Loading...
Minutes 01-28-19 MINUTES OF THE BUILDING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS MEETING HELD ON JANUARY AT 2 MONDAY, r .r INTRACOASTAL PARK CLUB HOUSE, 2240 N. FEDERAL HIGHWAY BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA Sanford Guritzky, Chair Shane KittendorF, Building Official Andrew Podray John Kuntzman, Deputy Building Official Paul Bortz Sean Swartz, Assistant City Attorney Timothy Hunt Daniel Berger Roberta Mann A. CALL TO ORDER Sanford Guritzky, Chair, called the meeting to order at 2:01 p.m. Attendance was taken with the above members noted as present. Minutes of the November 5, 2018 Meeting Motion Mr. Podray moved to approve the minutes. Mr. Bortz seconded the motion that unanimously passed. CHAIRPERSONB. C. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF MEMBERS AND VISITORS D. NEW BUSINESS Applicant: Jermaine Frazier Reference: 1641 N.W. 1st Court, Boynton Beach, FL Explanation: Applicant is appealing a demolition order issued as allowed by Section 116.4, inclusive, of the City of Boynton Beach Administrative Amendments to the 6t" Edition of the 2017 Florida Building Code. The applicant is requesting a stay of the demolition order and Meeting Minutes Building oar of Adjustments and Appeals Boynton Beach, Florida January , 2019 additional time to conduct the work stipulated by the Notice of Unsafe Building dated 0510112018. Shane Kittendorf, Chief Building Official, reviewed the background summary as contained in the meeting materials. This item is about an unsafe structure due to a fire that occurred on December 22, 2009. The structure was posted as unsafe. The follow up a few years later after a site visit occurred in 2017. The property was posted again and cited to move through the demolition process. The owner was given 10 days to comply. The property was again posted on May 1, 2018. Notices were sent and the owner requested a time extension on May 24, 2018. The contractor applied for permits on May 31, 2018. Staff reviewed the plans in one day and returned to the contractor with comments. The contractor returned the plans 94 business days later, which staff reviewed again within four business days. The owner was notified to appear before the Board on November 2, 2018. On November 19, 2018, the owner submitted an application for appeal to the Building Official's Demolition Order. On January 10, 2019, the contractor submitted corrected plans for review 58 days after the appeal of the Demolition Order. The plan review was performed on January 11, 2019 in one business day. On January 15, 2019, the Deputy Building Official requested the Designer of Record discuss the panel schedule comments and the next day, the contractor declined the deferred submittal option and referred to the fee for the revision of the comments to the contractor to address all items. Currently, the plans have been approved and are ready to be issued. The fees are pending along with the asbestos report. The owner has taken steps in the last few months to get permit in place and staff can move this forward to a permit status. Mr. Kittendorf noted the plans progressed from 2017 to 2019 with minimal action. At this point, the owner is at the point of permit and he would request a time extension based on his finding. Based on the Board's direction regarding the last unsafe structure the Board ruled one, he felt since the permit is ready to go, it would be appropriate to grant an extension in lieu of moving forward with demolition of the property. Chair Guritsky asked how much time was recommended and learned since the permits are approved, based on six-month permit, they have 180 days to perform an action. When an action takes place and there is an approved inspection, it rolls the permit forward. Mr. Kittendorf recommended giving them two weeks to complete last few transactions to get the permit issued. The Minutes Specialist administered an oath to all those intending to testify. Jermain Fraizer, the property owner, agreed with the time line to pay the fees. He summarized he received the property from his aunt in 2017 and since then, he and his father have been trying to maintain and comply. They made sure the property could not be accessed and had secured the structure. The Neighborhood can be rough at times and there are individuals in the neighborhood who will remove the windows and gain Meeting Minutes Building Board of Adjustments and Appeals Boynton Beach, Florida January 28, 2019 access to the property to seek shelter or other activities. Anything they do, they have to do that day and take the materials offsite with them and then move forward. It is not they do not want to comply, it is just an uphill battle. Mr. Frazier explained he is a building contractor. He is aware of the laws and code he must adhere to and he is also a father of five. When the building is restored it takes time and money. Mr. Hunt asked if Mr. Frazier did not have an issue with what building staff recommended of having two weeks to pay for the permit. Mr. Frazier understood the permit fee is under $400, which could be paid within two weeks. Mr. Frazier explained he is a general contractor, he has his subcontractors in line, and they have a tentative schedule to ensure all takes place in accordance with the contract. He commented they have to fit into the subcontractor's queue regarding the existing plans and the timeline they submitted was from three to six months ago. Each subcontract has their own schedule Mr. Frazier will have to fit into in order to adhere to the timeline. It will be off to some extent, but they do have a plan in place to issue the work order. Chair Guritzky asked if Mr. Frazier was ready to start atter the permit was finalized and learned he was. He thought it will be a slower build and estimated it would take about a year. From a monetary and contractual standpoint, they have to have the subcontractors in line to start work, remove materials at the same time, come back the next day, and do the same thing. He thought it would be a challenge and a little more time would be required. Motion Mr. Hunt moved to approve the extension for two weeks. Chair Guritzky asked if the City has a problem with him taking a year to complete the project. Mr. Kittendorf explained since staff has seen a proactive approach to get the permit in place, the goal is to get the permit and they have 180 days through the progress of inspections and each inspection will extend the time for an additional 90 days. As the homeowner continues to progress through the course of construction, they will communicate with the subcontractors on the job and should not have an issue continuing to move the project forward. Each time an inspection occurs, it extends the project an additional 90 days. A suggestion was made to include the 12 months. Discussion followed the motion is only to approve a two week period to get the permit issued and to say the project had to be completed in 12 months was unrealistic. When the permit is issued, he has 180 calendar days for each permit to pass inspection. Mr. Hunt thought a plumbing permit may have three inspections and technically, the project could extend to a year and a half. 3 Meeting "mutes Building Board of Adjustments and Appeals Boynton Beach, I ri 1 Mr, Podray asked about the stay of demolition and thought it should be included in the motion, but it was pointed out the building official is asking for an extension of two weeks to see if the permit is paid for and to supply needed documents. Further discussion followed the two weeks would stay the demolition. If stayed, the usual process the Board followed based on the prior Board determination gave 11 months to the prior contractor to bring his property into compliance and if not, he would have to appear before the Board to determine where he was and the Board would make a decision. The staff recommendation was to grant a stay of two weeks to get the permit going. The Board would determine if any further action would be needed if the permit expired at any time. Chair Guritzky asked if nothing progressed within the 180 days if the City could move to demolish. Mr. Podray thought there could be extenuating circumstances. Motion Mr. Podray suggested a motion to approve a stay of demolition for the next weeks until all open invoices are satisfied with the Building Department and then it will immediately trigger, provided the first requirement was satisfied, a second stay of demolition that will last the first six months. Provided the contractor is making progress on the different permit items, it will continue through the permitting process. As long as the stay is given for the first 6 months, the owner can sleep well knowing they have time to rehab the building and as long as they make adequate progress, it will continue every 90 days at the Building Official's discretion. Mr. Bortz seconded the motion that unanimously passed. Mr. KittendorF gave an update on the case the Board heard at the last meeting regarding 3150 Orange Street. The contractor submitted plans on December 18, 2018. All reviews were complete as of December 26, 2018 and staff has yet to receive any plans back at this time. It was noted the first plan review was denied. E. ANNOUNCEMENTS F. ADJOURNMENT Chair Guritzky moved to adjourn. The motion was duly seconded and unanimously passed. The meeting was adjourned at 2:14 p.m. Minutes Specialist Catherine Cherry