Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout11/15/2007O 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, NOVEMBER 15, 2007 at 8:30 A.M., IN THE TOWN HALL, 100 SEA ROAD, GULF STREAM, FLORIDA. I. Call to Order. Chairman Kent called the meeting to order at 8:30 A.M. II. Roll Call. Present and Hewlett Kent Chairman Participating: Charles Frankel Vice -Chairman Perry O'Neal Board Member Donna White Board Member Amanda Jones Alternate Member Scott W. Morgan Absent with Notice: Robert W. Ganger Also Present and William Thrasher Participating: John Randolph Rita Taylor Quinn Miklos William Wietsma Alternate Member Board Member Town Manager Town Attorney Town Clerk Agent for Swift Agent for 3232 Polo III. Minutes of the Regular Meeting and Public Hearing 10-25-07. Mr. Frankel moved and Mr. O'Neal seconded that the minutes be approved as circulated and all voted AYE. IV. Additions, withdrawals, deferrals, arrangement of agenda items. There were none requested. V. Announcements. A. Meeting Dates 1. Regular Meeting & Public Hearing a. December 27, 2007 @ 8:30 A.M. b. January 24, 2008 @ 8:30 A.M. c. February 28, 2008 @ 8:30 A.M. d. March 27, 2008 @ 8:30 A.M. e. April 24, 2008 @ 8:30 A.M. f. May 22, 2008 @ 8:30 A.M. Chairman Kent announced these dates and Mrs. Jones reminded that she would not be present for the December meeting. The Chairman asked if there were any exparte communications to declare and there were none. The Chairman asked that all persons who intended to speak please stand to take the Oath. Town Clerk Taylor administered the Oath to Mr. Miklos and Mr. Wietsma. Regular Meeting Page 2 Architectural Review & Planning Board November 15, 2007 VI. PUBLIC HEARING. A. Applications for Development Approval 1. An application submitted by Quinn Miklos as Agent for Constance Swift, owner of the property located at 2562 Avenue Au Soleil, Gulf Stream, Florida, which is legally described as Lot 42 Place Au Soleil Subdivision. Mr. Miklos displayed a site plan, color rendering and photographs of the existing house and surrounding houses. He explained that the improvements include a one story addition to an existing one story Gulf Stream Bermuda style dwelling. Mr. Miklos stated that the color and shutters would remain the same, the roof line, quoins and windows would match the existing. A special exception is being requested to permit additions to an existing non -conforming structure that encroaches 1 ft. into the east side setback. Mrs. Jones asked why the new windows depicted look different. Mr. Miklos explained that it is the graphic drawing, the windows would match the existing. The Board members complimented that design. There were no comments from staff. a. SPECIAL EXCEPTION to permit conforming one story additions to an existing non -conforming structure that encroaches into the east side setback 1 foot as provided in Section 70-75 (c)(1). Mr. Frankel moved and Mrs. White seconded to recommend approval of a Special Exception to permit conforming one story additions to an existing non -conforming structure that encroaches into the east side setback 1 ft. as provided in Section 70-75 (c) (1). Roll Call: Mrs. White; AYE, Mr. Frankel; AYE, Mrs. Jones; AYE, Mr. O'Neal; AYE and Chairman Kent; AYE. b. LEVEL 3 ARCHITECTURAL/SITE PLAN REVIEW to permit one story additions consisting of a total of 2,376 square feet to an existing one story Gulf Stream Bermuda single family dwelling. Mr. Frankel moved and Mrs. White seconded to recommend approval of a Level III Architectural/Site Plan based on a finding that the proposed one story addition, consisting of a total of 2,376 sq. ft., to an existing one story Gulf Stream Bermuda single family dwelling meet the minimum intent of the Design Manual and applicable review standards with the conditions that: 1) Prior to painting and prior to a Certificate of Completion, a Gulf Stream paint permit will be required. 2) If the proposed site plan is altered because of the requirements of the Health Department, a revised site plan will require ARPB approval. Roll Call: Mrs. White; AYE, Mr. Frankel; AYE, Mrs. Jones; AYE, Mr. O'Neal; AYE and Chairman Kent; AYE. B. Items related to previous approval 1. Request for change of architectural style @ 3232 Polo Dr. submitted by William Wietsma, Architect. Regular Meeting Page 3 Architectural Review & Planning Board November 15, 2007 Mr. Wietsma displayed a color rendering of the proposed changes and explained that the house was previously approved as classical anglo Caribbean style. However, the owners have traveled extensively in Asia and Africa and wanted