Loading...
Minutes 09-08-86MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING HELD IN THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT CONFERENCE ROOM, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA, MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 8, 1986 AT 7:00 P. M. PRESENT Vernon Thompson, Jr., Chairman Robert Gordon, Secretary Lillian Artis Paul Slavin Ben Uleck Raymond Eney, Alternate ABSENT George Ampol, Vice Chairman (Excused) George Mearns (Excused) Danny O'Brien Alan Newbold, Chief Plans Inspector Chairman Thompson called the meeting to order at 7:05 P. M., and introduced the Members of the Board, Mr. Newbold, and the Recording Secretary. MINUTES OF JULY 14, 1986 Mr. Slavin moved to accept the minutes as received, seconded by Mr. Eney. Motion carried 5,0. Secretary Gordon abstained from voting, as he was not present at the meeting of July 14. There was no meeting in August. ANNOUNCEMENTS None. COMMUNICATIONS Chairman Thompson said these would be saved for each case they are related to. OLD BUSINESS None. - 1 - MINUTES-BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA SEPTEMBER 8, 1986 Applicant,/ Owner: Vincent J. Gallo Request: Relief from Appendix A-Zoning, Sec. 5-D-2-a requirement of 60 ft. lot frontage to be reduced to 50 ft. lot frontage and relief from 7,500 sq. ft. lot area requirement to be reduced to 6,967 square foot lot area Proposed Use: Construct a single family dwelling Address: 1015 N. W. 7th Street Legal Description: Lot 102, LAUREL HILLS, THIRD ADDITION, recorded in Plat Book 23, Page 126, Palm Beach County Records Chairman Thompson read the six criteria the Board bases its decisions upon. They also base their decisions upon what they see when they go out and look at the plot in question to find out whether the hardship that exists was caused by the City, County or State government in some way, or was self-imposed. Chairman Thompson pointed out that this Board is not a majority Board. Tonight they did not have a full Board but only had six Members voting. Chairman Thompson advised that it would take five Votes to pass the request, and any three negative votes out of the six would deny the request. Secretary Gordon read the application and the responses to the six questions in paragraph 5. Vincent J. Gallo, Sr., 3862 Edgar Avenue, made the applica- tion on behalf of his and his wife, Betty's ability to help their son, Vincent j. Gallo, Jr., build a single family residence. He did not know of anything he could say, other than what was on the application. Mr. Gallo had left a set of plans with the Building Depart- ment and said the home is a one story, three' bedroom, two bath, single family residence with about 1,440 square feet of living area, a one car garage, laundry room, and screened porch. They stole the floor plan idea from Boynton Lakes North on North Congress Avenue. Mr. Gallo emphasized that the home will in no way detract from the residences in the immediate area. Numerous homes - 2 - MINUTES-BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA SEPTEMBER 8, 1986 have been built on 50 foot lots that he was sure had not detracted from the value of other residences, and he expressed that the style and size of the home to be built here far exceeds the minimum standards under the Code. Mr. Gallo attempted to contact the present owners of the property on either side. One gentleman has owned his lot since way back when. From talking to the Building Depart- ment, it was Mr. Gallo's understanding that the person own- ing the lot since prior to the enactment of the present Ordinance would have to be granted a variance, should he decide to build a home on that lot. The lot to the other side is another 50 foot lot that was inherited by a male gentleman, whose father is now deceased. Mr. Gallo contacted the attorney representing the estate, who was out of Fort Lauderdale, and was told they had no intentions of selling the property and that some day down the road, they intend to build a residence on the lot. About three years ago, Mr. Gallo said the other gentleman said he would sell the lot, but he wanted $10,000 for it. If someone could build on it, as a realtor, he would say it was an equitable price, but the lot is not buildable. If the gentleman sells to someone else, they will have to come in and ask for a variance. Mr. Gallo said it was public record. He had a copy of the contract and a closing statement in his file and informed the Board that he paid $5,000 for the lot. He attempted to purchase the lots on either side. One person was not willing to sell, and the other one wanted twice the value of the lot. He also had a letter in his file from the Lambert Agency, who gave him an opinion on the value of the.property. In the opinion of the Lambert Agency, as a non-conforming lot, as it stands now, Mr. Gallo said the lot he tried to purchase is not worth any more than what he and his wife paid for this lot. Mr. Gallo made an attempt to contact these people recently, but they would not indicate a willingness to sell. He made an offer to both people and asked them, if they were not willing to sell to him, if they would be willing to join in, put all three lots together, and make two 75 foot lots. Mr. Gallo would act as the agent and endeavor to sell all three lots as two, and they woUld have the pleasure of enjoying a fair market value of the property. Neither of them were willing to join in and do anything about - 3 - MINUTES-BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA SEPTEMBER 8, 1986 Mr. Gallo did not think he was being unreasonable in asking what they were asking (to be able to enjoy the use of the property, as was originally intended, and to build a home on the lot). Chairman Thompson asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor of granting the variance. There was no response. Mr. Slavin asked Mr. Gallo what the date of the letter of denial was. Mr. Gallo replied that it was dated February 22, 1983 and was from the Estate of Albert J. Baldwin, and on December 21, 1985, he attempted to recontact the Attorney. The Attorney was no longer handling the estate and had transferred his authority to an Attorney up north. Mr. Gallo attempted to contact the Attorney up north, and the Attorney never responded to his correspondence. He showed Mr. Slavin copies of the correspondence. Chairman Thompson asked if anyone wished to speak against the granting of a variance. Harold G. Werger, 1306 N. W. 7th Street, said when the Ordinance was put into effect, he went to City Hall to view other requested variances. They were always told that if you could buy land on either side of a 50 foot lot, that was their only alternative. As to Mr. Gallo saying $10,000 for the 50 foot lot was too high, Mr. Werger said he should check around. The lot across the street from the 100 foot lot was up for sale for $28,000. When he built on 7th Street, Mr. Werger was told he had to have the equivalent of the building lot, and he bought extra land in order to get the required footage and build. In today's prices, Mr. Werger stressed that $10,000 for that lot is not excessive. Mr. Werger owns Lots 97, 98, and 99. If Mr. Gallo gets a variance for this lot, he said he would come in for variances on the three 50 foot lots and build houses on them. If Mr. Gallo gets a variance, Mr. Werger said he should be entitled to variances. He bought