MInutes 09-13-76MI~IUT~o OF THE~u~D OF ADJUST~-~T M~ETING H~LD.~ AT CITY HALL,
BO~Z~' ~ ~'~m~_O~? BEACH, FLORIDA, W~0~D&~ ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ e '~[I~ ~' ~ '~ 1976 AT 7:00 P~M.
~RESENT
Joseph Aranow, Chairman
Der!e B. Bailey, Vice Chairman
Robert Gordon, Secretary
Alvin C. Boe!tz
Vernon Thompson, Jr.
Foy Ward · ~
Walter Rutter, Alternate
Albert Caravetta, Alternate
E. E. Howell, Bldg. Official
George Ampo! (Excused)
Prior to the meeting, there was a discussion regarding the
change to the ordinance pertaining to the Bos~d of Adjustment
acted on by the City Council at their last meeting. The
consensus of the members of the Board was to n~tify the City
~ if there is anything on any future agenma which
Manager ~n~
may concern the Board of Adjustment in any fashion, they would
like to know about it before it appears on the age~da so they
may give any attention to it desired.
Chairman Aranow called the meeting to order at 7:00 P. M. and
introduced the members of the Board, the Building Oft_cma±,
and the Recording Secretary.
Minutes of ~August 9 ~3976 ~~~
Chairman Aranow ascertained there were no~. -~::=~£ ~, on~s-
sions or corrections and then entertained a motion to adopt
the minutes as recorded. Mr. Thompson so moved, seconded by
Mr. Gor~o~. Motion carried 7-0.
yubl_~ c Hearing
Parcel #2 - East 25 ft. of Lot 8 and W. 37½ ft. of Lot 7,
Block ~9, Lake Boynton Estates Plat #1
Recorded in Plat Book 13, Page 32
Palm Beach County Records
Request - Relief from 12½ ft. side setback
(Corner lot) to 8 ft. side setback
Proposed Improvement - Screen Porch
Applicant - Thomas and Deborah Pomeroy
Address - 628 S. W. 3rd Avenue
M~. Gordon read the above application and advised it was re-
quested because the permit was issued with the 8 ft. side
setback for the original house and the owner wishes to main-
tain the same side setback for the new addition.
MINUTES
BOARD OF ADJUST~NT
PAGE ~0
SEPTE~ER 13, 1976
Mr. Thomas Pomeroy stated his name and his address as 6£8
S. W. 3rd Avenue. Chairman Aranow asked if he owned this
property as of this date and ~. ~omeroy replied: yes.
Chairman Aranow referred to having a copy of the contract
for the deed a~d ~. Pomeroy replied that he did not have
the deed at the present time. Chairman Aranow read the
contract pertaining to obtaining the title upon making cer-
tain payments and referred to the clause saying if he should
default in any payment~ he is out. He asked i£ he had made
all the ~ayments and ~. Pomeroy replied: yes and the City
Clerk has accepted this. Chairman Aranow replied that he
did also~ but wanted to make sure that he owns the property.
Mr. Howell added that if the Board allows this adjustment,
the Building Department will require permission from Boca
Estates £or amy addition to this house if the owner does not
show title.
M~P. Boe!tz asked if he knew the building was non-conforming
and Mr. Pomeroy replied that he did now. ?~. Boe!tz asked
if he knew when he bought it and ~'..~. Pomeroy replied: no.
I~-. Boeitz asked if a variance was granted for the 8 ft. set-
back and i~. Howell replied: no, it was bui!2 with the City's
blessings in error. ~'~. Boeltz stated that since the con-
tractor made an error, it did not mean the Board should make
another error. M~r. Pomeroy informed him that he paid extra
for the slab and the power comes to the edge of the slab.
Mr. Boeitz informed him that financially this was not a hard-
ship and explained how the changing of the ordinance had
caused hardships. However, there was never sma 8 ft. side
setback. Mr. Pomeroy stated that the City was at fault for
issuing the permit and explained that he would not haa~e paid
extra for
~n~ corner lot and slab if he had known.
