Loading...
Minutes 04-09-84MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING HELD AT CITY HALL, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA, MONDAY, APRIL 9, 1984 AT 7:00 P. M. PRESENT Vernon Thompson, Chairman George Ampol, Vice Chairman Robert Gordon, Secretary George Mearns Joseph Moore Paul Slavin Harold Weinberg Leo Grossbard, Alternate ABSENT Lillian Artis, Alternate (Excused) Bert Keehr, Deputy Building Official Chairman Thompson called the meetina to order at 7:03 P. M. He introduced the Deputy Building Official, Board Members, and Recording Secretary. Chairman Thompson recognized the presence of Mayor Carl Zin~erman and Councilman Nick Cassandra. Chairman Thompson announced that he had a call from Liliian Artis, who asked to be excused because her daughter was ill. MINUTES OF MARCH 12, 1984 Mr. Gordon moved to accept the minutes as received, seconded by Mr. Mearns. Motion carried 5-0 with Mr. Aalpoi and Mr. Slavin abstaining from voting because they were not present at the meeting of March 12, 1984. PUBLIC HEARING Chairman Thompson explained the purpose of the Board and read the six criteria on which the Board Members base their decision. He announced that they would have a full Board voting. Any three votes will deny the request and five votes will grant the request. Case ~56 - Lot 196, Laurel Hills 4th Addition, recorded in Plat Book 23~ Page 142, Palm Beach County Records Request - Relief from 60 ft. lot frontage require- ment to be reduced to 50 ft. lot frontage. Relief from 7,500 sq. ft. lot area requirement to be reduced to 6,965 sq. ft.~ lot area to construct a single family residence. Address - 1210 N. Wo 7th Court Applicant - Carole Lankin Secretary Gordon read the application and the answers to ques- tions a-f. MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA APRIL 9, 1984 Carole Lankin, 411 S. W. ist Avenue, came forward. Chairman Thompson asked Ms. Lankin if there was anything she would like to tell the Board that would help the granting of her request. Ms. Lankin replied that she has owned the lot for five years and at this time, she would like to build a house on it so she wanted the variance. Ms. Lankin added that the houses on either side are on 50 foot lots. Mr. Ampol noted that the deed showed the 2nd of February, 1984 and asked if that was when Ms. Lankin took title. Ms. Lankin explained that she was part owner prior to that. Chairman Thompson knew the lot was a fifty foot lot, the whole area was platted 50, and those who went out to look know it is landlocked in there. Mr. Keehr checked the records and advised that there is no question that the homes built on both sides are on 50 foot lots. He looked at the lot today, and it has been cleared. There are no other lots available. Mr. Keehr said this is a clear case of where the City upgraded the zoning and made this a non-conforming lot. Mr. Slavin~observed that it was originally platted in 1951 and asked when the change was made from 50 feet to 75 feet. Mr. Ampol answered, "June of 1975." Mr. Slavin asked Ms. Lankin how far back her interest in the lot went. Ms. Lankin answered, "October of 1979." Mr. Grossbard asked if it was going back to the grandfather law. Mr. Keehr replied that it was not really. If the applicant had owned the property prior ko May of 1975, she would not have to come before the Board. Since she purchased it after that date, the Ordinance reads that you must come before the Board of Adjustment. Chairman Thompson asked if anyone would like to speak in favor of the granting of the variance. There was no response. Chairman Thompson asked if anyone would like to speak against the granting of the variance. Mr. Kenneth Kribs, 1214 N. W. 7th Court (the property directly to the north of the lot in question), believed that they pur- chased their property from Mr. and Mrs. Lankin in 1978. They knew they were purchasing a 50 foot lot but did not realize the problems involved with a 50 foot lot. Needless to say, any 50 foot lot in their area has become a detriment to the neighbor- hood (the restrictions on the parking etc.) ~r. Kribs referred to further down 7th Court. He expressed that it is really a blight on the neighborhood. After they purchased, Mr. Kribs said they realized they would like to extend their property and asked the Lankins if they - 2 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA APRIL 9, 1984 knew who owned the vacant lot directly to the south of them. The Lankins