Loading...
Minutes 05-11-87MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING HELD IN COMMISSION CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MONDAY, MAY 11, 1987 AT 7:00 P.M. PRESENT Vernon Thompson, Jr., Chairman Lillian Artis, Vice Chairwoman George Mearns, Secretary Daniel E. Boyar Henrietta Solomon Ben Uleck Janice Lewis, Alternate (Voting) Raymond Eney, Alternate (Non-Voting) Alfred Newbold, Chief Plans Inspector ABSENT George Ampol (Excused) Chairman Thompson called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. He introduced the members of the Board, Mr. Newbold, and the Recording Secretary. Chairman Thompson also recognized the presence in the audience of former Vice Mayor carl Zimmerman, former Board member Ted Blum, and interested citizen Bob Fauser. (Vice Mayor Marchese also entered the meeting at a later time.) ORGANIZATIONAL MEETING Chairman Thompson announced that at the last meeting, since there was not a full Board, the organizational meeting had been postponed until this meeting. Chairman Thompson said the Board needed to elect a Chairman, Vice Chairman, and Secretary. Mr. Mearns nominated Chairman Thompson to continue serving as Chairman. The motion was seconded by Mrs. Solomon, and Chairman Thompson was unanimously elected Chairman. Mrs. Solomon nominated Mr. Uleck for Vice Chairman, but Mr. Uleck declined the nomination. Mrs. Solomon then nominated Mrs. Artis for Vice Chairwoman. The motion was seconded by Mr. Mearns, and Mrs. Artis was unanimously elected Vice Chairwoman. Mrs. Solomon nominated Mr. Mearns to serve as the Board Secretary. The motion was seconded by Vice Chairwoman Artis. Mr. Mearns was unanimously elected Secretary of the Board. MINUTES OF APRIL 13, 1987 Chairman Thompson announced that, at the Board Orientation meeting, members were urged to vote on the minutes, whether - 1 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 11, 1987 or not they were present at the meeting. Mrs. Solomon moved to accept the minutes as received. The motion was seconded by Mrs. Lewis and carried 7-0. NEW BUSINESS Chairman Thompson explained to the audience that the Board bases its decision upon what members see when they visit the site in question to decide whether the hardship that exists was caused by the City, County or State government or was self-imposed. He read the six criteria the Board also bases its decision upon. Chairman Thompson pointed out that this Board is not a majority Board. Any three negative votes will deny the request, and five votes in favor are needed to grant the request. Case #116 Applicant/ Owner: Christopher Kalish Request: Relief from R-1 zoning requirement of 7.5 foot side setback to construct a fireplace chimney. Existing setback is 7.2 feet instead of the required 7.5 feet; variance of an additional 1.8 feet is requested. Address: 3265 Ocean Parkway Proposed Use: Construct fireplace chimney at residence Legal Description: Lot 3, Block 8, Rolling Green Ridge, Recorded in Plat Book 24, Page 124, Palm Beach County Records Secretary Mearns read the application for Case #116 and the responses to the six questions in paragraph 5. As the responses .were handwritten, Chairman Thompson commented for the record that, if the applications were typed, they would be easier to read. Christopher Kalish, 3265 Ocean Parkway, asked the Board members if they had any questions of him. Mrs. Solomon asked if the structure would involve any safety problems. Mr. Kalish replied thlat it was structurally more sound. Without the chase, only the metal flues would be coming out of the house; with the chase, everything would be anchored within that. - 2 - MINUTES-BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 11, 1987 Mr. Uleck asked when Mr. Kalish purchased the home, and Mr. Kalish replied that he purchased it on September 7, 1984. Mr. Uleck asked if he got permits for all of the additions. Mr. Kalish reported that he got a permit to enclose the carport, but not the fireplace. He said after the chimney was built and the walls were enclosed, he was notified of a code violation. Mr. Uleck asked Mr. Kalish if he had been told that there was a certain setback from the property line. Mr. Kalish answered that he was not told when he first made the footing details. Inspector had told him to draw in on thie plan, and then go back and obtain a permit for the fireplace. No one was aware of the setback requirement, until after the walls had been built. Mr. Newbold reported that Mr. Kalish had been red tagged for the violation and given about thirty days to comply. When Mr. Kalish made no response, he was cited for a code violation. When Mr. Kalish received his letter regarding the violation, he then tried to rectify the situation. Whoever approved the slab for the fireplace was under the