Loading...
Minutes 07-09-84MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING HELD AT CITY HALL, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA, JULY 9, 1984 PRESENT Vernon Thompson, Jr., Chairman George Ampol, Vice Chairman Paul Slavin, Acting Secretary George Mearns Joseph Moore Ben Uleck .Lillian Artis, Alternate Bert Keehr, Deputy Building Official Kenneth M. Rubin, Attorney for Board William P. Doney, Assistant City Attorney ABSENT Robert Gordon, Secretary (Excused) Harold Weinberg, Alternate (Excused) Chairman Thompson called the meeting to order at 7:02 P. M. He introduced the Deputy Building Official, Members of the Board, and the Recording Secretary. Chairman Thompson recognized the presence of Mayor Carl Zimmerman in the audience. MINUTES OF JUNE 11, 1984 Mr. Ampol moved, seconded by Mr. Mearns, to approve the minutes as received. Motion carried 7-0. Chairman Thompson called attention to Councilman Nick Cassandra, who had entered the meeting. PUBLIC HEARING Chairman Thompson announced that there were three requests for variances. He pointed out that this is not a Board where a majority rules. Seven people will be voting tonight, and five votes will be needed to approve a request. Any three votes will deny a request. Chairman Thompson pointed out that when a decision is made by the Board, the only recourse that an applicant has is to perhaps come before the Board at another time or take it to Court. He stressed that the decisions the Board Members make are most important. Chairman Thompson said the Members also go out and visit the sites. Many times they do not talk to people because it is not good to discuss cases out- side of the Council Chambers. Chairman Thompson read the six criteria on which a judgment is based. - 1 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JULY 9, 1984 Case ~63 - Appeal of decision of an Administrative Office's Official on the Zoning Code in reference to the installation of a fence at the west end of the Mariner Village property at No E. 12th Terrace and Willard Way and the potential closing of Marine Road submitted by the Boynton Mariner Village Association, Inc. Mr. Slavin, Acting Secretary, read the Memorandum from Betty S. Boroni, City Clerk, dated June 19, 1984, which was addressed to all of the Members, re the appeal of Mariner Village. As all of the Members had copies of the documents forwarded with Mrs. Boroni's Memorandum and as they were public records, Mr. Slavin and Chairman Thompson agreed it would not be necessary for Mr. Slavin to read them into the record. Chairman Thompson said anytime anyone wanted a copy of any of the documents, they could go into City Hall and get one. Chairman Thompson asked if anyone was present to represent Mariner Village. Robert Lee Shapiro, Attorney for Mariner Village Association, Inco, of the law firm of Levy, Shapiro, Kneen & Kingcade, P.A., 218 Royal Palm Way, Palm Beach, Florida 33480, said he was the author of the letter dated May 17, 1984, which Mr. Slavin, Acting Secretary, referred to. Chairman Thompson asked Attorney Shapiro if there was any- thing he would like to tell the Board which might enhance his client. Attorney Shapiro wanted to make a presentation. He had an exhibit he wanted everybody to see. Attorney Shapiro thought it was first important to point out that this is not a request for a variance and is not governed by the criteria outlined by the Chairman in his initial presentation. This is an appeal from a decision of the Building Department and the Building Official to stop work or "red tag" a particular job that was taking place at Mariner Village. In order for the Board Members to override the decision of the Building Official in this case, Attorney Shapiro said it requires under Section 10 of the Building Code the concurrence of four voting members. Attorney Shapiro advised that the criteria is somewhat different as well because it does not require a particular hardship nor does it require proof of those items set forth in the criteria for obtaining a variance. He said their position was very simple, and that he would put on a couple of witnesses to verify the facts of what he says. To summarize the situation, Attorney Shapiro said Mariner Village is a townhome project located in Boynton Beach on - 2 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JULY 9, 1984 N. E. 12th Terrace. As the Members could see, it was represented by the residential units he pointed to on the exhibit. The lands not shown in residential units were owned by someone outside of Mariner Village, single family residences along Manor Drive, and a mix of single family and condominium residences on Rider Road. Attorney Shapiro told the Board his clients went to the city of Boynton Beach because they had a lot of serious problems. They applied for a building permit to erect a fence. Attorney Shapiro said they had a number of very valid reasons, and he was sure when Mrs. Wahl testifies, the Members would concur that the reasons were valid. Attorney Shapiro added that they have had a number of security problems and a lot of problems with unwarranted trespassers. When they tell trespassers to leave, they have been extremely belligerent. Attorney Shapiro characterized the overall case as persons in the city attempting to protect their rights to trespass on property owned by his Clients. However, Mr. J. S. McDowell went to the city and inquired of the city Building official what was necessary to erect this fence. Attorney Shapiro said the fence posts are the green dots on the exhibit, and they cross Marine Road and continue up to the border of their property. When they inquired of the Building official what was required, the Building Official advised Attorney Shapiro's clients to submit an application for a building permit, together with a sketch of the property and a letter specifying why a build- ing permit was requested for this particular fence installa- tion. Attorney Shapiro stressed that they did that~ and they did everything that the city asked them to do. If the City had said, "Jump through three hoops and go through site plan review," Attorney Shapiro said they probably would have done that at that time. However, based upon the advice of the City Building Official, Attorney Shapiro said they were issued a building permit. In reliance on the building permit, they started construc- tion of the fence, which Attorney Shapiro said has been vandalized badly since then. For those who viewed the site, Attorney Shapiro informed them that all of the fence posts that had been pulled down had been pulled down by the trespassers they are trying to protect themselves against. Attorney Shapiro continued by saying they went ahead, signed a contract, and their contractor went in and installed the fence posts along the road. That work was progressing - 3 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JULY 9, 1984 smoothly, when an official from the City issued what was called a stop work order, or a red tag. Those that were on the site saw it attached on one of the poles. Nobody really explained to them what the stop work order meant or what they allegedly had done wrong. They were supposed to stop work on the construction of the fence. Attorney Shapiro thought it was important to point out that they reviewed the Ordinance very carefully and do not believe in any way, shape, or form that a modification of any site plan was required in the first place, and that the interpretation has since been put on the site plan for review committee requirements of the Ordinance. Attorney Shapiro informed the Board Members that his client was never made aware of this in advance. The second thing Attorney Shapiro needed to point out was this is private property. It is not property owned by the City. It is not property maintained by the City but it is simply private property which was dedicated on the plat to the Mariner Village Association. If the City of Boynton Beach were to take the position that every fence installa- tion on every piece of private property in the City of Boynton Beach required a separate site plan review, Attorney Shapiro suggested that this Board would spend all of its life deal- ing with fence installations in backyards. Attorney Shapiro thought it was important to note there is no security problems created