HomeMy Public PortalAbout05/24/201201
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, MAY 24, 2012 AT 8:30 A.M., IN THE TOWN HALL, 100
SEA ROAD, GULF STREAM, FLORIDA.
I. Call to Order.
8:25 A.M.
II. Roll Call.
Present and
Participating
Absent w/Notice
Also Present and
Participating
Chairman Ganger called the meeting to order at
Robert W. Ganger
Paul Lyons, Jr.
Malcolm Murphy
Thomas M. Stanley
Scott Morgan
Tom Smith
Amanda Jones
William H. Thrasher
Rita L. Taylor
John Randolph
James Landquist
John Woolley
Marty Minor of Urban
Design Kilday Studios
Chairman
Board Member
Board Member
Alt. Member sitting as
Board Member
Vice -Chairman
Board Member
Alt. Member
Town Manager
Town Clerk
Town Attorney
Applicant /
800 Tangerine Way
Applicant /
935 Orchid Lane
Town Consultant
III. Minutes of the Regular Meeting and Public Hearing of 4-26-12.
Mr. Murphy moved and Mr. Lyons seconded to approve the Minutes of April
26, 2012. There was no discussion. All voted AYE.
IV. Additions, withdrawals, deferrals, arrangement of agenda items.
There were no changes.
V. Announcements.
A. Meeting Dates
1. Regular Meeting & Public Hearing
a. June 26, 2012 @ 8:30 A.M.
b. July 26, 2012 @ 8:30 A.M.
c. No meeting in August
d. September 27, 2012 @ 8:30 A.M.
e. October 25, 2012 @ 8:30 A.M.
f. November to be determined
g. December 27, 2012 @ 8:30 A.M.
Chairman Ganger asked if there will be a quorum for the next two
meetings. Clerk Taylor said it looks like there will be a quorum.
There were no conflicts with the meeting schedule.
VI. PUBLIC HEARING.
Chairman Ganger asked for declarations of ex -parte communication
concerning the applications for public hearing. Mr. Murphy stated that
Mr. and Mrs. Landquist are his neighbors and he advised them of the
application and approval process. Mr. Lyons stated that he drove by the
Architectural Review and Planning Board
Regular Meeting and Public Hearing - May 29, 2012 Page 2
property. Clerk Taylor administered the Oath to James Landquist, John
Woolley and Marty Minor.
A. Applications for Development Approval
1. An application submitted by James F. & Pamela
Landquist, owners of the property located at 800 Tangerine
Way, Gulf Stream, Florida, which is legally described as
O Lot 16, Place Au Soleil Subdivision.
a. SPECIAL EXCEPTION to permit a 155 sq. ft. garage
addition to the existing 396 sq. ft. garage that
encroaches 7.8 ft. into the required 20 ft. rear
setback.
Mr. James Landquist of 800 Tangerine Way introduced himself and
presented his application to the ARPB. He said he is proposing the
addition to his one -car garage to make it a two -car garage, which will
also increase the size of their driveway. Mr. Landquist saidhis house
was built in 1962 and they were informed that the addition is too close
to the 20' setbacks, and he said because of the angle at the back of the
lot they had to design the additional garage to be much shorter than the
existing. He said, in doing this, they are planning to redo the
landscaping, which landscape plan is included. Mr. Landquist said his
rear fence borders the new Hyundai Property where trees have been
removed. He said they would like to plant in that area to screen
Hyundai's 6' fencing. Mr. Landquist said one side of their home is
mostly sand where they would like a grassy area and more plantings, and
they will remove some of the pathways.
Mr. Murphy asked about the timeline for construction and Mr. Landquist
said it will be done over the summer. Mr. Stanley asked how the front
of the garage will look from the street. Mr. Landquist said it looks
like a standard two -car garage from the front elevation, it will have
the same roof line as the existing, they will remove the roof from the
existing garage and it will be uniform. Chairman Ganger asked if their
existing driveway is pavers. Mr. Landquist said they currently have
gray pavers and they will redo the entire driveway with coral -colored
pavers. Chairman Ganger asked Clerk Taylor if there were any comments
concerning this matter from neighboring residents. Clerk Taylor said
Ingrid Kennemer commented that she was in favor. There were no comments
from Staff.
