Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAboutPRR 14-1328From: Harry LaFarge [mailto:lafargetech @gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, August 30, 2014 9:57 AM To: Bill Thrasher Subject: Request for some public records GS # 643 brown emails Attention to the Custodian of Records, This email is a request for public records. I make this request pursuant to Article 1, Section 24 of the Florida Constitution and Chapter 119.07 of the Florida Statutes. I make this request of your agency for the following public records: Email exchange of Mr. John Randolph, Mr. Marty Minor, Mr. Bill Thrasher and Ms. Rita Taylor regarding the Brown Residence on and about May and June of 2011. This is a request for electronic records. The records sought are emails created and received in digital electronic form and are composed of digital text copy and other electronic and digital elements. Please produce the records in their complete original electronic format in which they were created or received. See § 119.01(2)(f), Florida Statutes. Do not reduce, compress, reformat, refile or otherwise alter the electronic record. If you contend that any of the records I am seeking, or any portion thereof, are exempt from inspection or disclosure please cite the specific exemption as required by §119.07(1)(e) of the Florida Statutes and state in writing and with particularity the basis for your conclusions as required by §I 19.07(1)(f) of the Florida Statutes. Please take note of §I 19.07(c) Florida Statues and your affirmative obligation to (1) promptly acknowledge receipt of this public records request and (2) make a good faith effort which "includes making reasonable efforts to determine from other officers or employees within the agency whether such a record exists and, if so, the location at which the record can be accessed." I am, therefore, requesting that you notify every individual in possession of records that may be responsive to this public records request to preserve all such records on an immediate basis. If any records are readily available, please produce those records first without waiting for all responsive records to be available. Produce the less readily available records as soon as they are available. If you anticipate the production of any of these public records to exceed $1.00 please notify me in advance of their production with a written estimate of the total cost. Please be sure to itemize any estimates so as to indicate the total number of pages and/or records, as well as to distinguish the cost of labor and materials. If any records may be produced for less than $1.00, please produce those records first while waiting to obtain authorization from me to produce more costly records. Do not incur any costs that you expect me to pay which are greater than $1.00 until notifying me of that cost and then obtaining my authorization to do so. All responses to this public records request should be made in writing to the following email address: lafareetechegmail.com TOWN OF GULF STREAM PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA Delivered via e-mail September 19, 2014 Harry LaFarge [mail to: lafargetech @gmail.com] Re: GS #1328 (brown emails) Email exchange of Mr. John Randolph, Mr. Marty Minor, Mr. Bill Thrasher and Ms. Rita Taylor regarding the Brown Residence on and about May and June of 2011. Harry LaFarge [mail to: lafargetech @gmail.com], The Town of Gulf Stream received your public records request on August 30, 2014. If your request was received in writing, then the request can be found at the following link: htto: / /www2.gulf- stream. ore/ WebLink8 /0 /doc /20131/Pagel.asox. If your request was verbal, then the description of your public records request is set forth in the italics above. In future correspondence, please refer to this public records request by the above referenced number. The Town of Gulf Stream is currently working on a large number of incoming public records requests. The Town will use its very best efforts to further respond to your public records request in a reasonable amount of time. Sincerely, Town Clerk Kelly Avery From: Randolph, John C. <JRandolph @jonesfoster.com> Sent: Monday, June 13, 2011 2:16 PM To: mmm @bridgesmarsharchitects.com'; 'tmurphy @dmrslaw.com' Cc: Bill Thrasher Subject: Town of Gulf Stream - Brown Residence Gentlemen, I have reviewed this matter with staff and it has been determined that a variance would be required for the windows proposed. This process is how previous similar applications have been handled in the past. As I previously advised, if the applicant or applicant's agents do not agree, this decision of the administrative official can be challenged by filling out the form(s) for "Administrative Appeal" that would be heard by the Town Commission at their next regularly scheduled Town Commission meeting. JOHN C. RANDOLPH John C. Randolph Attorney Direct: 