HomeMy Public PortalAbout10/25/2012l
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING AND PUBLIC HEARING HELD BY THE
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW AND PLANNING BOARD OF THE TOWN OF GULF STREAM,
FLORIDA ON THURSDAY, OCTOBER 25, 2012 AT 8:30 A.M., IN THE TOWN HALL,
100 SEA ROAD, GULF STREAM, FLORIDA.
I. Call to Order
8:35 A.M.
II. Roll Call.
Present and
Participating
Absent w /Notice
Also Present and
Participating
Chairman Morgan called the Meeting to order at
Scott Morgan
Amanda Jones
Malcolm Murphy
Paul Lyons
Beau Delafield
Tom Smith
Ann Aker
William Thrasher
Rita Taylor
John Randolph
Hope Calhoun, Esq. of
Greenspoon, Marter
Tom Laudani of Seaside
Builders
Richard Jones of
Jones Architects
Dave Bodker of
Dave Bodker Landscape
& Architecture
Joe Pike of
EnviroDesign
Martin O'Boyle, Res.
George Elmore, Res.
Bill Himmelrich, Res.
Lisa Morgan, Res.
Ben Schrier of
Affinity Architects
Chairman
Vice - Chairman
Board Member
Board Member
Alt. Member sitting
As Board Member
Board Member
Alt. Member
Town Manager
Town Clerk
Town Attorney
Rep. Applic. /Developer
Tom Laudani
Applic. /Developer
Architect /Harbour View
Landscape Architect/
Harbour View
Engineer /Harbour View
2300 N. Hidden
Harbour Dr.
1320 N. Ocean Blvd.
N. Ocean Blvd.
1140 N. Ocean Blvd.
Arch. /3333 N. Ocean
Joe Peterson of Landscape Architect/
Peterson Design Prof. 3333 N. Ocean
Guy Flora of GC/3333 N. Ocean
Mark Timothy Construction
Tom Murphy, Esq. Rep. Audrey Schwartz
Audrey Schwartz, Res. 3265 N. Ocean Blvd.
?I. Minutes of the Regular Meeting and Public Hearin of 9- 27 -12.
Mr. Murphy moved and Vice - Chairman Jones seconded to approve the Minutes
of the Regular Meeting and Public Hearing of September 27, 2012. There
was no discussion. All voted AYE.
IV. Additions, withdrawals, deferr
Mr. Thrasher requested to re- arrange
heard as follows: Item VI.A.2.b., VI
Item VI.4.a.,b.,c.,d. There were no
als, arrangement of agenda items.
the Public Hearing Agenda to be
.A.3.b., VI.A.l.a., 2.a., 3.a.,
objections. Chairman Morgan noted
Regular Meeting and Public Hearing
Architectural Review and Planning Board - October 25, 2012 Page 2
that Tom Murphy, Esq., is involved in Item VI.4 and has to be in court
this morning. He said, depending on how the meeting goes, Mr. Murphy
may be taken out of turn to make his presentation.
V. Announcements.
A. Meeting Dates
1. Regular Meeting & Public Hearing
a. November 15, 2012 at 8:30 A.M.
b. December 27, 2012 @ 8:30 A.M.
c. January 24, 2013 @ 8:30 A.M.
d. February 28, 2013 @ 8:30 A.M.
e. March 28, 2013 @ 8:30 A.M.
f. April 25, 2013 @ 8:30 A.M.
Chairman Morgan noted that the November Meeting will be held early in
the month and asked if anyone had a conflict. There were no conflicts
with the Meeting Dates.
VI. PUBLIC HEARING.
Chairman Morgan asked if there was Ex -parte communication concerning any
of the items being heard today. Mr. Morgan stated that he spoke with
Mr. Laudani last week regarding some of the matters discussed at the
previous meeting explaining why items were deferred to this meeting.
There were no further declarations of Ex -parte communication.
Clerk Taylor administered the Oath to the following individuals who were
planning to testify during this Public Hearing: Hope Calhoun, Esq., Tom
Laudani, Richard Jones, Dave Bodker, Joe Pike, Bill Himmelrich, George
Elmore, Martin O'Boyle, Tom Murphy, Esq., Audrey Schwartz, Lisa Morgan,
Ben Schrier, Joe Peterson and Guy Flora.
Hope Calhoun, Esq., introduced herself and said she is present on behalf
of the Applicant. She thanked the ARPB for their consideration and said
they have gone through many drafts working with Town Staff and they
believe the application has satisfied all architectural requirements.
Ms. Calhoun stated that, due to possible time constraints, all testimony
should be focused primarily on architectural review and then the
overlay. She said issues of the plat were heard previously and are not
necessarily relevant today. Ms. Calhoun requested the opportunity to
re- address the Board following the presentation to respond to any
questions or comments.
A. Applications for Development Approval
2. An application, deferred from Public Hearing held
September 27, 2012, submitted by Seaside Builders LLC as
agent for Harbor View Estates LLC, owners of property
located at 1220 North Ocean Boulevard, Gulf Stream,
Florida, legally described as Lot 4, Hidden Harbour
Estates Plat Two, a replat of Lots 4, 5 & 6, Golf Course
Addition according to the plat thereof as recorded in
Plat Book 15, Pages 173 & 174, Public Records of Palm
Beach County, Florida.
a. NORTH OCEAN BOULEVARD OVERLAY PERMIT to allow the
removal of existing nuisance exotics and extensive
Regular Meeting and Public Hearing
Architectural Review and Planning Board - October 25, 2012 Page 3
planting of native species and the installation of
an entrance wall and gates, a portion of which is
within the 50' corridor.
b. LEVEL 3 ARCHITECTURAL /SITE PLAN REVIEW to permit
the construction of a partial two -story Bermuda
style single family dwelling, 3 car garage with
bonus room above, 8,603 square feet, and a swimming
pool.
