Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes_Board of Adjustment_9/22/1980 MINUTES OF THE PUBLIC HEARING OF THE (` VI.LLAGE OF TEQUESTA ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT SEPTEMBER 22, 1980 A public hearing was held by the Village of Tequesta Zoning Board of Adjustment at 7:30 P.M., Monday, September 22, 1980 in the Village Hall, 357 Tequesta Drive, Tequesta, Florida. Board members present were: Head-Chairman, Bryan, Meyerowich, Otto and Wagner. Also present was Robert Harp, Clerk of the Board and John C. Randolph, Village Attorney. Chairman Head asked the Clerk to read the legal notice of the public hearing, which was done. The Clerk advised that proof of publi- cation was in hand for the publication made of the notice in the September 4, 1980 issue of the Courier and that seventeen (17) letter notices had been sent to owners of property within 500 feet of Lone Star Florida, Inc. and seventy-two (72) letter notices to owners of property within 500 feet of Vigliano. The first application to be considered was that of Lone Star Florida, Inc. , owners of a concrete batching plant located on Old Dixie Highway, Tequesta, Florida, to allow the operation of a non-conforming use business (concrete batching. plant) in a C-2 Wholesale Commercial and Light Industrial District and to allow the abandoned buildings to be occupied by ( the non-conforming use, contrary to the terms of Article XIX (5) (6) of the Official Zoning Ordinance of the Village of Tequesta, Ordinance No. 211, as amended. Attorney Dale Geisler, G. Duncan Lott, III and Gary Grundle, were in attendance representing Florida Lone Star, Inc. Geisler reiterated the requested variance and stated they would discuss the request by explaining (1) the conditions under which Lone Star acquired the plant; (2) reason for abandonment and (3) what they intend to do with the property if the variance is granted. Lott, Production Manager, Ready-mix and Block, Lone Star Florida, Inc. , advised they acquired the plant from Maule, Inc. February 1, 1978 along with other assets of Maule, Inc. at other Florida locations. Maule was in bankruptcy and receivership and had ceased operation July 1977. The Palm Beach County Health Department operating permit for the Maule Plant had expired prior to Lone Star purchase of the plant. He submitted a copy of the September 30, 1977 letter from the Palm Beach County Health Depart- ment to Pennsuco Cement & Aggregates, Inc. advising of deficiencies which had to be corrected before an operating permit could be issued (copy attached to these minutes). He stated the abandonment occured because of the circumstances at that time. Gary Grundle, Ready-mix Production Manager, Lone Star Florida, Inc. advised he stopped in the Village Office in July 1978 to inquire about Zoning Ordinance requirements for the site and was advised of the various problems and non-conforming use and difference in zoning regulations from �� what they had thought they were. Head asked Harp if there had been a * 9-22-80 - 2 • change in the zoning regulations and was advised the property had always been C-2 zoning classification since annexation in July 1964. Geisler stated Lone Star Florida, Inc. would operate the facilities in compliance with all federal, state, county and Village laws and regulations and would not impair any zoning requirements if the requested variance should be granted. He quoted from Article XVII of the Zoning Ordinance in regard to the powers and duties of the Zoning Board of Adjust- ment, stating the granting of the variance would not be contrary to the public interest and that the spirit of the ordinance would be observed and substantial justice done. John J. Giba, a resident of the Village of Tequesta and represent- ing Ernest A. Dorner, displayed a map showing the location of the Lone Star Florida, Inc. plant site and its relation to surrounding properties and advis- ing of the zoning classification of same. He stated his client owns 44 acres east of Old Dixie Highway across from the plant and .10 acres west of the railroad. He also stated the nearest Tequesta Pines lots are only 300 feet from the plant site. He stated the Village of Tequesta is basically a residential community with only necessary commercial service businesses to serve the area. He stated his client is opposed to the requested variance because (1) batching plant is not legal under C-2 zoning classification either as a variance or special exception, it is heavy manufacturing. (2) reinstitution of the abandoned facilities is not legal (3) batching plant generates dust, noise, traffic, pollution, etc. (4) trucks would adversely affect traffic on Old Dixie Highway (5) unloading of freight