Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout06/28/2012MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING AND PUBLIC HEARING HELD BY THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW AND PLANNING BOARD OF THE TOWN OF GULF STREAM, FLORIDA ON THURSDAY, JUNE 28, 2012 AT 8:30 A.M., IN THE TOWN HALL, 100 SEA ROAD, GULF STREAM, FLORIDA. I. 8:30 A II Call to Order. M. Roll Call. Present and Participating Absent w/Notice Also Present and Participating Chairman Ganger called the meeting to order at Robert W. Ganger Scott Morgan Paul Lyons, Jr. Tom Smith Thomas M. Stanley Malcolm Murphy Amanda Jones William H. Thrasher Rita L. Taylor John Randolph Roy M. Simon, Architect Marty Minor of Urban Design Kilday Studios Chairman Vice -Chairman Board Member Board Member Alt. Member sitting as Board Member Board Member Alt. Member Town Manager Town Clerk Town Attorney Agent for Paul Lyons And Peter Lyons Town Consultant III. Minutes of the Regular Meeting and Public Hearing of 5-24-12. Mr. Smith moved and Vice -Chairman Morgan seconded to approve the Minutes of the Regular Meeting and Public Hearing of May 24, 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. July 26, 2012 @ 8:30 A.M. b. No meeting in August c. September 27, 2012 @ 8:30 A.M. d. October 25, 2012 @ 8:30 A.M. e. November to be determined f. December 27, 2012 @ 8:30 A.M. Chairman Ganger noted that there will not be an August meeting, and he said the ARPB will schedule their November meeting after the Commission schedules their November meeting. Clerk Taylor said no applications have been submitted and, therefore, there may not be a July meeting. Chairman Ganger noted that 2nd reading of the Ordinances changing the Code and Comp Plan is scheduled for the July 13th Commission Meeting and, if adopted, Code changes will be effective as of that date. VI. PUBLIC HEARING. A. Applications for Development Approval Architectural Review and Planning Board Regular Meeting and Public Hearing - June 28, 2012 Page 2 Chairman Ganger asked for declarations of ex -parte communication concerning the matters scheduled for public hearing. Chairman Ganger stated that he drove by the Binnie property at 1314 N. Ocean Blvd. Mr. Stanley stated that he is a neighbor of Peter Lyons of 3550 Gulf Stream Rd. Mr. Smith stated that he drove by the Binnie property and that he is familiar with the properties located at 2945 Polo Dr. and 3550 Gulf (� Stream Rd. ARPB Member Paul Lyons recused himself from the hearing of both development applications as he is the owner/applicant for the property at 2945 Polo Drive, and Peter Lyons, applicant for the property at 3550 Gulf Stream Rd., is his brother. Mr. Lyons left the room and stated he would return to listen to the hearing for 3550 Gulf Stream Rd. Clerk Taylor administered the Oath to Roy Simon of Roy M. Simon, Architect, and Marty Minor of Urban Design Kilday Studios. 1. An application submitted by Roy Simon as agent for Mr. & Mrs. Paul Lyons, Jr., owners of property located at 2945 Polo Drive, legally described as Lot 12, Gulf Stream Properties Subdivision, Gulf Stream, Florida. a. VARIANCE to permit the replacement of an existing semi -circular flat roof over the dining area with a roof of a complex geometrical configuration consisting of 5 sections. b. SPECIAL EXCEPTION to permit the extension of the existing north wall of a single family dwelling that encroaches 2.5 feet into the north side setback for a bedroom addition of 272 square feet. C. LEVEL 3 ARCHITECTURAL/SITE PLAN REVIEW to permit the addition of a bedroom and an enlargement of the dining area which includes a roof of complex geometrical configuration, a total of 323.9 square feet, to the existing Gulf Stream Bermuda style, 1 - story single family dwelling. Roy Simon introduced himself and stated that he represents Mr. and Mrs. Paul Lyons, Jr. He said the original house was built in 1977 according to the setbacks existing at that time and, therefore, the applicant is asking that it be accepted as non -conforming because of those setbacks. Mr. Simon said the dining alcove, which is beginning to deteriorate, is located in the existing flat -roof, semi -circular addition and the applicant would like to enlarge the dining area and add a guest bedroom. He said they tried to simplify by following the planes of the existing roof to avoid drainage problems and tearing up the house. However, he