Richard Jones introduced himself and thanked the Board for recommending
approval of Lot 3 and said it did go through the Commission and received
approval. He said they received good comments from the ARPB at the last
meeting relating to the Town's new ordinance addressing two -story mass
and the appropriate methods of addressing the issue.
Mr. Jones said the proposed 2 -story Bermuda Style structure will sit on
the southeast lot. He said they addressed the issue of mass by breaking
down the house into various portions interconnected by covered roofs,
and they created courtyards to capture outdoor space. He said the color
scheme is the traditional off -white with black shutters and white
mitered roof. To address mass on the second floor, two balconies were
added on the south elevation facing the private road and one on the
north elevation facing another lot, all of which are a minimum of 24 SF
and consistent with the two proposed balconies on the east elevation.
In addition, they did overlays of the existing landscape and Mr. Jones
said Dave Bodker created elevations showing the existing 15' no -cut zone
landscaping as well as the proposed new landscaping, which will screen
the entire south elevation of the home and provide ample screening on
the north, east and west elevations as well.
Mr. Jones said that Dave Bodker will review the proposed landscaping,
Joe Pike will address any drainage questions, and the Developer, Tom
Laudani, will any questions. Chairman Morgan asked what the distance
will be from AlA to the gate and then to the house. Mr. Jones said it
will be 50 feet to the gate and 9819" feet to the house. Chairman
Morgan asked if the additional balconies are identical and asked for
their depth. Mr. Jones said they are identical and they are 4' deep by
6' wide, 24 SF. Chairman Morgan asked if the addition of the balconies
meets Code. Mr. Thrasher confirmed that saying Section 70 -73, Two -
story, provides four options that can be used to break massing of the
fagade and one option is the use of balconies that are a minimum of 24
SF.
Dave Bodker introduced himself. He said they depicted the proposed and
existing vegetation to show how all elevations will be seen from
different property lines. Mr. Bodker said there are 19 existing trees
along the south property line which will remain and any gaps will be
filled in with Buttonwood trees or Fishtail palms, and a series of under
plantings with various hedging. On the north elevation which faces the
interior, they will plant tall Sable palms at higher elevations of the
house and smaller trees throughout. The west elevation will also be
seen from the interior and shade trees will be planted in several
locations to break up the garage. The east elevation will be seen from
AlA, there are a large number of existing trees along the east elevation
Regular Meeting and Public Hearing
Architectural Review and Planning Board - October 25, 2012 Page 4
that will be filled in with additional plantings and there will be
additional vegetation on the north side of the entrance gate to provide
sufficient screening.
With regard to the wall on the south elevation as you drive down Hidden
Harbour Road, Mr. Lyons asked if existing vegetation will block the wall
on the south elevation. Mr. Bodker said they have already planted a 5'
high Buttonwood hedge along the wall which will eventually block the
wall, and he said there is also hedging on the top of the wall and along
the interior of the wall.
George Elmore introduced himself and questioned the Minutes of the
9/27/12 ARPB Meeting where on Page 4, Paragraph 2, it says Mr.
Himmelrich is happy with the drainage and there are no issues. Mr.
Elmore the drainage system works, but he said there are issues if it is
not properly maintained everyone in the 1300s will be flooded and it
must be resolved. He said Mr. Laudani is working on it and informed him
that documents were sent to his attorney, but they have not been
received. Chairman Morgan noted that this was covered in the last
meeting and the conclusion was that it should be brought to the
Commission for further pursuit. He said Staff will make record of Mr.
Elmore's comments in the Minutes of this meeting. Ms. Calhoun confirmed
that documents were sent to Mr. Elmore's attorney about two weeks ago.
Lisa Morgan introduced herself and said she would like to address
landscape issues exclusively and asked if the Board would hear her
presentation at this time or wait until after the building has been
addressed. Chairman Morgan said they will address the buildings and the
immediate landscape designs first. He said there is a separate
application for the overlay permit with the Australian Pines, which will
be addressed separately at the conclusion of the building. Mr. Thrasher
said there are two actions to be taken, one of which is on Level III and
the other is a portion of this property abutting N. Ocean Blvd. where
there is request for the creation of a clear zone on the east side.
Chairman Morgan recommended addressing all questions on building and
then move into the Overlay Permit.
Vice - Chairman Jones commented that she really liked the addition of the
balconies, which improves all facades of the building. Martin O'Boyle
introduced himself and asked if there is a requirement under the Code
for positive Drainage. Mr. Thrasher said the requirement is for the
individual lots and properties to retain the first 1" of runoff on their
site by either positive outfall or exfiltration trenches, or a
combination of both. He said Delray Engineering will be verifying that,
but he said the requirement is not restrictive to just positive outfall.
Mr. O'Boyle agreed saying there are two alternatives, positive outfall
and retention, and asked if runoff will be retained on site. Mr.
