Loading...
Minutes 08-12-91MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING HELD IN COMMISSION CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA, ON MONDAY, AUGUST 12, 1991 AT 7:00 P.M. PRESENT Vernon Thompson, Chairman James Miriana, Vice Chairman Raymond Eney, Secretary Andrew Haynes Thorns s Newton Ben UleCk Paul Slavin, Alternate (voting) Alfred Newbold, Bldg. Code Permit Admin. Jay Mussman Asst. City Attorney ABSENT Henrietta Solomon (excused) Kevin Michael Clair Chairman Vernon Thompson called the meeting to order at 7:04 P.M. and introduced the Members and the Recording Secretary. He also introduced Mr. A1Newbold from the Building Department and Mr. Jay Mussman, Assistant City Attorney. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF JULY 8, 1991 Secretary Eney made a motion to accept the minutes as received and the motion was carried unanimously. ANNOUNCEMENTS Chairman Thompson informed the audience of the purpose of the Board of Adjustment explaining the six criteria which are taken into consideration when hearing a request for variance, t~e explained that when a decision is rendered, it is not a majority vote. If three negative votes are cast, the application will be denied. He also explained that the Board attempts to determine whether the applicant is faced with a hardship which is self- imposed, imposed by the City or, in some instances, by the State. He further informed the audience that if the Board of Adjustment denies a variance request, the applicant's recourse then is to go through the courts to obtain the variance or return before the Board of Adjustment one year later. *Secretary Eney read the six criteria on which a decision is based. *Secretary Eney read the responses to the criteria, not the criteria. - 1 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA AUGUST 12, 1991 NEW BUSINESS 1. CASE %156 - Address: Owner: Legal Description: Requested va r ia nce: 2839 S. Sea crest Boulevard Va ri-Ca re, Inc. That part of lots 15 and 19, Section 33, Township 45 South, Range 43 East, Palm Beach County, Florida Number of signs allowed Secretary Eney read from the submittal application dated July 3, 1991, The denial was made by Milt Duff on July 5, 1991. The request is for an increase in the allowable number of signs from one to two. Ray Eney then read the response to the six criteria as submitted by the applicant wherein it is stated that the requested sign would increase visibility for visitors and resi- dents, enabling them to see the entrance to the parking lot and facility when approaching the facility. The Board members reviewed the site plan. There being no further communication on this matter, Chairman Thompson asked the applicant's representative to come forward. Stan Mason, Assistant Administrator of Boulevard Manor Nursing Center, explained that this facility is located just south of Bethesds Memorial Hospital. A large number of elderly patients, their relatives and spouses very often get lost in the Bethesda Hospital parking lot because they are only able to see the existing sign when traveling in one direction but there is not a sign visible when traveling in the other direction. There is an existing concrete wall on which Mr. Mason would like to have the sign reading, "2839 Boulevard Manor" placed. Ben Uleck stated that he had previously been on the Sign Committee and they had spent approximately eight months observing and reviewing signage all over the City in order to establish the sign code as it exists today which allows one sign per business. Andrew Haynes stated that there are a lot of laws that have been in existence for years that should be changed. He feels this sign would not be detrimental to anyone but would only be helpful in directing visitors who are often elderly or from out of town and unfamiliar with the area to the nursing center. - 2 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA AUGUST 12, 1991 Ben Uleck feels that this variance should not be granted because other businesses and developers will also ask for more than one sign, even though he does realize it would be better for the spplicant. Chairman Thompson asked the Board members to keep in mind that each case is based on its own merit. A1 Newbold brought to the attention of the Board the wording in the Code under Section 21-16 dealing with variances wherein it spells out that there are three different conditions under which the Board can act on a variance for a sign. These three conditions are setbacks, area and height and allowable number of signs. This is the only Board that has the right to hear a hardship and give the applicant an opportunity to explain his need. Chairman Thompson pointed out that this request can be looked at in two different ways. He stated that if every business which is located on a corner requested two signs, the code would be violated. However, he realizes that if he were traveling down Seacrest Boulevard, he would miss the entrance. Mr. Mason stated that the sign is located 150 feet west of Seacrest Boulevard where the road curves. In answer to Chairman Thompson's question, Mr. Newbold responded that the egress road is a continuation of S. W. Third Street. This was made clear in order to establish the fact that the City has a right to act on it. Paul Slavin stated that he observed the property and noted the exact footage from the entrance on Seacrest to