Boeltz referred to him having checked it and ~. Pomeroy re-
plied that he took it for grar~ted that the City issued the
~e~mmt correctly. ~. Boe!tz stated that ~hey must gl-ce the
same privilege to everyone and referred to the houses on the
other corner also being non-conforming. He added that he
~ not understand how these houses were built
. ~r~. Howell
stated that when a builder comes in with a plan s~nd submits
it for a permit~ it is the City's responsibility to check it
and the permit for this should not have been issued. He
cannot explain why the permit was issued as he was not here
then. How many home owners when they buy a home check to
see if the building meets the City code? .wh-. Boeltz replied
that e:~eryone should check when investing so much money in a
house.
. ~am=ey asked approximately how long this development had
been in existence and ~. Howell replied: better than two
years. Mm. Bailey asked if he had signed a construction con-
tract and if it stated it would be built to all City cosec,
etc. and }~P. Pomeroy showed him the contract.
MINUTES
BOARD OF ADJUST~NT
PAGE THPJ~E
SE?TE~'~ER 13, 1 976
~. Thompson asked if this contractor was still operating in
the City of Boynton Beach and ~. Howell replied: yes. He
added that the house directly behind this has a ~a½ £t. set-
back and it was built after he took o~er the Building Depart-
me~t. Howe~er~ there are at least four non-co~£orming houses
in this area ~nd he lives in one also. ~. Ward asked if they
were all built by the same company and Mr. Howell replied: yes.
M~. ~utter suggested moving the slab and l~. Pomeroy informed
h~m that the slab was tied into the house with a steel founda-
tion. ~. Howell added that evidently when he had the house
built, he paid for the foundation of the slab with planning
to carry out the lines of the house. The lines of the house
cannot be carried out with moving the slab. ~. Rutter
stated he thought this problem could be ~vercome by mo~ing
the slab back.
Mr. Bailey then read Item ~0 o~ the construction contract
stating it would be built to all City ordinances. He stated
he could see with signing this contract~ the contractor put
a hardship on ~. ?omeroy and the City put a hardship on the
contractor by not correcting it. ~. Boeitz suggested poss-
ibly making the contractor responsible to move it over and
Chairman Aranow replied that this was not the Board's job.
He clarified that a permit was issued~ a contract signed,
and possibly the City may be r~sponsible because they okayed
it. He does not want to give him any more hardship than the
law requires.
Chairman Aranow referred to what happened and asked why the
contractor got away with it~ Can this contractor continue
to build? How can they put a stop to it? ~'~. Howell in-
formed him that the first thing he did when he~ took over
the Building Department was to devise a plan checksheet and
they check the setbacks, proper zoning, etc. This is how
they caught this contractor. In fairness to the contractor~
in any 5ity when you submit a plan and if there is anything
wrong~ the plan is returned. He does not think there was a
procedure in the Building Department before he took over.
Chairman Aranow asked how they could stop a contractor from
getting away with this in the future and ?~. Howell replied
that hopefully the pisz~ check is doing that right now and he
thinks it is ~ ' ~.~ ~
· unamr~.an Aranow asked if a penalty could be
imposed on the contractor and ~. Howell replied that he did
not think the cantractor was at fault. ~. Ward disagreed
and stated he thought the contractor should imnow the code
regardless of the Building Department. ~. Howell referred
to contractors having to k~.ow many things and the Building
Department must tell them when they are wrong. He has been
in the ~u_±dmng trade all his life and bought the house across
the street and took for graze, ted it was conforming and it was
not. Chairman Aranow referred to this builder still buildir~
MINUTES
BOARD O? ADJUST~[~NT
FOUR
SE?~E~'~ER i3 ~ ~ 976
in Boyntbn Beach and asked why they couldn't refuse to give
him a permit to do anything and M~. Howell replied that they
couldn't unless it was proven that he willfully violated the
code. If a man turns in a plan in good faith and it is ap-
proved~ he is entitled to~ai?~rm~, There was some discus-
sion and ~. Boeltz stated he thought the contractor should
correct it for this man. Chairman Aranow still questioned
why the builder should be able to get aw~y with it. Mm.
