Loading...
1994.02.09_PB_Minutes_Regular (2)TOWN OF HIGHLAND BEACH • PLANNING BOARD REGULAR MEETING - MINUTES Wednesday, February 9, 1994 9:30 A.M. Chairman Robert L. Lowe called the Regular Meeting to order in Com- mission Chambers at 9:30 A.M. Deputy Town Clerk Doris Trinley called the roll. Present were the Chairman, Vice Chairman Leonard D. Bell and Regular Members James F. Morrill, William Maltz, Felix R. Goldenson and Michael W. Hill. Regu- lar Member Domenic Marino was absent. Also present were Town Attorney Thomas E. S1_iney and members of the general public; .Building Official Lee Leffingwell was absent. Upon MOTION by MR. MORRILL/MR. MALTZ, Minutes of the November 10, 1993 Regular Meeting were unanimously approved. At this time, Chairman Lowe announced an addition to the agenda under New Business regarding an amended site plan review for a single family residence at 2444 S. Ocean Blvd., Lot 129W(South). There was no objection. NEW BUSINESS Amended Site Plan Review for a Single Family Residence at 2444 South Ocean Boulevard, Lot 129W(South). Submitted by H. Frank Lahage & Assoc., Inc. for Gardner (owner). Architect John Conway addressed the Board, explaining the changes to be made, which included roofing material, pool and pool deck and second floor layout. He advised the roofing would be changed from t he to copper; the shape and design of the pool, but not its location, had been changed; and changes to the second floor had necessitated the removal of one (1) balcony, which faced an interior courtyard. Guy Flora, Project Manager, presented pictures of various roofs which employed copper and a sample of the proposed material was made available. The members convened to the table where discussion and review of plans took place with Messrs. Conway and Flora. Concluding same, it was determined that the Planning Board's purview extended only to the changes to the pool and the second floor layout; the change in roofing material would need to be addressed by the Community Appearance Board. r Planning Board Regular Meeting - Minutes February 9, 1994 Page 2 of 3 MOTION by MR. GOLDENSON/MR. MORRILL, was then made as follows: THE PLANNING BOARD APPROVES AMENDED SITE PLANS FOR A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE AT 2444 S. OCEAN BLVD., LOT 129W(SOUTH) RELATIVE TO THE POOL AND POOL DECK AND SECOND FLOOR LAYOUT. SUBMITTED BY H. FRANK LAHAGE & ASSOC. FOR GARDNER (OWNER); COMMISSION N0. 0593112, REVISED 2/4/94, SHEETS 1 THRU 12. The Motion met with unanimous favorable vote. NOTE: A copy of the Building Official's memo to the Planning Board stating that the changes met all Code requirements is attached to and made part of these Minutes. Consideration of Repeal of Section 6.4(f) of Chapter 30 (Town Zoning Codel. Attorney Sliney advised this issue had come about as a result of a letter received by the Town Commission in late December 1993 from Attorney Margaret L. Cooper on behalf of her client, Ocean Properties, owners of the Holiday Inn at 2809 S. Ocean Boulevard. The letter cited an amendment to the Town Zoning Code in 1984, which requires re- . moval of all non-residential, non-conforming uses within 40 years of date of construction, and asked that consideration be given to deleting this section [6.4(f)] from Code. Mr. Sliney also pointed out for the record that the letter was factually incorrect in that it noted "As the Holiday Inn is the only non-residential use in the Town, it is the only property affected by Section 6.4(f)." He noted that several .other properties had been or would be affected by this Section (Sunny Surf, Third Wind, Sea Cliff, Dolphin Apartments, etc.). Further, Mr. Sliney explained that the Town Commission