Present were Chairman Harry Iceland; Vice-Chairperson Patricia by cwy33203

VIEWS: 13 PAGES: 15

									JHRB M eeting M inutes
Novem ber 18, 2002
Page 1

                 JUPITER HISTORIC RESOURCES BOARD (JHRB)
                         REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
                              November 18, 2002


The meeting was called to order by Chairman Harry Iceland at 6:30 P.M.

ROLL CALL

       Present were: Chairman Harry Iceland; Vice-Chairperson Patricia Magrogan;
       Board Members Vicki E. Silver, William Upthegrove, Patricia Walsh; Thomas Baird,
       Town Attorney, Sam Shannon, Community Development Director, Wendy Harrison,
       Community Development/Staff Liaison, and Patti Thompson, Secretary. Mayor
       Karen J. Golonka and Board Members Chris Edwards, and Ken Rice were absent.

APPROVAL OF AGENDA

Vice-Chairperson Patricia Magrogan moved to approve the agenda with no changes;
seconded by Board Member William Upthegrove; motion passed unanimously.

MINUTES: October 21, 2002

Mr. Upthegrove moved to approve the minutes with no changes; seconded by Ms.
Magrogan; motion passed unanimously.

DISCUSSION OF JUPITER ELEMENTARY

Ms. Wendy Harrison, Staff Liaison, stated that she had been in contact with the Palm
Beach County School District staff related to the status of the Jupiter Elementary School.
The School District advised that they will be seeking direction from the School Board on
historic buildings. Ms. Harrison suggested that the Board consider making a
recommendation to the Town Council to transmit to the School District a letter expressing
the Town’s interest in preserving the 1927 building.

Board Member Patricia Walsh moved to recommend that the Historic Resource Board
request that the Town Council transmit to the School District an expression of support for
the preservation of the 1927 building on the campus of Jupiter Elementary School;
seconded by Ms. Magrogan; motion passed (5-0).

       Iceland       Magrogan     Silver Upthegrove Walsh
         Yes           Yes        Yes       Yes     Yes
JHRB M eeting M inutes
Novem ber 18, 2002
Page 2

REVIEW OF HISTORICAL ORDINANCE IMPLEMENTING LANGUAGE

Chairman Iceland recommended that Ms. Harrison present each group of points and
changes, and then the Board would request any clarifications or information, but not go into
discussion of those points. Then the Board will receive public comments on that particular
point. After public comments, the Board will have discussion, make recommendations and
vote on the points.

Individual site designation: Ms. Harrison stated that this is the process used to
designate an individual property as historic. This Board had previously approved a
recommendation that the property owner approval be able to be overridden by either four-
fifths majority or a unanimous vote. The property owner approval would be encouraged.
There is language added that for each proposed designation of an individual site, district
or archaeological zone, the Board is encouraged to obtain the permission of the property
owners within the designated area. Also, the owners of the property would be given an
opportunity at the public hearing to object to the proposed designation. The notification
time to the property owners was increased to 15 days from 10 days.

Mr. Upthegrove asked if the super majority is four-fifths.

Mr. Thomas Baird, Town Attorney, answered that to be consistent, it would be a super
majority of the members present and voting. If there are four (4) members present, then
it would take three (3) to pass; if there are five (5) members present, it would take four (4)
to pass, and if there were seven (7) members present, it would take five (5) to pass.

Mr. Upthegrove commented that this Board did vote for the super majority.


PUBLIC COMMENTS

Mr. Robert Culpepper, 101 Park Street, Jupiter, stated that he did not agree with a super
majority. He stated that a super majority should be the entire voting body and not just
those present. At a Jupiter Town Council Meeting, which has five (5) members, if there are
three (3) members present making a quorum, two (2) members could vote for this. He
does not agree with this. In his opinion, there should not be any designation unless there
is written approval of the property owner.

Ms. Anna Lee Culpepper, 101 Park Street, Jupiter, read her letter into the record. (See
Exhibit A)

Mr. Sandy Lankler, 88 West Riverside Drive, Jupiter, stated that at one of the meetings he
attended, the Town Council had shown that they were very much in favor of the property
owners’ approval of this entire process. He feels that if an inventory were taken of the
JHRB M eeting M inutes
Novem ber 18, 2002
Page 3

privately owned properties concerned, there would be few in number. Some of the owners
might want to be historically designated, but the only way to find out is to ask the owner.
In his case, he received a letter stating that the property that he wasn’t finished
constructing on Riverside Drive, unfortunately could not be designated as historic. All of
the work that went into checking out his property, including taking pictures, could have
been avoided if someone informed him that there was an interest in his property, and gave
him the chance to make the decision as to whether he wanted to be involved. Mr. Lankler
indicated that the people need to be involved in these decisions. Mr. Lankler suggested
that the Town write letters to the property owners involved and tell them the good news that
the situation has shifted from the first time that the letters were written. He mentioned that
the Historic Board should have a super majority.