explained that they did not. However, about a year later the owner of the property showed up and Mr. Kribs told her he was interested in purchasing the lot. He went to the bank where they had their mortgage, and the bank would not grant a mortgage. Mr. Kribs thought they termed it a "lot loan". Mr. Kribs tried to get the neighbor to the south of the lot to go jointly with him, split the lot, and each take 25 feet. They were in the process of trying to work out something when the lot he had attempted to purchase was listed with a realtor. When Mr. Kribs called the realtor, he was told, "You would not want the lot because you cannot build on it." Mr. Kribs was still in the process of negotiating with the owner of the lot when the Lankins purchased the lot. Mr. Kribs objected to the variance on the basis that 50 foot lots are a detriment to the neighborhood. When the Lankins owned the property Mr. Kribs now owns, they could have added to the neighborhood by purchasing the lot, at which point they declined. Mr. Kribs said the Lankins arrived on the scene, never consulting him to see if he was interested in the lot and purchased it, fully aware of the problem they were facing of having to secure a variance in order to develop the lot. Mr. Kribs said they would probably end up with three 50 foot lots in a row, where he was trying to accomplish two 75 foot lots. Chairman Thompson asked if anyone else would like to speak against the granting of the variance. Secretary Gordon advised there was one conm~unication dated March 21, 1984 from Jill Rovinetli which he read, "I have no objec- tion to this variance." Mr. Ampo! understood all of the neighbors within a 400 foot radius were notified and pointed out that was the only response the Board received. Mr. Siavin asked how the setbacks were affected on a 50 foot lot. Mr. Keehr answered that the setbacks are figured on a percentage basis. A 50 foot lot comes up with the same setbacks as the other homes in the same district (25 foot front, 25 foot back~ 7½ feet on each side). In other words, Chairman Thompson said a house can be built. The only problem is the variance is asking for frontage and lot square footage. Mr. Keehr informed Mr. Slavin that the actual percentages on a non-conforming lot are 25% of the depth for the front, and not over 25 feet. On the sides of the lots, it is 15% of the width, and it is 25% of the depth for the rear. - 3 - ~¢INUTES .- BOARD OF ADJUSTmeNT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA APRIL 9, 1984 Mr. Gordon asked Ms. Lankin if the house would be for her own use or to r.ent or-be sold. Ms. Lankin answered that she is going to move into it and live there. Chairman Thompson pointed out that 90% of all of the lots in that area are 50 foot lots and the land is landlocked. A denial will deprive the owner of a constitutional right. Mr. Ampol noted Ms. Lankin was landlocked and asked if that would not create a hardship for the person that owns the property. Chairman Thompson replied, "Yes." Mr. Kribs wished to speak and Chairman Thompson told him he could not speak right now. Mr. Kribs believed Chairman Thompson made an incerrect statement. Members of the Board said to let Mr. Kribs speak. Mr. Kribs was sure that the land was plotted at 50 foot lots. There was no question about that. However, Mr. Kribs said if you would go into the area you would find that the actual building on 50 foot lots is probably in the neighborhood of 10% or 15%. The rest are 60 foot plus lots. Almost everyone bought two lots or a lot and a half to develop in there. It ms nowhere near 90%. Chairman Thompson thought he said 90% of the lots when recorded or platted were 50 foot lots. If he did not, that was what he intended to say~ Mr. Weinberg moved that the request for a variance be granted due to the facts presented: That the lot itself is landlocked with a house on either side. Ms. Lankin is not. in violation of anything that she did in creating the situation as it is. Mr. Moore seconded the motion. No discussion. Mrs. Ramseyer was requeSted by Chairman Thompson to take a roll call vote: Mr. Mearns - Aye Mro Weinberg - Aye Vice Chairman Ampol - Aye Chairman Thompson - Aye Secretary Gordon - Aye Mr. Siavin - Aye Mr. Moore - Aye Motion carried 7-0. The request for variance was granted. Case #57 - Lots 14, 15, 16, 17 & 21, PARKER ESTATES, recorded in Plat Book 10, Page 37, Palm Beach County Records - 4 