Loading...
Minutes 10-18-93 HINUTES OF THE BOARD OF AD,)USTI4ENT #EETING HELl) IN COHI4ISSION CHAHBERS, CITY HALL, BOYNTOH BEACH, FLORIDA, OH HONDAY, OCTOBER 18, 1993 AT 7:00 PRESENT Ben Uleck, Vice Chairman Thomas Cordie Barkley Garnsey Henrietta Solomon Nello Tineri (arrived late) James Miriana, Alternate ABSENT Vernon Thompson, Chairman (excused) Raychel Houston, Secretary Irving Sechter, Alternate James Cherof, City Attorney Mike Haag, Zoning & Site Devel. Administrator ACKNONLEDGENENT OF NE#BERS AND VISITORS Vice Chairman Uleck called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. He announced that the Board would be hearing two cases this evening. Attorney Cherof advised that Case #186 should be tabled this evening since the applicant must make an amend- ment to his application. It will appear on next month's agenda. #otton Mr. Garnsey moved to table Case #186 until the next meeting. Mr. Cordie seconded the motion which carried unanimously. The Recording Secretary called the roll. Vice Chairman Uleck stated that although three members were absent, a quorum existed and the meeting would continue. Ms. Solomon said she felt a letter should be sent to all members advising them of their commitment to serve on this Board. Most of the absentees did not call the City Clerk's Office to advise of their absence. She feels action is neces- sary. Mr. Miriana agreed with Ms. Solomon's remarks. Vice Chairman Uleck reiterated the Board's policy regarding contacting the City Clerk's Office or another Board-member if attendance at a meeting is not possible. Vice Chairman Uleck announced that he would be chairing the meeting this evening. APPROVAL OF NINUTES Mr. Miriana noted the confusion which existed during last month's meeting when the Board voted on one of the cases. He explained that the Board members are often confused by the wording of the motion and vote opposite of how they actually wish to vote. He requested that the Chairperson clarify the motion before the vote is polled. Attorney Cherof advised that Robert's Rules suggests that the motions be in the affirmative as opposed to the negative. Even if the member wishes to deny the HINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUST#ENT NEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA OCTOBER 18, 1993 variance, the motion should be made to approve the variance and then it can be defeated. When the motion to approve is defeated, the variance is denied; how- ever, the members will always understand that a yes vote is for approval and a no vote is for denial. Mr. Tineri arrived for the meeting. Hotlon Ms. Solomon moved to approve the minutes. Mr. Cordie seconded the motion which carried unanimously. AGENDA APPROVAL The agenda was accepted as presented. CONTINUED PETITIONS None NEW PETITIONS Case #185 201 East Boynton Beach Boulevard Property Owner/Agent: Kenneth Zengage, Agent for Forward Progress, Inc. Request: Applicant requests to reduce the ten (10) feet required front setback to zero (0) feet and reduce the ten (10) feet required side setback to two (2) feet in connection with the installation of a free- standing sign for a car wash business. This case was tabled earlier in the meeting. Case #187 1 Virginia Garden Property Owner: Robert Fay Request: The applicant is requesting to reduce the twenty- five (25) feet required front setback to nineteen (19) feet and reduce the ten (10) feet required side setback to one point five (1.5) feet for the purpose of adding a detached garage to a single- family residence tot. Mr. Miriana read. the request and the Statement of Special Conditions, Hardships or Reasons Justifying the Variance. Mr. Miriana explained that this property is zoned R-1AA. The Building Depart- ment denied issuance of a building permit because the request did not meet the Code requirements with regard to setbacks. -2- HINUTE$ - BOARD OF ADJUSTt4ENT HEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA OCTOBER 18, 1993 Robert F~ said he is requesting this variance in order to build a garage to provide parking for his vehicle and storage for his lawn maintenance equipment. He is currently using a portable-type aluminum shed. Some of his equipment is also stored outside the shed. Mr. Fay lives on a cul-de-sac road with two other residences. Those property owners support Mr. Fay's request because they feel the addition of this garage will increase their property values. Mr. Fay explained that a 15' D.O.T. easement exists on the east side of his propperty. This easement is for a 36" storm drain pipe which empties into the canal. Although he is requesting a setback variance from 10' to 1.5', only the closest point would be 1.5' from his property line. There would be 15' for the D.O.T. easement, and then the neighbor's setback. He explained that the closest point of approach would be 23' to his neighbor. Mr. Fay owns the road/driveway which is an easement for the benefit of his neighbors. Going toward Colonial Club, there is a 63' easement, There are tree li:nes separating the property. Again, his neighbors support his request and he has had no comments from the residents of Colonial Club. The garage, if approved, would be built to match the house. He purchased the house eight years ago and has invested $120,000 since that time. He has no place to park his car and his equipment is exposed to weather. At the present time, the conditions are aesthetically unappealing to his neighbors who have also invested a great deal of money in their property. In response to Vice Chairman Uleck's question, Mr. Fay said the dimensions of the garage from north to south will be 28', and from east to west will be 