MINUTES OF THE JOINT PUBLIC HEARING OF THE GIP

MINUTES OF THE JOINT PUBLIC HEARING OF THE GIP( COUNCIL AND ZONING AND PLANNING BOARD
HELD IN CITY HALL ON WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 16, 1966, AT 10:00 A.M.
ROLL CALL:
COUNCIL
Present: Archie Turner, Mayor
Wesley G. Downing
Francis Ford
Carl O. Hoffmann
M. J. Casey Miller
S. Meredith Strong, Jr.
Absent: Joel Kuperberg
Also:
Elsie Lehman, City Clerk
Pursuant to noticed purpose of meeting and in accordance with Legal Notice re. Public
Hearing, and proceeding under a new policy adopted by the Zoning and Planning Board,
City Attorney David C. Spingler
Mayor Turner declared the joint public hearing open. read legal notice re public hearing, which is attached hereto and made a part of the
Mr. Spingler explained that this hearing is not concerned with just certain
minutes.
areas but the zoning map in toto, where amended, etc. Mayor Turner acknowledged presence
of Zoning and Planning Board and called for Roll Call.
ROLL CALL:
Also Present:
ZONING AND PLANNING BOARD
Present: C. M. Bauchspies
Clayton E. Bigg
J. Wilson Dyches
H. B. Watkins, Jr.
David C. Spingler, City Attorney
V. P. Wood, Jr., City Manager
Bert L. Pinkston, Zoning Administrator
Wm. R. Vines, Planning Consultant
W. R. Wilson, City Engineer
Jane Hamlin, Naples Star
Sam England, Collier County News
Malcolm Young, Collier County News
Tom Morgan, Miami Herald
Fred Winter, Fort Myers News-Press
Robert Strom, TV
Wm. Arbaugh, W.N.O.G.
and many other interested citizens and visitors
Absent: Wm. W. Zimmerman
Walter Condon
George Allen
B. Clarke Nichols
Capt. W. A. Burton
Mr. & Mrs. Peter Gulotta
James L. Walker
Mrs. Geo. L. Ford
Nelson Sanford
Benjamin G. Parks
Mr. & Mrs. Anton Nystrom
J. Thad Moss
John Pulling
Allan Foster
George Vega
Robt. McDaniel]
James McConnell
In the absence of a Chairman and Vice Chairman Wm. W. Zimmerman, motion was made by Mr.
Dyches, seconded by Mr. Bigg, that H. B. Watkins, Jr., be appointed temporary. Chairman
for purpose of guiding the hearing.
The Mayor requested applicants, their attorneys, or agents, be heard at this time.
Walter Condon, attorney representing Mr. Nelson Sanford and a group of Port Royal
residents, stated that they are aware of the complex problems in the Gordon Pass area
and in order to bring about fruition, that this item be deleted today with the understanding that the City Council and the Zoning and Planning Board act expediously in
solving these special problems that do exist.
Attorney George Allen, present representing owners of Gordon Pass Fish Camp, concurred
with Mr. Condon's suggestion that this . be set aside at this time.
4 C.
B. Clarke Nichols, attorney present representing Mr. Lester Norris, further concurred with suggestion made by Mr. Condon and further by Mr. Allen.
Capt. W. A. Burton requested that same action be taken regarding Oyster Bay end area
and that consideration be given to retaining "G" or "F-a" classification.
Mr. Peter F. Gulotta, owner of Lots in Golden Shores, stated that because of distance
(he resides at Delray Beach) it may be difficult for him to return and therefore he
requested a chance to be heard.
Mr. James L. Walker, present representing owners of three lots on Oyster Bay, agreed
with MT. Culotta, stating that a decision should be made on this property.
The Mayor requested Secretary of the Zoning and Planning B oard real all correspondence
received. The Secretary noted that three letters were received, one from Mr. Peter
F. Gulotta (Lots 1 & 2 Golden Shores), which she replied to; one from Mr. Joseph
S. Weinfeld (Lot 44, Oyster Bay, Unit 3), who is requesting that property remain
zoned "G"; one from Capt. W. A. Burton (D.G.D.Inc., Lot 13, Oyster Bay, Unit 5),
requesting either "G" or "F-a" zoning, not "F".