said they created what seems to be a complex configuration. Mr. Simon explained the roof drainage, he said there is a lot of foliage in the rear of the home which will be maintained, and he said the original windows do not have muttins and the applicant does not want them on the new windows. He said the Bermuda Style architecture typically has open windows to provide panoramic views. Vice -Chairman Morgan commented that the Code uses the word "complex" to provide discretion. He said it does not appear complex to him. Chairman Ganger asked Clerk Taylor if there were any comments concerning Architectural Review and Planning Board Regular Meeting and Public Hearing - June 28, 2012 Page 3 the design from the neighbors. Clerk Taylor said there were no comments from neighbors. There was no further comment from Staff. Vice -Chairman Morgan moved and Mr. Smith seconded to recommend approval of variance based on the finding that the replacement of an existing semi -circular flat roof over the dining area with a roof of a complex C geometrical configuration consisting of 5 sections meets the minimum intent of the Design Manual and applicable review standards, as defined by Code Section 66.154. There was no discussion. All voted AYE. Vice - Chairman Morgan moved and Mr. Stanley seconded to recommend approval of Special Exception of the extension of the existing north wall of a single family dwelling that encroaches 2.5 feet into the north side setback for a bedroom addition of 272 SF, as defined by Code Section 70- 74. There was no discussion. All voted AYE. Vice -Chairman Morgan moved and Mr. Smith seconded to recommend approval of Level III Architectural/Site Plan based on the finding that the proposed addition of a bedroom and an enlargement of the dining area which includes a roof of complex geometrical configuration, a total of 324 SF, to the existing Gulf Stream Bermuda style, 1 -story single family dwelling meets the minimum intent of the Design Manual and applicable review standards. There was no discussion. All voted AYE. 2. An application submitted by Roy M. Simon, Architect as agent for Mr. & Mrs. Peter A. Lyons owners of property located at 3550 Gulf Stream Road, Gulf Stream, Florida 33483, legally described as Lot 2, Block 2, Plat No. 1 Polo Fields, Gulf Stream, Florida, for the following: a. SPECIAL EXCEPTION to permit the extension of the existing north wall of a single family dwelling that encroaches 2.5 feet into the north side setback for a bathroom addition of 277 square feet. b. LEVEL 3 ARCHITECTURAL/SITE PLAN REVIEW to permit the addition of a bathroom and reconstruction of the front entry porch that includes a Dutch gable, a total addition of 488.7 square feet, to existing Colonial West Indies style 1 -story single family dwelling; the removal of existing pool and construction of a new pool; and the removal of the circular driveway to accommodate a front lawn enclosed with a 4' high fence. The driveway into the garage will be Chicago brick and a back -out space will be included. Roy Simon stated that he represents Mr. and Mrs. Peter A. Lyons. He said the home is a U-shaped, Colonial style with a swimming pool in the middle, a flat -roofed screened porch and semi -circular entrance. Mr. Simon said they propose to alter the exterior fagade, build a bedroom/bathroom addition on the rear of the home, remove the existing pool and concrete patio and install a new pool in the back yard, remove the circular driveway to provide a larger front yard, and enclose the flat -roofed screened porch to provide additional living area, which will have a gable roof and will follow the existing roof lines. He said the front fagade will change by removing the two windows and converting them Architectural Review and Planning Board Regular Meeting and Public Hearing - June 28, 2012 Page 4 to French doors, which will open onto a small, covered, unenclosed sitting patio. Mr. Simon said the aluminum awning windows in the rear of the home will be changed to impact resistant casement with muttins that provide a simple horizontal separation. He said everything meets current Code except for the side setbacks, and he said the applicant is requesting a special exception because the Code has changed since the Ohome was built and the setbacks are different today. Chairman Ganger asked if the roof over the enclosed porch area will match the rest of the roof and