05/29/1962
LOCATION AND \IIDTH OF R.IQHT-Olt'-WAY NOR'fH KEENE HOAD -
1. _...-", "'P"""P__-'" I J It II .. ""-- ..- _
r"l
THE ZONING Jl~d) PLANNING BOAd.D
l~inutes of' the J~oeting, Tuesday, May 29 J 1962"
'fhe meet~ing vias called to order at 3:00 p~ iY1" by the CI'iaTrman,
Hr.. Kruse. Pres.ent wero Members Reade 1 M)t'la.ndcr 1 S''1an and Gates J
Mr.. Rottig or tho Engil1eerir~ Department, and Mr... \'10110"
The minutos of the meeting of May 22, 1962, were approved as
readc.
'.
A~?LICllliT: HIGHLAN~D PINES .tU~Q1YI~+ON - (qOlLTINUED FgQM ~L~gLq~..
I-irQ Jo Frank Hancock, Jr. J appeared be.fore the Board at 3:30 p" M"
to discuss street alignmen~s ~or the continued development of High-
le,:ud Pines Subdivision Hhich 'lJlOuld includo plans as committed for
Flagler Dr:i,ve, North K0.ane itoad, and Sherwood Avenue as thoy bor-
dered the proposed Junior High School site c>
1\1aps of this area "'rare referred to as \'mll as drawing sho'V-1ing de-.
dication of. Sher,.JQod a.s a curvilinear street. iJlr.. liollo reported that
. the matter of location of school property had been discussed with
, .-.....
____""MrD Gilbert of the County Schools" This confirmed the plan of l..u-o
Hancock.,m1ch showed location of school site to extend 130 ~to \~est
of or{ginal west boundary which had been indicated ~s the north-south
section line" This change had caused a jog or misalignment of' North
Keene ltOad (already dedicnted along such section'line) north of t.he
SAL RR and North Keene Hoad sout,h of the railroad.. 'rhe Board, Planner,
and 11~. Rettig had expressed concern over this alignmont involving a
hazard of cross ing and the additional ha zard, on Flagler of ....lcaving
tra.ffic fro"m the south to make such crossing. Mr.. Hancock stated
that the plansubmitced was correct and was a r9sult of -
10 - Platt~ng needed to give adequate lot and 3CrGGt o.r.cange-
ment "lest of the section line..
\.
~
2 co - School Board ace e'Ptanco of idea to mQV(~ site 130'1 \-lest per..,
mitting a sharing in tti.r;ht-oi'-Vi.1Y and cas t of road",ay bor~'
. I
deri11g the 81 te and thH avoidance of n(~c0:ss::lry private
~,
Z & P Bd Minutes
1~3Y 29 2 Pl1~e If(.~
~
roadway on west of school site Llnd the avoidance of r:ll~" Hancock
platting a row of lots backing to the school i:Jite"
Upon dis CUtl sian ot' tho al igrunont 14r... Hancock ~ugge sted he make
the adjustment north of the railroad \'lher€l he \'!ould r oplat u. .transi-
tional curve to North Keene Hoad in Sunset Lake l-1anor" ,!11..~ ,~Oi\ r.f\
.~p~x:edd_ to this solE.~~"
.Q~.!2!!lliL.1lhe Ji!.ft~!Lqf2.'J:.ght-of-Yla~v..lor ._~.9..rth_)~e,en.~.~.ft - Itlr"
Hancock posed h:i.s problem of not having enough width of property to
provide the additional right-oi'-way. It \'las dectded that North
Keene noad should not require greatter than 60 ft" right-of .-way as
,
a resi.dential collector (with no comm~rc:J.al propert:tes), also that
additional property to meet a wider right-of--",ay \'lould need be taken
from air park property~ The Planner was concerned with noise and
< .
traff.ic discraction on No~ Ke~ne Hoad because of routing tilrough the
area to the acti.ve Litti1e LoC!gue GOrrLuunity Playfield and ultimate
,~ connecti.on to Dre\'1 Street ~ For this protection of homes, l'lro Hancock
\""-,,,i
, .
agreed to plat ''lith additional setback of 10 f'eet on each side of: a
60 fto right-or-wayo This ~ms also mentioned as desirable for resi-
dential lots on the east of the propert.y later to be platted facing
east on the roadway bordering the industri.al area" '.rhe Board also
. reminded !.1r.. HClncoclt .of the sid ewalk requirement in the vicin:tty of
schools and that such sidewalk would be nGcessary on North KGene
HoadlJ
v
GoncerninLthe .e='S~~~~P-:..J1Hd 9.2.!!neqt).oI1,.o~ ~'3E.glJ'loocL.9tirf2..~ -
Origina.l dedication sho1'1ed Sher\\'Ood extens:lon eant \'lith a transi-
tional curve. Later drm...ing ShOltled a Tt?e ,junction ut No. i{eoue Rd"
After some discussion of the pro and. cons of Tee conne ctions, jogs
causing crisscross of pedestrians and vehicles :i.n the vicinity of
schools, iflr.. Hancock agreed t.oiilal<ing an adeql.lat~iJ intorsec:tion of
Sherwood and North Keena. Hoad. Since thitl uould ne cess :Lt,a t.,s further
~
, ~~-......\
. ,.._~~l
~~
z ~ P Ed ~H.nutea 5/;19/62 Page 113
meeting of I-h'. Hancock and 1\W.. Ohristian, 'fhe Board agreed to dofer
thi3. decision until tho next regular moeting at which time l~r ~
Hancock would .report back.. At this eime J.1ro Hancock indicatod ho
\'lOuld bring before the Board a. suggosted re pla1~ of. a portion of
Sunset Lake l~nor showing II pro posed tie in to the alignment of
North Keene.Hoad south of the railroad intersection and approxi-
mately 130 .ft,.. '<Jest of the section line..