20'. Mr. Fay said that only his property is part of the City at the present time. It is anticipated that his two neighbors to the east will be annexed into the City in the early part of 1994. The other two homes on the street are single-family residences. He has one and one-half lots. The half lot has nothing built on it. He circulated photos of the property. He clarified that if the garage is built, there would be 22' at the closet point to the adjacent property. Because this property is on a diagonal, the 1.5' is the closest point of the southerly part of the proposed garage. The northern part of the garage would be 15' from the 15' easement. There is also an additional 15' on the opposite side of the easement. The tree line between the homes would not be disturbed. Mr. Miriana pointed out that the shed is a Code violation because it is on the property line. Mr. Fay explained that it was in place when he purchased the house. Mr. Miriana confirmed that the road is an easement and wondered how far back from the easement the garage is proposed. Mr. Fay explained that he owns the road but cannot build anything on it because it provides ingress/egress for his neighbors. Mr. Haag clarified that the setback is measured perpendicular from the property line. The front of the property is on the north side of the road easement. Attorney Cherof advised that Mr. Fay does not technically have a road; he has an easement. -3- HINUTE$ - BOARD OF ADJUSTHENT HEETING BOYNTOH BEACH, FLORIDA OCTOBER 18, 1993 Mr. Miriana noted that there is nothing on the west side between the house and the proposed construction. Mr. Fay said there is a 4' wing wall which hides the garbage cans. He wishes to place the garage where shown to allow for a gate which will permit a vehicle through and provide the required 12' separation between the house and the detached structure. Mr. Miriana had a problem understanding why Mr. Fay wishes to locate the garage so far from the house, and projecting out front, close to the east easement. Mr. Fay said he cannot move it back because of the D.O.T. easement. Also, because the property line is diagonal, if the garage is moved back, it will be closer than the required 12'. Mr. Haag confirmed that if the garage is detached, it must be 12' away from the house. Mr. Miriana suggested attaching the garage to the house. This will result in clearance from the easement. Mr. Fay said he is on a septic field and will not be able to service the field with a truck. A wide gate is required to permit the vehicle to enter the area. Further, attaching the garage to the house would not be aesthetically appealing. Mr. Miriana stated the majority of homes are built with attached garages. Mr. Fay said he is restricted by the diagonal D.O.T. easement lines and the Code requirement of 12' between structures. In response to a question from Mr. Garnsey, Mr. Fay said his neighbors to the east support his request, along with his neighbors on both sides of the canal. The neighbors using the road easement also support his request. Mr. Fay advised that written approvals from the neighbors are contained in the members' packets. Mr. Miriana inquired as to the location of the septic field. Mr. Fay explained that it is in the southeastern corner of the property. Mr. Miriana felt that attaching the garage to the house would not affect that septic field. Mr. Fay explained that when it needs servicing, the truck will not be able to get to it. If the garage is attached to the house, the windows in the living room would have to be eliminated. Mr. Miriana stated Mr. Fay is attempting to build on the property line, and if this is allowed, others in the area will want to do the same thing. Mr. Fay said he is not attempting to build on the property line. Further, he has a 15' easement from the next property and the closest any structure could ever come to the property line would be 18'. Mr. Garnsey felt Mr. Fay explained the hardship he would experience by attaching a garage to his house. It would require extensive renovations to his living area. Mr. Miriana feels the garage would be more accessible to the home if it was attached. Mr. Fay said there is not enough room to drive into the garage if it is attached to the house. Mr. Fay has given this project a great deal of thought for over two years, and this is the most aesthetic design he has come up with. In response to Ms. Solomon's question, Mr. Fay said if the garage is close to his house, he could probably get the car in with a tremendous amount of maneuvering. Moving the garage closer to the house would also require that Mr. Fay excavate his leach field from the septic tank, possibly requiring that the septic tank be moved. Mr. Fay will not put a garage closer to the house because he feels it will ruin his property value and his neighbors would not be happy with that solution. -4- HINUTE$ - BOARD OF ADJUSTHENT HEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA OCTOBER 18, 1993 Mr. Miriana feels that by putting the garage on the left side, the leaching field is closer to the home. He would not build a garage if he had to incur that expense of moving the leaching field. The field consists of 4" PVC pipes on top of rock. In order to move the garage closer, Mr. Fay would have to change the septic field and put in a new leaching field. This work could be done, but it would be costly. There was discussion taking place between members and Attorney Cherof advised them to make their comments heard so that those comments are part of the public record. Vice Chairman Uleck explained that this is the first time the Board has encountered such a situation and they are