Loading...
Minutes 02-10-86MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING HELD AT CITY HALL, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA, MONDAY, FEBRUARY 10, 1986 AT 7:00 P.M. PRESENT Vernon Thompson, Jr., Chairman Robert Gordon, Secretary George Mearns Paul Slavin Ben Uleck Raymond Eney, Alternate ABSENT George Ampol, Vice Chairman (Excused) Lillian Artis (Excused) Danny O'Brien, Alternate (Excused) Bert Keehr, Deputy Bldg. Official Chairman Thompson called the meeting to order at 7:03 P. M. and introduced the Members of the Board, Mr. Keehr, and the Recording Secretary. He recognized the presence in the audience of Mayor Nick Cassandra, Councilman Carl Zimmerman, Bob Fauser, an interested citizen, and Barbara Carney, Court Reporter for Mr. and Mrs. Thomas A. Hoadley (Case 995). Chairman Thompson announced that there would be a Board of six Members voting and pointed out that this was not a majority Board. Any three votes against a request would deny the request, and five votes for the request would grant it. MINUTES OF JANUARY 13_~, 1986 Under the heading of "Minutes of December 9, 1985," in the 3rd line, Secretary Gordon said the third line should be changed to show that Vice Chairman Ampol was excused, not absent from that meeting. Chairman Thompson commented that there is a big difference. Secretary Gordon moved, seconded by Mr. Uleck, to approve the minutes with the correction. Motion carried 6-0. NEW BUSINESS - PUBLIC HEARING Chairman Thompson pointed out the purpose of the Board by saying the Board looks on those conditions where perhaps, in some cases, the State, County, or City might have placed a hardship on the property in question. The Board Members go out and inspect the property and make their decisions within the Board's guidelines. Chairman Thompson read the six cri- teria for the basis of the Board's decisions. - 1 - MINUTES-BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA FEBRUARY 10, 1986 Case #95 Applicant: Request: Proposed Use: Location: Thomas A. Hoadley, Esq. Relief from R-1 zoning requirement of 60 ft. lot frontage to be reduced to 50 ft. lot frontage Relief from 6,000 sq. ft. lot area to be reduced to 4,989.67 sq. ft. lot area Construction of single family residence 650 S. E. 2nd Avenue Lot 33 THE LAWNS Recorded in Plat Book 9, Page 69, Palm Beach County Records Secretary Gordon read the application and answers to the questions. Mrs. Thomas A. Hoadley, 235 Cocoanut Row, Palm Beach, Florida 33480, came forward to represent the applicant. Chairman Thompson asked if there was anything she wished to say that might shed some light on helping the Board make its decision. Mrs. Hoadley had a copy of the house plan if the Members wanted to see what would be constructed there and what the house would look like. Mr. Slavin commented that they would get around to that later. Mr. Keehr informed Chairman Thompson that he had not seen the plans but there was no question in his mind that it would meet all of the standards, setbacks, etc. A house could be built and meet all of those requirements. In answering the criteria questions in 5 (b) of the applica- tion, Mr. Slavin noted Mr. Weeks, the prior owner, was issued permits. Mr. Keehr saw how Mr. Slavin could be confused because of the Warranty Deed and clarified that Mr. Weeks, the owner for many years, applied for a permit at the Build- ing Department and submitted plans, surveys, applications, and everything that was required. That plan was processed because Mr. Weeks owned it prior to May of 1978. Mr. Keehr continued by saying that plan was ready to be per- mitted. However, as it was being processed, Mr. Weeks sold the property to a Mr. Panizza, who was the gentleman Mr. Keehr confronted with the fact that, as owner of the lot, Mr. Panizza could not pull a permit until he obtained a variance, as the lot had recently been sold to him by Mr. Weeks. Upon - 2 - MINUTES-BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA FEBRUARY 10, 1986 hearing that, Mr. Panizza filed a petition of appeal with this Board but subsequently sold the property to Thomas A. Hoadley, who did file for the variance, and whose wife was before the Board at this time. Mr. Slavin further read from paragraph 5 (b), "if the applicant is not allowed to construct a single family home, then the land will be returned to Mr. Weeks, who can be given the authority to construct this single family house, based on the fact that he owned the land prior to the recent change in the building code. . .", and asked if this could be reverted to a grandfather clause again inasmuch as the propE y had changed hands twice. Mr. Keehr answered, "No," and that it could not be done. Mrs. Hoadley said