three lots and split them up into 75 foot lots, which the Code calls for. Mr. Werger referred to a case where a man received a variance to build a house, but the man never built. He sold the variance to a builder, which Mr. Werger said is wrong. Mr. Werger also alluded to Mr. Bob Brown being denied a variance on a 50 foot lot. Mr. Werger thought this should be denied because he lives there and wants to maintain the property values. If he - 4 - MINUTES-BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA SEPTEMBER 8, 1986 could buy any lots around there for $10,000, he thought it would be cheap. Mr. Werger paid a lot more for his. Michael L. Munro, 1021 N. W. 7th Street, owns Lots 104 and 105. The Ordinance went into effect in 1978. Mr. Gallo bought this lot in 1980. He is a realtor, has been in business for many years, and knew at the time he bought it that he could not build on a 50 foot lot. Mr. Munro recalled that Mr. Gallo came before the Board for a variance in 1982 on the same piece of property, and it was denied. He remembered that Mr. Gallo said the lot to the north of him (Lot 103) was not for sale. Mr. Munro had contacted the'Attorney handling the estatew who said the lot was for sale, but Mr. Gallo offered them $8,000 for the lot, and they wanted $9,000. Mr. Gallo felt it was too much. Mr. Munro said now Mr. Gallo is asking for another variance, and he was hearing conflicting stories. Mr. Gallo is saying with one breath that he wants to build a house for his son. Two minutes later, he was saying he was willing to buy the other two pieces of property, split them and sell them. Mr. Munro questioned whether Mr. Gallo wanted to build a house for his son or if he wanted to buy the property, split it, and make a profit. Mr. Munro pointed out that Mr. Gallo knew when he bought the property that he could not build on it and would have to come before the Board for a variance. If he can buy the other lot for $10,000 today, that would mean he would have a total of $15,000. Mr. Munro thought $15,000 for a 100x140 foot lot was a good price. Mr. Munro asked Mr. Gallo if he had Lot 103 surveyed on April 4th, when he had his lot surveyed. Mr. Gallo replied that he filed his application with a survey that was incorrect. Betty Boroni, City Clerk, called him. Mr. Gallo called the surveyor, who corrected the survey. He took it into City Hall the next day and filed the corrected, legal survey. Mr. Gallo never requested the survey on Lot 103. Mr. Munro knew a survey was done on both lots, apparently on the same day. Mr. Munro said that apparently the lot is for sale, meaning Mr. Gallo would pay $15,000 for the two lots. Therefore, he could see no reason why the Board should give Mr. Gallo a variance on a 50 foot lot. If they give Mr. Gallo a variance, - 5 - MINUTES-BOaRD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA SEPTEMBER 8, 1986 they will also have to give the gentleman that owns Lot 103 a variance. Chairman Thompson interrupted to say each case is based on its own merit, and he explained. Mr. Munro said they will end up with more 50 foot lots in Laurel Hills. 7th Court is full of 50 foot lots. He contended that Mr. Gallo knew what he was buying when he bought the lot. Mrs. Gallo interjected that she bought the lot. There was more discussion. Henry H. Bivins, Jr., 1022 N. W. 7th Street, lives to the east and north of the lot in question. He reiterated what Mr. Munro said and felt it was very detrimental to the area to have 50 foot lots there. Mr. Bivins referred to N. W. 7th Court and said the houses are small because they do not have that much area to build them on. Three homes will be built on 50 foot lots. This lot is between two other 50 foot lots. Mr. Bivins said they know the one will be grand- fathered in, and the other man will have a problem because he will not be able to buy any land. That was his concern. If it would be one home, Mr. Bivins stated it would be a different story. Bob Fauser, 125 S. E. 6th Avenue, was involved in the Brown case on November 11, 1985. When someone is applying for a variance, he asked if it did not have to be a unique hard- ship. If this problem is shared by other people in the same area, and there are other 50 foot lots, Mr. Fauser asked if it was not supposed to be addressed by a zoning change rather than a variance request. He did not think it was supposed to be a unique hardship, just to Mr. Gallo, and not to other people in the same area. He understood other people had 50 foot lots in that area. Because the City has upgraded the Zoning Code, Chairman Thompson replied it is the purpose of this Board. He told Mr. Fauser he would find there are 25, 40, and 50 foot lots throughout the City. This is not unique at all. There are more 50 foot lots out there, and Chairman Thompson was sure they would come before the Board. Most subdivisions in the City have lots that are not up to Code right now. Chairman Thompson advised that hardships can develop in many ways, as the Board has found out in workshops. For example, there could be a hardship in terms of dollars to buy extra property if that was what Mr. Fauser had in mind. - 6 - MINUTES-BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA SEPTEMBER 8, 1986 Mr. Fauser responded that Mr. Gallo is not alone in the area, and he understood from case law that it had to be a unique hardship. Chairman Thompson said if they went back now, they would be spot zoning. They would run into more problems than if they just tried to work out the ones that are in there. Chairman Thompson thought this was probably one of the only methods they had to work out the ones that are there. Some pass and some do not. Some people can combine lots one way or the other. No one else wished to speak against the granting of a variance. Mr. Uleck asked Mr. Gallo if he was still in the real estate business. Mr. Gallo answered affirmatively. Mr. Uleck asked him if he was not familiar with the zoning regulations when he purchased the land. Mr. Gallo replied that he was. Mr. Uleck questioned why he went ahead and bought this 50 foot lot when he knew the zoning was changed to 60 feet. Mr. Gallo bought the lot because some people in his office were going to purchase it, got into some financial trouble, and had to back out of the transaction or lose their deposit. He could not deny that he felt it was a good buy, stepped in, assumed their contract, paid them their deposit, and proceeded to purchase the lot. Mr. Gallo presented a letter to the Board, Which had been directed to Mr. Munro, and said he offered to PUrchase the other lot for $8,000. He also had the letter which was written back to Mr. Munro, stating that a broker had offered to buy the lot for $8,000, and they refused to sell because they wanted $10,000. Mr. Gallo had contracts to show that he attempted to buy the property on either side of him from both people, to pay the same price he and his wife paid for the lot they purchased for $5,000. Neither one of 'them would acknowledge Mr. Gallo's contract, and they totally ignored him. Subsequently, that letter came through. Mr. Gallo told Mr. Uleck that initially, he offered them $5,000, and they denied him. He reiterated prior statements. Mr. Gallo's reasoning behind not paying $10,000 was that it was unreasonable, unfair, unjust, and inequitable. He asked if he was supposed to buy a 50 foot lot for $9,000 and pay $4,000 