Mr. Simon confirmed that. Chairman Ganger asked Mr. Simon if the Dutch feature at the entrance of the home meets Code and Mr. Simon confirmed that. Vice -Chairman Morgan commented that the changes maintain the classic proportion of the structure. Chairman Ganger asked about additional landscaping in the front. Mr. Simon said they submitted a landscape plan with their application, along with a drainage plan. He said there will be a tall hedge across the front with a chain link fence behind it as part of the hedging, which continues around the property. Mr. Thrasher recommended a condition of approval to the Level III Architectural/Site Plan that the applicant shall complete a Gulf Stream Driveway Permit Application and a Driveway Maintenance and Removal Agreement. Chairman Ganger asked about the proposed underground propane gas and Mr. Simon explained that they are changing their cooking range from electric to gas, they have a fire place where they would like to use a gas log, they will use a tankless water heater for the addition, and they would like to establish a barbeque area. He said the underground tank will probably be located on the side yard. Mr. Thrasher reminded Mr. Simon of the minor accessory setback of 12 feet on the side, and he said the underground tank is fine, but any equipment such as a generator or barbeque grill that is 8 inches above ground must conform to the side setbacks. Vice -Chairman Morgan moved and Mr. Stanley seconded to recommend approval of a Special Exception to permit the extension of the existing north wall of a single family dwelling that encroaches 2.5 feet into the north side setback for a bathroom addition of 277 SF, pursuant to Code Section 70-74. There was no discussion. All voted AYE. Vice Chairman Morgan moved and Mr. Smith seconded to recommend approval of Level III Architectural/Site Plan based on the finding that the proposed addition Jof a bathroom and reconstruction of the front entry porch that includes a Dutch gable, a total addition of 489 SF, to existing Colonial West Indies style 1 -story single family dwelling; the removal of existing pool and construction of a new pool; the removal of the circular driveway to accommodate a front lawn enclosed with a 4' high fence; modifications to the driveway into the garage that includes Chicago brick and a back -out space meet the minimum intent of the Design Manual and applicable review standards, with the following condition: 1. The applicant shall complete a Gulf Stream Driveway Permit and a Driveway Maintenance and Removal Agreement. There was no discussion. All voted AYE. Architectural Review and Planning Board Regular Meeting and Public Hearing - June 28, 2012 Page 5 VII. Items Related to Previous Approvals. A. Landscaping revision related to approved renovations and improvements at 1314 N. Ocean Blvd. submitted by Krent Wieland Design, Inc. There was no representation from Krent Wieland Design, Inc. to present the application for the landscape revisions. Mr. Thrasher stated that O there were no odd species proposed in the revision and the plan looked okay to Staff. He said he is authorized to approve minor changes only and the changes to this landscape plan are major, which is why this has been brought back to the ARPB for approval. Chairman Ganger commented on the roof of this home saying that he drove by during daylight hours and it is a beautiful roof and very appropriate for the design of the home. Vice -Chairman Morgan moved and Mr. Smith seconded to approve the revisions to the landscape plan. There was no discussion. All voted AYE. VIII. Items by Staff. A. Additional Review of Proposed Amendment to Section 70-238, Roofs, as Written in Proposed Ord. 12\4. Mr. Thrasher stated that Marty Minor was present to discuss additional review of proposed Section 70-238, Roofs, as provided in Ordinance 12/4. Chairman Ganger commended Mr. Randolph for his recommendations, and he said the Commission was open-minded, they reacted to specific proposals and made suggestions, and there was a general feeling that the changes were constructive. Mr. Randolph said the specific issue before the ARPB with regard to roofs is whether or not it is necessary to better define the shade of gray and whether or not the language should be more specific than "appropriate for the neighborhood." He said so many shades of gray are brought before the Board and the ARPB tried to