impression 'that he would stay within the W~ll line, not knowing that he would protrude it outside of the line. The fireplace could be constructed within the wall line; Mr. Kalish wants to go 1.8' closer to the property line. Mr. Newbold further explained that the Code calls for a 7.5' side setback, and the existing setback is 7.2'; if the 1.8' addition were allowed, the structure would be 5.4' from the property line. Mr. Newbold explained to Mrs. Solomon that the type of fireplace Mr. Kalish is building could be built without pushing the wood frame outside, but he wants his to be built where the fireplace is flush with the wall and protrudes to the outside. Mr. Uleck asked if Mr. Kalish could put the flue in without using the additional 1.8'. Mr. Kalish replied that it could be done, but it would make the room (which is 10') too small. Secretary Mearns commented that, in effect, Mr. Kalish had created his own hardship. Mr. Newbold said the carport met Code when it was built, but when the new Code came into effect, it became a nonconforming structure. Mr. Newbold said nonconforming structures can be altered or added to, as long they are not increased. Mr. Kalish originally was not adding to it, but after the permit was issued, Mr. Kalish added the foundation. He then asked that the foundation be permitted, after he was red tagged. Mr. Boyar asked about Mr. Kalish's answer to question 'F' · which said neighbors had complimented the owners on the - 3 - MINUTES-BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 11, 1987 aesthetics and the overall improvement to the property. He asked if Mr. Kalish had any proof of this. Mr. Kalish said he had planned to bring a petition signed by his neighbors, but he did not have it. Mr. Boyar then asked if there was any point on the house besides the fireplace that protruded more than 7.2'. Mr. Kalish replied that the only other thing was the overhang, which was legal. Mr. Boyar asked Board members why the 7.5' setback was required. Chairman Thompson informed him that the Code was upgraded in 1975 to require increased setbacks to put homes further apart. Mr. Boyar wondered if any safety factors were involved. Mr. Newbold noted that setbacks are not only for aesthetic purposes, but also to stop fires from spreading. Mr. Boyar remarked that the survey map was very hard to read and evaluate. Chairman Thompson agreed and said they are usually not that hard to read. Chairman Thompson asked if anyone wished to speak in favor of granting the variance. There was no response. Chairman Thompson then asked if anyone wished to speak against the granting of the variance, and again there was no response. Chairman Thompson advised that there was one communication in the case. Secretary Mearns read the letter from Katharine M. Betts, 260 N. Palm Drive, who did not object to the construction of the fireplace. Chairman Thompson stated that the only thing in violation was the chimney that extended 1.8' past the required set- back. He also explained that, since the structure was non- conforming, Mr. Kalish was allowed to enclose the carport, but Mr. Kalish had extended the foundation 1.8'into the set- back. Chairman Thompson then asked for comments from the Board members. Mrs. Lewis said, in view of Mr. Newbold's comment about possible fire hazard if buildings are too close and in view of the fact that the structure was a fireplace, she would not feel safe in granting the variance. Secretary Mearns asked the distance to the nearest residence from the fireplace. Chairman Thompson first estimated a distance of 10', but when Mr. Kalish explained the location of the neighboring home, Chairman Thompson decided the total distance would be 30.10'. Mr. Uleck asked if the chimney was already constructed. Mr. Kalish said all the walls were already closed in, and the chimney was part of the wall. - 4 - MINUTES-BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 11, 1987 Chairman Thompson commented that the possibility of a fire hazard would have to be ruled out in this case. He added that the only problem he saw was the fact that Mr. Kalish went ahead with his plans without contacting the City. However, Chairman Thompson remarked, 1.8' was a very small distance. He noted that the neighbor's house was the only structure within at least 100' of the property. Secretary Mearns noted that in New York State the required distance between structures to help keep fire from spreading was 15'. Chairman Thompson repeated his opinion that a variance of 20" was not an unreasonable request. Mrs. Solomon asked if the Board was only to consider the variance and not whether or not the applicant got the permit. Chairman Thompson answered that was partially true, but the Board did have to be concern~ed with violations. He thought all questions