1979-11-06
-
--
--
TENTH MEETING
The Planning Board of the City of Okeechobee, Florida, convened in its
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 6, 1979
at 7:00 P.M., Tuesday, November 6, 1979.
Tenth Meeting in the Council Chambers at the City Hall, Okeechobee, Florida,
Chairman John D. Cassels, Jr. presiding.
Others present were:
Christina Hooker, Jim Wright, Robert Joiner, Frank
Altobello, Richard B. Spray and Janice M. Mann, Secretary.
Chairman Cassels brought the meeting to order.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Member Wright moved to waive the reading of the minutes, seconded by
Member Hooker, vote unanimous.
With no corrections, additions or deletions needed, Member Hooker moved
to accept the minutes, seconded by Member Joiner, vote unanimous.
Member Altobel10 moved to adjourn, seconded by Member Wright, vote unanimous.
There being no further business of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals,
PLANNING BOARD
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Member Altobello moved to waive the reading of the minutes, seconded by
Member Wright, vote unanimous.
With no corrections, additions or deletions needed, Member Joiner moved
to accept the minutes of the October 2, 1979, meeting, seconded by Member
Hooker, vote unanimous.
REZONING REQUEST - LOWRY MARKHAM
Charles Allen Robertson appeared before the Board regarding the rezoning
Mobile Home.
request of Lowry Markham to rezone a parcel of land from Holding to Residential,
Mr. Robertson reviewed the past events of this request, and stated the
proposed use of the property is a mobile home subdivision.
Citizen Melba Louthan was present in opposition to this request.
It was
determined that the southeast corner of Ms. Louthan's property adjoins the
property in question.
Member Altobello informed the Board he will refrain from voting due to the
fact he is an adjoining land owner.
decision:
The Board then reviewed the requirements as follows before rendering a
29
OE
1) Is the proposed change contrary to the established land use pattern? No,
it appears that it would be an expansion of an existing mobile home district
2) Would the proposed change create an isolated district unrelated to adjacent
and nearby districts? No, the whole purpose of a Holding area when the
Zoning Ordinance was enacted, a definite personality was not yet decided on.
3) Would the proposed change materially alter the population density pattern
and thereby increase or overtax the load on public facilities such as
schools, utilities, streets, etc.? In a town such as Okeechobee where the
facilities are set, this would not apply.
4) Are existing district boundaries illogically drawn in relation to existing
conditions on the property proposed for change? No, at the time the plan
was enacted the land was zoned Holding.
5) Would the proposed change be contrary to the City's comprehensive plan?
No, from past experience, it is desirable and in the public interest to
provide fairly orderly growth of residential areas, instead of isolated
spots.
6) Do changed or changing conditions make the passage of the proposed amend-
ment necessary? No, other than the fact that the owners want to develope
the area.
7) Will the proposed change adversely influence living conditions in the
neighborhood? No, the adjacent areas consist of mobile homes, sewer plant,
undeveloped land and sone residential.
8) Will the proposed change create or excessively increase traffic congestion
or otherwise affect public safety? No, the addition of 24 or 25 additional
lots will not create a problem.
9) Will the proposed change create a drainage problem? This does not apply
to this request.
10) Will the proposed change seriously reduce light and air to adjacent areas?
Again, this does not apply to this request.
11)
Will the proposed change be a deterrent to the improvement
of adjacent property in accord with existing regulations?
property that could possibly be affected adversely is that
south and is zoned Holding also.
or development of
The only
which is directly
12) Will the proposed change constitute a grant of special privilege to an
individual owner as contrasted with the public welfare? Every granting of
a rezoning request is a grant of special privilege.
13) Are there substantial reasons why the property cannot be used in accord with
existing zoning? Yes, the existing zoning is Holding and has substantially
no use.
14) Is the suggested change out of scale with the needs of the neighborhood or
the City? No, the expansion is needed.
15) Is it impossible to find other adequate sites in the City for the proposed
use in districts already permitting such use? Yes, there is no other
property available in the City for expansion.
16) Will the proposed change adversely affect property values in adjacent areas?
It could possibly affect the Blocks zoned RSF, directly north of the
property in question. At the same time it could improve the property zoned
Holding directly to the south.
Mrs. Tony Madonna of 406 S.E. 7th street appeared before the Board and
also spoke for Mrs. Wilfred Joyal stating they had no objections with the
restrictions being as they are.
Chairman Cassels noted the purpose of the Comprehensive Plan is to
balance the need of the public to have an orderly growth of residential areas.
--
--
--
-
-
-
The mere fact that there is a large protion of the porperty under a government
easement makes it undesirable for permanent structures to be built.
Considerin§
this, a mobile home subdivision is the most reasonable development.
Member Hooker moved to recommend the City Council grant the rezoning
request from Holding to Residential, Mobile Home, seconded by Member Joiner,
vote carried.
Member Altobello abstained.
BUILDING OFFICIAL
Building Official Richard B. Spray brought to the attention of the Plan-
ning Board the fact that the Rehabilitation Center request permission to build
two (2) houses for the Rehab children, on government property.
Building Official Spray inquired as to the proper proceedures to follow.
After lenghty discussion the Planning Board recommended he contact the City
Attorney to determine whether the houses can be built on government property
without public input or rezoning of property.
COMMUNICATIONS FROM MEMBERS
A. CHRISTINA HOOKER
Member Hooker brought to the attention of the Planning Board the great
need for a landscape ordinance for the City of Okeechobee.
Chairman Cassels suggested obtaining a copy of a Model Ordinance from
the Florida League of Cjties.
Then advertise for public hearing on such an
ordinance.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Member Altobello moved to adjourn the
meeting, secondec by Member Wright, vote unanimous.
n D. Cassels, Jr.
lanning Board Chairma
City of Okeechobee
ATTEST:
~.Y1î~
ice M. Mann
Panning Board Secretary
Clty of Okeechobee
3J
PLANNING BOARD AND BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS
FOR THE CITY OF OKEECHOBEE
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
NOVEMBER 6, 1979
AGENDA
7:00 P.M.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS
1. Approval of Minutes
PLANNING BOARD
1. Approval of Minutes
2. Rezoning request - Lowry Markham
3. COMMUNICATIONS FROM MEMBERS
A. John D. Cassels, Jr.
B. Frank Altobello
C. Christina Hooker
D. Jim Wright
E. Robert Joiner
4. Open for citizens not appearing of Agenda
5. ADJOURNMENT