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTmeNT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA APRIL 9, 1984 Lots ! and 2, Block B, HATHAWAY PARK, recorded in Plat Book 13, Page 17, Palm Beach County Records Request - Relief from zoning regulations, Appendix A - Zoning - Code of Ordinances, Section ll-H-16 (d-l), requiring 101 parking spaces for restaurant, to be reduced to 75 parking spaces, for an addition to the restaurant Address - 1021 South Federal Highway Applicant - J. O. Scott Lucille & Otley's Restaurant Owners - Otley W. & Mary Lucille Scott Secretary Gordon read the application and the six answers to questions a-f, paragraph 5. Mr. Jerry Scott, 102] South Federal Highway, thought they should bring out that the variance was simply overlooked the last time. They already have all of the variances tha~ are necessary except the one requested in this petition. Mr. Scott 'advised that it will be an.improvement to the neighborhood. Right now, he is ashamed of the way it looks and has been trying to do something about it for two years. ~r. Scott said this should be the last thing before they get the permit, go ahead, and get the area cleaned up. Mr. Ampol noted that Mr. Scott has "quite a bit" of parking. He asked if the other side of the street was his parking lot and Mr. Scott replied that it is. Mr. Ampol also noted that Mr. Scott has a parking lot in back of the restaurant. Chairman Thompson knew they were talking about parking spaces and asked if the restaurant would be increased in slze. Mr. Keehr referred to the "FACTS" Sheet and said the intent of the present Parking Ordinance was in case a present building or existing business was added to and it would increase the intensity of that business or cause more people to come in. The Ordinance was set up in that respect so that particular business would have to meet today's criteria for the number of spaces. However, Mr. Keehr said this business is not increasing its intensity. The applicant is not adding one seat. Mr. Keehr told the Members a major thing they should keep in mind was the applicant was not increasing the intensity of his business. He is doing nothing more than improving the appearance of it, and he has already submitted plans which meet our Land- scape Ordinance and is increasing the landscaping. - 5 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA APRIL 9, 1984 Mr. Keehr said the applicant is coming in line as far as the new Parking Ordinance relating to design and many factors, except for this, which he has no control over. Mr. Keehr believed the true intent of the Ordinance was not to penalize a.business such as in this case. Chairman Thompson was informed it was just to enclose mechanical equipment on the northwest side. Mr. Moore asked if any of the present parking spaces would be affected or any that might have been built had this not been done. Mr. Scott replied that there is a possibility they may lose~one space because they will have to move the dumpsters over one more space. Mr. Keehr thought it would he helpful for the Members to look at the surveys. He indicated the area where it will be enclosed and said it will have a flat roof and be completely hidden. Mr. Keehr added that the applicant could just build a six foot fence without a variance but he is building an actual structure. Mr. Gordon questioned whether parking was permissible at the front entrance on both sides of the street. Mr. Scott replied that it is. Chairman Thompson asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor of granting the variance. Mr. D. R. Puiliam, 633 Castil!a Lane, Boynton Beach, Florida 33435, said he and his wife received a notice which was sent to them in Loveland, Colorado. He thought the Members recognized the fact that Lucille & Otley's are doing a good business in town and are conducting themselves in a way that they should be encouraged to go ahead and do any improvement that is necessary. Mr. Pulliam came only to say that they want Lucilie & Ot!ey's to continue and have those privileges. Secretary Gordon read a letter dated March 28, 1984 from the Boynton Woman's Club, P. ©. Box 1135, Boynton Beach, in favor of the request. Chairman Thompson asked if anyone wished to speak against the request. There was no response. Secretary Gordon then read a letter addressed to Betty S. Boroni, City Clerk, from Ray W. Wilkins, 936 Brookdale Drive, Boynton Beach, Florida 33435, stating that he was against the request. Chairman Thompson pointed out that Mr. Wilkins' letter had