Loading...
Minutes 12-09-85MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING HELD AT CITY HALL, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA, MONDAY, DECEMBER 9, 1985 AT 7:00 P.M. PRESENT Vernon Thompson, Jr., Chairman Robert Gordon, Secretary Paul Slavin Ben Uleck Danny O'Brien, Alternate ABSENT George Ampol, Vice Chairman (Excused) Lillian Artis (Excused) George Mearns (Excused) Raymond Eney, Alternate (Excused) Bert Keehr, Deputy Bldg. Official William p. Doney, Ass't. City Attorney Chairman Thompson called the meeting to order at 7:02 P. M. and announced that four Members were not present. Out of a possible Board of seven, five were present. Chairman Thompson introduced the Members of the Board, Attorney Doney, Mr. Keehr, and the Recording Secretary. He recognized the presence in the audience of former Mayor and present Councilman Carl Zimmerman. MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 4, 1985 Mr. Slavin called attention to the 5th line from the bottom of the last paragraph on page 4 beginning, "Nothing was done " and said it should read that, · - · , "In the opinion of Mr. Slavin, nothing was done. . ." Secretary Gordon moved, seconded by Mr. Uleck, to approve the minutes with the Correction. Motion carried 4-0. Mr. O'Brien abstained from voting as he was not present at the November meeting. NEW BUSINESS - PUBLIC HEARING Chairman Thompson read the six criteria for the basis of the Board's decision and explained the Board's voting require- ments. Case 993 Applicant-. Request~ Carmen M. Lopez Relief from R-3 zoning requirement of 4,000 square feet lot area per unit. Applicant's property has approximately 10,000 square feet per - 1 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA DECEMBER 9, 1985 Proposed Use. - Location: lot and applicant has four units per lot. A variance of approximately 6,000 square feet per lot is required. R-3 zoning requires 750 square feet living area per unit, and applicant has two units of the four per lot with only approximately 467 square feet. A variance of approximately 283 square feet per unit is required. R-3 zoning requires two parking spaces per unit. Applicant has four parking spaces per lot. A variance of four parking spaces per lot is required. Multi-family residential dwellings 2226, 2304, 2310 S. E. Third Street Lots 18, 19 and 20, CRESTVIEW, recorded in Plat Book 23, Page 154, Palm Beach County Records Secretary Gordon read the application and answers to the questions. Chairman Thompson pointed out that there was a Board of five Members present, and it would take all five votes to grant the request. Carmen M. Lopez, 935 Hyacinth Drive, Delray Beach, Florida 33444, informed the Members that they bought the property three years ago as a duplex on paper, and it was fully rented at that time. They inherited the tenants that were there and never thought anything was wrong. Later on, they were told it was an illegal rental because only a duplex was allowed, so Mrs. Lopez started applying for a variance. Mrs. Lopez said ever since the buildings were built, the property has been rented that way. They were told to con- tinue renting it that way, and they never suspected there would be anything wrong. They were never told that it would require so many parking spaces per unit. They bought the property without coming to the City Hall to check records. Mr. Slavin asked if Mrs. Lopez had an Attorney represent her as a buyer when she bought the property. Mrs. Lopez replied that they bought it without an Attorney and bought several properties without consulting an Attorney because they believe people. Mr. Slavin questioned how Mrs. Lopez knew what she did was legal if she did not have an Attorney telling her what was correct or incorrect. Mrs. Lopez assumed the way it was rented was the proper way. - 2 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA DECEMBER 9, 1985 The Members had a copy of a Warranty Deed dated January 14, 1983. Mr. Slavin noticed a notation in the column which said $280,000. He asked if that was the price of the property and if Mrs. Lopez and her husband spent over a quarter of a million dollars without having an Attorney advise them. Mrs. Lopez answered that they did because they assumed the broker was representing them. Mrs. Lopez explained that they had asked the broker to get them an investment property, and this property was close to her husband's office and convenient. They did not have advice from a lawyer at the time they bought. They thought, since the broker was supposed to be working for them, that they had proper representation from him. It was not the listing broker but the broker they had asked to find some investment property for them. It was never pointed out to them that this was a duplex being rented as a quadruplex and that it was wrong. Chairman Thompson observed that the buildings were built in 1977, and Mrs. Lopez took control in January of 1983. He asked Mr. Keehr when the violation was called to his attention. Mr. Keehr replied, "Just recently." Mrs. Lopez informed Mr. O'Brien that she was told the Water Department brought it to the City's attention. Mr. Keehr believed the City received a complaint from a neighbor regarding the number of people occupying the