2023.08.10_PB_Agenda_RegularAGENDA
PLANNING BOARD REGULAR MEETING
Thursday, August 10, 2023 AT 9:30 AM
TOWN OF HIGHLAND BEACH, FLORIDA
3618 S. OCEAN BOULEVARD
HIGHLAND BEACH, FL 33487
Telephone: (561) 278-4548
Website: www.highlandbeach.us
LIBRARY COMMUNITY ROOM
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. ROLL CALL
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
4. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
5. SWEARING IN OF THE PUBLIC
6. PUBLIC COMMENT (limited to five (5) minutes per speaker)
7. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. July 13, 2023
8. NEW BUSINESS
A. Development Application No. 23-0003 / Le Sanctuaire Condominium
Association
Application by Mark Rothenberg, Ellemar Enterprises LLC, for a major
modification to an existing building, as provided in section 30 -39 of the town code
of ordinances, including but not limited to changes to the exterior façade and
balconies for the property located at 3425 South Ocean Boule vard.
9. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
A. Ongoing discussion of proposed changes (“amendment concepts”) to the
Accessory Marine Facility (AMF) and seawall regulations of the Town Code
Page 1
Agenda – Planning Board Regular Meeting
Thursday, August 10, 2023, 9:30 AM Page 2 of 2
10. ANNOUNCEMENTS
August 30, 2023 11:00 AM Natural Resources Preservation
Advisory Board Meeting
September 05, 2023 1:30 PM Town Commission Meeting
September 12, 2023 1:00 PM Code Enforcement Board Meeting
September 14, 2023 9:30 AM Planning Board Regular Meeting
11. ADJOURNMENT
Any person that decides to appeal any decision made by the Board of Adjustment & Appeals with respect to any matter
considered at this meeting, such person will need to ensure that a verbatim record including testimony and evidence
upon which the appeal is based. (State Law requires the above Notice. Any person desiring a verbatim transcript shall
have the responsibility, at his/her own cost, to arrange for the transcript.) The Town neither provides nor prepares such
record. There may be one or more Town Commissioners attending the meeting.
In accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), persons who need accommodation in order to attend or
participate in this meeting should contact Town Hall at (561) 278-4548 within a reasonable time prior to this meeting in
order to request such assistance.
Page 2
File Attachments for Item:
A. July 13, 2023
Page 3
TOWN OF HIGHLAND BEACH
PLANNING BOARD REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
Library Community Room
3618 South Ocean Boulevard
Highland Beach, Florida 33487
Date: July 13, 2023
Time: 9:30 AM
1. CALL TO ORDER
Chairperson Goldenberg called the meeting to order at 9:30 A.M.
2. ROLL CALL
Board Member Jason Chudnofsky
Board Member David Powell (joined via Zoom)
Board Member Roger Brown (joined via Zoom)
Board Member Brian DeMoss
Board Member Harry Adwar
Vice Chairperson Ilyne Mendelson
Chairperson Eric Goldenberg
Town Attorney Leonard Rubin
Deputy Clerk Jaclyn DeHart
ADDITIONAL STAFF PRESENT
Town Planner Ingrid Allen
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The Board Members led the Pledge of Allegiance to the United States of America.
4. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
Motion: DeMoss/Mendelson - Moved to approve the agenda as presented
which passed unanimously 7 to 0.
5. SWEARING IN OF THE PUBLIC
Deputy Clerk Jaclyn DeHart swore in those giving testimony.
6. PUBLIC COMMENT
There were no public comments.
Page 4
Planning Board Regular Meeting Minutes
Date: July 13, 2023 Page 2 of 5
7. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. June 08, 2023
Motion: Adwar/Mendelson - Moved to approve the minutes as presented
which passed unanimously 7 to 0.
8. NEW BUSINESS
A. Development Application No. 22-0012 / John Zessin
Application by Gregory Bonner, B1 Architect LLC, requesting site plan
approval for a new three-story, 9,397 square foot single family residence
with pool/spa and a dune walkover located at 3805 South Ocean Boulevard.
Chairperson Goldenberg read the title of the item and asked the Board members
if they had any ex parte communications to disclose. The members had no ex
parte communications.
Chairperson Goldenberg opened the public hearing and called Town Planner
Allen to present the application.
Town Planner Allen presented a PowerPoint Presentation of the Development
Order depicting aerial photographs, the proposed site plans, and renderings of
new-three story, 9,397 square foot single family residence with the pool, spa and
a dune walkover. She mentioned that the driveway configuration and landscaping
plans were approved by FDOT. The property owner will be required to maintain
the landscaping in the right of way and have to get Town Commission approval.
She advised that if the request receives the Planning Board approval, the
applicant will be required to obtain a building permit, prior to initiation of
construction, from the Town of Highland Beach Building Department. Pursuant to
Section 30-21(g) of the Town Code, commencement of construction shall be
initiated within two (2) years following the date of approval by the Planning Board.
Vice Chairperson Mendelson inquired about the driveway in reference to flooding.
Member DeMoss asked about recourse for the Town if the drainage plan does
not work. Town Planner Allen mentioned that the drainage and pavement plan
was reviewed and approved by a licensed drainage engineer.
Chairperson Goldenberg asked about lightning in regard to sea turtles.
Gregory Bonner, B1 Architect LLC, provided comments about the project in
regard to sea turtle lightning and drainage.
Chairperson Goldenberg opened the hearing for public comments.