a look that would allow the interior of the house to be connected with the exterior, as is common in Singapore. The changes requested include a verandah with lattice or louvers for shading Oand air flow, nana wall doors that can be opened completely to the exterior, fixed louvers and louvered shutters with dark brown trim at the window openings and bamboo and woven raffia panels throughout the interior to correspond with the tropical landscaping on the outside. Mr. Wietsma explained that the dark color on the windows is in keeping with many colonial Singapore houses, as are the other exterior elements including the columns, moldings and arches. Chairman Kent stated that the windows and shutters are not in keeping with the neighborhood and bronze window frames are prohibited. He suggested painting the window trim white, or a light tan or off white, and the shutters a contrasting color. Mr. Wietsma pointed out a provision in the Code Section 72-06, which provides for houses other than those that are in the preferred and prohibited section. He added that the window panes are not unusually dark, they are the same gray color that he uses on all his houses. Mr. Thrasher advised that the shutters must contrast and compliment the body of the house The Board members were concerned with the dark trim and the dark glass. They agreed that the change is drastic compared to the previously approved application and suggested that a new rendering be presented showing the painted frames and shutters. Mr. O'Neal moved and Mrs. Jones seconded to deny the request to amend the approval that was originally given and suggested that Mr. Wietsma return with a revised color rendering for 3232 Polo Drive. Roll Call: Mrs. White; AYE, Mr. Frankel; AYE, Mrs. Jones; AYE, Mr. O'Neal; AYE and Chairman Kent; AYE. VII. Code Review ^ A. Additional Architectural Styles (single family) �) The Town Manager reported there have been comments made that the new homes are looking too much alike and the Commission has directed that the Board consider whether or not additional architectural styles should be provided under the "preferred" section in the Core District. Mr. Frankel agreed and he has also heard comments about new homes looking too "cookie cutter". He commented that he would prefer to see more variety but they should be pure in style. Mr. Frankel suggested that Urban Design submit renderings of some of the styles that would be compatible with Gulf Stream. Regular Meeting Architectural Review & Planning Board Page 4 November 15, 2007 Town Manager Thrasher commented that it seems like the town wants more variety. However, the previous rendering that Mr. Wietsma presented was denied. Mrs. Jones agreed that more variety is needed but the type of style selected should have all the elements of that particular style. She offered to work with the town manager on different types of �) architectural style. Attorney Randolph suggested that Urban Design do a survey of the town as to what other architectural styles would be compatible with the existing homes and present renderings to the Board. B. Maximum Glass Permitted per elevation (single family) An application was recently considered for improvements to the home at 540 Palm Way. At first glance it appeared that there was an excessive amount of glass on the elevation facing the water. At the request of staff, a detailed analysis of the glass on this elevation was prepared and it was revealed that they were just under the 50% maximum permitted. The ARPB and Commission had concerns and asked that the provision be reviewed to determine if the maximum percentage allowed should be reduced. Mr. Frankel stated that he is not concerned with changing the maximum percentage allowed as there has only been one application addressing this issue during his tenure on the Board. He believes applications regarding this issue should be considered on an individual basis. Chairman Kent asked if there could be a limit placed on the color of glass. Attorney Randolph advised that there is a rating system used on wind shied glass color and this could be used on window glass as well. He suggested that perhaps Urban Design could recommend a rating system and revise the language on glass color to include "prohibited if it becomes a dominant feature". C. Upgraded Drainage Requirements The current Code requires that a property retain the first one inch of rainfall. OTown Manager Thrasher advised that he does not recommend changing the drainage regulations as he had been told it would be very difficult to hold more than one inch in some areas in town. D. Maximum