more than he paid for the other 50 foot lot. Mr. Gallo pointed out that then there would still be one remaining 50 foot lot. The person can automatically get a variance because there is no way he can be denied. He will - 7 - MINUTES-BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA SEPTEMBER 8, 1986 get sandwiched in between Mr. Gallo having to pay top dollar for a lot, and he can turn around and build on his 50 foOt lot. Mr. Gallo emphasized that it was not right and was inequitable. Mr. Gallo advised that he made an honest attempt to buy the lot, and he showed a letter from the Lambert Agency which gave a recently dated opinion of value that still said a non- conforming lot, in their opinion, is not worth any more than $5,0'00. Mr. Gallo stressed that all three lots are non- conforming. He repeated his prior statements and asked, "Where is the equity?" Mr. Gallo again wrote both of these people in 1985. He tried to buy, get the people to join in with him to consoli- date the lots to make them larger than 60 foot lots, and they both denied to join in with him. Mr. Gallo did not know how much more he could have done other than going out and paying through the nose to buy a piece of property that still would have left one 50 foot lot totally and completely non-conforming that someone else could have built on. He did not think he was asking for anything unreasonable and emphatically said he has done the best he can do without being gouged. There was arguing between Mr Gallo and Mr. Uleck. Mr. Uleck commented that in other words, Mr. Gallo was gambling. Mr. Gallo could not deny that and said Mr. Uleck was absolutely right. Chairman Thompson noticed Mr. Gallo bought the property in 1980 and wondered who owned it before then. Mr, Slavin informed him it was Jane Eggert. As a realtor, Mr. Gallo said he could have entered into an act of subterfuge because he could have gone to the Eggerts and said it was a non-conforming lot and if he bought it from them, he could not build on it. He could have told them he wanted to build the house and asked them to go to the City, apply for the permit, begin to build the house, and then he would buy it, but Mr. Gallo emphasized that he did not do that. He could have done it the same way one of these other owners could do right now. Chairman Thompson pointed out that the variance on any property is always on the property and not the owner. He wanted all of the Members to keep that in mind. Perhaps Mr. Gallo made a mistake in buying the property when he did, but - 8 - MINUTES-BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA SEPTEMBER 8, 1986 the Board could not penalize him simply because he is in the real estate business. Mr. Munro recalled that Mr. Gallo said he did not want to purchase that other piece of property and have, in essence, 100 feet wide, knowing there is a 50 foot lot right beside it, which will bring the value down. He questioned what that was doing to the existing homes that are there, that are already priced. Now they will have several, or the possibility of several, 50 foot lots. Mr. Munro recollected that Chairman Thompson made a comment that he was reviewing the piece of property and not the property owner. He said he should consider, when a person is buying a piece of property, what he is buying at the time. Mr. Gallo knew when he purchased it that the lot was non- conforming. Chairman Thompson did not care whether Mr. Gallo was or was not aware of it. That was not the Board's concern. Mr. Munro asked what ignorance was. Chairman Thompson answered that it was not excusable, one way or the other. The Board votes on the property only, not on individuals. He did not care what Mr. Gallo did for a living. When you buy property, Mr. Munro argued that you should know what you are buying. Chairman Thompson informed him that this City and every City has too many cases where people buy property and discover later on they need a variance. The purpose of the Board is to correct mistakes that are made by the City, County, or State. Chairman Thompson explained to Mr. Munro and again told the Board that they were not to place emphasis on the owner but on the land. The land has a problem, not the owner. Mr. Slavin had a copy of a floor plan of a one story, wood frame residence, 35' frontage x 52.67'. He asked if the 50 foot lot would support the building and meet all Codes, set- backs, etc. Mr. Slavin was talking about a Plat of Survey, not the Site plan. Mr. Newbold replied that Mr. Slavin was talking about the building, and it was drawn to show that it would meet Code with the variance. Chairman Thompson clarified that the question was whether the proposed house would meet setback Codes. The answer was that it would. Mr. Slavin stated that his question was whether the 50 foot lot would support the wood frame resi- dence, meet all setbacks and all Codes. Chairman Thompson - 9 - MINUTES-BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA SEPTEMBER 8, 1986 explained that the variance was on the width of the lot and the square footage of the lot. Mr. Werger asked to speak. Because he had given Mr. Gallo a chance to speak again, Chairman Thompson agreed, if it would be in addition to what Mr. Werger had submitted. Mr. Werger told of living in Laurel Hills since 1969 and building his home when there were only six houses. He said Mr. Gallo was balking at buying a 100 foot lot for $15,000 in Laurel Hills when you cannot touch a 100 foot lot in Laurel Hills for $15,000. The Members expressed that was not their con- cern. Mr. Werger pointed out that there is available land next to Mr. Gallo, and he should buy the land to conform to the zoning like he and others did. Mr. Werger added that he paid $21,000 "down farther" for a 100 foot lot. In 1969, Mr. Slavin noted the platting was still 50 feet. Mr. Uleck advised that it was changed in 1978. If the Code was changed back in 1978 to 60 feet and land is available on both sides, he said they should not give Mr. Gallo the variance. Mr. Gallo should build on a 60 foot or bigger lot. In 1982, Mr. Eney observed that Mr. Gallo came before the Board of Adjustment. From what he read of the minutes of that meeting, Mr. Gallo had added nothing tonight to change it. At that time, the Board denied him, and nothing had happened in the intervening four years. Mr. Gallo has just reapplied by reason of the lapse of time. Chairman Thompson said there had been some changes in the thiinking of the Board, when they found out what they could and could not do. At the last workshop the Board had with a Professor from the University of Florida, the Professor pointed out that if a person owns one plot of land, such as in a case like this, to force him to pay the price of the next door person's property would, Chairman Thompson per- sonally felt, be placing a hardship on the owner. Chairman Thompson pointed out that proof was on the table that attempts had been made to buy the property. One person said, "No." The other one said, "At this price." If that was the case throughout the City of Boynton Beach, he thought everybody would buy a lot, sit back, and wait in many cases. Chairman Thompson continued'that they would be placing a hardship on the person because they would be saying to that person that he could not use his property until he paid the price. - 10 - MINUTES-BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA