Loading...
LEGAL APPROVAL 'Ifie City of 'Boynton 'Beacn 100 'E. 'Boynton 'Beadi 'Bou1evartf P.O. 'BOi(310 'Boynton 'Beadi, 7foritfa. 33425-0310 City!JfaII: (407) 375-6000 7JU: (407) 375-6090 November 22, 1994 Mr. John W. Madison 2516 NE 4th CT Boynton Beach, FL 33435 Re: Board of Adjustment Case *199 2516 NE 4th CT Boynton Beach, FL 33435 Dear Mr. Madison: Your request for a variance regarding the above referenced case was denied by the Board of Adjustment at their November 21, 1994 meeting. If I can be of further assistance, please contact me. TJH/pab Sincerely, <C~;PF ~ d !=,N<- i J. Heyden i PIa ing and Zoning Director xc: Development Dept Case File Central File A: DENIED. BOA 5Imerkas gateway to tlU guifstream MINUTES u~ THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETI~~ HELD IN COMMISSION CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA, ON MONDAY, NOVEMBER 21, 1994, AT 7:00 P.M. PRESENT Vernon Thompson, Chainman James Miriana, Vice Chainman Raychel Houston, Secretary Barkley Garnsey Nello Ti neri Ben Uleck Irving Sechter, Alternate (Voting) Arthur Berman, Alternate (Non-Voting) Mike Haag, Zoning and Site Development Administrator Leonard Rubin, Assistant City AttOill ~ @ ~2: ::94 ~ rn ! \ PLANNING AND \ ZONING DEPT. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF MEMBERS AND VISITORS Chairman Thompson called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. He introduced the members of the Board, and announced that Mr. Berman would participate in the Board discussion on the subject case, but he would not be a voting member this evening. He also introduced Assistant City Attorney Rubin, Mike Haag, and the Recording Secretary. APPROVAL OF AGENDA The agenda was accepted as presented. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion Mr. Tineri moved to approve the minutes as received. Mr. Uleck seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. COMMUNICATIONS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS None OLD BUSINESS Chainman Thompson apprised all members of the elections which took place at the last Board meeting. NEW PETITIONS: Ca.se '199 Property Owner: Request: 2516 NE 4th Court John W. Madison The request is to vary Section 4.B.2. of Appendix A - Zoning, regarding the overall height of an accessory building. The Code requires a maximum overall height of 7 feet. The request is to allow 8 feet. Secretary Houston read the application. In analyzing this case, it was learned that Mr. Madison is requesting that the Board consider increasing the maximum - 1 - ..... MINUTES - BOARD O~JUSTMENT MEETING BOYNTON BEACH. FLORIDA 'ftttJII1 NOVEMBER 21. 1994 allowed height of his eighty (80) square foot storage shed (accessory building) from seven (7) feet to eight (8) feet. The existing shed is located near the northeast corner of the corner lot and was built without the benefit of a per- mit. The property owner was cited on May 20, 1994, for construction without a permit, and Case #94-1513 will be heard by the Code Enforcement Board on January 18, 1995, to certify the fine the Board assessed. On October 26, 1994, Permit #94-2208 was issued for construction of a shed. The permit plans reflect the structure in compliance with the Code; however, the applicant is seeking approval to increase the maximum overall height one (1) foot. It was noted that the back-up agenda material contained "Exhibit All, which was the applicantls response to the statement of special conditions for the variance request. Secretary Houston read a letter of support from Nelson Heath dated November 16, 1994. Chairman Thompson requested clarification from Attorney Rubin on whether or not a decision from this Board would create a conflict with the Code Enforcement Board. Attorney Rubin responded negatively. The Recording Secretary administered the oath to all who would be testifying during these proceedings. John Madison. 2516 NE 4th Court. owner of the property. introduced Donald Nettles who would speak on his behalf. Donald Nettles said Mr. Madison secured a permit for the slab on which the shed was built. He constructed the shed without a penmit. When he attempted to secure the necessary permit, he learned that the shed was built in excess of seven (7) feet. The reasons for the request are that he spent a good deal of money and time building the shed, it is aesthetically pleasing because it matches the house, and it requires low maintenance. Mr. Nettles pointed out that the sheds which can be purchased at stores like Scottyls wind up standing 714" or 716" once they are erected. Not only do they exceed the Code, but after a few years, they rust out and begin to look badly. Mr. Nettles circulated photos of the shed which was constructed by Mr. Madison. He pointed out that Mr. Madison spent money on engineering to make certain that the shed would withstand hurricane winds up to 110 mph. He requested the Board's consideration in granting the variance request. Vice Chainman Uleck questioned why Mr. Madison