structure, and Mrs. Dorothy Moore, Codes Enforcement Officer, investigated it. Mr. Keehr told Mr. O'Brien that the City had no idea how long 'this had been going on. Chairman Thompson asked if there is a common water meter and light meter there. Mr. Keehr answered that there are two electric and two water meters per building. Mr. Uleck asked Mrs. Lopez how she knew what to charge her tenants if they did not have a meter. Mrs. Lopez replied that she was not aware of the meter problem until she had a vacancy. When she tried to rent the apartment, she realized that there was only one meter for two apartments. Still, she did not think anything was wrong and thought it was done that way. The tenants divide the utilities. Mrs. Lopez said she rents the large apartment to tWo people and the efficiency to one person. Normally, their utilities are divided 2/3rds and 1/3rd. The tenants in the big apartment had paid a deposit, moved out, and the apartment was vacant, so the tenant in the little apartment was to pay a deposit. - 3 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA DECEMBER 9, 1985 Mr. O'Brien asked if this was under a unity of title or if it was three separate parcels. In other words, he wondered if Mrs. Lopez could sell Lots 18, 19 and 20 individually. Mrs. Lopez thought it would be possible, but they bought the lots altogether. When Mr. O'Brien was speaking of unity of title, he was saying that they could not split the three parcels, and the three parcels would always have to be together. Mrs. Lopez thought they could be split because she believed the south part of the first parcel was zoned commercial. Chairman Thompson noticed the lots were not connected and thought they could be sold separately. The reason Mr. O'Brien asked the question was because if they went through a unity of title and tied up all three parcels together, Mrs. Lopez could not sell either building separately and would be asking for a different variance than she was asking for right now. Mrs. Lopez emphasized that the lots could be sold separately. From the time that she applied for a variance and now, she sold the buildings separately. A title insurance company investigated it properly. It was sold separately with three different deeds and three different title insurances. Mrs. Lopez confirmed Mr. Uleck's statement that there are three different addresses and three different titles, not one title for all three units. Mr. O'Brien noticed Mrs. Lopez said she sold three different parcels and was glad an Attorney was present. He asked if each property would have to be treated separately. From Mr. O'Brien's knowledge of the Code, he thought they would have to treat each one of the three separate parcels individually and could not treat them as a whole because each one would be a different variance. Attorney Doney thought Mr. O'Brien was absolutely right and said that, actually, Mrs. Lopez was applying for three variances per lot, or a total of nine variances. Since the lot sizes were slightly different, it could affect the Board's decision, but each lot with each structure requires a variance. Chairman Thompson advised that would be on floor space, area, and land size. The other one would be on parking. Mrs. Lopez thought if it would be granted on one property, it would be granted on all three because it was the same thing. They bought all three as a package deal, and they - 4 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA DECEMBER 9, 1985 are identical. Mr. O'Brien informed Mrs. Lopez that each parcel, has different variance requirements. If she was go- ing to keep them as three parcels, there would be three variances for each parcel, and each one would be different. Mr. O'Brien explained that the parking and the living space are the same on each lot, but the square footage per living unit is different on each lot. Mrs. Lopez disagreed, saying the living areas are identical. Mr. O'Brien was saying the living area was the same, but the square footage per unit was supposed to be 4,000 square feet. On the 9,000 square feet, it would be one variance. On the 10,200 square feet and on the 10,600 square feet, it would be two other variances. Right there would be three variances, and Mrs. Lopez was asking for a blanket variance on three separate parcels. Mr. O'Brien informed Mrs. Lopez that the lots were not all the same size. Mrs. Lopez reiterated that she did not seek legal advice from anyone and assumed the lots were all the same size. Attorney Doney advised Chairman Thompson the Board could proceed but they would have to consider that each parcel was a separate item. He asked Mrs. Lopez when they closed on the property. Mrs. Lopez replied, "Friday" (December 6, 1985). Attorney Doney advised that Mrs. Lopez no longer owns the property. Mrs. Lopez said her application for the variance and the possibility of having everything changed made the sale possible because she told the buyers of her property that a variance was pending. Chairman Thompson thought the fact that Mrs. Lopez applied for the variance but was not the owner of the property now created a problem. Mrs. Lopez informed Attorney Doney that she brought the new owner to the meeting. If the new owner joined in the petition, Attorney