SEPTEMBER 8, 1986 Chairman Thompson informed the Members that the City is in a lawsuit right now because someone was denied the same thing by this Board three months ago, and it will come up soon. He emphasized that if all attempts have been made, the Board cannot force a person to pay more for the property of the guy next door if the person does not have the money or has the money and says he would be paying too much, as Mr. Gallo said. Chairman Thompson reminded the Members that every case before them tonight was in violation of a City Code, or it would not be here. If Mr. Gallo owned three lots, they could legally force him to divide them into two lots, but he owns only one lot, and they cannot force him to buy another lot. Chairman Thompson did not care how many dollars Mr. Gallo had, and he elaborated. Mr. Eney brought out that Mr. Gallo has the option to simply sit by and increase the value of his land by simply selling to the property owners on either side. Mr. Slavin objected, saying the other property owners do not want to buy it. Mr. Slavin could appreciate the feeling and thinking of the neighbors. He looked at the property four years ago and looked at it again. There was no change in the area. Mr. Slavin thought one 50 foot lot two blocks away came up that was grandfathered in. Right now, there is a piece of property that is grandfathered in. Another piece of property is a part of an estate. Unfortunately, the Board could not take into consideration what the neighbors felt because they have to go by the book. The neighborhood will have 50 foot lots that will be built on, and Mr. Slavin emphasized that they cannot be stopped. He explained that they will be grandfathered, or people will make attempts to buy and be turned down. Mr. Slavin further explained. Mr. Werger interjected that the fair thing 'to do would be to get an outside appraisal. Chairman Thompson informed him that he was out of order. Mr. Slavin informed Mr. Werger that an outside appraisal was brought in and that Mr. Gallo showed the Board a letter saying it was appraised at $5,000. Mr. Slavin said the Board knew the property would support a small, 1,500 square foot house. Mr. Gallo is 'requesting a variance of 533 square feet. The Board has nothing to do with property variances. In the minutes, Mr. Slavin told the Members they would see that he brought up the same issue - 11 - MINUTES-BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA SEPTEMBER 8, 1986 about Mr. Gallo being a realtor "years back". The Members had seminars and went to school since then and learned a lot. Mr. Slavin reiterated Mr. Gallo's efforts to purchase property and commented that it is a stalemate. He asked if they were going to deny Mr. Gallo the use of his property. Mr. Uleck repeated that when Mr. Gallo purchased the property, he knew that the Code was changed two years before that to 50 feet. He did not buy blindly. If Mr. Gallo had purchased the property, not knowing anything, Mr. Uleck might think differently. Many buildings that come before the Board are rejected, and Mr. Uleck felt his opinion was his opinion. His opinion was that Mr. Gallo purchased the property, knowing that it was a 50 foot lot and that the Code was 60 feet. Mr. Slavin read the third paragraph on page 11 from the minutes of May 10, 1982 and said that was Mr. Uleck's think- ing tonight. It was Mr. Slavin's thinking four years ago. Since then, the Members went to seminars, etc. Mr. Slavin reiterated prior statements and referred to the Court case the Board is involved in. Mr. Eney determined that what Mr. Slavin was saying was that what the Board did in 1982 was illegal, based on what the Members know now that they did not know then. Mr. Slavin would not say it was illegal. Mr. Eney responded that they denied Mr. Gallo the variance. Chairman Thompson interjected that it was denied, based on what the Members knew at that time. Someone in the audience said the Court case had not come up yet, so they did not know for sure. Mr. Uleck told the person he was out of order and said the case was up to the Judge. Because of the variance denial, Mr. Slavin said the people felt they had a right to go to Court. He also did not know what the outcome would be. Mr. Slavin brought out the fact that the overall footage was not excessive; the lot will support a 1,500 square foot house, which is not a small house. He did not see where three bedrooms and the rest of the house would be a disgrace to the~area, although he agreed other people have larger lots. There was disagreement between Mr. Slavin and Mr. Uleck about whether or not Mr. Gallo was locked in. Mr. Uleck could see two open lots, one on each side of Mr. Gallo's lot. - 12 - MINUTES-BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA SEPTEMBER 8, 1986 According to the criteria, Mrs. Artis noted it had to be a hardship by the City. In her opinion, it was not. She thought it would have been on the person that owned the property before, in 1978, and that person could have built without a variance. Mrs. Artis felt it was an altogether different situation when a person bought into a hardship. Four years ago, Chairman Thompson said that request was denied. Here it is four years later. The Board is the City, and the Board placed a hardship on the property simply because they denied Mr. Gallo the use of the property for four years. If this variance is turned down, Chairman Thompson said the Board will be denying him years plus. In a case like this, instead of correcting a situation that exists throughout Boynton, Chairman Thompson thought they were imposing more hardships on the ones that are in this type of situation. Chairman Thompson commented that he has been on the Board for eleven years, and he elaborated about cases and the Board. He said the Members are not here to keep a problem going. Now, four years later, in this case, it seemed to him they were playing poker to "steady up the price". Chairman Thompson has seen too many cases. He referred to the case they had three or four months ago, and bet the City would lose. Normally, Mr. Slavin said the Board does not digress from the work at hand or statements they heard, but he read the third paragraph from the bottom of page 15 from the May 10, 1982 minutes. The paragraph contained what Hayden Bivins, Jr., 1022 N. W. 7th Street, said. Mr. Slavin was sure that the three lots have accumulated a lot of dirt, and he was sure the Members have seen what happens to vacant lots in some of the finer residential areas of Boynton Beach. Mr. Slavin asked if they wanted more empty lots or if they would rather see a house that looks presentable. He elaborated. Based on the proposed size of the house, Chairman Thompson asked Mr. Newbold if it would in any way be degrading to what is there now, in terms of value. Mr. Newbold alluded to his experience in building houses and said Mr. Gallo did submit a blueprint, but there was no way of reproducing it. Chairman Thompson inquired whether Mr. Newbold studied the print. Mr. Newbold found nothing wrong with the print. Chairman Thompson asked if Mr. Newbold would say that was a small or medium sized home. Mr. Newbold answered that the - 13 - MINUTES-BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA SEPTEMBER 8, 1986 zone they were talking about was R-iA, and it requires a minimum living area of 1,250 square feet. Mr. Uleck said