HomeMy Public PortalAbout03 08 03 MinutesMINUTES OF THE CODE VIOLATION HEARING HELD BY THE SPECIAL
C) MASTER OF THE TOWN OF GULF STEAM ON MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 8, 2003
AT 10:00 A.M., IN THE COMMISSION CHAMBERS OF THE TOWN HALL, 100
SEA ROAD, GULF STREAM, FLORIDA.
Special Master Paulette Torcivia announced that the case being heard is Case No. CE -4-
03, addressing a code violation at 1511 N. Ocean Blvd., N. 82' lot 1 blk D & blk E Palm
Beach Shore Acres & s. 68' of Govt. lot 1 Sec. 10 Twnshp. 46 South Range 43 East Palm
Beach County Florida East of Ocean Blvd., Gulf Stream, Florida, that is owned by John
W. and Barbara S. Wynne. She announced for the record that the Respondents were not
present and then administered the Oath to Town Manager William Thrasher and Town
Clerk Rita Taylor. Attorney Torcivia asked the Petitioner, Town of Gulf Stream, to
present the facts of this case.
Attorney John Randolph, Attorney for the Town of Gulf Stream, presented a copy of the
Statement of Violation and Notice of Hearing along with a return receipt signed August
14, 2003 by someone, not recognized by the staff, other than Mr. or Mrs. Wynne. The
Special Master ruled that proper notice had been given and marked the documents as
Exhibit #1 for the Town of Gulf Stream. The violation described in Exhibit #1 is that
etched glass architectural features that had not been approved by the Architectural
Review and Planning Board were subsequently attached to the entry columns that had
been approved for construction in the North Ocean Blvd. Overlay District as provided in
Section 66-141(2)f after the columns had been inspected and approved.
The Town Clerk presented, at the request of the Special Master, the Property Appraiser's
print out for the property showing Mr. & Mrs. Wynne as the owners and it was marked as
Exhibit #2 for the Town of Gulf Stream.
Town Manager Thrasher testified that any structure erected or installed within the North
Ocean Blvd. Overlay District requires a Level 2 Architectural/Site Plan Review by the
Architectural Review and Planning Board, and a part of the criteria for approval is that
the use of exterior architectural elements, exterior materials and colors of proposed
structures and improvements shall be consistent with other on-site structures and the
surrounding neighborhood. Attorney Randolph ask that a copy of Section 66-144(b)(10)
of the Gulf Stream Code of Ordinances, which lists the criteria, be entered and it was
marked as Exhibit 43 for the'Town of Gulf Stream.
Attorney Randolph referred to photographs of the entrance gate at 1511 N. Ocean Blvd.,
handing a set to the Special Master and a set to Mr. Thrasher. Mr. Thrasher verified that
he had taken the pictures on September 4, 2003 and explained that they show two etched
glass architectural features attached to the entrance columns. Mr. Thrasher further
confirmed that these features were not included on the design that had originally been
approved for the gates and were not submitted for approval prior to them being installed.
The Special Master marked the photographs as Exhibit #4 for the Town.
Special Master Hearing -9-8-03
page 2
The Town Attorney handed Mr. Thrasher a copy of a portion of the minutes of the Town
CCommission Meeting of January 14, 2000 and a copy of a plan showing a gate and
column design that was reviewed at the meeting. He asked Mr. Thrasher to verify that
these documents are copies of the originals to which Mr. Thrasher answered they were.
At this point the Attorney asked that these be entered as exhibits. Special Master
Torcivia marked the minutes and plan as Exhibit #5 for the Town. Mr. Thrasher
confirmed that the etched glass designs were not shown on these drawings that were
approved on January 14, 2000.
Attorney Randolph asked Mr. Thrasher if there was a subsequent meeting at which a
revised gate design and location was approved and asked him to identify a portion of the
minutes of a meeting of the Architectural Review and Planning Board held on September
27, 2001 and a revised drawing. Mr. Thrasher did identify the documents as being
accurate. The Attorney asked that these documents be entered as exhibits and the
Special Master marked them Exhibit #6 for the Town. Town Manager Thrasher testified
that the etched glass feature was not included on this drawing as there is no protrusion
shown on the drawing. In addition he testified that the General Contractor for the project
had stated that the etched glass features had been added at a later time.