they had understood that, so that was their error. If the land was not large enough to build a home on, Mr. Uleck wondered what the land could be used for. Mr. Keehr replied that the land was big enough to build a home on, but it is not a conforming piece of land under today's regula- tions. If the Board was to deny a variance, the land could be used for nothing. Mr. Uleck commented that it was up to the Board to give the variance or not give the variance. Otherwise, the land would just be idle. Mr. Mearns asked if any other land was adjacent to this that could have been purchased. Mr. Keehr replied that this lot is landlocked. If they get the variance, Mr. Uleck asked Mrs. Hoadley if the home would be close to the same order and size as the rest of the homes and they would not be going to a two or three story home. Again, Mrs. Hoadley offered to show the plans. Mr. Uleck wanted to see them. Mrs. Hoadley presented the plans and said the house would probably be just a little bit smaller than the other houses in the area. It is a small, single family, one story dwell- ing. Chairman Thompson noticed that it had three bedrooms and two baths. Mrs. Hoadley estimated that it was about 1100 square feet. Chairman Thompson advised that it met Code. Chairman Thompson asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor of granting the request. There was no response. Chairman Thompson asked if anyone wished to speak against granting the variance. - 3 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA FEBRUARY 10, 1986 MS. Frances Cleary, 850 Horizons East, Apt. 208, Sterling Village, was not within the distance of 400 feet, but was asked by the President of the Senior Citizens Society to come this evening. She was interested in the procedure with regard to this because the last she knew, Mr. Panizza put the pilings in, and he did not have a work permit. She questioned why he sold the lot to the Hoadleys. Mr. Keehr replied, "Because I told him he could not have a permit.,, According to Mr. Keehr, Ms. Cleary said there was no single family home in the area, and there would be a two car garage there. Mr. Keehr corrected Ms. Cleary's statement by saying that there is space for two cars there, but he had not said there would be a two car garage. Ms. Cleary told the Members that the lot was sold to Mr. Panizza in August, and he sold it to Mr. Hoadley in December. Mr. Keehr interrupted Ms. Cleary to tell her Mr. Panizza sold the lot to Mr. Hoadley on the 9th of August. In December, Ms. Cleary stated that she was told Mr. Panizza had bought the lot in August, and he could not build because it would not come ~nder the grandfather clause and would need a work permit. Mr. Keehr went out the next day and put a stop on it. Then Mr. Panizza sold to the Hoadleys. Matthew R. Duncan, Representative of the Sterling Village Senior Citizens, Society, 240 Horizons West, Apt. 112, emphasized that there is not a single home in the whole area. He presented a petition with 71 signatures saying the unit owners were against the variance because the lot is too small and does not meet the requirements for an R-3 resi- dence, and the Board turned down a request from Sterling Village in 1979 to erect a small building on the lot. The same objections that existed then exist now. Mr. Duncan understood that back in 1979 the Board Members of Sterling Village wanted to purchase that lot. The Board of Adjustment was now saying it is only good for garbage, but that is not so. If Sterling Village had purchased it, Mr. Duncan said they would have "greened', it. In 1979, there were objections, and they were not given the variance. Mr. Duncan could not understand why the Hoadleys were applying for a variance. He thought someone from Zoning would have told them from the beginning that it was turned down. Mr. Slavin looked at the property twice and again this morning and saw a lot of garbage there, concrete poles, and - 4 - MINUTES-BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA FEBRUARY 10, 1986 other things. This Board had no control over what happened in 1979 and were going by "the book". Mr. Duncan thought someone should have gone after the owner and had him clean up the property. Mr. Slavin informed him that had nothing to do with this Board. Ms. Cleary said from the audience that the cement Mr. Slavin saw there were the piles that were used by the man that did not get the work permit. Mr. Gaetano V. Cruciani, 210 Horizons East, Apt. 305, said the building he is in is directly alongside the parcel in question. From their front window, he and his wife can overlook this property. Mr. Cruciani wished to read a state- ment because it would enable him to stick closer to the points