Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes_Board of Adjustment_07/21/2003 < o tf ,�vP �s� VILLA,GE OF TEQUEST� � DEPARTN�NT OF CO1��NIUNTIY DEVEI.OPMF.NT 9 � � Post Office Box 3273 • 357 Tequesta Drive ; ��'6 - OPi Tequesta., Florida. 33469-0273 • (561) 575-6220 � � �y 4" Fax: <561) 575-6239 c BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PUBLIC HEARING MEETING MINUTES JULY 21, 2003 I. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL The Village of Tequesta Board of Adjustment held a regularly scheduled Public Hearing at the Tequesta Recreation Center, 39� Seabrook Road, Tequesta, Florida, on Monday, July 21, 2003. The mee�g was called to order at 7:00 P.M. by Vice Chair Vi Laamanen. A roll call was taken by Recording Secretary Betty Laur. Boardmembers present were: Vice Chair Vi Laamanen, Steve Pullon,Paul Brienza,and Alternate Steve Gordon. Also in attendance were Village Attorney 3ohn C. Randolph, and Clerk of the Board Jeff Newell. Absent from the meeting were Chair Jim Humpage and Boardmember Jon Newman. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: Boardmember Pullon moved that the Agenda be approved as submitted. Boardmember Brienza seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 4-0 vote, The motion was therefore passed and adoPted and the Agenda was approved as submitted. III. APPROV�L OF PREVIOUS MEETING MINUTES Soardmember Pullon moved approval of the minutes for the meeting of June 16,20Q�, 2003 as submitted. Boardmember Brienza seconded the Recycled Paper Board of Adjustment Meeting Minutes July 21 , 2003 Page 2 motion. Vice Chair Laamanen announced she would abstain from voting since she had not been present at that meeting. Motion carried by unanimous 3-0 vote. The motion was therefore passed and adopted and the minutes were approved as submitted. IV. NEW BUSINESS 1. An application from Leti�ia and Leo Arroyo, owner of the property located at 470 Tequesta Drive, Tequesta, Florida, Lot 4, Block 15, Jupiter in the Pines Section B, requesting a variance to the terms of the Official Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the�ilIage of Tequesta, Ordinance No. 355, as amended, Section X, Supplemental Regulations Applying to a Specific, to Several or to all Districts, Subsection (A) General Provisions, {8)Floor elevations above sea level; to allow the conversion of the garage to a kitchen at the ezistiag house floor elevation of 7.15' (feet} above mean sea level (MSL}, and 18+ inches above the crown of road, to match the rest of the house, in lieu of all new construction, additions, and substantial improvements to ezisting structures being 8,5' MSL or 18" above the crown of the road, cul-de-sac or highway or meet the requirements of Section �V, Fiood Hazard Areas,whichever is more stringent, as required by the Zoning Ordinance. The Applicant is seeking relief from the regulation outlined above to retain the existing floor elevation of 7.15 feet in the garage area, The garage is to be converted to a kitchen area. Clerk of the Board Newell announced that no one was present for this application and recommended rescheduling this application for the ne�meeting. MOTION: Boardmember Puilon made a motion to carry forward the application from Letita and Leo Arroyo to the nezt scheduled Board of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Ju1y 21, 2003 Page 3 ................................... meeting. Boardmember Gordon seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 4-0 vote. 2. Application from Gerald and Jill Wenta, owners of the property located 226 Golfview Drive, Tequesta, Florida, Lot 290, Tequesta Country Club, requesting $ variance to the terms of the Official Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the Viliage of Tequesta, Ordinance No. 355, as amended, Section VII, Schedule of Regulations and Application of Regulations, Subsection {C}, Schedule of Site Requirements, R-1-A District, Front Yard Setback, to allow for the construction of a 24' g 21' attached car garage within the 25 foot front yard setback requirement. The garage is to eztend 3 feet into the front yard setback, for a total proposed setback of 22 feet. It was determined that no one was present for this application and a recommendation was made to reschedule this application for the next meeting. MOTION: Boardmember Pullon made a motion to carry forward the application from Gerald and Jill VVenta to the negt scheduled meeting. Boardmember Gordon seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 4-0 vote. 3. Application from Gregory Ronk, owner of the property located 147 Point Circie, Lot 40, Tequesta Country Club, requesting a variance to tbe terms of the 4fficiai Comprehensive Zoning Urdinance of the Village of Tequesta, Ordiaaace No. 355, as amended, Section VII. 5chedule of Regulations and Applicat�on of Regulations, Subsection (C), Schedule of Site Requirements, R-lA District, Front Yard 5etback, to allow for the construetion of a house located forward af tbe Building Line which establishes the required lot width of 100' (feet), and as defined in Section