Page 5
Planning Board Regular Meeting Minutes
Date: July 13, 2023 Page 3 of 5
Arora Segal, 3809 S. Ocean Blvd, was sworn in by Deputy DeHart and inquired
about how long the project would take to be completed and if there was a
provision made for sea oats or dune vegetation.
Josh Corey, Blue Ocean Building, was sworn in my Deputy DeHart and provided
comments in regard to the timeline.
Town Planner Allen explained that the applicant would be maintaining the existing
dune vegetation and that she had advised the applicant about the Town’s
initiative on dune restoration.
The public hearing was closed and followed by a motion.
Motion: Mendelson/Chudnofsky - Moved to approve Development
Application No. 22-0012 as presented. Based upon a roll call, Vice
Chairperson Mendelson (Yes); Member Chudnofsky (Yes); Member
Powell (Yes); Member DeMoss (Yes); Member Adwar (Yes);
Member Brown (Yes); and Chairperson Goldenberg (Yes). The
motion passed on 7 to 0.
B. Development Application No. 22-0017 / 3519 South Ocean Boulevard LLC.
Application by Mark Hunley, Charette International Architecture, requesting
site plan approval for a new three story, 3,997 square foot single family
residence located at 3521 South Ocean Boulevard.
Chairperson Goldenberg read the title of the item and asked the Board members
if they had any ex parte communications to disclose. The members had no ex
parte communications.
Chairperson Goldenberg opened the public hearing and called Town Planner
Allen to present the application.
Town Planner Allen presented a PowerPoint Presentation of the Development
Order depicting aerial photographs, the proposed site plans, and renderings of
new-three story, 3,997 square foot single family residence. She displayed the
new configuration of the driveway and mentioned that it was approved by FDOT,
and the property owner will be required to maintain the landscaping in the righ t
of way and have to get Town Commission approval.
She advised that if the request receives the Planning Board approval, the
applicant will be required to obtain a building permit, prior to initiation of
construction, from the Town of Highland Beach Building Department. Pursuant to
Section 30-21(g) of the Town Code, commencement of construction shall be
initiated within two (2) years following the date of approval by the Planning Board.
Page 6
Planning Board Regular Meeting Minutes
Date: July 13, 2023 Page 4 of 5
Mark Hunley, Charette International Architecture, was present and provided
comments on the property in regard to it being a narrow lot.
Chairperson Goldenberg opened the hearing for public comments.
The public hearing was closed and followed by a motion.
Motion: DeMoss/Mendelson - Moved to approve Development Order No. 22-
0017 as presented. Based upon a roll call Member DeMoss (Yes);
Vice Chairperson Mendelson (Yes); Member Adwar (Yes); Member
Brown (Yes); Member Powell (Yes); Member Chudnofsky (Yes); and
Chairperson Goldenberg (Yes). The motion passed 7 to 0.
9. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
A. Ongoing discussion of proposed changes (“amendment concepts”) to the
Accessory Marine Facility (AMF) and seawall regulations of the Town Code
Chairperson Goldenberg read the title of the item and referred the item to Town
Planner Allen.
Town Planner Allen briefly referred to the last meetings discussion and then
introduced Marine Expert with ATM (Applied Technology & Management)
Michael Jenkins.
Michael Jenkins engaged in extensive discussion with the Board about seawall
heights in regard to risks, costs, base flood elevation, flanking, grading, and
maximum seawall height. He recommended raising the sea walls to protect
properties.
Jeffery Remus, Building Official, provided comments on height elevations in
regard to our current ordinance.
The Board discussed maximum sea wall height in regard to base flood elevation
and agreed on a draft recommendation that Town Planner Allen will compile with
previous recommendations to be reviewed at a later date.
Chairperson Goldberg closed the seawall discussion and opened a discussion
about ladders. Michael Jenkins provided comments about dock and seawall
ladders in regard to safety.
The Board also discussed ladders in regard to the distance between ladders,
location, costs, and the depth of ladders. Town Planner Allen displayed
information showing the proposed amendment concept , requiring a ladder for
every 50 feet of dock, versus other municipalities codes. The discussion was
tabled for a future meeting.
Page 7
Planning Board Regular Meeting Minutes
Date: July 13, 2023 Page 5 of 5
The Board discussed side setbacks for docks in regard to the current town code
regulations. Town Planner Allen clarified the difference between building
setbacks and accessory marine setbacks. The discussion will be continued at the
next meeting. Chairperson Goldberg requested Town Planner Allen to create a
list using bullet points on what was already discussed.
10. ANNOUNCEMENTS
Chairperson Goldenberg read the announcements as follows.
July 27, 2023 11:30 A.M. Financial Advisory Board Meeting
August 01, 2023 1:30 P.M. Town Commission Meeting
August 08, 2023 1:00 P.M. Code Enforcement Board Meeting
August 10, 2023 9:30 A.M. Planning Board Meeting
11. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 11:21 A.M.
APPROVED on August 08, 2023, Planning Board Regular Meeting.
_________________________________
Eric Goldenberg, Chairperson
ATTEST:
Transcribed by: Jaclyn DeHart
08/08/2023
____________________________________ _____________________________
Jaclyn DeHart Date
Deputy Town Clerk
Disclaimer: Effective May 19, 2020, per Resolution No. 20 -008, all meeting minutes are
transcribed as a brief summary reflecting the event of this meeting. Verbatim audio/video
recordings are permanent records and are available on the Town’s Media Archives &
Minutes webpage: https://highlandbeach-fl.municodemeetings.com/.