make it broad enough to allow for discretion to make a decision as to whether a certain shade of gray is appropriate for the neighborhood. Mr. Lyons said the ARPB suggested deleting "slate -like" and the Commission felt that would be too rigid. Clerk Taylor clarified that the Commission stuck with real gray slate for Bermuda style architecture only. She said if a structure is not Bermuda style, the roof tile can be considered under another Code section where nothing specific is required. Mr. Minor said the Commission considered eliminating specific shades of gray and they wanted input from the ARPB concerning "appropriate for the neighborhood." Chairman Ganger noted that the issue of "appropriate for the neighborhood" was brought up by Commissioner Anderson who lives in Place Au Soleil, which is a very eclectic neighborhood. Vice -Chairman Morgan said that the eclectic nature of Place Au Soleil argues in favor of even more discretion, and he said he believes the phrase should be maintained. Mr. Thrasher noted the proposed language in Section 70-238 (a) and he said it is not necessary to define shades of gray because the flexibility for the Board to evaluate a home is provided in the underlying section. Clerk Taylor said when you look at different Architectural Review and Planning Board Regular Meeting and Public Hearing - June 28, 2012 Page 6 architectural styles, another shade of gray may be more appropriate. She said, for example, the new home at 1314 N. Ocean may not be as attractive with a very dark shade of gray. However, she said the home at 554 Palm Way, which is a different architectural style, called for the dark contrast. O Chairman Ganger pointed out that roof tile looks different in daylight and suggested reviewing a proposed roof tile outside to get a better idea of the actual color. Mr. Minor said the exterior color of the home should be considered. Mr. Stanley said it is helpful to consider the rhythm of the street. Mr. Thrasher said, on a Level I, he will only approve flat white thru and thru smooth uncoated tile or gray slate. He said anything other than that would go through the Level III process. Mr. Randolph said the ARPB must send their recommendation back to the Commission concerning the issue of gray roof tile and the phase "appropriate for the neighborhood." He said a unanimous consensus of the Board that the recommended language is appropriate will be sufficient. Clerk Taylor stated that Commissioner Anderson has strong feelings about the phrase "appropriate for the neighborhood" due to certain projects that were approved in Place Au Soleil. She said the detached 2 -story garage that was approved in Place Au Soleil is a type of structure which is far removed from that area. Clerk Taylor said when considering amendments to the Subdivision Code and how widespread a neighborhood should be, the ARPB scaled it back. Mr. Randolph said the Code language provides discretion and he does not believe it should be changed. Chairman Ganger noted that the primary issue with the 2 -story garage was privacy and what was appropriate for the neighborhood was secondary. He said the home was the first built in Place Au Soleil, it is a very eclectic home, and neighborhood design was not paramount. Vice -Chairman Morgan said the ARPB did not recommend approval of that application, the Commission approved it. It was the unanimous consensus of the Architectural Review and Planning Board that the recommended language in Section 70-238, Roofs, (a) concerning gray roof tile, and the phrase, "appropriate for the neighborhood" is appropriate and there are no further recommended changes. i JChairman Ganger noted that Mr. Randolph recommended Criteria K in Section 62-10, Criteria for Subdivision Review, which provides for no clear cutting of parcels, and he said the Commission approved the recommended language. It was the unanimous consensus of the Architectural Review and Planning Board that the language in Criteria K is appropriate. Ix. Items by Board Members. Chairman Ganger mentioned that he attended a Town of Manalapan Commission Meeting where they discussed the issue of term limits. He said their Planning Board and Architectural Board are separate and their Architectural Review and Planning Board Regular Meeting and Public Hearing - June 28, 2012 Page 7 members have term limits, and he said the Town of Manalapan will have a referendum for