561- 650 -0458 Fax: 561- 650 -0465 a randoloh(c'ones- foster.com Jones, Foster, Johnston & Stubbs, P.A. Attorneys & Counselors 505 South Flagler Drive, Suite 1100, West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Telephone: 561- 659 -3000 Website U.S. Treasury Regulation Circular 230 requires us to advise you that written communications issued by us are not intended to be and cannot be relied upon to avoid penalties that may be imposed by the Internal Revenue Service. Incoming emails are filtered which may delay receipt. This email is personal to the named recipient(s) and may be privileged and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you received this in error. If so, any review, dissemination, or copying of this email is prohibited. Please immediately notify us by email and delete the original message. Kelly Avery From: Randolph, John C. <JRandolph @jonesfoster.com> Sent: Thursday, June 09, 2011 4:22 PM To: 'Marty Minor' Cc: Bill Thrasher Subject: RE: Town of Gulf Stream - Brown Residence M a rty, Thank you for your response to my email and your comments. I have no argument with your analysis. I think there is also an argument to be made, based upon the wording of 70 -126, that because windows are considered integral items in the design and because the windows proposed are a design element listed as prohibited, that a special exception may be considered in the rehabilitated design to allow for the prohibited design element by way of special exception. This interpretation is obviously a more liberal interpretation than either you or Bill would give to this section, but it would at least give the applicant an opportunity to have this matter considered by ARPB which would then make the decision as to whether to allow the change or not. I am not here to make the case for the applicant and if you and Bill feel strongly about your interpretation in regard to this matter, I will simply advise the applicant that they have the ability to file an appeal of the decision of the administrative official in regard to this matter. Please let me hear from each of you in regard to this matter so I can advise the applicant how to proceed. Thank you. John C. Randolph Attorney Direct: 561- 650 -0458 Fax: 561- 650 -0465 jrandolph@jones-foster.com Jones, Foster, Johnston & Stubbs, P.A. Attorneys & Counselors 505 South Flagler Drive, Suite 1100, West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Telephone: 561-659-3000 Website U.S. Treasury Regulation Circular 230 requires us to advise you that written communications issued by us are not intended to be and cannot be relied upon to avoid penalties that may be imposed by the Internal Revenue Service. Incoming emails are filtered which may delay receipt. This email is personal to the named recipient(s) and may be privileged and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you received this in error. If so, any review, dissemination, or copying of this email is prohibited. Please immediately notify us by email and delete the original message. - - - -- Original Message-- - From: Marty Minor [mailto:MMinor @udkstudios.com] Sent: Thursday, June 09, 20119:52 AM To: Randolph, John C. Subject: RE: Town of Gulf Stream - Brown Residence Skip, Valid points and I would be able to agree if the architect was going with the same prohibited style of window which currently exists on the house. Currently, the house has a majority of jalousie windows - with some "picture" or large undivided windows. However, in my opinion, the jalousie windows are the predominant window style for the existing home. The architect is proposing replacing all the jalousie windows with undivided windows larger than the 4 s.f. that is preferred style. If the architect was proposing adding or rehabbing jalousie windows with more jalousie windows, then I believe Section 70 -126 would apply and a Special Exception would be appropriate. However, the small number of large undivided windows within the existing structure does not, in my opinion, rise to the "integral' standard in the first sentence of Section 70 -126 that would allow, by Special Exception, the addition of more larger, undivided windows. Thank you and let me know if you have any questions /comments. Marty Marty R.A. Minor, AICP Urban Design Kilday Studios The Offices at City Place North 477 South Rosemary Avenue, Suite 225 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 -5758 561- 366 -1100 - - - -- Original Message---- - From: Randolph, John C. [mailto:jrandolph @jones - foster.