Loading...
Minutes 03-19-98 MINUTES OF THE BUILDING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT & APPEALS MEETING HELD IN COMMISSION CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA ON THURSDAY, MARCH 19, 1998 AT 6:30 P.M. PRESENT Barry Goldman, Chairman Don Johnson, Deputy Director of A. Malek Abdallah Development Richard Kurtz Melvin Sternbach Milton Russell Michael Bessell Robert Mulroy, Alternate ABSENT Robert Zimmerman A. CALL TO ORDER – Barry Goldman, Chairman Chairman Goldman called the meeting to order at 6:32 p.m. B. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF MEMBERS AND VISITORS The recording secretary called the roll. All members were present with the exception of Mr. Zimmerman. C. APPROVAL OF AGENDA & MINUTES (Minutes of 2/19/98 Meeting) Mr. Russell moved to approve the minutes of the February 19, 1998 meeting. Mr. Kurtz seconded the motion that carried 6-0. (Mr. Mulroy did not vote since he was not present at that meeting.) Mr. Kurtz moved to approve the agenda as presented. Mr. Russell seconded the motion that carried unanimously. D. OLD BUSINESS: None E. NEW BUSINESS: Attorney Pawleczyk administered the oath to all who would be testifying during these proceedings. Applicant: Richard Johnson, Greenberg Farrow th Reference: 1520 SW 8 Street Explanation: Relief from Table 600, Standard Building Code, 1994 Edition, which does not allow any openingss 0’ – 3’ from a property line 1 MEETING MINUTES BUILDING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT & APPEALS BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MARCH 19, 1998 Don Johnson, Deputy Building Official, advised that the purpose of this meeting was to address the applicant’s request for relief from Table 600 of the Standard Building Code. This table deals with fire ratings and separation from the property lines. The Standard Building Code does not allow any openings within 0 feet to 3 feet of the property line. Richard Johnson, Architect for The Home Depot Expo Center, explained that The Home Depot is buying the majority of the property from the Morton group. However, Morton is retaining a portion of the property to the south for a future retail building. Because the property is being subdivided into two separate properties, there is a property line that separates the two buildings. Because of that property line, The Home Depot Expo Center will be on a zero-lot line. Table 600 does not allow for any openings in that wall. Mr. Richard Johnson said the reason for not allowing any openings is to avoid having someone exit onto a piece of property that is under the control of another property owner. The Home Depot and Morton Group will provide a “no build easement” adjacent to the exit to the east. This will ensure a clear path of movement from the exit and away from the buildings. The Home Depot and the Morton group will sign this “no build easement”, and it will be recorded in the County. In addition, The Home Depot will provide a series of steel bollards to protect this pathway to prevent parking of vehicles in the area. The Home Depot will control this area. By doing this, The Home Depot feels it meets the spirit of the Code. Although Mr. Richard Johnson was of the opinion that Table 600 does not allow openings because there would be infringement on another property owner’s property, Chairman Goldman felt the reason the Code does not allow this relates to fire and public safety. If an unrated wall is built and there is a fire, that fire could impinge on someone else. Mr. Don Johnson agreed with Chairman Goldman’s opinion and added that an additional reason is to protect the building. Mr. Johnson pointed out that there is no adjacent building planned at the present time. However, a truck dock could be built. This could lead to a situation where a truck making a delivery could become involved in a fire that might erupt in the building. Since the Code cannot control such a situation, it prohibits openings. Mr. Richard Johnson pointed out that if The Home Depot purchased the entire parcel of property, he would not be seeking relief since there would not be a zero-lot line wall involved. Mr. Bessell questioned the need for the passageway. Mr. Richard Johnson advised that it is not impossible for The Home Depot to change the design to exit the building from the rear. However, he pointed out that this is a prototype building and he would have to rearrange some of the spaces in the building to accommodate such a change. The retailer would prefer not to make those changes. He feels this layout is the most efficient use of the space. Mr. Kurtz referred to Table 600 and pointed out that this Code refers to fire resistance ratings. He feels this is a fire issue. Chairman Goldman also believes this is an issue of public safety. Other applicants appear before the board seeking relief, but their requests are usually not public safety related issues. This is a public safety issue and not something that cannot be achieved by doing it in another 2 MEETING MINUTES BUILDING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT & APPEALS BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MARCH 19, 1998 way. It would be a burden on the City to grant this relief because there are other options that can easily be achieved. He does not feel it would be proper to grant this relief. Mr. Richard Johnson insisted that if there were not an imaginary property line that only appears on a drawing, it would not be necessary to seek this relief. He does not feel this is a public safety issue. Chairman Goldman explained that the property line does exist because it is part of our building and zoning records. Mr. Bessell does not feel it is necessary to grant this relief since this building has not yet been built and there is no hardship created by anyone except those who want to build the building. Mr. Abdallah questioned whether the opening could be placed on the east rather than the south side of the building in order to avoid the zero-lot line