they could not count the garage and open vestibule. Mr. Newbold advised that the Code would require that they count the garage. They do not count the living area only. If the lot was three times as b!ig, Mr. Newbold said Mr. Gallo could build a 1,250 square foot hOuse there. Mr. Gordon had not seen the lot recently, as he had been away, but he did see it in 1982. From what they heard tonight and the communications shown to them, he thought things had changed 100% from 1982 until 1986. If this was the case, Mr. UleCk asked why the City does not pass 50 foot l!ots. He expressed that the City should have left the lots ~the way they were. When they changed the Code, it meant the new ones that are being rezoned. Mr. Uleck adamantly said they fight it in City Hall all of the time that they cannot change the lots designed 20 years ago as C-3, R-l, R-2, and R-1AA, and he asked why they were changing this now. This zoning was made 30 years ago. In that case, Chairman Thompson pointed out that Mr. Uleck would vote against everything that comes before this Board. Mr. Uleck disagreed. Chairman Thompson advised him that the Members sit on the Board to make Corrections where they feel a hardship is placed by the City. Mr. Uleck had said if this is the Code, the City should not change it. Chairman Thompson said all three cases coming before the Board tonight would be dead, as far as Mr. Uleck was concerned. Mr. Uleck denied saying that and explained that he was saying if an applicant was boxed in, had a 50 foot lot and could not do anything with it. They have come across them before. There was argument between Mr. Uleck and Chairman Thompson. If it was boxed in where the applicant had no choice, then Mr. Uleck thought they should go ahead and give a variance because that was a hardship. He asked, "What if they had 16 open lots over there?" Chairman Thompson replied that if Mr. Uleck would read the Code book, he wOuld see that if there were three lots, they would have to sPlit them and make two lots. If he had 16 lots, they would break the lots down and make sure each lot was 60 feet. Mr. Uleck asked, "What if they were 16 lots, all grandfathered in at 50 feet?" He added that nobody bothered to sell to Mr. Gallo because he bought one lot in the middle. - 14 - MINUTES-BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA SEPTEMBER 8, 1986 Chairman Thompson exclaimed that Mr. Gallo did not need but one lot. That is all he owns. Mr. Uleck was trying to say if there were 16 lots, and one lot was sold after they changed the zoning. Mr. Gallo bought the 50 foot lot, and Mr. Uleck pointed out that Mr. Gallo is "stuck" with it. The guy won't sell him the rest of them because he wants "$20,000" a lot more. Mr. U!eck commented that it was the same, identical thing they were talking about. Motion Inasmuch as he saw where the City did force a hardship and, secondly, seeing all of the communications tonight where Mr. Gallo did make an honest effort, Mr. Gordon moved that the variance be granted, seconded by Mr. Slavin. Mr. Slavin stated that he could not reiterate or say anything more than what Mr. Gordon said. At the request of Chairman Thompson, Mrs. Ramseyer read the motion and took a roll call vote. Chairman Thompson explained that an Aye vote would be in favor of the motion, and it was not a majority vote. Any three votes against the motion would deny the request. The vote was 4-2. Messrs. Eney and Uleck voted against the motion. The request was DENIED. Chairman Thompson explained that it takes five votes to pass a request, and they did no~ have a seven member Board tonight. Mr. Gallo commented that the Board carved out his path. He was sorry to see that they had one person on the Board that was very prejudiced. Mr. Gallo told the Board they could rest assured that it would help him in his case. Mr. Werger felt the decision was very fair. Mr. Gallo told Mr. Werger the lot was his, if he wanted to pay $10,000 for it. Case #107 Applicant/ Owner: B. Glassman & Sons Request: Address: Relief from Appendix A-Zoning, Section ll.iE, Nonconforming Structures, of the Boynton Beach Code of Ordinances, to alter the existing non- conforming structure in a manner that will further increase the nonconformity 1000 South Federal Highway - 15 - MINUTES-BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA SEPTEMBER 8, 1986 Legal DeScription: Lots 8, 9, 10, 11 (less west 35' Rd. R/W), PARKER ESTATE, recorded in Plat Book 10, page 17, Palm BeaCh COunty Records Secretary Gordon read the application. Boyd Bundy, Architect, Fort Lauderdale, Florida, showed a pla~ of what they would like to do with the building, and stated that Mr. Glassman was with him. Mr. Bundy expressed that it was a very complex situation. He showed a picture of the building, which is the Conrad Pickel Art Gallery on Federal Highway. The Women's Club directly abuts their property. Mr. Bundy said they wish to add overhangs and a parapet around to soften the very strong, angular character of the building to give it a character much more in concert with the single family homes behind it. For the record, Chairman Thompson said by adding the roof, it overhangs in the setback lines. He did not believe it showed on the survey. Mr. Bundy believed the survey and site plan the Members had was for the existing conditions. He offered a small scale plan and said they would be adding overhangs on all three sides. Mr. Uleck noticed they were going four feet beyond the building on all three sides. Mr. Bundy showed the existing face of the building and said he would be doing that all the way around. He would have a matching element similar to that on the back side of the building. Mr. Bundy showed the roof condition they would have to the side, where the Women's Club is, and said they were adding the little, non'inhabited cupola to camouflage the existing structure. Right now, three steel poles stick up there at a fUnny angle. Mr. Bundy said all of the roof elements will extend approxi- mately four feet. Mr. Uleck nOticed they were going to go five feet higher and asked if that was by reason of their eave. Mr. Bundy answered affirmatively and said the dashed line represented the slope of the existing roof structure behind. In order to balance and proportion this and to get the geometry that looks good in elevation, they had to come above that line. Mr. Bundy explained that this was not his first try at getting the building to look better, because he tried several different things. This was the combination that seemed to work the best. Mr. Uleck asked if Mr. Bundy was going to also increase the elevation. Mr. Bundy showed the point he was increasing it - 16 - MINUTES-BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA SEPTEMBER 8, 1986 Jto. AS best they could determine, that was the point of the real structure of the roof. There is a little skirt that goes around it, and they are proposing to take that off. The solid part of the real roof is slightly higher than the allowed 25 feet at this point. Mr. Bundy was coming above it and holding that line, as he was going back to accent the building architecturally. Mr. Uleck agreed Mr. Bundy was making a nice building out of it, but if the City said he should go to 25 feet, he thought Mr. Bundy could actually go to the 25 feet. Architecturally, Mr. Bundy pointed out that he would not have the pitch. Mr. Bundy advised that he