Mr. Michael Culpepper, 18937 129th Drive, Jupiter, read his letter into the record. (See
Exhibit B)

Ms. Anna Current, 711 Ryan Road, Jupiter, stated that she is amazed that we can come
this far after the big meeting with the out-pouring of the Town’s people standing up against
designating their property without their permission, to where the Town Council set a
mandate to this Board to get the input from the citizens and come back with an ordinance
that is implementing this. She feels that the Board is saying that most of the time they will
get the owner’s permission, but there may be some occasion when they will not get the
owner’s permission. In this case, they will have a super majority or majority and overrule
the owner. She believes that the Historic Board is either for property rights, or against
property rights. She feels that the Board has gone part of the way, but not all the way.
Having the approval of the citizens is a way of controlling the behavior of the Town
government. She has worked three (3) jobs to be able to keep her property, and now she
owns it, and no one is going to tell her what to do with her property. She is not stepping
away from this issue. The citizens have worked diligently in giving the Town information.
The Town Council wants big changes, but she feels that this is not big enough.

Mr. Robert Cromwell, P. O. Box 60, Jupiter, stated that he owns the property at the
northeast corner of the intersection of Center Street and Alternate A1A. He feels that
without the owners consent to declare an historical area, it is the same as condemnation
without compensation. The Town has the right to condemn property, but if they do, they
must compensate the owner. He feels that it should be the same in this case.

Mr. Bill Magrogan, 12 West Riverside Drive, stated that he could not believe that the
Historic Board did not show the courtesy to have a round table discussion. He mentioned
that they had two (2) meetings with Ms. Harrison. They had made five (5) or six (6)
suggestions and they had the understanding that these suggestions would be put in this
package. Mr. Magrogan expressed that the Town does not need a historic ordinance. Mr.
Magrogan expressed that the ordinance as written is a taking. He feels that the
professionals on this Board should have known that this was a taking, and they have a
JHRB M eeting M inutes
Novem ber 18, 2002
Page 4

responsibility to their fellow residents in the Town of Jupiter to say it openly at a meeting
so that it is heard and is recorded in the minutes. He stated that he was concerned that
designation as a historic site will drive home insurance right through the ceiling. Mr.
Magrogan challenged anyone to call their insurance company and find out the impact of
a designation. Mr. Magrogan also indicated if you get a contract to sell property you must
declare it and when you declare it, the price goes down. If you don’t declare it, you can
lose your contract. The professionals should have known this and should have said it in
the public meeting so that it could be heard or on the minutes. Jupiter’s concerns on
history are more of a check in the box for a good report card to the State of Florida, and
not a concern about history. If the Town feels that it needs an historic ordinance, he
recommends that the Town goes back to the seven page ordinance that the CPR prepared
with a lot of the input that is heard tonight. Mr. Magrogan asked that this Board consider:
no ordinance, the CPR ordinance, or a revision for public property only which exists now.

BOARD DISCUSSION

Ms. Walsh put forward the question of does this Board want to save anything in the Town
of Jupiter? We still do not have a list to work with and have not designated anything older
then fifty years old.

Chairman Iceland clarified that the Board must be careful using the word designation
because the inventory consists of buildings that were built before 1956. These are not
houses being recommended for designation.
Ms. Magrogan commented that the inventory was done without the permission of the
people, and it was sent to the State without our permission. It was not done right. It is not
this Board’s fault.

Chairman Iceland stated that one of the first steps in the creation of the Historic Board and
ordinance is having an inventory based on the information that is publicly available of the
age of the various houses in the Town. This does not mean creating a list of properties
that are going to be designated.

Ms. Magrogan remarked that there were house reports sent to Tallahassee requesting
designation. They were sent by Planning and Zoning. She asked Mr. Shannon if he would
like to explain why this happened? He stated that they provided an initial inventory, but did
not ask for designations.

