Loading...
Minutes 07-11-88MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING HELD IN COMMISSION CHAMBERS, PINELAND PLAZA, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA, MONDAY, JULY 11, 1988 AT 7:00 P. M. PRESENT Lillian Artis, Vice Chairwoman Raymond Eney Janice Lewis George Mearns Henrietta Solomon James Miriana, Alternate (Voted) Thomas C. Newton, Alternate (Voted) ABSENT Vernon Thompson, Chairman (Excused) Ben Uleck (Excused) Alfred Newbold, Chief Plans Check Inspector Vice Chairwoman Artis called the meeting to order at 7:00 P. M., introduced the Members of the Board, and Mr. Newbold. Vice chairwoman announced that there were three cases before the Board tonight, and she read the six criteria upon which the Members base their judgments. She also informed the audience that this was not a majority Board. Any five votes could pass the request, and three negative votes could deny a request. MINUTES OF JUNE 13, 1988 Mrs. Lewis moved to accept the minutes as presented, seconded by Mr. Eney. Motion carried 6-0. Mrs. Solomon abstained from voting as she was not present at the meeting. A~NOUNCEMENTS None. COMMUNICATIONS None. OLD BUSINESS Case ~125 - Owner: Agent: Request: 240 North Congress Avenue Phoenix Enterprises of Boynton Beach, Inc. Roland Reinhardt, President Relief from Appendix A - Zoning, H. Provision of Off-Street Parking Spaces (number of spaces required) - 1 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JULY 11, 1988 Proposed Use: Restaurant Legal Description: See "Addendum A" attached to the original copy of these minutes in the Office of the City Clerk REQUEST WITHDRAWN - The study of the parking agreement and the recommendation to change the layout of the parking lot has put them in compliance with the Code for the 250 seats and was approved by the City Commission on June 21, 1988. Variance no longer required. NEW BUSINESS Case ~126 - Owner: Agent: Request: Proposed Use: Legal 2400 Hypoluxo Road High Ridge Country Club William F. Weiss, General Manager Reduction in number of parking spaces 410 spaces required and propose to have 280 spaces - variance of 130 required Addition to Club House Description: See "Addendum B" attached to the original copy of these minutes in the Office of the City Clerk. Secretary Mearn read the application, the response to ques- tion 5, a through f, and the letter from Michael P. Corbett, A.I.A., Registered Architect, 6662 Westview Avenue, Lantana, Florida 33462, dated June 6, 1988. James W. Vance, Attorney at Law, Barristers Building, Suite 200, 1615 Forum Place, West Palm Beach, Florida 33409, representing High Ridge Country Club, said the country club is located well back from any public right-of-way. The club has a limited membership. The By-laws of the Club limit the membership to 265 members. Right now, they have 247 members plus 18 associate members. The associate members are widows or divorcees of regular members. Attorney Vance emphasized that the club does not intrude in any situation, such as people parking on streets because of the facility not having parking for customeers. This is an isolated area. By virtue of the By-laws, the membership - 2 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JULY 11, 1988 of the Club is limited, and it is not planned to be increased. Attorney Vance said the increased square footage is essentially for the purpose of upgrading the facilities that are already on the site. By using all of the paved parking that is available at this point and time, the Club has managed to increase the parking to approximately 280 plus spaces. Attorney Vance informed the Members that this is a combination of spaces for both employees and guests and has always proved adequate in the past. In his own mind, Attorney Vance could see no reason why a parking requirement that may be very valid in downtown Boynton Beach made a lot of sense as applied to an isolated country club such as High Ridge Country Club. Secretary Mearns asked if any additional parking would be in the confines of the Club, on its own property. Attorney Vance answered affirmatively. Mr. Mearns asked if this would in any way interefere with the Fire or Police Depart- ments. Mr. Vance replied that it would not and added that they will continue to have the access ways as they currently have them. Usually, a "large chunk" of the available park- ing is vacant. There are only five events, and they are at night during the year, where additional parking is required. The cars are simply parked on the adjacent fair- way. Attorney Vance stressed that any additional parking for the facility would look ugly. Mrs. Solomon asked if they were building another dining room. Attorney Vance informed her that they are expanding what they have now. Mrs. Solomon noted that Attorney Vance said they were not planning to increase the membership. Attorney Vance advised that he said the By-laws of the Club as they presently exist limit the membership to 265. Mrs. Solomon pointed out that there was nothing to say the By-laws could not be changed. If they increase the membership, she commented that they may be forced to have on the street parking. Attorney Vance did not think there would ever be on the street parking. You drive quite a distance into the Club, and he did not think any of the members of this Club would be willing to walk that distance. Essentially, they are paying rather high sums of money to utilize a facility that is comfortable. Vice Chairwoman Artis asked why they did not want to pave more of the area. Attorney Vance replied that the Club is fenced in by a drainage facility.i To expand out, they would - 3 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JULY 11, 1988 have to fill in canals, and there is no need. If they put additional parking there, they will be putting ugly asphalt in an area that is now green and planted for no purpose except to meet the requirements of an Ordinance that makes sense if you are in a downtown area or on a public right-of- way. Attorney Vance explained. Vice Chairwoman Artis was trying to find out whether a hardship existed. Attorney Vance answered that the hardship exists because of the conformity of the existing site. The existing site as constructed, in relation to the drainage facilities, makes it very difficult. Mr. Newbold interjected that Attorney Vance was trying to say that they were land- locked. Peter Paulson, Architect, Peacock & Lewis Architects and Planners, 501 South Flagler Drive, West Palm Beach, showed on a plan that it is approximately 1/2 mile from Hypoluxo Road to the clubhouse. On the west side is the existing maintenance barn. To the north is a drainage canal. To the south is the golf course, driving range, etc., and to the east is the golf course. Up to this date, Mr. Paulson said the Club has never had a parking problem. If there is, they use the area to the east for additional parking when they have their general functions during the year. If there would be 150 more spaces, what is now lush landscaping, driving range, and green area would be nothing but an unused parking lot 95% of the year. Attorney Vance added that it would be more than that since they only use the parking five nights a year. When you utilize a part of a golf course for parking, Attorney Vance stated that it is'a much more complicated situation than if you are using normal, vacant land. You may have to move five or ten holes of a golf course, and that is hard to do. Mr. Paulson told the Members that the driving range would be lost if that became parking. Attorney Vance observed that was the big problem they had. By affecting any part of the golf course, they might end up affecting all of it. Mr. Miriana questioned whether there was suitable drainage on the east side. In the event there was a storm, he wondered what they would do. Mr. Paulson explained that the area would flood, percolate, and eventually drain into the collection canal and then into the main canal. He could only recall that they had a problem twice. - 4 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JULY 11, 1988 Vice Chairwoman Artis asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor of the variance. There was no response. Vice Chairwoman Artis asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition to the variance. There was no response. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. It appeared to Mrs. Lewis that there was a hardship since. drainage would be involved and they would possibly have to redesign the golf course. Since they have land available for parking, she thought there was a possibility of the variance being granted. Mr. Newton did not like to see grass taken from a place and asphalt put in. Mrs. Lewis thought if the membership was inconvenienced at any time, they would force the extra parking. Mr. Eney was also in favor of granting the variance. Except on the special occasions, the traffic flow is of such a nature that it would not cause a demand for additional paved parkingo He thought it would be simpler and more acceptable for the cars to park on the grass. Mr. Eney moved that the variance be granted. Mr. Miriana seconded the motion. A roll call vote on the motion was taken by the Recording Secretary: Mr. Eney Vice Chairwoman Artis Secretary Mearns Mrs. Lewis Mrs. Solomon Mr. Miriana Mr. Newton Yea Yea Yea Yes Yes Yes Yes Motion carried 7-0. The variance was granted. CASE ~127 - OWner/ Applicant: Request: 955 Isles Road Aubrey K. Ewing Reduction of setback from minimum of 8' from property line to 5' setback to allow pool construction and reduction of setback from minimum 25' from property line to 15' setback to allow construction of screen porch with hard roof - 5 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JULY 11, 1988 Legal Description: Lot 44, BOYNTON ISLES, according to the Plat recorded in Plat Book 25, Page 34, as recorded in the Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida. Secretary Mearns read the application and the answers to question 5, a through f. Aubrey K. Ewing, 5285 Buckhead Circle, Boca Raton 33486, distributed smaller copies of the survey and the pool to the Members. Pool In order of priority, Mr. Ewing said the first was their pool location. As he mentioned in the response to question 5 of the application, the hardship they have been presented with has to do with the shape of the property. It is a narrow right triangle. Mr. Ewing thought most of the Members knew that the cost of Intracoastal property is quite high. In order for them to build a home commensurate with what they paid for the property, they had to build a home sufficient in style and square footage. They built it exactly the shape of the setback requirements of the property. What that did was compromise their ability to place a pool a safe distance from the back of the house. Mr. Ewing emphasized that they do not want a covered pool area. It will not be a screened in pool. They want an open pool. Mr. Ewing wanted to place the pool within five feet of the sea wall rather than within 8 feet, which is what the Code requires. They did not think that affected anyone in the area as far as their ability to enjoy their properties. The pool would back uplto the sea wall, which is the canal, and they have 20 feet on the point, on the Intracoastal, so Mr. Ewing said they would not encroach on anyone's property line by asking for the three foot variance for the pool. Mr. Ewing said the size of the pool was determined by the Architect, and it seemed to be a standard size pool. To make it more narrow would make the shape odd and would not fit the house very well. Covered Porch Mr. Ewing explained that this would be a flat roof porch. In the interest of his neighbors, he has not asked for any more than a 10 foot setback from the back of the house. - 6 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JULY 11, 1988 According to the Code, Mr. Ewing said he could build a screened structure without a hard roof that would go within eight feet of the sea wall. He wants to be a good neighbor, so he will not do that. Mr. Ewing wanted to build the covered porch so it would be waterproof and so they could use the flat roof as a deck that they can walk out onto from their upstairs bedroom. He stated that he would only build that ten feet beyond the rear wall of the house if he is granted a variance. Mr. Ewing said the hardship for that is the same as the one presented for the pool. They tried to squeeze a house on a lot that, apparently, no one wanted to build on for 25 years because its shape was strange, and nobody had ever figured out how to do it. He thought they had figured it out. Questions Mrs. Solomon noticed that Mr. Ewing's next door neighbor has a pool, and she wondered if they received a variance for their pool. Mr. Ewing did not think so. The neighbor was in the audience and informed the Board that she is well with- in the Code, and she went for no variances. Mr. Ewing explained that the difference in his neighbor's situation is that the width of his property where he is building his pool is considerably more narrow at that point than his neighbor;s. He has a neighbor on the other side whose pool is three feet within the Intracoastal Waterway, and they have a variance for that pool. Mr. Ewing thought it depended on the shape of the property, especially those on the cul-de-sac. With the setbacks, Mrs. Solomon asked if there would be a safe distance from the sea wall with the pool there. Mr. Newbold replied that the pool will be supported on pilings, so there will be very little weight. The pool will support the sea wall rather than be detrimental. That would not be an issue here. It would be more of a structural problem. Mr. Newbold further explained. Mr. Ewing said that was an issue their Architect considered as well, and they hired an engineering firm which designed the structural aspect of the pool before they proposed it. He informed Mrs. Solomon that the pool is 15'x34'. Mrs. Solomon asked if the porch would be near the pool. Mr. Ewing replied that the actual covered part will come within - 7 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JULY 11, 1988 about eight feet of the pool. The pool is on the east end of the property, and he showed where the covered flat roof would start. He thought it would run about 20 feet. Mr. Ewing explained the plan to Mrs. Solomon and the variances he was looking for. Secretary Mearns asked if Mr. Ewing would put up the screened enclosure if he did not get the variance. Mr. Ewing replied that he would put some kind of screened enclosure there, so they would have a screen room. He agreed that he would not need a variance for that. Vice Chairwoman Artis asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor of the variance. Secretary Mearns read a letter from Linda and Michael Brinkman, 957 Isles Road, Lot 45, Boynton Isle, dated JUly 11, 1988. The letter stated that the Brinkmans, as ajoining neighbors, had no objection of Mr. Ewing's request for reductions in setback requirements for the proposed pool and screen porch with hard roof. Vice Chairwoman Artis asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition to the variance. Marilyn Huckle, 656 Castilla Lane, said it was unclear to her about the hard roof screened enclosure. Mr. Newbold explained that it would be a one story level roof height with a flat deck. Evidently, Mr. Ewing will be able to come out of the second story portion of his house. Mrs. Huckle determined that it was a one story addition, which will protrude ten feet away from the main building. Vice Chairwoman Artis added that it can also be used as a sun deck on the second floor. Mr. Ewing responded that the screen will be just around the porch area and not around the pool area. Mrs. Huckle asked if it would be around the three sides with the hard roof. Mr. Ewing answered, "Yes." Mrs. Huckle determined that the only projection that would be in the vision of Mr. Ewing's neighbors to the west would be