Loading...
1984.12.12_PB_Minutes_RegularTOWN OF HIGHLAND BEACH, FLORIDA • PLANNING BOARD REGULAR MEETING DECEMBER 12, 1984 9.30 A.M. Vice chairman Doris Rome called the Regular Meeting of the Planning Board of the Town of Highland Beach, Florida, to order at 9:30 A.M. Present also were Messers. W. J. Wernecke, M. A. Waldman, J. E. Ward and R. F. Blosser. Chairman Irving S. Saunders was present and available for duty, if needed. Alternate member Amelie Leng was absent. Mr. Waldman made a MOTION, seconded by Mr. Ward, to accept and approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of November 14, 1984, as read by each member. Mr. R. F. Blosser abstained as he was absent at the November 14, 1984, meeting. NEW BUSINESS: MR. PHILIP COLMAN • Mr. Philip Colman introduced himself stating he is the developer and a resident of Villa Magna. Mr. Colman said he has a contract to pur- chase lots 87 & 89 East. The present owners have a permit to build 24 condominum units - i.e. 2 units per floor, 12 floors; a lobby floor and a parking floor for a total of 14 stories. Mr. Colman offered a brochure of the present owners proposed building for the members to review. Plans or drawings showing Mr. Colman's proposed modifications were not available but he outlined several improvements over the originally authorized plans. Mr. Colman proposes to build the enclosed garage area level with the street, relocate the pool area, install security alarm systems in each apartment, include a resident manager's apart- ment at the lobby level, improve the window treatment to provide full views, and include a proper laundry room with all the necessary facilities. After checking the original plans of Le Concord, Building Official Bruce Sutherland said the height of building was 123' 611. Mr. Waldman inquired if the proposed new building would be kept at that height. Mr. Colman said he is not proposing to change the general perimeters permitted at the time the owners obtained this permit; he is prepared to stay withih-the confines and limitations that prevailed at that time. F_ PLANNING BOARD • REGULAR MEETING MINUTES DECEMBER 12, 1984 Page 2 of 9 Vice chairman Doris Rome said the height of the building bothers the Planning Board Members. Mr. Colman said the building will not exceed the height of the configurations of the proposed building; he will build no more than the already authorized 14 floors. Mr. Blosser questioned if the seawall will remain as part of the build- ing. Mr. Colman said the seawall is part of the building; if possible, he would prefer the seawall not be part of the building. Mr. Blosser asked the Building Official from what was said today, would he consider this a modification of the existing plan or would it have to be considered an entirely new plan. The Building Official said he could not be sure until he sees the plan and just what changes were made. Town Attorney David Friedman, when asked for his views, said he would defer to Bruce --it is a technical question as to whether the changes are, in the Building official's opinion, a new plan. Mr. Wernecke said the present owners have the right to build the build- ing in the brochure; that he "would greatly prefer Mr. Colman's changes" and sees no objection. is Mr. Blosser questioned whether the Planning Board had the legal right to determine if these are modifications, or if it is legally a new plan. Mrs. Rome said the great change in the list of Mr. Colman's requests is bringing the building up. Where you are starting to change walls, and you are putting in floor to ceiling windows, etc., this becomes a change of the outside of the building —the height change, the balcony change, the wall change. I'm not sure what the legal interpretation of this is - whether this is in fact a new plan or whether there is a modification of an existing plan. Town Attorney David Friedman mentioned a provision in the code that concerns the Planning Board... section 8.6 the 'construction and use to be as provided in applications, plans, permits and certificates of occupancy'. Building permits or certificates of occupancy issued on the basis of plans and applications approved by the Building Official authorize only the use, arrangement, and construction set forth in such approved plans and applications, and no other use, arrangement or con- struction. Use, arrangement or construction at variance with that authorized shall be deemed violation of this ordinance.' This can not be construed too strictly, he went on. A developer should not be ham- 40 if he had some building plans that were approved; and, if for F, PLANNYNG BOARD REGULAR MEETING MINUTES • DECEMBER 12, 1984 Page 3 of 