Loading...
1986.12.17_TC_Minutes_Specialr TOWN OF HIGHLAND BEACH, FLORIDA Minutes of Meeting of Town Commission -- ,. ~.._ PUBLIC HEARING Wednesday, December 17, 1986 5.01 P M The Public Hearing of the Town Commission was called to order by Mayor Edward J. Sullivan in Town Commission Chambers in Town Hall. Others in attendance were Vice Mayor Mary Louise G. Blosser, Commissioners John J. Basso and William A. Grier. Town Commissioner Betty Jean Stewart was absent. Others in attendance were Town Attorneys Thomas E. Sliney and David Friedman; Town Manager Hugh D. Williams; Town Clerk Mary Ann Mariano; and members of the general public. Mayor Sullivan .made a statement that no written comments had been received up to this point by the Town with regard to this Public Hearing and asked if any were to be submitted at this time. The following written matters were then submitted to the Town Commission: 1. A letter dated December 17, 1986 to the Mayor and Town Commission from Alan J. Ciklin, Attorney, regarding Boca Highland proposed land use plan change. 2. A letter dated October 30, 1980 to Hoffman and Hoffman Attorneys from former Mayor Louis Y. Horton. This was submitted by Attorney Kenneth Slinkman. 3. Also submitted by Attorney Slinkman was a permitting chronology prepared by Snyder Oceanography Services, Inc. dated May 22, 1986 regarding Hidden Harbor, owned by Paul and Camille Hoffman. Mayor Sullivan then noted that the perimeters of which the meeting would be held were to limit comments from the public to five minutes, except comments made by developers or attorneys representing developers who would be given a ten minute limitation. Attorney Sliney then gave the status of the land use proposed amendments to the public present. Attorney Sliney noted the meetings held by the Planning Board with the submission of a November 17th Resolution to the Town Commission proposing the following amendments be made to the Comprehensive Plan of the Town of Highland Beach, which is attached to their Resolution as Exhibit "A". The affected parcels are as follows: HOFFMAN/BROADVIEW PARCEL, Lots 59, 60, 62, 65 and 69 (West of AlA only) formerly known as RPUD-2 BOCA HI PARCEL, formerly known as "B" and "C" Sites of former RPUD-1 (Northerly portion of Boca Hi Complex Lot 2 A.N.) Town Commission Public Hearing December 17, 1986 Page 2 of 5 ENCLAVES OF BOCA COVE AND BOLA COVE PARCELS, Lots 15S and 15N REGENCY PARCEL., Lot 56W CONNAUGHT PARCEL., Lot 71W BEAGLE PARCEL, Lot 58W DEGANAHL PARCEL, Lot 57W Attorney Sliney further noted that there would be other Public Hearings held and that this in fact was the first of several. He stated that the purpose of this Hearing was to orient everyone so that the property amendments could be submitted to the State Department of Community Affairs during which time the Town could further review this matter at the same time that the DCA was reviewing it. Attorney Sliney noted that all Hearings had been held in accordance with the law with the appropriate notice sent and published according to regulations. At- torney Sliney also noted that written comments could also be submitted during this review period. • The Mayor then asked if any member of the public wanted to be heard on this matter. Mr. Philip Colman of 2727 South Ocean Boulevard, Villa Magna, was the first person to address the Town Commission. Mr. Colman had a copy of the recent issue of the Bulletin in which it said a Workshop Meeting had been scheduled for December 17, at 4 P.M. and requested information as to what happened to this meeting. Attorney Sliney noted that due to the publication requirements it was his recommendation that this meeting not be held as two weeks notice had not been given to the affected property owners and apologized for any inconvenience caused any person who had gotten to the Commission Chambers at 4 o'clock. Mrs. Terry Natale, 4740 South Ocean Boulevard, representing the Braemar Isle Condominium Asso wished to thank the Town Commission as well as she feels are taking necessary steps to insure Highland Beach and urged the Town Commission's regard. then addressed counsel ciation. Mrs. Natale the Planning Board who the quality of life in continuance in this Kenneth Slinkman, Attorney representing Paul and Camille Hoffman, property formerly known as RPUD-2, then appeared before the Town Commission. Mr. Slinkman voiced objections as to the procedural holding of this meeting. Attorney Slinkman did not think that the Hearing was held in compliance with applicable State law and did not meet the criteria of a land use plan change. Attorney Slinkman took exception to the fact that the Town's expert consultant who had prepared the land use study, John Toshner, was not present and available to answer any Town Commission Public Hearing • December 17, 1986 Page 3 of 5 questions which might be raised. It was noted that Attorney Slinkman felt that the burden was on the Town to give justification for any proposed change, which had not been given at any time during the Public Hearings. Reiterating a need for the basis upon which any land change amendment is being proposed, Attorney Slinkman took exception to the five minute rule and had felt that any developer, attorney, or other experts in the various fields dealing with this matter would not have ample time to present any facts to the Town Commission which he felt were vital to the matter. Attorney Sliney then stated that he felt that there was a misconception as to the purpose of this Public Hearing. Attorney Sliney noted that this Hearing was merely for the purpose of orienting everyone as to what was being proposed, prior to its transmittal to the Department of Com- munity Affairs and that there would be other Public Hearings held so that everyone would have ample time to state their