3. ARC-24-0098 301 POLMER PARK RD. The applicant, Patrick Carney, has filed an application requesting Architectural Commission review and approval for the construction of a new, split-level, two-story, single-family residence of over 10,000 square feet; with final hardscape, landscape and swimming pool improvements.
To the Committee of Architectural Commission of Palm Beach,
My name is Peter Garvy and I live with my wife Patty Garvy at 300 Cherry Lane. This letter contains comments for the Commission to consider regarding the proposed development at 301 Polmer Park Rd.
My wife and I moved to Palm Beach in 2009 to take care of my elderly father. We quickly fell in love with the community and the island and decided to make Palm Beach our permanent home. We love our home and our neighborhood. This is the first time that I submitted any comments regarding any of the numerous construction projects around us.
I am submitting my comments to this Commission because I believe that are some unique conditions associated with the 301 Polmer Park Rd and 300 Cherry Lane properties that need to be understood and considered.
The first time I saw or even heard about the plan for this project’s construction was in the official notice from your Commission. I have not spoken with the Developer Owner, the Developer Owner’s attorney or the Architect to express my concerns with the project but will be happy to do so. My wife and I received a Letter from Mr. Carney addressed to the neighborhood within the last week.
My specific concern with the project concerns the North Side of the plans. The plans include a two story building running from East to West along the North side of the property line. What I need the Committee to understand is that there is a significant elevation difference between the south side of my property (300 Cherry Lane) and the north side of the 301 Polmer Park property. The elevation grade between 301 Polmer Park Rd and 300 Cherry Lane does not slowly happen. Rather it happens suddenly. The property at 301 Polmer Park Rd is built on a hill and depending on the location the property sees a sudden increase of elevation from four to eleven feet compared to the 300 Cherry Lane property. The current wall between the two properties that is shown on the North side of the plans, in my opinion, actually acts as a retaining wall holding up the property that 301 Polmer Park Rd is built on. I invite any and all members of the Commission to stop by the backyard of 300 Cherry Lane to see for yourselves what I am describing. I believe that when you stand on our property and look directly up to 301 Polmer Park Rd you will understand why a second floor does not make sense.
My concern is if this project proceeds and a two floor structure is built on extremely higher elevation (as compared to 300 Cherry Lane) it will tower over our dining room, our kitchen and our family room. It also will tower over our outside eating area. I would also expect it to block sunlight for this outdoor area at least certain times of year.
I believe that the submitted plans are actually deceiving in capturing the true North view and they do not display the sudden and dramatic elevation difference between the properties. I ask the Commission to look at Pages 21, 26, and 30. Please remember when looking at those pictures of the North side that the property at 300 Cherry Lane is actually at the bottom of the wall pictured in those drawings.
I am asking the Commission to recognize the unique nature of the elevation change between 301 Polmer Park and 300 Cherry Lane properties and not allow a second floor to be built along the North side of the property line.
My wife and I believe that this large structure sitting on top of a high hill will impact the neighborhood in a negative manner and will change the charm of the Regency style of the Cul de sac neighborhood.
My wife, Patty, and I would be happy to speak directly with any Committee Member of the Commission regarding our request.
Sincerely,
Peter Garvy
300 Cherry Lane
Attachment received via email 12.18.24
To the Committee of Architectural Commission of Palm Beach,
My name is Peter Garvy and I live with my wife Patty Garvy at 300 Cherry Lane. This letter contains comments for the Commission to consider regarding the proposed development at 301 Polmer Park Rd.
My wife and I moved to Palm Beach in 2009 to take care of my elderly father. We quickly fell in love with the community and the island and decided to make Palm Beach our permanent home. We love our home and our neighborhood. This is the first time that I submitted any comments regarding any of the numerous construction projects around us.
I am submitting my comments to this Commission because I believe that are some unique conditions associated with the 301 Polmer Park Rd and 300 Cherry Lane properties that need to be understood and considered.
The first time I saw or even heard about the plan for this project’s construction was in the official notice from your Commission. I have not spoken with the Developer Owner, the Developer Owner’s attorney or the Architect to express my concerns with the project but will be happy to do so. My wife and I received a Letter from Mr. Carney addressed to the neighborhood within the last week.
My specific concern with the project concerns the North Side of the plans. The plans include a two story building running from East to West along the North side of the property line. What I need the Committee to understand is that there is a significant elevation difference between the south side of my property (300 Cherry Lane) and the north side of the 301 Polmer Park property. The elevation grade between 301 Polmer Park Rd and 300 Cherry Lane does not slowly happen. Rather it happens suddenly. The property at 301 Polmer Park Rd is built on a hill and depending on the location the property sees a sudden increase of elevation from four to eleven feet compared to the 300 Cherry Lane property. The current wall between the two properties that is shown on the North side of the plans, in my opinion, actually acts as a retaining wall holding up the property that 301 Polmer Park Rd is built on. I invite any and all members of the Commission to stop by the backyard of 300 Cherry Lane to see for yourselves what I am describing. I believe that when you stand on our property and look directly up to 301 Polmer Park Rd you will understand why a second floor does not make sense.
My concern is if this project proceeds and a two floor structure is built on extremely higher elevation (as compared to 300 Cherry Lane) it will tower over our dining room, our kitchen and our family room. It also will tower over our outside eating area. I would also expect it to block sunlight for this outdoor area at least certain times of year.
I believe that the submitted plans are actually deceiving in capturing the true North view and they do not display the sudden and dramatic elevation difference between the properties. I ask the Commission to look at Pages 21, 26, and 30. Please remember when looking at those pictures of the North side that the property at 300 Cherry Lane is actually at the bottom of the wall pictured in those drawings.
I am asking the Commission to recognize the unique nature of the elevation change between 301 Polmer Park and 300 Cherry Lane properties and not allow a second floor to be built along the North side of the property line.
My wife and I believe that this large structure sitting on top of a high hill will impact the neighborhood in a negative manner and will change the charm of the Regency style of the Cul de sac neighborhood.
My wife, Patty, and I would be happy to speak directly with any Committee Member of the Commission regarding our request.
Sincerely,
Peter Garvy
300 Cherry Lane