N< Definitions, (47} Building Line. A line on a lot, generally, but not necessariiy, parallel to a �ot lin� or riad right-of-way line, located a sufficient distance therefrom to provide the minimum yards required by the zoning code. The building line Board of Adjustment Meeting Minutes � July 21., 2003 Page 4 ................................... delimits the area in which buildings are permitted subject to all applicable provisions of the zoning code. The applicant is seeking relief from the regulation outlined above to build a portion of his house within the 100' width line. Due to the configur$tion of his lot the applicant wishes to construct a portion of his house in an area with only 90' of width. A. Swearing-In of Witnesses, if Required Clerk of the Board Jeff Newell swore in all those intending to speak for this application. B. Disclosure of Eg-Parte Communications During disclosure of ex-parte communications, Boardmember Gordon and Vice Chair Laamanen disclosed they had visited the site and spoke to no one; Boardmembers Pullon and Brienza reported they had had no exparte communications. �. Tes�imony of Witnesses and Cross Egamination, if any Mr. Ronk testified that he was trying to preserve the setback on his 80' wide lot, and did not want to move the house too far back because it would then block the view of his neighbors. Mr. Ronk confirmed there was 10' setback on each side, but that it was jogged. Mr. Ronk showed the Board a survey containing the footprint of the house and explained that the rear setback varied. Mr. Ronk commented that visually the home would look more relieved than if there were a straight walL The house would be one story in the front; the second story would begin past the setback. Mr. Ronk reported he could build with the setback but would have no yard and the home would not be as appealing. Mr. Ronk explained that the lot was pie-shaped. Mr. Newell responded to a question of when this 100' lot line rule had been established that he did not know the date zoning Board of Adjustment Meeting Minutes July 2 i, 2003 Page 5 ................................... requirements for RlA made this and other lots nearby non- conforming. Mr. Newell explained these were originally platted lots and when zoning requirements for RIA changed, Point Circie fell into this. Mr. Ronk's proposed home was approximately 5,000 square feet, and appro�mately 30' over the Iine. Boardmember Pullon explained that in a prior case, the Board and the applicant had negotiated down to 10' over the line, and that 30' was a lot to ask. Mr. Pullon requested the applicant re-engineer the house to get the same square footage but to be only i 0' over the line. Mr. Ronk commented he could push the house back 5 feet, then it would be 20' from the rear wall, but because it was a pie shaped Iot the sides would get wider. Mr. Ronk asked the Board to look at the percenta.ge of the 5,000 square feet that was over the line, noting it was the most narrow part of the house. Boardmember Brienza requested and received information on the setbacks of the adjoining properties. Boardmember Gordon reported he had walked the lot and measured, and had felt the house was very far forward until he went to the property and saw that houses on both sides would be forward of this house, and had concluded that designing this home with the sides where they were was a good design. Vice Chair Laamanen commented that hardship meant one was unable to iive comfortably in his home, and there were reasons the rules and regulations had been established . Ms. Laamanen stated she felt in Point Circle they were leaving no side Iines, and that was being done everywhere, including in Jupiter, and she thought it was horrendous to have 10' side lines. Ms. Laamanen commented the applicant wanted to go into the side if he had to move farther back, and she found that unacceptable. Ms. Laamanen stated she would iike to see the applicant get closer to the original Iine setback to comply a little more closely with the regulations. Mr. Ronk respo�ded that he met the 10' side yard requirement; that the neighbQrs had gone to the 10' line with their home and had most of their activities in the center which was what he wanted to do also, and the neighbors were probably happy he was not blocking their view, Board of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Juiy 21, 2003 Page 6 iiiiiiiriiiiiiiiiiiiriiiiiiiiiiiiii which he would do if he built to the ordinance. Mr. Newell confirmed no Ietters had been received regarding this application. MOTION: Soardmember Gordon made a motion to approve the front yard setback to the petitioner's request of 33'. Motion was seconded by Boardmember Brienza . The vote on the motion was: Vi Laamanen —against Steve Pulion —against Paut Brienza —for Steve Gordon—for The vote was tied 2-2. Village Attorney Randolph advised that another motion was needed. Boardmember Gordon commented the home met the setbacks on the sides and in the back but more importantly, met the neighbors' needs by not blocking their views, and the request placed the home on a.direct