Loading...
Minutes 03-25-74MINUTES OF ThY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ~E~NG B~LD AT CITY HALL, BOYNTON BE~_CH, FLORIDA, MONDAY, MARCH 25, 1974 ~.T 7:00 P.M. P~SENT Foy W~d, Chairman Jack Barrett, Bldg. Official J. Lester Cousins~ Vice Chairman - Walter B. Rutter, Secretary A1 Boeltz Simon Ryder, Alternate ABSENT Frank G. Lucas Ezell Hester, t ~ A1 erna~e Chairman Ward called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. and introduced the Members of the Board, the Building Official and the Recording Secretary. The Minutes of March 11, 1974 were read. Mr. Rutter made a motion to accept the minutes as read and it was seconded by ~. Boeltz. Motion carried 5-0. Parcel #1 - Relief from 70 ft. lot width requirement to 50 ft. lot width platted. Lots 90 and 91, Lakeside Gardens Recorded in Plat Book 8~ Page 57 Palm Beach County Records Address: Applicant: Use: 2612 Lake Drive Merlin M. & Charlotte Z. Dunn Single family residence in accordance with all City zoning requirements. ~. Rutter read the above application. He then read a letter received from M~~. & ~s. Dunn appealling to the Board with several reasons for granting this pe~itiono They also made reference to other variances granted in t~s s~eao Copies of letters were attached written at the time of purchase in 1964 in reference to building being permitted at that time. Chairman Ward announced a letter had been received from ~w. & ~rs. Dunn stating that M~s. Hood would represent them. Edith G. Nood stated her name and that she represented Coast- line Realty and also lived across the street from this prop~ erty. Mr. Boeltz questioned how many 50 ft. lots were in this s~ea. Mrs. Hood reolied that this is the last one. There is a 50 ft. lot next~door~ but he will not sell. There are four 50 ft. lots there. ~&r. Dunn's property is in the middle with this 50 ft. lot on one side and a house on a 50 ft. lot on the other side° Mr° Ryder questioned whether this application should go be- fore the Zoning Board and Mr° Barrett replied that the Zoning Board would not consider this, as 50 ft. lots are not even included in the zoning~ MIN~JTES BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PAGE ~0 ~L~RCH 25~ 1974 lv~. Rutter pointed out that Mrs. Hood's client was well aware that the ordinance was put through in 1962 and this was purchased in 1964. Many people go ahead and buy being well aware of it and just hope they can build. We are also aware that they have paid taxes in good faith. Mr. Ryder added that if we were dealing with the original owners that owned the property before the ordinance, it would be a hardship. MY own feeling is that it is not an obliga- tion of the Board to so drastically change the zoning. I think the Zoning Board is the only one that could properly change this and the whole block would have to be done. I don,t think the Board of Adjustment shoUld dO this. There are several non-conforming uses there a~eady and this would just add to it. Mr. Barrett stated the Zoning Board has nothing to do with this at all. In your duties, it is stated that any substan- dard lot should be considered by this Bosmd. This man has a single family residence lot and if you expect him to Day t~xes on it and not be able to build, it just is not ri~. If it is a platted 50 ft. lot on record, it is up to this Board to consider it. Only if an adjoining property is avail- able~ should it be considered further. This one lot was pur- chased to build a home. ~s. Hood informed the Board that she lived across the street and has a 75 ft. lot. I Pmow that in the area there are at i ~ eas~ half the homes built on 50 ft. lots. Mr. Rutter ques- tioned again whether there was additional property he could purchase and ~s. Hood replied: no and I attempted to se~l this lot to the adjoining property owners and they did not want to buy additional prooerty. Chairman~ard stated that all setbacks would have'to'be met. The only question~.~is whether he can b~uild on a 50 ft. lot. Why did he apply to the City in 19647 ~mso Hood replied that he was planning to retire then, but his plans changed. Mr. Rutter then read a letter received from Mrs. L. J. Kopf of 260] Lake Drive objecting to this application. Chairman Ward recessed the meeting while the Building Offi- cial went to get the Ordinance in reference to 50 ft. sub- standard lots on record. Mr. Barrett returned and read the Ordin~mce referring to substandard lots on record. When a lot or parcel of land does not conform, but was a lot on record ~ud recorded, such parcel.may be used for a single family dwelling in any zoning, provided it is heard by the Board of AdjUstment in each individual case. He also read another part ~ '~ r~errl.~g to replatting of these parcels if held for more than three years and adjoining land can. be acquired. ~ ± hUJ TES BO~&RD OF ADJUSTMENT PAGE TH~.EE M~RCH 25, t974 Mr. Rutter then read a letter frOm Mrs. William K. Kupferle of 2600 Lake Drive stating that she objected to the granting of a arlance for the next door n ignbor. I feel strongly V ' eo that the values would decrease ifsmaller houses were per- mitted, I trust you will see fit to de~ this request for a variance. Chairman Ward added that this letter was read at a previous meeting when ~M. Dunn was present a~ud he said he talked to N~s. Kupferle and she was in favor of it; how- ever, since then, ~ talked to her and she was opposed to it. Chairman Ward asked if N~. D~mn planned to use this property for his own use and Mrs ~Hood replied: no, it is for sale. They can't use it now. 