Laudani asked Mr. Pike to answer the question and Ms. Calhoun stated
that Mr. Pike can answer the question generally because drainage is not
before the Board today. She said drainage issues were handled with
respect to the plat during a previous hearing. Chairman Morgan said
much of this was covered at the last meeting, but he said it involves
our Code, which relates to ARPB activity. He asked Mr. O'Boyle to make
Regular Meeting and Public Hearing
Architectural Review and Planning Board - October 25, 2012 Page 5
his points so they are of record and then Mr. Pike may give a brief
response; however, he said it may or may not impact the Board's decision
today.
Mr. O'Boyle asked Mr. Pike if the drainage required under the Code is
positive or retained on site. Further, Mr. O'Boyle said there is no
positive drainage, the drainage system installed is hooked into the
drainage of Hidden Harbour Estates, and he said there is a declaration
of record prohibiting any modification without agreement of the property
owners. He expressed concern for the new homeowners who may later find
out they have no rights, and he said, after what Mr. Elmore and Mr.
Himmelrich experienced, he does not believe there is positive drainage
and they should take a closer look. Mr. O'Boyle said the ARPB is
obligated to protect homeowners and he asked if anyone present could
show they have positive drainage.
Mr. O'Boyle mentioned three large signs on the property between his home
and the property previously owned by Mr. Wheeler property that were
erected by the Developer and are prohibited. Chairman Morgan said the
issue of signs should be brought to the Town Manager. He said the point
raised with regard to drainage is legitimate and it should be brought
before the Town Commission. Mr. Randolph said it is relevant to the
ARPB that the first 1" of rainfall is retained on the property because
it deals with individual lots, and he said Mr. Pike may want to address
that. Mr. Pike introduced himself and said that legal positive outfall
and outside retention meet the requirements of the City of Delray Beach,
South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD), the Town of Gulf
Stream's Engineering Consultant and two independent drainage engineers
hired by the neighbors. He said there is a series of on -site collection
inlets and two positive outfall pipes to the Intracoastal, which is
State water. Mr. Pike said Hidden Harbour has a drainage easement, but
they tied directly into the waters of the State. He said they are
working on a maintenance and inspection schedule and have covered
everything required by law and then some.
Mr. Himmelrich introduced himself and stated that he did tell Mr.
Laudani the system is working, but he said his concern is whether it
will continue to work. He said there is an agreement between the
neighbors and the Developer and he is concerned about the Developer
honoring the agreement with regard to drainage, landscaping or any other
issue. Mr. Himmelrich said he discussed this with the Town Manager and
the general response is that it is not a matter of the Town, but rather
a civil matter. He said he would like to go on record saying that if
the Town approves any changes in the buffer it would specifically
contradict the agreement the neighbors have with the Developer because
the buffer is outlined with measurements. Mr. Himmelrich said he
disagrees with Mr. Pike in that the drainage they installed was not set
forth to the neighbors prior to installation. He said they are
satisfied the system is currently working, but it was not approved as it
was supposed to have been done according to the agreement. He said it
may be seen as a civil matter and not a matter of the ARPB or the
Commission, but it is important to know that the agreement between the
neighbors and the Developer is in place.
Regular Meeting and Public Hearing
Architectural Review and Planning Board - October 25, 2012 Page 6
Tom Laudani introduced himself and said he would like to address Mr.
Himmelrich's comments. He said his attorneys supplied Mr. Elmore's and
Mr. Himmelrich's attorney with a draft of the drainage agreement for
maintenance two weeks ago. He said he signed a private maintenance
agreement with Centerline Utilities for semi - annual maintenance of the
system due to concerns of drains clogging with leaves, etc., and he said
�- he will continue to work with Mr. Himmelrich and Mr. Elmore to satisfy
their concerns of drainage system maintenance. In addition, Mr. Laudani
said the signs that are in place were approved by the Town in terms of
location prior to their installation.
Chairman Morgan suggested moving on with the architectural review of Lot
4, and he said the next point in the application is the Town's
requirement of planting Australian Pines. Mr. Thrasher asked that the
Board take action on the Level III at this point due to some concerns
regarding the clear zone. To clarify, Mr. Randolph asked Mr. Thrasher
if he is suggesting all matters relating to the clear zone come at the
end of the Agenda and that the Board vote on the Level III first. Mr.
Thrasher confirmed that. Chairman Morgan said the Level III relates
strictly to the architectural plan before the Board and the immediate
landscaping of the structure.
Mr. Lyons moved and Mr. Murphy seconded to recommend approval of Level
III Architectural /Site Plan based on a finding that the proposed partial
two story single family Bermuda Style dwelling, a 3 -car garage with a
bonus room, a total of 8,603 SF, and a swimming pool meet the minimum
intent of the Design Manual and applicable review standards with the
following conditions:
1. The electric service lines shall be buried.
2. The roof shall be white (through and through) un- textured,
uncoated flat cement tile.
3. Any minor modification in the landscape plan shall be
submitted to the Town Manager for review and approval and any major
modifications shall be brought back to the ARPB for review and approval,
prior to commencement of landscaping.
4. Wall and /or fences will be measured from the lowest abutting
grade with a maximum height of 8' including any lighting fixtures that
may be attached.
5. All chain link fencing will be screened from neighbor's view.
There was no discussion. All voted AYE.