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 20114:26 PM To: Marty Minor Subject: Town of Gulf Stream - Brown Residence Marty, I have had additional conversations with Mark Marsh the architect and Tom Murphy the attorney in regard to the issue of the Brown house. We discussed Section 70 -126 of the code relating to this matter. They point out, and it appears to me they are correct, that the Browns would have the opportunity to use this section to modify the windows, as opposed to seeking a variance for a prohibited element. It seems to me the prohibited elements deal with new houses and that this section deals with additions and rehabilitations. Please let me know if you agree or disagree with me. If you disagree with me, please advise as to the area of disagreement. They are anxious to hear from us in regard to this matter so they can move forward with their application. Thank you. JOHN C. RANDOLPH John C. Randolph Attorney Direct: 561- 650 -0458 Fax: 561- 650 -0465 jrandolph@jones-foster.com Jones, Foster, Johnston & Stubbs, P.A. Attorneys & Counselors 505 South Flagler Drive, Suite 1100, West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Telephone: 561-659-3000 Website U.S. Treasury Regulation Circular 230 requires us to advise you that written communications issued by us are not intended to be and cannot be relied upon to avoid penalties that may be imposed by the Internal Revenue Service. Incoming emails are filtered which may delay receipt. This email is personal to the named recipient(s) and may be privileged and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you received this in error. If so, any review, dissemination, or copying of this email is prohibited. Please immediately notify us by email and delete the original message. Kelly Avery From: Randolph, John C. <JRandolph @jonesfoster.com> Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2011 4:26 PM To: 'Marty Minor (MMinor @udkstudios.com)' Subject: Town of Gulf Stream - Brown Residence Attachments: SDOC2766.pdf Marty, I have had additional conversations with Mark Marsh the architect and Tom Murphy the attorney in regard to the issue of the Brown house. We discussed Section 70 -126 of the code relating to this matter. They point out, and it appears to me they are correct, that the Browns would have the opportunity to use this section to modify the windows, as opposed to seeking a variance for a prohibited element. It seems to me the prohibited elements deal with new houses and that this section deals with additions and rehabilitations. Please let me know if you agree or disagree with me. If you disagree with me, please advise as to the area of disagreement. They are anxious to hear from us in regard to this matter so they can move forward with their application. Thank you. JOHN C. RANDOLPH John C. Randolph Attorney Direct: 561- 650 -0458 Fax: 561- 650 -0465 jandolph @jones - foster.com Jones, Foster, Johnston & Stubbs, P.A. Attorneys & Counselors 505 South Flagler Drive, Suite 1100, West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Telephone: 561- 659 -3000 Website U.S. Treasury Regulation Circular 230 requires us to advise you that written communications issued by us are not intended to be and cannot be relied upon to avoid penalties that may be imposed by the Internal Revenue Service. Incoming emails are filtered which may delay receipt. This email is personal to the named recipient(s) and may be privileged and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you received this in error. If so, any review, dissemination, or copying of this email is prohibited. Please immediately notify us by email and delete the original message. GULP STREAM DESIGN MANUAL § 70 -146 DIVISION 2, SPECIAL EXCEPTION ARCHITECTURAL STANDARDS Sec. 70 -126. Additions and rehabilitations incorporating a prohibited design element that is an integral part of the design of the existing structure. Designs for additions and rehabilitations may incorporate prohibited design elements that are an integral part of the existing structure (such as a flat roof) subject to the following: (1) Permitted design elements. Any design element listed as prohibited that is an integral part of an existing structure proposed for expansion or rehabilitation. Integral items shall include, but not be limited to architectural style, building form, roof material, windows and doors; but shall not include cosmetic elements such as paint colors. (2) SPeci/ic standards for review. a. The addition or rehabilitation shall comply with the standards listed in section 70 -107. b. The prohibited design element shall be an integral part of the design or structure of the existing building, C . The incorporation of an existing prohibited design element into the design of the addition or rehabilitated portion of the structure shall be minimized to the extent necessary to provide a continuity of design between the rest of the existing structure and the addition or rehabilitated portion. d. The prohibited design element shall not have a more prominent appearance on the addition or rehabilitated portion of the structure than it has on the rest of the existing structure. e. The rehabilitation or addition shall not incorporate any discouraged or prohibited elements not currently present on the