Howell explained that the house was built and a c/o issued
which states it meets the Boynton Beach code. Chairman
Aranow replied that he was saying because the c/o was issued~
it is an excuse and ~ov~rup. If this applicant is denied,
he thinks he would be perfectly justified in suing the City
and the contractor. Why shouldn't the Building Department
say this contractor is incompetent because he built where
he should not have and Mr. !Howell reviled that contractor
could say a complete set of ~lans ha~ been submitted and
question why they were appro%ed. Chairman Aranow replied
that they should let the City and the contractor fight it
out~ but why put this man on the spot? He believes the con-
tractor should not be allowed to build in Boynton Beach. ~.
Howell replied that he did not think they could refu~e the
contractor legally, if the plans are in order~ they must
issue a permit. The house behin~ was revised after he turned
it down. This was also the job of the Building Department on
the other four houses. Chairman Aranow~-~o~^~~_~,~. that he got
away with it and Mr. Howell replied that he didn't think it
was with willful intent. M~'. Ward agreed that he didn't th~nk
the builder should go scot free.
~h '
~amrman Aranow asked if anyone desired to speak for or against
th~s application and received no response.
~. Thompson moved to grant the variance, seconded by i~.
Bammey. Chairman Aranow requested a roll call vote ~ad Mms.
Kruse took it as follows:
l~. Boe!tz - No
Mr. Bailey - Yes
i~. Ward - Yes
~. Thompson - Yes
Mr. Rutter - Yes
Mr. Gordon - Yes
Mr. Aranow - Yes
Motion carried 6-]. Chairman Aranow requested ~,~s. Kruse
to re~urn ~ Pomeroy's pism to the C~ty ~
· -. ~erk.
MINUTES
Parcel ~3 - Lots 1~ 2, 3, 6 and 5, Seacrest Hills, Block 1
Recorded in Plat Book 25, Page 74
Palm Beach County Records
Request - Variance to allow commercial parking
lot in resmmen.~al zone
Address - 2600 Block, S. W. 6th Street
Applicant - Bethesda Memorial Hospital
Mr. Gordon r~aae ~ the above application and advised m~'~ was re-
quested because the hospital parking is not adequate. Ail the
C-1 property is being used. The request is for the only
otne~ adjacent property s3zai!abie.
?~. Robert Hill stated his name smd his address as 9!9 S. W.
27th Avenue. Chairman Aranow referred to=~n~o~ request being
to change a zoning requirement pertaining to use and informed
him that the Board did not have the authority to do this. Ac-
Cording to the application, they are requesting a use in R-lA
which is not there. He feels he will have to convince the
Board that thsy have this authority. M_~. Hill replied that
he did not know how he could address himself to that particu-
lar question. He is here on the direction of P~. Howell and
does not understand this question. He understood it was the
proper form for Bethesda Hospital to make this request.
Chairman Aranow clarified that he was asking to change use
in R-tA. He is recuesting a varismce to be granted that
will allow commercial parking in the R-~A zone. The only
Board that could do that would be the Planning & Zoning Board
and not the Board of Adjustment M~. Hill "~ ~m
· - m~o~..~ed him that
they appeared before the P!muning & Zoning Board and were
directed to this Board because they were not a public forum
which this body is. Aiso~ in the zoning ordinances, there
are some exceptions per~Xtting commercial parking in resi-
dential zones.
Mr. Howell informed the Board that this application did go
before the Planning & Zoning Board, but it was before they
had a City Planner. He read the section of the code permit-
ting parking for various uses in residential zones. He
added that he did not particularly direct this man to this
Board, but the Planning & Zoning Board more or less pushed
him this w~y. He believes he was referred to exhaus~ this
Board. There a:~e_ parking lots in R-~. ~.~." ~ a~d R-tAAA. They
do permit some
com~.e~c~a_, parking in these areas. Chairman
Aranow replied that under the section read, there was no
permission. They do not have the authority to change the
use of zoning, if the Planning & Zoning Board wanted them
to exhaust every possibility before going back totthem, it
is all right with him. This Board does not hesse the author-
ity and the law says so. To take if from one zone to the
other is up to the Piarming & Zoning Board. ~!r. Ward agreed
and suggested that it be referred back to the Planning
Zoning Board.