exceeded the seven (7) foot height limitation from the start. Mr. Madison said he was unaware of the limi- tation. He stated that he was of the belief that the penmit he secured for the slab was also for the building. He learned of all the requirements once he was cited. Vice Chainman Uleck pointed out that Mr. Madison could have built this shed with a flat roof, rather than a pitched roof. Mr. Nettles said the height was - 2 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTM~"f ~EETING BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA NOVEMBER 21, 1994 increased in consideration of the appearance of the 618" door and to make it accessible for Mr. Madison who has a tall stature. In response to Secretary Houston's question, Mr. Madison said he is no longer accruing fines under the Code Enforcement process since he resubmitted his plans. Mr. Tineri pointed out to Mr. Madison that the permit clearly states, "For Slab Only". Mr. Madison said he was unaware of this. Vice Chairman Miriana felt Mr. Madison should have been aware of the fact that a permit was required. Mr. Nettles said Mr. Madison has gotten a penmit for every other thing he has done on this property. He just did not think he needed a permit for the building in addition to the slab. Chairman Thompson asked Mr. Haag to explain how the fees are charged with regard to permits. Mr. Haag explained that the price of a permit for a slab only as opposed to a slab and building may be very close because it is based on value. A penmit for the slab would be $35. If the value of the slab and the building is under $3,000, the price would be $35. The work described on the penmit application is what determines the cost of the penmit. Ron O'Donnell ~ member of the Bul1ding Board of Adjustment and Appea1s~ was ad- ministered the oath. He stated that there are laws, and this Board should follow those laws. Chainman Thompson explained to Mr. O'Donnell that the Board members are aware of their responsibilities, and they judge each case on its own merit. All criteria is reviewed before a decision is made. Mr. O'Donnell said that if this applicant is granted at eight (8) feet, he will go to nine (9) feet. Mr. Haag referred back to a question which was raised with regard to a conflict between the Board of Adjustment and the Code Enforcement Board. The Code Enforcement process will establish the fine Mr. Madison must pay. The outcome of this meeting will not change anything which has already transpired in that process. The Code Enforcement Board is not waiting for this Board to approve or deny the request. In January, they will certify the fine. THERE WAS NO ONE ELSE PRESENT WHO WISHED TO SPEAK ON THIS APPLICATION. Chairman Thompson reminded the members that the only thing in question is the height of the building. Vice Chainman Miriana said he was disturbed by this application because he feels this shed is too close to the easement and property line on the street side. Mr. Haag advised that the slab was penmitted in that location which means that this would have been acceptable if it was less than 100 square feet and not more than seven (7) feet in height. There was no problem with the setback along the road or from the east. - 3 - MINUTES - BOARD~USTMENT MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA ~J NOVEMBER 21, 1994 Mr. Haag referred to the survey on Page 6 of the back-up material which was done after the slab and prefinished frame shed were in place. This is shown just outside of the easement. According to Code, as long as this is not in the ease- ment, it can be permitted if all other setback requirements are met. Vice Chairman Miriana further thought it was necessary for Mr. Madison to have a twenty-five (25) foot clearance on the street side. Mr. Haag explained that this is a corner lot. On this corner, he needs a side setback which is one-half of the front setback. His front setback is twenty-five (25) feet since the front is towards NE 4th Court. The side is NE 25th Avenue. That side setback requirement would be twelve and one-half (12.5) feet. Mr. Haag prepared a sketch for viewing by the Board members to assis~ them in understanding the scenario he described. Secretary Houston asked the applicant if it is possible to replace the pitched roof with a flat roof without destroying the building. Mr. Nettles responded negatively. Mr. Haag clarified that he does not know whether or not that shed depicted in the photo shown to Mr. U1eck is in compliance with the Code. Mr. Nettles said Mr. Madison has a penmit for the shed which was depicted. In response to a question from Vice Chairman Miriana, Mr. Haag explained that the applicant has a penmit for the shed. The drawings indicated that the shed would be seven (7) feet tall. However, Mr. Madison built the shed at eight (8) feet without a permit. This Board must detenmine whether or not he must reduce the height of the shed or relocate it on the site in order to keep it at eight (8) feet. Motion Vice Chairman