no bearing because the variance does not ask for an extension of anything, but the letter would be a part of the record. - 6 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH~ FLORIDA APRIL 9, 1984 Chairman Thompson asked the Members to hold their discussion just to the improvement requested, which is to enclose the mechanical equipment. In viewing the property that the owner would like to enclose, he thought it would enhance the area. Chairman Thompson was talking about the north section of the parking area and could understand why they would like to enclose it. He thought those living to the north or to the west of the property would also appreciate it. Mr. Ampol moved to grant the request because it would be a beautification. Chairman Thompson announced that they had a motion to grant the request to enclose the mechanical equipment. Mr. Gordon seconded the motion. Mr. Keehr advised that the applicant was actually asking for a variance on the number of parking spaces. What he ms doing is what Chairman Thompson said, but what the applicant is doing, under the new Code, requires that he have more parking spaces~ Therefore, theappz~cant~ ' is asking for a variance with the present parking spaces. Mr. Gordon withdrew his second. Mr. Ampol agreed to add tha~ to his motion. Chairman Thompson requested the Recording Secre- tary to read the motion. Mrs. Ramseyer read that the motion was to grant the request for a variance on the parking lot with the present number of parking spaces. Mr. Weinberg thought they should specifically put in the motion the fact that there are 26 less parking spaces because that is what ~the variance is requesting. Mr. Ampol was again requested to repeat his motion. Mr. Ampol moved to grant the request and also that the applicant conform with the parking spaces required. Mr. Weinberg said the applicant was asking for 26 less parking spaces than required and it had to be in the motion. Mr. Keehr explained that the existing Code requires 101 spaces. The applicant has 75 exist- ing parking spaces. Therefore, a variance of 26 parking spaces is required and Mro Ampot.'s motion was that the applicant be granted the variance of 26 parking spaces. There was more discussion and Mr. Weinberg explained that the applicant was leaving the parking spaces at the present status quo. It was not clear in Mr. Grossbard's mind. In other words~ the applicant was leaving it at 75 and not adding any seating space to the restaurant. He asked when the zoning was changed. Mr. Keehr estimated it. was about a year ago. In order for the applicant to make the improvement; Chairman Thompson said the applicant had to be granted a variance for 26 spaces. If the variance is not granted, he cannot make the improvement and would be in violation. No improvements could be made on that building. At the present time, it calls for i01. - 7 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA APRIL 9, 1984 "In other' words," Mr. Grossbard asked, "if he would leave it alone, as it is, he would not have to come before this Board for a variance?" The Members Confirmed that was right. Mr. Ampol withdrew his motion and Mr. Gordon withdrew his second. Mr. Weinberg thought Mr. Keehr put it in the proper way and wished to adopt Mr. Keehr's language into a motion. He moved to grant the request for a variance of 26 parking spaces in order to allow the restaurant to build the structure they have planned to build. Mr. kmpol seconded the motion. At the request of Chairman Thompson, Mrs. Ramseyer repeated the motion. Mrs. Ramseyer then took a roll call vote on the motion: Mr. Weinberg ~ice Chairman Ampo! Chairman Thompson Secretary Gordon Mr. Slavin Mr. Moore Mr. Mearns Aye Aye Aye Aye Aye Aye Aye Motion carried 7-0. The request for a variance was granted~ Case ~58 -Lots I & 2 of ROUSSEAU'S SUBDIVISION according to the plat of record and recorded in Plat Book 1, Page 14, Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida. Also all that part of Section 33, Township 45 South, Range 43 East, lying west of said Lots 1 & 2 of Rousseau's Subdivision and lying East of the East right-of-way line of U. S. ~1 except that part taken for S. E. i5th Avenue Request - Relief from zoning regulations, Appendix A-Zoning - Code of Ordinances, Section ll-H-16 (d-2), requiring 653 parking spaces for existing shopping center, bank and proposed restaurant, to be reduced to 562 parking spaces, for space for the proposed restaurant Address - 1606-1634 