3. An application, deferred from Public Hearing of
September 27, 2012, submitted by Seaside Builders as
agent for Harbor View Estates LLC, owners of property
located at 1230 N. Ocean Blvd., Gulf Stream, Florida,
legally described as Lot 6, Hidden Harbour Estates Plat
Two, being a re -plat of Lots 4, 5 & 6, Golf Course
Addition, Gulf Stream, Florida.
a. NORTH OCEAN BLVD. OVERLAY PRMIT to allow removal of
existing nuisance exotics providing for a 13'
clear zone from the edge of roadway and extensive
planting of native species and installation of a
Regular Meeting and Public Hearing
Architectural Review and Planning Board - October 25, 2012 Page 7
6'high aluminum rail fence 12' west of the east
property line that will be screened with landscape
material.
b. LEVEL 3 ARCHITECTURAL /SITE PLAN REVIEW to permit
construction of an 8,857 square foot Colonial West
Indies style partial two- story, single family
dwelling, attached 2 car garage with 6' high walls
and fences screened with landscape material around
the property, and a swimming pool.
Ms. Calhoun said their Architect will present the architectural features
of this home and reminded the Board that all non - related issues should
be considered, but that the focus remains on what is before them. She
requested time to re- address the Board at the conclusion of this
presentation to respond to any questions or comments.
Mr. Jones said this particular home is under contract, and he described
the proposed structure as a long and narrow Colonial West Indies Style,
changing mass from one -story to two -story with a garage connected by a
loggia and a carriage house above. He said they contacted Marty Minor
of Urban Design Kilday Studios and Mr. Minor corresponded by letter with
his interpretation of the Code regarding two -story mass. Mr. Jones said
the Code provides options to address second -story mass, one of which
allows the applicant to propose an alternative in the event the other
options are not consistent with the architectural style. He said they
are proposing an alternative that is consistent with the Colonial West
Indies style. Mr. Jones explained that the second story will be a
different color and will have a clapboard -look siding, and the roof will
be a gray flat slate -look tile with mitered ridges. Mr. Jones said at
the last meeting Vice - Chairman Jones commented on the half -moon window
and felt it was not consistent with the architectural style, and he said
they are now proposing an alternative half -moon window with a flatter
arch.
Mr. Jones summarized the landscape overlay saying they presented the
existing 15' no -cut zone landscaping with the proposed additional
landscaping. He said you will barely see the home on the north
elevation, the south elevation is internal to the community and you will
see a mix of landscape and architecture, and the east and west
elevations are the same. Chairman Morgan said the wall along the north
elevation appears to be uneven. Mr. Bodker said it is existing
vegetation which is up to 18 feet high, and he said there is a gap where
the drainage swale to the catch basin goes through where they are
�. proposing new trees of about 20 feet high to plank the swale and to
block the house. Mr. Lyons asked if the gap along the north elevation
will be closed. Mr. Bodker said there is an easement there, but he said
the proposed additional plantings will eventually close the gap.
Chairman Morgan asked if the Board Members had questions or comments.
Vice - Chairman Jones said she likes the flatter- arched design of the
half -moon window. Mr. Lyons expressed concern about possible loss of
existing vegetation and vegetation put in place to screen architecture
in both the buffer zone and throughout individual lots. He said he
would like to have something put in place to enforce replacement to
Regular Meeting and Public Hearing
Architectural Review and Planning Board - October 25, 2012 Page 8
maintain the approved landscape plan. Mr. Himmelrich stated that he
lives very close to the property and expressed similar concerns with
regard to open spaces and gaps in the landscaping. Mr. Laudani and Mr.
Bodker assured the Board and Mr. Himmelrich that there will be
sufficient landscaping for screening and it will be maintained in the
future. Mrs. Morgan requested that the ARPB make a specific
recommendation to the Commission concerning maintenance of the buffer
-- around the entire development.
During this discussion concerning the protection and maintenance of
existing and new vegetation both in the buffer area and throughout the
property, it was suggested that a landscape agreement could be put in
place or deed restrictions applied to individual lots. Mr. Randolph
said he would work with the Applicant's attorney, Mark Grant, to put
documentation together.
Mr. Murphy moved to recommend approval of Level III Architectural /Site
Plan based on a finding that the proposed partial two -story single
family 8,857 SE Colonial West Indies style dwelling, attached 2 -car
garage, with 6' walls and fences, screened with landscape material
around the property and a swimming pool meet the minimum intent of the
Design Manual and applicable review standards with the following
conditions:
1. Replace the two half -moon windows as shown on the north and south
elevations with the proposed alternative design as presented.
2. The electric service lines shall be buried;
3. Any minor modifications in the landscape plan shall be submitted to
the Town Manager for review and approval and any major modifications
shall be brought back to the ARPB for review and approval, prior to
commencement of landscaping;
4. Wall and /or fences will be measured from the lowest abutting grade
with a maximum height of 6' including any lighting fixtures that may be
attached;
5. All chain link fencing will be screened from neighbor's view; and,
6. A recommendation to the Town Commission to set a condition through
documents and provisions that the landscaping in the buffer areas as
prescribed in the landscape plan is maintained.
