Loading...
Minutes 02-11-74 MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF ADJUST~V~NT MEmTI~G HELD AT CITY HALL, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORiDa&, MONDAY, FEBRUARY II, 1974 A.T 5:00 P.M. PRESENT Foy Ward, Chairman Jack Barrett, Bldg. Official J. Lester Cousins, Vice Chairman Frank G. Lucas A1 Boeltz Simon Ryder ABSENT Walter B. Rutter, Secretary Ezell Hester Chairman Ward called the meeting to order at 5:00 P.M. and introduced the Members of the Board. The Minutes of January 28, ~974 were read. Mr. Cousins made a motion to approve the minutes as read and it was seconded by Mr. Lucas. Motion carried 5-0. Parcel #1 - Lots 90 & 91 Lakeside Gardens Recorded in Plat Book 8, Page 57 Palm Beach County Records Relief from ~5' frontage requirement to 50' front Address: 2612 Lake Drive Applicant: Merlin M. & Charlotte Dunn Mr. Cousins read the above application stating it was re- quested since the property was purchased in May, 1964 prior to the zoning ordinance and the unavailability to purchase adjacent lots. Mr. Cousins read a letter from ~.~. Dunn stat- ing that M~s. Edythe G. Hood of Coast Line Realty had his authority to appear in his behalf. Mrs. Hood stated she was present, but that Mr. and Mrs. Dunn had arrived from out of town in time for the meeting. Mr. Merlin D~n stated his name and his address as 3201N. 52nd Street, Milwaukee, WiSconsin. He informed the Board that at the time he purchased the property, he tried to find out if it me~ with the city's requirements for building a residence· have a letter date~ May 6, 1964, from your Building Department stating that abuilding permit could be issued- This was changed after we p~chased it. We have talked to the adjacent owners and neither will sell any addi- tional property. The property to the South is placed close to the northern line and they could not sell, as they do not have additional ground and the same is true for the lot to the North. MINUTES PAGE TWO BOARD OF ADJUSTmeNT ~ET!NG FEBRUARY 11, 1974 Mr. Ryder questioned the date the ordinance was passed and Mr. Barrett verified it was passed in 1962. Mr. Ryder stated that then this property was purchased after the Ordinance was passed. M~. Dunn referred to the letter he received which led him to believe the ordinance was not in effect. The real estate broker did not inform us at the time we bought it that it was not in compliance. You are probably right, but I could not determine it. ~. Ryder asked about the lots north of the property. M~. Dunn replied they had just been sold and were granted a variance. Mr. Ward agreed that some var- iances had been granted in that area. Mrs. HOod informed the Board she had checked with City Hall and the variance was granted on March 15, 1971 for that particUlar property. Mr. Dunn continued that they had talked to the property own- ers to the South and apparently since they have known us, they seem glad we plan to build. ~hen they received the notice, they were going to make some objection if we planned to sell it. ~e will comply with the setback requirements. Chairman Ward asked if anyone was present in favor to this application. ~. Herold DeWhite stated his name and that he owned property across the street and had no objection. Mrs. Hood stated her name and that she owned property across the street and was not opposed. Chairman ~ard stated that a letter from ~. E. Mupferle had been received stating objection to this application. Mr. Cousins read the letter stating that as next door neighbors to the lots in question, I would like to lodge ~v complaint against any changes in the zoning. Z feel the zoning was set for a specific purpose° Z am sorry for the owners, since I think they were not aware of this when they purchased this. I do object to this. ~. Dunn stated that within the past 1½ hours he had talked to Mrs. Kupferle and she said just the opposite. She said they thought of objecting, but had changed their minds. Chairman Ward replied they had no rea- son to doubt M~. Dunn, but must consider the letter° Mr. Lucas questioned the building plans and ~. D~n explained further about the house he planned to build, stating that all setbac~ would be met. Chairman Ward ascertained that nobody was present to object to the apolication. Ee then questioned the Z~ning pertain- ing to 50~ lots. N~. Barrett stated that any substandard lot on record must be reviewed by the Board of Adjustment. Mr. Lucas read Section 12 pertaining to substandard lots. MINUTES 'BOARD OF ADJUST~NT MEETING PAGE THREE ~ V ~EBRU.