the roof line, and the screen which they would see through. Mr. Ewing answered affirma- tively. Robert Silvester, 951 Isles Road, (Lot 42, Boynton Isles), lives two lots west of the applicant. He believed there would be a fence or railing around the hard roof, which was a continuation out on the deck that was already in the - 8 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JULY 11, 1988 print. Mr. Ewing clarified that a rail with pickets was drawn on the plan, but he stated that they could vary that. Mr. Newbold informed Vice Chairwoman Artis that the height regulation on that is 25 feet. The eaves of the two story portion of the house are 18'10". Mr. Ewing shoWed the detail of the deck and said that did not have to be their fina~ design. He could put some lucite or whatever the Code requires for a safety measure. Mr. Silvester expressed that it would certainly obstruct the view. There was discussion about the railing on the sun deck. As Mr. Ewing had not submitted any drawings, Mr. Newbold said he could not respond. Mr. Silvester questioned how Mr. Ewing could get a variance without a drawing. Mr. Newbold replied that Mr. Ewing was asking for a setback so he could prepare the drawings. Right now, he is not permitted to put the sun deck there. If he is going to use it as a sun deck, Mr. Newbold said Mr. Ewing will have to have a railing around it. Mr. Silvester reiterated that the railing would certainly obstruct their view. Mr. Silvester informed the Members that Mr. Ewing has a 4,200 square foot house with living space, including the garage. If he had planned it more thoroughly, Mr. Silvester said Mr. Ewing would have had his pool without any problem. Mr. Silvester said Mr. Ewing explained to him that he was asking for a variance because his Architect and the City of Boynton Beach Engineering or Building Department gave him the wrong information. Consequently, the pilings for the pool were put in the wrong place. Speaking for his wife and himself, Mr. Silvester did not see it as a hardship. Lorraine L. McGinley, 953 Isles Road, lives immediately west of Mr. Ewing and wished to reiterate what Mr. Silvester said in terms of whether a hardship was involved. She said Mrs. Solomon had looked at her pool. Mrs. McGinley's pool is three feet away from the edge of her house. She has a patio, as Mr. Ewing had drawn, and she did not find that to be inconvenient. Mrs. McGin!ey did not find her pool to be a safety hazard. She would have loved to have a wider pool and gone through a variance, but she felt what she had was enough. Mrs. McGinley elaborated. As far as the screen porch was concerned, Mrs. McGinley stated that looking through three layers of screen is not the same as no layers of screen. She could not put a - 9 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JULY 11, 1988 screen room on her home because she is parallel to the Intra- coastal the same distance as Mr. Ewing is. She thought they were both the same distance away from the sea wall, and she did not feel an enclosure would be best for her heighborhood because it would be blocking their views as well as encom- passing her view. Mrs. McGinley did not feel a hardship was involved. She alluded to the square footage of Mr. Ewing's house and said she felt the dimensions in the house were far superior to any of the other houses on the street. The extra screen room will be an added privilege. Mrs. McGinley did not think there were that many enclosures on the street that were comparable to Mr. Ewing's house. Mrs. McGinley clarified for Vice Chairwoman Artis that her property is cut by the cul-de-sac. Her lot has a rectangu- lar shape. Mrs. McGinley expounded and repeated prior statements. Mrs. Solomon asked what Mrs. McGinley specifically was talk- ing about. Mrs. McGinley had no objection to the Ewings having a pool, but she objected to them going for a variance because special privileges would be allowed where there would not be a hardship involved. Mrs. Solomon felt Mrs. McGinley's objections seemed to be because Mr. and Mrs. Ewing built a big house. Mrs. McGinley replied that the City's guidelines say having a pool that close to the house is not a hardship. She was not saying she did not want them to have a pool, but she saw no reason why they could not have put it close to the house. Her pool is close to her house, and she does not find it to be a hardship. Mrs. Solomon questioned whether Mrs. McGinley was also saying something about the porch. Mrs. McGinley felt that in the beginning, the perimeters had been set up in keeping with the neighborhood. She thought there was a difference between a hard roof and a screened enclosure. Mrs. McGinley was now under the assumption that a screened roof does not need the same setbacks as what Mr. Ewing was calling a hardship. Mr. Newbold explained that a screened roof is called a screened enclosure, but a hard roof is to follow setbacks. Mrs. McGinley repeated that she did not think a hardship was involved. Richard Morse, 949 Isles Road, thought there was confusion as to what Mr. Ewing would like. He thought he and the neighbors were worried about their views, looking down the - 10 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JULY 11, 198~ canal, so all of them can get a little piece of the action on the Intracoastal. Mr. Morse had no problem with where Mr. Ewing put the pool because it would not hurt his (Morse's) view. Mr. Morse thought they were more interested in the screened room and the use of the hard deck above the screened room and maybe the possible enclosing of the screened room down the road. Even if it was enclosed with canvas, as one neighbor has, it would be in the setback area. Mr. Morse thought one had nothing to do with the other and he suggested that possibly the pool would not bother anybody if it was submitted alone. The screeened room was what everybody had a partial problem with. Mr. Morse told Mrs. Solomon they were all interested in the view. This would protrude in the wide area where the residents can see the boats go by on the Intracoastal and enjoy it. The pool would have nothing to do with their views. Vice Chairwoman Artis understood the only solid structure in the variances would be the roof itself. Mr. Newbold explained that there were two separate variance requests. The issue with request ~2 is that Mr. Ewing is asking to put a solid roof structure, which has to comply with the same required setbacks as any other structure (the main building itself). The main building, as Mr. Ewing had pointed out, was the main basis of the setback. Anything Mr. Ewing builds beyond the main wall of the building protrudes into the open space of the setbacks required. Mr. Ewing was ask- ing for an enclosure. Mr. Newbold confirmed that Mr. Morse's statements were correct. Once built, the screened porch could be glassed tomorrow, canvassed tomorrown~ etc. Once it is granted, *Remove the "n' Mr. Newbold said the Board could not take it back because a and should variance goes with the land. It could be screened today and read once the rains begin to blow, Mr. Ewing might decide to "tomorrow" enclose it. If a variance is granted, Mr. Ewing would have that right at a later date. Mr. Newbold corroborated Vice Chairwoman Artis's statement that there could be two motions (one for variance request and one for request 92). See minutes of 8/8/88 Mr. Newbold verified Mrs. Lewis' understanding that if it was just a screened enclosure without the roof, Mr. Ewing would not have to have a variance. Mr. Newbold further explained and repeated prior statements. - 11 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JULY 11, 1988 Michelle Klein, 944 Brookdale Drive, asked if Mr. Ewing would be able to screen the pool in at any point, if he was granted a variance for the extension of the pool beyond the setback. Mr. Newbold answered that the pool and screened enclosure could not occupy the same space. The screened enclosure has the same requirement as the pool. If