Miriana moved to deny the request to grant a variance for an eight (8) foot high shed. Mr. Garnsey recalled that a previous City Attorney recommended that all motions should be made in the affinmative, and then the Board could vote it up or down. Since this is a quasi-judicial process, City Attorney Rubin explained that if the Board denies this request, an order must be prepared setting forth the reasons for the denial. He recommended either a motion to grant, or a motion to deny. Secretary Houston seconded the motion to deny the request. Attorney Rubin reminded the members that prior to voting on the motion, findings to support the denial must be stated. Vice Chairman Miriana explained that his reason for denying this variance is that the applicant created the hardship, and the shed is not conducive to the neighborhood. - 4 - MINUTES - BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA NOVEMBER 21, 1994 Secretary Houston referred to the special conditions, hardships or reasons for justifying the variance as set forth by the Building Department. Her reasons for denying this variance relate to: 1. Item C requires that "...the granting of the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this Ordinance to other lands, buildings or structures in the same zoning district". 2. Item E requires, "...that the variance granted is the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, building or structure". Secretary Houston feels the applicant can continue to use the land if the variance is not granted. Also, since other people have been denied a similar request, this applicant would be receiving a special privilege. Mr. Garnsey said he will not support the motion because Mr. Madison has already had enough hardship. He will have to pay a fine. He has paid a $400 applica- tion fee to appear before this Board and he feels it is an undue and unnecessary hardship for him to remove the building or shorten it. It is an attractive building as is obvious from the photos which were circulated and the testimony of neighbors. He does not feel the applicant tried to circumvent the permitting process to get away with substandard construction. The Board Secretary feels this request should be denied because it would grant special privileges. Mr. Garnsey does not feel the granting of the variance would grant special privi- leges since anyone can pay $400 and appear before the Board to see if their cir- cumstances warrant an increase in the height of a similar structure. Mr. Garnsey feels this is the minimum variance which will make possible the reason- able use of the building or structure. Chainman Thompson advised the applicant that this is not a majority vote. Any three (3) negative votes will deny the request. The Recording Secretary polled the vote. The motion to DENY the variance carried 5-2. (Messrs. Garnsey and Sechter cast the dissenting votes.) OTHER BUSINESS Vice Chainman Miriana questioned how well the Code Enforcement Division follows up on decisions made by the Board of Adjustment. In response to a question from Chainman Thompson, Mr. Haag advised that in this particular case, since a penmit was issued for this shed, Mr. Madison will not be able to get an inspection on the shed until the height is changed to the seven (7) foot standard. If he lets the penmit lapse (a period of six months), a field inspector would then check the site (deadbeat check). At that point, it could be cited again. Once cited, he would have to go back before the Code Enforcement Board. Mr. Uleck questioned the amount of time a violator has to correct a violation. It was explained that the Code Enforcement Officer works with the violator to gain compliance. If compliance cannot be achieved in that manner, then the case is referred to the Code Enforcement Board. - 5 - MINUTES - BOARD~JUSTMENT MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA "tw ..J NOVEMBER 21, 1994 Attorney Rubin explained that the amount of time allowed for compliance varies immensely depending on whether or not the Officer can work with the violator. Once it goes before the Board, the circumstances of the case are weighed and a decision is made. The Code Enforcement Board exists to ensure compliance, not to generate revenue. COMMENTS BY MEMBERS Since there was a question earlier this evening about how to word a motion, Chairman Thompson asked Attorney Rubin if there was anything new the Board should be aware of in this regard. Attorney Rubin responded negatively but explained that since this is a quasi- judicial board, whenever the use of the land is denied to a property owner, the Board must set forth specific reasons for the denial. The applicant now has the opportunity to appeal this decision to the Circuit Court if that is his choice. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Board, Mr. Uleck moved to adjourn the meeting. Mr. Berman seconded the motion. The meeting properly adjourned at 8:00 p.m. ~ m.(J~ Unet M. Prainito Recording Secretary (One Tape) - 6 -