With respect to discussion re Gordon Pass area, Mayor Turner stated that this portion
would be continued until March 2, 1966 regular meeting of Council, 10:00 A.M., at
which time it is hoped the problems can be resolved, and therefore closed the public
hearing re. Gordon Pass. Members of the Zoning and Planning Board concurred with
this.
Turning to rezoning of Oyster Bay and Golden Shores, Mayor Turner recognized Mr.
Gullotta, who offered the following facts for consideration 1. Does not acknowledge rezoning of property to "F-a" as they were not
notified that the change was taking place.
Challenges legality of changing what is principally a commercial area
2.
attempting to keep it residential
Uniqueness of these lots prohibit classification of residential because
3.
of close proximity to commercial buildings in the area.
In reply to question by Mr. Strong, Mr. Gullota replied that he would prefer "G"
If it is true that this property is
zoning but if not "F-a" would be satisfactory. now zoned "F-a", stated Capt. W. A. Burton, isn't it true that "G" is assessed at a
higher value than "F_-_a" and should not value have been changed on these properties,
Rezoning, he said, would be a serious injustice
reappraised downward for less taxes. to the people who purchased this property - it reduces economic value.
Mr. James L. Walker pointed out that the three people he represents bought their
property under the realization that it was still zoned "G" and the lots are large
they knew nothing of the change
enough to accomodate buildings 60 feet in height in zoning. He added that although the legal requirements were me, he felt the City
has a moral responsibility to notify property owners. He stated that he found no one
It was explained by Mr. Watkins, that this reon the area who requested the change. zoning was proposed by the Zoning and Planning Board not by an individual or indivHe further stated that he would like to go on record as asking how it was
iduals.
changed from "G" to "F-a" and was it legal, and, are we not morally responsible for
notifying property owners.
City Attorney Spingler explained that a duly advertised public hearing was held on
May 19th, which is all that is required, at which time no written objections were
received but two letters favoring the changing of height in "G" south of South
He continued
Golf Drive from Gulf of Mexico to eastern City limits of the City. that in a public hearing held on July 7, 1965, new classification "F-a" was submitted
for property zoned "G" as so described above, covered under Ordinance No. 1109, legal
notice being duly publicized for public hearing; no objections were raised at this
43
-3and he was instructed to prepare draft of what is now Ordinance No. 1121 which was
passed on August 4, 1965, and was in full force and effect from that date of passage.
Therefore, he concluded, we did follow the legal requirements although we did not
notify the property owners personally.
Mrs. George L. Ford, also property owner in this area, concurred with all who talked.
City Manager Wood noted that he received letter from Mr. John Pulling re rezoning of
property owned by him on Fifth Avenue North (northeast side of River Park Subdivision,
In discussing the map he wished this area to be
fronting on Fifth Avenue North.
considered under its present classification, industrial, and not be changed to "F_Ia"
Reason for request, not enough room on this lot for a multiple family
Multiple Family. dwelling but enough room for a store building which contemplates constructing.
ktu
4:44
Mr. Hoffmann thanked the Zoning and Planning Board members for their untiring efforts,
and explained that the final decision on the zoning will ben p de by the Mayor and Council.
Mayor Turner declared the hearings on the floor closed and continued until such time
as the Council can study the recommendation of the Zoning and Planning Board in order
to render their final decision.
Dr. Ford interjected that additional time should be given in order for the two new
members on the City Council and the two new merribers on the Zoning and Planning Board
ample time to review these subject areas and therefore moved that the Public Hearing
be continued until the next regular meeting of Council on March 2, 1966, at 10:00 A.M.
Motion was seconded by Mr. Hoffmann and carried unanimously.
Councilman Downing asked that consideration be given to notifying affected property
City Attorney Spingler explained to Mr. Downing
owners before making final decision.
that they were notified by letter in December, 1965.
This part of the Council meeting adjourned at 11:20.