where the sign would be located. He stated that he actually got lost and ended up in the parking lot of Bethesda Hospital. He had to turn around, follow the wall and then he saw the sign. He pointed out that the sign is not free-standing; it will be up against the wall and that it is not a garish sign and is harmonious with the surroundings. He feels the sign code is not carved in stone and that if it were, there woUld be no need for the Board. Ben Uleck stated that the sign which exists was placed in the wrong location. It should have been placed on S. W. Third Street. Ray Eney stated that the existing sign serves the purpose of identifying the property. However, the applicant has a secondary problem in that once the turn is made, there is no further indi- cation to direct a visitor to the facility. He feels the second sign which is being requested is more of a guide and is in no way an advertisement. Therefore, he is in favor of granting the variance. - 3 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA AUGUST 12, 1991 Thomas Newton agrees that the variance should be granted because if he had not known the way to the facility, he would have gotten lost. He feels people who are visiting need the second sign. Chairman Thompson asked three times whether anyone else in the audience wished to speak in favor of the request. There was no response. Chairman Thompson asked three times if anyone in the audience wished to speak against the granting of the variance. There was no response. Chairman Thompson then stated that it is not the responsibility of the Board to take a survey to be sure a sign is placed pro- perly and that if the first sign was not properly placed, it is not the fault of the Board that there is a need for a second sign. He does agree that one could get lost in the parking lot; however, one must take the City's position into consideration as well. Andrew Haynes stated that this is not an advertising gimmick for the applicant. It would be a help to those visiting and would alleviate their getting lost after they make the turn. Ben Uleck made the statement that the sign should merely read "2839" and not include the words "Boulevard Manor" and that he will vote against granting the variance. Ray Eney pointed out that the fact sheet explains that the main entrance was changed from Seacrest Boulevard to the side street. He stated that the Board has been given the right to allow two signs and for that reason he sees no objection to granting this variance. Vice Chairman Miriana stated that a lot of effort went into care- fully drafting the ordinance governing signs and he does not see s hardship. He feels the situation can be remedied; suggestions have been made. He stated that he will vote against granting this variance. In answer to a question posed by Chairman Thompson, Mr. Newbold stated that if the sign were to read just the address, it would not be accurate since the facility is not actually on Seacrest. He further stated that the Board members should look at the par- ticular situation to determine if it is creating a problem and think about how often a piece of property can be found with this problem. Considering how much land they have, only a small por- tion of it faces Seacrest. Paul Slavin stated that the granting of this variance would cause no harm and that it would not commercialize the property. He made the analogy that driving along A1A one sees mansions with - 4 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA AUGUST 12, 1991 the name of the mansion on both ends of the property and this is not considered advertising, just as this variance request is not commercial. The applicant may have made a mistake which he is trying to correct and he is coming to the Board for help. MOTION Paul Slavin moved that the requested variance be granted for the reasons that the requested sign would not be free-standing and it would not degrade the area. Further, it is not a commercial sign but is directional to the entrance of the facility and is 150 feet west of Seacrest Boulevard. The motion was seconded by Ray Eney. A roll call vote on the motion was taken by the Recording Secretary as follows: Chairman Thompson Vice Chairman Miriani Secretary Eney Mr. Newton Mr. Haynes Mr. Uleck Mr. Slavin - Nay - Nay - Aye - Aye - Aye - Nay - Aye The motion failed with a vote of 4-3. The request was DENIED for the reason that the provisions of Appendix A-Zoning, Section 10, Sub-paragraph B3 were not met. 2. Case #157 - Address: Owner: Legal Description: Requested Variance: 150 N.W. 12th Avenue V.C.I., Inc. Lot 15, Block 6, Happy Home Heights R-1-A Building & Site Regulations Variance Secretary Eney read the submittal application dated July 5, 1991. The property is presently zoned R1A. The denial was made on July 11, 1991 by A1 Newbold based upon existing zoning requirements of Code from which relief is required under Appendix A-Zoning, Sec. 5.D.2.a. Secretary Eney read the response to the six criteria as submitted by the applicant wherein it is stated that they are seeking relief from a front and one (1) side setback as well as relief from minimum lot square footage. The prevailing con- ditions exert a hardship in that they are in place and existing and are unique to the subject property. - 5 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA AUGUST 12, 1991 Secretary Eney stated that several additional communications