radius with the other homes, and the applicant could not go any wider. Mr. Ronk confirmed he could not go any wider, but would have to go up. Boardmember Pullon explained each request was consider�d individually, and this Board's job was to grant variances on hardships where there was a problem and also to grant minima.l variances. In the other case that had been referred to, the applicant was able to redraw the house and be closer to within the l0U' line, Mr. Pullon stated he appreciated that the applicant was trying not to block the neighbors' views, but 30' was a lot, and 30% of the footprint was in front of the line. Mr. Ronk indicated his idea was to try to conform with vvhat was existing and he was not trying to get as close to the street as his neighbors. Mr. Ronk sta.ted the ratio of open space to the footprint was very good, and in the other Board of Adjustrnent Meeting Minutes July 21, 2003 Page 7 iiiiiiiiiririiiiiiiiiiiriiiiiriii►i case mentioned, that Iot was deeper than his so he did not have that l�ury. Boardmember Pullon indicated he would be happy for the applicant to defer to the next meeting. Village Attorney Randolph recommended deferring to the ne�meeting, since there was a tie vote and it appeared there would be a tie vote even to deny. Mr. Ronk requested a number of feet over the line that would be acceptahle to the Board. Mr. Pullon indicated he would accept 10'. Discussion ensued. Boardmember Gordon indicated the applicant was a victim of a pie-shaped lot. Vice Chair Laamanen commented the regulartions were there whether the lot was pie-shaped or not. The Village Attorney advised that this Board served as a Board of Adjustment to give variances where there was something unique to the lot. Mr. Newell explained that the pie shaped lot was creating difficulties for this applicant, and there were seven more lots on Point Circle with this issue. Vice Chair Laamanen stated she would agree to 20' over the line, and Mr. Pullon agreed with 20'. Mr. Newell requested the Board state the measurement as 20' forward of the 100' line. Mr. Gordon indicated he was willing to accept the application as submitted because the applicant had made an effort to design the house around the lot and was considering his neighbors. Mr. Gordon stated he found it offensive that the rule was 100' when it did not fit th� lot or others in that neighborhood, and all the other existing homes in that neighborhood sat on the 25' setback line. NIr. Ronk indicated that in order to be anly 2Q' over the line, he would make the north wing shorter. The Village Attorney advised that if the Board granted just a dimensional variance the applicant would have to do some redesign and questioned if the Board would be unhagpy not seeing the final plan. Mr. Ronk sta.ted as he pushed the house back that would widen the setbacks, and unfortunately he would be closer to the water, and he had wanted more yard. Discussion ensued. Mr. Pullon indicated he would make a motion to approve a variance for Mr. Ronk that the forward setback of the home would exceed the 100' line by no more than 20' to the east of the are shown in the picture and Board of Adjustment Meeting Minutes July 21, 2003 Page 8 ................................... no other setbacks would be violated. Mr. Newell advised that the ordinance said the line did not have to be parallel and it could be a straight line; that the 100' line was behind the 25' setback, and the i 00' are should be drawn as a s�raight line. Discussion ensued. MOTION: Boardmember Pullon made a motion to grant the variance to Mr. Ronk of the front setback line so no part of the structure would be more than 20' to the east of the current setback line established at the 100' width line and no part of this structure will ezceed side or rear setbacks. Boardmember Gordon seconded the motion. The vote on the motion was: Vi Laamanen —for Steve Pullon—for Paul Brienza—for Steve Gordon —for The motion therefore carried by unanimous 4-0 vote. Clerk of the Board Newell announced that applicants Gerald and Jill Wenta were now present. (Agenda Item 2) MOTION: Boardmember Brienza made a motion to reconsider the agplication for Gerald and Jill Wenta. Boardmember Pullon seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 4-0 vote. A. Swearing-In of Witnesses, if Required Clerk of the Board Jeff Newell swore in all those intending to speak for this application. Board of Adjustment Meeting Minutes July Z 1, 2003 Page 9 ................................... B. Disclosure of E�-Parte Communications Vice Chair Laamanen,Boardmember Gordon, and Boardmember Brienza reported they visited the site but spoke to no one. Boardmember Pullon reported no exparte communications. C. Testimony of Witnesses and Cross Egamination, if any Gerald Wenta stated he would like to build a garage 3' into the easement in order to create additional living space to meet the needs of his family. Vice Chair Laamanen indicated the long side wall bothered her. Mr. Wenta advised it was only 3' longer than the other side. Boardmember Gordon questioned if a swale would be required