Ba,~T~ OF ADJUST~NT
Chairman Aranow suggested hearing from the people and the
~om±owmng appeared before the Bosmd in opposition.
Mr. Ca~ar Maut[i stated his name and his address as t50 S. W.
2~th Avenue. He stated that he ~o~.~~=~°°~ that this was no~' the
proper Boazm. However, it could be a sounding Board of get-
ting how m~ny people ar ,~:,~ob~ectmng to it Chairman Aranow
replied that he didn't believe this was their purpose. Mr.
Mauti continued that he thought it should be cancelled and
be sent back to the Planning & Zoning Board where it belongs.
?~ Bob Rcs~=~ "= ~ =
· v~=iznm stated his name and his amar=ss as
S. W. l~th Street and advised that he lived adjacent to this
land. The people on S W. 4th Street t=V-e ~ ~
· ~= ,pr=ce in their
homes. Those five lots have been eyesores for years. ?ne
hospital has made no attempt to keep it clean. It was used
for a supply yard and parking lot when the construction was
tatung place. He called the City to have the cars removed.
There are rats and garbage in those lots. They did put up
shrubs, but they eme only 2~ ft. .Ign. He def±esthem to show
him when the parking lot is fully loaded. He thinks they are
trying to find.out if there is going to be any friction from
people in the neighborhood and there will be. Chairman Aranow
replied that this was not the oroblem facing them right now.
He asked if this was where the-gate was located and
Roste!!ini replied: yes and he woUld like to know how come
the gate was put there?
I'~c. Larry Roush stated his name and his address as 26!43 S. W.
4th Street. He stated he was opposed as well as the other 15
people present on that street. This would be detrimental to
their property, children and families and anything in this
way would not look like democracy.
Ms. Margsmet Fish stated her name and her address as 2619
S. W~ . &th, Street. They ha3~e had a water ..~roblem x_om~ the
hospital =-~ .... ~
~v,~r,s~nce they have lived there, it has never
been corrected. When it rains, the ~ater comes in her gar-
age. With a parking lot~ they will have much more water.
A!so~ the gates give the teenagers a good place to hang
around at night. She thinks a security guard should be
around the ' ~ · ~ ~
~usm~al at all times. ~m~
- ~ ~-~ Aranow clari-
fied that the Board was going to vote as to whether they
have ' ~ ~ ·
~urmsamctmon to entertain this ap~Imcatmon or not.
This is what they are concerned with. If they cannot get
to the point to entertain the application, there is no reason
to state objections. Ms. Fish continued that she wanted to
give her opinion. She is opposed to a parking lot and will
not stand for it. ~-
~. Lloyd Weeks stated his name and his address as 26~5 S. W.
%th Street and informed the Board that he was opposed to it.
MI}~ITES
BO~D OF '~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~S~ ~ST~T
~w~. John Graziano stated his name and his address as 2623
S. W. 4th Street. He informed the Board that he was ooeosed
because he is right across the street. "~
M~s. Cus'ano + ~
s~a~ed her name end her address as 2709 S. W.
4th Street and stated she was opposed.
?~. Bailey referred to the law orohibiting the Board from
acting and ~-~
· ~a~ if not available, he would havei~to abstain.
Chairman Aranow referre~ to reading a case law at the last
meeting referring to this. ~o Howell referred to the Offi-
cia! Zoning Regulations ~
a~m M~. Bailey read Section ~0, Item
4-C on Page 38~ pertaining to the Board of Adjustment no~
being allowed to grant use.
Mr. Rutter made a motion to refer this application to the
proper Board or authority who is to handle this. M~. Gordon
seconded the motion. Under discussion~ Mr. Thompson re-
marked that he d~d not nmnk it could go to the City Council
because they only ao~orove recommendations ~de by the Plan-
ning & Zoning Board~- Mr. Hill asked if he ~as referring to
thio request going directly ~o the City Council ~ ~
unomoson cta~_~med that in a case like ~ they would send
it back to the proper Board for recommendation. Chairman
Aranow then requested a roll call vote and Mrs. Kruse took
it as follows:
Mr. Boe!tz - Yes
~. Bailey - Yes
Mr. Ward - Yes
Mr. Thompson - Yes
Mm. Rutter - Yes
Mr. Gordon - Yes
Mm. Aranow - Yes
Motion carried 7-0. Chairmsn Aranow requested ~s Krose to
give '~ ~ ~ ~ ·
v~ plan from ~ethesda Hospital back to the City Elerk.
