Loading...
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