the pool was now set at a setback of five feet, Mr. Ewing could not set the screened enclosure at eight feet because he would be three feet over the pool line. The only legal way Mr. Ewing could enclose the pool with a screened enclosure would be if the pool was set further back*in now*and he would come+for a delete variance to set the screened enclosure a~*eight feet. "in now" Mr. Newbold further explained that Mr. Ewing is moving the pool out five feet, and the variance would be for the pool to be five feet, not a screened enclosure. Mr. Ewing would have to amend his request to ask that a screened enclosure also be put in that area. The pool has to be enclosed by a fence around it for safety. +"come" shou] be "receive' ** "eight" should be "five" Mr. Newbold clarified for Vice Chairwoman Artis that Mr. Ewing wants to set the pool at a setback of five feet instead of eight feet and is asking for a three foot variance. On the screened enclosure, he wants to set it at a 15 foot set- back instead of 25 feet. For clarification, Vice Chairwoman Artis said to assume the Board grants Mr. Ewing a 10 foot variance for the hard roof deck. She-asked if he could enclose it at any time. Mr. Newbold answered affirmatively and explained that Mr. Ewing would be working on an existing roof, which the Board would have granted him. He would have the right to enclose under the existing roof. Screened enclosures never have existing roofs. See minutes of 8/8/88 Mrs. Klein pointed out that her question was that if Mr. Ewing has a foundation around his pool within five feet of the seawall, can he extend screening to encompass that or does he have to work within the eight feet. She asked if he could down the road screen the pool in within three feet of the seawall. Mr. Newbold answered, "No, not without meeting the applicable Code or coming in for a variance." Caroline D; Silvester, 951 Isles Road, did not understand why Mr. Ewing wanted the hard roof. She alluded to the square footage of the house and said he could have avoided coming in for a variance. Vice Chairwoman Artis replied that the Board was not here to answer that question. Mr. Eney asked how much land area was covered by the Ordinance. Mr. Newbold replied that it was a large, odd - 12 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JULY 11, 1988 shaped property. Right now, Mr. Ewing is within his percent- age coverage. If he exceeds that, it will be another problem. Mr. Ewing had an application to construct a pool, which was denied. Then Mr. Ewing began to address the enclosure. Mr. Ewing interjected that he has no intention of ever enclosing the pool or of ever enclosing the covered porch he was asking for. If it would put their minds at ease, he said he would eliminate the request of asking for the use of the hard roof as a sun deck. All Mr. Ewing wanted was a dry area out there with a screened room. Mr. Newbold emphasized that his part on the Board was to advise the Members. He advised the Members that if they granted the variance to Mr. Ewing, based on what Mr. Ewing was saying, at that point they would have no administrative power to take it away and do something different. There are certain times that they can, under certain conditions, but this was not one of them. For example, Mr. Newbold said he might buy that place from Mr. Ewing tomorrow, and Mr. Ewing telling the Members what Mr. Ewing might do with the roof would have no bearing. Once the Members grant Mr. Ewing permission to build the roof, it will be established as the outline of the struc- ture. If Mr. Newbold would buy the building, he would have every right to apply to the Building Department, take out the glassed front, and enclose it in solid block. ,It would have nothing to do with what the previous owner said he would do. Mr. Newbold would become the new owner, and the City would not be able to deny him the right to enclose it in solid block if he did not like the glass. He further explained. Secretary Mearns had a petition signed by 18 property owners, in opposition to the requests. The property owners requested the Board to deny the variances. Mrs. Solomon did not think anyone's view from Brookdale Drive would be blocked. A man in the audience responded that it definitely would block their view. They would be looking south. As no one else wished to speak in opposition to the requests, THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. *This sentence should read: "It would have nothing to do with what the previous owner said he would do, if Mr. Newbold became the new owner; and the City ..." See Minutes of 8/8/88 - 13 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JULY 11, 1988 Motion to Separate Variance Requests In accordance with the advice of Mr. Newbold, Mrs. Solomon moved to separate the two variance requests and to make two separate motions. Mr. Miriana seconded the motion, and the motion carried 7-0. Motion re Pool Mrs. Solomon moved to grant the variance for the pool, (reduction of setback from a minimum of eight feet from the property line to a five foot setback to allow pool construc- tion). The motion was seconded by Mr. Newton, and a roll call vote on the motion was taken by Mrs. Ramseyer: Secretary Mearns Mrs. Lewis Mrs. Solomon Mr. Miriana Mr. Newton Mr. Eney Vice Chairwoman Artis Aye Aye Aye Aye Aye Aye Aye Motion carried 7-0. The variance for the pool was granted. Motion re Screen Porch With Hard Roof Mrs. Solomon moved to deny the variance for the screen porch (reduction of setback from minimum 25 feet from property line to 15 foot setback to allow construction of a screen porch with a hard roof). Mr. Newton seconded the motion. Vice Chairwoman Artis advised that a "Yes" or "Aye" vote would mean they were in favor of the motion to deny the request for variance. Mrs. Ramseyer took a roll call vote on the motion as follows: Mrs. Solomon Mr. Miriana Mr. Newton Mr. Eney Vice Chairwoman Artis Secretary Mearns Mrs. Lewis Yes Yes Yes Aye Aye Yes Yes Motion carried 7-0. The variance for the screen porch with a hard roof was DENIED. Case 9128 - Owner/ Applicant: 644 Dimick Road Michael A. Mrotek and Ramona L. Mrotek - 14 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JULY 11, 1988 Request: Legal Description: Request variance from maximum structure height of 25' to be increased to 32' for construction of single family residence Lots 40, 41, 42 and 43, LAKESIDE GARDENS, Palm Beach County, Florida, according to the Plat thereof recorded in Plat Book 8, page 57, Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida Secretary Mearns read the application and the answers to question 5, a through f. Michael A. Mrotek, 455 S. E. 1st Avenue, Delray Beach,' said the structure is a total summation of the mathematics incurred in building the building. You add the first floor to the second floor plus the roof, and you come to the total height. The first structure has the elevation it has to accommodate Mr. Mrotek's truck, which requires a 10 foot overhead door, and his boat which is on a trailer so that he can get it into the building. With this in mind, the mathe- matics (added up with the 10 foot door to the first struc- ture) being over the height, but not being living area, is not allowed to be in public view, according to the City's Code. To preempt complying with the Code, Mr. Mrotek said he was designing a structure around the facility to comply with the Code. The hip roof is minimal. They were talking about the very top section of the roof extending into an area of space rather than into someone's view. Mr. Mrotek submitted snapshots he had taken from the job site to the Members, which illustrated how the building lays within the confines of the neighborhood and how it corresponds to the neighborhood structure. Vice Chairwoman Artis called attention to items 5, 6 and 7 in the City's "staff Site Analysis" from their meeting of July 11, 1988. Mr. Eney asked Mr. Mrotek why he filled the land to the height it presently is, which is over and