9 some reason, he had to make a minor modification. It is the discretion of the Building Official to determine what is a modification; or, what is a substantial change in the use, arrangement or construction of the building. Vice chairman Doris Rome said if the Planning Board had a tm-all draw- ing showing the changes, they would have a better understanding of it. They must listen to the Building Official who said that these changes were not minor but major modifications. The Town Attorney did not say legally Mr. Colman had his blessings according to the code. Town Attorney David Friedman said it is a question of interpretation. As it stands now, these changes are not authorized. Modifications to a plan, if approved by the Building Official, as long as they are not substantial, should pose no problem. Mr. Sutherland explained sub- stantial as a change in the basic shape of the structure, the columns, the beams. Cosmetic changes like windows would not be substantial. Town Attorney Friedman said the new code does not address guidance as to the modifications that can be approved or not approved. You have to look to the practice the Building Official used in the past re- • garding modifications to building plans --I think that is in Bruce's area of expertise. Mr. Blosser said the Town Commission is meeting on Tuesday, December 18, 1984, and "I would be perfectly willing to make a recommendation." He was asked to dictate one based on the concensus. A MOTION then was made by Mr. Blosser stating: "We are extremely impres- sed with the improvements outlined by Mr. Colman in the proposed modifi- cation of the pending project and would be inclined to approve them subject to details, if they are legally considered to be modifications of an existing approved plan, rather than requiring going to an entirely new project under new zoning. The number of units would not be in- creased other than to accoate a Resident Manager's suite. Height of the building would not be increased except it would be floated 10 feet higher to avoid possible water in the garage which is below dune level, and there are various other improvements recommended by Mr. Colman whose quality construction has been beyond question. "We ask Commission to hear him at its Workshop Meeting on December 18, 1984, because he is under extreme time compulsions and, absent knowl- edge of the legality of the specific plan, we are unable to make an • unqualified recommendation. As outlined, however, all five members PLANNING BOARD •REGULAR MEETING MINUTES DECEMBER 12, 1984 Page 4 of 9 • 0 are enthusiastically in favor of the changes, if they can possibly be accommodated, because they will represent major improvements over what otherwise will be apparently built under the present project." The Building Official thereupon stated, as part of the resolution: "Based on the information received today at this meeting, the building appears to be within the general perimeter of the present structure including setback, width, depth, height and general concept of the existing building. I would not require an additional permit." Town Attorney David Friedman then stated, as part of the resolution: "Talking to the Building Official, I understand it has been the prac- tice to allow modification to building plans providing an entire new plan does not need to be submitted, and based on his opinion, I look at the design of the building as indicated by Mr. Colman. There are no changes in the use, arrangement and construction of the building and, therefore, if the Building Official feels that he can approve the modifications, it is my opinion that a new building permit would not be required. My only reservation is that the Building Official has not had an opportunity to look at the modified plans. We can only give our opinion based on what has been presented to us by Mr. Colman." Mr. Blosser moved that the Planning Board adopt the letter as dictated above and that it should go to the Town Commission promptly, over the signature of the Vice chairman. Mr. Waldman seconded the move, which was carried unanimously. Mr. Colman said at the meeting following the next, he should be able to come before the Planning Board with plans supporting his statements. The meeting recessed at 11:00 A.M. At 11:05 A.M., the Planning Board reconvened. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: FREDERICK RESIDENCE -FINAL SITE PLAN REVIEW. MIKE WOOLSEY, ' REPRESENTATIVE PRESENT. Vice chairman Doris Rome said the Planning Board has a final site plan review of the Frederick Property and a declaration of restriction must be studied. Each member received a copy of the deed restriction. PLANNING BOARD • REGULAR MEETING MINUTES DECEMBER 120, 1984 Paste 5 of 9 Mr. Blosser, who was absent from the previous meeting, questioned the need of a deed restriction as there already is a Unity of Title on the property. Vice chairman Doris Rome said that, in view of the neighbors concern of the future of the property, the members had felt a deed restriction would be more binding than the Unity of Title. It had been suggested by Mr. Mike Woolsey, Mr. Frederick's representative, to further re- strict the property. Mr. Blosser distributed copies of 'Declaration of Unity of Title' to the Board Members. After reviewing his copy, Attorney David Friedman said the Unity of Title is not as restrictive as a deed restriction. The deed restriction specifies that the property will not be used for business, commercial or any other purpose and that it's a covenant running with the land. Vice chairman Doris Rome said 'Exhibit A' does not indicate if the lots are East or West. Mr. Mike Woolsey, Mr. Frederick's representa- tive, said they are willing to provide a sealed survey, or whatever • the Town Attorneys request. Attorney David Friedman said Town Attorney Tom Sliney wondered if the Planning Board thought it advisable to include some kind of provision stating no further buildings be erected on the property. The members agreed. Town Attorney David Friedman and Mr. Mike Woolsey drafted a new paragraph 3 which is to be added to the deed restriction. Mr. Blosser said when this goes to the Town Commission, it should be noted that the Planning Board is cognizant of the fact that there is an existing declaration of Unity of Title, particularly with reference to section 8, and it believes the deed restrictions which have been worked out at the Board's suggestion would be further beneficial in the interest of the future. Paragraph 3 of the deed restriction was amended to read as follows: "The undersigned agrees that other than structures authorized by the existing approved site plan, no additional guest houses or other living facilities shall be erected on the property except that this restriction shall not prohibit renovations to existing structures provided that the plans for such renovations are approved by the Town of Highland • Beach." I PLANNING BOARD • REGULAR MEETING MINUTES DECEMBER 12, 1984 Page 6 of 9 Town Attorney David Friedman said if the deed restriction is agreeable to all Board Members, it would be drafted, executed and held in escrow pending approval of site plan by the Town Commission. Mr. Mike Woolsey agreed to the modification (the new paragraph 3) and stated that they will also agree to the additional information tying down -'the legal description of the Frederick Property. Mr. Blosser made a MOTION, seconded by Mr. Wernecke, to accept final site plan of the Frederick Property and send on to the Town Commission. The secretary polled the Board Members which resulted as follows: Mr. Ward 'aye' Mr. Wernecke 'aye' Mr. Waldman 'aye' Mr. Blosser 'aye' Mrs. Rome 'aye' The MOTION carried unanimously. MILANI REPORT BY JOHN WARD vice chairman Doris Rome thanked Mr. John Ward for his report which required much research. After speaking with Mr. Dennis Eschelman and Commissioner Wilkin, Mr. Ward felt they are very keen on the County Park Project at the Milani site. However, the County does not have the funds to purchase the property. Mr. Ward reported that the beach is in terrible condition --much debris and garbage. Who is responsible for cleaning the beach? The Town feels the property owner should be responsible for the beach in front of their property. Absentee ownership, like Milani, is a problem. It was also reported by Mr. 'Ward that there is a lot of storm damage which is an eyesore. Does the Town have any responsibility to clean that up? Mr. Blosser said Tony Abbate checks the beach. If it is a violation of the code, it is reported and a citation issued. If first citation is ignored, a second citation is issued. Then, the Code Enforcement Board levies a penalty sufficient in its judgement. 0 0 PLANNING BOARD REGULAR MEETING MINUTES • DECEMBER 12, 1984 Page 7 of 9 HOFFMAN PROPERTY. TITLE SEARCH BY DAVID FRIEDMAN. Town Attorney David Friedman presented a copy of the site plan of the Hoffman RPUD showing the area owned by Hidden Harbor Associates. Hidden Harbor Associates is a joint venture composed of three corp- orations of which Paul Hoffman and his wife are officers and directors. 