HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes_Board of Adjustment_11/18/2002 F Tf VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA
�:�P `�sa
' DEPARTMENT OF COMiVIUNIIY DEVELOPMENT
- � � Post Office Box 3273
,��� 0 250 Tequesta Drive • Suite 305
3 ` o� Tequesta, Florida 33469-0273
�� ., ; ��
�ti C y (561) 575-6220 • Fax: (561) 575-6224
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
PUBLIC HEARING
MEETING MINUTES
NOVEMBER 18, 2002
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, 399 Seabrook Road,
Tequesta, Florida,on Monday,November 18, 2002. The meeting was called
to order at 7:02 P.M. by Chair Jim Humpage. A roll call was taken by
Recording Secretary Betty Laur. Boardmembers present were: Chair James
Humpage, Steve Pullon, Jon Newman, Vi Laamanen, and Paul Brienza.
Also in attendance were Village Attorney John C. Randolph, Clerk of the
Board Jeff Newell, and Village Planner Carol Lux.
II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
�VIOTION:
Boardmember Laamanen moved that the Agenda be approved as
submitted. Boardmember Pullon seconded the motion,which carried by
unanimous 5-0 vote.The motion was therefore passed and adopted and
the Agenda was approved as submitted.
III. APPROVAL OF PREVIOUS MEETING MINUTES
Boardmember Laamanen moved approval of the minutes for the
meeting of October 28, 2002. Boardmember Brienza seconded the
motion, which carried by unanimous 5-0 vote. The motion was
therefore passed and adopted and the minutes were approved as
Xec>>cle�Paper �
Board of Adjustment
Meeting Minutes
November 18 , 2002
Page 2
submitted.
IV. NEW BUSINESS
1. An application from Scott and Fatima Brecht, owners of the
property located at 364 Franklin Road, Lot 5, Block 14, Jupiter in
the Pines, Sec. B Subdivision, requesting a variance to the terms of
the Official Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the Village of
Tequesta, Ordinance No.355,as amended, Section VII. Schedule of
Regulations and Application of Regulations, Subsection (C),
Schedule of Site Requirements, R-1 District, Minimum Rear Yard
Setback,to allow the construction of a 468 square foot addition with
a rear yard setback of 17' (feet) in lieu of 20' (feet) as required by
code.
A. Swearing-In of Witnesses, if Required
Clerk of the Board Jeff Newell swore in all those intending to
speak.
B. Disclosure of Ex-Parte Communications
Boardmembers Newman and Laamanen reported they had had no
ex-parte communications. Chair Humpage and Boardmembers
Brienza and Pullon reported they had visited the site and had
spoken to no one.
C. Testimony of Witnesses and Cross Examination, if any
Clerk of the Board Newell advised that everyone within 300' had
been notified and he had received one phone call, with the person
requesting inforrnation regarding setbacks, etc., but nothing had
been received in writing; therefore there were no objections to the
Board of Adjustment Meeting Minutes
November 18, 2002
Page 3
...................................
proposed variance.
Scott Brecht addressed the Board and indicated he and his wife
had a growing family and needed more sleeping quarters. Their
plan was to add a bedroom with a bath, and they also planned to
have a covered patio and a pool. Mr. Newman asked if the rear
easement was a power line easement. Mr. Brecht responded no,
and Chair Humpage explained that the applicant's property backed
up to Dover Ditch. Chair Humpage indicated that the plot plan
showed that on the east side of the addition there was a 9'-11"
setback for the side yard,which Mr. Brecht indicated was correct.
Chair Humpage noted the Board was to be stringent with the
codes in granting a variance, and one of his concerns was Dover
Ditch because Village vehicles needed to access that area when
flooding occurred. Mr. Brecht responded the Dover Ditch ended
at his house and became a large field with pipeing under the
ground. Chair Humpage commented there was a large catch basin
there. Chair Humpage commented he had tweaked the plan and
got 483 s.f.,which was 15 s.f. more than the applicant had, and his
plan was within the setbacks. Chair Humpage commented the
applicant had indicated they lost 2 feet in the back because the
house was set back 2 feet farther than the setback, but that was
existing when they purchased the property and not to be
considered. Chair Humpage requested that the applicant consider
coming into the side setback 1-1/2 feet which would keep the
applicant within the side setback parameters and go 1-1/2 feet
towards where they proposed to put the patio, and they would then
get 483 square feet of new addition and still comply with the
setbacks. Mr. Brecht responded they wanted the bedroom out
because coming in narrowed the bath and closet and he was trying
to get more closet without compromising the sleeping quarters;
and they did not want more sleeping quarters as much as a balance
between the bedroom, bath, and closet while still having the least
amount of addition. Mr. Brecht explained that the patio across the
back was existing, and if he went too far to the right it would
Board of Adjustment Meeting Minutes
November 18, 2002
Page 4
...................................
affect the pool.