Respectfully submitted,
ZONING AND PLANNING BOARD
CITY 0
--4‘
NAPLES
735 Eighth Street, South
State of Florida
February 11, 1966
The Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council
City of Naples
Florida
Mrs. Miller and Gentlemen:
The Agenda for tne Regular Meeting of February 16, 1966, is enclosed
My comments on the Agenda are as follows:
You will note that in addition to being a rather long agenda that it
There are four public hearings
will be a rather complicated one. scheduled as well as three bid openings. We have listed them separately so that the Mayor will be able to defer them to later on during
the morning and afternoon in order not to interrupt the business taking place at the time.
REPORTS
Minutes of the Zoning and Planning Board meeting of February 9
and the Parks and Recreation Boards meeting of February 8 are
enciosed for all Council members. Minutes of the Recreation
Board meeting of January 18, which were previously forwarded
to the cid Council, are enclosed for the two new members of
Council.
OLD BUSINESS
Proposal to widen 3rd Street from Broad Avenue South to 14th
a
Avenue South. Copy of the engineer's report on the cost is
attached for the benefit of the two new members of Council.
c. Ap p lication to Department of Housing and Urban Development for
open space land acquisition grant in amount of $187,500 for
Bay front Park on Naples Bay between 10th Avenue South and
Broad Avenue South. We will need a resolution from the Council
in order to file our application for Federal aid on the proposed bay front park (land purchase only). As reported to you
at the conference last Wednesday, Mr. Ed Gallagher has been
pushing us to consummate a transaction on his property. The
Mayor and I visited Mr. and Mrs. Norris and discussed the
possibility of St. Charles Charities acquiring the property
for us immediately, since the Government grant does not permit
direct negotiations by the City prior to Federal approval.
Mr. Norris was not too enthusiastic about accepting the posiIt appears that Mr. Gallagher is crowding
tion of middie man.
us for a fast deal and that it might not be wise for us to be
in that position. Since he knows that we want the property
and since he aso knows that we have the power of eminent dona:n, ! 1 -3 i. not in a good position to deal with a private
Page Two
The Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council February 11, 1966
I recommend to Council that we file the Federal aid
buyer.
application and defer making a firm commitment with any land
owner until we have received Federal approval.
NEW BUSINESS
Appeal from First Methodist Church to Reverse Order of Zoning
a.
Administrator prohibiting open storage of Bus in Residential
Zone. We have had several complaints from residents living
near the Methodist Church, objecting to the parking of the
Ordinance 1121
rather dilapidated bus on the church property. specifically prohibits the storage of commercial vehicles in
I have refused to back off the City's iliar.residential zones.
fi*
and
advised
the
church that their only appeal would be
1-::)5tttotkIzati„.5_-s:,L,o-Q
to the City Council.
Request from County Commission for City participation in cost
b.
of building Collier County Welcome Station. A copy of a letter from Mr. Dewey Polly is attached.
c,
Proposal to adopt and enforce minimum housing legislation.
A copy of a letter from Mr. Watkins of the Naples Development
Corporation is attached.
1 am glad that private interests
are willing to develop additional low-income housing in the
Naples area; however, if we are to rid ourselves of the
McDonald Quarters blight, we must adopt and enforce minimum
housing standards.
I recommend that the Council adopt the
standard minimum housing code as prepared by the Southern
Building Code Congress.
g. Proposal to purchase Lot 55, Lakewood Park S/D for extension
of 10th Street North.
Lot 55 in Lakewood Park Subdivision
stands right in the way of a northerly projection of 10th
Street to 22nd Avenue North. Plans will soon be submitted,
we are told, for a single family residence on this lot.
We
can purchase this lot for $2,800 which, in the opinion of
our tax assessor, is its fair market value. I believe it
would be in the best interests of the City to do this to
protect the future right-of-way of 10th Street projected.
2:00 P. M. Joint meeting with County Commission on Water Management.