above the grade of the surrounding properties. Mr. Mrotek answered that he was informed by Med Kopczynski, Deputy Building Official, that the land is in Zone 7 of the Corps of Engineers. The Corps of Engineers require that the mean sea level (MSL) of that lot be 8 feet above the sea, which is exactly where it is. Mr. Mrotek stated that he was informed by the Building - 15 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JULY 11, 1988 Department that they would not consider any structure on that land unless it was in compliance with the Corps of Engineers. Therefore, he has already been compelled to spend over $10,000 to improve that property just to make it build- able and to comply with the existing laws of the land. Vice Chairwoman Artis asked if the Board was allowed to address the height before Mr. Mrotek meets the setbacks. Before anybody can file variances before the Board of Adjust- ment (BOA), Mr. Newbold said they are directed to his office, and he goes over the Code with that person. He went over the questions with Mr. Mrotek and tried to explain to him the problems that exist. Mr. Mrotek had used the same state- ments with Mr. Newbold as he did with the Members with reference to filling in the land. Mr. Newbold has been reviewing the Codes for quite some time and had a chance to talk to Mr. Kopczynski. Mr. Kopczynski said he did not so advise Mr. Mrotek with regard to the MLS, and he had advised Mr. Mrotek the land was OK with the general setbacks. Mr. Newbold explained to Mr. Mrotek that a normal overhang did not mean the six foot wide balcony and the roof that would be projecting there. Mr. Newbold said the Members had to consider all of the facts in making a decision on a variance. By granting this variance at just the minimum, he asked how it could be the minimum if they still have a setback problem. Vice Chairwoman Artis commented that it would be hard for the Board to decide about the height regulation if the minimum setback was not permitted. Mr. Mrotek explained that the drawings were prepared as a preliminary illustration to visually or in hard copy illustrate what will take place on the site. The setback variance that was illustrated was not requested, was not to be considered, and was not to be taken in the minds of the Members because it did not exist. The 30 foot setback put on the drawing was put there as an illustration of the posi- tion of the building on the property. In placing the build- ing on the property, it was placed one foot too close to the boundary line only because there is a balcony on the build- ing. Otherwise, it would be five feet in excess of the minimum requirements by the City of Boynton Beach. The difference can easily be changed when the building is laid out on the lot. There would be no problem there. The building does not exist, and nothing has been done. Mr. Mrotek emphasized that he was before the Board to request the variance on the height because the Architect illustrated - 16 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JULY 11, 1988 there would be consideration necessary from the City before the plans are submitted. He then contacted Mr. Newbold and asked him what the process would be to preempt any problems. Mr. Mrotek repeated prior statements. Mr. Mrotek knew the wall was mentioned in a letter, and he also knew it was a subject of concern with the Members. He apprised the Members that the wall was permitted by the City. The plans were inspected by the Engineering Depart- ment and okayed. A permit hangs on the property at this very minute. Also, the permit to move the fill or do any excavating was granted by the City of Boynton Beach because of the fact that excessive amounts of money had to be spent to do this. To ensure the grades, perc, run off, and aesthetic value, Mr. Mrotek had to go to this means to provide a building pad that was adequate for the structure he was proposing. Mr. Mrotek said the elevation of the building that he would like to build for his own pleasure and the aesthetic value of the neighborhood would well comply with what is there. He told the Members that the home directly across the street from him has a 30 foot elevation above grade. He was looking for a 32 foot elevation. There are structures to the north and south of his property, within 400 feet, that well exceed five stories. The application Mr. Mrotek made was in error because he stated that the condominium to his south is three stories. It is actually four stories plus a roof. Mr. Mrotek said the pictures illustrated exactly what is happening down the road. You see an exact wall. To the north is Hypoluxo Marina. The barn storage has been there since he did not know when. This structure will be in what is already an atmosphere of high elevated buildings across the street and north and south of it. Mr. Newbold stressed that he had to give the Board the facts. The Building Department does research for the Board on the facts. Mr. Newbold was not trying to advise the Board one way or the other how they should decide. The application requested that the applicant provide the Board with a proposal of the structure. That meant that the applicant was not supposed to give the Members a fake. This was the proposal that Mr. Mrotek submitted. It was put in the record and was there. That meant if the Board acted, it should address these issues. - 17 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JULY 11, 1988 Mr. Newbold told the Members to notice that the roof over- hangs the six foot balcony that was in question. He informed'the Members that what they were looking at was the proposal. Mr. Mrotek had all of the time in the world to prepare the application. He was told what needed to be there. If Mr. Mrotek had listened to Mr. Newbold, Mr. Newbold said Mr. Mrotek could have revised it before the application was submitted. Mr. Newbold and Mr. Mrotek had checked off the items, and that item was put in as the pro- posed structure. Mr. Newbold emphasized that the Members had to look at it as that. Mr. Newbold advised that only the height was what the Members were looking at. All other aspects must comply with the Code in time. Mr. Newbold told the Members the building Mr. Mrotek was referring to was a storage facility in the Town of Hypoluxo. If it was in Boynton Beach, it would be located in a commercial zone and the height of commercial property. Mr. Mrotek is in R1AA, which is one of the highest residential zones. The City Staff only gave the facts that were germane to the City of Boynton Beach. Mr. Newbold expounded and said they were addressing the requirements for an R1AA zone, which is 25 feet maximum height. With regard to Mr. Mrotek's other question dealing with the engineering and filling of the land because of the low lying of the land and the flood requirement, Mr. Newbold agreed Mr. Mrotek has to comply with that. Mr. Mrotek has 13.5 feet to the under side of the porch, and he has a total of 32 feet to the top of the structure. The City's Code requires 25 feet maximum height. That was the issue before the Board. Mr. Newbold elaborated and reiterated that the other structures Mr. Mrotek was talking about were out of his zone. Mr. Mrotek agreed that the "Hypoluxo barn" was in another town, but it was part of the aesthetic value of what he is looking at. The commercial piece of property on the south of him, which is within 400 feet, is looked at by everybody in the neighborhood. The house across the street from him is a 30 foot house, plus the cupola. Therefore, across the street from him, Mr. Mrotek stated that there is a building that is in excess of 25 feet. Apparently, a variance was granted, and he wanted the same consideration. Mr. Mrotek took a picture of that house which he presented for reference. According to the City Code, Mrs. Solomon said the plan Mr. Mrotek submitted to the Building Department had incorrect - 18 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JULY 11, 1988 setbacks. Mr. Mrotek responded that