experiencing difficulty understanding and deciding this case. Mr. Haag referred to Page 12 of the back-up material to explain how the neigh- bors access their property. Motlon Mr. Garnsey moved to approve the applicant's variance to reduce the twenty-five foot required front setback to nineteen feet, and the ten foot required east side setback to 1.5 feet. Mr. Cordie seconded the motion. Mr. Miriana said that the Building Department has advised that these unincor- porated properties will be annexed into the City. The Board must consider the future regarding adjacent properties. This area is zoned R-1AA. He questioned whether or not the Board should allow this situation which may expand to other properties. He further feels Mr. Fay has other options. He feels the leaching field should be kept away from the home. Further, an attached garage would not aesthetically affect the home. He feels the Board must consider what an approv- al like this will mean in the future. Attorney Cherof advised the members to get back to the elements Of a variance. Those elements deal with special circumstances and conditions which do not exist in other areas. He pointed out that of all of the cases which have been dealt with before, the road easement and the unincorporated properties make this a unique situation. The question is not whether or not it can be designed dif- ferently. The Board must decide this case on whether or not it fits into the elements. Mr. Garnsey feels Mr. Fay has spent $120,000 improving his property and does not think he would do anything to detract from the property values. This property has high residential value and quality. His neighbors support his request. This situation is unique in that there are easements on both sides which will provide a buffer between his property and adjacent properties. He further feels this situation is the most unique of any of the requests he has experienced since becoming a member. Mr. Garnsey recommends approving the variance. Vice Chairman Uleck will also support this request for variances. THERE WAS NO ONE PRESENT TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OR OPPOSITION OF THIS REQUEST. -5- NINUTE$ - BOARD OF AD~USTHENT NEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA OCTOBER 18, 1993 The Recording Secretary polled the vote. Mr. Cordie - No Mr. Garnsey Yes Ms. Solomon - Yes Mr. Tineri Yes Mr. Uleck Yes Mr. Miriana - No The motion failed; the variance was DENIED. Mr. Garnsey asked Vice Chairman Uleck to explain to the applicant that a full Board was not sitting this evening and if the seventh member had been present, it is possible that the motion to approve would have passed. Attorney Cherof advised that five affirmative votes are required to grant an appeal or variance. This Board was one person short. Ms. Solomon questioned whether or not Mr. Fay had any recourse because the Board was short one member. Attorney Cherof advised that anyone who voted in favor of the motion could make a motion to reconsider. If the motion passes, the item can be tabled until the next meeting for rehearing. Iqot:l on Mr. Garnsey moved to reconsider the motion in view of the fact that a full Board was not present. Mr. Tineri seconded the motion. The Recording Secretary polled the vote. Mr. Cordie - No Mr. Garnsey Yes Ms. Solomon - Yes Mr. Tineri - Yes Mr. Uleck - Yes Mr. Miriana - No The motion to RECONSIDER carried 4-2. Mr. Garnsey moved to table this matter until the next meeting when hopefully there will be one more member present and the vote will reflect the true wishes of the Board. Mr. Tineri seconded the motion. Attorney Cherof advised that these variances affect property rights. This Board is comprised of seven people and two alternates. The Board may want to set a policy on whether or not to hear a case, unless a full Board is present. Vice Chairman Uleck clarified that in the future, if less than seven members are present for a meeting, the Chairman should offer the applicant the option of having the case heard and accepting that decision, or waiting until a full Board is present. -6 HINUTES - BOARD OF AI~IUSTNENT HEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA OCTOBER 18, 1993 Attorney Cherof advised that many other cities offer this opportunity to the applicant. Vice Chairman Uleck realized that the presence of one additional member could have made the difference in this case, He added that during future meetings, if seven members are not present, the Chairman will be responsible for offering the applicant the options available. There will be no additional cost to the appli- cant. The Recording Secretary polled the vote. Mr. Cordie - Yes Mr. Garnsey - Yes Ms. Solomon - Yes Mr. Tineri - Yes Mr. Uleck - Yes Mr, Miriana - Yes The motion carried 6-0. Attorney Cherof advised that this case will be back on the next agenda, No~lon Mr. Miriana moved that if a full Board (seven members) is not present, the option will be given to the applicant regarding whether he will accept the decision of the members present, or table the matter until the next meeting. Vice Chairman Uleck seconded the motion. The Recording Secretary polled the vote. Mr. Cordie - Yes Mr. Garnsey - Yes Ms. Solomon - Yes Mr. Tineri - Yes Mr. Uleck - Yes Mr. Miriana - Yes The motion carried 6-0. Vice Chairman Uleck advised Mr. Fay that he now has an opportunity to have his case reheard by the Board. He explained that this was a very unusual case for the Board. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Board, Mr. Miriana moved to adjourn the meeting. Mr. Cordie seconded the motion. The meeting properly adjourned at 8:15 p.m. Recording Secretary (TWo Tapes)