Mr. Stanley moved and Mr. Lyons seconded to recommend approval for a
Special Exception to permit a 155 SF
garage addition to the existing 396
SF garage that encroaches 7.6 feet into the required 20 feet required
setback. There was no discussion. All voted AYE.
b. LEVEL 3 ARCHITECTURAL/SITE PLAN REVIEW to permit a 155
sq. ft. garage addition to the existing Gulf Stream
Bermuda Style single family dwelling.
Mr. Murphy moved and Mr. Stanley seconded to recommend approval of Level
III Architectural/Site Plan based on a finding that the proposed 155 SF
garage addition to the existing Gulf Stream Bermuda style single family
dwelling meets the minimum intent of the Design Manual and applicable
review standards. There was no discussion. All voted AYE.
Architectural Review and Planning Board
Regular Meeting and Public Hearing - May 24, 2012 Page 3
2. An application submitted by John & Elisabeth Woolley,
owners of property located at 935 Orchid Lane, legally
described as Lot 88, Place Au Soleil Subdivision, Gulf
Stream Florida.
a. LEVEL 2 ARCHITECTURAL/SITE PLAN REVIEW to permit the
replacement of existing broken, awning type windows in
all existing openings visible from the street with
triple horizontal sliders. The sliders will have
impact glass set in white frames.
Mr. Woolley introduced himself and presented his application to the
ARPB. He said he would like to replace their 40 -year old, poorly
functioning, awning type windows with horizontal, high impact sliders.
Mr. Woolley said they chose horizontal sliders to avoid having them open
onto the porch. They look almost identical to casement except that they
move from side to side. He said Plantation shutters are throughout the
house and sliders are easier than casement to open and maneuver. He
said they would like to do the window replacement in two phases due to
cost and his wife's asthma issue. Mr. Woolley said doing this in a 40 -
year old house can create a lot of dust and release materials from the
walls and, therefore, they plan to section off the house and do the work
in two phases. Mr. Woolley stated that all windows will duplicate the
existing with regard to size and number.
Mr. Lyons said he viewed the property and commented that the window Mr.
Woolley is proposing in the patio area will not look different from the
street. With regard to the other windows, he asked Mr. Woolley why he
would not use casement. Mr. Woolley said he thought the ARPB would
prefer one style throughout to be consistent. Mr. Murphy asked about
the discouraged element and Mr. Thrasher said roller -style sliders are
clearly discouraged.
Mr. Stanley noted that there are no muttins on the proposed windows and
Mr. Woolley said if muttins are preferred they would do that. Mr.
Thrasher said the total glass has been measured and muttins will not be
required by Code, but he said if the existing blinds remain, there will
be some busyness in appearance, which may not be relevant. He said, as
presented, they meet the Code with regard to opening size, but he added
that they could accomplish the look they are going for with another type
of window that does not go against the Code.
Mr. Stanley asked if any other ranch -style homes in Place Au Soleil have
had window replacement with a similar style. Mr. Thrasher indicated
that, to date, he has not received any permit applications to replace
dated windows. Chairman Ganger said there are certain safety standards
for bedroom windows. Mr. Woolley said they are replacing bedroom
windows, but he said sliders are not a safety issue and, in fact, are
easier to climb through.
Mr. Lyons asked Mr. Thrasher for his view of having a slider in the
porch area and casement throughout the remainder of the house. Mr.
Thrasher said it should be consistent. Chairman Ganger said he does not
like to approve discouraged elements, but he said he would be willing to
Architectural Review and Planning Board
Regular Meeting and Public Hearing - May 24, 2012 Page 4
approve this application because they will look like the existing
windows from the street and they will be consistent throughout. Mr.
Randolph said this application stands on its own merit and does not
necessarily set a precedent in the event another property owner requests
the same. Mr. Stanley asked Mr. Woolley if he had a strong objection to
replacing all windows at once for reasons other than cost. Mr. Woolley
said it is mainly because of his wife's asthma. He said, if the
approval depends on replacing all windows at the same time, they may
have to spend the summer in Maine. Mr. Thrasher commented that
regardless of screening, the fine dust will travel throughout, and he
said he would prefer that all replacement is done at the same time.