~. Thompson referred to the $50 fee and asked if it could be
transferred back to the ~ ~ ~
P~an_~=n~ & Zoning Board and Cna~m~n
Aranow replied that t
TM
n~s was not their problem. He added
that with the advertising, etc., he understood that the cost
of many of these applications ran close to $300 to $400.
~ Howell referred ~ ~
~ · o~c~ to the oaragraph read from the zon-
ing book and stated he thought t~e Board had the power, but
when this Board rules, it b to take into ~ ~
co_s=deratmon all
b
t~_e excentions on Page 40 of the zoning book. ~.
~ ~ mo~l~z
replied that they could not give a special privilege. Chair-
man Aranow referred to the Josephson Case held in
S~a~e
court stating the Board shall exercise 'ud~cia~
~ ~ - : - power. In
g~°~= ~, a use otherwise
. pronnsm~ed, the Board is ~mend-
rang the ordinance and taking legislative ~ower and
power should be exercised by the City Council. -
MINUTES
BOARD OF
Parcel #1 - Lots t%8, t%9 and 150~ Arden P~k
Recorded in ~lat Book 2~ Page 96
Palm Beach County Records
Request - Relief from 15 ft. side setback
requirement
Proposed Improvement - Roof over existing slab
.Applicant - James M. Hopkins
Address - 905 N. Railroad Avenue
-~. Gordon read tn~ ~ above application and advised it was re-
quested toTM~ bumlaL~g and prov_~me shame
~a~.e uniformity of the ' '"~'~ ~ '
and shelter when working on automobiles.
Chairman Aranow acknowledged the presence of Councilman
Norman Strnad in the audience and invited him to join the
Board. Councilman Strnad declined and remained in the audi-
ence.
PA~. Hopkins stated his n~me and his address as 905 N. Railroad
Avenue. Chairman Aranow referred to an existing roof on the
south extendir.~g from the back of the building to the ~ ~
line and ask_ed when it was put over the concrete slab and
Hopkins ~for~ed him about ~s to ~ years ago. Chaimman Arauow
asked if he was the owner then and ~. Hop~ns replied: yes.
Chairman Aranow asked if he had gotten a permit from the Build-
ing Department and P~. Hopkins replied yes, it was zoned dif-
ferently and it was permitted to build to the line. I~. Boeltz
agreed this was correct as he had checked.
P~. Bailey asked how big the slab was on the west side and
. ~oi%,,~ns informed him it would be about ~0 ft. ~'~. Bailey
ask. ed if it would be attached to the existing roofa~..m~ _i~..
reuiied.
~ . .. yes. Mr. Bailey asked if a site plan ~.~4
oeen submitted and ]~,~. Howell sno~zed~ ~ h_m'i ~ one.
Chairman Aranow asked if this was grandfathered and P~. Howell
informed him just the existing_ was ~randfo~' ' ~+~e~e~..~ ~ Chairman
Aranow ~ ~' ~ ~
~s~.ea if he had the same _.~ght to build to the bui!d~ng
line ~ ~. --
~a P~. Howell informed nmm that the code now reads that
you must have ]5 ft on one side and the ~ ~ ~
· s~r~e~ side mustnave~ -~
a ~5 ft. setback. P~. Boeltz clarified that the new zoning
caused a hardship by not allowing this extension. Chairman
Aranow questioned why a 15 ft. setback was required since t~e
~m owned the property before the code went into effect and
Mr. Howell replied that he could not issue a permit to add on
to a non-conformity.