entirely. Mr. Richard Johnson responded affirmatively but explained that it would require redesign of the building. Chairman Goldman reiterated that the building, as presented by Mr. Richard Johnson, would violate the Code because the opening is not permitted. Mr. Richard Johnson disagreed and stated that the purpose of Table 600 is to state what the fire rating should be. In addition, it states the number of openings that can be included in the wall. That is a function of the fire rating of the wall. Chairman Goldman explained that 10 or 20 years from now, when things have changed with respect to who owns the building, what will prevent a building from being built in this small space? Attorney Pawelczyk explained that the applicant is requesting that a condition be imposed for a “no build easement” on this section of the property. It would be recorded in the public records and no one could build a structure on that section. If the board feels that condition is necessary to grant this approval, Attorney Pawelczyk requested that a statement be included in the body of the “no build easement” that the easement document cannot be altered or amended without the consent of the City of Boynton Beach and the Building Official. In addition, the document would have to be approved by the City Attorney’s Office. In response to Mr. Richard Johnson, Mr. Don Johnson advised that by providing the “no build easement”, the applicant is doing the same thing as moving back the wall. In Chairman Goldman’s opinion, it is an inconvenience for the designer to layout this structure differently and, therefore, he is asking the board to negate the Code. Since the building is not built at this point, there is no hardship involved in redesigning it. Mr. Mulroy pointed out that it is possible the Morton group will want to develop the parcel located next to The Home Depot all the way back. He questioned whether Mr. Johnson has had dealings with Mr. Morton in the past. Mr. Johnson explained that the Morton group cannot build in the “no build easement”. The “no build easement” does not allow that and they cannot encumber anything in that area. 3 MEETING MINUTES BUILDING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT & APPEALS BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MARCH 19, 1998 In response to Attorney Pawelczyk, Mr. Johnson explained that the easement would encumber Morton's property. He has agreed to the “no build easement”. Attorney Pawelczyk advised that the City would have to see that agreement in writing from Mr. Morton. Mr. Mulroy asked if the agreement would still be legally binding if one of the parties backed out of the agreement. Attorney Pawelczyk explained that it would be legally binding once it is recorded. That easement would sit on the property until the City of Boynton Beach allows it to be changed. Both parties would have to supply a “no build easement” to the City Attorney’s Office subject to the conditions of this board. It would have to be recorded before the variance is approved. If the board is moving toward approval of this request, Attorney Pawelczyk suggested that the City Attorney’s Office approve the form of the easement. Whoever controls the property over the easement must sign and provide a letter to the City acknowledging acceptance of such a proposal by the Expo Center as well as requiring that the document be recorded. Motion Mr. Abdallah moved to approve the request of the applicant provided that a “no build easement” be provided for the permit file prior to issuance of permit #98-603. Mr. Mulroy seconded the motion. Mr. Don Johnson advised that the plans are in review. He requested that the motion include a provision that the easement agreement is to be prepared, executed, and recorded in Palm Beach County, and a copy provided for the permit file prior to issuance of the permit #98-603. Mr. Bessell does not support this request. Mr. Mulroy confirmed that once both parties sign the “no build easement”, no building could be put in this area. Mr. Kurtz agreed that this statement was true but pointed out that courts have thrown out certain legal agreements in the past. Attorney Pawelczyk explained that only the City of Boynton Beach could vacate the easement. Mr. Russell was of the opinion that the “no build easement” meant the wall would no longer fall under the jurisdiction of Table 600. Mr. Don Johnson advised that the wall would remain under the jurisdiction of Table 600 for a one-hour wall. However, it would allow the applicant to have up to 10% openings. A roll call vote was polled. The motion failed 3-4. (Chairman Goldman, and Messrs. Kurtz, Sternbach, and Bessel dissented.) In Chairman Goldman’s opinion, this is an issue of building redesign. Mr. Bessell agreed that the applicant could make the building smaller and keep the opening in the same location. 4 MEETING MINUTES BUILDING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT & APPEALS BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MARCH 19, 1998 Mr. Abdallah felt the easement would mean the property line no longer exists. Mr. Don Johnson disagreed and explained that the property line remains in place. However, a “no build easement” is being created. Attorney Pawelczyk reiterated that the easement goes with the land and remains with the land until the City of Boynton Beach vacates it. It does not matter who owns the property. Motion Mr. Bessell moved to deny this request. Mr. Sternbach seconded the motion. The recording secretary polled the vote. The vote carried 4-3. (Messrs. Abdallah, Russell, and Mulroy dissented.) F. ANNOUNCEMENTS: Mr. Don Johnson reminded the members of the Building Board of Adjustment & Appeals meeting to be held on Thursday, March 26, 1998 at 6:30 p.m. in the West Wing Conference Room “C”. G. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the board, the meeting properly adjourned at 7:12 p.m. Janet M. Prainito Deputy City Clerk (One Tape) jmp 10/3/08 4:43 PM j:\shrdata\cc\wp\minutes\bbaa\021998.doc 5