Chairman Ganger asked Clerk Taylor if there have been any comments from
neighbors. Clerk Taylor said there have been no comments. There were
no further comments from Staff. Mr. Stanley moved and Mr. Murphy
seconded to approve Level II Architectural/Site Plan for the replacement
of all windows on all elevations to a roller -style window as proposed on
the spec sheet, with the following condition: The replacement of all
windows on all elevations to roller -style will be done in completion,
not in phases. There was no discussion. All voted AYE.
Mr. Lyons suggested that Mr. Woolley have his contractor install a heavy
duty filter and change it frequently during the window replacement,
which will help keep the air clean.
Chairman Ganger updated the ARPB Members on the Special Commission
Meeting saying that there was a lively discussion with regard to the
ARPB recommendations that have been set forth to date. He said the
recommendations will go before the Commission in ordinance form for
first reading at their June 8th meeting. Chairman Ganger said there were
some changes and some additions, such as no clear cutting of lots when
coming in with a subdivision. He said, in general, the recommendations
were endorsed. Chairman Ganger thanked Mr. Lyons for joining him at the
Commission Meeting and he said there were a few residents that also
attended. He thanked the Commission and commented that the Commission
took the ARPB recommendations very seriously and asked great questions.
Chairman Ganger asked if any recommendations made today would go into
the ordinance for first reading. Clerk Taylor and Mr. Randolph
confirmed that.
B. Ordinances.
UMr. Minor briefly summarized the Ordinances for a recommendation of
approval to the Commission. He said the first ordinance concerns
rezoning of the annexed area. The Town Commission has adopted the land
use portion of that area as multi -family, which change has been reviewed
by the State Land Planning Agency (formerly DCA) and other appropriate
State agencies, all of whom have signed off on it. Concurrently, it
will be rezoned so that the rezoning has the Town's designation of
Residential Medium (RM) to match the land use applied to that area. The
first ordinance concerns the rezoning of this property from the County
designation of RM to the Town designation of RM. Mr. Minor said the
Architectural Review and Planning Board
Regular Meeting and Public Hearing - May 24, 2012 Page 5
County allowed 12 units per acre and the Town will allow 5.7 units per
acre.
Mr. Minor said the second ordinance includes a provision regarding
reconstruction of loss in the event of an emergency such as a hurricane
or fire, which states they can reconstruct as is, but no larger. It
O amends the multi -family section of the Zoning Code, listing the projects
in RM West and RM East, with an additional provision addressing rehab
and additions to existing structures in that area, which states that it
must be consistent with Town Code. There is also a reference to the
Special Exception process.
Chairman Ganger asked about the one commercial property in that area
that operates as a time share. He asked if it could be sold for the
same use. Mr. Minor said time share is not allowed by Code and,
therefore, it is a non -conforming use. Mr. Randolph said these are
purely zoning regulations that run with the land and they have the right
to sell it for the same use; however, he said if it is abandoned, the
property would have to conform.
1. No. 12/2; AN ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN COMMISSION OF THE TOWN
OF GULF STREAM, PALM BEACH, COUNTY, FLORIDA AMENDING THE
TOWN'S ZONING MAP TO REZONE 12 PARCELS OF REAL PROPERTY
COMPRISING APPROXIMATELY 16.6 ACRES, MORE OR LESS, IN
SIZE; SUCH REAL PROPERTY IS LOCATED GENERALLY EAST AND
WEST OF STATE ROAD AlA, SOUTH OF LITTLE CLUB ROAD AND
NORTH OF SEA ROAD; FROM THE PALM BEACH COUNMTY DESIGNATION
OF RM -MULTIPLE -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (MEDIUM DENSITY) TO THE
TOWN OF GULF STREAM ZONING DESIGNATION OF "RM" (MULTIPLE
FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT); PROVIDING THAT THE TOWN
ZONING DISTRICT MAP BE REVISED ACCORDINGLY; PROVIDING FOR
SEVERABILITY; REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES OR PARTS OF
ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT HEREOF; PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION
AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Mr. Stanley read the title of Ordinance No. 12/2. Mr. Stanley moved and
Mr. Murphy seconded to recommend approval of Ordinance 12/2 to the Town
Commission of the Town of Gulf Stream Town, FL for 1"' reading at their
June 8, 2012 Meeting. There was no discussion. All voted AYE.
