Received via email 2.11.24:
Please distribute to Mayor and Town Council members.
Thank you.
Dear Mayor and Town Council Members,
The increasing requests for a variances, most of which don't involve any hardship and many of which will impose on neighboring residents, is very disturbing. In addition, the situation is exacerbated due to the painful reality that residents appear to have little influence on what happens in our neighborhoods.
This is evident if you consider the recent history of Monterey Road.
Driving down our street, which in itself is very difficult due to construction congestion, you will notice as you head turn from N. Ocean that the former Kennedy residence on the ocean is undergoing around its fourth? major renovation. Tuning onto Monterey you'll see :
1. The construction project for a single family home that will probably not be completed for more than 5 years.
2. The next construction project at 249 Monterey was the site of our streets
most beautiful Monterey colonial home designed by Maurice Fatio. It was demolished last year after the owner promised to restore it in exchange for dividing the lot. Promise not kept despite resident protest.
3. Across from our home at 282 Monterey, a McMonster is being completed that looks absurd straddling its inadequately sized lot.
4. At 272 Monterey, attempts to resist construction of another McMonster and the destruction of Town protected trees may have been at least temporarily successful, due in large part to resident opposition. However, the property is on the market again foreshadowing another battle.
5. At 284 Monterey, we now have an unsightly flat roof box shape addition to a classic Bermuda style land marked home, which was blessed by the Town Council and Landmarks, to be built well within the side set back and located 4 feet, 8 inches from our property line.
You don't need to be an architect to realize that this addition is actually ugly and you can see this yourself if you walk up our brick motor court towards the garage and look to your right.
If you notice a wall separating the two properties, you may think how considerate of the owner to try to address some of the privacy and noise concerns of the next door neighbors, who didn't receive notice of plans to build an addition so very close to their side yard. Not so, my husband's careful research found a case that indicated that the attempted/ failed notice to us was probably inadequate, hence the wall and hopefully, a hedge was able to be negotiated.
The real question is what extreme hardship did the owner, who lives across N. Lake way in a huge home with four garages, suffer that allowed him to relocate the side wall of his planned guest/party house to 4 feet, 8 inches of the property line. No, I don't think avarice and entitlement actually qualify as hardship.
In addition, we assumed that the plans we were shown while negotiating for the wall were approved by the Town Council and therefore, non negotiable. However, when I recently requested a copy of the Council's approved plans for the East side elevation, they were not the same as plans we had been shown because windows had been added that were not on the plans approved by the Council. This would indicate that the owner and/or his representatives knew someone who saved them the trouble of having the changes approved by Landmarks or the Council.
Something about all this reminds me of a trip I made with a civic group to Somalia many years ago. While visiting the capital, we had a young driver who observed that he was taking us to meet with important people in the government. He asked us if we could speak to certain people we were seeing to try to get him a house because that is the way such things were handled there.
In other words, it wasn't what you knew but who you knew and what influence you might have on them. Unfortunately, it appears that Monterey Rd. and other North end residents have very little influence on what is happening in their neighborhoods and Palm Beach itself as we experience the noticeable deterioration of our quality of life.
When considering variance requests in the future, I hope that you will not just say that you considered all the requirements; but, also ask any appropriate questions to ensure that this is actually the case.
Another valid concern of residents is that no matter what rules are violated by development/construction interests, that there are usually no appropriate penalties or fines that will deter them from doing the same thing in the future.
Regarding the traffic study, it appears that unless it is revised to include the increase in traffic coming soon from new development in West Palm Beach and proposed projects here, which will probably be approved in some form despite the fact that the island is already built out, it won't be relevant.
Thank you for your consideration.
Pamela Dunston
282 Monterey Rd.
Received via email 2.11.24:
Please distribute to Mayor and Town Council members.
Thank you.
Dear Mayor and Town Council Members,
The increasing requests for a variances, most of which don't involve any hardship and many of which will impose on neighboring residents, is very disturbing. In addition, the situation is exacerbated due to the painful reality that residents appear to have little influence on what happens in our neighborhoods.
This is evident if you consider the recent history of Monterey Road.
Driving down our street, which in itself is very difficult due to construction congestion, you will notice as you head turn from N. Ocean that the former Kennedy residence on the ocean is undergoing around its fourth? major renovation. Tuning onto Monterey you'll see :
1. The construction project for a single family home that will probably not be completed for more than 5 years.
2. The next construction project at 249 Monterey was the site of our streets
most beautiful Monterey colonial home designed by Maurice Fatio. It was demolished last year after the owner promised to restore it in exchange for dividing the lot. Promise not kept despite resident protest.
3. Across from our home at 282 Monterey, a McMonster is being completed that looks absurd straddling its inadequately sized lot.
4. At 272 Monterey, attempts to resist construction of another McMonster and the destruction of Town protected trees may have been at least temporarily successful, due in large part to resident opposition. However, the property is on the market again foreshadowing another battle.
5. At 284 Monterey, we now have an unsightly flat roof box shape addition to a classic Bermuda style land marked home, which was blessed by the Town Council and Landmarks, to be built well within the side set back and located 4 feet, 8 inches from our property line.
You don't need to be an architect to realize that this addition is actually ugly and you can see this yourself if you walk up our brick motor court towards the garage and look to your right.
If you notice a wall separating the two properties, you may think how considerate of the owner to try to address some of the privacy and noise concerns of the next door neighbors, who didn't receive notice of plans to build an addition so very close to their side yard. Not so, my husband's careful research found a case that indicated that the attempted/ failed notice to us was probably inadequate, hence the wall and hopefully, a hedge was able to be negotiated.
The real question is what extreme hardship did the owner, who lives across N. Lake way in a huge home with four garages, suffer that allowed him to relocate the side wall of his planned guest/party house to 4 feet, 8 inches of the property line. No, I don't think avarice and entitlement actually qualify as hardship.
In addition, we assumed that the plans we were shown while negotiating for the wall were approved by the Town Council and therefore, non negotiable. However, when I recently requested a copy of the Council's approved plans for the East side elevation, they were not the same as plans we had been shown because windows had been added that were not on the plans approved by the Council. This would indicate that the owner and/or his representatives knew someone who saved them the trouble of having the changes approved by Landmarks or the Council.
Something about all this reminds me of a trip I made with a civic group to Somalia many years ago. While visiting the capital, we had a young driver who observed that he was taking us to meet with important people in the government. He asked us if we could speak to certain people we were seeing to try to get him a house because that is the way such things were handled there.
In other words, it wasn't what you knew but who you knew and what influence you might have on them. Unfortunately, it appears that Monterey Rd. and other North end residents have very little influence on what is happening in their neighborhoods and Palm Beach itself as we experience the noticeable deterioration of our quality of life.
When considering variance requests in the future, I hope that you will not just say that you considered all the requirements; but, also ask any appropriate questions to ensure that this is actually the case.
Another valid concern of residents is that no matter what rules are violated by development/construction interests, that there are usually no appropriate penalties or fines that will deter them from doing the same thing in the future.
Regarding the traffic study, it appears that unless it is revised to include the increase in traffic coming soon from new development in West Palm Beach and proposed projects here, which will probably be approved in some form despite the fact that the island is already built out, it won't be relevant.
Thank you for your consideration.
Pamela Dunston
282 Monterey Rd.