Our engineers will be presenting their report on future water
sources on Wednesday. I have already provided each of you with
the engineer's report on water supply to Vanderbilt Beach. We
are attempting to convince the County Commissioners to set up a
taxing district to include Naples Park and Vanderbilt Beach so
that the water distribution system could be installed and assessed
directly to the property owners that will benefit. The system
would then be turned over to the City for maintenance, and we would
pick up several hundred new customers without capital out-lay by
the system.
I believe that this is a more sensible approach to the
problem than that suggested in the report by the engineers. This
is why we are asking the County Commission to sit in on our discussion of the problem next Wednesday afternoon.
Page Three
The Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council February 11, 1966
The other items on the Agenda are either self-explanatory or have
already been discussed.
Respecq lly suqviitted,
I\
Lerutrtth
V. P. Wood, Jr.
City Manager
VPW/esm
Enclosures
WALTER R. CONDON
ROBERT B. MCDANIEL. JR.
CONDON AND MCDANIEL
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SUITE 7. BAL.CH BUILDING
NAPLES. FLORIDA. 33940
MIDWAY 2-4200
February 14, 1965
Hon. Bert L. Pinkston
Tax Assessor City of Naples Naples, Florida
Re:
and
City Council, sitting as
an Equalization Board
City of Naples
Naples, Florida
Conboy vs. City of Naples, Port
Royal, Inc., Fuller Industries, Inc.,
Aqualane Shores, Inc., Moorings
Development Company of Canada,
Ltd., et. al.
Gentlemen:
As you know the above suit has been in
the Courts for almost four years. As your Attorney
will advise you, in litigated matters Court rules
provide that the opposing side be informed, by written
memoranda, of forthcoming hearings.
I have not been
so informed by written or oral notice, but; through
the medium of the public press I have been advised
that you have completed your 'reassessment' of the
developers' lands and that said revaluations will be
'equalized' Wednesday, February 16, 1966.
After reading. of your actions in the Collier
County News, I examined your 'revaluations' and find
the following:
a) They are not in keeping with the Order of the Circuit
Court or the Mandate of the Florida Supreme Court; and,
b) That said 'revaluations' still do not comply with
your City Charter or the State laws since said assessments
are not the 'fair cash value' for said lands; and
c) That said 'reassessments' are not fair, uniform or
equal to assessments of adjacent land since adjacent lands
are assessed in excess of four times as much. (prior to
our suit and your revaluation adjacent lands were assessed
in excess of 15 times).
Hon. Bert L. Pinkston and
City Council, sitting as an
Equalization Board
February 14, 1966
page 2
Therefore, we request that you raise these
valuations to their fair cash value and at a value
equal to adjacent lands not owned by the developers
SO that your tax roll, as amended, will be 'just and
uniform' and in compliance with the aforementioned
Court Orders.
Sincerely,
CONDON & MCDANIEL
By
A o r neys for Vincent H. Con soy
Suite 7, Balch Building
Naples, Florida
WRC/jb
CC:
Hon. Archie M. Odom, Circuit Judge
Hon. David Spingler, Attorney for the City and the
Tax Assessor
Hon. Darry Davis, Attorney for Port Royal, Inc.
Berryhill, Avery & Law, Attorneys for the Moorings
Carroll, Vega, Brown & Nichols, Attorneys for
Fuller Industries and Aqualane Shores
CITY OF NAPLES
1
735 Eighth Street, South
State of Florida 33940
February 16, 1966
Honorable Mayor and Members of Council
City of Naples
Naples, Florida
Members of the Council:
I am submitting herewith, the amended tax rolls of the
City of Naples, Florida for the years 1962, 1963, 1964 and 1965,
in accordance with the provisions of the City Charter of the City
of Naples and a certain Order of the Circuit Court of the Twelfth
Judicial Circuit in and for Collier County, dated September 4, 1964,
and the Mandate of the Supreme Court of the State of Florida, dated
December 2, 1965, requiring the City of Naples, Florida to amend its
tax rolls as it pertained to the various subdivisions located within
the City of Naples, Florida.