by the proposed fence installa- tion. Access to the units that are not owned by his client or not governed by the Mariner Village Association is freely available to N. E. 10th Street and Rider Road. Even though part of Marine Road is their property, Attorney Shapiro said they have left that part of Marine Road which gives access to Manor Drive open. He did not think they had the legal obligation to do that, but Attorney Shapiro said they are trying to be good neighbors. They left it open so in the event there is a Police call or a Fire call along Manor Drive, these vehicles will have access to the single family homes. If you look at the configuration of the proposed fence, Attorney Shapiro stated they are doing nothing but securing their own property. He thought in America you had the right to do that. Attorney Shapiro said they heard some talk and are prepared to prove the site plan that the City officials are now demanding strict compliance with has been violated at least four or five material times in that the initial developer - 4 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JULY 9, 1984 and builder did not have to comply strictly with that site plan. They have not gone to Codes Enforcement and required the initial developer to go ahead and do those things which are shown in the site plan. Attorney Shapiro said his client thought that the method the City Officials have used has been extremely unfair to their clients. Legally as well as morally and fair play, Attorney Shapiro told the Board his clients are entitled to put that fence upon the property. Attorney Shapiro wished to call a couple of witnesses to verify what he was saying because he thought it was an important issue to his clients. He thought his clients had the right to be safe in their homes. Attorney Shapiro said Mr. McDowell would tell what he was told by the Building Official. Mr. Slavin asked if this was laid out by a Professional Engineer or an Architect. Mr. Ampol answered, "No." Mr. McDowell said they did the plan. Mr. Slavin determined the plan before them was done by the unit owners. Mr. Slavin said he may have misinterpreted a statement Attorney Shapiro just said and, if possible, would have the stenographers read it back to Attorney Shapiro. Mr. Slavin noticed Attorney Shapiro said something about the Building Official not checking or doing things in the original site plan that the developer did or presented to the City when Mariner was built. Attorney Shapiro verified that was correct. Mr. Slavin asked Attorney Shapiro if he was saying the officials were lax in their inspections in checking on the project during construction because that was the inference Mr. Slavin got. Attorney Shapiro replied that Mr. Slavin could draw that inference if he wished but his point was they are being made to go through this process because of "strict compliance" with the site plan. However, Attorney Shapiro was pointing out that procedure, in this instance, is not fair because there are a number of improvements shown on site plans which, in fact, do not exist. Attorney Shapiro said there are no records in the official records of the City of Boynton Beach modifying the site plan, so Mr. Slavin could draw any inference he wished from that. If this plan was drawn by a Professional Engineer or an Architect who would be conversant with the Zoning Codes and the rules and regulations pertaining to them, Mr. Slavin asked if they would have a problem today. Attorney Shapiro replied affirmatively. In other words, Mr. Slavin said the site plan would have been submitted at the time by a - 5 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JULY 9, 1984 Professional Architect or an Engineer who does this type of work and knows what the Codes are for the City of Boynton Beach or whatever. Mr. Slavin said that was his answer, because Attorney Shapiro had told him it was done by some- body else. Attorney Shapiro pointed out that when they applied for the building permit, the fence company (who along with Mr. McDowell worked out the plan for the fence) clearly de- lineated on a reduction of the official plat, which the Members had before them, where this fence was going. It was no secret where the fence was. Although Mr. Slavin seemed to draw some inference on the fact that this plan was not prepared, Attorney Shapiro informed them that his clients copied it from the official plat. That is what exists in the fielde Attorney Shapiro submitted to the Board that this fence does not violate any provision of the Zoning Code of the City of Boynton Beach. The fence complies with all of the zoning requirements of the City of Boynton Beach. The fact that the fence complies with the City Ordinance is not in dispute. What is in dispute from the Building Official's perspective is whether or not Mariner Village was obligated to go through a site plan review. Mr. Slavin understood that and did not question the legality of the height of the fence and what it contains. He agreed with Attorney Shapiro on all of those points, but said no site plan was filed to put up the fence. Attorney Shapiro disagreed, saying that was not true, because it was attached to the application. Mrs. Wahl came forward and provided a copy of the site plan to each Board Member. Mr. Uleck had a copy in front of him saying the land was surveyed by Richard L. Shepherd, Registered Land Surveyor. He noticed the Fence Contractor laid out the drawing of the fence comparable to the surveying plat he had in front of him. Attorney Shapiro confirmed that was correct. Mr. Uleck noted Attorney Shapiro's clients were donating the road that goes from Manor Road to North 10th and asked if the clients own the road. Attorney Shapiro replied, "Yes." Mr. Uleck asked if they are going to give the fence to the east. So the Members of the Board would understand, Attorney Shapiro said their property line is the black line on the exhibit. They are not going to block the access to Manor Drive° Mr. Uleck said Attorney Shapiro's clients are giving the residents the privilege of using their land but are putting the fence to the east. Attorney Shapiro said they - 6 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JULY 9, 1984 are putting the fence up for security. Mr. Uleck inspected the property and could not see anything wrong with the fence. Shaneen Wahl, 611-4 N. E. 12th Terrace, Boynton Beach, President of Mariner Village Association, said since the Board of Directors of Mariner Village took over from the developer in October of 1983, security has been one of their foremost worries. They had several break-ins, many tres- passers, and many minor and nuisance pranks. The residents purchased there because they wanted a nice place to live. Mrs. Wahl said they just wanted to put their fence up to secure their properties and to feel safe at night° They have many men who travel, and they leave women and children at home by themselves. Even as she stood here tonight, Mrs. Wahl wondered if her home was safe. Mrs. Wahl, Mr. McDowell, and Mr. Butterworth (who is an Engineer) approached the City and made request after request about closing off that road and building the fence. They at no time tried to hide what they were doing. They wanted to close off the road and secure their property. Mrs. Wahl said they started construction on the fence, and a gentleman from the Building Department appeared and told them to stop. At that point and time, Mrs. Wahl asked him why. Nobody knew why. Mrs. Wahl said she has a Board and people she has to answer to, being a representative of Mariner Village; and she cannot go back to them and say they spent $2,000 but cannot build the fence and are just going to stop and take it down. Mrs. Wahl reiterated that nobody could give her an answer as to why they could not build the fence. That was all they asked for, and no one could give her an answer. Mrs. Wahl said they told her they would give her an answer in two days and they did not know what it was. She was told maybe she could do this or that when, in fact, they were told if they applied for a building permit and received one, they could proceed with building the fence. Since those days when they started building this fence, Mrs. Wahl said they have been subjected to not even courtesies. Her name has been slammed around so bad, she has