Doney thought possibly they could clear it up because Mrs. Lopez had no authority to bind someone when she does not own the property. Attorney Doney advised Mr. Slavin that Mrs. Lopez had every right to apply for the variance. However, he did not know that she had the right to continue with the petition without the new owner, after title had changed hands, because the new owner would be bound by the Board's determination and would not be able to come back next month and ask for the same variance. Attorney Doney agreed with Mr. Slavin that owner- ship would not enter into the Board's determination and it was a jurisdictional type thing. - 5 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA DECEMBER 9, 1985 Mr. O'Brien suggested a postponement because there were legal problems and asked Mrs. Lopez to consider this. Legally, Chairman Thompson said the Board could not do that. Attorney Doney advised that they could continue the hearing, and he felt they could cure the problem if the new owner would agree to join in the application and to be bound by both the application and determination of the Board. Mr. Slavin commented that they could table this for a future date. Attorney Doney agreed but added that they could continue with the request if the new owner would be willing to go along with the application as it was drawn up. It could be that the new owner had different ideas. Mr. Slavin alluded to Mr. and Mrs. Lopez buying the property without an Attorney advising them what was what and said now they were in a bind, looking for an out. In all fairness to Mrs. Lopez and the new owners, he thought they should seek legal advice. Mr. Slavin thought perhaps they should take Mr. O'Brien's recommendation and table the petition until a future date when they could come with all of their legal problems. He thought an Attorney should advise them how to proceed with all of their problems because it was pointed out that they will need variances on all three buildings, not just one. Chairman Thompson thought Mr. Slavin's point was well taken but said the policy of the Board is to hear as much as possible about anything that comes before it. At that point, he believed the Board had the right to withhold the vote. However, they have always been.told to hear the case first. Mr. Uleck felt they were dealing with Mrs. Lopez and not the new owners, and they should continue with Case #93. Chair- man Thompson agreed. If the owner did not wish to join in the application, Attorney Doney did not know that the Board had the authority to hear the case because Mrs. Lopez did not own the property. He advised that there was nothing Mrs. Lopez could ask for. If she does not own the property, she Ks not entitled to anything. Ahmed Naeem, 2226 S. E. 3rd Street, Boynton Beach, Florida 33435, wanted to continue with the case. Attorney Doney asked if he closed on the property last Friday and if he was the current owner. Mr. Naeem answered affirmatively. He also answered that he had seen the petition for the variance - 6 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA DECEMBER 9, 1985 that Mrs. Lopez filed and wished to join in the petition and be bound by any determination made by the Board. If the Board denied the petition, Attorney Doney advised Mr. Naeem that he could not come back before the Board for a year. It would be binding upon him as well as Mrs. Lopez. Attorney Doney said Mr. Naeem would have appeal rights but as far as applying for a variance, he could not come back to the Board and ask for the same variance unless one year runs. Mr. Naeem wished to continue. He said the property is rented, and four families are staying in one bedroom, one bathw and two bedrooms, and one bath in each building. Mr. Naeem told the Members he sacrificed everything to buy the property. As for the parking, he said there is enough space for six parking places, but no more than that. As for the difference in one bedroom and one bath and two bedrooms and one bath, there is more than 400 feet because a walk-in closet was added to one bedroom. Mr. Naeem said the fire escape was no problem because there is a back side door to go out, which is connected to two bedrooms and one bathroom too. There was no doubt that it should not have been that way, and Mr. Naeem admitted he should have known that too, but he hoped it would be approved. Mr. Naeem said the only thing missing and the only drawback was that the City needs parking for two cars at each unit, but he knew the Board could make exceptions, and he appealed that it must be done. Mr. Naeem stated that he had been living there since July, and nobody made any objections. He has not seen any kinds of fights or anything like that with any neighbors. Mr. Naeem said they are not charging for each individual but just charging for four apartments and are taking the money that way. Mr. Naeem hoped it would not give any problems but said it was up to the Board. He told the Board Members it would be very difficult for him to come up with payments because the rate of interest is high, and he asked the Members to con- sider that. As far as Mr. Naeem could see, there was no problem with the property, and he added that there are two water meters. Mr. Naeem noticed Mr. O'Brien