Size Garage Doors (single family) The Commission requested that a review of the current Code provision relating to garages facing the street and dominating the front elevation be performed. Mr. Frankel asked the standard width of a garage door. He stated that cars are being made larger and it is difficult to enter and exit a standard garage. He suggested asking Urban Design to limit the Regular Meeting Page 5 Architectural Review & Planning Board November 15, 2007 percentage of doors on the front and that the fagade or size of doors be changed. Mr. Thrasher stated that the normal width of a garage door is 9 ft. He believes whether there are two or three doors with one stepped back, it is still a dominant feature. He suggested limiting the number of doors Ofacing the street because there is no way to effectively screen them. Chairman Kent was concerned that limiting the size would impact homes on smaller lots. Town Clerk Taylor reminded that prior to the design manual, garage doors were not allowed on the front but it was changed to accommodate smaller lots and must be screened from the street. Attorney Randolph suggested that this item be sent to Urban Design for recommendation and the Board agreed. E. Political Sign Regulations Currently there are no provisions in the Code to address political signs and they cannot be prohibited as it would be a violation of a Constitutional Right. Staff prepared the following language and recommended that it be made a part of the code 1. No sign shall exceed a maximum of four square feet in area. 2. No more than one sign shall be placed upon any property unless such property fronts upon more than one street, in which event two signs may be erected, one each frontage. 3. Signs shall be located only on properties where the property owner has given permission. 4. The placing of signs anywhere on public property or rights-of-way is prohibited. 5. Minimum setbacks from lot line of another -ten feet; from the front property or from a street -5 feet; maximum height -four feet including support for the sign. 6. Temporary political signs shall not be placed prior to 30 days of the election to which they relate and shall be removed within 48 hours after the day of the election to which they apply. Chairman Kent commented that he had no problem with the political sign language as proposed. OMrs. White asked if the lettering on the signs could be white. Attorney Randolph advised that content or color cannot be regulated as it would be a violation of a Constitutional Right. Mr. Frankel moved and Mrs. White seconded to recommend adoption of the regulation language for political signs. Roll Call: Mrs. White; AYE, Mr. Frankel; AYE, Mrs. Jones; AYE, Mr. O'Neal; AYE and Chairman Kent; AYE. F. Clarify Roof Projection Special Exception Language Staff has found the language in Section 70-72(b) regarding the Special Exception for roof projections to be somewhat confusing. After Regular Meeting Architectural Review & Planning Board Page 6 November 15, 2007 discussions with Urban Design it was believed that under item (2)d, it would be much clearer if the word "additional" be eliminated. Chairman Kent stated that he was in favor of eliminating the word "additional" as he also found the section confusing. Mr. Frankel moved and Mr. O'Neal seconded to recommend eliminating the word "additional" under Section 70-72(b) 2(d). Roll Call: Mrs. White; AYE, Mr. Frankel; AYE, Mrs. Jones; AYE, Mr. O'Neal; AYE and Chairman Kent; AYE. VIII. Items by Staff. Town Clerk Taylor asked for direction regarding the next code review meeting. She advised that Urban Design would be presenting the changes on the multi -family structures and that there would be a roofing contractor making a presentation on roofing material. She was concerned that there would not be enough time to address the boat dock/lift issue. Chairman Kent asked if Urban Design could do another study on this matter. Town Manager Thrasher advised that the Commission denied approving more funds to Urban Design for a boat dock/lift study. Attorney Randolph commented that there was a study done by Urban design and advised that the Board could hear the presentation on the boat dock/lift and the Commission could make a policy decision as to whether a change is needed. It was agreed that the boat dock/lift issue would be heard on the January, 2008 agenda. IX. Items by Board Members. There were no items from the Board Members X. Public. There were no comments from the public. XI. Adjournment. Chairman Kent adjourned the meeting at 10:40 A.M. Y nne E. Eckert, CMC Deputy Town Clerk