Page 8
File Attachments for Item:
A. Development Application No. 23-0003 / Le Sanctuaire Condominium Association
Application by Mark Rothenberg, Ellemar Enterprises LLC, for a major modification to
an existing building, as provided in section 30-39 of the town code of ordinances,
including but not limited to changes to the exterior façade and balconies for the property
located at 3425 South Ocean Boulevard.
Page 9
PLANNING BOARD
STAFF REPORT
MEETING OF: August 10, 2023
TO: PLANNING BOARD
FROM: INGRID ALLEN, TOWN PLANNER
SUBJECT: APPLICATION BY MARK ROTHENBERG, ELLEMAR
ENTERPRISES LLC, FOR A MAJOR MODIFICATION TO AN
EXISTING BUILDING, AS PROVIDED IN SECTION 30-39 OF THE
TOWN CODE OF ORDINANCES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED
TO CHANGES TO THE EXTERIOR FAÇADE AND BALCONIES
FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3425 SOUTH OCEAN
BOULEVARD (DO#23-0003).
Applicant (Property Owner): Le Sanctuaire Condominium Association, Inc.
3425 South Ocean Boulevard
Highland Beach, FL 33487
Applicant’s Agent: Mark Rothenberg
Ellemar Enterprises LLC
6810 North State Road 7
Coconut Creek, FL 33073
Property Characteristics:
Comprehensive Plan Land Use: Multi Family Medium Density
Zoning District: Residential Multiple Family Medium Density (RMM)
Parcel PCN#: 24-43-46-33-41-000-0010, 24-43-46-33-41-000-0020,
24-43-46-33-41-000-0030, 24-43-46-33-41-000-0040.
Site Location: 3425 South Ocean Boulevard
I. GENERAL INFORMATION:
HIGHLAND BEACH BUILDING DEPARTMENT
3614 S. Ocean Boulevard
Highland Beach, FL 33487
Ph: (561) 278-4540
Fx: (561) 265-3582
Page 10
Property Background:
On April 7, 1992, the Board of Adjustment held a Workshop Meeting whereby the Board considered
a request for relief from side setbacks from 20 feet to 16 feet 6 inches, and height requirements from
40 feet to 50 feet 10 inches for a proposed four (4) unit condominium at 3425 South Ocean
Boulevard. The Chairman of the Board announced the Public Meeting for the item to be held on
April 21, 1992.
On April 21, 1992, the Board of Adjustment approved a variance allowing side setbacks for the
parking garage to be reduced from 20 feet to 16 feet 6 inches and denying a variance request to
increase the building height from 40 feet to 50 feet 10 inches (motion carried 7-0).
On June 10, 1992, the Planning Board considered a preliminary review for a four (4)-unit
condominium at 3425 South Ocean Boulevard. The Planning Board gave final approval (motion
carried 5-0).
On June 30, 1992, the Town Commission held a Workshop Meeting whereby the Commission
reviewed “the proposal” for the property located at 3425 South Ocean Boulevard. The Town
Commission moved the matter to the July 7, 1992 Town Commission Regular Meeting consent
agenda for consideration.
On July 7, 1992, the Town Commission approved a proposal for 3425 South Ocean Boulevard
(motion carried 5-0).
Request and Analysis:
The Applicant is proposing a major modification to an existing four (4) unit condominium (Le
Sanctuaire) located at 3425 South Ocean Boulevard. Pursuant to Section 30-39 of the Town Code,
major modifications to existing buildings are described as follows:
“…that alter existing principal or accessory structures, including but not limited to
the building footprint, number of square feet, building height, number of dwelling
units, parking requirements, change in exterior facade, change of use, change of
roof line, change of elevation, all exterior walls, balconies, foundations, accessory
structures, and similar substantial improvements as determined by the building
official.
The proposed major modification consists of the following:
- Replacement of existing balcony railings with glass.
- Exterior façade changes that include modification to architectural style consisting of the
addition of pilasters to the front of the building, decorative fins to the front and side of
the building, as well as the addition of wall/eyebrow architectural features.
- Replace existing Spanish roof tiles with a metal roof.
The Applicant is also proposing new landscaping on the property (there are no proposed changes
to the landscaping in FDOT’s right -of-way along State Road A1A ), changes to the configuration
of the existing pool, changes to windows and doors, the addition of a waterfall feature at the front
Page 11
of the building as well as additional hardscape changes including t he replacement of pavers along
the driveway, pool and north terrace all of which are attained via the building permit process. It is
worth noting that while part of the existing structure as well as some of the proposed major
modifications are located east of the Coastal Construction Control Line (CCCL), the Florida
Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) ha s determined that such proposed changes are
exempt activities and therefore do not require a FDEP permit.
According to Section 30-39(b) and Section 30-31 of the Town Code, major modifications are to be
approved in the same manner as the original structure/application. As noted above, the Town
Commission approved a proposal for the property on July 7, 1992, and therefore the proposed major
modification requires the approval of the Town Commission. Pursuant to Section 30-22 of the Town
Code, when acting in an advisory capacity, the Planning Board shall recommend approval, approval
with conditions, or denial of an application for development approval (Note that the Town
Commission is scheduled to consider the request on September 5, 2023).
Following an approval by the Town Commission and prior to initiation of construction, the
Applicant will be required to obtain a building permit from the Town of Highland Beach Building
Department. Pursuant to Section 30-21(g) of the Town Code, commencement of construction of the
approved major modification shall be initiated within two (2) years following the date of approval
by the Town Commission.