Mr. Randolph asked the Board if they are satisfied with the landscape
plan as presented and that it provides the necessary buffer. Chairman
Morgan and Mr. Thrasher said they are not satisfied. Chairman Morgan
suggested including a recommendation of a deed restriction to the lots,
to be incorporated in both the homeowners' association agreement and
also in the individual property deeds, that the buffer property as
defined in the landscape plan be maintained at the homeowners expense,
that the lot foliage abounding each individual lot be maintained at that
individual homeowners expense, and that it be subject to approval and
supervision by the Town. Ms. Calhoun asked if the recommendation could
be for appropriate documentation determined by Attorneys Randolph and
Grant as opposed to a deed restriction. Mr. Randolph asked the Board if
they are saying they approve the landscaping and want it to be
maintained in the future and, if so, is the Board satisfied that the
Regular Meeting and Public Hearing
Architectural Review and Planning Board - October 25, 2012 Page 9
landscaping as shown does create a screen along the road to the abutting
properties. Chairman Morgan said he does not see that on the plan, but
he said there is a representation that it will create the buffer and he
will accept the representation and turn it over to the Town to enforce
it. Mr. Randolph explained that the deed restriction would apply to the
properties themselves and provide a restriction so that the purchaser
would be aware of their obligation to maintain a site screen along the
boundary of their property in perpetuity.
Chairman Morgan said this recommendation to the Commission should apply
to all the properties and all applicable landscaping and buffer zonings,
not just Lot 6, and it would be the entire responsibility of the
homeowners' association. Mr. Murphy asked if the ARPB could make a
recommendation that the condition to maintain the landscaping is by way
of documents and provisions to be determined in discussion between
Attorneys Randolph and Grant. Mr. Randolph said it requires a strong
recommendation to the Commission saying that their approval is subject
to there being binding provisions in place that will assure the buffer
will be maintained into the future. Mr. Himmelrich commented that the
site screen language is important because they have already agreed to
the buffer, but he said it is important that they agree to maintain what
the Board is approving from the drawings, which is a full screening of
80% of the structure. Chairman Morgan asked how they could make the
recommendation apply to all of the lots, since two of the lots have
already been approved without it. Mr. Randolph said he would discuss
the matter with Mr. Grant.
Mr. Murphy amended Condition 6 to read as follows:
6. A recommendation to the Commission to set a condition by way of
binding documents and provisions that the prescribed landscaping in the
landscape plan be maintained in a way to be determined through Attorney
Grant and the Town Attorney. Mr. Randolph said he would recommend
adding the Applicant's promise that there will be a site screen of
hedging or plantings that would fully screen the property. Mr. Murphy
added Condition 7, as follows:
7. The site screen as detailed in the plans which were presented to
the ARPB will be provided by the Developer to the best of his ability.
Mr. Lyons seconded the motion. There was no further discussion. All
voted AYE.
Chairman Morgan asked for a motion to incorporate the conditions made on
( Lot 6 to all of the lots in the subdivision.
Mr. Dela£ield moved and Mr. Murphy seconded to recommend to the
Commission that the conditions imposed on Lot 6 in terms of site
screening and illustrations of the landscaping will be consistent with
all of the lots in the subdivision, including Lot 3, which has already
been approved by the Commission, and Lot 4, of which the ARPB has
recommended approval to the Commission, by way of binding documentation
and restrictions imposed by the Town Commission. Mr. Randolph said the
Board can make this recommendation to the Commission, but he said he
does not know how enforceable it will be based on the fact that there
Regular Meeting and Public Hearing
Architectural Review and Planning Board - October 25, 2012 Page 10
has already been an approval by the Commission of one of the lots.
Chairman Morgan said it would be an advisory to the Commission. Mr.
Randolph stated that he will be working with Mr. Grant to come up with a
provision that holds the homeowners' association responsible for
maintaining the buffer. There was no further discussion. All voted
AYE.
Chairman Morgan asked Attorney Tom Murphy to make his presentation to
the Board. Mr. Murphy introduced himself and stated that he represents
Audrey Schwartz who resides at 3265 N. Ocean Blvd. He said Mrs.
Schwartz is looking forward to meeting her new neighbors, Mr. and Mrs.
Gillman, who have purchased the property at 3333 N. Ocean Blvd. Mr.
Murphy said Mrs. Schwartz has no objection to the proposed improvements
on the Gillman property; however, he said it is important to her that
her trees are protected during construction. He said Mrs. Schwartz
would like to have her representative present when they begin removing
trees and she is requesting a 30 -day notice of commencement of
construction. Mr. Peterson of Peterson Design Professionals, who is the
landscape architect for 3333 N. Ocean Blvd., stated that he would be
happy to provide Mrs. Schwartz with 30 days notice.
Chairman Morgan called for a short break at 10:15 A.M. The Public
Hearing continued at 10:25 A.M.
Chairman Morgan recused from this portion of the hearing because Mrs.
Morgan would be making a presentation to the Board with regard to the
existing canopy and buffer area of the subdivision. He turned the
meeting over to Vice - Chairman Jones. Mr. Randolph asked Mr. Thrasher to
give his presentation before discussion.
1. An application, deferred from Public Hearing held
September 27, 2012, that was submitted by Seaside Builders
LLC, as agent for Harbor View Estates, LLC owners of
property located at 1229 N. Ocean Blvd., Gulf Stream,
Florida, legally described as Lot 5, Hidden Harbour
Estates Plat II, Replat of Golf Course Addn. Lts 9, 5 & N
92' of Lt 6, Gulf Stream, Florida.
a. NORTH OCEAN BOULEVARD OVERLAY PERMIT to allow
removal of existing nuisance exotics and some native
trees providing for a 13' clear zone from edge of
roadway.