South Federal Highway, Causeway Square Applicant - Thomas R. Blum, John Therien Owners - James D. Casto, Thomas K. Ireland, and Bernard Schoninger Secretary Gordon read the application and the answers to ques- tions a-f, paragraph 5 of the application. Before asking the representatives for the applicant to come forward, Mr. Keehr explained the surveys. - 8 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA APRIL 9, 1984 Mr. Keehr indicated S. E. 15th Avenue (Woolbright Road), the bridge, Causeway Shopping Center, where Grand Union used to be, and K-Mart. He said everything is south and showed where the new restaurant will be and the parking that will be added to the area. Mr. Gordon noted it was mn back of K-Mart. Mr. Keehr informed Mr. Grossbard that the entrance to the restaurant will be from the Causeway parking areas. Mr. Weinberg asked if it would actually be on the Intracoastal, and Mr. Keehr replied that it would. Mr. Keehr said this was built in 1960. He did not have the parking requirements for 1960 but did have them for 1962, which would have been similar. At that time, one space was required for every 300 square feet of gross useable area. Today, one space for every 200 square feet of gross useable area ms required, so naturally, that means they are 1/3rd short of what our requirement is today. Under the old parking requirements, for the whole shopping center, Mr. Keehr said it was 413 spaces. Right now, they have 457 parking spaces so they had more than enough spaces when they built the development. One Member noted that now it requires 653. Mr. Keehr said that was because now our Parking Ordinance requires one parking space for every 200 square feet. However, this is all existing, and Mr. Keehr pointed out that there is nothing they can do with that. Mr. Keehr showed what would be added. Under today's Parking Ordinance, 30 parking spaces are required and the applicant is going to construct 105, which means the entire parking center is benefiting by 75 spaces. By adding an excessive amount of park- lng and constructing the restaurant, Mr. Keehr pointed out that the applicant is going to improve the whole area by landscaping and will end up with a total of 562 parking spaces° By the fact the applicant is constructing his building, Mr. Weinberg determined that the applicant becomes part of the entire shopping center. Therefore, the entire parking center is the applicant's respo~sibi!ity as far as bringing it up to the 623 spaces. Mr. Keehr confirmed that was correct. Mr. Weinberg asked if the Board was being asked for a variance for the entire shopping center in the applicant's behalf. Mr. Keehr answered that was correct. Mr. Keehr explained that the applicant is asking for a variance of 101 parking spaces as required under today's Parking Ordinance. If the applicant is going to bring the parking center up to the required parking spaces, Chairman Thompson asked why the variance was needed in the first place. Mr. Keehr replied, "Because he is not.~' First, they had 562, and Chairman Thompson noted it calls for 653. He said that was 91. The required parking spaces are 653, and the proposed plan calls for 562. The difference is 91, so there was a mistake. - 9 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA APRIL 9, 1984 Mr. Slavin questioned whether there was any error in the original figures. Mr. Keehr replied,"No." He referred the Members to #4 on the "FACTS" sheet, which he read: [~Under the present parking ordinance, this shopping center and bank would require 623 spaces." Mr. Keehr said the restaurant would require 30 more spaces, so he told the Members to add 30 to the 623, and they would come up with the 653. There ar'e presently existing 457 parking spaces. If you add 105 to that, you arrive at 562. Mr. Keehr said it all boils down to "x" number of spaces under today's Ordinance for the entire shopping center for all of the square footage in the shopping center including the proposed restaurant and exist- lng bank. However, when the applicant adds this new restaurant he is adding more parking spaces than is required by today's Ordinances. Consequently, the rest of the area will be bene- fiting from it, and they will be parking there when the restaurant is not open and will be utilizing it and vice versa. If he is going to upgrade the shopping center to more than what is required, Chairman Thompson asked what the purpose of a variance was. Mr. Keehr explained that the reasoning was