Staff has reviewed the Applicant’s proposed request including plans date stamped received by the
Building Department on July 25, 2023 and finds that the project is consistent with the Code of
Ordinances.
Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (561) 637-2012 or
iallen@highlandbeach.us
Ingrid Allen
Town Planner
Attachments: Application
Aerials
FDEP correspondence (dated February 1, 2023)
Town Commission Workshop Meeting minutes (June 30, 1992).
Town Commission Regular Meeting minutes (July 7, 1992).
Applicant proposed Plans (11X17)
Page 12
Page 13
Page 14
342 5 South Ocea n Boul eva rd Palm Be ach Cou ntyNone
Aug ust 1, 20 23
0 0.008 5 0.0170.004 25 m i
0 0.01 0.020.005 km
1:57 6
Crea te d b y: P alm Beach Co untyµPage 15
01/09/2023SUBJECT PROPERTY3425 South Ocean Boulevard (front)Page 16
3425 South Ocean Boulevard (rear)01/09/2023SUBJECT PROPERTYPage 17
From: Mark Powell <mpowell@coastal-engineers.com>
Date: February 1, 2023 at 3:43:11 PM EST
To: Mark <mark@ellemar.com>
Cc: Carlos Linares <Carlos@stofft.com>
Subject: FW: 3425 South Ocean Boulevard, Highland Beach - Request for Confirmation of Exemption
Mark,
Please see email below from DEP. I believe this will satisfy the Town but let me know if you need
anything else.
Thank you,
Mark A. Powell, P.E.
Isiminger & Stubbs Engineering, Inc.
Registry Number: 8114
649 US Highway 1, Suite 9
North Palm Beach, FL 33408
561-881-0003
e-mail: mpowell@coastal-engineers.com
www.coastal-engineers.com
Attention:
This email and any files transmitted with it from Isiminger & Stubbs Engineering, Inc., are preliminary
unless signed and sealed and are confidential and intended solely for use by the individual or entity to
whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the
sender.
From: Kieckbusch, David <David.Kieckbusch@FloridaDEP.gov>
Sent: Wednesday, February 1, 2023 3:37 PM
To: Mark Powell <mpowell@coastal-engineers.com>
Subject: 3425 South Ocean Boulevard, Highland Beach - Request for Confirmation of Exemption
Mark,
No permit is necessary for the repair/replacement of the seaward portion of the dune walkover since it
will occur in the original footprint and the installation/improvement of the façade as it does not include
any foundation work. These are exempt activities according to 62B-33.004 F.A.C.
The proposed fountains do not require a CCCL permit because they are considered non-jurisdictional
since they are landward of the 1997 CCCL.
This is for residence at 3425 S. Ocean Blvd., Highland Beach.
Let me know if you have any questions.
Thank you,
David
Page 18
David Kieckbusch
Environmental Specialist II
Florida Department of Environmental Protection
Southeast District – West Palm Beach
3301 Gun Club Road, MSC 7210-1
West Palm Beach, FL 33406
David.Kieckbusch@floridadep.gov
Office: 561.681.6646
Cell: 561.313.9007
Page 19
*
Page 20
Page 21
*
Page 22
Page 23
Page 24
Page 25
Page 26
Page 27
Page 28
Page 29
Page 30
Page 31
Page 32
Page 33
Page 34
Page 35
Page 36
Page 37
Page 38
Page 39
Page 40
Page 41
Page 42
TOWN OF HIGHLAND BEACH
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
APPLICATION NO. 23-0003
500 Ft Public Notification Boundary
July 24, 2023
Dear Property Owner:
This is to notify you that the PLANNING BOARD of the Town of Highland Beach will
conduct a public hearing on Thursday, August 10, 2023 at 9:30 AM and the TOWN
COMMISSION will conduct a public hearing on Tuesday, September 5, 2023 at 1:30
PM in the Community Room of the Town Library located at 3618 South Ocean
Boulevard, Highland Beach, Florida to consider the following application.
APPLICATION BY MARK ROTHENBERG, ELLEMAR ENTERPRISES LLC, FOR
A MAJOR MODIFICATION TO AN EXISTING BUILDING, AS PROVIDED IN
SECTION 30-39 OF THE TOWN CODE OF ORDINANCES, INCLUDING BUT NOT
LIMITED TO CHANGES TO THE EXTERIOR FAÇADE AND BALCONIES FOR
THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3425 SOUTH OCEAN BOULEVARD.
The application is available for inspection in the Town Clerk’s Office at Town Hall, Monday
through Friday during normal business hours of 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.
Any person that decides to appeal any decision made by the Town Commission with respect to
any matter considered at this meeting, such person will need to ensure that a verbatim record of
the proceeding is made, which includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is based.
The Town of Highland Beach does not provide such a record.
In accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, persons who need special accommodation
to attend or participate in this meeting should contact the Town Clerk’s Office at (561) 278-4548
at least 48 hours prior to the meeting. If you are hearing or speech impaired, please contact the
Florida Relay Service at 1-800-955-8770 or 1-800-955-8771.
For additional information, please contact the Town Planner at (561) 278-4540.