he was misinformed. His understanding was that an overhang can encroach. An overhanging gutter can go into your easement by two feet. That means it is hanging in space by two feet. Underneath that gutter is a balcony, so if a gutter is hanging over two feet, Mr. Mrotek asked whether there was a problem with the balcony. Mr. Newbold had said there was a problem with the balcony. Mr. Mrotek had replied that he would move the house one or two feet, and it would be fine. He had the room to do that, and there was no problem in doing that. He did not want to look for a variance in that sense, as he does not need one. Mr. Mrotek was just telling the Members how it happened. That was the reason the mathematics were on the drawing that way. Mr. Mrotek emphasized that there was no concealment, and he was not trying to double talk the Board. Mrs. Solomon commented that it was difficult to judge on something that was not exactly correct. In this case, Vice Chairwoman Artis advised that the Board was allowed to put a condition on the variance. Mr. Mrotek pointed out that he had no request for a variance on the easement. It is a corner lot. Mr. Mrotek looks out on space. There is 42 feet from his building to the road. Mr. Mrotek explained and said the house is well set back off of both roads. He had to buy two pieces of property because there is a setback. The lot was only 50 feet wide, and 25 feet of it had to go to a front yard, so the lot was cut in half. At this point, they have a nice appearing, aesthetic lot. Vice Chairwoman Artis advised that the plans Mr. Mrotek gave to the Building Department showed that he was not meet- ing the setbacks. For that reason, the Board would be allowed to put a condition on the variance. Mr. Mrotek stood corrected on that, and he assured the Members that it would be properly set back so that it would comply with all requirements. Mrs. Solomon asked if the land had to be built up in order for Mr. Mrotek to build. Mr. Newbold answered that Mr. Mrotek had explained it very well. The flood control agency sets the standards throughout the State of Florida. They said the basic flood elevation must be eight feet above sea level. That might mean Mr. Mrotek only needed to raise the property one foot or whatever. That means that the flow elevatiDn must be at that height. It means the land, the yard, and everything has to be at that height. - 19 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JULY 11, 1988 Mr. Newbotd said there are a number of ways Mr. Mrotek can accomplish an elevation of his property. If right now the natural lot is seven feet above sea level and the Code reads that he must comply with the flood plan, or be a minimum of 18 inches above the crown of the road, whichever of the two is the greatest, if Mr. Mrotek's property makes the seven feet, and the seven feet is 18 inches above the crown of the road, Mr. Newbold said Mr. Mrotek does not have to do anything to the lot. If the flood plan is eight feet, and the lot is at seven feet, Mr. Mrotek has to raise the flow height at least to the eight foot level. Mr. Newbold did not research the elevation of the fill because that had been done by the Engineering Department. Mr. Newbold asked Mr. Mrotek how high he raised the lot. Mr. Mrotek answered, "Eight feet MSL, the requirement." Mr. Newbold asked what it was before and how much sand Mr. Mrotek brought in. Mr. Mrotek replied that it was seven feet in some spots and six feet in others. Some fill had been put in prior to this. Mr. Newbold determined that Mr. Mrotek was saying the lot was at seven feet, and the Code was saying it should be eight feet. After elaborating, Mr. Newbold said the Members could very well see that they were only talking about a foot. Mr. Mrotek argued that this was something that was not being illustrated to everybody's total vision. The situation is that you can build a house on any elevation as long as the first floor meets the Corps of Engineers eight feet. Mr. Mrotek showed what he could have done but said he likes a back yard, and he wanted a place to build his pool. Mr. Newbold informed the Members that all of the houses in the State of Florida have to meet the flood control require- ments. That was not a reason for Mr. Mrotek to have a 32 foot high ceiling. Mr. Newbold elaborated and explained that he was pointing out that even if Mr. Mrotek took his building off that lot and put it anywhere in Boynton, it would be 32 feet high. Mr. Mrotek agreed that was correct, but he emphasized: (1) The building is that tall to accommodate a truck and a boat, both of which do not belong on the street. (2) It is costing him money to build it that w~y. The second story is normal. (3) The peak roof is a 4'12" pitch, which is minimum built in Florida, based on 6'12", 7'12", which is more of a steeple type roof. This is down to the minimum. Mr. - 20 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JULY 11, 1988 Mrotek said about seven feet of the peak is sticking in the air. If he had a flat roof, Mrs. Solomon said Mr. Mrotek would be conforming. She asked if it would be a hardship if he did not build the peak roof. Mr. Mrotek answered that it would be because he would not have his vaulted ceilings and the air flow that develops in the vaulted ceiling to cool the house with natural breezes that are prevalent there. He would lose the aesthetic value and would have a roof that would not drain with the pitch. Mr. Mrotek did not feel flat roofs were adequate, and they have a tendency to leak. Also, a flat roof is much hotter than a vaulted ceiling or a pitched roof where you have air escaping in between. Although you can insulate, with a flat roof, you have very little space. It still puts an unnecessary hardship on the living conditions of the building. Mr. Mrotek was an air conditioning contractor for ten years in Maryland and knows about heat loads and what it costs to cool something down. According to the plan, Mr. Mrotek had four bays. Mr. Miriana commented that it looked more like a commercial structure than a residential structure in an R1AA zone. Mr. Mrotek agreed that it would appear that way. He put three doors on one side and one door on the other side for a distinct purpose. His vessel will go in the easternmost door. The center door is for his wife's car, and the other garage door is for the truck. Therefore, all of the vehicles can be off the streets, inside. Mr. Mrotek said the fourth door is on the back side of the building. It is to roll equipment in from the back yard, and it is to open up and get a breeze through the structure. Mr. Mrotek explained that he did it for ventilation. He remarked that it is cheaper to buy a $350 door than it is to build a structure. Mr. Mrotek alluded to having a drive through garage at one time and commented on how handy it is to roll your lawn mower out, etc. He wanted to be able to at least roll a wheelbarrow or tractor out. Otherwise, he will be stuck for getting in and out. Vice Chairwoman Artis advised that it was the Board's duty to find a hardship and the applicant was to help them deter- mine whether the hardship was self imposed or imposed by the City or the County. There has to be a distinct difference between a self imposed hardship and a hardship imposed by the City or County. - 21 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JULY 11, 1988~ Mr. Mrotek referred to the flat roof and stressed that he wants a vaulted ceiling. A flat roof would require him to run air conditioning in there instead of natural breezes. He planned to chimney the vaulted ceiling and vent it to the sky. Hot air will move up the chimney and out the top. The movement of air is what he planned on cooling his house with. Mr. Mrotek asked the Members to notice that there would be Windows around the full perimeter of the building, so it would be a definite hardship in his design, his total way of living, and the structure he was planning to reside in. Mr. Mrotek could not understand why the Board