like the prior case, when you add to something or square footage to something, you must bring it up to today's Code in numbers, design, and everything. Since this is a separate lot by itself, with the amount of parking spaces they are building for their square footage, Mr. Slavin asked if the applicant would be over and above. Mr. Keehr answered, "Right, in the shopping center." Mr. Slavin asked, ~'If it was in-an independent lOt?" Mr. Keehr explained he had to say in the shopping center because in an independent lot, it would require more parking for the restaurant and would throw everything off. Mr. S!avin noted Mr. Keehr said they were adding 105 to the parking lot and thought it was confusing because of the fact you take in the entire square footage which you would call useable land or useable area that would require so much. With all of their work and upgrading, Mr. Slavin pointed out that the overall is still short. Mr. Keehr confirmed that was right. Mr. Weinberg asked if the type of restaurant would have any bearing on it and whether it would be like Gentleman Jim's or the Banana Boat. Mr. Keehr answered that our Ordinance does not specify types of restaurants. It can be any nature of restaurant.. By being in the shopping center, Mr. Weinberg said they are taking advantage of the fact that all of the parking space they will need is 30 spaces. If they were an independent lot, as Mr. Keehr brought out, they would probably need a great many more. Mr. Weinberg referred to the Banana Boat and said they get a great deal of parking. He asked if they will overrun the entire parking area and deprive the other stores of parking. - 10 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA APRIL 9, 1984 The Banana Boat, as it sits today, only has about 75 spaces, and Mr. Keehr said the applicant has 105. There is a comparison right there. If the applicant was building on a private site, he would have seating for 320 people with those parking requirements and Mr. Keehr did not believe this restaurant would have that many seats in it. On a private lot, he would be over in parking. Chairman Thompson advised that the only reason the applicant is before the Board is because the present shopping center does no~ meet the present requirements. Other than that, the applicant would not be here. It was the same sl~ua_lon'~ ~' the Board just got through with. In order to make an improvement, because of non-conformity, the applicant had to come before the Board. Paul Slattery, Architect, Slattery-Root Architects, 2101 N. W. 2nd Avenue, Boca Raton~ Florida, said they were not only providing enough spaces for the restaurant but in addition, it would benefit everybody in the shopping center and surrounding areas. In addition; Mr. Slattery pointed out there was an existing, run, down condition with a minimal amount of landscaping. They have provided new landscaping and landscape strips, an irrigation system, and are easing the overall parking situation through the entire development. Chairman Thompson asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor of granting the variance. There was no response. Chairman Thompson asked if anyone wished to speak against granting the variance. There was no response. About two or three years ago, Mr. Slavin recalled this Board had to consider a variance regarding the Banana Boat. A lot of people living in Coastal Towers voiced their objections for reasons the Board had no control over. He noted the Board had a letter similar to the objections raised by the various people who spoke against the variance that the Banana Boat asked for. Secretary Gordon read the letter which Mr. Slavin referred to. The letter was from Mary L. Moran, 646 Snug Harbor Drive, Apt. 408, Boynton Beach, Florida 33435. Mr. Slavin referred toGe requirement that a notice be sent to all residents within a radius of 400 feet and asked if that also applied to the various businesses in the shopping center. Mr. Keehr answered that all persons owning property within 400 feet of the entire outline of the shopping center were notified. He informed Mr. Slavin that a lessee does not get notification. Chairman Thompson asked about across the Intracoastal. Mr. Keehr answered, "No. That is in Ocean Ridge." Chairman Thompson advised there is a piece of land that belongs to Boynton just south of there. Mrs° Ramseyer said she had the list of those who were notified if the Members wished to see it. - 11 