TOWN OF HIGHLAND BEACH, BUILDING DEPARTMENT
Page 43
Sold To:
Town of Highland Beach - CU00398185
3614 So. Ocean Blvd.
Highland Beach,FL 33487
Bill To:
Town of Highland Beach - CU00398185
3614 So. Ocean Blvd.
Highland Beach,FL 33487
Published Daily
Fort Lauderdale, Broward County, Florida
Boca Raton, Palm Beach County, Florida
Miami, Miami-Dade County, Florida
State Of Florida
County Of Orange
Before the undersigned authority personally appeared
Rose Williams, who on oath says that he or she is a duly authorized representative of the SUN- SENTINEL,
a DAILY newspaper published in BROWARD/PALM BEACH/MIAMI-DADE County, Florida; that the
attached copy of advertisement, being a Legal Notice in:
The matter of 11720-Notice of Public Meeting ,
Was published in said newspaper by print in the issues of, or by publication on the
newspaper¶s website, if authorized on Jul 31, 2023
Affiant further says that the newspaper complies with all legal requirements for
publication in Chapter 50, Florida Statutes.
Signature of Affiant
Sworn to and subscribed before me this: July 31, 2023.
Signature of Notary Public
Name of Notary, Typed, Printed, or Stamped
Personally Known (X) or Produced Identification ( )
Affidavit Delivery Method: E-Mail
Affidavit Email Address: jdehart@highlandbeach.us
7468198
SUN-SENTINEL
Page 44
Order # - 7468198
SUN-SENTINEL
Page 45
SUN-SENTINEL
Page 46
File Attachments for Item:
A. Ongoing discussion of proposed changes (“amendment concepts”) to the Accessory Marine Facility
(AMF) and seawall regulations of the Town Code
Page 47
TOWN OF HIGHLAND BEACH
AGENDA MEMORANDUM
MEETING TYPE: Planning Board (“Board”) Meeting
MEETING DATE August 10, 2023
SUBMITTED BY: Ingrid Allen, Town Planner, Building Department
SUBJECT: Ongoing discussion of proposed changes (“amendment concepts”) to
the Accessory Marine Facility (AMF) and seawall regulations of the
Town Code
SUMMARY:
At the July 13, 2023 Planning Board meeting, Board discussion and commentary by the
Town’s Marine expert on the proposed amendment concepts to the AMF and seawall
regulations of the Town Code included the following:
- Dr. Michael G. Jenkins of ATM (the Town’s Coastal and Marine consultant) recommended a
maximum seawall height of Base Flood Elevation (BFE) plus one (1) foot. Note that Section
6-128(b) of the Town Code provides a minimum seawall height (for seawalls west of State
Road A1A) at BFE or higher as provided by the FEMA FIRM maps. The Board agreed on Dr.
Jenkin’s recommendation on a draft basis.
- Type and distance of ladders (concept tabled).
- Encroachment into water for AMFs at 25 feet or 25 percent of the waterway to be measured
from wetface of seawall. For unique encroachment circumstances, require marine expert
review.
- No marine side setbacks for docks; however, boat lifts should have setbacks (Note that the
Town Code currently requires a marine setback for AMFs including docks for properties
located in Single-Family zoning districts).
- Dr. Jenkins agreed with the proposed amendment concept that would exempt personal
watercraft lifts (e.g. jet ski lifts) from the definition of boat lift which requires that the lift cannot
be higher than the superstructure of the boat when lifted.
For reference purposes, the Board’s previous discussion s on the amendment concepts are
provided in the tables below:
June 8, 2023
The Planning Board indicated that they wish to discuss the following items at the July 13, 2023
Board meeting:
- Height of seawall
- Mooring setback
- Ladder(s) on docks or seawalls
Page 48
May 11, 2023
AMENDMENT CONCEPT BOARD DISCUSSION (staff response in italics)
NA Consider mooring setback to address moored boats extending
beyond individual property lines.
10 foot side setback for all
zoning districts. For lots <
100 feet in width, setback is
10% of width; however,
setback cannot be less than
5 feet.
-Maintain current accessory marine facility setbacks for those
single-family properties located within Byrd Beach (if majority of
residents agree).
-What was the intent for the proposed change to the accessory
marine facility setback? The previous Vice-Mayor, Greg Babij, was
authorized by the Town Commission to sponsor a review and
propose any amendments to the current accessory marine facility
regulations. Mr. Babij prepared a draft report on the proposed
amendment concepts which was provided to the Town
Commission at their March 15, 2022 Commission meeting (draft
report provided to Board).
Requesting additional Board site visit on the Town’s marine patrol
vessel to assess existing docks in multifamily zoning districts and
how they may be impacted by the proposed amendment concept.
The Town Manager, Marshall Labadie, has agreed to such
request. Staff will be coordinating site visits with members of the
Board.
April 13, 2023
AMENDMENT CONCEPT BOARD DISCUSSION (staff response in italics)
Maximum height for AMF = BFE plus 7
feet.
There should be limit, look to Board member Brown for
input.
Require a ladder for every 50 feet of
dock.
Reasonable for health and safety. Consider requirement
not just for docks but include seawalls. Location of
ladder should not interfere with the docking or mooring
of vessel.
10-foot side setback for all zoning
districts. For lots < 100 feet in width,
setback is 10% of width; however,
setback cannot be less than 5 ft.
Agree to apply setback for multifamily zoning districts as
proposed.
NA Floating docks should be part of the amendment (Note
that according to Section 30-68(h)(6) of the Town Code,
floating docks are subject to conformance will all zoning
requirements). Town Attorney, Len Rubin, indicated that
there may be some leeway in regulating setbacks for
“floating vessel platforms” and “floating boat lifts” for
which Florida Statutes currently provides an exemption.