Ms. Magrogan stated that Tallahassee was asked for designations on five (5) different
houses. Mr. Shannon stated that the Town did not request that the State designate
anyone. Mr. Shannon indicated that the question was raised as to whether or not any
structures qualified.

Mr. Shannon then indicated that what is before the Board tonight, as the Town Council
requested, is to review the existing ordinance and make recommendations to the Town
Council as to any modifications that the Historical Board feels appropriate. Until they are
changed, the existing ordinance is in effect.
JHRB M eeting M inutes
Novem ber 18, 2002
Page 5



Ms. Magrogan stated that this was not what she asked. She asked why it was sent off
without us reviewing it in the first place.

Mr. Baird noted that there is an agenda that is approved. He suggested that the public
comment has been heard on Section 27-1675.9, and they have made some comments as
to how they would like the ordinance to read. It is probably time for the Board now to
discuss how the language ought to read and make your recommendations to the Council.
In regards to the super majority, there are three options: a super majority of the members
then present and voting; a super majority of the Town Council; or a unanimous vote of the
Town Council.

Ms. Magrogan made a motion that it be the super majority of the Town Council.

Chairman Iceland asked if there is an established interpretation of a super majority rather
than their establishing one.

Mr. Baird stated that the Board is not being asked to define super majority. The super
majority is a term that means four out of five in the context of the Town Council. The staff
is suggesting that you either recommend to the Council that the designation would have
to be approved by four out of five Council members or five out of five Council members.
This is what you are being asked to pick from.

Ms. Silver mentioned that the motion is to delete the words “or unanimous”, and seconded
the motion. Chairman Iceland responded all in favor of accepting the wording on the first
page of points with the exception of the change that is included in the motion.

Ms. Silver asked a question on #4A regarding the new language: the owners of the
property shall be given an opportunity at the public hearing to object to the proposed
designation. She inquired if this was redundant because the public hearing is for the
purpose of receiving and evaluating comments. Is the last sentence needed?

Mr. Baird answered that it is needed because it reflects the special interest that the
property owner has as distinguished from any other member of the public. It is in there
to ensure that the property rights of the property owner get the special attention to which
they are entitled. It is their property that is being considered. It is giving them almost a
special standing in the process.

Mr. Upthegrove asked who would initiate a designation that a property be made historic?

Chairman Iceland expressed that it can be initiated by the property owner, by the Board,
or by the Town.

Chairman Iceland called for vote on the motion: motion passed (4-1).

       Iceland           Magrogan   Silver Upthegrove Walsh
         Yes               Yes      Yes       No      Yes
JHRB M eeting M inutes
Novem ber 18, 2002
Page 6

District Designation: Ms. Harrison stated the change proposed is to include an election
process which was not in the existing ordinance. If the Board recommends designation of
a district, a vote of the property owners would be taken prior to the public hearing before
the Town Council. The property owners must be notified by certified mail. A majority of
the votes cast and received is required for the Town Council to designate the district. The
proposed language was the result of discussions with the residents.

PUBLIC COMMENTS

Mr. Culpepper stated that the private property owner be notified. If this is the first premise,
then everything would be a lot smoother and a whole lot better. The Board is worrying
themselves to death about how they are going to override the poor property owner who
doesn’t want this thing.

BOARD DISCUSSION

Ms. Silver noted that there was a box on the flow chart that stated property owner notified
by certified mail of potential designation. Is it a matter of where the box is?

Chairman Iceland stated that the Board is very concerned with working with the property
owners at every stage of the process. He agrees that the notification should take place as
early as is feasible.

Ms. Harrison commented that to notify the property owner earlier, she recommended not
to take out the notified by certified mail with potential designation. She would add property
owner notification when the application is initiated. She indicated that she can draft
language with Mr. Baird that will encompass this into the process being discussed.

Ms. Walsh asked that at the time the application for designation notice be sent to the
property owner.

Ms. Silver noted that the language in the notices should be concise and simple.

Mr. Upthegrove commented on the last sentence about the majority of the votes cast. He
would like to see this changed to a two-thirds majority.

Chairman Iceland asked if there are any local governments that require more than a
majority for district designation?

Ms. Harrison answered that there were not any that required more that 50%.

Mr. Upthegrove moved to amend the last sentence to read a two-thirds of the votes cast
and received by the Clerk in favor of the district is required for Town Council to designate
a district; seconded by Ms. Silver; motion passed (3-2).