had requested the Planning Board review the matter and transmit their recommendation to the Commission after a publicized Public Hearing had been held. Attorney Cooper next addressed the Board, giving a brief history of how Town zoning codes from approximately the early 1970's had affected the Holiday Inn, and concluding that since the Inn serves a unique and useful purpose to the Town, it would be appropriate for the members to recommend repeal of Section 6.4(f). She also mentioned that repeal of the Section would be an incentive to keep the Inn and the property in good order, noting the owners would hardly be inclined to make any improvements to buildings whose use was scheduled to be 'discontinued' in a few years. Michael Walsh, one of the owners of Ocean Properties, also spoke on behalf of the Inn, which he advised is but one of approximately 30 hotel-type properties his family owns. He answered questions posed by . the panel to their satisfaction and noted that in his opinion the restrictions of Section 6.4(f) adversely affected the business's value, as well as made loan financing for upgrades, etc., more difficult. Planning Board Regular Meeting - Minutes February 9, 1994 Page 3 of 3 After further discussion and deliberation, MR. GOLDENSON/MR. HILL made the following MOTION: THE PLANNING BOARD WILL HOLD A PUBLICIZED HEARING ON MARCH 9, 1994, AT 9:30 A.M., TO CONSIDER RECOMMENDING REPEAL OF SECTION 6.4(f) OF CHAPTER 30 (TOWN ZONING CODE). Unanimous favorable vote followed, NOTE: A COPY OF MS. COOPER'S 12/23/94 LETTER REFERRED TO HEREIN, AND A COPY OF THE APPLICABLE TOWN CODE ARE ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE PART OF THESE MINUTES. There being no further business to come before the Board at this time, the meeting was adjourned upon MOTION by MR. MORRILL/MR. MALTZ at 10:20 A.M. dmt APPROVI ATTEST: DATE: -- ,~ E~ W~ iam Ma z E'~~~'~ Domenic-'Maxino-~'~=_.~--, i TO: • FROM: DATE: RE: PLANNING BOARD COMMITTEE DD LEE LEFFINGWELL, BUILDING OFFICIAL d•~• FEBRUARY 7, 1994 AMENDED REVIEW FOR GARDNER RESIDENCE 2444 SO. OCEAN BLVD The roofing material change being considered at your meeting of February 9, 1994, is acceptable from Building Code Standards and Coastal Building specifications for 140 mile an hour winds for the Town of Highland Beach. The amended plans being considered include a change for pool and pool deck and second floor layout. • LL;el • F= E ~ ' 1 - '-! •~ T I_I E 1 r• 1 S H rJ D ~~ "= C1 N Fc LI ti S r=1 tJ D !~: E 1J ``-'. P _ 4~ -- • .. .TONES, F'~STE~L, JO~N'STON & STUBBS, P. A. ATTORNEYS ANO COUNSELOAS . Ft.AGLER CENTER TOWER Sues 30UTti Fe•AdLER OArvE EL6VENTW FLOOQ P, O. BOX 3+75 LAAar a KtxAwOQA JOr•w (ILAIa wcC~2AC><!N ftCPHCN J. AyCAUI SCOTT ~, NeMUl~tw WEST PALM BEAI~N, FLQAlCA J~~02•J~7S TgACEY tuJ1070TT1 Jorct ~ coNwAr , JQHN C. gANCOIPH JCNN C. qAU 407 e5c•3o00 NAROAIKT L, COO-tq u+0atw npSt FAX• (~07)ls~Q.•1154 ,/~~ tOwAAO 01A>: RCCCCCA 0. BOANt tTCVlN J. aO TwMAN otrta A, tACwt • / 7 ~' ~ ,~ C41gItT0-weq t. OYgC O. CNLVCA SMITw 0 ~ A r a iTONw a ~r ~M ~N q. TOML INtON KT~q t, wOLTON MwgrK t. KL(IN~tLO JOHN to TAI.,Ota 41CFIACL ~. wwLSH WRSTER'S DIRECT LJNE: _.__..~......__.,..~.