There was no application for a Level 3 Architectural Site Plan Review at
this time, only consideration of the clear zone.
Town Manager Thrasher explained that the Florida Department of
Transportation right -of -way west of the pavement on AlA is included as a
part of the North Ocean Boulevard Overlay District and as such he would
like to address this area in relation to all three lots, numbers 9, 5
and 6. Mr. Thrasher displayed a survey of the entire plat and one of
just the area along AlA and pointed out that the proposed 13' from the
edge of pavement was shaded in red pencil. He further called attention
to the fact that the west line of the 13' is almost the same as the
easterly property line of the three lots.
Regular Meeting and Public Hearing
Architectural Review and Planning Board - October 25, 2012 Page 11
Mr. Thrasher advised that he had asked the developer if he would be
willing to clear this area of existing plant material, some of which is
nuisance exotic growth, sod and install irrigation in the 13'so the Town
could plant Australian Pine trees in this area. He explained that the
Town had been successful in having the State declare AlA a historic and
scenic highway because of the Pine canopy and a Special Act of the State
Legislature had given Gulf Stream the authority to restore and extend
the canopy along both sides of AlA on the right -of -way, provided they
were planted beyond the clear zone. Mr. Thrasher stated that the Town
has planted over 90 additional trees since the Special Acts were
enacted. He pointed out that the clearing would not encroach into the
landscape buffer area that the developer had provided on the private
property.
Lisa Morgan, the property owner south of the development, made a
presentation with regard to the importance of the preservation of the
natural hammock and canopy along AlA, the existing vegetation at the
entrance of the subdivision and the buffer area. She said she has lived
in Gulf Stream since 1996 and she supports the Australian Pines;
however, she said not every project can be approved before considering
the properties to be affected by removing nuisance and non- native
vegetation and planting Australian Pines. Mrs. Morgan provided photos
of what exists and was particularly concerned that there is very little
existing vegetation to the south of the entrance of the subdivision and
in the buffer area. She said taking down any of the native landscaping
to make room for the Australian Pines would be a mistake. Mrs. Morgan
said if it is possible to maintain the 15' buffer and plant Australian
Pines in front of it, she would be all for it. She said she would hope
that the ARPB would recommend to the Commission that this is not the
right location to do this.
Mr. Thrasher said they are not suggesting the removal of some of the
large trees. He said at the request of the Town, the Developer's plan
is to mitigate the trees that were native and accidentally removed. He
said the DOT requirements were not as strict years ago as they are today
and he said we are obligated to the 11' clear zone. Mr. Thrasher said
it is true that a lot of the vegetation behind the hammock was removed,
but he said there will be new plantings and screenings behind that. He
said the Australian Pines do give the Town some protection with regard
to the widening of the road, adding bike lanes and /or sidewalks, since
they are somewhat protected by the Special Acts.
Mr. O'Boyle asked if there was a requirement that none of the foliage
along AlA be touched. Mr. Bodker said there is a 10' buffer. Mr.
O'Boyle said Mr. Thrasher pointed out that the DOT has control over
their property and he asked Mr. Thrasher why the DOT would come in now.
Mr. Thrasher said there is nothing preventing them from doing what they
want with property in their jurisdiction, but he said he is not implying
that they are going to do that now.
Several neighbors of the subdivision and Board Members expressed their
concern over disturbing the vegetation along AlA in this location. Mr.
Regular Meeting and Public Hearing
Architectural Review and Planning Board - October 25, 2012 Page 12
Lyons said if the community does not want this he would suggest not
recommending approval. Mr. Thrasher said if this is not approved the
Developer would move on. Mr. Laudani said he is more than happy to
comply with the wishes of the neighbors, the Town and its residents.
Clerk Taylor said that it is her understanding that a motion will be
required to approve the N. Ocean Blvd. Overlay Permit with the exception
of the 13' clear zone, due to the fact the Overlay District extends an
additional 50' onto the private property.
Mr. Lyons moved and Mr. Dela£ield seconded to recommend approval of the
North Ocean Boulevard Overlay Permit excluding the 13' clear zone with
regard to Lots 4, 5 and 6. Mrs. Morgan asked about a fence 12' in from
the property along Hidden Harbour Rd. Clerk Taylor said the Code
mandates that any walls or fences in that zoning district facing AlA
must be 12 feet back, whereas along the Beachfront District walls and
fences can be along the property line, but she said it meets Code.
There was no further discussion. All voted AYE.
Vice Chairman Jones returned the gavel to Chairman Morgan.
4. An application submitted by Benjamin Schreier,
Affiniti Architects, as Agent for Doris J. Gillman,
the owner of property located at 3333 N. Ocean Blvd.,
Gulf Stream, Florida, which is legally described as
Part of Lot 5, Gulf Stream Ocean Tracts, Gulf Stream,
Florida.
a. NORTH OCEAN BOULEVARD OVERLAY PERMIT to remove
existing landscape material and driveway,
install new driveway and landscaping and
constructs foot perimeter wall with entry gate
within the North Ocean Boulevard Corridor.
b. LAND CLEARING PERMIT to relocate /clear existing
landscaping material for relocation of
driveway, preparation of building site and
property beautification.
c. DEMOLITION PERMIT to remove existing structures.
d. LEVEL 3 ARCHITECTURAL /SITE PLAN REVIEW to permit
construction of a 9,036 square foot Colonial West
Indies style partial 2 -stor single family
dwelling, 3 car attached garage and a swimming
pool.