mentioned that the lots are separate and have been titled separately. It is not on the deed that they are separate, and Mr. Naeem asked why he - 7 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA DECEMBER 9, 1985 would think they were separate. He said there was no doubt that the application should have been made differently, but he just wanted to finish the matter and take care of this. Mr. Uleck pointed out that all three building permits were issued on June 16, 1975, and each was issued as a duplex. The original owner changed the units, and Mrs. Lopez was in the wrong. Mr. Uleck stated that Mr. Naeem knew all about this and still bought the property. Now Mr. Naeem wants a variance. If everyone who violated the City Code could get a variance, Mr. Uleck said there would be a lot of violations in the City of Boynton Beach. Mr. Naeem said he was before the Board and told the Members his problems so he would not be in violation. He stressed that it would be a hardship on him. Secretary Gordon asked if Mr. or Mrs. Naeem were related to Mrs. Lopez. Mr. Naeem answered, "No." Chairman Thompson asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor of the variance. Mrs. Ahmed Naeem, 2226 S. E. 3rd Street, Boynton Beach, Florida 33435, reiterated what her husband said about the mortgage and bank payments and also stressed that they would face a lot of hardships if the Board Members would not consider their case. She wondered what they would do with the tenants and how they would get them to vacate if the variance was denied. Mrs. Naeem admitted that they were fully aware that this was going on about the variance, but her husband had applied for the loan prior to this. They were half way through getting their deed when they got the notice. After going through all of the loan procedures with the bank, Mrs. Naeem said they did not want to lose out and thought they would rather carry on. She requested the Board to do something about it and said they came to ask for help more than anything else. Mr. Slavin asked if Mr. and Mrs. Naeem paid cash for the property or if it was mortgaged. Mrs. Naeem did not know but thought her husband could answer the question. If the property was bought with a mortgage, Mr. Slavin was quite sure that rather than receiving the mortgage, the lender would see if the property could support the mortgage. He emphasized that this was a hardship that was self imposed. - 8 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA DECEMBER 9, 1985 Neither the City nor the County had anything to do with it. Mr. Slavin could not see where, in good conscience, they could say there was a hardship. Mr. Slavin continued that Mr. and Mrs. Naeem were asking for a variance of 283 feet. In other words, they were asking for about a 61% footage of the Code. Mr. Slavin referred to Brother Joe being turned down and asked how the Board could work on this when nothing was there that stated it was a hardship that was imposed by an ageny of the City. Nothing was grandfathered in this. Mrs. Lopez bought from somebody who had violated the property, and whether the City knew about it or not was not the concern at the moment. Mrs. Naeem was only asking that the Board help them. If not, their last resort would be to rent it as a duplex. Mrs. Naeem asked for more time so they could work out something. She knew it was a self-imposed hardship, but since they had gone so far with everything, and it was only later that they got the notice, they wanted to carry on with the deed. The property was in good condition, and Mrs° Naeem said all of the tenants were very happy, and there were no kinds of problems except for a complaint made by one tenant. Mrs. Lopez came forward to inform the Members that one tenant did not pay her rent. Mrs. Naeem continued that when Mrs. Lopez served the tenant with a notice, the tenant blackmailed Mrs. Lopez. When Mrs. Lopez served the tenant with a notice, Mrs. Naeem said the tenant threatened Mrs. Lopez, saying she would go to the Council and see that Mrs. Lopez was in trouble. That was how the case came up to the Board. Mrs. Naeem told the Board Members she and her husband are the new owners, and she again asked the Members to give them some consideration. They just bought the property a week ago. She urged the Members to at least give them more time. Chairman Thompson again asked if anyone wished to speak in favor of granting the variance. There was no response. Chairman Thompson asked if anyone wished to speak against granting the variance. John Pagliarulo, 3546 South Lake Drive, Boynton Beach, sympathized with the new owners and previous owners but knew the Board and City had their jobs to do. He owns a duplex around the corner and said the area is quite crowded. Mr. - 9 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA DECEMBER 9, 1985 Pagliarulo has seen many violations in the area and expressed concern about it because his property will go down in value too if the City does not crack down on some of the violations. Although he sympathized with the people, he said if they allow one to go by, sooner or later, everybody will be asking for the same variance. Mr. Pagliarulo built and rented his duplex in accordance with the Codes of the City. He was