The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My Public Portal About12 08 14 Special ARPB MeetingTHIS IS A SPECIAL MEETING BEING HELD BY THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW AND PLANNING BOARD OF THE TOWN OF GULF STREAM, FLORIDA ON MONDAY, DECEMBER 8, 2014 AT 8:30 A.M., IN THE COMMISSION CHAMBERS OF THE TOWN HALL, 100 SEA ROAD, GULF STREAM, FLORIDA. I. Call to Order. Chairman Lyons called the meeting to order at 8:30 A.M. II. Roll Call. Present and Participating: Absent with Notice: Also Present and Participating: Paul A. Lyons, Jr. Thomas Smith Robert Dockerty Malcolm Murphy Hewlett Kent S. Curtiss Roach William Thrasher John Randolph Amanda Jones Marty Minor Hollis Tishwell Chairman Vice Chairman Board Member Board Member Alternate Member Alternate Member Town Manager Town Attorney Board Member Urban Design Kilday Bridges & Marsh III. Continued from Meeting of 10- 23 -14. (Code Revisions) A. Should paver brick be counted as hardscape Sec. 70 -80, Sec. 70- 148(1) Marty Minor from Urban Design Kilday Studios was recognized and reminded that at the previous meeting there had been a general discussion regarding paver bricks and he had been asked to determine how other towns consider paver bricks. He advised that he contacted 8 different, but similar towns. He reported that 6 considered paver bricks as hardscape, impervious like asphalt. Two towns (Palm Beach Gardens and Ocean Ridge) allow pavers to count as open space as part of recreational facilities, he said. Mr. Minor pointed out that counting this as hardscape allows more pervious area resulting in less complicated drainage structures and systems. He noted that Gulf Stream has a little higher open space requirement at 40% than some towns at 35 %. But, it is in the same range as similar communities. Mr. Thrasher pointed out that since Gulf Stream does not consider pebbles or paver bricks as hardscape, it would be a significant adjustment and change in the code that would run in parallel to the change from the retention of the first 1 inch of runoff to the standards set by the South Florida Water Management as has been recommended by the ARPB. He believed it would be a good idea to consider some portion of paver bricks ARPB Special Meeting 12 -8 -14 @8:30 A.M. and pebbles, if not everything, as hardscape so as to generate more green space and run off capabilities. Chairman Lyons cautioned that if parking areas are greatly reduced by proposed changes it could result in more cars being parked on the rights -of -way. All agreed that there has been an increase in the use of paver bricks and a decrease in the use of pebbles. Mr. Smith questioned if there is merit in having different standards for the rear yard as opposed to the front yard. Paul Castro, Building and Zoning Director of Town of Palm Beach, was contacted by telephone regarding how they classify pavers and pebbles. He advised they are both considered as hardscape and are not counted as landscaped open space, adding that any material having a reinforced subsurface for driving vehicles over does not count as landscaped open space. Mr. Castro said that in certain districts there is a requirement that one half of the landscaped open space must be within 10 feet of the perimeter of the property. General consensus of the members of the ARPB was to count 100% of pavers as hardscape and 50% of pebbles as hardscape, unless there is a reinforced subsurface, in which instance pebbles would also be counted at 100 %. Mr. Minor was directed to prepare the proper language for this code change prior to any formal recommendation is made. B. Entry Feature Height, Sec. 70 -100 Mr. Thrasher reminded that Mr. Minor had provided recommended changes to the code as it relates to entry feature heights, and that this had been discussed at a previous ARPB meeting. He further reminded that the term entablature was recently used in connection the entry feature on a proposed new home and he believed it may be helpful to add the definition of entablature along with the language provided by Mr. Minor, to assist in defining the entry feature. Mr. Thrasher had asked to change the definition to include: entry features are the front portion of the structure which provide door entrance to the dwelling. The height of the entry feature is measured from the finished floor elevation to the upper portion of any balcony, railings, Dutch gable, entablature or other such elements. 2 ARPB Special Meeting 12 -8 -14 @8:30 A.M. Considerable discussion was held in an effort to determine if the height of the entry feature is to be arbitrary or strictly defined in the code. Mr. Minor and Mr. Tishwell were included in the discussion. Attorney Randolph remarked that the ARPB has recommended that a waiver provision be inserted in the code. He pointed out that there could be specific heights in the code and if the applicant believed his design has certain elements that may make it acceptable, they could apply for a waiver. Mr. Roach left the meeting at 9:45 and Alternate Member Hewlett Kent moved into this voting position. Chairman Lyons remarked that there are parameters associated with waivers and asked that those be put in the record and the following was read into the record. 1. Granting the waiver will not cause substantial injury to the value of other property in the neighborhood where it is to be located. 2. The waiver, if granted, will be compatible with the adjoining development or the district in which it is to be located. 3. The waiver, if granted, will be compatible with other design elements of the structure. 4. The waiver, if granted, will not do an injustice to the integrity of the guidelines within the district. 5. The waiver, if granted, is meritorious to the Town because of its general appearance and adherence to the majority of the design elements within the structure. Chairman Lyons observed that this proposed solution accomplishes the following: The homeowner is put on notice as to what can be approved and they take the necessary risk if they choose to push beyond those parameters and file the waiver option to make their case before this Board and the Town Commission. Vice Chairman Smith moved to approve the language proposed by Marty Minor for Sec. 70 -100 and the addition of the definition of entablature proposed by Town Manager Thrasher for Sec. 66 -1 and to direct Mr. Minor to prepare the proper language for these amendments. The motion was seconded by Mr. Kent and all voted AYE at roll call. 3 ARPB Special Meeting 12 -8 -14 @8:30 A.M. B. Color- Sections 70- 106(b), 70- 106(c), 70- 106(d) Town Attorney Randolph explained that he had prepared this language some time ago in an effort to assure that the approved color is uniform throughout the face of the structure excluding the trim. Mr. Thrasher had advised that 2 new homes have recently been approved with a different color and surface on the second stories which are very attractive but could not have been approved if this proposed amendment was in place. It was pointed out that if the waiver amendment were to be adopted, the applicant would have the option to file for a waiver which would give the Boards the opportunity to consider each project on its own merits. The Board members agreed that the amendment as written is needed and Mr. Murphy moved to approve the verbiage as provided by Attorney Randolph in the documents that were circulated to the Board prior to this meeting, amending Color- Sections (1)70 - 106(b)Principal building, (2) 70- 106(c)Trim, (3)70- 106(d)Accent, and the motion was seconded by Mr. Dockerty with all voting AYE at roll 'call. IV. Public There was no public comment. V. Adjournment. Chairman Lyons adjourned the meeting at Approximately 10 A. M. Carole Vitale Recording Secretary 4