LEGAL APPROVAL
The City of Boyntvn Beach
DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING AND ZONING DmSON
100 E. Boynton Beach Boulevard
P.O. Box 310
Boynton Beach, Florida 33425-0310
TEL: 561-742-6260
FAX: 561-742-6259
August 8, 2005
www.boynton-beach.org
Mr. Jeff Tomberg
P. O. Box 1426
Boynton Beach, FL 33425
Dear Mr. Tomberg:
Re:
For:
File No.:
Location:
Dear Mr. Tomberg:
Zoning Code Variance Request
Relief from setback requirements
ZNCV 05-003
2625 Lake Drive North
Enclosed is the City of Boynton Beach Development Order for application item ZNCV 05-003 which
represents approval for the relief from the City of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations, Chapter
2, Zoning, Section 5.C.2 requiring a seventy-five (75) foot minimum lot frontage to allow a 22-foot
variance, resulting in a fifty-three (53) foot minimum lot frontage within the R-1-AA Single-family
Residential zoning district.. The City Commission approved this variance on August 2, 2005.
Please include a copy of this letter and Development Order when you submit your application
for permitting at the Building Department.
Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please feel free to contact this office at (561) 742-
6260.
Sincerely,
z&
Michael W. Rumpf
Director of Planning & Zoning
Enc.
cc: Avon Investments, Inc. - 820 Ocean Inlet Dr., Boynton Beach FL 33426
S:\Planning\SHARED\WP\PROJECTS\2625 Lake Drive North\Approvalletter after CC.doc
DATE OF HEARING RATIFICATION BEFORE CITY COMMISSION:
August 2,2005
TYPE OF RELIEF SOUGHT: Request for relief from the City of Boynton Beach land
Development Regulations, Chapter 2, Zoning, Section 5.C.2, requiring a seventy-five (75) foot
minimum lot frontage to allow a 22-foot variance, resulting in a fifty-three (53) foot minimum lot
frontage within the R-1-AA Single-family Residential zoning district.
lOCATION OF PROPERTY: 2625 lake Drive North
DRAWING(S): SEE EXHIBIT "B" ATTACHED HERETO.
X THIS MATTER came before the City Commission of the City of Boynton Beach, Florida
appearing on the Consent Agenda on the date above. The City Commission hereby adopts the
findings and recommendation of the Community Redevelopment Agency Board, which Board found
as follows:
OR
THIS MATTER came on to be heard before the City Commission of the City of Boynton
Beach, Florida on the date of hearing stated above. The City Commission having considered the
relief sought by the applicant and heard testimony from the applicant, members of city administrative
staff and t~e public finds as follows:
5.
6.
7.
DATED:
1.
Application for the relief sought was made by the Applicant in a manneJ:..c-On~i~tent with
the requirements of the City's land Development Regulations. I' Ir~l i' . i -c' II 'W7 Ii: ill)
U I c', ' " tJ ,/ ~ n
The AP~~S WI" - 5 2005 U
HAS NOT I
2.
established by substantial competent evidence a basis for the relief re DEPA TENT OF DEVELOPMFNT
3.
The conditions for development requested by the Applicant, administrative staff, or
suggested by the public and supported by substantial competent evidence are as set
forth on Exhibit "C" with notation "Included".
4.
The Applicant's application for relief is hereby
~ GRANTED subject to the conditions referenced in paragraph 3 hereof.
DENIED
This Order shall take effect immediately upon issuance by the City Clerk.
All further development on the property shall be made in accordance with
and conditions of this order.
Other
8- 5" -os
S:\Planning\SHARED\WP\PROJECTS\2625 Lake Drive No \
Ex~.1bit 'A' - Location '.,..lap
50 25 0
I
50
100
150
,
200
I Feet
..'
.
,..
\)
,q-
'" -,..
"''''
~3
:..
7.50
TIE 35.00
~
()
'"
<:r
'"
()
'"
W
~ !:;
~ '"
...
t,
<r
Z
/-
a
--l
~
'l.
LAKE WORTH
WATERWAY
50.0}'
? 00'4" OO'E
~
2/>V FI-OOl:
I-INE
<$1>"
....ft
:..
7.50
TIE ~
8~",
, <() '"
8m/-
t,()()
<r_--l
Z
PROPO<jED
RE'jI DENCE
FF-IO.OO
'"
...
~
&
~.