taken time off work to try and get this straightened out and to look into every possibility. Mrs. Wahl's income has suffered drastically from this, but it is something where you just do not "catch the ball and drop ito" When Mr. Mearns went out to inspect the fence, he noticed it had originally been installed in the middle of the road. He asked if it was moved after it was red tagged. Attorney - 7 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JULY 9, 1984 Shapiro answered, "Yes. It was moved under an agreement between Mr. Doney's office and my office." Mr. Ampol questioned what assurance the city had that they would not block off Manor Drive later on, at a future date. Attorney Shapiro replied they have no more assurance, but on behalf of Mariner Village, his clients would be prepared to enter into an easement for the benefit of those people on Manor Drive. He added that the people on Manor Drive have not been very nice to his clients, but his clients would be nice to them in return because his clients have no intention of blocking off Manor Drive from now on. John S. McDowell, a resident of Mariner Village for 4-1/2 yearsw was the one who took on the job of investigating whether they could build the fence. He went to the City Hall and talked to Mr. Keehr, who sent him to Tom Clark, city Engineer. Mr. McDowell discussed it with Mr. Clark. At first, there did not seem to be any problem. Mr. Clark's comment to Mr. McDowell was, "If you want to build a fence around your own property, there is no problem." Mr. McDowell thought they should refer to it as what it is and said, "It is not 1-95 but a little tiny 18 foot wide winding lane." When they talked about closing off that "little lane", Mr. Clark said there may be a possibility that they could run into some difficulties but suggested to Mr. McDowell that they apply for a building permit. If they went through the process, the Building Department would either issue a permit or, if they did not, then Mr. McDowell was told they would have to go before the Board of Adjust- ment or some Board. Shortly after that, Mr. McDowell did apply for the building permit and gave a covering letter explaining that they wanted to restrict entry to their own entrance and the reason for it. Also, Mr. McDowell's next door neighbor had a very bad accident. He indicated the point of the accident on the exhibit and told about his neighbor being on a bicycle and someone cutting down Manor Drive, running into his neighbor, and the neighbor being in the hospital for several months. Everything seemed to be going so fine, and it amazed Mr. McDowell that when they started to build the fence, he got a call from Mr. Keehr saying they could not build it. Mr. McDowell told Mr. Keehr, "Fine. Give me something in writing." Mr. McDowell also talked to Mr. Tom Clark, and he could not give him anything in writing. The next day, Mr. Hamilton, the previous developer of the property, and Mr. - 8 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JULY 9, 1984 Dwyer came over with the City Officials and put a red tag on it. Mr. McDowell could not understand it. Mr. McDowell said they have had an amount of problems with break-ins, people coming in and using their facilities and swimming pool, kids stealing fish out of their ponds and playing in their gazebo. He told of a man throwing two bags of trash in the canal. Mr. McDowell said they suggested this was private property and the man said, "What are you going to do about it?" They called the police. Mr. McDowell told the Members that they have $6w500,000 worth of property there that they purchased in good faith, and they want to protect it. There was applause. Attorney Shapiro reserved the right to come back providing anything would be said contrary to this issue. Chairman Thompson stated people had walked in and out of the meeting such as Peter L. Cheney, city Manager, and a couple of Councilmen. William P. Doney, Assistant City Attorney, employed by James W. Vance P.A., 1615 Forum Place, West Palm Beach, Florida, said the Board had Attorney Kenneth Rubin to advise them if they~had any questions as a Board. Attorney Doney came before the Board as the representative of the Building Department and the Building Official to explain why this particular incident had been handled the way it had been. To clarify what the Building Department's position is, Attorney Doney said the issue is not whether a fence was needed there or not. The issue is not whether there is a security problem there or not. He had no reason to doubt that these people may have trespassers, vandalism problems, or other problems there and would like to keep others out. Attorney Doney said the issue before the Board was whether the Building Official properly issued a stop work order based on the Ordinances of the City of Boynton Beach. Attorney Doney said the Ordinance in particular they were going to be referring to is the Site Plan Review Ordinance. He showed to the Board the original site plan for the property. Whether there have since been deviations he was not aware of, Attorney Doney did not know. He submitted that if there were deviations that were not caught, to allow another deviation would not be proper as two wrongs do not make a right. - 9 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JULY 9, 1984 Attorney Doney handed a plan he had to the Board Members as it was small for them to see and said it was actually the same thing Mariner Village had. He asked the Members to note it was reviewed by the Technical Review Board, the Planning and Zoning Board, and although not stamped on there, it was reviewed by the City Council. That is what Mariner Village needed to develop the property. Everything was proper. The original site plan shows no fences. What happened next was there was an application for a build- ing permit to erect a fence. Attorney Doney had the indivi- dual here who issued the permit and said he would explain how he reviewed the situation at the time and what dis- cussion, if any, he had with Mr. McDowell concerning the fence. In any event, Attorney Doney said a permit has been issued. What happened beyond that, before work was done, the site was being laid out, and Mr. Keehr was notified that the fence was going up. Mr. Keehr went out and notified the individuals involved (the contractor and individuals from Mariner Village) that the fence could not be erected because it is a modification to the site plan. It is not whether the fence is on the property or not. It is not whether the fence is a good idea. In fact, the fence may be a great idea, but Attorney Doney said they have to go about it the right way. The right way is set forth in the City's Site Plan Review Ordinance. That Ordinance, and particularly Section 19-27, provides that if you deviate from the site plan~ your origi- nal site plan becomes null and void. Attorney Doney asked, "How do you keep your site plan from becoming null and void?" If you deviate or want to make changes, he said you need to have an amendment to the site plan. That is the crux of the problem from the City Build- ing Official's point of view. There is no amendment to the site plan. There is no check to see whether this fence is a good idea because there was no review by the City Officials. There was a building permit issued but if they reviewed the Site Plan Review Ordinance, Attorney Doney said they would note that many factors are looked into. Attorney Doney did not know how many were familiar with City site plan procedures but informed them that there is a Technical Review Board made up of City Staff, the City Engineer, Fire Department, Police Department, and the City Planner. People look at it for different factors. The factors that are considered by the Technical Review Board are such things as location of streets. Attorney Doney said they have a site plan that was approved. The road is - 10 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JULY 9, 1984 on private property. There is no question. Nobody is say- ing that Marine Road is not on private property within their property line. Attorney Doney asked, "But does that deny access for safety vehicles? I'm not saying that it does, but it might. It needs to be reviewed." Attorney Doney called attention to Police and Fire vehicles that need to get in there. If the