Respectfully submitted,
.02-4
Bert L. Pinkst n, Tax Assessor
City of Naples, Florida
B LP :mh
CITY OF NAPLES
FLORIDA
1962
AMENDED TAX ROLL FOR
LOTS UNSOLD
Port Royal
Valuation
84,670.00
137,300.00
42,740.00
659.40
659.59
639.83
1,302.45
652.75
953.99
804.37
1,304.35
406.0
$777,130.00
$7,382.76
$357,460.00
$3,395.87
1,2 S. 3 242,780.00
2,306.41
24,030.00
228.29
5,810.00
55.2 0
Galleon Drive Section
Spyglass Island
Kingstown Drive
"
Rum Row
Nelson's Walk
Admiralty Parade
Gin Lane
"
Ft. Charles Dr.
Green Dolphin Lane"
Total
Moorings, Unit 2
Royal Harbor, Units
Aqualane Shores, Unit
Oyster Bay, Unit
$ 69,410.00
Tax
6
5
69,430.00
67,350.00
137,100.00
$
68,710.00
100,420.00
Valuation
$1,407,210.00
Grand Total
AMENDED TAX ROLL FOR
Tax
$ 13,368.53
1963
Port Royal
$
11
Nelson's Walk
Admiralty Parade
Gin Lane
Ft. Charles Dr.
"
Green Dolphin Lane"
$ 59,960.00
67,500.00
50,970.00
129,300.00
53,990.00
97,530.00
85,660.00
135,530.00
40,460.o0
Total
$720,900.00
$6,488.10
$251,890.00
$2,267.01
3$221,590.00
$1,994.31
5,810.00
52.29
Galleon Drive Section
Spyglass Island
Kingstown Drive
"
Rum Row
it
Moorings, Unit 2
Royal Harbor, Units 1,2 &
Oyster Bay, Unit
5
539.64
607.50
458.73
1,163.70
485.91
877.77
770.94
1,219.77
364.14
1,200,190.00
Grand Total
AMENDED TAX ROLL FOR
Port Royal
Galleon Drive Section
Spyglass island
Kingstown Drive
"
Rum Row
11
11
Nelson's Walk
Admiralty Parade "
11
Gin Lane
Fort Charles Dr. "
Green Dolphin La. "
Total
$ 60,540.00
60,490.00
47,500.00
122,130.00
$
544.86
544.41
54,840.00
95,860.00
85,430.00
135,530.00
40,970.00
427.50
1,099.17
493.56
862.74
768.87
1,219.77
368.73
$703,290.00
$6,329.61
1964
10,801.71
Amended Tax Roll Continued
Valuation
Royal Harbor Units
1,
2
3
&
Tax
Valuation
Tax
$ 952,280.00
$ 8,570.52
$1,224,150.00
$ 8,569.05
$248,990.00 $2,240.91
Grand Total
1965
Port Royal
$ 80,790.00 $ 565.53
73,860.00
517.02
44,120.00
308.84
153,790.00 1,076.53
506.52
72,360.00
119,560.00
836.92
769.30
109,900.00
178,930.00 1,252.51
41,660.00
291.62
Galleon Drive Section
Spyglass Island
Kingstown Drive
"
I'
Rum Row
I/
Nelson's Walk
Admiralty Parade
1I
Gin Lane
Fort Charles Dr.
"
Green Dolphin La.
$874,970.00 $6,124.79
Total
Royal Harbor, Units 2
1,
&
3 $349,180.00 $2,444.26
Grand Total
RECAPITULATION FOR YEARS
Port Royal
Moorings Unit
2
Royal Harbor Units 1,
2
Aqualane Shores, Unit 6
Oyster Bay, Unit
5
Grand Total
&
1962, 1963, 1964 and 1965
$3,076,290.00
$26,325.26
609,350.00
5,662.88
3 1,070,540.00
8,985.89
24,030.00
228.29
11,620.00
107.49
$4,791.830.00
$41,309.81
4.L-4—'.........-
Bert L. Pi
Tax Assessor
City of Naples, Florida
11(ston,
Col/2y
& ilS5011ATES,
433 FOURTH STREET, NORTH, ST. PETERSBURG 31, FLORIDA
P.O. BOX 353
896-2644
November 3, 1965
Mr. Vincent P. Wood
City Manager
City of Naples
Naples, Florida
Dear Mr. Wood:
Pursuant to your request, we have made a study of Royal Harbor and Port
Royal Subdivisions for the purpose of arriving at a fair factor to be applied
to all subdivision developments.