I 3.75
7.50
TIE
llJ
()
()
()
()-
88
c.ll'v1:REP
z'"
''b
2.Z4
<- TIE
c
'"
'"
PROF'~ 2.31
DR/V!: TIE
i 7.50 ZJ ." ~
TIE I 8,
, ()
()1/\
IU I~~ ()1/\
N c '" t,1/\
-:~ " <r
'"
~I- .... Z
<..,
} 22.00
25.00
N oaOO'OO E ~
53.00'
53.03' C,
~'f'l.
f~_'"
t.v
~ 0
... .... ~
fl- f~_~.1>
~ 53.03' F t.v
- --6fl, - - - - - _ __ ---J.--
0.60'
'"
II<
~AKE DRIVE NORTH
~~
I~
PI-OT I'WIN 2-z..!-OS
ADO EXI~TIN6 . PROF'O">ED El-EVATICN'> I 2-0.;-04
REV/':>E (;eIITIFI(;AT/lN -4-02-04
@
DIM/(;K roo
" j!:
.,; ~
2 ~
>- ~
! ...
i j
~ POTTER RD.
~
IU
"-
LOCATION MAP
N.T.'?
21
'0
"
'4
"
"
'7
12
'Il
'14
l'
l'
16
11
€3
DRA INAGE NOTE~:
Fl-OW ZeN:: A7 CEl- 11 01/30/t>Z
CCMU-lITY-PMEl- NO. I 2el l' 0004 C
MAP REVI?ED: ">E~R '0, 1162
l-OT AREA . llZ20.'Z ~Q FT +/_
PROF'ER'TY ADDRe'n:
2'25 L-AKE DR 1 V!: NOI:TH
OO'rNTlN l)EA[.H, FLOR IDA 33435
CERTIfY TO:
AVlN I Nv'E':>n.e-rr~. I NG.
'-'" 1 TED 6fNORAL. T I TI-E II-bURANGE GCM' /WI'
VCl-N H?OKEli: . Ca.t>/WI' TITI-E IN:>U/1:ANGE AGENCY, IN(;.
~.r
NOTE",;
/. l.N:>f:R5ROL<<> UT I I- I TIE? WERE NOT
l-OCATED EXCEPT A., ?HO'ilN.
2 . ll-i: l-~ '*OlIN H:RElN WERE NOT
~nA(;TED DY .,1JR'v!:YOR FOR EA':>EM:NT",
R I eHT -OF-\JAY'>, RE?EINA T ION'> J>IoD OTI-fR
."Mll-AI: MATTER'> OF REGORP.
,. El-EVATION'> ARE NATIGNAl- C'lEODETI(;
VERT I(;AL. DATL-M OF I 121.
"'. OEAJ: lto.\:i"j ARE OA?ED IN T!-E WE.,T R/IJ I-IN:
OF I..AKE ."DE DRIVE, A'n1.l>ED TO OEAR
N 00 00'00' E_
5. ~lN RCP J>1oD (;Ar I.N..E'n NOlCD.
, . DENOTE? PROF'O';!'j? I.OT 5RAPE?
7 . DENOTE? EX I ':> T 'N6 I.OT 5RAPE?
U06EN:> :
F . FIEl-D
F/>V . - POL<<>
CCN;. . WNG~
fl.. - Eu:YATllN
N'D . NAIl- . DI%
R/IJ . RleHT OF \JAY
? . I' . '?OIJT1-E1:N flEl-l-
IR.c - IRlN RCP . CAP
IJ.E. - UTII-ITY EA~
NfTT - NAIl- AN> TIN TAi'
M.E. -- MA.1NTEN6.NGE EA~
FP.I- - FI-OI: IDA rOfER . I- teHT
P.C.P.- PE~ UNTROI.- ron,1T
@ - \JA TER I.eTER
@ . ">EIlER
THE ,?IGNATURE AND THE ORIGINAL RAI?ED ?EAL OF A FLORIDA LICEN".:>ED ?URVEYOR
BOLJN:)ARY ,?LJRVEY
LOT':> ll-IIRTY-ONE (, I 1 AN) THIRTY-TWO (3ZI. IN LAK~IDE 5ARD~. A ?l.e-
DIVI?ION OF THE To.>>N OF ooYNTON. FLORIDA, AGGORPlNU TO THE PLAT OF ?AID
~IVt?ION I<:ECORDED IN 1H: OffICE Of THE Cl.-ERK Of THE C:;II<:GUIT CO\.lRT IN
AN) fOR PALM l'EACH COLNTY, FLORIDA, IN PLAT OOOK 6 AT PAGE 57, AN) 1'HE
~TH ~ FEET OF THE WE':>T 55.5 'FEET OF I.OT TH/Ii:TY-THli:EE 0'1.
3-11 -04
">U:VEY PATE'
I . .20'
~AL.E :
FIL-E
r.I'. r.
LJNIVER~AL.. ~LJRVEYINCi ~Y~TEtvf?J INC.