Mr. Ward asked if a new~. survey was submitted a~.~.~ M,_-~. Howell
r~-o~4 that a legal survey was submitted. Chairman Aranow
referred to the members having r~c~v~d~ ~ ~ o~a~ ~ copies of the
survey with the old ~ ' ~ .-~' ~
a~.~t!on and new autult~_on ~ot being
mamked. The differences in the Surveys were discussed and
MINUTES
BOARD OF ADJUSTmeNT
PA~ N ~.i~E
~ ~ ~ i 976
S~,PT~R 13,
Chairman Aranow questioned the exact plans. ~.Hopkins in-
formed him it would be 24 x 2I ft. and ~. Caravetta added
that he wanted to cover the existing slab. Chairman Aranow
requested that an up-to-date survey certified by an engineer
be presented. ~. Howell clarified that he meant a spot sur-
vey showing everything existing. Chairman Aranow suggested
that they table this application until two weeks from tonight
and have a survey presented~ that time.
M~~. Bailey stated it was clear in his mind and he did not
think another survey was necessary. He thinks this is ade-
quate. Zn visiting the site, there is a carport on the south
side approximately 24 ft. from the building extending south
and approximately 60 ft. ex~ending west. It covers the whole
south side of the building. Permission is being requested
to add to the western portion of 60 ft. 21 ft. more in the
same depth. Mr. ~ard agreed, but added that they do not h~ve
anything to show there is an add~mon. ~. Bailey referred
to it being sketched on the survey, which they have accepted
previously. He referred to ~. Hopkins submitting a site
plan although it was not included with the application.
Chairman ~-~ st~d they were entitled to get a survey
~howmng everything. He thinks if they ~re en~m~em to it,
they should have it. Mr. Rutter agreed and added that they
should have2it for the records. There was some further dis-
cussion whether it would, be necessary and ~. Howell informed
the Board that the Building Department would also require it.
if the Board wants to look at it first, that is fine. Since
the non-conforming ordin~uce has been passed, the Building
Department requires an up-to-date survey within six months.
He explained to ~. Hopkins that an up-to-date su~ey was
required ~ ~.
snowmng the existing addition and a drawing of what
is planned.
Mr. Rutter made a motion to obtain the proper survey showing
the existing conditions and proposed and table this until
two weeks from tonight. Mr. Gordon seconded the motion
Motion carried 7-0.
Old Business
t~. Thompson told about his church obtaining a variance about
a year ago to build an addition and at that time, it was not
clear regarding the shortage of parking spaces. ~. Howell
claim._ed that the variance was granted on the setbacks, but
it stated the parking was all right aa~iong as it was all
right with bhe Building Department. The parking spaces are
short and not in accordance with the ordinance and they need
clarification from the Board regarding their ruling. There
was further discussion and then Chairman Aranow requested
that all the papers pertaining to this application be sub-
mitted at the next meeting for the Board's consideration.
MII~YjTES
BOARD OF ADJUST~i~[T
PAGE TEN
SE~E~v~ER 13, t 976
Other Business
~. Bailey stated he would like to find out definitely that
this Board cannot rule on a use vari~uce. He knows everyone
has their own opinion and respects their opinions, but this
is the third time it has been before the Board and he has
been indecisive. He would like to find out for sure. Chair-
man AranOw referred to the Josephson Case in the State of
Florida ss~ing they cs~not make a change in an ordinance
because by doing so they are ~mending the ordinance, which
they are no~ allowed to do. Mr. Bailey referred to the Assis-
tant City Attorney's note advising that the Board could rule
on it. There was further discussion and Mr. Bailey stated he
would still like to know for sure.
Chairman Aranow then referred to ~. Nutter's application
which the Board turned down. He advised that M~. Nutter
ao~earem before the P!~uning & Zoning Board and they de-
cided they were going to make a reco~muendation to the City
Council to permit manufacturing of light furniture under C-4
instead of M-t. As far as he understands when the Board of
Adjustment makes a decision, there is no appeal to the City
Council nor Planning & Zoning Board. If they want an appeal,
they must go to the courts to review this Board's decision.