Boardmember Laamanen stated she was opposed to not abiding by
setback lines in that area which had smaller homes on smaller lots,
and everyone was trying to gain privacy, and the more the�illage
allowed setbacks to be eroded that was infringing on setbacks.
Mr. Brecht commented that two houses from his home this type of
improvement had been done and it provided more house but also
gave privacy from the next house. Mr. Brecht commented he
would do the addition tastefully and if the wall looked like a
Berlin wall he would add landscaping to soften it, and would not
impact anyone else. Boardmember Laamanen was opposed to
changing the percentage of land coverage on small lots. The
applicant indicated he did not exceed the lot coverage under roof
and this would have the feel of a courtyard rather than a concrete
jungle. Boardmember Laamanen asked how difficult it would be
to make the patiu 16' wide, to which Mr. Brecht responded that
would cut into his wife's closet. Chair Humpage suggested the
applicant might want to reconsider his layout. Village Attorney
Randolph advised that the Board could defer the matter to allow
the applicant time to redesign the plan. Chair Humpage advised
the applicant that deferring would not cost him any more money,
and that he was opposed to encroaching on the 20' setback and
would like to see the applicant change his plan a little.
Boardmember Pullon suggested turning the plan 90 degrees just
enough to get into the setbacks, and that would eliminate the need
for the variance and the Board of Adjustment. The applicant
indicated he would defer and take time to work with the plan.
Attorney Randolph advised that there would be no additional fees,
that deferral would provide an opportunity to redesign, and if the
redesign continued the need for a variance the applicant could
return; however, if the Board denied the request tonight the
applicant would have to redesign anyway. Boardmember Pullon
advised the applicant that the Board's goal was to grant the
minimum variance, which the applicant needed to consider.
Board of Adjustment Meeting Minutes
November 18, 2002
Page 5
...................................
Boardmember Newman commented the applicant was trying to
push the setback on one side, but on the other side had room to
work. Mr. Brecht commented he had wanted to break up the wall.
Mr. Brecht stated he would defer. Boardmember Brienza asked
what restrictions applied for a pool, to which Mr. Newell
responded the pool could be 50% of the area it covered if an open
pool or could be 100% of coverage if enclosed. Mr. Brecht
commented his would be an open pool. The Village Attorney
commented that the only reason the applicant would need to return
would be if he wanted to convince the Board why he could not
meet the setbacks. The time for the next meeting was discussed.
D. Finding of Fact Based Upon Competent Substantial Evidence
Motion:
Boardmember Newman made a motion to defer voting on
application from Scott and Fatima Brecht, owners of the
property located at 364 Franklin Road, Lot 5, Block 14,
Jupiter in the Pines, Sec.B Subdivision,requesting a variance
to the terms of the Official Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance
of the Village of Tequesta, Ordinance No. 355, as amended,
Section VII. Schedule of Regulations and Application of
Regulations, Subsection (C), Schedule of Site Requirements,
R-1 District, Minimum Rear Yard Setback, to allow the
construction of a 468 square foot addition with a rear yard
setback of 17' (feet) in lieu of 20' (feet) as required by code
until Monday, December 9, 2002, or the application could be
withdrawn, and requested the applicant bring a total plan
including the pool if he returned. Boardmember Laamanen
secoaded the motion. The Village Attorney advised that the
applicant could not change the setbacks or the application
would have to be re-advertised. The motion carried by
unanimous 5-0 vote.
V. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Board of Adjustment Meeting Minutes
November 18, 2002
Page 6
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
There was no unfinished business to come before the Board.
VI. COMMUNICATIONS FROM CITIZENS
There was no communication from citizens.
VII. ANY OTHER MATTERS
Clerk of the Board Newell advised that the Board needed to elect a Vice Chair,
since Mr. Owens had resigned.
MOTION:
Boardmember Newman made a motion to appoint Vi Laamanen as Vice
Chair. Boardmember Brienza seconded the motion, which carried by
unanimous 5-0 vote.
Mr. Newell introduced Village Planner Carol Lux, and indicated that at a later
date he would discuss with the Board possibly appointing Ms. Lux as Clerk of
the Board.
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
Upon motion by Boardmember Pullon, seconded by Boardmember
Brienza, and unanimously carried, the meeting was adjourned at 7:37
p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
���V�1
Betty Laur
Recording Secretary
ATTEST:
,C�
Jeff Newell ,4►2Qt i.vx
�.�..1 N� �L,�rz,��C
Board of Adjustment Meeting Minutes
November 18, 2002
Page 7
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Clerk of the Board
DATE APPROVED:
�/���a