CE~T1FICATE OF A~IZATlON Nt.t.f)f~ U> 5ql}4
2'2' I..AKE D~IVE NORlH
f'OYNTON "eACH, Fl-O~IDA ""',,
OFFICE: 5~ -7"-0""2 FAX: 5~ -7"-OQ06
00-11 -033
XHIBIT B
~ITE
,".
EXHIBIT C
Application for variance of Rod Regan, Avon Investments, Inc.
Statement of Special Conditions:
A. Special conditions exist which are peculiar to the land which are not applicable
to other land in the same zone and district. Result from the property being platted
prior to the modern zoning codes. This Plat dates back more than 50 years. At
the time the individual lots were platted in 25-foot frontage by 160' depth. The
applicant owns Lots 31 and 32, and has a 3' parcel relating to Lot 33.
B. The special conditions arise from the lot having been previously platted and the
City amending or altering the size frontage requirements for single family
residential lots. The non-conforming use existed prior to the purchase of the
property by the applicant.
C. Granting the variance will not confer on the applicant any special privilege denied
by this ordinance against other lands or structures in the same zoning district, or
simply allow the applicant to build on property he currently owns that previously
had a residence on it.
D. Literal interpretation of provisions of this chapter would deprive the applicant of
the rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same zoning district by
precluding him from building on a previously-built residential lot, which at the time
it was originally platted and built upon, the two lots conformed with necessary
zoning codes. Currently the zoning and ordinance in questions requires a 60-foot
frontage, and the applicant does not have 60 front feet.
E. The variance granted is the minimum variance that will make possible the
reasonable use of this property. The reasonable use of this land is for a single
family residence, and without the variance this property is non-conforming
because it does not have the necessary frontage to comply with the ordinance.
F. The granting of the variance is consistent with the purpose of this chapter and the
variance does not change the nature or character of the neighborhood; nor does
it change the nature or character of the lot; nor is it otherwise detrimental to the
public welfare. Granting the variance will permit the applicant to remain consistent
with the nature and character of the existing neighborhood and consistent with the
existing use of the property. It is not injurious to the character of the neighborhood
in any respect.
G. Variance of minimum lot front requirements is not available to be purchased by
the applicant, as the property on Lot 33 currently has a residence on it and the
necessary frontage cannot be acquired by the applicant on the south side. On the
north side there is an easement for ingress and egress to the lake Worth
waterway which cannot be acquired by applicant. There is no possible way to
acquire sufficient frontage to comply with the zoning code.
i
,
~z
.....
~
o
-..J
o
o
.....
~
o
"'T1
~
~
..'
td
I\)
0)
I\)
01
r
Q)
~
CD
o
1
--
<
CD
Z
o
;4.
::T
?"
"
co
o
N
CD'
CD
.....
-
'.
EXHIBIT "E"
Conditions of Approval
Project name: 2625 Lake Drive North
File number: ZNCV 05-003
Reference:
DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT
PUBLIC WORKS- General
Comments: None X
PUBLIC WORKS- Traffic
Comments: None X
UTILITIES
Comments: None X
FIRE
Comments: None X
POLICE
Comments: None X
ENGINEERING DIVISION
Comments: None X
BUILDING DIVISION
Comments: None X
PARKS AND RECREATION
Comments: None X
FORESTER/ENVIRONMENT ALIST
Comments: None X
PLANNING AND ZONING
Comments: None X
ADDITIONAL COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD
CONDITIONS
Conditions of Approval
2
DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT
Comments:
1. None X
ADDITIONAL CITY COMMISSION CONDITIONS
Comments:
2. To be determined. ~
S:\Planning\SHARED\WP\PROJECTS\2625 Lake Drive North\COA.doc
S:\Planning\Planning Templates\Condition of Approval 2 page -P&D ORA 2003 form.doc
Meeting Minutes
Community Redevelopment Agency
Boynton Beach, Florida
July 12, 2005
coverage with the proposed project would be 38.5% or a variance of 3.5%. Staff had not received
any letters in support or denial from the surrounding property owners. Staff recommended that the
project be denied for lack of traditional hardship. The board may wish to consider, however, that an
ordinance to amend the LDR to allow maximum lot coverage of 45% in R-l-AA zoning districts had
passed first reading at the City Commission and was scheduled for second reading on July 19, 2005.
If the ordinance passed, this issue would be moot.
Attorney Jeff Tomberg appeared on behalf of the owners, Mr. and Mrs. John Trach. He stated
that there was a pending Code Enforcement issue on this property for the addition of a balcony that
would be between the first and second floor of the home. The variance was being sought because
his clients hired a contractor to put in a balcony, assuming he had pulled the appropriate permits
and gotten the appropriate permissions. The contractor proceeded to erect the balcony. Code
Enforcement notified the Trachs that they were in violation of the City's Code. If the variance were
not granted, it would seem unfair to have the Trachs tear down the balcony now and come back for
a new permit if the new LDR ordinance were approved at the next City Commission meeting. The
Code case had not proceeded to the fine stage and was not going to be heard again until the
September Code meeting.