Ben Schrier introduced himself and briefly presented the project
proposed for 3333 N. Ocean Blvd. He said the new structure will be
9,036 SF, it is a Colonial West Indies Style home with clapboard style
siding, a gray slate tile roof and brown windows. Mr. Schrier asked for
consideration of the front entry gate which was originally proposed with
an elliptical element in the center and Staff was not happy with that.
He said they are proposing an alternative design which is horizontal at
the top, but he said that Mr. and Mrs. Gillman would still like the
Board to consider the original design.
Chairman Morgan asked about shutters. Mr. Schrier said there will be
some white Bahama shutters. Chairman Morgan asked about the doorway on
Regular Meeting and Public Hearing
Architectural Review and Planning Board - October 25, 2012 Page 13
the balcony above the entrance and asked if there was a purpose for the
clumping of windows. Mr. Schrier said it will bring light into the
interior. Mr. Lyons asked what the view would be from the street. Mr.
Schrier said you would only see the structure as you enter through the
driveway, but he said you would not see much from the street.
Joe Peterson, the Landscape Architect, said there will be a 6' high
privacy wall in front with trees and plantings along the wall,
C, throughout the interior and against the home. He said there will be
layers of shrubs in front and along the walkway, hedging along the sides
and in the back and Coconut Palms around the pool and deck. Mr.
Peterson said the existing Ficus hedge on the north elevation will be
removed and replaced with a new Ficus, and he said the existing Sea
Grapes will remain with additional plantings around them. Mr. Peterson
said that very tall Sea Grapes will be planted along the side property
lines for additional screening. He said there are some very overgrown
Sea Grapes that will be removed and replaced with much denser Sea
Grapes.
Mrs. Schwartz mentioned the privacy wall they are proposing along N.
Ocean Blvd. and was concerned about the column on her property line.
She asked if the wall would meet her column and Mr. Peterson it would be
about 4' from her column.
Mr. Lyons was concerned with protecting the neighbors to the north and
south during demolition and construction and he asked Mr. Peterson if
they were going to remove all of their vegetation immediately. Mr.
Peterson said they are only removing the cluster of Sea Grapes to the
south and the existing Ficus hedge to the north. He said the neighbors
to the north have a 6' high screen wall on their property. Mr. Peterson
said there may be some period of time when there would be openings.
Guy Flora of Mark Timothy Construction stated that he would be
responsible for the property during construction. He said the
Australian Pines will be removed immediately and they will install a
screened privacy fence, and they will put up the privacy wall in the
front as soon as possible. Chairman Morgan said Mrs. Schwartz asked for
a 30 -day notice before commencement of construction and he asked Mr.
Flora if he can do that. Mr. Flora said he can do that. Chairman
Morgan asked Mrs. Schwartz if she had any other comments. Mrs. Schwartz
said she would like them to do the screening to protect her property and
her vegetation. Mr. Flora said they would install a chain link fence
with a green shade for protection.
Chairman Morgan asked Mr. Thrasher for Staff's analysis of the roof
tile. Mr. Thrasher said it is consistent with the architectural style.
Clerk Taylor noted that the neighbor to the north was by Town Hall to
look at the plans and there were no objections.
Mr. Lyons moved and Vice - Chairman Jones seconded to recommend approval
of each of the following:
Regular Meeting and Public Hearing
Architectural Review and Planning Board - October 25, 2012 Page 14
North Ocean Boulevard Overlay Permit to allow the removal of existing
landscape material and driveway, install new driveway and landscaping
and construct a 5 foot perimeter wall with entry gate within the North
Ocean Boulevard Corridor.
Land Clearing Permit to relocate/ clear existing landscaping material
for relocation of driveway, preparation of building site and property
beautification.
Demolition Permit to remove existing structures.
.' Level III Architectural /Site Plan based on a finding that the proposed
construction of a 9,036 SF Colonial West Indies Style partial 20story
single family dwelling, 3 -car attached garage and a swimming pool meet
the minimum intent of the Design Manual and applicable review standards,
with the following conditions:
1. The electric service lines shall be buried.
2. Any minor modification in the landscape plan shall be
submitted to the Town Manager for review and approval and any major
modifications shall be brought back to the ARPB for review and approval,
prior to commencement of landscaping.
3. Wall and /or fences will be measured from the lowest abutting
grade with a maximum height of 6' including any lighting fixtures that
may be attached.
4. All chain link fencing will be screened from neighbor's view.
5. The landscape plan will protect existing Australian pine
trees and provide a 13' clear zone where possible allowing for the
planting by the Town of two Australian pine trees on the north of the
existing driveway entrance and up to eight on the north side of the
existing driveway.
6. Change the proposed gate design to the alternate gate design
that is less ornate. The agent has shown several gates along SR AlA,
several of which are fronting homes classified with Mediterranean style
architecture.
7. The property owner will give the neighbor to the south 30
days notice prior to commencement of construction.
There was no further discussion. All voted AYE.
VII. Items by Staff. There were no items by Staff.
VIII. Items by Board Members. There were no items by Board Members
IX. Public. There were no items by the Public.
ournment.
Chairman Morgan adjourned the meeting at 11:45 A.M.