staff is given an opportunity to review it, Attorney Doney said maybe the other way is fine, and maybe it is sufficient access and there is no problem with the fence. He reiterated that it has not been reviewed. Attorney Doney continued by saying the City Technical Review Board would also review points of entry and exit and would review on original site plans or amended site plans locations of walls, the types of walls and fences, and the types of materials used for the fence. They look at those sorts of things from a professional point of view from the professional staff. After that happens in an original site plan or an amended site plan, Attorney Doney said it goes to the Planning and Zoning Board for a similar review. People look at it. Conceivably again, there is no problem. Con- ceivably, there is a problem with Marine Road being closed. Again~ Attorney Doney reiterated, none of these have been reviewed. Finally, after the Planning and Zoning Board's approval or consideration to whatever extent, the plan will go to the City Council. After all of those bases are touched and the proper approval gotten, Attorney Doney said it may be perfectly correct for them to build exactly that fence, but it is the Building Department's position (again as advising the Building Official) that those steps must be gone through. Somebody must take a look at it, from a professional point of view, as to whether emergency vehicles can get in and whether there are any other problems with the fencing. Attorney Doney expressed that the Building Department is not saying that the fence is not on their property or the fence is a bad idea. The Building Department just does not know at this point. Attorney Doney said Mr. Bradbury was here to answer ques- tions and was the individual who reviewed the plans that were submitted and issued the permit. Attorney Doney called attention to a small line (not a double line) showing Marine Road. It was a line highlighted on the plan to show where the fence would be. Attorney Doney did not know what con- versations were had with others but stated that Mr. Bradbury - 11 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JULY 9, 1984 would tell the Board that he did not really realize when he issued the permit that a road was being closed, whether on private property or not. That would have, at least, alerted Mr. Bradbury to contact some other people about checking into it. Attorney Doney asked Mr. Bradbury to tell the Board what he recalled about the application from the permit review process, as it was applied for, and why he issued the permit. Mr. Brian Bradbury, Plans Checker, City of Boynton Beach, said the application came in on the 30th of March to install a six foot chain link fence. He informed everyone that was his writing on the application. Mr. Bradbury said one question he did ask was to make sure it was on the "fellow's" property. He said that was what Mr. Keehr wanted. Mr. Bradbury called attention to the fact it says right on the application it is to be set on property lying within Boynton Mariner's property. Mr. Bradbury had no problem with it. As a matter of fact, Mr. Bradbury said it is processed almost immediately unless there is any question. Mr. Bradbury saw no reference to any gates or anything at all. If he saw a gate, it would have reminded him to go over the initial progress of it. There was no mention of gates, just a fence. When he checked the fence drawing, Mr. Uleck asked Mr. Bradbury if he had a surveyor's drawing. Mr. Bradbury answered, "No." Mr. Uleck wondered how Mr. Bradbury could approve something if he did not have the original surveyor's drawing and questioned how Mr. Bradbury would know if the markers were on the property of the people. Mr. Bradbury referred to the bottom righthand corner which says, "I here- by certify that the survey is in force," and said it was signed by Richard Shepherd. Mr. Uleck asked, "And you went ahead and gave him the fence and gave him the permit here?" Mr. Bradbury replied, "Yes." Normally, on a residential fence (not particularly this one), Mr. Bradbury said they do not require a survey. Mr. Uleck repeated that it did not require a survey at all for a fence. He heard the Attorney say you had to have a layout drawing and everything else. Mr. Uleck disagreed with the City Attorney and said in all of the buildings that he has seen here, they never had a fence showing on most of their drawings or their plat plans. They got the stamp or per- mission to put up the fence after the building was built. Mr. Uleck said he could give many cases. Chairman Thompson interrupted to remind Mr. U!eck every case is based on its own merit and to hold it to!this case. - 12 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JULY 9, 1984 Mr. Uleck did not know why it should be on the plat plan to show a fence. If these people requested a fence and have a surveyor's drawing, are in there and have been there, and even gave permission to open up one road, and since it is their property, Mr. Uleck did not see why a permit should not be issued. Mr. Ampol asked Mr. Keehr if he red tagged it or if one of the members of the Building Department red tagged it. Mr. Keehr said one of the members of the Building Department red tagged the fence. The permit was issued and Mr. Keehr believed construction did not commence until a couple of weeks afterwards. He added, for Mr. Bradbury's sake, that Mr. Bradbury was only with the department for one month prior to the issuance of the permit. It may not be an excuse for the Building Department but, in looking at the plan, Mr. Keehr did not see a road in there himself, and he has been looking at plat plans and surveys for many years. Attorney Doney had no objections if Attorney Shapiro wanted to ask something. When Mr. Bradbury issued the building permit, Attorney Shapiro asked Mr. Bradbury if he knew Mariner Village was a PUD and more than a single family, residential property. Mr. Bradbury replied, "Yes, I did. Attorney Shapiro asked Mr. Bradbury if he knew it was multi- family and if he was familiar with the Ordinances of the City. Mr. Bradbury answered, "No. I am not familiar." Chairman Thompson asked if the Board was to allow cross- examination like that here. Generally, in these types of administrative hearings, Attorney Rubin advised that cross- examination is allowed. Attorney Shapiro asked if Mr. Bradbury said in a normal situa- tion, generally it is not required to have a site plan amendment for a private piece of property if they want to put up a fence. Mr. Bradbury answered, "Yes." Attorney Doney asked Mr. Bradbury, "Had you known when you looked at this that Marine Road was being closed, would you have issued the permit?" Mr. Bradbury answered, "No." Attorney Doney had nothing else to add except one other reference to the Site Plan Review and Approval Ordinance. He pointed out that they were not talking about private property rights. If they are gOing to say anyone can build a fence on their own property if they want to, then Attorney Doney said we do not need Zoning Codes, and we do not need site plan approvals. He said they were talking about site plan approval only for the structure of other than single - 13 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JULY 9, 1984 family or multi-family dwellings. Attorney Doney said they have the original site plan and, obviously, it is a multi- family type development, and they absolutely complied origi- nally with the Site Plan Review Ordinance. Attorney Doney pointed to one other Section in the site plan Review (an Ordinance, which is Section 19-18). It says, "No building permit shall be issued for the construction of any building, structural or other development of the property, other than for the construction of single family or two family dwellings unless the site plan has been reviewed by the Technical Committee and by the Planning and Zoning Board and approved by the City Council. Attorney Doney said they could sit here tonight and point to Mr. Bradbury and say he issued the building permit, but he did not think that was the issue. Mr. Bradbury admitted that maybe he made a mistake. As Mr. Keehr pointd out, before the posts were put in the ground, he approached the people from Mariner Village and the contractor and said,"We can't let you go