cars could cause problems at County Line Road railroad crossing (6) traffic will be increased (7) Rinker Plant is spoiling the community (8) if plant not allowed to operate is a hardship to applicant, the operation of the plant is a hardship on the Village (9) heavy manufacturing is out of place in the Village of Tequesta (10) values of adjacent properties will be drastically reduced by such an operation (11) Village of Tequesta is 85% built-up and present activity of Rinker Plant and contemplated Lone Star Plant would be for areas outside of the Village of Tequesta (12) and the Village does not need the plant and the variance should not be approved. His client strongly requests the Zoning Board of Adjustment to deny the application. Lee Brown, 7 Pine Hill Trail, Tequesta Pines, representing Tequesta Pines Property Owners Association, stated they concur with Giba's comments and read from the last paragraph of the September 12, 1980 letter to the Zoning Board of Adjustment objecting to the requested variance. He asked for a show of hands for those opposed to the application. Vic Lombardi - Tequesta Hills (not in the Village) stated he agreed with the previous speakers and advised the Board of the problems with persons using the bay garages for "pot" parties, etc. at the Lone Star site and the pot holes in the road at Rinkers. Lenor Pentek, 3900 County Line Road, 16C, (not in the Village) expressed concern about additional trucks and traffic and asked Geisler how many trucks does Lone Star expect to have at the plant. Geisler stated they would reply to all questions at one time. 9-22-80 - 3 Fred Ryan, Tequesta Hills (not in the Village) asked how Lone Star justified logistically to build the plant when the market is far away and why they want to improve the land value of the site. Sal Mancuso, 60 Birch Place, Tequesta Pines, stated he concurs with the previous statements in opposition to the application and advised that he was at a Village Council meeting where the Village Council indicated their regrets that the Rinker Plant was in the Village and he does not see how another concrete plant can be justified for the Village. Lott showed a drawing for a proposed new plant and photographs of the existing plant and advised that the improvements to the plant would have to receive site plan approval and all other necessary approvals prior to the issuance of a building permit and provisions to satisfy dust, noise, traffic, etc. would have to be made, also (1) the site would have five (5) trucks at estimated four (4) trips/day/truck and a total of eight (8) people, including truck drivers at the site (2) propose for all materials to be received by rail (3) Lone Star Florida, Inc. does not own land but leases it from Florida East Coast Railway and Lone Star Florida, Inc. is not interested in improving the land values (4) propose to fence in entire property, landscape the site and provide necessary buffers (5) the property has been cleaned up and secured as requested by the Village. He said the three (3) south silos would be destroyed. if A gentlemen in the audience complained about the railroad noise including their whistles and advised that Palm Beach County does not have a noise ordinance. He was advised the Village does have a noise ordinance. Giba stated if the plant did not operate there would be no noise or traffic but if it was allowed to operate there would be additional noise and traffic. Geisler stated Lone Star Florida, Inc. wants to fix the site up. Herbert Foxman, 28 Hickory Hill Road, Tequesta Pines, President of Tequesta Pines Property Owners Association reiterated the terrible railroad noise problem at the site. Bryan asked the grounds for the requested variance and Geisler advised they needed approval to proceed to provide a new plant at the site. Bryan asked if the basic reason is hardship. Geisler advised the plant had been abandoned by the previous owner, not Lone Star Florida, Inc. Bryan asked if they were aware of non-conforming use at time of purchase and Geisler said he could not answer yes or no as twenty-seven (27) plants were involved in the purchase at that time. Wagner asked why Lone Star Florida, Inc. chose now to apply for variance and Grundle advised they had been working on what to do with the plant until now. Wagner asked what is the company's plan if the application is denied and Geisler said that decision had not been made as yet. + 9-22-80 - 4 Otto asked why the occupational license was not renewed October 1, 1978 and Grundle replied it had probably been overlooked. Head asked what Lone Star Florida, Inc. intended to do about the dust problem and was advised all current requirements in this regard would have to be