Mr. Rubin will update the Board on this matter at the May
11th meeting.
Maximum seawall height Expert to testify. Staff has reached out to the Town’s
marine expert, ATM, and will advise the Board on their
availability to appear at a Board meeting.
Page 49
Encroachment into water at 25 feet or
25% of waterway width, whichever is
less (measured from the shortest
distance adjacent to the property line)
Measure from closest landward position (to
accommodate PL in the water). Apply 25 feet or 25%
encroachment to canals and lakes only exclude
Intracoastal Waterway.
March 9, 2023
AMENDMENT CONCEPT BOARD DISCUSSION
Maximum height for AMF = BFE plus 7
feet
Maybe the proposed “7 feet” is not high enough but there
should be a limit.
Require a ladder for every 50 feet of
dock
Require ladders on seawall and docks and consider
adjustable ladders whereby the length of the ladder
needs to be in the water at low mean tide.
10-foot side setback for all zoning
districts. For lots < 100 feet in width,
setback is 10% of width; however,
setback cannot be less than 5 ft.
10-foot setback for Multi-Family Zoning Districts needs
more discussion. Consider setback for mooring of boats.
ATTACHMENTS:
- Proposed amendment concepts list
- Draft report from previous Vice-Mayor Greg Babij (presented to the Town Commission on
March 15, 2022)
- ATM report (dated 2-11-2022)
RECOMMENDATION:
At the discretion of the Board.
Page 50
PROPOSED AMENDMENT CONCEPTS
• Maximum height for Accessory Marine Facili�es = Base Flood Eleva�on
(BFE) plus 7 feet.
• Exempt personal watercra� (PWC) li�s from the requirement that “in no
case shall the li� be higher than the superstructure of the boat when li�ed”
OR remove requirement.
• Maximum seawall cap width = 3 feet; maximum seawall cap plus dock
width = 8 feet.
• Encroachment into water at 25 feet or 25% of waterway width, whichever is
less (measured from the shortest distance adjacent to property line).
• 10 foot side setback for all zoning districts. For lots < 100 feet in width,
setback is 10% of width; however, setback cannot be less than 5 feet.
• Require a ladder for every 50 feet of dock.
ADDITIONAL CONCEPT:
• Maximum seawall height
Page 51
DRAFT Proposed Revisions to Marine Accessory Ordinances
Abstract:
The existing marine accessory ordinances lack some detail and it is recommended they are enhanced to
provide clarity on topics that have been a source of ambiguity and contention. Items like maximum
allowable height of marine accessories, ambiguity around jetski lifts vs. boat lifts, and the process of
dealing with marine accessories in where there is a discontinuity in the waterway (i.e corner lots, end of
canals) have all been points of contention between residents and the Building Department, due to lack
of detail.
Additionally, this is an opportune time to consider revising certain other components of the current
ordinances to address anticipated future conflicts or in some cases better conform with code used by
surrounding towns.
While reviewing the recommended changes, it may be beneficial to envision the concept of a 3-
dimensional box that sits on the rear property line of any waterfront lot. Marine accessories must
completely fit within the box to be permissible. Otherwise, they would be required to go through the
process of obtaining a variance.
Summary of Recommendations
1)Define a Maximum Allowable Height of Marine Accessories:
Recommended Maximum Height: Base Flood Elevation plus 7 feet.
There have been multiple debates around what is an acceptable height of boat lifts. The current codes
only state that a boat lift shall not be higher than the superstructure of the boat when lifted, but is silent
on how high up in the air the combined boat lift and boat can be. This leaves open the potential for
installing boatlifts on top of excessively high pilings, as long as the boat lift is fully retracted so the boat
will be higher than the lift itself.
It is recommended that the “height” of the 3 dimensional box behind any waterfront property be Base
Flood Elevation plus 7 feet. Referencing Base Flood Elevation allows the ordinance to be dynamic with
sea level rise, as it is a reference datum that has been occasionally revised higher by the US Government
in conjunction with the sea level. Pilings, and also the boat lift components must not be higher than
this recommended maximum allowable height.
2)Amend existing language related to Jetski (Personal Watercraft) Lifts
The current codes are excessively onerous for jetski lifts, relative to boat lifts. As Section 30-131 is
written, the bottom of the keel of any boat shall not be hoisted greater than one foot above the
minimum seawall elevation, and in no case shall the lift be higher than the superstructure of the boat
when lifted.
Page 52
Because of the low vertical profile of a jetski (3 feet) relative to the vertical profile of a boat lift (7 feet),
a boat lift can be installed to hold a boat, but the very same boat lift would not be permissible if it is
used to instead lift a jetski.
It is recommended the current code be amended by either by removing the section that states in no
case shall the lift be higher than the superstructure of the boat when lifted, or simply exempt jet skis
(personal watercraft) from this code.
3)Define a maximum width of a seawall cap and also a maximum width of a dock out into the water.
Recommended maximum new seawall cap width of 3 feet as measured from the property line
Recommended maximum dock plus seawall cap width of 8 feet as measured from the property line
As properties are redeveloped and seawalls are replaced, there exists the potential for residents to look
to “extend” their effective usable property out into the water by building a new seawall outside of the
existing seawall. There is also the potential for properties to get extended by pouring excessively wide
seawall caps on top of new seawalls and building excessively wide docks.