opposed to the issuing of a variance, based upon some of the items he previously mention- ed. Mr. Pagliarulo believed the Board should try to allow the people to convert the property back to a duplex and ask the proper rent, as it must be quite big to have this many rooms. He said he is always being asked for a lot of rental space, which he does not have. Mr. Pagliarulo suggested that, possibly, there was another avenue they could pursue rather than trying to go through this particular routine. Mr. Pagliarulo felt it was totally against the Code. He could not understand how it ever came about or how the City allowed it to happen. Inspections probably were never made, and the Board was being asked to approve something that may be totally out of context with the Code. Mr. Pagliarulo referred to fire regulations, etc. Once the Board approves one of these, he believed they wOuld uncover a can of worms because the whole area would probably come before the Board. It was Mr. Pagliarulo's personal opinion that the line had to be drawn some place, and they had to put a halt to what is going on and enforce the law which the City created. In defense of the City, Chairman Thompson wished the record to show that violations are done on weekends, holidays, and at night, which makes it impossible for the City to be free of this type of work. He admitted that many cases come before the Board that the City does find. In his many years on the Board, Chairman Thompson could say that the City really does a good job (especially Bert Keehr and "Bud" Howell of the Building Department) in making the City of Boynton one of the best when it comes to zoning and City Codes, which they recommend to the City Council. Chairman Thompson asked if anyone else wished to speak against the granting of the variance. John M. Arnold, 798 N. W. 15th Avenue, Boca Raton, Florida 33432, informed the Members that he and his wife own three apartments located at 2290, 2294, and 2296 S. E. 4th Street, - 10 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA DECEMBER 9, 1985 which is the next block to the east. The apartments are presently condominiums. There are six units in one building, and each unit contains 750 square feet with better than two parking spaces. The units have two bedrooms and two baths with a screened in porch. Mr. and Mrs. Arnold built the buildings, have had them for three years, and are very proud of them. At this time, Mr. Arnold could not go along with Mr. and Mrs. Naeem asking for special favors and requests for viola- tions~to the Code, whereby they would be creating parking problems. He knew there were parking problems on S. E. 3rd Street because he has been through there many times. Apparently, somebody, in violation of the Code, altered the apartments that were built and added an additional apartment, whereby they are in violation of parking, square footage, and other things. If the Board went along with the request of Mr. and Mrs. Naeem, Mr. Arnold thought it would be a green light for any other apartment owner or duplex owner in the area to ask for similar relief. Mr. Arnold said he has a great deal of expense with his apartments such as the mortgage, interest, and real estate taxes. The real estate taxes that just came out are nearly $1,000 per apartment. If the BOard granted the request, Mr. Arnold thought it would create more parking problems and would give a green light to anyone else who wanted to ask for the same relief. He said he could turn three apartments into six apartments at half the footage, and it would be a great relief on the rent. There could be an entrance on the front and an entrance on the rear. Mr. Arnold noticed that both Mr. and Mrs. Naeem admitted that the condition was there before they bought, and they bought, knowing that these things were violations. Now, they were asking for relief. He did not think any sympathy whatsoever should be given to them. Mr. Arnold thought the Board should maintain the Code because, in his estimation, Boynton is run very well. He thought the apartments should be returned to the way they were built originally. Mrs. Lopez interjected that no additions, structural changes, annexes, or openings in walls to make doors were made to the property. It Ks still in the same condition as when it was built. No changes whatsoever were made. Mrs. Lopez emphasized that the property has been like that since the day it was constructed. - 11 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA DECEMBER 9, 1985 Amy Arnold, 2298 S. E. 4th Street, recently purchased a 1,250 square foot condominium, which is one block over from this property. It has more than two parking spaces. If the Board granted the request, Ms. Arnold felt it would be a serious degradation to the area and would not be fair to people like her who recently invested. She also felt it would be a poor investment of her money if the request was granted. Ms. Arnold's real estate taxes were also $1,000, which is a lot of money and a major expense for her. Ms. Arnold expressed that it was disheartening to know that Mr. and Mrs. Naeem could come before the Board and try to get out of things that have been deemed the right thing to do by the City. She asked why it should be changed now, if