ahead." It was not a matter of where the fence was up, the permit was issued, and everything was by the Boards and the City retracted it. It was done originally, even though the permit had been issued. In defense of the Building Department, Chairman Thompson said at any time during the completion or even after the completion, until the permit is lifted, the Building Depart- ment has the right to red tag any job whether right or wrong until it is cleared up. He asked that the Members keep that in mind. Although the permit was issued, Chairman Thompson said some are issued and red tagged before they get off the ground. Mrs. Artis asked if the site plan was not reviewed by every- one that should have reviewed it except the City Council. She referred to the one that was stamped and passed around. Attorney Doney said that was the original site plan. It was approved by the City Council but they do not stamp it. It is recorded in the City Council Minutes. Attorney Doney said it is the one when the project was first initiated and constructed. That needs to be done again to show the fence and Marine Road being closed. If the people sign off on it, the Technical Staff, Planning and Zoning, and the Council have no objection to it, then Attorney Doney said the fence can go up after the work order has been lifted and they have amended their site plan. They can put it in just like that. If they wanted to put it to the west of Marine Road and it is approved, they could - 14- MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JULY 9, 1984 build it there. Again, Attorney Doney repeated it is just a review procedure not somebody saying the fence submitted here is a bad idea. No one-made that determination yet. It has not been presented to that point. Mrs. Artis asked if the red tag was issued because it had not been reviewed by those Review Members after the change was made. Attorney Doney replied affirmatively and added that they should have been reviewed when they went about erecting the fence or before they went about erecting the fence. Mr. Mearns asked what kind of mechanics and economics were involved in the resubmission of a new site plan. He ques- tioned what they were talking about. Attorney Doney replied they would need to submit plans which would go to a Technical Review Board, which is Staff Members that meet informally from Engineering, Traffic, Police, Fire, and different prospectives to review the site plan. He was talking about different site plans and not about picking on Mariner Village. The Technical Review Board (TRB) makes a recommendation and may say they approve the amendment with the exception that something should be changed. They could do it with con- ditions. They make the recommendation and submit it 'to the Planning and Zoning Board for review at one of their public hearings. After that is done, they can again approve, deny, make recommendations, or put conditions on their approval. The last word is the City Council. The City Council can approve, deny, and impose conditions on approval and that sort of thing. Attorney Doney continued that it would take some time and he supposed it would cost some money in the sense of the people's time, and if they need an attorney or whomever else such as a surveyor it would cost money. Attorney Doney did not dispute that. Mr. Mear~knew there would be concern with safety, the entrance and egress of fire equipment, ambulances and what- ever. He felt it would help for the preservation of the people in that area. Apparently, before this was built, it was OK. Presumably, with Marine Road open and N. E. 12th Terrace, Attorney Doney replied there was adequate access when it was approved. With Marine Road closed, he did not know but said it could be fine. Mrs. Artis asked if Mariner Village should have been notified at the time of the request for the permit that they had to - 15 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JULY 9, 1984 have another review. Attorney Doney answered, "Ideally, yes. Someone should have said a fence is an amendment to the site plan, and you need to go through these Boards. It would have been fabulous if it had been handled that way, but it wasn't." Attorney Doney added that a permit was issued. Mrs. Artis was trying to determine a hardship. Attorney Shapiro thought it should be pointed out that Attorney Doney~s reading from the Site Plan Review Code was, in Attorney Shapiro's opinion, certainly misleading. That Code talks about the initial review of site plans for the development of a multiple unit project. However, the Code does not refer to any amendment of the site plan subsequent to the approval of the initial site plan. It does not say that if you want to amend your site plan or if you want to put up a fence after your site plan is reviewed that you have to go through a whole new site plan process. Attorney Shapiro stated that the City's Building Code and the Zoning Code say if you want to do something after you have your site plan reviewed, then you go and apply for a building permit. They applied for a building permit and re- ceived a building permit. As Mr. McDowell said, Attorney Shapiro reminded the Members that his clients asked the man at the time, and the man said, "Apply for a building permit°" Attorney Shapiro said they have let a contract; the contract has time frames on it, and they are legally obligated now to the contractor who installed their fence and relied upon the people. He noted Attorney Doney said they have to let some- body look at it and asked, "What the heck are we supposed to do? We went to the people who would look at that, and it is that man right there who reviewed the plans and reviewed the amendments and request for a building permit~ and that guy gave us the permit. In reliance upon the permit, we went out, signed a contract, and started work. We asked Mr. Keehr why we couldn't continue, and he wouldn't answer. The reason he wouldn't answer is because there is something fishy going on at Mariner Village!" There were shouts and applause from the audience. Chairman Thompson interrupted Attorney Shapiro to tell him he was out of line. Attorney Shapiro continued to speak about neighbors cutting down overhanging trees when Chair- man Thomas again interrupted him to tell him he was out of order. Attorney Shapiro submitted to the Board that, in any event, they got a building permit and submitted a plan to this man - 16 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JULY 9, 1984 who is a professional plan checker. Chairman Thompson again broke in to tell Attorney Shapiro he was overlooking that the Board heard there was a mistake made, and they were aware of that. He told Attorney Shapiro that he has pinpointed it over and over again. If no mistakes are made, Chairman Thompson said this Board would not exist. The Board is here because mistakes are made. Attorney Shapiro apologized for losing his temper. Notwithstanding what Attorney Doney said, Attorney Shapiro said this Board has the legal power to say that they do not agree with Mr. Keehr and Mr. Doney's interpretation of what is required in the Site Plan Ordinance and whether or not you can proceed and get a building permit and erect a fence on your own property. Attorney Shapiro said that was the point of the Board. It was not a legal issue of whether Attorney Doney is right and they should have gotten a site plan. Attorney Shapiro told the Members the Board has the authority to view that plan and base its opinion on the testimony of his clients as to why the fence is necessary. and, by a simple vote of the majority, Attorney Shapiro said the Board Members could decide that they choose to override the red tag decision. Attorney Shapiro begged the Members' indulgence, as his clients think it is important. They think somebody is going to get hurt there again. Somebody is going to get robbed. Attorney Shapiro said they think their rights are going to be severely prejudiced after they went through the whole process that the City told them to go through. He did not think it Was fair to make them delay for five months, and to make them breach a legal contract which they entered into in reliance upon what the City said because of what they consider as influence on Officials of the City. Attorney Shapiro believed the Members should agree with his