Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDocumentation_Regular_Tab 8A_9/11/1997 . 4mirA ' . , p ,_ VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA V .; DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT i''' . /;� Post Office Box 3273 • 357 Tequesta Drive s...00r ` ! Tequesta,Florida 33469-0273•(407)575-6220 •„`,' =p` Fax:(407)575-6239 'cN cool BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ' PUBLIC HEARING MEETING MINUTES JUNE 16, 1997 I. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL The Village of Tequesta Board of Adjustment held a regularly scheduled Public Hearing at the Village Hall, 357 Tequesta Drive, Tequesta, Florida, on Monday, June 16, 1997. The meeting was called to order at 7:32 P.M. by Vice Chair Susan Brennan. ' A roll call was taken by Betty Laur, the Recording Secretary. Boardmembers present were: Vice Chair Susan Brennan, and Boardmembers Gilbert Finesilver and Donna McDonald. Also in attendance were Scott D. Ladd, Clerk of the Board, and Village Attorney John C. Randolph. Absent from the meeting were Chairman Raymond Schauer, and Boardmember Betty Coyle. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Boardmember Finesilver moved that the Agenda be approved as submitted. Boardmember McDonald seconded the motion. The vote on the motion was: Susan Brennan for Gilbert Finesilver - for Donna McDonald - for The motion was therefore passed and adopted and the Agenda Recycled Paper BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING MINUTES JUNE 16, 1997 PAGE 2 was approved as submitted. III. APPROVAL OF PREVIOUS MEETING MINUTES 1. Meeting of May 19, 1997 Boardmember McDonald made a motion to approve the minutes as submitted for the May 19, 1997 meeting of the Board of Adjustment. Boardmember Finesilver seconded the motion. The vote on the motion was: Susan Brennan - for Gilbert Finesilver - for Donna McDonald - for The motion was therefore passed and adopted and the minutes were approved as submitted. IV. NEW BUSINESS An application from Jackson D. King and Catherine M. Ford, owners of the property located at 135 Point Circle, part of Lot 36 & Lot 37, Tequesta Subdivision, requesting a variance to the terms of the Official Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the Village of Tequesta, Ordinance No. 355, as amended, Section ZVI, Uniform Waterway Control, Subsection (B) , Dock and Pier Length, Width and Configuration, Paragraph (1) , to allow the construction of a 4' wide by 94' long dock access walkway with a 6' wide by 20' long terminal platform, in lieu of no dock or pier being constructed which extends waterward from the mean high water line in excess of seventy-five (75) feet, as required by the Code. A) Swearing-In of Witnesses, if Required. Mr. Scott D. Ladd, Clerk of the Board, conducted the swearing-in of those who intended to speak: Mr. Riley and BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING MINUTES JUNE 16, 1997 PAGE 3 Attorney Tammaro. B) Disclosure of Ex-Parte Communications. A poll of the Boardmembers indicated that none had had ex-parte communications. C) Testimony of Witnesses and Cross Examination, if any. Michael S. Tammaro, Attorney for the Applicant, explained that this matter had been heard by the Board of Adjustment in January, 1996, and the Board had then directed the applicant to work out matters with his neighbor, Mr. Perry. Since that time Mr. Perry had sold his property to Mr. and Mrs. Johansen, who had no objection to the dock. Village Attorney John C. Randolph advised the applicant that with only three members of the Board in attendance that their vote would need to be unanimous in order for approval to be granted; therefore the opportunity for postponement was given, which was declined by the applicant. Cindy Riley was sworn in by Clerk of the Board Scott D. Ladd. Mrs. Riley questioned how close the applicant s dock would be to their dock, and was told it would be 23 feet. Mrs. Riley questioned the angle of the proposed dock. Discussion ensued regarding placement of the dock. Attorney Tammaro explained the drawing of the dock, stated that the dock had been placed as far south as possible, and that it was right on the legal lot line as indicated by the surveyors. Mrs. Riley advised the Board that she and her husband had been separated because of this matter. Vice Chair Brennan asked Mrs. Riley if she was objecting, to which Mrs. Riley responded she wanted to clarify what was going in and she was still not really clear about what was happening. Attorney Tammaro stated he had been working with Mr. Riley for the past 18 months BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING MINUTES JUNE 16, 1997 PAGE 4 and would be happy to sit down with Mrs. Riley to discuss_ the matter. Attorney Tammaro explained the placement of the dock and how that placement had been determined. Vice Chair Brennan questioned whether any thought had been given to orienting the boat lift and platform to the south rather than toward the north. Attorney Tammaro explained why that was not possible. Fred Riley was sworn in