Lot sales in both subdivisions indicate approximately the same progress
as to the time involved to sell all lots in either subdivision.
The following subdivisions, which are all in Port Royal, were platted in
1958 and offered for sale at that time: (1) Admiral Parade, (2) Ginn Lane.
(3) Port Charles Drive, (4) Green Dolphin, (5) Kingston Drive, (6) Rum
Row, (7) Nelsons Walk.
Galeon Drive Subdivision was platted in 1955, as was Spy Glass Island.
Galeon Drive is 80.5 percent sold, and we recommend all lots go on the
tax roll as appraised values.
Spy Glass Island is 40 percent sold, and we recommend it be treated the
same as the above mentioned subdivisions.
We have made a complete study and analysis of the subject developments,
including the time element involved in the sale of all lots, estimated average
selling prices, carrying costs, all discounted to present worth; and we feel
the fair market value would be properly reflected by taking 25 percent of
the present appraised value of each and every lot.
Page
Mr. Vincent?. Wood
November 3, 1965
The components of the discounting formula herein referred to has been
retained in our files and can be used to sustain the discount recommended,
if it should become necessary to do so.
It is our recommendation that all future subdivisions be discounted at the
same discount price.
Yours very truly,
HUNNICUTT & ASSOCIATES, INC.
H. W. Seiple
Director Annual Appraisal Service
HWS:ja
c/c Mr. Bert L. Pinkerton
THE REGULAR MONTHLY MEETING OF THE ZONING AND PLANNING BOARD WAS HELD IN CITY HALL
ON WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 9, 1966t; AT 10:00 A.M.
ROLL CALL:
Present: Wm. W. Zimmerman, Vice Chairman
C. M. Bauchspies
Clayton E. Bigg
J. Wilson Dyches
H. B. Watkins, Jr.
Also Present: David C. 3pingler, City Attorney
V. P. Wood, Jr., City Manager
Bert L. Pinkston, Zoning Administrator
Wm. R. Vines
Mrs. Tony Sentovich
Malcolm Young
Due to the resignation of Chairman, S. Meredith Strong, Jr. (elected to City Council
on February 1, 1966), Vice Chairman Wm. W. Zimmerman took the Chair.
Application No. 1 from Mrs. Tony Sentovich,
Mr. Zimmerman read Agenda Item 1 1065 - 6th Street South, for rezoning of property described as the South 10 feet
of Lot 11; All of Lots 12 to 16 inclusive, Block 10, Tier 7, and,LOts 7 to 16
inclusive, Block 9, Tier 7, from "E" Single Family District to "F" Multiple
Family District.
Mrs. Sentovich was recognized and she explained that her property is directly
across from the Ice House and, all the property across the street from her is
presently zoned for apartments which would be advantageous for her, but "E"
zoning is very detrimental. Also, 15 feet of her property is already zoned "F".
Mr. Pinkston explained that this property was previously zoned neighborhood
shopping for Mr. Dudley Gallehue; after Wm. Stone, Con.f- , ctor, purchased property
he requested it be rezoned to "E" Single Family District.
Mr. Dyches asked Mrs. Sentovich if she was owner of all the property to be
rezoned. She stated she was not. Petition was presented signed by 4 of the
7 property owners; Mrs. Sentovich stated the other property owners did not say
they would not sign the petition, they wanted additional time to think about it.
Mr. Vines noted that Mrs. Sentovich is only the spokesman for the group; the
petitioners are all of the owners of propeerty included in the application. He
further noted that on inspection of the area, it is alnost so.liAly developed wi.th
single family homes and he questions how can the construction of duplexes and/or
apartments take place without demolishing what is now existing. Mrs. Sentovich
replied that her property has been for sale for quite sometime and because it is
across from the Ice House this has kept it from selling; they have enough room,
she said, on their property to add a duplex and this is what their intention is.