By limiting the maximum seawall cap width from the property line, and also the maximum distance the
seawall cap plus dock can extend from the property line, the risk of one property owner effectively
creating their own peninsula is minimized.
It is recommended that the waterside edge of any new seawall cap be limited to 3 feet from the
property line, whether it is on top of a new wall, or is a cap raise on top of an existing wall.
Additionally, it is recommended that any new dock built is limited to a maximum distance of 8 feet out
into the water as measured from the property line. This would allow for the outer edge of neighboring
docks to all be limited to the same distance from the property line regardless of seawall cap size. For
example, if a property has a 2 foot wide seawall cap, then that property would be allowed to have a 6
foot wide dock, and meet the maximum combined width of 8 feet. While if a neighboring property has a
3 foot wide seawall cap, they would be limited to a dock width of 5 feet.
Lastly it is recommended that language be added into the code to limit the installation of no more than
1 new seawall outside of the original property seawall that abuts the property line. This eliminates the
risk that new seawalls are repeatedly installed on the waters edge side of existing seawalls, which would
effectively create a man-made peninsula.
4) Define a Maximum Distance that Marine Accessories can Extend into the Water
Recommended Maximum Distance: The lesser of 25 feet from the property line or 25% of the
waterway width.
This recommendation can be thought of as the perpendicular edge of the 3 dimensional box, as
measured from the property line straight out into the water.
The town codes [Sec. 30-68(g)(6)a and b] simply defer to the Army Core of Engineers for approval of
distance into water. It is recommended that the maximum distance be limited to the lesser of 25 feet or
Page 53
25% of the width of the canal or waterway. Additionally, this distance will be measured from the
shortest distance between the two properties in question.
This maximum distance of 25 feet is not an arbitrary value. It was chosen to allow residents to mix and
match combinations of seawall cap widths, dock widths and boat lift widths of reasonable size without
having to obtain a variance.
The chart below shows the various widths of boatlifts ranging from small boats to very large boats.
For illustration, a typical 40 ft powerboat may weigh 30,000 to 40,000 lbs., and that lift is 16 ft wide
(center to center) which is 17 ft wide when measured to the outsides of all pilings.
This very standard lift size could be installed at any home that has also conformed to the recommended
seawall cap and dock widths, and stay at the 25 ft maximum distance:
3 ft seawall cap + 5 foot dock + 17 foot boatlift = 25 ft.
On the larger end of the spectrum, a 120,000 lb boatlift could hold about the largest size boat an owner
would probably want to be able to lift behind a residential property. That boatlift is 22 ft wide center
to center, which would be 23 feet wide to the outsides of the pilings. This “mega lift” could still fit in a
back yard, but it would have to be right up against a seawall cap, as there is no room for a dock. Early
seawall caps were 2 feet wide, and newer caps are 2.5 feet to 3 feet wide. Also note this lift could be
installed at a property that has a 3 foot new cap, by notching out 1 foot where the inside pilings are
installed. And again this is an extreme outlier example.
A much more typical boat lift for very large boats would be a 50,000 or 60,000 or even possibly an
80,000 lb. lift and the widths there easily stay within the maximum 25 foot threshold with a 3 foot wide
seawall cap.
I am not sure Highland Beach has ever had a request to install an 80,000 or 120,000 lb. boatlift, as those
are a very rare size.
5)Amend Side setbacks to utilize a smoothed definition instead of the complicated step function
definition. Additionally apply the new definition to all property types.
The current town codes utilize a step function where the side setbacks jump at discrete intervals. For
example, if a single family zoned property is 71 feet wide, the side setbacks are 25 feet on each side.
Comparatively, if a single family zoned property is 69 feet wide, the side setbacks are 15 feet on each
Page 54
side. Additionally, there exists a different set of side setbacks for single family zoning vs multi-family
zoning. Multi-family zoning has a zero foot setback.
It is recommended that the side setbacks be a smoothed function and are less for smaller properties so
as to enhance the ability to utilize the water frontage. It is also recommended that the same set of
rules apply to all properties equally, regardless of zoning.
Recommendations for Side setbacks:
-For properties with waterline length of 100 feet or more: 10 foot side setback on either side. This
setback matches surrounding towns such as Boca Raton, Hillsboro Beach, and Ocean Ridge.
-For properties with waterline length of less than 100 feet: the side setbacks are proposed to be 10% of
property waterline length on either side, with a minimum setback of 5 feet, on either side.
Utilizing this framework, a 71 foot wide property would have side setbacks of 7.1 feet, and a 69 foot
property would have side setbacks of 6.9 feet.
Lastly, it is recommended that the current code clarify that with measurements will be made based on
the assumption that a lot line is extended beyond said pro perty line on a line perpendicular to the
seawall or bulkhead. This clarification will provide clarity when measurements are being made with
properties that have lot lines that are not perpendicular to the seawall, such as pie shaped lots.
6) Require a Ladder for every 50 feet of dock.
This is simply a requirement in most surrounding towns and our code is silent.
7)Strengthen existing language on the approval process of marine accessories in areas where there is
a discontinuity in the waterway by acknowledging that they are a “special case” and external
expertise will be utilized.
The majority of conflicts are associated with areas where there is a discontinuity in the waterway such
as an abrupt restriction in the waterway width, end of canals, or corner lots or lots that extend into a
waterway. The current code is a bit nebulous around these more complicated properties, and in some
cases boatlifts have previously been installed in locations where one property owner is inadvertently
restricting or blocking an adjacent property owner of the ability to also install a boatlift.