2. NO. 12/3; AN ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN COMMISSION OF THE TOWN
OF GULF STREAM, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE
TOWN'S CODE OF ORDINANCES, AT SECTION 71-1, TO INCLUDE
NEWLY -ANNEXED PROPERTIES UNDER THE RM -EAST AND RM -WEST
ZONING DESIGNATIONS; AMENDING, AT SECTION 66-131, THE NON-
CONFORMING USE REGULATIONS TO ADDRESS STRUCTURES WITH A
NON -CONFORMING DENSITY; ADDING SECTION 71-8, ADDITIONS AND
REHABILITATIONS, TO INCLUDE REFERENCE TO STANDARDS FOR
ADDITIONS AND REHABILITATION OF MULTI -FAMILY BUILDINGS;
PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF
ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION;
PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Mr. Murphy read the title of Ordinance No. 12/3. Mr. Murphy moved and
Mr. Stanley seconded to recommend approval of Ordinance 12/3 to the Town
Architectural Review and Planning Board
Regular Meeting and Public Hearing - May 24, 2012 Page 6
Commission of the Town of Gulf Stream Town, FL for lst reading at their
June 8, 2012 Meeting. There was no discussion. All voted AYE.
Mr. Lyons asked Mr. Minor why RM West and RM East are divided. Mr.
Minor said it was an established breakdown because East of AlA has
slightly different regulations than West of AlA which reflect current
O conditions. Chairman Ganger asked whether there have been any proposals
from the Seahorse for construction on the West side of AlA. Mr. Minor
said single family structures are encouraged in RM West, the minimum lot
size is 20,000 SF and there is room for two single family structures.
Mr. Thrasher said Staff has reviewed some conceptual designs, all of
which are multi -family. No applications have been submitted for that
property.
VII. Items by Staff.
A. Proposed Zoning Code Changes
1. Section 70-71, Floor Area Ratio (continued from 4-26-12)
Mr. Minor said Floor Area Ratio was discussed at the last meeting and
the Commission looked at two recommendations. One was the additional
FAR incentive and moving the second story back 10 feet and the other was
making the maximum second floor area .7 of the first floor area for all
districts. At the end of the discussion, the ARPB requested additional
mandatory measures to ensure further variations rather than the cookie
cutter fagade. He said a new paragraph is proposed under 70-73. Two -
Story Structures, where an applicant must incorporate one of four
features within the front fagade of any new two-story structure: (1) A
second -story setback of 5 feet; (2) a front porch with a minimum of an
8' depth; (3) a balcony of a minimum of 24 SF; or (4) an arcade, each of
which would provide a level of visual interest. In addition, a waiver
is included which provides that the Town Commission may waive this
requirement if the applicant can demonstrate that these features are
inconsistent with the homes architectural style and that the visual
variation is provided through other measures.
Mr. Lyons said the use of the word "front" does not work with corner
lots with one very long wall that faces the streets. Mr. Minor
suggested "incorporated within the front fagade or facades facing
roadways. Mr. Lyons said he prefers that wording. Chairman Ganger
asked how he would respond to these suggestions if he was an architect.
Mr. Minor said he has had this conversation with several architects and
they like the waiver and they like everything spelled out to better
understand their parameters and to provide options to the applicant.
Mr. Stanley suggested using ". . . facades facing public or private
roadways." Mr. Minor clarified that he would be making a change to the
second sentence of Section 70-73(b) to read, "One or more of the
following features shall be incorporated within facades facing public or
private roadways on any two-story single family home in all zoning
districts." Mr. Murphy moved and Mr. Lyons seconded to recommend
approval of the proposed language, as amended, to the Town Commission.
There was no discussion. All voted AYE.
Architectural Review and Planning Board
Regular Meeting and Public Hearing - May 24, 2012 Page 7
Mr. Lyons noted that the ARPB approved a slate roof on Palm Way and he
said at a previous meeting it was suggested to include the Cape Dutch
architectural style in the Code. Chairman Ganger said that gray tile is
now an approved color. Mr. Randolph clarified saying the Commission
decided to leave the strict language of the Code as it relates to white
thru and thru, non -coated tiles and gray slate tiles, eliminating slate -
O like, with a provision to allow the discretion for a modification to
that if good cause is shown. Further, he said any modification to that
would be subject to the ARPB approval process. Mr. Randolph said this
only relates to the predominant architectural style of Gulf Stream
Bermuda. Clerk Taylor said Cape Dutch does not fall into the
predominant styles, but it can fall into the overall section, which
everyone must comply with.