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA APRIL 9, 1984 So that it~would not create a problem, Chairman Thompson pointed out once again that it was before the Board because the shopping center at the present time does not conform to the City Code in terms of parking spaces. Mr. Weinberg wished the minutes to reflect that an error was made and it is 91 not 101 parking spaces. Mr. Keehr informed Chairman Thompson that it brings the shopping center 91 parking spaces shy of the Code. That is why the applicant is asking for a variance. If the shopping center is short of the amount of parking spaces according to Code and people come in, Mr. Slavin asked if the Board has the right to change the Code and compound a felony. Mr. Keehr advised that the Board is not only "compounding the felony", as Mr. Slavin stated, but they are improving a non- conforming condition~ and they just passed a variance that came before this. This is the same thing. Mr. Slavin pointed out that the other one was a business that has been established for thirty odd years. In almost any case that comes before the Board, Chairman Thompson commented that the Board is going against the City Ordinance. If not, the applicants would not be before the Board. If the restaurant is not to go into business, Mr. Weinberg pointed out that the parking area of the shopping center would be approximately 166 spaces short. By the restaurant coming into business, they are adding 75 parking spaces to a condition which is existing at the moment. Therefore, the restaurant is assuming the difference in what the shopping center should have and what they have and are narrowing that difference down by 75~ Mr. Weinberg did not think the Board should penalize them for some- thing which was changed after the fact. If the owners of the Causeway Shopping Center are short of parking spaces~ Mr. Slavin wondered if they know they are shor~. He asked if they made no effort to amend it and recalled that they recently did some work there to improve the parking areas, etc. With all the land, Mr. Slavin thought they could have put in the additional parking spaces and bring themselves up to Code, especially when the amount of spaces required were being reduced from 300 down to 200. Mr. Keehr referred to Boynton Plaza and said they are short of parking because of today's Ordinance which is only a year old. He said the shopping center on 36th and U. S. 1 was also short of parking. They are not going to buy any more property because none ms available. Mr. Keehr explained that they are improving a condition that under today's Ordinance would call for more parking, so the applicant is giving 75 more spaces. - 12- MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACHr FLORIDA APRIL 9, 1984 Mr. ~einberg moved that the Board approve the request for a variance from Thomas R. Blum and John Therien, as the Applicants, for the 91 parking spaces in order for them to complete their project. Mr. Slavin seconded the motion. Chairman Thompson requested verification again from Mr. Keehr that it is 91 and not 1 find out later that is another problem. Mr. B made the statement that on the application), th posed restaurant will z confirmed that figure i 01 because if 91 is put in now and they not 91 but really 101, they will have eehr went over the figures and said he in both cases (on the "FACTS, Sheet and e existing shopping center, bank and pro- equire 653 parking spaces.. Mr. Keehr n two different areas and was confident of the figure. He was also confident of a figure that states that the present Parki%g Ordinance would require 653 parking spaces for the existing shopping center, bank and {roposed restaurant. The difference between those two figures is 91 and not t01. Therefore, Mr.~ Keehr was reasonably confident that 91 would hold up. Chairman Thompson requested the Recording Secretary to read the motion mnd have a roll call vote: Vice Chairman A~poi Chairman Thompson Secretary Gordon Mr. Slavin Mr. Moore Mr. Mearns Mr. Weinberg Aye Aye Aye Aye Aye Aye Aye Motion carried 7-0. The request for a variance was granted. Mr. Keehr had the feeling the Members think they are put on the spot at times and said the people really have nowhere else to go. This is the only BOard that can make those kinds of decisions and allow these kinds of improvements. Chairman Thompson thought it was good that all facts are brought out. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting properly adjourned at 8:40 P. M. - 13 -