HomeMy Public PortalAbout04/23/1991 * Special Meeting0,
CHAIRMAN:
VICE CHAIRMAN:
BOARD MEMBER:
ALTERNATE MEMBER:
Joan Orthwein
William Lynch
Donald McGraw, Jr.
Samuel Ogren, Jr.
Susanna Souder
Joan LaPorte
A. Curtis True
April 19, 1991
SPECIAL MEETING OF THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW AND PLANNING BOARD OF
THE TOWN OF GULF STREAM, FLORIDA, CALLED AT THE ORDER OF THE
CHAIRMAN, TO BE HELD ON TUESDAY, APRIL 23, 1991 AT 8:00 A.M. IN
THE TOWN HALL, 100 SEA ROAD, GULF STREAM, FLORIDA.
FIT"DI NY.11
I. Call to Order
II. Roll Call
III. Assignments from the Town Commission
A. Additional Review and Study of a Site Plan submitted by
Sam S. Caliendo, Agent for Gerry and Mary Lepkanich,
17217 Hunington Parkway, Boca Raton Polo Club, Boca Raton,
Florida 33496 -Requesting approval to construct a two
story single family dwelling at 3223 N. Ocean Blvd., Gulf
Stream, Florida.
1. Recommendation to the Town Commission
IV. Adjournment
SHOULD ANY INTERESTED PARTY SEEK TO APPEAL ANY DECISION MADE BY THE
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW AND PLANNING BOARD WITH RESPECT TO ANY MATTER
CONSIDERED AT THIS MEETING, SAID PARTY WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE
PROCEEDINGS, AND FOR SUCH PURPOSE, MAY NEED TO INSURE THAT A VERBATIM
RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY
AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. 286.0105, F.S.S.
SPECIAL MEETING OF THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW AND PLANNING BOARD OF
THE TOWN OF GULF STREAM, FLORIDA HELD IN THE TOWN HALL ON TUESDAY,
APRIL 23, 1991 AT 8:00 A.M.
I. The meeting was called to order at 8:10 A.M. by Joan Orthwein,
the Chairman, the applicant having arrived late.
II. Roll Call
Present: Joan Orthwein Chairman
William Lynch Vice Chairman
Donald McGraw, Jr. Board Member
Samuel Ogren, Jr. Board Member
Susanna Souder Board Member
Also Present:
Joan LaPorte
John Randolph
Rita Taylor
Richard Brandt
Richard Brooks
Sam Caliendo
Oscar Garcia
Barbara Stenson
Charles Velie
Phyllis Evans
III: Assignments from the Town Commission
Alternate Member
Town Attorney
Town Clerk
Code Enforcement Officer
Applicant's Agent
Applicant's Agent
Applicant's Agent
Town Resident
Town Resident
Town Resident
A. Additional Review and Study of a Site Plan submitted by
S. Caliendo, Agent for Gerry and Mary Lepkanich,
17217 Hunington Parkway, Boca Raton Polo Club, Boca
Raton, Florida 33496 -Requesting approval to construct a
two story single family dwelling at 3223 N. Ocean Blvd.,
Gulf Stream, Florida.
Mrs. Orthwein explained that the Town Commission had directed that
the applicant appear before the Architectural Review and Planning
Board for further review of the proposed development. She asked
the applicant if he was prepared to present revisions that had been
referred to in the letter that had been received in advance of the
meeting.
Mr. Richard Brooks, the architect representing the owner, advised
that a reduction of approximately 20% had been made in the size of
the structure in an effort to reduce the mass of the building. He
said that in effect, he had just "shrunk " the house,resulting in
the open space being increased to 46.8%. Mr. Brooks asked Mr. Oscar
Garcia to assist him in distributing several sets of drawings and
Mr. Garcia pointed out that the porte-cochere had been redesigned
in that the peaked roof had been lowered in order to address some of
the concerns of the Town Commission and the Architectural Review Board.
Mr. McGraw questioned if the large arch window in the front had been
changed on the new plan to which Mr. Brooks advised that it was not
intended to alter that.
Mrs. Souder stated that she had no problem with the inside arrangements
but had a problem with the outside appearance of the structure and
felt the whole thing was out of character with Gulf Stream.
Mrs. Orthwein observed that the vault in the front was more of an Art
Deco design and not in keeping with design that is acceptable in the
Town. Mr. Brooks did not agree stating that this design went back
to early Roman times and that there was nothing like it in the area.
Special Meeting -Architectural Review
and Planning Board -April 23, 1991 page 2
Mr. Ogren observed that the main entrance is a very strong design and
residents in Gulf Stream are not used to that "look". He added that
he did not know if even in the future it would be acceptable and
suggested that perhaps if the front could be softened it might be more
appealing and fitting. Mr. Brooks replied that the Owner feels very
strongly about keeping the entrance as is and added that with the
very large front setback and the amount of plantings that will be
provided, this will hardly be seen from AlA.
Mrs. Souder noted that the first floor elevation is at +15' and
stated that she was concerned about what that would do to the existing
property on the south. Mr. Brooks cited once again that the side set
back is larger than required and extensive planting will shield the
area to the south.
Mr. Lynch questioned how high the finished floor elevation was as
compared to the houses on each side and was advised that it is 1h'
higher.