related to the case would have to be looked at. Mr. Uleck advised the new members that the applicants have to be able to prove hardship in order to be granted a variance. Secretary Mearns asked if Mr. Kalish would have to tear down the structure if the variance were not granted, and Chairman Thompson responded affirmatively. Vice Chairwoman Artis asked what would happen to the charges of the Codes Enforcement Board if the variance were granted. Chairman Thompson said once the Board of Adjustment makes a decision, the applicant would not have to go before any other Boards. Mr. Uleck felt if the structure could be built properly within the Code requirements, it should be done that way. If it could not be built to Code, then the Board could con- sider granting the variance. Chairman Thompson reminded him that the applicant was just trying to have more space in the room. Mr. Boyar asked if there were any photographs or if there was any proof that the neighbors did not object. Chairman Thompson said there were many cases where neighbors approve or disapprove, but using that as a basis for decision could cause bad judgment to be used. As for photographs, Chairman Thompson said they were rarely received. Chairman Thompson advised Mrs. Solomon that all of the residents within 400' of the property were notified of this hearing. Mr. Boyar asked what would happen if other residents started asking for similar variances, based on this case, if this variance were granted. Chairman Thompson advised that each case is decided on its own merit, and each case before the Board is in violation; if every case were turned down, there - 5 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 11, 1987 would be no need for the Board to exist. However, the out- come of one case could not be a deciding factor in the out- come of another case. Mr. Uleck repeated that hardship must be the determining factor. Mr. Boyar thought the hardship was the fact that the house was built so close to begin with; he further noted that this change was an improvement to the house. Secretary Mearns said Mr. Kalish had created his own hardship by making this change. Mr. Boyar noted the addition was only an exten- sion of about 20" over an area of about 4.4' in width. He added that no one was being crowded since this was in the back yard. ' Motion Vice Chairwoman Artis moved that the variance be GRANTED to the applicant, in view of the fact that 20" of a 4.4' area was involved and realizing that the applicant did build with- out a permit. The motion was seconded by Mrs. Solomon. A roll call vote was taken on the motion: Chairman Thompson - Aye Vice Chairwoman Artis - Aye Mr. Boyar - Aye Secretary Mearns - Nay Mrs. Solomon - Aye Mr. Uleck - Nay Mrs. Lewis - Aye Chairman Thompson announced that the variance request had been GRANTED by a 5-2 vote. Case #115 Applicant: Owner: Request: Address: Proposed Use: Legal Description: George Gentile, gbs architects Bojaco Realty Corp., c/o Royal Petroleum, Inc. Relief from C-2 zoning requirement of 30 foot front setback to be reduced to 10 foot front setback for construction of new canopy. 302 West Boynton Beach Boulevard Construct new canopy - Texaco station Lots 10-18 inclusive (less N 10 ft. Road R/W) - 6 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 11, 1987 Block 2, Boynton Heights Addition, Revised Plat, Recorded in Plat Book 10, Page 64, Palm Beach County Records Secretary Mearns read the application for Case #115 and the responses to the six questions in paragraph 5. Don Hearing, with gbs architects and representing Royal Petroleum, Inc., said the request was for a variance in the setback requirement. He explained that the existing zoning designation at this location was C-2, a commercial zoning designation. Mr. Hearing stated the lot was nonconforming, with an existing structure on it that was built at a time when the Zoning Code allowed the canopy to be extended to the point at which it now exists (10' setback). He added that having a nonconforming lot and a nonconforming structure presents a hardship on his client. Mr. Hearing said his client wished to construct a new canopy. This canopy would only extend to the point that the existing canopy extends; it would not protrude out any further. The new canopy would be more contemporary in design, which would benefit the appearance of the City. Mr. Hearing said the canopy needed to be constructed to provide additional pro- tection from the elements; not having this extra protection would keep the station from being competitive, which would be another hardship. Mr. Hearing distributed pictures showing the existing canopy, and he repeated that the new canopy would not extend further than the existing one and that the lot was nonconforming. Mr. Hearing also showed a set of