1998.01.06_BAA_Minutes_Regular
•
TOWN OF HIGHLAND BEACH
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
PUBLIC HEARING
Tuesdav, Januarv 06 1998 9 30 A M
Vice Chairman Neil W. Burd called the Public Hearing to order in
Commission Chambers at 9:30 A.M.
Deputy Town Clerk Jane Dillon called the roll. Present were Vice
Chairman Neil W. Burd, Members James J. Niehoff, Victor P. Hadeed,
Robert L. Lowe, Leonard D. Bell, Betty Jane Hofstadter and Barbara
Kane.
Also present was Town Attorney Thomas Sliney, Building Official Bob
Dawson and members of the general public.
NEW BUSINESS
PETITION NO. 12-97-60. REQUEST FOR VARIANCE SUBMITTED BY MR. KEN
ADAMS (APPLICANT/OWNER}, FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4201 INTRACOASTAL
DRIVE, LOT 27, BLOCK 4, FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A BOAT DOCK IN
PROTECTED AREA.
SEEKING RELIEF FROM TOWN CODE OF ORDINANCES CH. 30 (ZONING);
SECTION 5.2(d); NON COMMERCIAL DOCKS, PIERS, LAUNCHING FACILITIES
AND MOORING DEVICES.
REQUESTING: REQUIRED 25 FOOT SETBACK BE WAIVED AND ALLOW PROPOSED
DOCK TO BE CONSTRUCTED AT PROPERTY LINE.
Chairman Burd explained the process the Board follows in hearing a
Petition at a Public Hearing. Recording Secretary swore in all
those who would be testifying in this matter, noted that required
advertisements were published and that Petitioner notified required
residents within 300 feet of subject property by certified mail.
Mr. Duvall stated that a permit had not been issued to Mr. Adams
due to his plans not having met code setback requirements.
Mr. Adams replied to Chairman Burd that his hardship is the
extremely high expense which he would incur should he have to place
a "boat lift" at the north side of the seawall rather than the
lesser expense of placing a dock at property line at the east side;
also the wear on his. boat if he was to place a dock at the North
side rather than installing a lift.
There was lengthy discussion regarding other docks in the area,
boat sizes, width of canals, etc. Neighbor Barbara Stergiades of
4205 Intracoastal Drive spoke on behalf of herself and her husband,
expressing concern not with the requested petition, but should the
property change hands in the future, might there be a problem with
a new neighbor encroaching on their property with a larger boat.
Board of Adjustment
• Quarterly/Workshop Meeting
Januarv 06, 1997 Page 2 of 2
Attorney Sliney quoted several case studies of what "hardship"
entails.
Chairman Burd closed the Public Hearing at 10:00 a.m. and
discussion followed, with the following MOTION being made by MR.
NIEHOFF/MRS. KANE:
THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT DENIES REQUEST FOR VARIANCE SUBMITTED
BY MR. KEN ADAMS FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4201 INTRACOASTAL
DRIVE, LOT 27, BLOCK 4, FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A BOAT DOCK IN
PROTECTED AREA.
Rollcall met with unanimous vote to DENY Petition
MOTION to adjourn was made by CHAIRMAN BURR at 10:10 a.m.
APPROVE:
Neil W. Burd, Chairman
James F. Niehoff, ec.
Victor P. Hadeed
., ..t
Robe~1 L . Lowe
Leonard D. Bell
i~
Betty j Hofstadte
--".
~'L-- ~_.
Barbara Kane
ATTEST : L~'x~' ! ,%
DATE : ~ ~C~ ~ C ,~
~. • •
r 1
LJ
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
DECISION ON PETITION FOR VARIANCE
Petition No. 12-97-60 Dated Januarv 6, 1998
Town Code Ch.30, Section 5.2 (d) Public Hearing Date January 6, 1998
Petitioner Ken Adams (owner)
4201 Intracoastal Drive, Lot 27, Block 4
In the above numbered Petition, by vote as shown in the official Minutes and
recorded on the reverse side of this form, it was determined and ordered that
the requested variances be granted [ ]; denied ,~; granted subject to the
following conditions and safeguards [ ]:
In reaching its decision and order, the Board has found / has not found in
• the case of the above numbered Petition that:
1. Special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the
land, structure or building involved, and which are not applicable to
other lands, structures or buildings in the same district.
2. The special conditions and circumstances do not result from the action of
the applicant.
3. Granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any
special privilege that is denied by the ordinance to other lands,
structures or buildings in the same district.
4. Literal interpretation of the provisions of this ordinance would deprive
the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same
district under the terms of the ordinance, and would work unnecessary and
undue hardship on the applicant.
5. The reasons set forth in the applicant's petition justify the granting of
the variance, and the variance granted is the minimum reasonable variance
that will make possible the reasonable use of land, structure or
building.
6. Granting of the variance will be in harmony with the general purpose and
intent of the ordinance, and will not be injurious to the neighborhood or
otherwise detrimental to the public welfare.
~ 1 ~ • •
Board of Adjustment
Decision on Petition for Variance No 12-97-60 Page 2
•7nless otherwise previously stated, any authorization by the Board for a
variance shall expire if the Petitioner fails to obtain a building permit
within one (1) year from the date of authorization of such variance.
SIGNATURES WRITE "FOR" OR "AGAINST" VARIANCE
~ ~ ~~
Chairman, Neil W. Burd
James F. Niehoff, Sec.
~~~
Victor P. Hadeed
`7
.r ~W ;
Betty J ne! ofstadter -
Barbara Kane
~~~~~~
in
~~w~-~
Gj
~/
NOTE: ANY PERSON, OR PERSONS, OR ANY TAXPAYER, BOARD, DEPARTMENT,
OFFICER, BOARD OR BUREAU OF THE TOWN OF HIGHLAND BEACH AGGRIEVED BY
A DECISION OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MAY, WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS
AFTER RENDITION OF THE DECISION OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APPLY
TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA, FOR JUDICIAL
REVIEW PURSUANT TO FLORIDA STATUTE 163.250.
CC: BUILDING OFFICIAL
•