Loading...
Minutes 03-09-87MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING HELD IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA, MONDAY, MARCH 9, 1987 AT 7:00 P.M. PRESENT Vernon Thompson, Jr., Chairman Lillian Artis George Mearns Paul Slavin Ben Uleck Raymond Eney, Alternate Danny O'Brien, Alternate ABSENT George Ampol, Vice Chairman (Excused) Robert Gordon, Secretary (Excused) Alan Newbold, Chief Plans Inspector Chairman Thompson called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. Chairman Thompson introduced the members of the Board, Mr. Newbold, and the Recording Secretary. He then recognized the presence in the audience of Mayor Nick Cassandra, Vice Mayor Carl Zimmerman, and interested citizen Bob Fauser. MINUTES OF DECEMBER 8, 1986 Mr. Slavin moved to approve the minutes as received. motion was seconded and carried unanimously. ANNOUNCEMENTS The Non e. COMMUNICATIONS None. OLD BUSINESS None. 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 bases its decision upon. - 1 - MINUTES-BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MARCH 9, 1987 Chairman Thompson pointed out that this Board is not a majority Board. Any three negative votes will deny the applicant, and five votes in favor are needed to grant the request. Case #112 Applicant/ Owner: Pedro M. Diaz Request: Relief from Appendix A-Zoning, Section 6-C-3-B requiring a 30 foot minimum side and/or rear yard for commercial building abutting a resi- dential zone. Request a 20 foot rear yard setback. Address: Use: Legal Description: Also, relief from Appendix A-Zoning, Section 4-L requiring a six foot solid, stucco masonry wall where a commercial district abuts a resi- dential district. Request that requirement of wall be waived. 3301 West Boynton Beach Boulevard Shopping Center That portion of Tract 7, Palm Beach Farms Company Plat No. 8, according to the Plat thereof on file in the office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court in and for Palm Beach County, Florida, recorded in Plat Book 5, page 73, lying North of right-of-way of State Road 804. Less the North 27 feet thereof conveyed to Lake Worth Drainage District by Official Record Book 3655, page 1979, Palm Beach County Records. Acting Secretary Slavin read the application for Case #112 and the responses to the six questions in paragraph 5. Pedro Diaz, 2867 Banyan Boulevard Circle, Boca Raton, Florida, said his written statement summarized the reasons for his request. 'He stated that the main reason for the request was that the land behind his property is proposed to be zoned commercially. He added that there are easements to the south and to the north of the canal which provide a buffer between the two properties. - 2 - MINUTES-BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MARCH 9, 1987 Board members looked at the surveyor,s map of the property. Mr. Eney had a question concerning Mr. Diaz, written statement that "the literal interpretation of this chapter would make necessary to cut the length of the proposed stores to less than 55', which is considered uneconomical.,, He asked if Mr. Diaz' objective was to have a 55' store. Mr. Diaz replied that the plans were about 60' in the architect,s drawings. Chairman Thompson asked if the proposed plan would put his building back less than the building next to his. Mr. Diaz answered affirmatively and explained that the neighboring property owner culverted the canal and was given the 27', so his property was longer, and he was allowed to move the building back. Mr. Diaz stated that even if the variance is granted, his building will be forward of the other building. Mr. Uleck asked why Mr. Diaz did not want to follow the Code for a 30' setback. Mr. Diaz replied that the length of the stores, because of the parking constraints, would be less than 55' long. In response to Mr. Uleck,s inquiry, Mr. Diaz said the building would be 47' (27' + 20') from the canal. Mr. Newbold stated that the Code calls for a 30' rear setback, and Mr. Diaz was requesting a 20' setback. Mr. Slavin asked Mr. Newbold if a culvert had been put in by the property owners of the land at the Lake Worth Drainage District canal east of Knuth Road. Mr. Newbold explained that the LWDD will not put the culverts in; they may be put in at the property owners, expense. Mr. Slavin asked, if the property owners get the deed to the property, whether they get another 27'. Mr. Newbold answered affirmatively. Mr. Slavin wondered if Mr. Diaz would be in conformity if he put in a culvert and got the 27' easement and the land abutting his did not. Mr. Newbold answered that he would not be in conformity only if he was in violation of a city ordinance. He added that there is no ordinance mandating that the canal be culverted. Mr- Slavin asked, if Mr. Diaz puts in a culvert and the LWDD gives him a easement of 27', how the ordinances would be affected. Mr. Newbold replied that if the LWDD granted him the 20' to use as his property and maintained an easement as they are doing on the adjacent property, then Mr. Diaz, by Code, would be the owner of that property. In answer to Mr. Slavin,s question, Mr. Newbold said if Mr. Diaz puts in the culvert and gets the title to the property, he would have 27' more. Mr. Slavin asked if Mr. Diaz' situation would be affected if the other property owners did not put in a culvert. Mr. Newbold advised that an easement had already been granted and a culvert installed at the property adjacent to Mr. Diaz' property. Chairman Thompson stated - 3 - MINUTES-BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MARCH 9, 1987 that getting the additional 27' is optional for all the pro- perty owners. Mr. Mearns believed that the LWDD was not prone to grant approval for things like this without placing a lot of restric- tions and limitations on it. He asked if they could come in at any time and remove the culvert, causing Mr. Diaz' property to become non-conforming. Mr. Diaz did not think the LWDD would be able to remove the culvert, because they would have deeded the property (27') to the property owner. He explained that they would not give the property owner the land over the culvert (25'); the property owner would not be able to build anything on top of the culvert except a parking lot or grass. Mr. Diaz added that once the land is culverted, the property owner is responsible for keeping the culvert clean. Mr. Mearns commented that liability would also fall on the property owner. Mr. Diaz said the LWDD is apparently very eager to have the canal east of Knuth Road culverted. However, west of Knuth Road, the LWDD will not allow property owners to culvert. Chairman Thompson asked if there was anyone who 