have been received from people in the city of Delray Beach endorsing the applicant's work in that city. The site is s 40' x 90' lot. The existing residential structure was constructed in 1947 and has the following deficiencies: a 7' front yard set back and a building encroaching on Lot 16 by 1.25 feet. The owner has dedi- cated 2.87 feet of Lot 16 to Lot 15, giving the house a 1.62 foot side setback. The structure is non-conforming because it does not conform with the following site regulations: Front yard 25 feet Frontage 60 feet Side yard 7.5 feet Lot area 7500 sq. ft. 7.5 feet existing 40 feet existing 1.62 feet existing 3815.3 sq. ft. existing A variance from these regulations would allow the structure to be repaired in compliance with City Codes. Frank E. McKinney, 50 N.E. 3rd Street, Delray Beach, spoke regarding his application for this variance, explaining that he specializes in restoring older, blighted buildings which are in an acute stage of ill repair. In order to do so, he must be granted these variances. The building has been condemned by the City Code Enforcement and is to be demolished. Mr. McKinney brought to the attention of the Board a letter which he had sub- mitted from a structural engineer stating that the property can be restored. He feels this is an area that he would like to target for rehabilitation of some properties which are located near Poinciana Elementary School. This would make a nice pro- perty for a teacher or teacher's aid. He pointed out that without this variance, the condemnation would go through and the building would be demolished. A new structure could not be built on this property based on lot size restrictions; therefore, the lot would be left vacant with nothing on the City tax rolls. The Board members asked questions of the applicant concerning his intent to rebuild this structure in conformance with building codes. A1 Newbold explained that the existing building will not be torn down, but will be repaired and revitalized in conformance with codes. Chairman Thompson asked three times whether anyone else in the audience wished to speak in favor of the request. There was no response. Chairman Thompson asked three times if anyone in the audience wished to speak against the granting of the variance. There was no response. Andrew Haynes stated that it would be preferable for the City to have this building restored in compliance with code than to have an empty lot which would fill up with trash. - 6 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA AUGUST 12, 1991 Ray Eney made mention of the supporting documents submitted which include a letter from Sam Gillotti, an engineer who inspected the property. Mr. Gillotti goes into detail noting decayed area and other areas that are in need of treatment. Mr. Gillotti states that he is of the opinion that the building can be restored struc- tura lly. James Miriani stated that if the Board were to grant the variance, it would be the responsibility of the Building Department to see to it that the building meets necessary requirements. MOTION Andrew Haynes moved that the variance be granted for the reasons that the building is existing and is not being added on to and will be more valuable to the City in a restored state than if it were to be demolished, resulting in an empty lot. The motion was seconded by Thomas Newton. The motion passed 7-0. The variance request was GRANTED. 3. Case 9158 - Address: Owner: Legal Description: Requested Variance: 1219 Isle Court Christopher Ludwick Lot 50, Venetian Isle Front setback Secretary Eney read from the submittal application dated July 9, 1991 which was denied on the basis of Appendix A-Zoning, Sec. 5.C.2.a on July 12, 1991 by Milt Duff. This code requires a 25 foot front setback; the applicant is requesting a 21 foot set- back, requiring a variance of 4 feet. In the applicant's response to the six criteria, a description of the property indicates that its border includes the beginning arc of a cul de sac. There being no further communication on this matter, Chairman Thompson asked the applicant to come forward. Cynthia Stacey, 940 St. James Street, West Palm Beach, fiancee of the applicant, stated that the site plan shows that only a small corner of the house is affeCted by the request. Ms. Stacey pro- vided the Board with a petition which has been signed by 15 neighbors in the area who are in favor of the variance being granted. This petition has been entered into the record. The Board Members reviewed the site plan. - 7 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA AUGUST 12, 1991 Chairman Thompson ssked three times whether anyone else in the audience wished to speak in favor of the request. There was no response. Chairman Thompson asked three times if anyone in the audience wished to speak against the granting of the varisnce. There was no response. There being no further communication on this application, the Chairman entertained a motion. MOT I ON Ben Uleck moved to grant the variance of 4 feet that is requested which was seconded by James Miriana. The motion passed 7-0. The request was GRANTED. OTHER BUSINESS Chairman Thompson advised the Board members that there is a pending case to come before the Board next month. ADJOURNMENT Secretary Eney made a motion to adjourn which was seconded by Paul Slavin. The meeting properly adjourned at 8:30 PM. Recording Secretary - 8 -