clients and lift the red tag. They could proceed because they got a legally binding valid building permit. There was applause. Chairman Thompson said the Members had a case before them which was an interpretation of one of the City's Ordinances which requires that a Review Board review a site plan before an addition of any kind is made. He wished to hear from the Board Members. Mr. Ampol asked if all of the homeowners within 400 feet had been notified and if they had received any replies against this. Mrs° Ramseyer, Recording Secretary, called attention to the letter from Mr. and Mrs~ N. Mallory which she had - 17 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JULY 9, 1984 passed out to the Members before the meeting° A woman in the audience said she had communications that just arrived. Chairman Thompson requested Acting Secretary Slavin to read the communications. Raymond J. Kubes, 660 Manor Drive, was told by Peter Cheney, City Manager, that all that was required was to come here and speak "for" or "against". He wanted to speak "against" but also had a petition from members of the neighborhood, including Manor Drive and Rider Road. Chairman Thompson requested Mr. Kubes to hold his question and let the Acting Secretary read the communications at this time. Acting Secretary Slavin read the following communications which were addressed to Chris Lazzara, 624-4 N. E. 12th Terrace, Mariner Village, Boynton Beach 33435: Mailgram from Jack and Anne Marie Vanderhyme, Middletown, Virginia, saying they agree a fence would be the best solu- tion. Communication dated July 3, 1984 from Diane and Romulo Espada, 624-1 N. E. 12th Terrace. They were in favor of closing off the road and putting up the fence. Letter from Findlay Sinclair, 500 Egret Circle, 98510, Delray Beach~ 33444 (owner of 732-6 N. E. 12th Terrace) dated July 3, 1984, supporting the issue of having the village property properly fenced in order to enhance their rights of security and quiet enjoyment. He stated that he would be out of town but would appreciate hearing the results and, in particular, why the city red tagged the job after a building permit was issued. Mailgram from E. W. Hall, P. O. Box 257, Belgrade Lakes, Maine 04918, (Owner of unit 718-6) which read: "Imperative that we have security by erecting fence enclosing of streets." Mailgram from George and Pearl Weisbrot, 743-7 N. E. 12th Terrace, in favor of putting up a fence and closing off the street. Mr. Slavin also read a Mailgram addressed to Mrs. Shaneen Wahl~ Mariner Village Association President, 611-4 No E. 12th Terrace, Boynton Beach 33435, from Albert L. Strunk, 3849 Mechanicsville Road, Whitehall, Pennsylvania 19052, saying they need the fence at once to preserve private property which Mariner Village residents maintain financially. - 18 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JULY 9, 1984 Mr. Slavin then read a memorandum from Betty S. Boroni, City Clerk, to which was attached a letter from Mr. and Mrs. N. Mallory, 650 Manor Drive, Boynton Beach. The letter, which was hand delivered to Mrs. Boroni's office on July 9 at 5:00 P. M., stated they were strongly against the project of Mariner Village closing off Marine Drive and cutting in half their entrance and exit to their home at the end of Manor Drive. Mr. and Mrs. Mallory also mentioned emergency vehicles and felt it would be unsafe to close Marine Drive and feared for the safety of the residents. During the 3~ years they lived there, Marine Drive was changed to a one way street. Mr. and Mrs. Mallory did not complain then, but they feel this change would be unsafe for all vehicles travelling in their area. Raymond J. Kubes, 660 Manor Drive, Boynton Beach, told the Board Members the real problem is Mariner Village is closing a road that has been here for thirty years or better. Mariner Village residents seem to feel that because they purchased a road that has been in existence for 26 years before they purchased it that they can do with it what they choose without any consideration for residents in the area. Mr. Kubes said none of them were notified of any activities as far as Mariner Village wanting to close Marine Drive. Mariner Village claims it is a little lane. Mr. Kubes informed the Board Members that the "little lane" goes right in front of his house. The map that was drawn for the Board was deceptive because it makes it look like there are "tons of room" of which there are not. Mr. Kubes was sure the Members knew, if they visited the site, that there is not a lot of room. In fact, Mr. Kubes said the fence would obstruct the use of his garage totally. Mr. Kubes showed an area that would be narrowed by approxi- mately six feet, which the map did not show. He said it made it look like the road is very continuous and showed how the road comes. Mr. Kubes told the Board Members that Mariner Village is running the fence through the middle of the road. The distance from his garage to the fence is about 5~ feet, and Mr. Kubes will not be able to manuever his vehicles into a two car garage. The area looked like it was running down the road line, but Mr. Kubes said it is not. Mariner Village is about 4 or 5 feet into the road, and there is no need for this. Mr. Kubes said it creates a vehicle as far as traffic. He indicated an area where vehicles are parking. For vehicles going north on Marine Drive to try and enter Manor - 19 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JULY 9, 1984 Drive, it is almost impossible. Mr. Kubes observed garbage vehicles and said they are running over Mr. Mahlmeister's property in an attempt to pick up garbage. He could not possibly conceive a fire truck with its length and size making the turn safely in an expedient manner to handle any type of a fire problem in this area. Mr. Kubes pointed out that the fence does nothing about fire hydrants that they are eliminating from his neighbor- hood's use. For the Firemen to get to the fire hydrants that protect his house and a development of apartments against fire, Mr. Kubes said the Firemen will have to leap over this 6 or 7 foot fence to hook up their hoses, come back and put out fires. To put out a fire at Mr. Kubes' house will take an extra five minutes, at which point he would lose half of his house. Mr. Kubes called attention to the fact that it says nothing about a wall and exits for apartments in this area that are privately owned. He indicated their only exit, which was towards N. E. 12th Terrace, and said the fence totally blocks off their exit. If there is a fire, Mr. Kubes asked, "Where are they going to go?" Mr. Kubes also referred to maintenance of property and said if there is a broken window, it would be impossible for a man to get in there to fix it near the fence. Mr. Kubes said the fence will also enclose his water meter so the City will not to be able to get in there and read it. He asked if the City is going to put in a new meter so they can gain access. When you close off a road, Mr. Kubes said it is a major change° A fence around your property is OK, but when you want to stop access of emergency vehicles, you just cannot go ahead without any review from the authorities that the residents elect to take into consideration all possibilities of any problems that can arise and by-pass them. Mr. Kubes advised you have to go through the proper procedure, which Mariner Village has not done. He felt if Mariner Village wants a fence, let them follow the proper procedure every- body else has to follow. Mrs. Wahl noted they were speaking about fire hydrants and a fire hydrant was in question. She said fire hydrant 94 was on the site plan, if it was not installed. Mrs. Wahl passed out copies but did not have enough copies for every- one. Mr. Hogeland A. Barcalow, 744-1 N. E. 12th Terrace, one of the first record owners of Mariner Village, a Member of the - 20 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JULY 9, 1984 Board of Realtors of Boca Raton, thought the fence project was unreasonable and expressed it at Mariner Village's annual meeting. Although Mr. Barcalow thinks security is important, he thought the proposal here violated the origi- nal PUD agreement for parking. Bob Hamilton and others had certain spaces, and Mr. Barcalow said they do not have ade- quate parking as it is. If they fence the parking area