he wanted to make. He said the points he would make would directly address one of the points made by the appli- cant in which he implied or stated that this building would not be injurious to the neighborhood. On the contrary, Mr. Cruciani felt it would be highly injurious tlo the nei~bor- hood, and all of the neighbors he spoke to indicated that they agreed to his stand. Mr. Cruciani and his wife opposed granting the variance because the proposed use of this substandard plot would be in conflict with the aesthetic character and quality of the surrounding residential area. The properties on all sides of this tiny plot are large land parcels occupied exclusively by apartment type buildings. He referred to the Bal Moral Apartments, Sea Terrace, and Sterling Village, which com- pletely encircle this small parcel. In addition to their structural similarity, Mr. Cruciani said these buildings share a common feature in that the land spaces occupied by the buildings themselves are small compared to spaces reserved for lawns, roadways, parking and outdoor recreation. This results in large distances between buildings and abundant amounts of open space. The space is not only visibly pleasing but also affords advantages that relate to the physical health and safety of the residents, many of whom are advanced in ages. Mr. Cruciani stated that an isolated, single family type structure squeezed piece-meal into a sub-modular sized plot in the midst of this otherwise spacious and orderly setting would inject a sour note into the present aesthetic harmony of the area. This sort of architectural inconsistency is symptomatic of neighborhoods that have been abandoned through the process of aesthetic deterioration. - 5 - MINUTES-BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA FEBRUARY 10, 1986 Mr. Cruciani prayed that the Board would not be a party to forcing this process of decay in his neighborhood by failing to uphold the City's own established criteria of reasonably respectable building practices. He said it should be kept in mind that the exceptions sought here were exceptions to the already minimal standards of the City Code and the least demanding residential Code, which is R-1. Mr. Cruciani said the granting of the exceptions would be an unjustified infringement on the property rights of adjoining property owners whose property values and the enjoyment of their neighborhood would be considerably hurt by such action. Mr. Cruciani had photographs which addressed the appearance of the neighborhood as it exists now and as it existed at the time he bought his apartment three years ago. He said it would give some idea of what the effect would be by placing a building on the Sub-sized plot. The first two pictures were views from Mr. Cruciani's apart- mento One faced the east, where the waterway could be seen between two buildings spaced at least 125 feet apart. The other view was taken from his dining room, and it looked south through the Village and showed the spacious area of the lawns, parkways, etc. that gave a feeling of airiness and sunlight, which was an attribute and what Mr. and Mrs. Cruciani considered when they bought the apartment. The third picture Mr. Cruciani gave the Board was a view from his front door, which is on the 3rd floor. Looking to the northwest, he and his wife have a view of the Sea Terrace Apartments, another Sterling Village building about 200 feet away, and a slight site of the garage building which adjoins this property on the west. If he understood correctly, Mr. Cruciani said the garage building is on or very close to the border line of the parcel that was the subject of this hearing. Three years ago, Mr. Cruciani said it was a very neatly maintained lawn area. At that time, he felt it was simply a buffer zone provided deliberately because of the construction of the garage. It was inconceivable to Mr. CrUciani three years ago and was inconceivable to him now that anyone would want to squeeze in a house on that small parcel of land. As it turns out now, he said the City Code belars out the judgment that this property is too small to decently accommodate a decent home structure. - 6 - MINUTES-BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA FEBRUARY 10, 1986 Mr. Cruciani said the parcel is much different than it was then. The weeds have been allowed to grow. The concrete pilings have been left in place, and it is unsightly, but this is something which can be remedied readily. If a building is built on the lot, the view Mr. and Mrs. Cruciani have will be cut down to a view of a roof of a building only 20 or 30 feet from his front windows. They are on the top floor, so they are better off than some of the people below