by Clerk of the Board Scott D. Ladd. Mr. Riley explained he was the neighbor to the north and that he had worked with the owner and with his wife on this matter; commented that the dock was in a cove which made it a difficult situation, stated that the dock did not bother him as it did others, including his wife; explained that he had hired attorneys to determine what was right and what was wrong in this situation; and expressed his belief that the applicant had done the best he could. Mr. Riley stated the original dock had been 15 feet from his pilings and was now 23 ' away. Mr. Riley stated he approved the dock. Mr. Riley commented that this matter had created a very stressful situation for everyone involved, that he had spent hours on this, and explained that the water in the cove was very shallow so that without the variance there would be no dock. The angle of the dock was discussed further. Clerk of the Board Ladd asked whether the applicant would consider placing the lift outboard of the 6' x 20 ' platform or to reduce the platform from 20 , to possibly 18 ' . Mr. King stated he did not believe two feet would make a difference. Attorney Tammaro indicated he had heard concern expressed but no objection, and stated that if approval were granted the southern neighbors would be contacted to see if they would agree to putting the lift on the south side. After further discussion, Attorney Tammaro stated that if this could not be resolved to make the neighbors comfortable, the dock would not be built. D) Finding of Fact Based Upon Competent Substantial BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING MINUTES JUNE 16, 1997 PAGE 5 Evidence. Boardmember McDonald made a motion to approve the dock as shown along with the - fact that the applicant will • continue to work out any difficulties with the Rileys if there are any to be worked out. Boardember Finesilver seconded the motion. Village Attorney Randolph advised that the motion must include a finding that provisions of the Code had been met. Boardme®ber McDonald revised the motion to approve the plans as presented for a dock for the property located at 135 Point Circle, Tequesta, stating that items A through J of Variance Criteria within the Code had been met, subject to Mr. and Mrs. Riley's concerns being listened to and worked out. BoazdmeMber Finesilver seconded the revised motion. The vote on the motion was: Susan Brennan - for Gilbert Finesilver - for Donna McDonald - for The motion was therefore passed and adopted. V. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Deferred from the April 21, 1997, Board of Adjustment public hearing, an application from Larry and Carol Wright, owners of the property located at 11 DeWitt Place, Lots 2 a 3, Noit Gedacht Subdivision, requesting. a variance to the terms of the Official Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance of the Village of Tequesta, Ordinance No. 355, as amended, Section X, Supplemental Regulations, Subsection (Al, General Provisions, Paragraph (1) (c) , to allow the construction of an accessory use tennis court surrounded by a four (4) foot high fence along the sides and a ten (10) foot high fence on either end of the court, and located forward of the building front, in lieu of walls and fences may be erected or maintained within BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING MINUTES JUNE 16, 1997 PAGE 6 or adjacent to a property line to a height not exceeding mix (6) feet and. no wall or fence shall be permitted to extend forward of the building front on any lot or parcel, as required by the Code. Clerk of the Board Scott D. Ladd reported receipt of a letter from Mr. Wright stating he could not be present and requesting a deferral. Mr. Ladd read aloud from the letter, as follows: Re: June 16, 1997 Re-Hearing Scheduled for Tennis Court Dear Mr. Ladd: It is with much anguish that I notify you of my inability to effectively address the above referenced issue at the time set certain. Due to my being out of the country for over two weeks and now being called out of state the week of June 16, I respectfully request that the documentation requested for the rehearing set for June 16 be deferred to the July or next scheduled variance board meeting. I understand that Joanne has already provided the required notices to those parties with an interest in this issue and said issue has been given a time certain for rehearing. I implore your understanding and ask that this issue be rescheduled. I apologise for any inconvenience, etc. Larry H. Wright Village Attorney Randolph commented that the time certain had been given so that the applicant would not have to advertise again and people present at the last meeting would be informed of the meeting. Attorney Randolph commented that he did not believe there was anything in the Village Code regarding the time before a meeting that an application must be withdrawn, therefore the matter was before the Board as to whether or not to grant deferral. The letter was dated June 3 and received on BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING MINUTES JUNE 16, 1997 PAGE 7 June 4, which gave 12 days notice of his inability to attend, however, the letter was only notice to Mr. Ladd, who could not poll the Board in advance of the meeting; therefore, the issue of deferral had to be brought to this meeting. Attorney Randolph advised that people were present who had intended to be heard and the Board should give consideration to their comments. A) Swearing-In of Witnesses, if Required Clerk of the Board Ladd conducted the swearing-in of Bill Taylor, 1 Bayview Court. Mr. Taylor stated he lived two lots from the location of the proposed tennis court. Mr. Taylor commented that he believed an individual should be granted a continuance if there were extenuating circumstances such as a death in the family or illness; however, he did not see that in Mr. Wright' s letter and was therefore not sure a continuance was justified. Mr. Taylor stated he was directly affected by the decision on this matter and he was not sure he would be in town in July for that meeting. • Clerk of the Board Ladd conducted the swearing-in of Bob Gibson, 5 Bayview Court. Mr. Gibson commented that at the last meeting the Board had made very specific recommendations to the Wrights and expressed concern that if this matter were deferred that those recommendations should still stand. Mr. Gibson provided each Boardmember with a transcript from the last meeting containing those recommendations. Discussion of deferral ensued. Attorney Randolph advised that deferral did not have to be to a time certain, if not deferred the Board would hear this matter at tonight' s meeting; and that if it were denied the applicant could reapply in six months. Mr. Ladd commented that the Village had re-advertised even though it was not required. Attorney Randolph stated that the original recommendations of the Board would stand at a BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING MINUTES JUNE 16, 1997 PAGE 8 future meeting if deferred. Boardmember Finesilver made a motion to defer this matter without a time certain. The motion died for lack of a second. Clerk of the Board Ladd conducted the swearing-in of Bryan O'Brien, 10 Bayview Court. Mr. O'Brien stated he lived across the street from the Wright property, and was a new resident of the Village, and also indicated that he was opposed to the requested variance. Boardmember McDonald questioned Village Attorney Randolph as to whether Mr. Wright could have had his attorney present to speak for him, to which Attorney Randolph responded that he could have. At the request of Boardmember Finesilver, Clerk of the Board Ladd re-read the portion of Mr. Wright' s letter stating the reason he could not attend. Boardmember McDonald made a motion to deny the continuance to Mr. Wright based on the fact she believed his letter could have been more explicit and the people who had came to the meeting did have a voice and had come under the impression that this matter would be discussed and deliberated at tonight's meeting and they should be heard, and that their time was as important as Mr. Wright's. Vice Chair Brennan passed the gavel and seconded the motion. The vote on the motion was: Susan Brennan - for Gilbert Finesilver - for Donna McDonald - for The motion was therefore passed and adopted. Village Attorney Randolph advised the Board that their options were now to approve the application, approve the application with conditions, or to deny the application. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING MINUTES JUNE 16, 1997 PAGE 9 Boardmember Finesilver expressed concern that all of the Boardmembers present had not been present at the original meeting and should become familiar with what had transpired, to which Boardmember McDonald responded she had read all of the material regarding prior events in the case. A recess was granted to allow Clerk of the Board Scott D. Ladd to go to the Community Development Department to get the exhibits presented at the last meeting. The recess was granted at 8:30 P.M. Vice Chair Brennan called the meeting to order at 8:35 P.M. Mr. Bill Taylor commented that when a precedent was established that opened the door to lawsuits and misunderstandings which could be avoided if when hardships were granted the least amount of latitude necessary was given. Mr. Taylor discussed prior situations where a wall had been built and where a tennis court had not been built because a variance was not granted. Mr. Taylor expressed his opinion that this was a good example of where a variance should be granted but stated that it should not infringe upon the neighbors except where absolutely necessary, and the tennis court should be placed as close as possible to the Wright' s house. Mr. Taylor stated that he was affected when the Village set a precedent that could later affect him. Mr. Taylor urged the Board to be compassionate as far as a variance because of the extenuating circumstances, but not to the detriment of the neighbors. Mr. Gibson expressed agreement with W. Taylor s comments. Mr. Gibson read aloud the following recommendations