now, which means it will no longer be available, it will defeat the original proposal to the City of Boynton Beach. Mr. Barcalow said many of the problems at Mariner Village stem from the City Engineering Department not examining closely and the Building Department not inspecting the project as it developed but the fence, as he saw it, as a citizen of Boynton Beach, is a hazard and has to be reexamined and relocated. Chairman Thompson asked if anyone else who had not spoken wished to speak. There was no response. Mr. Slavin was handed a petition addressed to Chris Lazzara with nine names which gave Chris Lazzara their full support for the installation of the fence and the closing of the road as indicated on the building permit in the possession of Mariner Village. Mr. Slavin noted ~4 read "Jack and Anne Marie Vanderhyme," and the petition was dated July 9th. He brought this up because on one hand they had a petition and he read a mailgram dated July 8 from the Vanderhymes. A woman in the audience explained that the Vanderhymes are on vacation and it came late this afternoon. Mr. Slavin had another petition with 41 names rigidly objecting to the proposed closing of Marine Drive. The road has been in use by the public approximately 30 years and the people who signed the petition demanded their rights to continued use of Marine Drive, Willard Way, and all other roads existing prior to construction of Mariner Village. Mr. Clarence R. Weir, 624 N. E. 12th Street, said upon installation of the fence, Mariner Village will create secure parking along the area just east of the fence line along Marine Road. At present, they do have some parking spaces which were supposed to have been a shuffleboard court in the original documents. Mr. Weir said they have some parking spaces along the south side of their property on Rider Road. He was told by people living along Rider Road that he has no right to park there because that property is just parking for their buildings when, in fact, it is Mariner Village's property. They are supposed to be able to park there. Very often they go to park and cannot park - 21 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JULY 9, 1984 there because everyone else in the area is using their park- ing. Mr. Weir stressed that they want to secure the road for themselves. Mr. Weir told the Board that Ray Kubes did not give the full story on the entrance of his garage. Mr. Kubes very rarely uses his garage and parks his cars and trucks out on the road, and he would have room to make a righthand turn into his garage which the Members could see if they inspect the site. There were comments and also applause. Another man wished to speak. Chairman Thompson said if the man did not have anything different to say, he would appreciate it if he would not tie up the meeting. He said they have heard both sides, and the Board has other cases to hear. Michael P. Smodish, Attorney for the homeowners on Manor Drive outside of Mariner Village, whose office is at 3452 New Boynton Road, Boynton Beach, said the only two things he had to add was that clients he has have deeds from back in the 1960s in which they were guaranteed access to what is the canal that leads into the Intracoastal before Mariner Village was a "gleam in some developer's eyes". This will be impeded, to put it mildly, if Mariner Village is allowed to erect a fence on either side of Marine Drive. The other thing Attorney Smodish had to add was it seemed to him that everything that had gone on at the meeting tonight was to the effect that there is absolutely no ques- tion whatsoever that the portion of Marine Road that Mariner Village wants to erect a fence on is the private property of Mariner Village. Attorney Smodish was not so sure that was correct when you have a road that has been in use by the public for 30 years or more. He thought there were some very complex legal questions as to the ownership of that road and the use of the road beyond the authority and jurisdiction of this tribunal to determine. Attorney Smodish felt it would best be left to the determination of the courts. There was some applause. Chairman Thompson said the Board could have this reviewed by the Boards, which would take time, as someone has said. He was sure it would cause expense. The Board had the other option of passing it, feeling perhaps that the City Inspector perhaps did not interpret the law correctly. He thought those were their options and asked the Members if they felt the case should go back before the Boards or end right here. The safety, as the Attorneys pointed out, was not the Board's problem. The Board was not to question the fence but just question the law that guides our Building Department. - 22 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JULY 9, 1984 Mr. Ampol asked what the width of Manor Drive is. Mr. Keehr did not know. He drove down Manor Drive and estimated the pavement width was probably 20 feet wide. There were shouts of "No" from the audience. Mr. Keehr informed Mr. Ampol that Marine Drive is much narrower. Mr. Ampol thought that would create a traffic hazard. Chairman Thompson again reminded the Members that they were not concerned about the fence. That was not the problem of the Board. Their problem was the interpretation of the City Ordinance only. Chairman Thompson asked the Members to keep their questions in that direction. If the road is owned by'the residents of Mariner Village, Mr. Uleck asked if Mariner Village was paying taxes on the road and who was maintaining the road. Chairman Thompson repeated that the Board was not concerned about the taxes or whether it is a private road. They were just to determine whether the City Official acted properly in red tagging the job. Chairman Thompson requested Mrs. Ramseyer to give a roll call. The Members asked, "For what?" Chairman Thompson replied, "To deny - to not to deny but to have it be reviewed by the Boards. We first have to have a motion on it to have it reviewed by all necessary Boards." Mr. Slavin did not think that was in the province of the Board. He said the Board's province was in the Ordinances they have received. The City Attorney told them exactly where the City stands and supposedly what their position is in this matter so Mr. Slavin thought they should go along with the guidelines. He did not know whether it was in the Board's prerogative to say "Yes, the city Boards are to review this or not." Since it is very rare that a case of this kind comes before the Board, at this time hearing all of the evidence, Chairman Thompson asked Attorney Rubin if it was proper for the Board to have the case reviewed by all of the Boards or what decision the Board was to make at this point. It was Attorney Rubin's opinion that at this point, 'the status quo was that the project was red tagged. Therefore, the status quo is that the Building Official issued a stop work order. At this point, it was Attorney Rubin's opinion that the Board needed to vote on whether the Building Official was correct in issuing a stop order. According to the Ordinance, it appeared that the Board could put certain conditions on their decision. Primarily, it seemed that the - 23- MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JULY 9, 1984 question for the Board was whether the Building Department was correct in issuing a stop work order. Chairman Thompson said the Board heard the advice of their Attorney, who in this case was a neutral party. If there were no questions, Chairman Thompson said he would entertain a motion to have this reviewed by the Boards which would be in favor of the Building Department or, on the other hand, not to have it reviewed by the Building Department which would mean, if he was correct, to have the red tag lifted. At this point, Attorney Rubin advised it would seem if the Board voted that the Building Official was correct in issuing a stop work order, it was his opinion that then the petitioner of Mariner Village could apply to the proper Boards for the amended site plan review. Attorney Rubin did not feel the Board needed to address the question of whether the petitioner of Mariner Village would be entitled to come back. Attorney Rubin thought if the Board ruled that the stop work order was issued properly, it would be up to Mariner Village to go through the