since the elevation would create water runoff. Mr. Newell advised there was a swale policy within the Village. Mr. Gordon asked if side loading the garage had been considered. Mr. Wenta.indicated in order to side load the garage it would need to come out more than it would now, and explained that the floor elevation in the garage would be 6" lower than the rest of the house. Mr. Wenta agreed to put in a window to break up the wall. Boardmember Laamanen objected to neighbo�s having to look at solid wails. Mr. Vt�enta stated he would add an additional window so that the 49' wall would have three windows. Mrs. Wenta indicated that the neighbors knew of their plans and had no objections. MOTION: Boardmember Brienza made a motion to approve the application to Gerald and Jill Wenta subject to placement of a window on the north side of the garage. Mr. Pullon seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 4-0 vote. V. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. An application from Dorothy May Campbell,owner of the property located at 3Q Eastwinds Circle, Lots 7 & 8, Eastwinds Landing Board of Adjustment Meeting Minutes July Z i, 2003 Page 10 iiiriiiiiiriiiiiiiiriiiriiriiiiiiii subdivision, requesting a variance to the terms of the Official Compreheosive Zoning Ordinance of the Village of Tequesta,Section XVI. Uniform Waterway Control, (B), Dock aod Pier Length, Width, and Configuration (1) "No dock or pier shall be constructed which egtends waterward from the mean high water line in eaccess of the least of the following distances; (a) Seventy-five (75) feet; or (b) Ten(10)percent of the waterway width; or(c)The distance from the point at which the dock or pier intersects the mean high water line measured in a straight line to the nearest point on the three-foot mean low water line; provided, however, the foregoing limitations shall not prohibit a dock which does not eztend waterward from tbe mean high water line in ezcess of siz (6) feet." A. Swearing-In of Witnesses, if Required Clerk of the Board Jeff Neweli swore in all those intending to speak for this application. B. Disclosure of Ex-Parte Communications Boardmember Gordon reported no exparte communications. Vice Chair Laamanen, Boardmember Pullon, and Boardmember Brienza all reported they had visited the site and spoke to no one. C. Testimony of Witnesses and Cross Eacamination, if any Mr.Newell reported.the Village had received two letters since the last meeting. Mr. Newell read into the record a letter from John and Sharon Liechey objecting to the requested variance. This letter has been made a part of these minutes and attached as Exhibit"A". Mr.Newell read into the record a letter from Donald and Joann Iezik, also objecting to the requested variance. This letter has been made a part of these minutes and attached as E�ibit "B". Gene Wehage, contractor for this project, stated Boardmember Board of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Juty 2 i, 2003 Page 11 ................................... Newman had requested at the last meeting that he take measurements again for water depth. Mr. Wehage reported water depths taken July 16, 2003 ranged from 50' to 90' out at low tide. The depth at 90' was 22". Mr. Wehage reported water depths taken June 20 that ranged from 22" at 50' to 33" at 90'. Mr. Wehage stated the request was for the lowest depth at 75' and he had only gotten 20" at 75'. Mr. Wehage commented the variance was really needed to extend out in order to get depth, and almost all the docks to the south were out this far or farther. Mr. Pullon asked for the minimum depth DEP required for a boat lift. Mr. Wehage responded, at least 30" but they would allow 2 feet. Mr. Wehage indicated the appiicant would be willing to compromise by eliminating the mooring pilings. Mr. Wehage pointed out on the aerial photograph shown, docks to the south extended out 85' to 90'. Jol1n Pinkham, 4980 County Line Road, stated he lived directly across from this property and he had spoken at the last meeting. Mr. Pinkham's concern was safety and stated he did not want to see someone get killed. Mr. Pinkham stated he could not get his boat off the lift at low tide and there were a lot of other properties like that. Darleen Bryan, 256 Tequesta. Circle, expressed safety concerns, indicated the dock would be a safety hazard, and someone would run unto it. Ms. Bryan stated the three 95' docks that were there had been granted that length because of the mangrove density in that area. Ms. Bryan indicated everyone would like to bring their boats in and get off the lifts at low tide, but had to wait until the tide came in to get enough depth, and had to live with that,but the main concern was safety. Mirni DeLisle,220 Gountry Club Drive,two blocks north of Mrs. Campbell's property, read a letter from her and her husband to Jeffrey C. Newell, Clerk of the Board, objecting to the requested variance. Ms. DeLisle's letter has been made a part of these Board of Adjustment Meeting Minutes July 2 i, 2QQ3 Page 12 iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiir.Iiiiiiiiiiiii