working drawings, which showed the extent of the improvements. He said the existing canopy is not visually acceptable or compatible with the area. As a point of interest, Mr. Hearing said this would not be the closest structure to the property line along Boynton Beach Boulevard, and he said the entire area is a nonconforming area. In response to Mrs. Lewis' inquiry, Mr. Hearing said the structure would be expanded to the side streets where there are no setback requirements, rather than toward Boynton Beach Boulevard. Secretary Mearns inquired about the elevation of the new canopy, and Mr. Hearing informed him that the new canopy would be level and would be a height of 14'6". There would also be cut-off luminaries, so the lighting would stay under the canopy. Mr. Boyar asked why the 30' setback was required in the Code. Chairman Thompson thought it was for safety reasons. Mr. - 7 - MINUTES-BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 11, 1987 Newbold replied that all cities have to have some regulations for aesthetics, open air, safety, etc. Cities also have research done and bring in professional planners to establish zoning codes that conform to some standard. These codes are approved after much research. Mr. Newbold said the reasons for the determinations were too numerous to elaborate upon. Mr. Boyar did not think safety would be adversely effected by having the new canopy, since the gas pumps would still be located in the same place. He thought there could be more of a safety hazard if the canopy was not permitted, because the customers could slip and fall in the rain. Chairman Thompson stated that this case had been before the Board one year ago. At that time, Royal Petroleum, Inc. had wanted to extend the canopy beyond the present canopy toward Boynton Beach Boulevard. The request was denied, because the Board felt it would be too close to the street. Chairman Thompson clarified that the request now was not to go beyond that point, but just to remodel the existing canopy (a setback variance would still be required to put a new canopy in the same location). Mr. Uleck believed the 10' setback, the new canopy, the land- scaping, and the modernization of the building would benefit Boynton Beach Boulevard. He thought the variance should be granted, providing the applicant precisely followed the plans. Chairman Thompson asked if the property had been grandfathered in since 1975. Mr. Newbold said the building was built in 1967 under Conditional zoning and must have gone through an approval procedure. Mrs. SOlomon asked when construction would take place, assuming the Board granted the variance. Mr. Hearing replied that the applicant would like to make the changes right away. Chairman Thompson asked if anyone wished to speak in favor of granting the variance. There was no response. Chairman Thompson asked if anyone wished to speak against the granting of the variance. There was no response. Mrs. Solomon asked who was responsible for making sure the work was done correctly, if the variance was granted. Chairman Thompson told her that the Building Department was responsible. Chairman Thompson asked if there were any communications in reference to this case; there were none. - 8 - MINUTES-BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 11, 1987 Mr. Boyar thought the plans would be an improvement to the current condition of the building. He said the applicant would be landscaping the empty lot beside it. Mr. Boyar believed that the applicant needed the overhang to remain competitive with other service stations. He thought the changes would be an asset to the City. Chairman Thompson commented that there had been a lot of improvements made since Royal .Petroleum had taken over the service station. He added that there has been an overall improvement in the condition of all service stations in Boynton Beach in the last several years. Mr. Uleck moved to GRANT the variance of 20' needed to constr~uct the canopy in the same location as the old canopy. Vice Chairwoman Artis seconded the motion. Mr. Boyar asked if the motion should state that the approval was subject to the applicant adhering to the plans presented. Chairman Thompson replied that the City makes sure these plans are followed. A roll call vote was taken on the motion: Chairman Thompson - Aye Vice Chairwoman Artis - Aye Mr. Boyar - Aye Secretary Mearns - Aye Mrs. Solomon - Aye Mr. Uleck - Aye Mirs. Lewis - Aye Chairman Thompson announced that the variance was GRANTED by a 7-0 vote. ADJOURNMENT Mrs. Solomon asked if the Board meets in the summer. Chairman Thompson told her that they do, unless there are not enough members in town to conduct a meeting. There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 8:35 P.M. Linda Warlick Recording Secretary (Two Tapes) - 9 -