them. Mr. Cruciani gave two other photographs to the Board that were taken from the second floor and first floor. If they have a 20 foot high structure, it will be higher than the garage which could be seen in the photos, and it would practically obliterate the view from those points in the apartment building. Mr. Cruciani said the second point of intrusion would arise because a substandard single family dwelling in this location would create a continuous threat of the tranquility and safety the existing members enjoy as members of a stable, predominantly adult community. All of the surrounding complexes are professionally managed by on site managers with responsibilities for maintaining community standards, and there will be no assurance and little likelihood that these standards would be accepted and lived up to by the occupants of a separate substandard dwelling, especially if the occupants prove to be transient tenants subscribing to a variety of different and possibly objectionable lifestyles. The parcel in question borders an unrestricted road of entrance into Sterling Village, and Mr. Cruciani said the Village's paved areas would present a temptation to neighbor- hood youngsters to ride bicycles, skate boards, etc. on the Village grounds. He outlined hazards they could pose and said other problems that should be anticipated would be those arising from uncontrolled pets, noise, and litter that might attend the occupancy of the proposed premises by persons with less disciplined lifestyles and he went into detail. ' In summary, Mr. Cruciani felt there was abundant cause to deny the application on the basis of the harm that would ensue to the neighborhood, the aesthetics, and the peaceful and orderly lifestyle that exists in the area. Moreover, he saw no basis for the Board not to emphatically reaffirm the established City standards in this Case. - 7 - MINUTES-BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA FEBRUARY 10, 1986 Mr. Cruciani stated that the property was presumably acquired with the knowledge that it fell short of the minimum accepted "norms" for residential building practices, and the applicants definitely have taken a deliberate, speculative gamble in the hope of receiving arbitrarily favorable treat- ment by this Board. He could not see it as an obligation of the BOard to allow one individual to violate the City's standards for his sole benefit contrary to the interest and wishes of numerous affected property owners. Mr. Lawrence Butchart, Apt. 309, Building 210, Sterling Village, said he would be the most affected by this because his apartment overlooks the lot. He took pictures from his porch and bedroom to show the Board the proximity of where the house would be in relation to his bedroom and the other 12 people that live in that particular condominium. Paul Steinbrenner, 210 Horizons East, said this building adjoins the property in question. He said the granting of the variance may cause a precedent which might be to the detriment of other properties in the area. Further, in granting the variance, they would be reducing the frontage down to 50 feet. This would mean the building would have to be set endways on the lot, which would be, by far, the least aesthetic way a building could be on a lot. Mr. Steinbrenner said it would be most objectionable, and he did not think it would be warranted for t~e Board to grant the variance because it would affect the view of second floor people and will generally harm the appearance of the entire property. He saw no reason why a variance should be granted at this time, when it could possibly~gamage and hurt them and offer a precedent for future cond!itions like this. Mr. Cruciani said a question had arisen as to what other use might be made of this property, and it was implied that it would be totally useless. He argued that a buffer zone between properties should not be considered to be totally useless as it would serve an architectural purpose. Mr. Cruciani emphasized that the property should be serving as a buffer zone between Sterling Village's buildings, which are all surrounded by lawns under their control. Mr. Cruciani admitted when the property was sold, Sterling Village and Bal Moral were there, but the property would not bring the same price if it was not sold for residential building purposes. He stated that it did not follow that wherever there is a square inch of land, the land has to be - 8 - MINUTES-BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA FEBRUARY 10, 1986 put in such a condition that it can be sold for as high as possible a price without consideration of what it is going to do to the neighborhood. Mr. Cruciani felt that the property should be