existing structure. L The cost of the addition or rehabilitation shall not exceed 75 percent of the value of the existing structure. Secs. 70- 127 -70 -145. Reserved. DIVISION 3. GENERAL LANDSCAPE STANDARDS Sec. 70 -146. Purpose. (a) The landscape architectural standards have been developed to reinforce the overall character and the image of the town environment. (b) The primary objectives of the landscape standards are to: (1) Reinforce the community's identity. (2) Enhance visual quality. (3) Provide buffering. (4) Provide a pleasant environment for living areas. (5) Provide a pleasant environment for driving, walking, and other activities in the community. (c) The correct selection of plant material: (1) Beautifies the streetscape and softens buildings. (2) Controls glare. CD70:65 Kelly Avery From: Randolph, John C. <JRandolph @jonesfoster.com> Sent: Monday, May 16,20114:19 PM To: Marty Minor (MMinor @udkstudios.com) Cc: Bill Thrasher Subject: Brown Residence Review Memorandum Marty, I have reviewed your memorandum to Bill Thrasher regarding the Brown Residence Review. I note that one of your recommendations is that the applicant revise its application and drawings to reflect the preferred design element for windows within in the Town. The architect for the project has contacted me and advised that her client does not wish to revise the application but would like to have the matter reviewed by the ARPB. I am assuming that the applicant, under the code, has the opportunity to appeal the decision of the administrative official in regard to his interpretation of the code. Beyond that, do you find that the code would require any kind of a variance, particularly in regard to the prohibited items, or is that something that can be dealt with simply by the ARPB? Please advise as to your opinion in this regard. Thank you. JOHN C.RANDOLPH John C. Randolph Attorney Direct: 561- 650 -0458 Fax: 561 - 650 -0465 irandoloh(o)iones- foster.com Jones, Foster, Johnston & Stubbs, P.A. Attorneys & Counselors 505 South Flagler Drive, Suite 1100, West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Telephone: 561 - 659 -3000 Website U.S. Treasury Regulation Circular 230 requires us to advise you that written communications issued by us are not intended to be and cannot be relied upon to avoid penalties that may be imposed by the Internal Revenue Service. Incoming emails are filtered which may delay receipt. This email is personal to the named recipient(s) and may be privileged and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you received this in error. If so, any review, dissemination, or copying of this email is prohibited. Please immediately notify us by email and delete the original message. TOWN OF GULF STREAM PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA Delivered via e-mail January 2, 2015 Harry LaFarge [mail to: lafargetech @gmail.com] Re: GS #1328 (brown emails) Email exchange of Mr. John Randolph, Mr. Marty Minor, Mr. Bill Thrasher and Ms. Rita Taylor regarding the Brown Residence on and about May and June of 2011. Dear Harry LaFarge [mail to: lafargetechOgmail.coml, The Town of Gulf Stream received your public records requests on August 30, 2014. You should be able to view your original request at the following link http://WWW2.gulf- stream.org/WebLinkg/O/doc/2013 1 /Pagel. aspx. If your request was verbal, then the description of your public records request is set forth in the italics above. In future correspondence, please refer to this public records request by the above referenced numbers. The Town may incur expenses for the production of documents. You are responsible for the costs of duplication, as allowed by Chapter 119, Florida Statutes, and you may also incur a special service charge for the labor needed to respond to this request. Please find a partial response of documents that were gathered in 15 minutes of our time at the following link: httn:/ /www2.gulf- stream.org[WebLink8 /0 /doc /20131/Pagel.asox. To produce any further documents that you have requested, the Town of Gulf Stream estimates the need for .75 hours of administrative support at $36.39 per hour, the labor cost of the personnel providing the service, per Fla. Stat. § 119.07(4)(d). If the costs of producing these documents will exceed your deposit, the Town will provide you with an initial production of responsive records and an estimate for the production of any additional responsive records. If the costs of production are less than the deposit, the Town will provide you with the responsive records and a refund. (.75 hours @ 36.39 = 27.29) = Deposit Due: $27.29 in cash or check. The Town of Gulf Stream is currently working on a large number of incoming public records requests. Upon receipt of your deposit, the Town will use its very best efforts to further respond to your public records request in a reasonable amount of time. Sincerely, Town Clerk