~Mz 11, 1974 Mr. Cousins made a motion to approve the variance and it was seconded by Mr. Lucas. The vote was 3-2 with Me. Ryder and Mr. Boeltz voting against; therefore, the request was denied. M~. Dunn asked if the vote would be changed if the o~e letter of opposition was removed. Mr. Ryder replied that it had some weight, but we see defending the purpose of the zoning. Dunn reolied that then there wasn't anything he could do with that lo~. Chairman Ward pointed out there were many 50' lots on record and they were on record when the ordinance was changed. Mr. Barrett referred to the ordinance where it stated a single family residence could be built. My personal opinion is that this man can only hold the lot and pay taxes on it and I think if it was taken to court, he would win it. Mr. Lucas pointed out that it also must be considered that the land was purchased in 1964. In cases like this, the Board representing the City of Boynton Beach must take into consideration this man has been paying taxes since 1964 and I assume he is plan- ning a presentable building there. In 9 years, he has shown his faith in paying the taxes on the property. Mr. Ryder stated that it was possible also that he had not been able to unload the property in that time. Chairman Ward replied that possibly he didn't want to and ¥~. Dunn stated that he had not tried to. Me. Ryder questioned how the Board felt about the opposition. Mr. Lucas stated they could not take the verbal part into consideration, but this was the only letter in opposition. Mr Dunn stated that he was de~!n=tely certain that Mrs Kupferl~ would w' ~ . · ~th~raw it I talked to ~s. Kupferle and she approved us building, but not someone else. Chairman Ward stated the decision stood that the vari- ance had been denied. Mr. Dunn asked about reapplying and ~. Lucas informed him he must go to the City Clerk. The people will be informed again in the event there is another hearing. Parcel #2 - Lot 22, Block 11 Central Park Annex Recorded in Plat Book 12, Page 51 Palm Beach CoUnty Records Relief from 10' front setback requirement to non-conforming existing O' setback A~dress: 141S. E. 15th Avenue Applicant: Julian E. Patrick Mr. Cousins read the above application stating the request was made for the purpose of constructing additional space to the rear of the existing building. The additional front ~etback was taken for a road right-of-way° MINUTES BOARD OF ADJUSTmeNT ~ETING PAGE FOUR FEBRUARY 11, 1 974 Mr. Julian Patrick stated his name and his d ~ ~ a dress as 432 N.M. 2nd Avenue, Boynton Beach. He informed the Board he wished to build, as per the plans presented, an additional warehouse storage space to the rear. The nonconformance is already there. I just want to-make additional space in the rear. When these buildings were built, they apparently had the prooer setback; but with the widening of the road, they do not'have a setback now. I did not own the building when the road was widened. }-~. Cousins verified that with the zoning, whenever you have b ' a non-conforming uild!ng, you must come before this Board to do anything further. ~M. Barrett pointed out that whether this was approved or not, the O' setback is existing. I am sure S. E. 15th Avenue witl be widened further. With the widening of the road and:~:ta~ng some of the front, I believe he will need this space in the back. Mr. Ryder pointed out that most cities state if a building is in a road, you can- not improve or add to the property in any way and this is the case here. I want to know if the owner can claim damages later. Fm. Barrett pointed out that the only thing he was c~ming before the Board of Adjustmen.2 is because it is a non- conforming building. Chairman Ward pointed out that whatever the Board did does not affect the front. I will make a copy of this letter. Mr. Cousins read a letter from ~M. Charles I. Owens stating he opposed the O' setback due to exposure to his property. Mr. Lucas checked the list to see if this man was included on it. ~. Cousins found his name on the list and his ad- dress listed as 818 West Main Street, Forest City, North Carolina. .Mr. Barrett stated that Mr. Patrick owned Lot 22 and t,~. Owens owned Lots 14-19. Mr. Patrick replied that he didn't belive it was contiguous with his property. Mm, Cousins clarified that once this building had the re- quired setback and then the county took it for a right-of- way. Mr. Barrett stated he believed there was payment made to the owner at the time of taking. ~M. Lucas pointed out if they decided to widen the road f ~ ur~her, they may take part of the building off. Mr. Barrett stated he believed they were going to widen the road. Mr. Cousins ~ m~me a motion to approve the request and it was seconded by ~. Lucas. Motion carried 5-0. MINUTES BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ~ETING PAGE FIVE FEBRUARY 11, t 974 Mr. Cousins read a letter from Rossi & Malavasi Engineers, Inc. it referred to the Leisureville setback of Lots 16, 17, and 18 and enclosed a copy of a drawing, which had been revised to show the 4' pavement requirements as requested at the Board of Adjustment meeting. We have requested pro- posals from contractors to make these adjustments and will contact you upon completion of work. Thank you for your consideration and approval. Signed: Enrico Rossi. 9. Cousins and Mr. Ryder checked the plans for Leisureville. M~. Ryder questioned whether the road had been moved and ~. Barrett replied: No, the center line is the middle of the right-of-way. It depends on how much is platted. ~. Lucas m~de a motion to adjourn the meeting and it was seconded by Mr. Cousins. Motion carried 5-0 and the meeting was adjourned at 5:45 P.M.