conformed to including installation of central dust collector. , paving yard and sweeping the yard. Wagner asked if the three (3) silos were removed where would materials be stored and Lott advised the two (2) adjacent silos would be used. Bryan asked the terms of the lease and Geisler said it was five (5) year renewable effective 1978. Wagner moved, seconded by Meyerowich that the application of Lone Star Florida, Inc. for the requested variance under consideration be denied. The vote on the motion was: Wagner For Meyerowich For Head For Otto For Bryan For l / and the motion therefore passed. The next application to be considered was that of Norman P. and Mary L. Vigliano, by their agent, Alfred DeFilippo, owners of Lot 192,. Tequesta Pines Subdivision (21 Hickory Hill Road) requesting a variance to the terms of the Official Zoning Ordinance of the Village of Tequesta, Ordinance No. 211, as amended, Section 9.6 (3) (a) Rear Yard, to allow a rear yard setback of 19.44 feet instead of 20 feet for the southeast corner of a house constructed on said Lot 192. DeFilippo advised he had constructed the house and drew a sketch on the blackboard explaining the requested variance showing an approximate six (6) inch encroachment. Head asked when the house was constructed and was advised the owner moved in about a month ago. Head asked how the error occurred and DeFilippo advised that the corner stake had probably been removed and replaced in error for some reason and that all the other corner stakes were correct. Bryan asked when the error was discovered. DeFilippo advised it was found when the tie-in survey, after the house was built, was made as required by the Village and the bank. He said the house is a little out of square. Meyerowich stated that this same thing had occurred several times recently but new Building Department requirements for tie-in survey before the house is completed should preclude future errors. i 9-22-80 - 5 Butterfield explained the new Building Department requirement for tie-in survey with the stem wall for CBS houses. Head questioned the hardship and said is it because the house is built. Butterfield said resolving the matter now could prevent problems with a future sale of the property. Head asked if there was anyone in attendance in opposition to the application and there were none. Frances G. Riccardi, owner of Lot 217, Tequesta Pines, had sent in a letter of opposition to the application. Bryan moved, seconded by Wagner that the variance to allow a rear yard setback of 19.44 feet for the southeast corner of the house on Lot 192, Tequesta Pines Subdivision (21 Hickory Hill Road) be approved. The vote on the motion was: Bryan For Wagner For Otto For Meyerowich For Head For and the motion therefore passed. The public hearing was adjourned at 8:40 P.M. Respectfully submitted, �� Eb:r�ta Clerk of the Board RH:jf 1 Pglni 0 1 • P:O. BOX . 29 . WEST ' PA !. M BEACH. FLORIDA 33402 • C.L.BRUMBACK.M.D..M.P.H. DIRECTOR Please Address Reply To: ESE-WPB rrstf:ox.i:, September 30 , 1977 t Mr. Henry B. Burks Pennsuco Cement&. Aggregates ,- Inc . . P.O. Box 122601 Palm V� late --Station - Hialeah , Florida 33012 Re: AP - Jupiter Maule Concrete Batch Plant NAO 50=2418 Dear Mr. Burks : This is to acknowledge receipt of your letter dated August 29 , _ 1977., wherein you request a renewal of the referenced permit . Concrete batch operating -plants are reviewed and inspected county wide to ascertain compliance with current State regulations re- garding the discharge of particulate and fugutive dust . At the time of permit expiration , many- plants are required to upgrade .. or add pollution control equipment . Several deficiencies at the Jupiter Maula batch plant exist.These are.: 1. -Insufficient control of fugitive dust on the cement truck during hatching. A ground level baghouselis required. 2. Insufficient control of fugitive 'lust caused b `' y yard vehicular and/or equipment traffic . The yard must be paved`;to prevent and/or limit fugitive dust emissions . Your application for operating permit will be held in abeyance pending engineering plans and acceptable timetable ( generally .no more than two years ) for correction of the aforementoned deficiencies . continued. - r Mr. Henry B. Mks Page -• 2 - September 30 , 1977 Ai_�o , to consider your application complete , we need either a current corporate certificate of good standinu. , or , if this is not possible , ega proof' as Lu L ,C I TI 7viuu3 ( s } who preside t over the company at this time. Sincerely, For the Division Director - Environmental Sciences' &' Engineering ". Terry'- D. Heath , P.-E. , Supervising Engineer cc++ Plan Review & Pe::mit s f�C '� i l Oh ~ FJG/TDH/fm LSC M i -