1,11".. Hancock Je it the meeting at ll.~30 P D r;l..
mt~YICE ST.ATION SITE, PLAN ~ ~ll1B1~ OIL ,c~~l.~r SQ..UTI!~A~~ ,CORNER
P..BE\f S'rR3~T~-"AND JU.?IT~a A \[ENUE - Tho. Planner raco:Jlmended approval..
Hee'tated that the City Engine\8r had indicated his driveway' require-
ments~ Upon motion of' }lIra Gates, seconded by l-lr.. l1eade, .tl!e Borard
y-oj:;ed to. ~er,ove ~heusite J?lC:\~ ~ a~ subm~lledo~
SEdVICE . STAT ION SI'rE PLAN ( H.UI~BLE ~OI~ gg) AT NOH.'1'HEAS'l' q~~NEn.
DRE\'[ STREST ANQ PATRICIA AVE" - (Reference was made to Dec oj 5/61
Board review of a site plan for this same location submitted by
. Phillips Petroleum) ':" 'l'he Planner noted that there were no stop
liBhts at; this intersection and in his opinion the plan would be im-
proved by the elimination of the second opening on the minor street..
However, he stated he wouid recommend approval subject to drivEn-my
re quirements as indi~ated by the Cit.y ~ngi neer <> Upon mot. ion of l...1rn
Reade, seconded by 1.~D Mylander, the _B9qr~Y~~~1~n?Ai~ousl~~~-
,prove the 8i te e1.?-n as sU~Jlli ~ted u
CONTINUATION OF HillVIEH1 COlvIPHl~HENSIVC; PLk\J R3POIn DIlAF'f - '1'he
1 T ___ ___.......0<1 ----<1>........___
Board reviewed Planner 1 s dz'afc' of an insertion maldng reference by
name (and in sequence) to the precedulg study reports of the P]4nn
The Board agreed to delete WIY reference to future study reports and
the insertion, as revised, was a.pproved for inclusion as a next. to
the last paragraph in the introduction to t.he COlllprehensi ve Plan
Repo1"tQ
I
'i
.!
.,
"
,
I
1
. .
i
I
.1
00
I
~
1.Jr. \/011e completed revie\'i of 1111'. Hcado' ~ cOIll.ncnt 00 (JO t; on tho
COn1iJrehensi va Plan Heport (boginning "d.th linted Itom 15) and out...
lined corroctions and revlsion~ as required (which are entered in
City Plannerts report draft) 0
PLAT.E DELETIONS ... INSER'l'IONS - Mr.. Wolle advised that in view
~.,-~ ~ ..........-....
of the Boardts docision to insert El Central Business District Plate.
,
he would recommend removal of the Future Population Distribution
Plate (foldout) and retaining the plate on Exis~ing Population Dis-
tribution (which he explained io the only one that has inserts of
statistical distr.icts). After some discussion of' the Plannarla .recom-
Juendation, ~ec1sion "me mad~ to retain both Eopulat~on Dis~riu~tio~
.Elates ill ~he 90mprehensJve Plan rt.9port all9-_ tiO obt,ain an esti.tw.lte ~C?!!
.2E,st of the, additio~l e,BD Plate in '.cp...to.!.:,
.CHAIRlJlAN' 9_ ITEJ4,S..~ IN~~l1JJON .o.}i~.1.LA.. rr!t.1& S,UNLiARY IN C.oI1P~\EHE~-
~IVE PL~\N REPORT - The Chairman displayed a booklet obtained through
1~.. Gallo\'lay entitled, It}t"acts About Florida Taxes and Exemptions
1961-l96Zff .. He raported that one copy had been sent to Harland !
. i
Bartholomew and Associates "lith a letter suggesting that a summary j
of some of the most important j.nformatiol1. miYit be useq. in the Capi-
tal Improvement Program and Con~rehensive .Plan deports.. It was
requested t.hat additional copies of' this booklet be obtained for
Board members I)
CHAIRi.'lAN'S ITEMS - CAPITllli Il<iPROVEMEN~P SECTION FOn COi\1Pll,;~ HENSrVE
r .d. 411 _~ 1IIi.... J ___-...t ~ J I I --.......................... I
fLAN H.zPOR~... 1\1r.. Holle statod he ,"iOuld arrange for a Committee meet...
ing the follo\'Ting lrriday afternoon to flll.:U ize th:l.s see tiOll!,
AGENDA ITEMS 5-.0, 5-D, 6-A) .6-0, and 6-D v-lOre not covered due
, to lack of time..
,
j
......."
The meeting was adjourned at 5:10 Pc M~
Respectfully.submitted"
Cj:od Q. u1(/d~ ~,
Oity Planner
Seefy