was not cutting off anybody's light or impinging upon anybody else. Mr. Newbold showed how the building looks now. Chairman Thompson informed Mr. Uleck that the building is higher than 25 feet now. Mr. Newbold informed the Members that the applicant is putting an architectural amenity that is not really a whole roof, and he explained by drawing on the blackboard. Mr. Uleck pointed out that the applicant was still fixing the roof and going up to the five feet. He emphasized that the applicant was going across the whole roof. Mr. Bundy stated that he was not. Mr. Bundy said what Mr. Newbold had drawn on the blackboard was a very accurate represen- tation of what would occur there. Mr. Bundy continued that there was a flat roof, and he was building a skirt around it. He said Mr. Uleck was correct in saying he was going up and coming down again with it. Mr. Bundy reiterated that he was building a skirt around to hide the roof, even though, from the ground, it would appear to be almost a full roof. Mr. Slavin asked if there were flower pots. Mr. Bundy replied that they were built-in planters. Mr. Slavin asked where they were in relation to the City line. Mr. Bundy showed them on the plan. Mr. Slavin was trying to determine how far the present structure was from the present building line. Mr. Bundy answered that at one point it is 16 feet. At another point, it is 14.7 feet. In round numbers, the building is currently 15 feet from the property line. When he puts the overhangs and everything else in, Mr. Slavin pointed out that it will be less. Mr. Bundy agreed that the overhangs would encroach into the area with the 30 foot front yard. - 17 - MINUTES-BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA SEPTEMBER 8, 1986 Mr. Slavin determined the applicant was seeking a variance of approximately 15 feet or more. When you first look at them, Mr. Bundy said the numbers look large. He called attention to the fact that the existing structure of the Women's Club is closer to Federal Highway than they are, and their building looks pretty good. There was discussion about the Women's Club. If this building was demolished and a new building was constructed on this land, Mr. Bundy said there is a piece of land available for that under the Code that he doubted was even the size of the room they were in. Under today's Ordinances, he thought this was all that was buildable on the site. Mr. Slavin knew it was a very irregular shaped lot the way it was laid out. When they start taking those numbers into consideration and put the planters in, he wondered where people will walk. Mr. Bundy answered that there is plenty of space. The sidewalk that exists will exist. He will not be anywhere near the sidewalk, and the planters will not come close to the sidewalk but will be 8 to 10 feet away at their closest point. Mr. Bundy was sure the building was built in conformance with the existing Code at the time, and he did not know how many times the Code had been subsequently updated. At this point, all they were saying was that in order for them to improve the building aesthetically, hopefully, in concert and cooperation with the community, they need the flexibility to do something with it. Mr. Slavin asked if the building will become an office build- ing. Mr. Bundy answered affirmatively and added that was what it was previosly. Mr. Slavin thought Mr. Pickel had an art gallery. Mr. Bundy said Mr. Pickel had offices and a business from it. It had become a very low density office building. Mr. Slavin knew there were only nine parking spaces on the lot. Mr. Bundy did not anticipate that the number of people in the building would present a problem. On a C-1 office building, Mr. Slavin asked how many parking spaces there are per square foot. Mr. Newbold replied that it varies, based on the use of the C-1 structure. It is office, which is one parking space for 300 square feet. Mr. Slavin inquired what the square footage of the proposed building would be. Mr. Newbold answered that it had not changed. Mr. Slavin stated that he was asking the - 18 - MINUTES-BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA SEPTEMBER 8, 1986 Architect. Mr. Bundy did not remember but estimated it was around 3,000 square feet, which would be about ten parking spaces. He pointed out that he may be short by one but is within reason. Mr. Uleck questioned whether anybody from the neighborhood adjacent to the building was against it. Mr. Slavin read a memo from the City Clerk, dated September 8th, which said Mr. James L. Moffitt, owner of 1006-1008 S. E. 4th Street, had no objections to the request. Chairman Thompson asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor of granting the variance. John Howell, 900 Isle Road, directly across the street, talked to three neighbors on the street. He talked to Mr. Newbold about what was going to be done and thought they all agreed it would enhance the appearance of the present lot and would also add a modern, attractive building to downtown Boynton Beach. The use of it would be an office that would only have tenants from 8:00 A. M. until 5:00 p. M., five days a week, rather than some of the other existing uses that could be grandfathered in without any variance. Mr. Howell said he and his neighbors were in accord that it would be very beneficial to them. It would help them and make their neighborhood look better. Mr. Howell stated that his wife is active in the Boynton Beach Women's Club, and Mrs. Carl Zimmerman was present and was going to speak for the Women's Club. He said there had been a lot of conversation relative to the manner in which the Architect had gone to great detail to coordinate his efforts to keep the same theme. It even makes the downtown Boynton area more attractive. The Women's Club put a new red tile roof on their building, and there will be a lot of upgrading in that building. Mr. Howell said there will be a lot more interest in that section of town due to the fact that the Women's Club will be attracting more functions, and he explained. Mr. Howell talked to as many people as he could that had been sent notices, and no one raised any objections. After they found out what was going to be done, it was unanimous. Mr. Howell reiterated prior statements, said there were some minor things that had to be done that were cosmetic, and - 19 - MINUTES-BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA SEPTEMBER 8, 1986 stated that they recommend that the Board give favorable consideration to the application. Chairman Thompson asked if anyone else 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 a variance. There was no response. There was only one communication, and Mr. Slavin again read the communication from Mr. Moffitt. Mr. Slavin asked if the applicant filed plans for the build- ing. Mr. Newbold answered that they filed no more than what the Members saw in the folder. When a permit is asked for, Mr. Slavin questioned whether an applicant gives the Build- ing Department the blueprint, specifications, etc., such as what the roof will be. Mr. Newbold answered affirmatively. Mr. Slavin asked whether Mr. Newbold had received that in total. Mr. Newbold replied, "Not yet." Mr. Slavin remarked that it was a beautiful picture and wondered if they would build it with the Spanish tile roof~ ing, etc. The variance would be granted on the property but, by the same token, what is