minutes and is attached as "E�ibit C". Ms. DeLisle pointed out on the aerial photograph how views would be affected by the proposed dock. Donald Jones, 7 Eastwinds Circle, sta.ted he was opposed to the variance and that the issue was safety and aesthetics. Tim Goldsbury, 7 Tradewinds Circle, stated Ms. Campbell would like to use her lots in the same manner as others who had 95' docks in that development, and stated safety was everyone's concern. Mr. Goldsbury indicated that 22" of water would not allow fuli use of the dock and Ms. Campbell was trying to have a dock in keeping with others already granted variances in order to utilize her property. Steve Osborn,216 Country Club Drive,immediately north of Ms. Campbell's property, stated docks north of her property were not 95' and that his dock was 75'. Mr. Osborn stated he could not get his boat off the lift at low tide and he was opposed to the variance because his view would be adversely affected and because of safety concerns. Attorney Thomas J. Baird spoke representing Mr. and Mrs. Jones and the Eastwinds Landing Homeowners Association, and requested that Mimi DeLisle's letter be incorporated into the record,that the aerial photograph be incorporated into the record, and that Section 16 of the Code be incorporated into the record. Attorney Baird addressed Subsection G(2)(�regarding aesthetics which he stated was a concern and must be considered in order to grant a variance. Mr. Baird stated most of those who had spoken lived within 300' of this property, that the request must meet the criteria in the Village's code,and must meet the legal definition of a variance. Six criteria must be evalua,ted,first as to whether there were specific conditions peculiar to the land,structure,or building. In this case, Mr. Baird suggested there were no peculiar circumstances, or if there were that it was that this lot was located Board of Adjustment Meeting Minutes July 21, 20Q3 Page 13 ................................... at the narrowest portion of the waterway making it particularly inappropriate to have a long dock in this area. Consequently,if the applicant was granted the variance she would be getting a special privilege that ather people in the area did nc�t receive and others had testified they had a problem at low tide, and if the variance was granted Mrs. Campbell would be granted a special privilege. Mr.Baird noted another criteria was whether a literal interpretation of the code would deprive her of the ability to construct the dock, and it would not, it would only deprive her of the ability to construct an extended dock�ne that was much larger than other docks in the area, and it was certa.inly not the minimum variance that could be granted. Mr. Baird expressed his opinion that the other residents who had spoken had answered the question whether it would be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the code and if it wouid be detrimental to the public welfare. A number of other criter�a were required in sections A through J and Mr.Baird commented he did not believe it had been demonstrated tonight that any of those criteria had been met, and if they were going to be met someone would need to stand up and sta.te how they were met. Mr. Baird stated his belief that the primary issues here were aesthetics and safety, whether hazardous conditions would be created, and impeding the flow of water,which he bel�eved h�d been demvnstrated. Mr.Baird indicated he had heard nothing regarding the other criteria such as obstructing navigation and transferrence of riprarian rights,which might be an issue. Mr. Baird commented the decision must be consistent with the laws of the Village and he believed the variance would not be consistent with the comprehensive plan. Mr. Baird stated that in summary he did not think the variance met any of the criteria A through J, and requested the variance request be denied. Dorothy Campbell provided a handout to Vice Chair Laamanen that she had not received since she was not present at the last meeting. Ms. Campbell commented the aerial photograph was taken in 2002 and obta.ined from the property appraiser. Ms. Campbell pointed out where the river was more narrow in some Board of Adjustment Meeting Minutes july 21, 2003 Page 14 ................................... places, and asked that the Board consider her application for a variance. Ms. Campbell sta.ted she felt she had met the requirements and presented proper information,and stated that Mr. Wehage had built four of the six other docks in Eastwind Landing. Ms. Campbell stated she did not understand the statements that it would not be in harmony, and that she was one of the original property owners and did not recall mangroves as an issue. Regarding obstructing views, Ms. Campbell stated she had two lots, and it would be worse if each lot had separate owners and each applied for a dock, and that views were obstructed everywhere and she did not see where her dock wauld ruin anyone's view. Ms. Campbell stated she did not see the view as a problem. Ms. Campbell stated she cared about