everybody else abides by what is correct. The whole area could do the same thing, because every building in that general area is the same. If everybody applied for this kind of a variance, the area would be so degraded, it would not be worthwhile to live there. Chairman Thompson asked if anyone else wished to speak against the granting of the variance. There was no response. Secretary Gordon read a letter from Edward T. Finnigan, 2510 S. W. 14th Street, opposing the request, as there would be major changes in the zoning law which would allow a serious overcrowding of the property that would result in a serious devaluation of his property and the other properties in the area. Chairman Thompson asked Attorney Doney if the Board should act on this as one or three separate requests. If the Board's feelings were the same on each request, Attorney DOney advised that they should act on all three parcels together. If they had reason to treat one request different- ly, they should~bring it up as a separate item. If they decided to treat it as one, Chairman Thompson asked if they had to spell out the footage. Mr. Uleck suggested they go by the addresses and lot numbers. He did not think the footage should make that much difference because none of the lots would have the proper amount of footage. Attorney Doney agreed. Mr. Uleck noticed that Mrs. Lopez requested all three at one time, and he preferred to take the paCkage deal because all of the lots were in violation. Attorney Doney advised that it was a matter of degree. - 12 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA DECEMBER 9 , 1985 Instead of working on all three lots either collectively or individually, Mr. Slavin thought they should go back to the Code to hear the powers and duties of the Board. He read paragraphs 3 and 3d under "POWERS AND DUTIES" from pages 1939 and 1940 of the Boynton Beach Code and said the Board was not working an undue hardship upon the applicant. All of the hardships had been self imposed either by the Youngs, who sold the property to the Lopezs, or the Lopezs when they transferred the property to Mr. and Mr. Naeem. Mr. Slavin pointed out that the amount of footage requested was excessive. He was sympathetic with the applicants because they did not have legal advice. There was discussion by Mr. Slavin and Mr. Uleck about hardships and violations. Chairman Thompson reminded the Members that if the variance was granted~ it would be granted to the property in question and not the owners. If you get down specifically to building and site regula- tions, Mr. Slavin said you come down to the size of the minimum living area (750 square feet per unit). The appli- cant wants to build on about 61% of the Codes. If a motion was to be made, Mr. O'Brien thought it had to be made on the application as submitted, which was on the three parcels collectively. If they split it into three different parcels, they would need a calculator. Mr. O'Brien called attention to the fact that the application submitted was not asking for the minimum variance and, therefore, moved to deny the application as submitted. The Chairman did not want a motion at that time, so Mr. O'Brien withdrew his motion. Chairman Thompson said the Board had the authority to grant or deny the request. However, they did have a responsibility to the City of Boynton Beach and the State of Florida. He could not understand how the property could be bought without bank attorneys going into details and having surveys, etc. Attorney Doney thought what was odd was what Mr. Slavin pointed out. If there is financing, so much is based on income. If you check on income, you would have to check on the number of permissible units to do a property analysis, and it should have been caught at that point. If only two units are permissible, it will change the income from four units, so it would affect the amount. Chairman Thompson reminded everyone that five votes would be needed to grant the request. - 13 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA DECEMBER 9, 1985 Mr. O'Brien moved to DENY the request as submitted, in that it did not follow the steps of the minimum variance request allowable. Mr. Uleck seconded the motion. There was discussion as to whether a "Yes" vote would deny the request and a "No" vote would grant the request. For future reference, Attorney Doney said that typically, whatever the Board did with any of the cases, they should make a motion to grant the variance. If the Members wanted to vote "No", that would be fine. Then, they could keep things straight. A motion to deny is not incorrect. It just gets confusing. Chairman Thompson announced that an "Aye" vote would be in favor of the motion to DENY the request. Mrs. Ramseyer took a roll call vote on the motion, and the motion carried 5-0 in favor of the motion to DENY. In voting "Aye", Chairman Thompson commented that the case was unique and so far out of line, that perhaps an Attorney who specializes in real estate could have worked it out, as it was complicated. Mr. O'Brien reiterated that the request, as submitted, precluded the motion that he made. The request was DENIED. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting properly adjourned at 8:22 P. M. ( Two Tapes - 14-