could not grant him permission to have the roof up in the middle of the sky seven feet. It is a hip roof and is not a full barn roof, where it would take up the expanse of the full sky line. Mr. Mrotek remarked that he already has a peak across from him that is a barn roof, and it is 30 feet high. Mr. Mrotek's roof would be two feet over that, which would give him no advantage. He called attention to the photo- graph. Mr. Mrotek said the house is across the street from the lot, across from Lake Drive. Mr. Newbold had no record of a variance being granted. Mr. Mrotek said the home was built eleven years ago. He informed Mr. Newbold that it is a two story building. The bedrooms are upstairs, and there is a full veranda or view off of the back side plus the roof. It looked like a one story to Mr. Newbold. Mrs. Mrotek, sitting in the audience, interjected that the house has four full bedrooms up there. Mr. Miriana referred to the plan and was informed by Mr. Mrotek that the little squares are skylights. He expected to flip them up and let the air expel out of the top, which is a natural way of ventilating the house. Mr. Mrotek explained that it would be one storY living. The lower area is strictly to keep his boat and truck in. They will not go in an eight foot door and require a ten foot door. Mr. Mrotek repeated prior statements. There was more discussion about the plan. Vice Chairwoman Artis was trying to establish that the hard- ship was put on Mr. Mrotek by the City. If he is not able to build the roof, Mr. Mrotek said he would have to run his air conditioning. Actually, he would have to go to a flat roof. A flat roof on the home would be absolutely ridiculous. This is a Keys'home, which is prevalent in Key West and Key Largo. This is exactly the way they build the homes in the - 22 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JULY 11, 1988 Keys except sometimes they are on stilts and sometimes they are closed in. It is a home that is predominantly built there because they have tidal surges and hurricanes. Mr. Mrotek said testimony from his neighbors was that in the 1964 hurricane, they had eight feet above Lake Drive. That would put three feet of water in his first floor. Mr. Mrotek continued by saying the elevation was to comply with Boynton Beach's City Code to keep his boat out of the back yard and front yard. He elaborated and said if an officer said he could not keep his boat in.his yard, he would have to put the boat in storage and pay $160 a month. That is why the structure was formulated this way. It would be a definite hardship all the way around. Mr. Newbold wished to remind the Members and make Mr. Mrotek aware that financing is not a hardship, and he explained. He asked the Members if they were going to permit Mr. Mrotek to have a building seven feet higher than the Code and said they should think about under what conditions they would permit it, other than financial problems. Mrs. Solomon thought Mr. Mrotek should take the plans back to Mr. Newbold's office and redesign them in some way. Mr. Mrotek responded that the mathematics would not allow it. There is a ten foot door and two feet of head room to roll the door up in. There is an 18 inch beam that is required to carry the floor. That was the mathematics in the engineering book. There is the floor, eight feet living space above it, and a four foot pitch. That was the minimum required under the Engineering Code that lets you build structures, i.e. it has to be so strong, etc. so that it is safe and can take the wind load. Mr. Mrotek emphasized that he had to fill the lot, not for today, but for a 100 year plan. He knew that was not written some place, but he said they are in an adverse environment. Conditions can get nasty. If he lowers the whole building, it will be useless. He will not have a ten foot door, and the boat and truck will be on the street. That will be a hardship because Code Enforcement will be after him. Mr. Mearns asked if he could not have put another type of structure on the property that would have met the Code. Mr. Mrotek replied that he would have to go to a one story building, and he did not have the land to put a garage next to the house. Mr. Mrotek explained and again referred to economics. In response to Vice Chairwoman Artis, Mr. Mrotek - 23 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JULY 11, 1988 said it was his choice to move to Boynton Beach. He guessed the hardship was self imposed. It was getting to be a definition of what is self imposed. Mr. Mrotek expounded. Mr. Mrotek repeated prior statements and added that he built the building to accommodate existing conditions in the area. He could sell his boat, but he asked, "Then why be in Florida?" Mr. Mrotek elaborated on boating, his truck, and boat. He again told Vice Chairwoman Artis why he needed a ten foot door. Mr. Mearns apprised Mr. Mrotek that the Board had to be very careful about setting precedents because Mr. Mrotek brought up precedents that already exist in the area. The Board would be faced with this if they made allowances in Mr. Mrotek's case. The Board was there to base their decisions on that, plus the hardship. With the Corps of Engineers, Mr. Mrotek said anyone else in that area will have their first floor at eight feet today. Gold Coast Engineering tested the lot to make sure it was buildable and that the ground was proper for him to build. It has already been said that they are talking about increas- ing the MLS to 8½ feet. The elevation level went from 7½, and then to 8. Mr. Mrotek elaborated. Mr. Newbold argued that the Building Department had not heard anything. The elevation has not been changed since it was put in. The Federal Government does not move that fast. If Mr. Mrotek's lot was the only lot in Boynt~on Beach affected by the Flood Control elevation, Mr. Newbold would say Mr. Mrotek should bring it up 365 days out of the year, but every lot throughout Palm Beach County has to meet the same requirements. Mr. Mrotek's lot, not the floor of the house, was only one foot low. That was not 'a reason for the Board to say there was an elevation problem. Mr. Newbold did not know of any Ordinance that would mandate that Mr. Mrotek had to have three garages underneath the house at any height to house a boat and truck. The Board must look at whether or not the house is seven feet higher than the Code and if Mr. Mrotek can show the Members that a hardship exists. Mr. Newbold explained and said permits are issued daily for two story buildings all over the City, and none of them exceed the height. Vice Chairwoman Artis informed Mr. Mrotek that the Board could not deny him the use of the land. The Board has the - 24 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JULY 11, 1988 power to override any Board in the City. The Board is also subject to a Court Order, if there is a need for one. That is why the Members have to be very careful, because they do not like to spend time in Court. Some of the Members have had to spend time in Court. Mr. Mrotek replied that he had his heart set on the struc- ture, and he once again referred to not having the self cooling of the upper story and the storage of his vehicles being a hardship. He expounded. Vice Chairwoman Artis explained that if this was a situation where Mr. Mrotek was landlocked and needed the variance, or the City had changed the zoning, which required that he not be able to use his land, it would be a hardship imposed by the City. It had to be clear whether Mr. Mrotek or the City was creating the hardship. Mr. Mrotek again mentioned his vessel. Mr. Mrotek stated that he found a design through an Archi- tect and through research in books that he can utilize with normal ventilation in a structure that he chose to do. That requires a peak to the roof. It has to go up. Mr. Miriana said to assume the garage doors were the standard height. Mr. Mrotek responded that if he takes the doors down to eight feet, they will only be down to 30 feet. If