made to the applicant at the last meeting: Vice Chair Brennan: I would move that we defer the application, that the application come back with certain BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING MINUTES JUNE 16, 1997 PAGE 10 changes, one being that he take into consideration moving the position of the court further away from Mr. Gibson's property to allow less of a hardship on Mr. Gibson. That no lights be planned, and that a deed restriction be applied to the property regarding lights so that if someone else comes and purchases the property, that lights could not be put in. I think that there should be more communication between the applicant and Mr. Gibson regarding buffers, you know, hedges, to help minimize the noise and visual objections. Mr. Gibson reported that there had been no communication from the applicant and requested denial of the application. Mr. O'Brien questioned whether there were landscaping plans for buffers and fences. Mr. Ladd explained the requested fencing and that the Wrights had been supposed to discuss landscaping with Mr. Gibson and the other neighbors. Mr. O'Brien questioned why a variance was necessary, to which the response was for fencing. Discussion ensued regarding the height of the fence requested. Mr. O'Brien expressed his opinion that ' allowing over utilization of property could destroy the character of an area. Mr. O'Brien requested that a fence of normal height be approved and addressed with hedges so as not to be visually obtrusive to the neighbors. Clerk of the Board Scott D. Ladd relocated the tennis court on the graphic exhibit to the position it could be placed that was closest to the Wright' s house. Mr. Ladd stated it could not go any further south than he had placed it because of the utility easement. Mr. Ladd explained that the west side was buffered by a wide alley belonging to the Village. Mr. Ladd recalled that Mr. Wright' s objection to this location was that some mature mango trees would be lost. During ensuing discussion, Mr. Ladd commented that Mr. Wright must provide unity of title for his two lots. Mr. Gibson commented that he BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT • MEETING MINUTES JUNE 16, 1997 PAGE 11 would be agreeable to have the tennis court moved as far south as possible and buffered well with landscaping, with no lighting and a deed restriction for the lighting, and unity of title. Attorney Randolph advised that the Board could require Mr. Wright to come back before them with a landscape plan to assure proper buffering. Boardmember Finesilver made a motion to approve the variance as requested by Larry and Carol Wright for the tennis court at 11 DeWitt Place, Lots 2 a 3, Noit Gedacht Subdivision, with the following conditions: 1. The tennis court shall have no lights, which condition shall be placed in a deed restriction so that future owners cannot add lighting. 2. Buffers and hedges shall be provided. 3. The tennis court location shall be as far south as possible without encroaching on the utility easement. 4. Unity of title for Lots 2 and 3 shall be required. 5. A detailed landscaping plan must be provided to the Village at a subsequent meeting prior to issuance of a permit for the purpose of providing buffering for the fence. Boardmember McDonald seconded the motion. The vote on the motion was: Susan Brennan - for Gilbert Finesilver - for Donna McDonald - for The motion was therefore passed and adopted. Discussion ensued regarding direction to be given to the BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING MINUTES JUNE 16, 1997 PAGE 12 applicant regarding the landscape plan to provide buffering of the fence around the tennis court. After discussion it was decided to allow the applicant to present a landscape plan which he believed would provide an adequate buffer of the tennis court, which could then be massaged by the Board. Disclosure of Ex-Parte Communications: A poll of the Board revealed no ex-parte communications. VI. COMMUNICATION FROM CITIZENS Made Griest, Dover Road, questioned whether the vacant chair on the Board had been filled, to which Clerk of the Board Ladd responded that it had not. Mr. Griest stated that he was speaking for many Village residents, and that this Board' s decisions were very important since they could not be reversed by the Village Council. Mr. Griest expressed his opinion that 4 or 5 Boardmembers should be required at a meeting since the decisions were so important. VII. ANY OTHER MATTERS There were no other matters to come before the Board. VIII. ADJOURNMENT Boardmember McDonald moved that the meeting be adjourned. Boardmember Finesilver seconded the motion. The vote on the motion was: Susan Brennan - for Gilbert Finesilver - for Donna McDonald - for BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING MINUTES JUNE 16, 1997 PAGE 13 The motion was therefore passed and adopted and the meeting was adjourned at 9:08 P.M. Respectfully submitted, 6;t4...A.AJ Betty Laur Recording Secretary ATTEST: )hAt b. Add Scott D. Ladd Clerk of the Board DATE APPROVED: 8-18-9.7 •