Mr. Minor said the Board would like to clean up the section of the Code
that addresses metal roofs. He said metal roofs are listed under
"prohibited" with a note which states, "Certain metal roofs determined
by the Town to be appropriate to the structure and to the neighborhood
may be approved only in instances of re -roofing of existing structures
based upon an engineer's certification that the existing structure will
not support a tile roof." Mr. Randolph said a recent applicant did
provide an engineer's certification stating that his structure cannot
support a tile roof and when the Commission wanted the Town's engineer
to test that certification, the applicant refused to allow that. He
said the recommended language, which reads, "This certification shall be
reviewed and confirmed by the Town and its encineer vrior to avvroval of
the roof material" will provide clarification of the note in this
section. Mr. Lyons moved and Mr. Stanley seconded to recommend approval
of inserting this language into the note to clarify this section of the
Code. There was no discussion. All voted AYE.
With regard to slope of driveways, Mr. Thrasher said Mr. Minor had
communication with an engineer who indicated that an existing slope of
driveway of a newly -constructed single family home in Gulf Stream has a
1 in 10 slope. Mr. Thrasher said he walked this slope and it is
reasonable, compared to the driveway slope on the Coon property, which
is 1 in 5. He asked Mr. Minor if he was at a point where simple
language could be comprised to include, "no slope would exceed the 1 in
10 degree." Mr. Minor said he is waiting to hear from another engineer
before providing this language. Mr. Randolph said the Board can approve
the concept that they want language incorporated into the ordinance
which allows for a reasonable slope approaching garages or driveways,
and he said if the Board is comfortable considering this without
figuring out the slope it can go directly to the Commission from here.
Mr. Stanley moved and Mr. Lyons seconded to approve the recommendation
of language addressing the slope of driveways to be further reviewed by
Staff and submitted to the Town Commission. There was no discussion.
All voted AYE.
With regard to Section 70-238, Roofs, Mr. Thrasher asked Mr. Minor if
Cape Dutch could be included in the phrase, " . . . predominantly
Architectural Review and Planning Board
Regular Meeting and Public Hearing - May 24, 2012 Page 8
Georgian or British Colonial with Bermuda influences." Mr. Minor said
he is not as familiar with Cape Dutch, but he said he would talk to Mark
Marsh to provide an answer.
Mr. Randolph said as a result of the Commission Meeting we now have a no
clear cutting provision in the subdivision Code. He said the Commission
O directed Staff for a landscaping provision to address single family lots
which would regulate the manner in which people treat their landscaping.
They asked for language from many standpoints such as leaving existing
landscaping along the lot perimeter during construction, or requiring
that new landscaping must stay and an approval process would be required
if taken out. Mr. Randolph said there are no language details, but he
said this can be handled in the same fashion as slope of driveways. Mr.
Thrasher said he would also like to add a description of a Level II
Architectural/Site Plan that includes landscaping. He said currently
there are not provisions in the Code that address changing out, moving,
modifying or adding landscaping.
D
Mr. Randolph said Jupiter Island has a provision that screening is
required to protect the neighborhood from viewing construction. Mr.
Stanley said Delray handles this matter administratively. He said
construction screening cannot be left up indefinitely, the contractor
must put in landscaping such as a hedge, and certain trees could be
tagged that must remain. Mr. Lyons said Vice -Mayor Orthwein suggested
phases where a hedge could be removed to allow entry of equipment, but
the hedge must be replaced at the close of construction. Chairman
Ganger suggested informing the Commission that the ARPB is addressing
the removal of historic trees and hedging during construction, but that
additional information and further guidance is required to put this
language in ordinance form.
Chairman Ganger mentioned painted bulkheads. Mr. Thrasher said this
should require a Level I review, which currently addresses structures
only, not seawalls. He said this should be addressed.
VIII. Items by Board Members.
IX. Public. There were no items by the Public.
X.
Administrative Assistant
nley moved and Mr. Murphy seconded to
eting was adjourned at 11:00 A.M.