       Iceland           Magrogan   Silver Upthegrove Walsh
         Yes               No       Yes       Yes     No
JHRB M eeting M inutes
Novem ber 18, 2002
Page 7

Mr. Baird stated that the notice language can be added with another motion.

Ms. Magrogan moved to put at the beginning of the process, property owner notification
by certified mail of potential designation; seconded by Ms. Silver; motion passed (5-0).

       Iceland       Magrogan       Silver Upthegrove Walsh
         Yes           Yes          Yes       Yes     Yes

Development Review of Historic Sites: Ms. Harrison stated that the certificate of
Appropriateness (COA) process would occur once a property was designated. The
direction of the Board was to have a 30-day time limit from receipt of completed COA
applications to approval. What is being proposed here is that the COA will go to this Board
and this Board would have the authority to approve, but the Town Council would serve as
the appeal authority. We can have a 35-day time limit on the approval of the completed
application.

PUBLIC COMMENTS

Ms. Current asked for a clarification of this section.

Ms. Harrison stated that this section only applies to properties that are already designated.

Ms. Current noted that it would be with the owners’ consent if they agreed to it or without
the owners consent if it is the super majority.

Ms. Harrison replied yes, the super majority.

Ms. Current commented that one of the things that bothers her is #(j) that the property
owner has to take it to court. She continued by saying that if you were still after her
property, and she still did not agree, the only recourse she would have is to go to court.
She stated that she does not have that kind of money, and there should be another way
to work this out such as arbitration rather than having to go to the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit
Court.

Mr. Baird responded by stating that this process sets up one appeal to the Town Council.
If the Council doesn’t overturn the decision, the next step in virtually any process whether
it is zoning or historic preservation is that you exercise whatever legal rights you have to
challenge in the court, and ask the court to overturn what the local government has done.
There is a standing order in the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit Court which requires mediation
between the Town and property owner before they will go into the judicial forum. He stated
that mediation can be expensive, but not as expensive as going all the way through a
circuit court appellate proceeding. There is another mediation opportunity depending upon
the kind of remedy one chooses to follow. For example, if you alleged that this was a
property rights violation, contained also within that statute is a compulsory mediation
process prior to the legal proceedings.

Chairman Iceland responded that the Board agrees that they should find amicable ways
to resolve all these issues.
JHRB M eeting M inutes
Novem ber 18, 2002
Page 8

Mr. Baird suggested that in the 30 days to file an appeal with Town Council, perhaps what
the Board should consider inserting in there is that if the property owner elects, he can
request mediation before the Town Council takes up the issue. Mr. Baird indicated then
if the Board makes a decision, and the property owner takes an appeal of that decision,
there is a period of time there where the owner will have the opportunity to go to your
elected officials and indicate their concern. As long as there are the ex parte disclosures,
there should not be a problem with getting heard by elected officials. One of the concerns
here was that there needed to be a speedy time frame for decision making so that the
property owner is not in limbo for a long period of time.

Ms. Current stated that all of the light is being shone on this speedy process, but it still
does not answer the question that if it does go against what the property owner wants, then
their only recourse is to go to court.

Mr. Upthegrove asked the question if a person does file a suit to appeal the decision of the
Town Council, and they prevail, would they be entitled to recover attorney’s fees.

Mr. Baird answered not under an appeal of a local government decision such as a zoning
decision or this. There are provisions under certain constitutional cases, taking cases,
where if you prevail and the court agrees that there has been a taking, then attorney’s fees
could be awarded, or a due process claim.

Chairman asked if there is a motion with the changes to Section 27-1675.10 that were
discussed?

Mr. Upthegrove moved to approve the COA language as presented with the change of
”Preservation” to “Resources”; seconded by Ms. Silver; motion passed (5-0).

       Iceland           Magrogan   Silver Upthegrove Walsh
         Yes               Yes      Yes       Yes     Yes

Tax exemptions for historic properties: Ms. Harrison commented that this is based on
State Statute, and it allows for the maximum exemption which is 100% of the
improvements that are authorized and approved for a period of ten (10) years. The
exemption applies only to taxes levied by the Town. If the Town enters into an Interlocal
Agreement with Palm Beach County, the County taxes would also be exempted. The
owner has to enter into a covenant or agreement with the Town agreeing to maintain those
improvements for the period of the tax exemption. If the improvements are not maintained,
the owner can be assessed for back taxes for that period.