11 In 197e an RPUD, along with all the amenities, was approved for 24/25 acres of land to the Hoffmans. After receiving the RPUD, the Hoffmans sold off part of the acres and conveyed title to part of this property. Vice chairman Doris Rome said the Town Commission should be apprised of this fact and enact a new ordinance invalidating this RPUD because it no longer exists on the acreage that it was granted to. Town Attorney David Friedman read a portion of the old code into the minutes, "during the existance of the RPUD any agreements, contracts, deed restrictions and sureties required relating to land is by in the RPUD shall be submitted by the owner and approved by the Town Commission." The two easements in 1983, Attorney Friedman said, could possibly re- late to land use; an easement is a right to use. Vice chairman Doris Rome said the Planning Board should point this out to the Town Com- mission without taking a stand. A memorandum to the Town Commission from the Planning Board read as follows: In response to your request that the Planning and Zoning Board research the Hoffman RPUD, we are informing you of our findings. 1. Since the date the RP was approved by the Town of Highland Beach, do 19�1�, the property was owned by Paul Hoffman and his wife Camille. Since October 7, 1980, there have been transfers of that property, including but not limited to a transfer of the property in Phase I, to the joint venture known as Hidden Harbor Associates. That transfer was on or about February 27, 1981. There is also a transfer of the area and the site plan desig- nated as Phase II to Hidden Harbor Development Co. PLANNING BOARD REGULAR MEETING MINUTES DECEMBER 12, 1984 Page 8 of 9 That transfer was on May 25, 1983. Also, on May 25, 1983, there were two grants of easement that were executed. One was an easement from the Hoffmans to Hidden Harbor Development Co.; the other was an easement from Hidden Harbor Development Co. to the Hoffmans. The latter easements, as far as the Planning Board could determine, were not approved by the Town of Highland Beach, and the Planning Board would like to bring to the Town Commission's attention Section 8.9 (1) of the Town Code entitled 'Administration of existing residential planned unit developments' which states in sub -section 1 "during the existance of any RPUD, any agreements, contracts, deed restrictions and sureties required relating to land use of the RPUD, shall be submit- ted by the owner and approved by the Town Commission." 2. The Planning Board finds no evidence that the build out date has been extended beyond July, 1985. There was a discussion at a Commission Workshop Meeting held October 28, 1980, regarding extension of per- mission until 1990, followed by a letter written by the Mayor, dated October 30, 1980, stating "It is our conclusion that the project under RPUD-2 should be completed by August 8, 1990. I look forward to hearing from you in regard to the above." Search of the minutes of subsequent meetings and statutes by the Town Clerk, however, has failed to disclose any legislative action which would have that effect. 3. Ordinance No. 282, adopted July 1, 1975, specified that "in any event, building permits shall be applied for all buildings included within the RPUD approval and all such buildings shall be completed within ten years of the effective date of this ordinance." This gives rise to questions as to whether any ordinance will be in ef- fect on this property after July 1, 1985. 4. Further questions have been raised by the fact that the Hoffmans were contesting tax assessments on their pro- perty because they claimed a great portion of it was • under water; and, after a court hearing, the decision was in their favor and the taxes on the property were reduced accordingly. I PLAWING BOARD • REGULAR MEETING MINUTES DECEMBER 12, 1984 Page 9 of 9 • Therefore, because of the above facts, it is the conclusion of the Board that the previous zoning has, or is, expiring and that any permits in the future should be issued only under the existing zoning code. Mr. Waldman made a MOTION, seconded by Mr. Blosser, for acceptance of the foregoing statement and resolution. The recording secretary polled the Board Members which resulted as follows: Mr. Waldman 'aye' Mr. Wernecke 'aye' Mr. Ward 'aye' Mr. Blosser 'aye' Mrs. Rome 'aye' The MOTION carried unanimously. Vice chairman Doris Rome said election of officers will take place at the January meeting which is scheduled for Wednesday, January 9, 1985, at 9:30 A. M. The agenda for the January meeting closes on Thursday, December 27, 1984, at noon. A MOTION by Mr. Waldman, seconded by Mr. Wernecke, to adjourn the meeting carried unanimously. Vice chairman Doris Rome adjourned the meeting at 12;(--- P. V- APPROVED: _-V-74-1-k_ Doris R.'Rome, Vice chairman William J Wernecke Marvin A. Waldman r Rym(j�nid F."Blosser Ward Attes Date: amk 12 /2 7/84