maintained as a buffer zone in some form or other and said it might be acceptable as additional parking space. If this were owned by Sterling Village, it possibly might be used for van park- ing, or it could be used as a nursery for growing young plants. At least, it could be maintained in its proper con- dition and be an asset to the community rather than a detri- ment, which it would be if it is occupied by a building completely out of context with the rest of the neighborhood. With all of the objections the Board heard and all of the interest the people objecting had shown in the lot, Secretary Gordon asked why they ~id not buy the lot. A man in the audience wished to answer but was advised by Chairman Thompson that the question was out of order. Fred Clements, 210 Horizons East, Apt. 306, Sterling Village, began to answer Secretary Gordon's question and was stopped by Chairman Thompson. Mr. Clements informed the Members that it was turned down in 1979. He said the 210 building runs north and south, and the patios on the south apartments will face the proposed building. The building will be in front of the patios, and Mr. Clements asked if the people are to sit and look at the building or look at the wall. Since no one else wished to speak against the request, Secretary Gordon read a note written by Gene Moore, Esq., 639 East Ocean Avenue, on the Notice-of Public Hearing, stating he had no objection. Irene M. Brannan, 1708 N. E. 4th Street, p. O. Box 310, Boynton Beach, also wrote on her Notice that she had no objections to the proposals. Mr. Keehr recalled that in 1979, Sterling Village wanted to construct a storage building on this site that required a variance because of the strenuous setbacks for R-3 (40 feet and 20 feet). They came before the Board for a variance because they could not build a very big storage building if 40 feet out of a 50 foot lot was taken away from them. Mr. Keehr confirmed that Sterling Village was denied that vari- ance and added that it was for a storage building under R-3 zoning, and not for a home. - 9 - MINUTES-BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA FEBRUARY 10, 1986 Chairman Thompson stressed that each case is based on its own merit, and one case does not set a precedent at all with the Board. As Chairman of the Board, it is his job to make sure that does not happen. In 1979, Chairman Thompson was a Member of the Board. He asked that the Members keep in mind that when the property was platted, it met Code. Also, in workshops, the Professor from the University of Florida pointed out that the Board did not have the right to deny a person the use of his property. The decision is on the property, not the owners, and the Board does not care who the owner is. Chairman Thompson pointed out that whoever owns the property has a right to it, especially when it met Code when it was platted. Mr. Slavin said the Board heard several times that the build- ing would be substandard housing and asked if the building would be substandard, in Mr. Keehr's opinion. Mr Keehr answered, "No." ' · Mr. Mearns asked if the storage building would have obstructed their view had Sterling Village been successful and constructed it by their own choice. Chairman Thompson recollected that at that time, Sterling Village was taking over the maintenance of their property and wanted some place to store their lawnmowers. As the property stands right now, Chairman Thompson pointed out that the property is in accord with the Code because it meets everything but the frontage and footage and is not a zoning problem. Mr. Keehr advised that it is a zoning problem insomuch as the property is non-conforming today with the standards set forth from the original date of platting, but it can accommodate a home that meets all of the other requirements of the Zoning Code. Mr. Slavin noticed from the survey that the plot was laid out irregularly. One side in the length was 99.85 feet and the other side was 99.78 feet, and it was 50 feet at both ends. Mr. Uleck noticed that all of the lots in the block ran on a bias and ran nowhereB Inasmuch as the owner did not cause this hardship and inas- much as there is no available property abutting the lot, Secretary Gordon moved that the variance be granted. Mr. Slavin seconded the motion. A roll call vote was taken by Mrs. Ramseyer, as requested by Chairman Thompson, and the motion carried 6-0 in favor of the request to grant the variance. - 10 - MINUTES-BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA FEBRUARY 10, 1986 A man in the audience had a question. Chairman Thompson advised that it would be a violation of the Sunshine Law for the Board to go back into the case. The man asked if they would