he takes the doors down to six feet, they will only be down to 28 feet. Mr. Newbold explained that the longer the run, the higher the pitch. There are a lot of things in design. All two story houses do not have to have a 4 to 12 foot pitch. Mr. Mrotek agreed but said the 4 to 12 pitch facilitates the movement of the air. The flatter the pitch, the less the movement. There was discussion. Mrs. Mrotek said they would very much like to live in Boynton Beach. Her husband tried very hard to design a home that would make them happy and that would look nice in the neighborhood. Mrs. Mrotek said the home across the street that they talked about has tall garage doors. She had a tour of the home and said a boat is inside the garage. Upstairs are four full bedrooms. The house is 30 feet high, and they are asking for 32 feet. Mrs. Mrotek knew the overhang could be worked out. She referred to her husband working several hours on the plans. Mrs. Mrotek said the final Architect,s plans would not be finished until they get - 25 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JULY 11, 1988 approval on the peak. They are trying very hard to have something pretty. Secretary Mearns read a letter dated June 24, 1988 from Martin McGee, 410 Ashland Avenue, River Forest, Illinois 60305. Mr. McGee wrote that he owns the house at 640 Dimick Road (Lots 44 and 45, Lakeside Gardens Subdivision). He was informed that concrete blocks were being laid to a substantial height quite close to the east of his house. Mr. McGee asked the Building and Zoning Departments to check the construction to ensure that it is not closer to his home than the 7½ feet required by the Code. To permit this would detract from the value of the property. Secretary Mearns read another letter from Mr. McGee, dated June 30, which was in response to the City's notice of hear- ing. Mr. McGee wrote that he owns the houses at 628 Dimick and 640 Dimick Road. All houses in the area are normal height and are built at elevations substantially lower than the proposed structure. Mr. McGee enclosed photos of the retaining walls at the site, which were sent to him by a neighbor. He wrote that it was obvious that the wall itself dwarfs his home in the background of the photos. For this reason, he objected to the variance from the maximum structure height. No one else wished to speak in opposition to the variance, and THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Vice Chairwoman Artis asked how old the house in question, across the street, is. Mr. Newbold could not answer because nothing in the City records showed that anything had been put there that was higher than the actual Code height. He was not disputing Mr. Mroteck. Mrs. Solomon asked when there was a change in the Code. Mr. Newbold replied that the Board of Adjustment was started in 1975. Prior to that, research showed that the property was still zoned R1AA. Vice Chairwoman Artis reminded the Members that each variance is on its own merit. She said they must be absolutely clear in their minds that the hardship was not self imposed, and she added that the Board could put a stipulation on the motion. Vice Chairwoman Artis said it was possible for the Board to pass the height variance and stipulate that all other requirements must be met according to the Code. Mrs. Lewis did not see how there was a hardship because Mr. Mrotek was not being denied the use of the land. Many - 26 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JULY 11, 1988 people store boats and trucks in their yards, although she thought the garage was a great idea. However the Board had~ to address a hardship, and Mrs. Lewis did not think that had been shown. Mr. Miriana thought the same way Mrs. Lewis did. Mr. Eney was aware that the house across the street was in excess of the height of the remaining houses. The remainder of the houses look like they were built 20 or 25 years ago. The one directly opposite Mr. Mrotek's is definitely higher than any of the surrounding houses in that area. In considering the total area of where Mr. Mroteck, Mr. Eney said he is bordered on one side by an R-3 development, and a storage barn on the other end. He could not see that a variance would make a great deal of difference. Even if Mr. Mrotek conformed to the City Code, Mr. Eney did not think it would be a better house or more aesthetically pleasing if he changed it. The first 100 feet in are commercial. From the type of neighborhood that it is, Mr. Eney could not see why Mr. Mrotek should be denied the variance. Mr. Eney moved to grant the variance from a maximum structure height of 25 feet to be increased to 32 feet for construction of a single family residence under the condition that all other parts of the Code be followed, provided that all other specifics of the Code be met insofar as they pertain to setbacks and overhangs. Mr. Mearns seconded the motion, and Mrs. Ramseyer took a roll call vote on the motion as follows: Mrs. Lewis Mrs. Solomon Mr. Miriana Mr. Newton Mr. Eney Vice Chairwoman Artis Secretary Mearns No No No Yes Yes No Yes The vote was 3-4. The request for variance was DENIED. PENDING REQUEST FOR FUTURE MEETING - AUGUST 8, 1988 Case #129 - 445 North Federal Highway Owner: Eslett Ruiz Request: Reduction in number of parking spaces - 27 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JULY 11, 19~8 ELECTION OF CHAIRPERSON AND VICE-CHAIRPERSON Chairperson Mrs. Solomon nominated Vernon Thompson as Chairman, seconded by Mrs. Lewis. As there were no other nominations, the nominations were closed, and Vernon Thompson was retained as Chairman of the Board by a vote of 7-0. Vice Chairperson Mrs. Lewis nominated Lillian Artis as Vice Chairperson, seconded by Mrs. Solomon. There were no other nominations, and Lillian Artis was retained as Vice Chairperson of the Board by a vote of 7-0. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting adjourned at 9:45 P. M. Patricia Ramseyer Recording Secretary, (Three Tapes - 28 - Location: 240 North Congress Avenue A parcel of land in the Northwest Quarter (N.W. }) of Section 29, Township 45 South,' range 43 East, City of Boynton Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, more particularly described as follows: From the Northwest corner of Section 29, Township 45, South, Range 43 East, City of Boynton Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, a point on the centerline of the 100 foot right- of-way of Congress Avenue, run S.0°58'29"E. along the West line of Section 29, and said centerline of Congress Avenue, a distance of 322°06 feet to its intersection with the Southerly line of the 106 foot right,of-way of State Road 804 as same is recorded in Road Plat Book 2, Pages 217 - 220, Public Records, Palm Beach County, Florida; thence continue S.O°58'29"E., along said line, a distance of 500 feet to a point; thence 'N,87°54"O6"E., 60.04 feet to the Easterly right,of-way line of Congress Avenue and the Point of Beginning of the described parcel of land; continue thence N.87~54'06-E. 225 feet; thence run S.0°58'29"E. 140 feet; thence S.87"54'06"W. 225 feet; thence N.0~58'29-W., 140 feet to the said POINT OF BEGINNING. ADDENDUM A Location: 2400 Hypoluxo Road Being a parcel of land in the northeast quarter (N.E. 1/4) of Section 8, Township 45 South, Range 43 East, said parcel being a portion of HIGH RIDGE COUNTRY CLUB as recorded in Plat Book 39, Pages 137 and 138, Public records of Palm Beach County, Florida, said parcel being more particularly described as follows: BEGINNING at a concrete monument delineated as P.R.M. ~4 on the west line of said plat; thence South 65°45'00" East (bearing datum according to said plat), 625.00 feet; thence South 87°East 460 feet; thence North 03°East, 300 feet; thence North 22°West, 480 feet; thence North 87"West, 702.04 feet to the west line of said plat; thence South 18~08'34'' West along said west line, 526.80 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING, containing 14,26 acres, more or less. ADDENDUM B