After checking rezone petition check sheet and concurring that all was in order,
motion was made by Mr. Watkins, seconded by Mx. Bauchspies, that the Board accept
Application No. 1 and that it be advertised for a joint public hearing. Motion
unanimously carried.
(It was established that the joint public hearing would be
held March 2, 1966 at 10:00 A.M.)
Agenda Item 2 was read by the Vice Chairman Review of subdivision plat, Unit
#6, The Moorings, as per agreement. It was determined that the Board has re-
viewed the preliminary plat of Unit #6, The Moorings,(property lies immediately
north and contiguous to the City limits from the Gulf of Mexico to the Tamiami
Trail )that is included in a certain agreement between the City of Naples and
Mr. Link, President of The Moorings. City Manager Wood was questioned if the
A
ZONING AND PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
February 9, 1966
PAGE TWO
preliminary plat meets with his approval. With the exception of the street
pattern and the omission of alleys and easements, he noted it looked acceptable,
and this could be discussed further with Council. Motion was made by Mr. Bigg,
seconded by Mr. Bauchspies, that the preliminary plat of Unit #6, The.:Mporings,
be approved as reviewed for presentation to Council. Motion so carried.
Although not an agenda item, Mr. Bauchspies brought up the subject of appointments to this Board, two of which were created thru resignations and two whose
terms expire in ray. He opinioned that serious thought should be given to these
appointments to the Board because change of membership now could be very detrimental
- continuity of thinking is essential at this time.
Mr. Zimmerman requested of Mr. Vines that he prepare a summary of what has been
done so far on the new zoning ordinance and what remains to be done. Mr. Vines
so agreed to prepare summary. Mr. Zimmerman further requested that the nomenclature
of "J-a" District be straightened out. Mr. Vines assured him it has been "J-a" Gencral Commercial District and "K-a" is Heavy Commercial District.
Agenda Item 3 - Conclude discussion on new "J-a" (Memo dated 1/24166)
After due discussion, motion was made by Mr. Watkins, seconded by Mr. Dyches,
that in "J-a" District (memo dated 1/13/66) under Uses Permitted: 2 Marinas,
there be inserted the following wording:
2. Marinas: No boats or other merchandise may be stored or displayed in
required front yards. Maintenance and repair activities shall occur
either under roof, in rear yards, or at dockside.
Mr. Zimmerman questioned if Mr. Watkins and Mr. Dyches would be receptive to
adding to their motion, that a Marina diagram be prepared to illustrate last
adopted paragraph, this to be included in ordinance. Mr. Watkins and Mr. Dyches
were in agreement. Motion unanimously carried.
In discussing definition of Marina, it was established that following wording
be adopted Marina: A recreational boating establishment which provides covered or
uncovered boat slips or dock space; charter and sight seeing boat dockage;
dry boat storage, marine fuel and lubricants, marine supplies, restaurants or
refreshment facilities, boat and boat motor sales or rentals. Pleasure boat
and boat motor maintenance and repair is permitted as an accessory use, however,
no dredge, barge or other work boat dockage or service is permitted, and no
boat manufacturing or reconstructicn is permitted.
"J-a" General Commercial District accepted as amended.
Conclude discussion on "K-a" (memo dated 12/30/65)
Mr. Vines noted that a tie vote exists from meeting of February 3, 1966, re
Minimum Yards Required: 1. Front Yard - 10 feet or 15 feet. Roll Call Vote
was called for Mr. Bauchspies, 15 feet; Mr. Bigg, 15 feet; Mr. Dyches,
10 feet; Mr. Watkins, 10 feet; Mr. Zimmerman, 10 feet, after motion was made by
Mr. Watkins, seconded by Mr. Dyches that Under F. Minimum Yards Required - 1.
Front Yard - 10 feet, be accepted as written. Motion so carried.
"K-a" Heavy Commercial District accepted as amended.
\0‘,
Meeting adjourned at 11:55 A.M.
Respectfully submittedf
Secretary, ZONING AND PLANNIN BOARD