'Mro Barrett pointed out that i~ was the Board's prerogative to tie the variance to the present owner~ however, if these people decide not to build, you will just ~ · ~ave another appeal. ~M. Rutter made a motion to grant the variance providing setback requirements are met. ~Mo Cousins seconded the motion. Motion carried 5~0~ Parcel #2 - Relief from 75 ft. lot width requirement to 50 ft. lot width platted. Relief from 7500 sq. ft. requirement to 62 o ft, Lot 2~ Block 6, Bowers Park Recorded in Plat Book 1 ~, Page 57 Palm Beach County Records Address: 234 S.E. 3rd Avenue Applicant: Richard Jo Dek~r Use~ Duplex Mr. Rutter read the above application. N~. Richard J. Dekker stated his name and his address as 21 Sahal Island Drive, Ocean Ridge. He informed the Bos~d he is interested in purchasing this. property and bu~lGing a duplex for rental. The street is all apartments and duplexes. The adjacent lot is not for sale. It does not meet the re- quirements of the new code, but did meet the old one. The woman who owns it is a widow and since her husband died, she has no way of getting here and does not plan to move here now. The sale is subject to approval of this variance, ChairmanWard questioned why he did not submit a certified survey with this application. Mr. Dekker replied that he investigated the cost of surveying and it is around $200. if ! buy it, t would have it surveyed. I was reluCtant to spend this money on a lot ~ was not sure I could buy. MINUTES BOARD OF ADJUST~.~NT PAGE FODZR i~JRCH 25 ~ 1974 ~. Barrett pointed out that R-2 Zoning does allow a single family residence on a 50 ft. lo~, but this request is for a duplex. ~. Dekker replied that the street was all duplexes with several large ~partments. It would not be donducive for one single family home in the area along the railroad. Chairman Ward pointed out that there must be a hardship in- volved. Where a hardship is created by the applicant's own acts, it is not considered a hardship. M~. Cousins questioned whether someone would buy it for a single family residence and Mr. Dekker replied that he would be reluctant to buy it with it being surrounded by apartments and next to the railroad. M~. Ryder stated that the Board had a.s'mmzls~' ~ case and only allowed a single family residence and he felt the same now° Mr. Dekker agreed, but with all these larger apartments around it, it just would not be ad- visable ~ . ~. Bs~rett pointed out that in the old R-2 Zoning, it allowed 8 units and this is why the ~partments are in the area. Chairman Ward ascertaznem' ~ that there wasn't anybody present in favor to this application nor i~objection to this aopli- cation. - Mr. Ryder made a motion that the petition be denied and it was seconded by ~'.~. Boeltz. Motion carried 4-~, -~ ' ~ with ~. Cousins voting against. ~. Rutter read a letter addressed to Foy Ws~d from the City Manager in reference to Ezell Hester objecting to the minutes listing hi~ as absent. ~o Hester believes that an alternate must be called to attend a meeting in the absence of a regu- lar member' He also disagrees with certain minutes ~ ' · · pertaining to notice of his absences. ~. Rutter then read Mr. Ward's reply to ~ir. Eohl. He assured him this could be cleared up if M~. Hester attended a meeting. Prior to this year, it stated that a member missing three meetings would be replaced and this would apply as well to the alternates. I am sure this would be the guideline for this year. I saw M~. Hester prior to the organizational meet- ing and he stated he would not attend, in the past, I hs~e reEarded M~. Hester as a good Board Member and since he was Chairman, i am sure he is aware that meetings could not have been held if alternates were not present. Most alternates s~e present and listen in. Chairman ~'"~ ~ ~r~ read the February 25 Minutes where it stated M~. Lucas asked that another member be appointed to the Board. The request was for one more alternate and that the City Co~cil had been notified of ~. Hester's three absences. MiNU~$ BO~RD OF ~&DJ~JSTMENT PAGE FIV. E ~L~CH 25~ 1974 Mr. Cousins made a motion that in reference to the Minutes of February 25, that the entire conversation Chairman Ward mentioned in reference to Mr. Hester be deleted, since he objected to it. Also, a copy of these minutes are to be sent to Mro Frank Kohl, City Manager. Mr. Rutter seconded the motion~ ~der discuss~on~ M~. Barrett said he thought the ruling was if you missed three meetings in a row~ you would be replaced and the Board must request a replacement recommendation from the City Co~cil. ~ R~der referred to Chairman ~ard's reply about ml'ternates sitting in and asked why they couldn't take part in the deliberations and not vote. This w~ it makes it sass for an alternate to stay ~way. I always check the site and ~oning. Chairman Ward r~plied that he didn't think anything was inferred that an alternate should not attend a meeting. ~. Barrett suggested that they check the Roberts Rules of Order which states an a~ernate cannot take oarto ~iotlon c~ried 4-0, with Chairman ~ard not~ voting. ~¢r. Rutter made a motion that the City Council be notified of ~. Hester's absences and a reco~mendation be made for a replacement. ~m. Cousins seconded the motion. Under dis- cussion, Mr. Ryder stated that he did not think the Council was s3~;are of this vacancy. ~¢r. Barrett stated that the Cou~cilmembers get a copy of all the Boards' meetings. I would like to suggest that the Chairman write a letter or memo to the City Manager requesting that this be placed on the Council's agenda. Motion carried 5-0. ~@. Ryder made a motion to adjourn and it was seconded by Mr. Cousins. Meeting properly adjourned at 7:45