Ms. Magrogan moved to approve the tax exemption for historic property; seconded by Ms.
Silver; motion passed (5-0).

       Iceland       Magrogan       Silver Upthegrove Walsh
         Yes           Yes          Yes       Yes     Yes

Historic resource designation procedures: Ms. Harrison explained that this change
means that upon the mailing of the designation reports to the owners, no permits shall be
JHRB M eeting M inutes
Novem ber 18, 2002
Page 9

issued by the Town for any new construction, alternation, relocation or demolition of the
real property included in the nomination.

PUBLIC COMMENTS

Mr. Lankler remarked that he could have this historical building that the Town wishes to
designate as an historic property could now go and apply for a permit to tear it down. If
you have to put this in, then put it in when the property owners are first told that the
property could be designated as an historical site.

Ms. Harrison clarified that the Board has added a notice at the very beginning of the
process.

Mr. Culpepper stated that he respectfully requests that the Board delete this language
entirely and have the property owner to be the one to initiate this if he wants to.

BOARD DISCUSSION

Ms. Magrogan moved to delete “insert 27-1675.9 historic resource designation procedure;”
seconded by Mr. Upthegrove.

Chairman Iceland expressed that he doesn’t agree. What the Board is saying is that once
the designation process starts, then no action can be taken by the property owner which
would undo the results of the outcome which they have expedited in every way possible.
He is in favor of keeping this language in. It affords the whole process to go forward in a
orderly expedited way.

Ms. Silver asked the question is there a way to measure the time line for implementing this.
Can staff determine how long this delay would be at the most so that they can have some
idea if it is unreasonable based on the process in the ordinance?

Ms. Harrison responded that the process right now would take a public hearing before this
Board and public hearing before the Council and that process is 45 days to two months.
The two months assumes that there are no appeals and additional information is not
required.

Chairman Iceland remarked that if they were in the situation that a property was being
considered for designation and the owner applied for a permit to demolish the property,
would the historic designation possibly, along with many other factors, be taken into
account by the Town.

Ms. Harrison stated that the potential historic designation could not be taken into account
until it is designated. This is the language that gives the Town the authority to consider the
historic nature of the property while it is in that process.

Chairman Iceland called for a vote on the motion to eliminate the insert; motion defeated
(3-2).
JHRB M eeting M inutes
Novem ber 18, 2002
Page 10

       Iceland       Magrogan       Silver Upthegrove Walsh
         No            Yes           No       Yes     No

Ms. Silver moved to approve the amendment as written; seconded by Ms. Walsh; motion
passed (3-2).

       Iceland       Magrogan       Silver Upthegrove Walsh
         Yes           No           Yes       No       Yes

Economic Hardship: Ms. Harrison explained that this is part of the COA process. In an
instance where there is a claim of undue economic hardship, the owner may submit, by
affidavit, to the Board at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. The purpose of
this procedure is that if the Board is requiring an improvement that is too expensive relative
to the value of the property, then the applicant has the opportunity to prove that it is not
worth it.

No public comments.

Ms. Magrogan moved to approve the economic hardship language as written; seconded
by Ms. Silver; motion passed (5-0).

       Iceland       Magrogan       Silver Upthegrove Walsh
         Yes           Yes          Yes       Yes     Yes

Variances: Ms. Harrison stated that this language permits this Board to recommend to
the Zoning Board of Adjustments that if there is a piece of property that would benefit by
receiving a variance to the Town Zoning Code, the Board could make the recommendation.
This gives the Board of Adjustment the authority to use the historic nature of the property
as a reason to grant a variance.

Mr. Baird noted that this makes it easier to get a variance.

No public comments.

Ms. Magrogan moved to approve the new variance section; seconded by Ms. Silver; motion
passed (5-0).

       Iceland       Magrogan       Silver Upthegrove Walsh
         Yes           Yes          Yes       Yes     Yes

Archaeological Considerations: Ms. Harrison stated that the Board’s direction on this
section was to draft a solution that involves zones, but look for ways to make sure that the
creation of zones did not cause hardships to individual property owners, specifically single
family owners. There are two (2) definitions proposed for Archaeological Zone and Field
review.

Ms. Harrison continued that this Board also wanted to minimize the hardship to the
property owners, and the language on the 2nd page includes ways that the property owner
JHRB M eeting M inutes
Novem ber 18, 2002
Page 11

did not have to pay for this review. The three (3) ways are: the Town can bear the cost of
the review; the Town can contract with a qualified individual or firm to perform the review;
or the Town can reimburse the property owner for the expenses.