Attorney Randolph advised that during conversations with the attorney"
for the applicant or for Mr. Caliendo, one of their complaints had bees
that they had not received back from the Board and Commission what
they don't like about the project and because of that they are receivii
no guidelines as to how to modify the plan. He added that today he
was hearing input from the Board and that it is the option of the
applicant to indicate that he does not plan making changes. Mr.
Randolph felt that the Board should indicate what they don't like
about the plan, if in fact they do not like it. He stated that if the
Board chooses to approve the plan, they just approve it. But if the
Board denies the plan or approves it with conditions, it is necessary
to specify the basis for the denial. Attorney Randolph then advised
that he was taking this opportunity to respond to the letters he had
received from Mr. Caliendo, one of the attorneys involved with the
project, stating that he had not answered them in writing and did not
want the opportunity to go by at this time and then have it said later
on that they had gone unanswered. Mr. Randolph explained that in one
of the letters it was stated that they felt all of the zoning require-
ments had been met and inquired as to what additional legal requirement
needed to be met, assuring that the client would comply. Attny.
Randolph advised that he does not review the zoning ordinances but
to the best of his knowledge, they had been met except that there was
one provision of the zoning code dealing with the point from which
the height of the building is measured which is being considered
for amendment but that this application had be submitted prior to
that consideration and will be considered as in the past. Mr. Randolph
advised that presently the code reads that technically the height
would be measured from base flood elevation which is +7' but that the
Town may not have been using this point and that is the answer as to
which zoning ordinances may not have been met. He felt that the Board
was not addressing the zoning ordinances but the criteria that is
set forth in the Architectural Review ordinance. Attny. Randolph
noted that the applicant does not, in the correspondence, give a great
deal of treatment to #5 in the Ordinance which says the building is not
visibly excessively dissimilar in relation to any other structures
existing in one or more of the following features, one of which is
cubical contents. He stated that cubical contents is one of the items
that is not subjective, amoung others, and it is proper to compare
this figure of 179,880 cubic feet with that of other structures in Town
Special Meeting -Architectural Review
and Planning Board -April 23, 1991 page 3
He stressed once again the applicants project must be considered
by taking into consideration all of the criteria in the Ordinance and
then stating specifically what is felt does not conform to that]
in the event of a denial, or an approval with conditions,so the
applicant will know how he can amend the project if he so desires.
Mr. Brooks stated he specifically addressed the items 3, 5, and 6 in
his memorandum to the Board. He felt that with the Town establishing
^ the building envelope with the zoning ordinances, it is redundant to
consider cubical content.
Mrs. Souder commented that she wondered why the applicant had not
appeared in person to explain why they wanted this particular project
in view of the fact this has been denied twice by this board. She
felt the Board would be much more comfortable if there was direct
contact as has been done in the past with other applicants when there
were conflicts to be resolved. Mr. Caliendo explained that the
delivery of Mr. & Mrs. Lepkanich 4th child is at hand and they did not
want to travel.
Chairman Orthwein stated that thavault at the entrance is too strong
and this type of architecture is not what people in Gulf Stream want
to see. She felt that perhaps the applicants should know what their
prospective neighbors feel in regard to this style. Mr. Brooks felt
quite the opposite in that it does fit into everything the Town
requires. He stated that there are several homes in the Town which
have a similar design, citing the older house on the south and the
Phipps house.
Speaking from the audiance in opposition to recommending approval
of the proposed structure were Barbara Stenson, Charles Velie and
Phyllis Evans.
Mr. McGraw once again recognized that Mr. Brooks had addressed Items
1, 3 and 5 of the Ordinance 91/12 but that he did not agree with his
remarks and still felt that the structure is not in good taste or desigr
and it certainly does not fit the community.
Mrs. Orthwein recalled that the Town Commission had indicated that
they did not like the style of the structure and she asked Mr. Brooks
why they did not make some attempt to modify the design before present-
ing it at this meeting. He stated that he came away from the Commissior
meeting with an interpretation that they felt the size and mass should
be reduced. He felt that by shrinking the building as had been done,
met most of that criteria. With regard to this meeting, he stated he
interprets the remarks to indicate that the Board is taking exception
to the vault. Mr. Randolph stated that that is one thing that had been
talked about but there were many other things also addressed and he did
not believe the record should indicate that the vault is the only
problem with the design.
Mr. Ogren stated he believed the Board was saying that they want to
see a little more of a conventional design,`a-low key -look. Mrs.
Orthwein agreed.
Mr. Brooks stated they would like to come before the Board again with
some modifications on the second of May.
/ Special Meeting -Architectural Review
and Planning Board -April 23, 1991 page 4
Mr. Lynch moved to defer consideration of the application until the
Special Meeting of May 2, 1991 at 8:00 A.M.at which the applicant
will have the opportunity to present a modification of the plan in
accordance with the direction given at this meeting with special
attention to the front exterior. The motion was seconded by Mr.
McGraw. Attorney Randolph explained that since action is being
^ deferred to a time certain, it will not be necessary to meet
advertising requirements. Roll Call: Mr. McGraw; AYE, Mrs. Souder;
AYE, Mr. Lynch; AYE, Mr. Ogren; AYE, and Chairman Orthwein; AYE.
IV. Adjournment
Chairman Orthwein adjourned the meeting at 9:10 A.M.
Rita L. Taylor
Town Clerk