After discussion by the board, it was decided to continue this item pending Commission action.
Motion
Ms. Horenburger moved to continue request ZNCV 05-002 until the next regularly scheduled CRA
meeting pending Commission action. Vice Chair Tillman seconded the motion that passed 5-0.
2.
Project:
Agent:
Owner:
Location:
Description:
2625 Lake Drive North (ZNCV -05-003)
Jeff Tomberg
Avon Investments, Inc.
2625 Lake Drive North
Request for relief from the City of Boynton Beach
Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2, Zoning,
Section 5.C.2, requiring a seventy-five (75) foot
minimum lot frontage to allow a 22-foot variance,
resulting in a fifty-three (53) foot minimum lot
frontage within the R-l-AA Single-Family
Residential zoning district.
Eric Johnson, Planner, presented a summary of the request for variance, stating the subject property
is comprised of two lots that form a single parcel, zoned R-l-AA. The lots were platted in 1922 as
part of the Lakeside Gardens subdivision. The O.188-acre parcel is vacant and does not conform to
current R-l-AA zoning district regulations related to lot width. The owner applied for a building
permit to construct a new Single-family detached dwelling. From a preliminary review, the placement
of the house would comply with Code, except that the lot frontage does not meet the minimum
required by the R-l-AA zoning district. According to the Code on non-conforming Lots, the applicant
would meet all of the criteria for being allowed to construct a home without the necessity of a
variance, under these non-conforming provisions, except the applicant has 53 feet of frontage and
not the requisite 60 feet, a deficit of 7 feet. Staff recommended approval of the requested variance
of 22 feet, to reduce the minimum required lot frontage from 75 feet to 53 feet.
Jeff Tomberg, agent for Avon Investments, Inc., asserted that Avon Investments had been
building homes in Boynton Beach for the last eight to nine years. He had built in excess of 100
4
Meeting Minutes
Community Redevelopment Agency
Boynton Beach, Florida
July 12, 2005
homes in the Cypress Creek community and was in the process of building and rebuilding in Atlantis
Country Club. They believe that this house would be an asset to the community.
Chair Heavilin opened the floor to the public.
Mike Mrotek, 2624 Lake Drive North, Boynton Beach, speaking on behalf of the Lakeside
Gardens residents, expressed opposition to the granting of this variance because there was a 30%
difference between the Code and the request.
Chair Heavilin closed the floor to the public since no one else came forward to speak.
Jeff Tomberg stated that the variance should be granted because all of the legal criteria necessary
to allow the variance had been met. The house would comply with all setback and other
requirements.
Chair Heavilin voiced the opinion that the City had a number of lots in the City that were platted
many years ago and did not conform to the current Code. She thought the board should continue to
address the 50-foot lot frontage requests as special cases. The board supported her view.
Motion
Mr. DeMarco moved to approve the request (ZNCV 05-003) for relief from the City of Boynton Beach
Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2, Zoning, Section 5.C.2, requiring a seventy-five (75) foot
minimum lot frontage to allow a 22-foot variance, resulting in a fifty-three (53) foot minimum lot
frontage within the R-l-AA Single-Family Residential zoning district. Vice Chair Tillman seconded the
motion that passed 5-0.
3.
Project:
625 NE 15th Place (Deasy Variance) (ZNCV 05
05-005)
Maryanne and John Duncan
Maryanne Deasy
625 NE 15th Place
Request for relief from the City of Boynton Beach
Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2, Zoning,
Section 5.C.2, requiring a ten (10) foot side yard
setback to allow a six (6) foot variance, resulting in
a four (4) foot side yard setback for a screen
enclosure within the R-l-AA Single-Family
Residential zoning district.
Agent:
Owner:
Location:
Description:
Ed Breese, Principal Planner, stated that the request had been initiated due to the homeowner's
desire to screen an existing pool. The former owner did not take the location into account and as a
result, created a situation that now limits the applicant's ability to construct the enclosure within the
setback regulations. Based on the traditional hardship criteria, staff believed that the variance
request should be denied.
However, the board has previously granted varianc;es for other than hardship criteria, and may want
to consider that: 1) This was not a case where the applicant built the maximum size pool knowing it
would preclude the installation of a screen enclosure and was now requesting to vary the City
regulations to accommodate one; 2) The subject request represents the minimum amount of area
required to screen the pool and deck, based upon the existing improvements; and 3) Staff had not
5