safety and was not putting in an obstacle for boats, and had obta.ined a respecta.ble contractor. Ms. Campbell asked that her application be considered. In respanse to a question regarding the type of boat she would have, Ms. Campbell indicated she had not decided and did not have a specific boat in mind. Vice Chair Laamanen noted no docks had been built for ten years and a lot had changed,it had become more crowded,and it was not wise to reflect on prior docks. Ms. Campbell noted four of the speakers had docks. Mrs.DeLisle stated her dock was only 35'. Mr. Wehage commented their depths were the same as they were at 90' where Ms. Campbell wanted to put her dock. Tim Goldsbury commented most of Tequesta. was built out i0 years ago and this would not be additional clutter. Mr. Newell stated he had been here two years and 5 to 10 doeks had been built in that time. Cyrese Colbert, Assistant to Dottie Campbell, pointed out on the aerial photo where the river narrowed in other places and that if this was a safety hazard it would also e�st in those places. Mimi DeLisle pointed out where the channel ran and that the Board of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Juty 2 i, 2003 Page 15 ................................... channel had become narrower over the years making it difficult to turn boats and to ski because you had to do those things in the channel;that a dock in this position would interfere with docking boats north of that location, and suggested moving the dock to the south so as not to block views and for safety. Ms. Campbell stated the location chosen was to keep farther from her neighbor but that neighbor was protesting anyway. At Boardmember Pullon's request,Attorney Baird clarified he was representing Mr. and Mrs. Jones and the Eastwinds Landing Homeowners Association and that a majority of the Board of Directors was opposed to the variance. Boardmember Pullon discussed low tides with Mr. Wehage. Mr. Wehage indicated a 75' dock would work. Mr.Newell confirmed there were two bathomeric surveys—June 20 and July 16, and provided copies of one of them which had not been given to the Board. Mr.Newell clarified that anything beyond 50-1/2' would require a variance. Mr. Newell noted for the record that dolphin pins were limited to 15' by code and were shown at 18' on the drawing, which was an error. Mr. Gordon indicated most of the boats that would fit under the bridge would be outboards that would require 2' draft. Mr.Pu11on stated it would be unnecessarily restrictive not to allow a dock at all and 50' was not long enough. Mr. Pullon suggested 65' to 70' total length as a compromise with the same platform and lift, making it much safer and usable, and stated he would like a condition there would be no outboard pilings. Mr. Wehage requested 75'. Mr. Wehage clarified an ENCON permit was not required, and DEP aproved 90'. Mr. Newell commented DEP had approved 84'plus the platform but it was still subject to Village code. DEP was concerned with seagrass, etc, rather than navigation, which was governed by the Corps of Engineers. Board of Adjustment Meeting Minutes July 21, 2003 Page 16 ................................... MOTION: Boardmember Gordon made a motion that this Board grant the variance to Dorothy Campbell in line with their powers of granting a variance satisfying the sig hardships of the code to allow the eztension of the dock into the river not to ezceed 73' from the northernmost terminus from the mean high water line,which puts 75' of dock there. Village Attorney Randolph clarified that the motion was to grant a 75' dock in lieu of the 90' dock that was requested on the basis that it meets the criteria set forth in the code for the granting of variances,and asked if that was subject to elimination of the outboard. Mr. Gordon stated yes, and it made the terminus at 75' with nothing beyond it. Boardmember Pullon seconded the motion with the clarification there would be no pilings or any other structure north of the terminal platform of the dock, which Mr. Gordon accepted. The vote on the motion was: Vi Laamanen —for Steve Pullon—for Paui Brienza—for Steve Gordon—for Motion therefore carried. VI. COMMUNICATIONS FROM CITIZENS There was no communication from citizens. VII. ANY OTHER MATTERS Discussion of need for alternate members —Village Attorney Randolph noted that it had been passed on to the Village Council that alternate members were needed. The Recording Secretary reported there was currently an opening for � � . � Board of Adjustment Meeting Minutes July 21, 2c�o3 Page 17 ................................... one alternate, and that information had been in Smoke Signals. Mr. Newell advised Mrs. Campbell and Ms. Colbert that the aerial photograph they had provided must be placed in his office since it was to be made a part of the record. VIII. ADJOi:I RNMENT Upon motion by Board�nember Pullon, seconded by Boardmember Brienza, and unanimously carried, the meeting was adjourned at 9:15 p.m. Respectfully submitted, � Betty Laur Recording Secretary TEST: C� ewel Clerk of the Board ATE ROVED: � g !� Z�sz�3