Mr. Randolph asked if a Certificate of Occupancy had been issued that covered the house
and the gate to which Mr. Thrasher replied this had been issued January 7, 2002 and that
he had personally inspected the project and the etched glass features were not in place on
the columns at that time. He stated that later in January he noticed the etched glass
feature had been added and he phoned the contractor regarding the fact they had not been
approved and are in violation. The contractor advised that the Wynne's were out of town
on an extended vacation but they had thought that since this etched glass feature had been
on the property at the time all of the structures had been demolished, they would be
grandfathered and reinstalled on the new structure. Mr. Thrasher stated that he informed
the contractor that these were not grandfathered. He further stated that on April 25, 2002
he wrote a letter to the contractor advising the etched glass was not a part of the original
application for review and a request must be submitted, reviewed and approved by the
ARPB. Attorney Randolph asked that a copy of this letter be included as an Exhibit that
the Special Master marked as Exhibit #7.
The Town Attorney reminded that the Town has two sections in the Code, Sec. 66-327
and 66-446 relating to signs: He then handed those sections to Mr. Thrasher and asked
him if he had reviewed them when determining the etched glass features were in
violation. Mr. Thrasher stated he had taken the sections into consideration. Mr.
Randolph asked that the Hearing Officer take judicial notice of these two sections that
relate to signs. He read from Sec. 66-327(2), "Signs shall be prohibited within the North
Ocean Blvd. Overlay District, except the following: Address signs and signs designating
the name or the owner of an estate or the name of a condominium or club and signs
necessary to designate entrances and exits." With regard to Sec. 66-446(b), Mr.
Randolph quoted "The erection, display and maintenance of a sign on any property or
building within the town is prohibited except the following, which are permitted: Except
for the designation of resident name, property owner, location, or address, the erection,
Special Master Hearing -9-8-03
page 3
display, and maintenance of an illuminated sign on any property is strictly prohibited."
These sections were entered as Exhibit #8 for the Town.
Attorney Randolph asked Mr. Thrasher if the owners came back before the ARPB
regarding this matter and was advised that the owners attorney came before the ARPB,
but not with a formal application, asking for clarification as to whether or not this
architectural feature should have been approved. He further advised that Chairman
Wheeler stated the home and entrance gates and columns had been approved, but not
with the etched glass feature. The Chairman had pointed out that the ARPB has
discretion to make a judgment as to whether architectural elements are consistent with the
style, which in this case is Mediterranean, and etched glass is not consistent with a
Mediterranean style architecture. It was suggested that a wood or framed Spanish tile
feature would be two options. The Special Master questioned if it would only be
necessary to remove the etched glass feature from the columns to correct the violation
and was advised that this is true. She remarked that it is necessary to display address
numbers and understands this is acceptable if they are displayed in a style consistent with
the architectural style. Mr. Thrasher replied that this is true. The Special Master
accepted the minutes of the ARPB meeting of February 27, 2003 as Exhibit #9 for the
Town.
The Special Master asked if the owner would still be in violation if he were to move the
etched glass features to the front of the home, that being beyond the 50' distance from the
front property line. Mr. Thrasher answered that they would also be in violation for that
since the etched glass would not be in conformity with the style of the home even though
it would be outside of the North Ocean Blvd. Overlay District.
Attorney Randolph then asked that the formal Notice of Violation, dated June 3, 2003,
that is required, be entered as an exhibit for the Town. The Special Master marked the
Notice as Exhibit #10 for the Town.
Special Master Torcivia again asked Mr. Thrasher if he had inspected the entrance prior
to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy to which he replied he had and the etched
glass features were not present at that time, which was early January. In answer to a
question from the Special Master, he further stated that he first noticed the etched glass
features toward the end of the month of January.
Attorney Randolph advised that the Town also has a copy of the Notice of Violation with
the green card attached and the Special Master stated that will be Exhibit #11 for the
Town.
On being asked by the Special Master what is being recommended in this case, Attorney
Randolph advised the Town would like to have the violation corrected with a finding of
violation of the Code with a period of 15 days in which to comply by removing the
etched glass features. In the event they did not comply within the 15 days, the Town
requested that a fine of $150.00 per day be assessed retroactively from the date of non-
compliance plus administrative costs.
Special Master Hearing -9-8-03
page 4
The Special Master found the Respondents in violation in this case and ordered
compliance by September 23, 2003 or a fine of $150.00 per day shall be assessed with a
Fine Assessment Hearing to be held on September 26, 2003 at 10 A.M. The Special
Master also approved administrative costs, which will be set at the Hearing on Sept. 26`h.
The Hearing concluded at 10:45 A.M.
Rita L. Taylor, Town Jerk