I Raministrative Assistant
FORM 813 MEMORANDUM OF VOTING CONFLICT FOR
COUNTY, MUNICIPAL, AND OTHER LOCAL PUBLIC OFFICERS
LAST NAME -FIRST NAME -MIDDLE NAME
NAME OF BOARD. COUNCIL. COMMISSION. AUTHORITY. OR COMMITTEE
ti
AicP s
MAILING ADDRESSTHE
BOARD, COUNCIL, COMMISSION. AUTHORITY OR COMMITTEE ON
WHICH I SERVE IS A UNIT OF:
'9 �` 4^ Li�9
'ec ' []COUNTY ❑OTHERLOCALAGENCY
CITY COUNTY
6,L c /r� /4� A
/ n ��
NAME OF POLITICAL SUBDIVISION:
6✓L,�c tT.tc
DATE ON WHICH VOTE OCCURRED
MY POSITION IS:
/CELS`/Z 1
[3 ELECTIVE ErOPOIN71VE
WHO MUST FILE FORM 8B
This form Is for use by any person serving at the county, city, or other local level of government on an appointed or elected board, council,
commission, authority, or committee. It applies equally to members of advisory and non -advisory bodies who are presented with a voting
conflict of Interest under Section 112 3143, Florida Statutes
Your responsibilities under the law when faced with voting on a measure In which you have a conflict of Interest will vary greatly depending
on whether you hold an elective or appointive position For this reason, please pay close attention to the instructions on this form before
completing the reverse side and filing the form.
INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 112.3143, FLORIDA STATUTES
A person holding elective or appointive county, municipal, or other local public office MUST ABSTAIN from voting on a measure which
Inures to his or her special private gain or loss. Each elected or appointed local officer also is prohibited from knowingly voting on a mea-
sure which inures to the special gain or loss of a principal (other than a government agency) by whom he or she is retained (including the
parent organization or subsidiary of a corporate principal by which he or she is retained); l0 the special private gain or loss of a relative; or
to the special private gain or loss of a business associate. Commissioners of community redevelopment agencies under Sec. 163 356 or
163 357, F , and officers of Independent special tax districts elected on a one -acre, one -vote basis are not prohibited from voting in that
capacity
For purposes of this law, a "relative" Includes only the officer's father, mother, son, daughter, husband, wife, brother, sister, father-in-law,
mother-in-law, son-in-law, and daughter-in-law. A "business associate" means any person or entity engaged In or carrying on a business
enterprise with the officer as a partner, Joint venturer, coowner of property, or corporate shareholder (where the shares of the corporation
are not listed an any national or regional stock exchange).
ELECTED OFFICERS:
In addition to abstaining from voting in the situations described above, you must disclose the conflict:
PRIORTOTHE VOTE BEING TAKEN by publicly staling to the assembly the nature of:.yopn Interest in the measure on which you
are abstaining from voting; and
WITHIN 15 DAYS AFTER THE VOTE OCCURS by completing and filing this form with the person responsible for recording the min-
utes of the meeting, who should Incorporate the form in the minutes.
APPOINTED OFFICERS:
Although you must abstain from voting In the situations described above, you otherwise may participate in these matters. However, you
must disclose the nature of the conflict before making any attempt to Influence the decision, whether orally or in writing and whether made
by you or at your direction.
IF YOU INTEND TO MAKE ANY ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION PRIOR TO THE MEETING AT WHICH THE VOTE WILL BE
TAKEN:
• You must complete and file this form (before making any attempt to Influence the decision) with the person responsible for recording the
minutes of the meeting, who will incorporate the form in the minutes. (Continued an other side)
APPOINTED OFFICERS (continued)
• A copy of the form must be provided Immediately to the other members of the agency.
• The form must be read publicly at the next meeting after the form is riled.
IF YOU MAKE NO ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION EXCEPT BY DISCUSSION AT THE MEETING:
• You must disclose orally the nature of your conflict in the measure before participating
• You must complete the form and file It within 15 days after the vote occurs with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the
meeting, who must incorporate the form in the minutes. A copy of the form must be provided Immediately to the other members of the
agency, and the form must be read publicly at the next meeting after the form Is riled.
DISCLOSURE OF LOCAL OFFICER'S INTEREST
I, "'5z' + %'� ° "�'�^ , hereby disclose that on o r r, z 20 z
(a) A measure came or will come before my agency which (check one)
Inured to my special private gain or loss;
Inured to the special gain or loss of my business associate,
inured to the special gain or loss of my relative,
Inured to the special gain or loss of by
whom I am retained; or
Inured to the special gain or loss of which
is the parent organization or subsidlaryof a principal which has retained me.
(b) The measure before my agency and the nature of my conflicting interest in the measure is as follows:
amu/ i -f G✓`t�f-• Ea^/`zs.1c .. �c � i�.-,.�uG-r,e,.%
i" S f it^ at/1 cif Ja v � ^ �.-•-^'�G .
Ou,
`-
Dale Filed
NOTICE: UNDER PROVISIONS OF FLORIDA STATUTES §112.317, A FAILURE TO MAKE ANY REQUIRED DISCLOSURE
CONSTITUTES GROUNDS FOR AND MAY BE PUNISHED BY ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING: IMPEACHMENT,
REMOVAL OR SUSPENSION FROM OFFICE OR EMPLOYMENT, DEMOTION, REDUCTION IN SALARY, REPRIMAND, OR A
CIVIL PENALTY NOT TO EXCEED $10,000.
CE FORM BB - EFF. 1/2000 PAGE 2