47'-12'') to the beginning Of a curve concave to the south-southwest having a
radius of 566.06 feet and a central angle of 27°-12'-36'' and whose local tangent
at said beginning bears North 65°-12'-52'' West; thence northwesterly and westerly
along the arc of said curve~a distance of 268,83 feet to the end of said curve;
thence South 87°-34'-32'' West a distance of 44.15 feet to the beginning of a
curve concave to the north-northeast having a radius of 680.00 feet and a central
angle of 25°-23'-35"; thence westerly and west-northwesterly~ along the arc '
of said curve, a d/stance of 301.37 feet to a point of compound curvature ending
said curve and beginning a curve concave to the northeast having a radius "
of 390.50 feet and a central angle of 47°-57'-18"; thence west-northwesterly
and north-northwesterly, along the arc of said curve, a distance, of 320.84
feet to a point of compound curvature ending sai~ curve and beginning a curve toni
cave to the east-northeast baying a radius of 265 feet and a central angle.of
18°-01'-$5"; thence north-northWesterly and northerly along the arc of said
curve a distance of 83. 40 feet to the end of said curve; thence North I°-02'-40''
West a distance of 177. 79 feet to the point of Beginning, containing 3. 3289 Acres
of land more or less and being subject to any and all easements and/or rights .'
of way of record. '~-
Request: R-1AA with Special Exceptions To R-SA
Parcel to be used for Multiple .Family Resident&al Apartments.
Applicant: Caldos Properties, Inc.. (Palm Beach Leisureville)