procedure that Attorney Doney had outlined. Motion Mr. Slavin could sympathize with the people at Mariner Village and their problems but said it was not confined to them exclusively. However, as the saying goes, Mr. Slavin said they have to go by the book. Mr. Slavin moved that the Board be on record as saying that the City Official acted in good faith according to the Ordinances and according to the City Codes in issuing the red tag in stopping the construc- tion of this fence. Mr. Ampol seconded the motion for the same reason Mr. Slavin gave. Mrs. Ramseyer took a roll call vote, and the motion carried 5-2 in favor of the motion that the Building Official of the Building Department acted properly in red tagging the job. Mr. Uleck and Mrs. Artis voted against the motion. THE BOARD TOOK A RECESS AT 8:35 P. M. The meeting resumed at 8:40 P. M. Case 964 - Lot 3, Block 5, 1st ADDITION TO ROLLING GREEN, recorded in Plat Book 24, Page 86, Palm Beach County Records Request - Relief from R-1-A zoning requirement of 7,500 square feet minimum lot area to be - 24- MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JULY 9, 1984 reduced to 6,420 square feet lot area to utilize lot for permitted zoning use Address - 1624 N. Eo 1st Street Applicant - Clinton Jones, Agent for John Pagliarulo Building Contractor, Inc. Acting Secretary Slavin read the application, the six questions posed to the applicant in paragraph 5 of the application and the applicant's answers. There was also a Power of Attorney signed by Karen R. Mingo, giving authority for Clint Jones to act as her agent in acquiring information regarding the above property. Mr. Slavin also read the Memorandum dated June 19 from Betty S. Boroni, City Clerk, which enclosed copies of documents regarding the petition. Clinton Jones, 1600 North Federal Highway, 911, Boynton Beach, stated he works for John Pagliarulo Building Contractor, Inc. He asked the Board to note that both Case ~64 and Case 965 are the same. Chairman Thompson said the Board would take Case 964 now and Case ~65 later. Mr° Jones told the Board Members the property cannot be improved unless there is a variance. There is no other available property to be bought surrounding the lot. Chair- man Thompson reviewed the property and found it to be land- locked. He believed when this was originally platted, they were all 50 foot lots in the whole area plus or minus one way or the other. Mr. Keehr advised these were 60 feet, and these are even more than that. He asked what the survey was. Mr. Jones advised one is 60 feet and the other one is a little more. Mr. Mearns noted it was 60x107. Mr. Jones said the variance is totally on square footage. The house that they will put in that area will meet all other requirements as far as boundaries around the house. Mr. Slavin asked when the zoning was changed. replied, "June, 1975." Mr. Ampol Chairman Thompson asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor of the request. There was no response. He asked if anyone wished to speak against the request. There was no response. Mr. Slavin pointed out that the contract of sale dated 4/12/84 specifically states that the above lot does not con- form to the minimum building site of 7500 square feet and a special exception must be signed. He asked Mr. Jones if he - 25 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JULY 9, 1984 was building a home for himself. Mr. Jones answered, "No, I am not building it for my own personal use." Mr. $1avin said the property is landlocked, an eye sore to the City, and serves no purpose in its present state. According to the plans filed for the purpose of this building, Mr. Slavin asked if it will meet all setbacks and everything else. Mr. Keehr answered, "Yes. He clari- fied that there were no plans submitted. None are required for this variance, but it will meet all requirementse The Building Department will see to it that it meets all requirements. Mr. Jones asked if the variance will be transferable° Chairman Thompson answered, "Yes. It is on the lando" Being that the land is locked in and it is a hardship case, Mr. Ampol stated he would rather see a building on there that conforms with the Building Department instead of a lot of garbage being dumped there° He moved to grant the variance, seconded by Mr. Uleck. Mrs. Ramseyer took a roll call vote on the motion, and the motion carried unanimously 7-0 to grant the request. Case 965 - Lot 9, Block 15, 1st ADDITION TO ROLLING GREEN, recorded in Plat Book 24, Page 86, Palm Beach County Records Request - Relief from R-1-A zoning requirement of 7,500 square feet minimum lot area to be reduced to 7,327 square feet lot area to utilize lot for permitted zoning use Address - 1521 N. E. 2nd Court Applicant - Clinton Jones, Agent for John Pagliarulo, Building Contractor, Inc. Acting Secretary Slavin read the application, and the answers to the six questions outlined in question 5 of the application. He also read a letter of authorization signed by John A Pagliarulo, giving John Pagliarulo the authorty to act as his agent in acquiring information regarding the above property. Mr. Slavin called attention to the documents listed in the Memorandum from Betty S. Boroni, City Clerk, dated June 19. Mr. Slavin read a note dated June 22, 1984 from David L. Marsh, 725 North Lakeshore Boulevard, Lake Wales, Florida 33853 asking the Board to give these people a variance. Mr. Marsh wrote it will help the City and County. - 26 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JULY 9, 1984 Mr. Slavin also read a letter from Fred Akers, 1610 N. E. 2nd Street, Boynton Beach 33435 saying if someone wants to build a dwelling on that waste lot, he heartily recommended letting him do so as it could be a great improvement to our community. Chairman Thompson advised this was also landlocked in. In fact, it was a dumping ground. Mr. Slavin asked Mr. Keehr if the property will support a house with all of the requirements, setbacks, etc. Mr. Keehr replied, "Yes." He informed Mr. Ampol there is room for a swimming pool. Due to the fact that~this is a landlocked piece of property, it constitutes a hardship, and because there is no other property available, Mr. Mearns moved to approve the request, seconded by Mr. Moore. Mrs. Ramseyer took a roll call vote, and the motion passed unanimously 7-0 to grant the request. Identification Cards Chairman Thompson reminded the Members not to forget their cards when they go out to view property. Discussion re Case 963 Mr. Slavin told of receiving a call from Mrs. Wahl asking him if he had seen the property and if he wanted to call her, she would be happy to show him around and explain what had taken place. Mr. Slavin informed Mrs. Wahl it is not within the province of the Members to meet with people. They are to do their own inspections. Chairman Thompson said Mrs. Wahl also called him. He asked the Members to recall that at the Workshop they had with the Professor from the University of Florida, if someone is there who would like to show you the property, it is fine, but the Members are not to express their point of view to anyone outside of here. Mrs. Wahl had called other Members too. Mr. Uleck called and went there. He had no idea of the kind of fence or lot line and asked the Members if they had any information on the fence or lot lines. Mr. Uieck asked the Members how they would know what they are looking for. A gentleman saw him ride by, and Mr. Uleck asked him if he had a survey or plan. The man did, so Mr. Uleck asked to see it. The man also had a drawing of his fence. Mr. Uleck looked around and parked his car on the little street they were talking about. He said that was where the - 27 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JULY 9, 1984 young fellow had the big ranch home. Mr. Uleck questioned why the man built that if the road was not his. While he parked his car there, Mr. Uleck said they came from 12th Terrace, and five cars went around him, almost knocked him down, and almost got his back fender. He referred to developers coming in and taxpayers having to go to court. Mr. Uleck expressed that he did not agree with what the City did to those people. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting properly adjourned at 9:00 P. M. Patricia Ramseyer Recording Secretary (TWo Tapes) - 28 -