He referred to the Planning & Zoning Board having the right
to change the zoning, but in this instance it was done for
one person. They actually have overruled the Board of Ad-
justment decision. According to the case cited, the Board
of'Adjustment cannot change a use because they would be chang-
lng the ordinance which is not their province. They have the
authority to change setbacks providing the other things are
met, but they cannot amend an ordinance. The law says they
can only appeal their decision by going to the court. With
the Planning & Zoning Board changing the ordinance, he thinks
they are affecting this Board's decision. He believes the
City Attorney should attend a meeting to answer this use
question.
Mr. Howell explained how he~thought the City Attorney would
go with a court case. The State supersedes local ordinances.
Zn cases where court cases have stated certain facts, he
thinks the City Attorney will abide by them.
~. Rutter agreed that if this Board denies something and
~ne ?lanning. ~ ~ ~ &~ Zoning~ ~ Board changes the zoning, it ~s over-
~~hms Boa~a.
~. T~ompson referred to ~. I~utter applying to the Planning &
Zoning Board the night after the Board of Adjustment meeting.
He f~t af~e. this Board, his only recourse was to the courts.
To get on the agenda the following night seemed like he was
playing one Board against the other. He does not know if th:e
M±NUTES
BOARD OF ADJUST~'~NT
P~GE Ez~V~I
~ ~ ~ ~976
S~PT~.~,~R ~ 3,
City Council considered it. Chairman Aranow replied that he
did not think the City Co~£nci! approved it yet and believes
it will be on the agenda for the next meeting. He added that
he thought the P!am. ning & Zoning Board had the right to change
zoning laws under certain circumstances. He referred to the
zoning ordinance being adopted in June ~975 with public hear-
ings, etc. However, now the Planning & Zoning Board is chang-
ing the zoning governing the City of Boynton Beach within 24
hours after an application is denied by this Board. The Plan-
ning & Zoning Board is doing something even the City Council
can't do and as far as he is concerned only the courts can do.
He thinks there must be some way of making a chs~_ge.
~. Howell referred to there being certain circumstances in
the zoning book where this Board could rule. He e~piained
how he thought the courts would ask an applicant to exhaust
the City Boards before hearing the case. According to the
book, there are reasons for when this Board can grant use
variances and possibly they need guidance with this court
law of what comes before this Board and change the zoning
book.
Chairman Aranow stated he didn't think the City Attorney was
any greater an authority than the members of this Board to
decide how they should make a decision. They make a decision
according to the statute and their way of thinking. The City
Attorney is not a judge and cannot review their decision.
Their decisions are reviewed by the State court and they must
tell the Board when they are wrong. He does not like the idea
that the Planning & Zoning Board or City Council has the right
to overrule them. it seems wrong, as the State court is the
only one ~ ~ ~
~h:_c~ may review a decision. The Planning & Zoning
Board has made a decision nullifying that. ~'~. Gordon sug-
gested meeting with the Planning & Zoning Board. Chairman
Aranow continued that they must regard the merits of each
case before arriving at a decision. They are governed by
the ~ ~
statu~es and how the statutes are interpretted by the
courts. Until the Josephson decision is overruled, they are
bound by that decismon. Theftle was ~urtnere ~ discussion and
then Chairman Aranow suggested they give it further thought
and possibly come to a conclusion at the next meeting in two
weeks. He questioned asking the City .Attorney to attend to
have his opinion on the quastion of the change of use and to
also investigate the ~osephson case. He thinks they are en-
titled to guidance from him. ~. Ward agreed it would be
helpful.
Mr. Bailey moved to request the City A~to~ney to be present,
seconded by ~ir. Boe!tz. Chairmsaa Aranow clarified that the ~/~?/?~
request would be to the City Manager and ?~s. Padgett to see
that the proper letter is forwarded to the attorney. Motion
carried 7-0.
MINUTES
BO~%RD OF ADJUSTP~NT
PAGE 7~:~ELVE
$E ~'r'i~ 13,
.... ~ ~ 1 976
Adjournment
PP. Bailey made a motion to adjourn, seconded by M~. Boe!tz.
MOtion ~ i '
carr~em 7-0 and the meeting was oroperly adjourned at
8:50 P.M. ~
Res pec tfutiy submitted,
Suzanne Kruse
Recording Secretary
(Two Tapes)