on the property is also the BOard's concern. That was why he asked if Mr. Newbold re- ceived a complete set of prints, including specifications and details. Mr. Bundy was willing to specify, as part of the record, the materials and finishes at this point and time. In fact, he was willing to give the Building Department a black and white copy of that. In other words, Mr. Slavin questioned whether the finished structure would be as represented. Mr. Glassman answered, "Absolutely.,, Mr. Slavin emphasized that Mr. Bundy was doing the designing, not Mr. Glassman. Mr. Bundy advised that Mr. Glassman owns the building. Mr. Slavin said that did not mean a thing, if Mr. Bundy was designing the building. After more discussion, Mr. Bundy retorted that the two of them (Mr. Glassman and he) were here saying on the record that, 'to the best of their knowledge and belief, what the Members saw on the rendering was what they would get. Chairman Thompson pointed out that the Board had two things in one: the radius of the height of the roof, Which was in violation (2 feet over), and the overhang to be placed 4 feet in the setbacks. He brought out the fact that the Board was - 20 - MINUTES-BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA SEPTEMBER 8, 1986 not denying the owner the use of his property. The building was built years ago. Mr. Newbold informed the Members that it was built at a time when it met what the Zoning Code was at the time. Since that time, Chairman Thompson said the City has a Height Code that the 27 feet would violateo The City also has side setbacks that place the building in violation. Those were the things the Board should consider. At present, the violation of the height is only two feet more than it should be, and Mr. Uleck observed that the applicant wants to go up five more feet. There was disagree- ment between the Members and Mr. Slavin as to whether the building was in violation at the time it was built or whether it met the Code. Mr. Uleck pointed out that it is a C-1 building, and they could go up to 75 feet. There was more argument. When the building was built, Mr. Slavin said the height was correct. Mr. Uleck agreed there was no violation unless the applicant wanted to build. With reference to the setback, Mr. Uleck said the downtown area was offered ten foot setbacks from the sidewalk. This is also a business street. It is a C-1. Chairman Thompson interrupted to say Mr. Uleck was comparing it with the down- town, and this is not in the downtown redevelopment area. There was more argument between Chairman Thompson and Mr. Uleck. Mr. Uleck agreed it would be a beautiful building that would enhance the downtown. If they do what they are promising to do, he said he would go for the variance. Mr. Uleck also agreed that Mr. Slavin was right when he asked about specifi- cations. In his opinion, they were updating the neighbor- hood, and the people were all for it. There was discussion about the location. Chairman Thompson interrupted to remind them that they had to ask themselves if it was a hardship (a self-imposed hard- ship, or if it would be a hardship). He said they had to admit it was not a hardship and was not a hardship imposed by the City. It was not even a hardship to the owner because the building is being used. As Mr. Slavin has always stated, Chairman Thompson advised that whatJthey would like to do and what they would like to see done will put the Board into a Court of law. Chairman Thompson pointed out that another Architect could come in, design it, and change the whole thing, and it still - 21 - MINUTES-BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA SEPTEMBER 8, 1986 would be beautiful, but it would be in violation. He reiterated that it is not always the way they would like to see things done. If it is useable the way it is, like many other things that have come before the Board such as the Two Georges, Chairman Thompson said they can build on it. He asked if the Members understood the points he was trying to make. Chairman Thompson asked if the Members were going to vote for everything that comes before the Board that is in viola- tion and beautiful. He said the Members were not using good, common sense because they could not do it that way. They had to think about whether it was a hardship, and they had established the fact that a hardship had not been placed on it by the City. The City had not changed any rules that would affect the use of the Ulldlng as it is right now. b ' Chairman Thompson asked the Members to keep that in mind, and he further explained. Mr. Uleck admitted those were the facts before the Board, but it was a matter of opinion. He told Chairman Thompson that they disagreed before, on the other case. Chairman Thompson stressed that it was not a matter of opinion. Mr. Slavin interjected that the building is useable. Mr. Uleck admitted it was not a hardship and remarked that it was not a hardship on the other case either. Chairman Thompson informed him it was a hardship because it could not be used. Mr. Gordon reminded them that case was closed. In the applicant's petition to the Board, nowhere did Mr. Eney see mention made of a hardship. He questioned whether the Board was saying it was a hardship or whether the appli- cant was saying it was a hardship. Chairman Thompson advised that the Board was saying it was not a hardship, and the purpose of the Board is to grant a variance when a hard- ship is placed on the property by the City. Mrs. Artis asked if the Board could say it was not a hardship when the owner could not improve the building without a variance. Chairman Thompson answered that the building can be improved and painted as long as it does not extend beyond the points where it is now. Mr. Uleck brought out that the only thing the applicant was asking a variance for was the roof that extends four feet and then the height. The Code says "No". Chairman Thompson read that a non-conforming structure or building may be added to or altered if such alteration or addition does not, - 22 - MINUTES-BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA SEPTEMBER 8, 1986 in itself, constitute a further violation of existing regula- tions. If you look at the nature of the variance, Mr. Newbold pointed out that the variance is to get relief from the Section Chairman Thompson just read, which is Appendix A- Zoning, Section ll.iE. The building became non-conforming when the City upgraded the C-1 Ordinance. He pointed out that the building could have been 75 feet. One side had no setbacks and the others were left where they are now. The applicant met the setbacks at that time. The property was non-conforming before the change. Because of this non-conforming nature, Mr. Newbold said the applicant was before the Board, and he was non-conforming because of prior actions by the City. That was what Mrs. Artis was concerned with. Mr. Newbold explained that the applicant .was trying to upgrade that non-conformance. He would need a variance to upgrade it from the scope of that zoning. As pointed out, the building line itself is already at the property line. You need 30 feet, and the applicant has 15 feet. Mr. Newbold again explained what the applicant wants to do. That was Mrs. Artis' point. ' Chairman Thompson understood what Mr. Newbold was saying but reiterated that the building is useable and is used for a purpose right now. He