__ MKMALL T. RaANC H. ADAMf WCAYCq December 23, 1993 Arlin G. Votress, Mayor Bill Paul, Vice Mayor Arthur Eypel, Commissioner Jahn F. Rand, Cammiss~.oner David Augenstein, Commissioner Town Commission • Town of Highland Beach 3614 South Ocean Blvd. Highland Beach, FL 33487 Re: Ocean Properties/Holiday Inn Qur File Na: 1U211.20 Gentle~aten ~CNAY/. ~I~ICN THAy 1.0.7.0.7 MAAg7 ALIJtON JOHN1TpN lasalwa R sauce JvNa Ip~.tN. -A4~C. WO~t IW •1111 tCT1agP YwWAw A. ~Otrtq 01 CONNttI 1, MARTIN f1~WA0AN This office represents Ocean Properties, the owner oY the ~3oliday Inn in Highland Beach. My client recently leazned that the Zoning Code, Section 6 (Non- conforming Uses), was amended on September 11, 1984 to add § 6.4(1). This requires removal of all non-residential, non- conforming uses within 40 years of the date of construction. As the Holiday Inn is the only non--residential use in the Town, it is tha only property affected by § 6.4(f). Without abandoning my client's concerns as to the legality ct subsection (f) and whether a taking has occurred, this letter is to request that the Town ,, consider removal of subsection (f) by amendment to the Zoning Code. The Holiday Inn serves a useful and necessary purpose in the Town, providing accommodation .for guests aE the residents and pleasant restaurant fa,ci~.ities for the Tvwn. Tf removed, it may likely be replaced by yet another condominium. .~ ' FEE:- 1-~+-~} TL~E 1:= 1 ~ H~~L~GSQN RLI~~ ANDREWS F. ~~ December 23, 1993 Page 2 We would request that this issue be placed on the agenda for the next workshop ~aeet~.ng of the Town commissa.on. Please let me know when this will be discussed. Thank you for your help. Sincerely, DONE , FOSTER, O STON & STU88S, P.A. rga et L. Coops MLC/rsf cc: Mary Ann Mariano, Town Manager •lc/10271.20/coamission.t~ JONES. FOTEE R .1 Or+ni~:7nni ~. sYiiAa s o v J !. •,\u ~`~ i~i.'.~'~r~ '~ If at the time of passage or amendment of this ordinance, lawful use of land exists which • would not be permitted by the regulations imposed, then: (a) No such nonconforming use shall be enlarged or increased, ~ nor extended to occupy a greater area of land than was occupied at the effective date of adoption or amendment of this ordinance. (b) No such nonconforming use shall be moved in whole or in part to any portion of the lot or parcel other than that occupied by such use at the effective date of adoption of this ordinance. (c) If any such nonconforming use of land ceases for any reason for a period of more than six (6) months, any subsequent use of such land shall conform to the regulations specified by .this ordinance for the district in which such land is located. (d) No additional structure not conforming to the require- ments of this ordinance shall be erected in connection with such nonconforming use of land, nor shall any structure destroyed or deteriorated to the extent of seventy (70) per- cent or more of the assessed valuation of the structure be replaced. (e) If such nonconforming use involves no structure with a replacement cost exceeding five thousand dollars ($5,000.00), such use shall be discontinued within three (3) years from the date it becomes nonconforming and any minor structures shall be removed unless converted to a conforming use and unless the structure would be a con- forming structure in the district. Any and all nonresidential nonconforming uses shall be discontinued within forty (40) years of the date of construc- tion of the nonresidential building; provided, however, that no such mandatory discontinuance shall be required in less than twenty (20) years from the date the use became non conforming. Any structure involved in such nonresiden- tial, nonconforming use shall be removed unless converted to a conforming use which complies with all property de- velopment regulations in the district within which it is located. For purposes of this section, the date of construe- - tion sh ' ~ be the date of issuance of the building permit in the principal building by. the town. Additionally, no owner of real property may rent property to a tenant who will use the property for a nonconforming ~xse. This provision ap- plies regardless of the type of nonconformity involved.