oppositions and call whatever experts were necessary to assure fairness. Commissioner Grier questioned the transmittal to the State Department of Community Affairs without any recommendations from the Town Commission being made at this point. Commissioner Grier-felt that an implied approval was being given to the State Department of Community Affairs before the Town Commission has ample time to hear all sides of the matter. Attorney Sliney noted • that this was in fact an implied approval if such transmittal was made to the DCA, noting that the appropriate procedure would be for the Town Commission to make a MOTION to authorize the Town Clerk or the Town Manager to make such submittal. Marvin Waldman, Planning Board Member, addressed the Town Commission noting his refutal of Attorney Slinkman's statements. Mr. Waldman stated that numerous meetings had been held by the Planning Board where- in Mr. Toshner had been present and every opportunity had been given to bring in any expert witnesses by the developers or their representatives over the past six months. Attorney Slinkman noted that he has transcripts of every Planning Board Meeting at which Mr. Toshner appeared at one meeting and was only there for about five minutes. Attorney Slinkman contends that he had not been allowed to speak, and further contended that he had not been able to get public reports made by Camp, Dresser & McKee on behalf of the Town after several requests had been made. John Ward, Planning Board Member, also refuted Mr. Slinkman's statement stating that Mr. Toshner had been at two meetings and every opportunity had been given for questions at that time. Mr. Colman then re-addressed the Town Commission also regarding the Camp, Dresser & McKee reports wanting to know where they would be avail- . able. Mr. Williams requested that Mr. Colman define the report he was interested in inasmuch as the Town has numerous reports given by its Town Commission Public Hearing December 17, 1986 Page 4 of 5 engineers, CDM. Mr. Colman was invited to come into Town Hall and go through the reports to determine which report he was referring to. Commissioner Grier noted that the only report that could possibly be referred to in this matter would be predicated on water resources where- in Mayor Sullivan noted that all reports were available in Town Hall and could be gone over and supplied to any person requesting same. Mayor Sullivan noted that this Hearing was in relationship to zoning and not a water problem and that this matter was not properly before the Town Commission at this time. Attorney Sliney noted that the water reports would not necessarily be made a part of any submission to the DCA. However, the DCA distributes the submission to other State Agencies which could in fact request any additional information avail- able from the Town. Brian Taub, representing Broadview Savings & Loan, addressed the Town Commission. Mr. Taub wanted to be put on record that he objected to any down-zoning of the parcels, the same as he has rejected in the past. Mr. Taub feels that there are vested rights in the property. Mr. Ed Anzek, of Darby and Way, representing Paul and Camille Hoffman, then also addressed the Town Commission. Mr. Anzek noted that there was discussion regarding a memo by the Town Manager to the Planning Board referencing three Camp, Dresser & McKee reports. Mr. Anzek noted that after the meeting a copy of such memo was given to him by the Town Manager and a telephone call made requesting copies of such CDM reports be given to him. Although Mr. Anzek stated that the Town Manager had been very cooperative in this endeavor, it was noted that the reports themselves had never been received from CDM. Mr. Williams will check on this matter and find out why these reports were never supplied. Attorney John Corbett, representing the Connaught Property, addressed the Town Commission. Mr. Corbett stated that it was his client's posi- tion that approved site plans existed on this property and vested pro- perty rights existed. Mr. Corbett referred to several previous letters on record stating that vested rights did exist and the approved site plan was still in effect. Mr. Corbett felt that the Gee & Jensen Report prepared by John Toshner ignored very vital matters involved in this proposal. Mr. Corbett does not feel that just to draw a straight line is justification to amend the Comprehensive Plan of the Town. Also, Mr. Corbett noted that until a long term solution is found for the Town's water problem that there was no justification to use this cause for any land use amendment. He noted that full development of the Town had no significant impact on traffic or evacuation time inasmuch as evacuation time would be based upon hurricane season when most residents were not present. Mr. Corbett further stated that he felt that water conserva- tion plans should be enforced prior to making any determination regarding land use, noting that wetlands would not be affected on the Town Commission Public Hearing December 17, 1986 Page 5 of 5 property he represented. Mr. Corbett felt that there is no justifica- tion for the land use amendment and felt that the action was premature and requested that any further action be deferred until the overall review of the Town is undertaken next year. Mr. Corbett continued his presentation by stating that the problems identified are city-wide problems and should be addressed as such during an overall review of the Town and not in the present proposal. Inasmuch as there were no other public comments to be made, this Public Hearing was properly adjourned at 5:40 P.M. APPROVED: MAYOR EDWARD ~(T/./ SULLIVAN VICE MAYOR MA~2Y LOUISE G. BLOSSER ISSIf~fl~'ER JOHN J, $A'$'S COMMISSIONER WILIIIAIrY A: GRrER ~.~ COMM SIGNER BETTY JEAN STEWART ATTEST: c DATE : `I .3 '