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. Chairman Thompson announced that no communications concerning this variance were received. Mr. Uleck commented that if this variance was granted, other property owners might also. request reductions in setback length. Chairman Thompson reminded members that the variance request was twofold; in addition to the request for reduction in setback length, there was also a request to waive the require- ment of a 6' wall. Mr. O'Brien asked if commercial properties were waived from this requirement when they have certain types of alleys between them and residential properties. Mr. Newbold said this was a buffer wall that was required between residential districts and commercial districts. Mr. O'Brien asked if this wall would be required, if he was abutting a thru-street or right-of-way, whether it be an alley or street. Mr. Newbold answered that it would depend on where the residential line falls. Mr. O'Brien .then asked if the differential between the 20' and the 30' setback requirement fell into the same classification as the wall under those circumstances. Mr. Newbold answered affirmatively and explained it was because the canal property will never be developed because the Flood Control District controls it. He said the County has zoned it AR (Agricultural/ - 4 - MINUTES-BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MARCH 9, 1987 Residential), although no one will ever plant a garden or build a residence there. Mr. Newbold added that if the City ever annexes that land, it would be zoned commercially. Mr. O'Brien said that due to a technicality, the canal right- of-way must be considered as agricultural and residential zoning. Mr. Newbold said he had questioned the Planner, because he thought the City ordinances should have no bearing since the property was under County jurisdiction. Mr. O'Brien said that, since the property does border a right-of-way and since the ordinance was written to protect the residential owner and not to place a hardship on the commercial owner, it is clear in the Code that this criteria would not hold concerning abutting of right-of-ways. Mr. O'Brien stated that Mr Diaz was in a Catch-22 situation. ' Chairman Thompson stated the City has no control over the adjacent property, and he noted that, if the City gets control over it, it would be zoned commercially. He also noted that there would be a distance of over 70' to anything that would be built across the canal. Chairman Thompson saw no reason for a wall to be built. Mr. Mearns asked if the City made the neighboring property owner build his wall. Mr. Newbold did not think that property owner had come before the Board. There was more discussion. Motions Mr. O'Brien wished to take the two requests separately, ge moved to grant the request for the variance on construction of the wall, because the property abuts a man-made buffer (the LWDD canal), because the future land use plan for the area to the north will be commercial, and because of reasons stated earlier by Mr. O'Brien and Chairman Thompson. Mr. Slavin believed that both requests should be included in the same motion. Mr. O'Brien thought that since two separate variances were being requested, the two requests should be voted on separately. Chairman Thompson stated that only once before had two items been requested, and he said the Board had voted on them together, since they had been presented to the Board as one package. Chairman Thompson explained that if the two requests had been presented separately at the beginning, then they could be voted on separately. Chairman Thompson recommended voting on the requests in one motion, since they were presented to the Board in the same package. Mr. Newbold advised that Mr. Diaz had made application for the two requests separately; he first applied for the setback variance and then requested a - 5 - MINUTES-BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MARCH 9, 1987 variance on the wall. independent requests. Mr. Newbold stated that there were two Chairman Thompson stated that the Board would then vote on the requests separately. He asked that a motion be made on the first request regarding the setback. Mr. NeWbold asked if the first motion made by Mr. O'Brien had been disposed of. Chairman Thompson said that since there had been no second, he preferred to vote on the first request first. Mr. Slavin said he would second Mr. O'Brien's motion, but then he withdrew his second, so the first request could be voted on first. Mr. O'Brien's motion was withdrawn. Mr. Slavin moved to grant the request for a variance on the 20' rear yard setback, because the hardship was not self- imposed and because the footage involved is about 75' from building to possible building. The motion was .seconded by Mr. Eney. A roll call vote was taken on the motion: Chairman Thompson _ Aye Mrs. Artis - Aye Mr. Mearns - Aye Mr. Slavin - Aye Mr. Uleck - Aye Mr. Eney - Aye Mr. O'Brien - Nay Chairman Thompson stated the variance request for the setback was APPROVED by a 6-1 vote. Mr. O'Brien moved to grant the request for a variance on the construction of the 6' masonry wall. The reasons for his motion were: 1) the property abuts the LWDD canal, which is a man-made thoroughfare, and other properties in commercial zoning which abut right-of-ways of certain natures do not have to install such a wall; 2) the situation was not caused by the applicant; 3) other properties that abut certain ri~ht-of-ways within the City are allowed to bypass the wall requirement, if residential property is on the other side of the right-of-way. The motion was seconded by Mr. Mearns. A roll call vote was taken on the motion: Chairman Thompson _ Aye Mrs. Artis - Aye Mr. Mearns - Aye Mr. Slavin - Aye Mr. Uleck - Aye Mr. Eney - Aye Mr. O'Brien - Aye - 6 - MINUTES-BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MARCH 9, 1987 Chairman Thompson stated the variance request for waiving the requirement of the wall was APPROVED by a 7-0 vote. ADJOURNMENT Chairman Thompson noted that there was one case pending before the Board for their April 13, 1987 meeting. There was discussion concerning whether it was necessary for Board members to receive information on the property and property owners in the surrounding 400' of the property in question. Mayor Cassandra said he could ask the City Attorney whether this information was necessary for Board members to have. He said those property owners did have to be notified of the hearing. It was decided that Board members would continue to receive this information, as the majority of the members desired to receive it. There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 8:02 P.M. Linda Warlick Recording Secretary (One Tape) - 7 -