8. ARC-24-0095 210 JAMAICA LN. The applicant, J. Williams Weeks Estate (Robin Weeks), has filed an application requesting Architectural Commission review and approval for the construction of a new, two-story, single-family residence with final hardscape, landscape and swimming pool improvements.
Public Comment, Town of Palm Beach Admin
admin
4 months ago
Received via email 12.19.24:
To my friends in TPB Government:
As neighboring property owners, Mrs. Parker and I were notified of ARC-24-0095; a new residence proposed at 210 Jamaica Lane.
As a founding member of our Underground Utilities Task Force, serving from 2015 to 2022, I recall the challenge we encountered obtaining from residents the utility easements required to enable the installation of transformers.
In my own neighborhood, I vividly recall that three of the four property owners adjacent to my home at 215 Jamaica Lane, including M/M Weeks, the owners of 210 Jamaica Lane, refused to grant an easement to the Town. Fortunately for our project, my sense of civic duty moved me to enlist my neighbors to the west, Lee and Dory Cruz of 221 Jamaica Lane (cc above) , to share with us the granting of an easement which has allowed the installation of a transformer which will serve property numbers 204, 205, 210 and 215 once our phase is energized.
While examining the site plan submitted to ARCOM as ARC-24-0095, I noticed no indication of a new utility easement. I remember well our Town’s publicly announced decision several years ago to require an easement from the owner of any project applying to replace an existing residence with new construction. I regarded this decision as wise and proper, as the design of each phase requires a load calculation for each residence so that a transformer’s capacity is not exceeded.
During one of our first UUTF meetings, our member Wilbur Ross stated that we would come to regard FPL as a “competent negotiator,” a statement with which I agreed.
Patricia Strayer, who has served us with distinction for years, informed me on December 2 that “…once all easements are acquired in a phase, we no longer track the submittals to ARCOM to ask for additional easements. For the most part if a rebuild creates a need to modify the existing underground network, FPL will force the rebuild to provide the home for an additional transformer.”
I believe that this policy invites FPL (if a new load calculation so indicates) to choose an easier path, and to elect to replace an existing transformer within an existing easement with a larger transformer in the event the new project refuses to grant an easement. As such, Mr. and Mrs. Cruz and we and many of our fellow residents who cooperated with the project and granted easements are exposed to the risk of future disruption of our properties, or at least the need to defend ourselves versus FPL.
I urge you to revisit this apparent change in our Town’s policy. Mrs. Weeks’ existing home, like three of the four currently connected to our transformer, is more than seventy years old, and its proposed replacement is at least half again as large.
Demanding new easements from those who maximize structures under our code was a wise policy. I urge you to restore it, including regarding the referenced project.
Sincerely yours,
Tom Parker
215 Jamaica Lane
Received via email 12.19.24:
To my friends in TPB Government:
As neighboring property owners, Mrs. Parker and I were notified of ARC-24-0095; a new residence proposed at 210 Jamaica Lane.
As a founding member of our Underground Utilities Task Force, serving from 2015 to 2022, I recall the challenge we encountered obtaining from residents the utility easements required to enable the installation of transformers.
In my own neighborhood, I vividly recall that three of the four property owners adjacent to my home at 215 Jamaica Lane, including M/M Weeks, the owners of 210 Jamaica Lane, refused to grant an easement to the Town. Fortunately for our project, my sense of civic duty moved me to enlist my neighbors to the west, Lee and Dory Cruz of 221 Jamaica Lane (cc above) , to share with us the granting of an easement which has allowed the installation of a transformer which will serve property numbers 204, 205, 210 and 215 once our phase is energized.
While examining the site plan submitted to ARCOM as ARC-24-0095, I noticed no indication of a new utility easement. I remember well our Town’s publicly announced decision several years ago to require an easement from the owner of any project applying to replace an existing residence with new construction. I regarded this decision as wise and proper, as the design of each phase requires a load calculation for each residence so that a transformer’s capacity is not exceeded.
During one of our first UUTF meetings, our member Wilbur Ross stated that we would come to regard FPL as a “competent negotiator,” a statement with which I agreed.
Patricia Strayer, who has served us with distinction for years, informed me on December 2 that “…once all easements are acquired in a phase, we no longer track the submittals to ARCOM to ask for additional easements. For the most part if a rebuild creates a need to modify the existing underground network, FPL will force the rebuild to provide the home for an additional transformer.”
I believe that this policy invites FPL (if a new load calculation so indicates) to choose an easier path, and to elect to replace an existing transformer within an existing easement with a larger transformer in the event the new project refuses to grant an easement. As such, Mr. and Mrs. Cruz and we and many of our fellow residents who cooperated with the project and granted easements are exposed to the risk of future disruption of our properties, or at least the need to defend ourselves versus FPL.
I urge you to revisit this apparent change in our Town’s policy. Mrs. Weeks’ existing home, like three of the four currently connected to our transformer, is more than seventy years old, and its proposed replacement is at least half again as large.
Demanding new easements from those who maximize structures under our code was a wise policy. I urge you to restore it, including regarding the referenced project.
Sincerely yours,
Tom Parker
215 Jamaica Lane