term limits for Commissioners. Chairman Ganger said when he addressed their Commission he suggested merging the two Boards. He extended an invitation to Commissioner Gottlieb to attend a Gulf Stream ARPB meeting. OMr. Stanley said there is a possibility of an application being filed in time to be included on the July 26th ARPB Meeting Agenda. Mr. Randolph asked Mr. Stanley if he will have to recuse himself from the proceedings on July 26th and Mr. Stanley confirmed that. Mr. Smith noted that the hammerhead at 1220 N. Ocean Blvd. is under construction. Chairman Ganger said he heard there was a contingent as to whether the developer has fulfilled his obligation to the parties of the Neighborhood Agreement with respect to drainage. Mr. Thrasher said the Town has been advised that the drainage plan has been installed. He said the developer was required by South Florida Water Management District to acquire their permit. Mr. Thrasher said Neighborhood Agreement requires maintenance on the pipe because it can frequently clog which will cause flooding on either end of the pipe. He said the Town's approval process required that they apply for, and receive, appropriate regulatory permits. X. Public. There were no public comments. XI. Adjournment. Mr. Smith moved and Vice -Chairman Morgan seconded to adjourn the meeting. The meeting was adjourned at 9:40 A.M. r Gail C. Abbale Administrative Assistant J FORM 8B MEMORANDUM OF VOTING CONFLICT FOR COUNTY. MUNICIPAL. AND OTHER LOCAL PUBLIC OFFICERS I ASI NAM IIIRS I NAM M91DI.I NAMIA I N.AIFIII- CI IN -z COUN IN I HI'HOARD. COUNCII, COMMISSION. AUI HORIIY OR COMM III EWN �'llN I SPRVF IS A UNITOF. CIIY O COUNTY 1 OTIIERI.00ALAGENCY MV POSITION IS: APPOINTIVE 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 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 ELECTED OFFICERS: A person holding elective county, municipal, or other local public office MUST ABSTAIN from voting on a measure which inures to his special private gain. Each local officer also is prohibited from knowingly voting on a measure which inures to the special gain of a principal (other than a government agency) by whom he is retained. In either case, you should disclose the conflict: PRIOR TO THE VOTE BEING TAKEN by publicly stating to the assembly the nature of your 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 minutes of the meeting, who should incorporate the form in the minutes. APPOINTED OFFICERS: A person holding appointive county, municipal, or other local public office MUST ABSTAIN from voting on a measure which inures to his special private gain. Each local officer also is prohibited from knowingly voting on a measure which inures to the )ecial gain of a principal (other than a government agency) by whom he is retained. A person holding an appointive local office otherwise may participate in a matter in which he has a conflict of interest, but must disclose the nature of the conflict before making any attempt to influence the decision by oral or written communication, whether made by the officer or at his direction. IF YOU INTEND TO MAKE ANY ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION PRIOR TO THE MEETING AT WHICH THE VOTE WILL BE TAKEN: • You should 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. • A copy of the form should be provided immediately to the other members of the agency. • The form should be read publicly at the meeting prior to consideration of the matter in which you have a conflict of interest. CE FORM 88 -1-91 PAGE 1 IF YOU MAKE NO ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION EXCEPT BY DISCUSSION AT THE MEETING: • You should disclose orally the nature of your conflict in the measure before participating. • You should complete the form and file it within 15 days after the vole occurs with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the meeting, who should incorporate the form in the minutes. DISCLOSURE OF LOCAL OFFICER'S INTEREST hereby disclose that on (a) A measure came or will come before my agency which (check one) mored to me special priNate gain: or _ inured to the special gain of (b) The measure before my agency and the nature of my interestinthe measure is as follows: Date Filed Signature by whom I am retained. NOTICE: UNDER PROVISIONS OF FLORIDA STATUTES §112.317 (1985), 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 $5,000. CE FORM Na - IAI PAGE 2