get a notification so they could appeal the decision. Chairman Thompson informed the man they could appeal through the Courts only. Case ~96 Applicant,/ Owner: Request-. Proposed Use: Location: MGM Structures, Inc. Relief from R-iA zoning requirement of 7,500 sq. ft. lot area to be reduced to 7,137 sq. ft. lot area Construction of single family residence 1750 N. Seacrest Boulevard Lot 27, less the North 7.97 feet, Block 29, ROLLING GREEN RIDGE, lST ADDITION, recorded in Plat Book 24, Pages 223-226, Palm Beach County Records Secretary Gordon read the application. Steve Gumley, 2241 N. E. 1st Lane, informed the Members that he and his father, Theodore Gumley, own MGM Structures, Inc., 117 East Coast Avenue, Hypoluxo, Florida 33462, and are building single family homes throughout Palm Beach County. They have been building rather regularly in the past three to five years in Boynton Beach, and he estimated they have built about forty family structures in the City in the past five years. Mr. Gumley said they purchased a number of lots in that vicinity over the past couple of years, specifically three adjacent lots to this, and they purchased this lot based on the same premise that it did conform to the minimum require- ments for the size of lot needed to build a single family structure. After they purchased the lot, they realized that sometime in the previous ownership of the lot, there had been the taking or giving of 3-1/2 feet of the 100 feet of depth, so the adjacent lot to the west was the beginning of duplex zoning. Mr. Gumley said they were stuck with a lot they purchased and a client who wished to have a home there, and they had built a couple of houses next door. He felt nothing else could be done with this particular piece of property. The house they contracted to build for their client would be a 3 bedroom, 2 bath house of about 1,248 square feet. - 11 - MINUTES-BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA FEBRUARY 10, 1986 Mr. Gumley told the Members he has had good experience in the City to do the job, and it will be a hardship for them if they are denied the variance. The type of structure they will build would be non-conforming to the area, and they are just short 313 square feet of meeting the zoning requirements. As a matter of fact, Mr. Gumley's building permit was processed right up to the last day. After waiting six weeks for it, he went to pick it up and, at the last moment, the Building Department caught the mentioned shortage Mr. Gumley needed to meet the R-1AA requirements. He hoped the variance would be granted so they could construct the house and a family could move there. Mr. Keehr informed Mr. Slavin that he did not see the plan for 'the house but has seen many of Mr. Gumley's homes in the area. Mr. Slavin asked if this house could fit into the lot and meet all Code setbacks or if there would be a problem. Mr. Keehr answered that there would be no problem what- soever. Mr. Slavin referred to batter boards, which Mr. Keehr explained were offset quite a bit from the actual corner of the building. Mr:. Keehr referred the Members to the survey and said they could see how Mr. Gumley would fit the house on the lot. He said Mr. Gumley gave it 7.7 feet on both sides that was over and above Code, which requires 7.5 feet, and a house just like it is next door. Chairman Thompson told the Members that the lot is landlocked and the whole area has the same problem. One or two lots had over 50 feet. No one else wished to speak in favor, and no one wanted to speak against the variance. Secretary Gordon read a note Mary McGrady, 130 N. E. 19th Avenue, wrote on the Notice, saying she would like to have a family home there. Mr. Slavin moved to grant the variance for the following reasons: 1. Somewhere down the line, as pointed out, inches or feet were taken or given away. There is no other property Mr. Gumley can buy, and it was not of his doing. The amount of square footage involved was minimal to what was needed. Secretary Gordon seconded the motion, and Mrs. Ramseyer took a roll call vote, as requested by Chairman Thompson. The motion carried 6-0, and the request was granted. - 12 - MINUTES-BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA FEBRUARY 10, 1986 Pending Request for Meeting of March 10, 1986 Case #97 - 212 N. E. 14th Avenue Owner: D'NT Enterprises, Inc. (T. Rihn, Vice President) Request: Lot Size Chairman Thompson hoped all of the Members would be present at the next meeting because there will be four cases. OTHER BUSINESS None. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Board, Mr. Gordon moved, seconded by Mr. Slavin, to adjourn, and the meeting properly adjourned at 8:15 P. M. (Two Tapes) - 13 -