This situation was discussed extensively with the Marine Consultant, and in his expert opinion, no code
can be written to address every possible potential scenario within the town. His recommend course of
action is to treat any property that has a small water frontage (perhaps less than 50 feet) or that has a
discontinuity in the waterway as “a special case.” In these special cases, the standard procedure will be
to consult with a marine expert who will make recommendations to the planning board on locations and
maximum permissible sizes of marine accessories, with the intention of making sure all surrounding
property owners are not having their ability to also utilize the waterway restricted. The code already
allows for outside experts for review of development approval requests via Sec. 30-12. The
recommended code change is simply to clarify to all parties that a consultation with a marine consultant
along with a consultant recommendation to the planning board will be part of the approval process in
these special cases.
Page 55
The planning board can then decide what will be permitted. If a resident disagrees with the planning
board’s approval, and feels that their access is being restricted as a result of a marine accessory
installation, they can seek remedy through the court system.
Page 56
2047 Vista Parkway, Suite 101 | West Palm Beach, FL 33411 | 561.659.0041
2/11/22
Ingrid Allen
Town Planner
Town of Highland Beach
3614 S. Ocean Boulevard
Highland Beach, FL 33487
Re: Accessory Marine Facility Code Amendments Relative to Boat Lifts
Town of Highland Beach
Ms. Allen,
This correspondence is provided as additional discussion and opinion regarding changes to
Town of Highland Beach code relative to ‘Accessory Marine Structures’ and specifically boat lifts
as defined within sec. 30-68 of municipal code. Items are discussed relative to potential
changes to specific requirements of the current code.
1. Requirement for Accessory Marine Facilities to receive Planning Board approval
The requirement that all accessory marine facilities receive planning board approval (ref. Sec.
30-68 Supplemental district regulations (g)(3)) is not a common requirement within coastal
communities. Boat lifts are generally allowed with restrictions without planning board approval.
Board approval is typically reserved for sites with special and unique circumstance (see item 6.
below) or for variance requests from the standard provisions defined in code. The requirements
for lift installation are generally defined by code in terms of limitations to the location (setback)
and overall size of the structure. These limitations meet the intent to minimize impacts to
adjacent properties, allow for safe navigation and minimize impacts to view.
2. Requirement of setbacks for all zoning districts
Page 57
Page 2 of 3
2047 Vista Parkway, Suite 101 | West Palm Beach, FL 33411 | 561.659.0041
Requirements for minimum setbacks for all zoning districts are a standard practice and are a
key provision to meet the intent to minimize impacts to adjacent properties, allow for safe
navigation and minimize visual impacts. The zero-foot setback for multi-family zoning within the
Town’s current code is anomalous and does not provide a sufficient setback to meet the intent.
Required minimum setbacks for boatlifts and docks vary considerably by jurisdiction. The
nominal width of lots within a municipally are generally relevant to this provision. Areas with
larger lots tend to have larger setback requirements, while areas with smaller lots have lesser
setback requirements to allow for reasonable use.
3. Limits to waterway encroachment
Limitations to the distance structures can encroach into a waterway are a standard practice and
meet the intent to allow for safe navigation and minimize impacts to adjacent properties and
views. Encroachment maximum distances on the order of 25 feet (relative to the waterway
edge) are fairly common, though additional restrictions for narrow waterways are also common
practice. In general, a fifty-foot effective fairway width is a common design standard for
residential canals.
4. Limitations to pile maximum height
Limitations to maximum pile height is not a common practice but does meet the intent to
minimize impacts to view. This approach also addresses a related issue relative to overall
vessel size. Limitations to pile height restrict the ability to lift vessels beyond a certain size
which addressed both issues of view and waterway navigability. In terms of maximum height, it
should be defined relative to a fixed vertical datum. Pile heights generally on the order of 12 feet
(NAVD 88) (which equates to something on the order of 8 feet above dock height) meet the
lifting requirements for most vessels.
5. Limits to seawall cap and dock width
Limitations to Sewall cap and dock total width meets the intent to limit impacts to adjacent
properties, waterway navigability and view. A total width of 8 feet (inclusive of the seawall cap
and dock) is consistent with general practice.
Page 58
Page 3 of 3
2047 Vista Parkway, Suite 101 | West Palm Beach, FL 33411 | 561.659.0041
6. Special and unique circumstances - Sewall discontinuities and corner lots
Regulation of boat lifts through minimum setbacks, size and height limitations are generally
sufficient to meet the intent to minimize impacts to adjacent properties, allow for safe navigation
and minimize impacts to view for waterways that are generally unform in dimension adjacent to
the regulated property. The majority of conflicts are associated with areas where there is a
discontinuity in the waterway such as an abrupt restriction in the waterway width, corner lots or
lots that extend into a waterway. Application of uniform code provisions to address these areas
are problematic as each circumstance is unique and requires consideration of the specific
current and intended use and access to the waterway. These issues are further complicated by
the range of boat types, sizes and performance characteristics which may be germane to both
the use and potential for impact to adjacent properties. Such instances likely warrant further
consideration by the Planning Board.
Sincerely,
Applied Technology & Management, Inc.
Michael G. Jenkins, Ph.D., P.E.
Coastal Engineering Principal
Printed copies of this document are not considered signed and sealed and the signature must be verified
on any electronic copies.
Michael
G Jenkins
Digitally signed by
Michael G Jenkins
Date: 2022.02.24
09:00:36 -05'00'
Page 59