pointed out that it states that the building can be used for the purpose it is built, or it can be changed to something else as long as it meets the Code. The minute they step out to extend beyond those points, Chairman Thompson said they would be violating the Code, and they would be doing it in 1986. The law was passed in 1978. Now, they have to meet that Code, and they would not be meeting that Code by going further into the violation. Mrs. Artis reminded Chairman Thompson that the building was conforming until the Code was changed. Chairman Thompson repeated that the building is useable. Mr. Uleck commented that what Chairman Thompson was saying was the applicant could paint the building, and that was all he could do. Chairman Thompson advised that they could cut back on it. Mr. Uleck replied there would be nothing left There was more discussion. ' Mr. Uleck understood what the Code was. He stated that it was wrong, but then again it was right. It was right for the people living in that community and was good for the City. Just because the City passed certain Codes did not - 23 - MINUTES-BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA SEPTEMBER 8, 1986 mean the City was right all of the time. In many cases, Mr. Uleck said the City is wrong, and he stated that he could prove it to Chairman Thompson in many places. The Members objected, and Mr. Slavin said they were not discussing that. Mr. Uleck argued that Chairman Thompson was telling him the book said "No", and you cannot go beyond it. Chairman Thompson stated that he established the fact that there was not a hardship, and that would relieve the City of any responsibility. Mr. Uleck pointed out that this was a par- ticular case. It was not an average building where it was set back and had a lot of room. They were talking about a 'V" shaped building, which was different. There was a conflict between Chairman Thompson, Mr. Uleck, and Mr. Slavin, and Mr. Uleck began to state his opinion. Mr. Newbold interrupted to suggest that perhaps Secretary Gordon should read the powers of the Board. Chairman Thompson said the Members knew they had the power to pass anything before the Board, but they also have laws. Any time the Board violates one, that person has a recourse, and that is to take the Board to a Court of law. Chairman Thompson read, "to adhere and to decide cases". He emphasized that the Board has laws that are passed down from the State of Florida to the City of Boynton Beach, and they cannot just pass when there is no hardship. The Board first establishes a fact of whether a City hardship has been placed on a person. This building has been in operation and probably still is, and the Code was enforced in 1978. Mr. Slavin thought the building was in operation, but when he saw it, it looked closed. Chairman Thompson agreed that the building was closed but a facade was placed on it since 1978, and it did not stop the use of that building. That was the fact the Members had to keep in mind. He recalled that it was only done about four years ago. Mr. Uleck asked if it was just repainted. Mr. Slavin replied that they remodeled, plastered, and everything. Mr. Slavin was glad Chairman Thompson brought the Members back to realitY and pointed out that it is a useable, two story building. The deed and contract for sale represent a lot of money on the part of the purchaser, subject to regu- lations, etc. Inasmuch as the building is ~useable and no hardship was imposed by the City, the money spent to buy the property was a lot of money. Anyone spending that kind of money would want a return on it. - 24 - MINUTES-BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA SEPTEMBER 8, 1986 Mr. Slavin did not know what the applicant figured putting into the property or what they figured on getting back Der square foot, but-that was not the Board's concern. The Board's concern was what the hardship was, if any, how it was imposed, and what they could do to alleviate it. Motion Mr. Slavin "unfortunately,, moved to DENY the request for the reasons he stated a moment ago. He added that the building is useable, and he was quite sure Mr. Glassman and his Archi- tect could sit down and redo what they had to do to bring the building to as pretty a condition somewhere in the confines of its present structure. Anything else would be self- imposed. Mr. Gordon seconded the motion. A roll call vote on the motion was taken by Mrs. Ramseyer, as follows: Mr. Slavin _ Aye Mr. Eney _ Nay Mrs. Artis _ Nay Mr. Uleck _ Nay Chairman Thompson _ Aye Secretary Gordon _ Aye The vote was 3-3. Chairman Thompson announced that the request was DENIED because there were three votes against the request for a variance. Case #108 Applicant: Agent: Owner: Request: Request: Legal Description: McDonald's Corporation Heyman Properties - Lessee: McDonald's The Old Colony Company Relief from Appendix A-Zoning, Sec. 4-L, Buffer Walls, of the Boynton Beach Code of Ordinances requirement of a solid stucco masonry wall at least 6 feet in height where a commercial district abuts a residential district That the existing 6 foot fence with hedge be accepted in lieu of CBS wall See "Addendum A" attached By memo dated September 4, 1986, Mr. Newbold advised that it was determined that this case did not require a variance and should be' deleted from the agenda. - 25 - MINUTES-BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA SEPTEMBER 8, 1986 Case #109 Applicant/ Owner: Request: Address: Legal Description: Rev. Nathaniel Robinson Relief from R-lA zoning requirement of 7,500 sq. ft. lot area to be reduced to 7,490 sq, ft. lot area for construction of single family residence 1505 N. E. 1st Street Lot 11, Block 14, ROLLING GREEN, lST ADDITION Recorded in Plat Book 24, Page 86, Palm Beach County Records Secretary Gordon read the application. Reverend Nathaniel Robinson, 227 N. E. llth Avenue, wanted to build a home on the property but needs 10 square feet. The builder was present. Mr. Slavin saw the iproperty and, in his opinion, 10 square feet was not going ito deter from the neighborhood or give Rev. Robinson any speCial privileges. He wanted to make a motion because he did not see why they had 'to go through a lengthy discussion. Mr. Uleck stated he was all for this one and asked if there was not a vacant lot next to this lot. Reverend Robinson answered affirmatively. Mr. Uleck remarked that he would not argue about ten square feet. Chairman Thompson asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor of granting the request and asked the builder if he wanted to speak. The builder replied that it was not necessary. No one wished to speak against the request, and Secretary Gordon informed Chairman Thompson that there were no communications. Mr. Slavin asked if the plans met everything. answered affirmatively. Mr. Newbold Mr. Slavin moved to grant the request for the reason that ten square feet would not damage anything. The area is beautiful, and a house on this lot would only enhance the neighborhood. Mr. Uleck seconded the mOtion. A roll call vote was taken by Mrs. Ramseyer and the motion carried 6-0. ' - 26- MINUTES-BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA SEPTEMBER 8, 1986 ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Board, Mr. Uleck moved, seconded by Mrs. Artis to adjourn, and the meeting adjourned at 9:10 P. M. RPecor~angR~emcS~eY~ry (Three Tapes - 27 -