Ms. Magrogan asked if the people are notified of this and could this trigger a designation.

Ms. Harrison responded that this is not a designation. This is for a zone and a separate
procedure. This could trigger designation if the site was a significant enough site. The first
determination is the creation of the zones and there is also language that clarifies the map
that we have. She referred to the current map that was adopted with the existing
ordinance. The ordinance provides that the map should be updated annually as new
information becomes available.

Chairman Iceland clarified that these are separate issues; designation, COA, and
Certificate to Dig.

Ms. Harrison continued that the designation of an archaeological site would follow the
same process as the designation of an historical site. The field review is before this
process and a much simpler process.

PUBLIC COMMENTS

Mr. Magrogan stated that Mr. Shannon’s Planning and Zoning Division and permit
organization are swamped with work. If you put something in to get it through Jupiter now
is about a year. There is probably a good reason for this, there is zoning, comprehensive
plans. The Planning and Zoning group has the greatest niche in town, because no one
knows where all of this is, only them. He stated that George Gentile might be the only
person that could do the job. Mr. Magrogan repeated that there is a backlog and it will take
a year, and you are adding on two more months. They lose two months so that makes it
14 months to get through. He remarked that this is not right. The only reason he is up
here is because he is resident. This whole ordinance is potentially a harassment tool.
Property rights are a real thing. The Town of Jupiter forces so many ordinances through,
the ones mentioned earlier, all harassment tools that just sit on the shelf and if you do
things that they don’t want, they will apply one of them to you. His property is not a
resource of the Town of Jupiter. He is appealing to the Board to give the property rights
some thought. This ordinance needs to be stopped.

Chairman Iceland addressed Mr. Magrogan stating that he raised a good issue, but he
thinks that Mr. Magrogan misinterprets what the Board is trying to do. The Board is not
trying to lengthen the process, we are trying to shorten the process by imposing firm limits
on the time that any archaeological intervention could take place. By limiting to 60 days
or less, we wouldn’t be adding, it would take place within the time frame that is already
allotted for process. He expressed that if he thought that this was not the case, he would
be very concerned.

Mr. Magrogan indicated that he would like Chairman Iceland to have Mr. Shannon take him
through the process. He stated again that it takes a year to get something through. He
commented that human beings, if they are in the right position and they get irritated with
JHRB M eeting M inutes
Novem ber 18, 2002
Page 12

you, your blue prints will sit and not work. That is human but it happens. You are just
given another tool to harass the people of Jupiter.

BOARD DISCUSSION

Chairman Iceland responded that he is very concerned that Mr. Culpepper and others felt
that the Board is not listening to their concerns. He suggested that the Board has made
many of the changes requested, but not all. In talking about this section, it was up to the
Board to find a way to preserve archaeological sites, but protect the rights of property
owners. The two elements of protecting the property owner rights were expedite the
process and protect the property owner against the costs of any archaeological survey or
mitigation. Both of these were built into the reviewed section.

Ms. Magrogan stated that she came to a meeting and was told that her property, along with
the Lankler property, was going on the master map, and it was to be sent to Tallahassee.
This Board did not vote on this. The Town Council did not vote on this. The next thing she
hears is that there are artifacts found on Riverside Drive. There were never any artifacts
brought forward. No one on Riverside Drive is going to believe an archaeologist.

Chairman Iceland mentioned that these ordinances have worked all over South Florida
entirely avoiding conflicts between property owners and archaeologists.

Mr. Baird put forward that what is under discussion is a proposed amendment to Section
27-1675. The Board needs to either make a recommendation that this 60 day time frame
be the law, and that the Town bears the cost, or not. If these recommendations are not
passed along, then they wouldn’t be considered by the Town Council in terms of changes
to the existing ordinance.

Ms. Silver mentioned that she did not understand the last underlined sentence where it
states approved field review shall contain an effective date not to exceed 60 days at which
time the proposed activity may begin. She asked aren’t there other permitting processes
that are required by the Town Code before the activity can occur.

Ms. Harrison responded that the field review will not delay the project any more than 60
days.

Chairman Iceland commented that he would like to change the previous sentence that
states the Town “may bear the cost of the review.” It should state “the Town shall bear the
cost of the review.”

Ms. Silver suggested that the sequence of the name of the map should be Town of Jupiter
Known Archaeological Sites and Zones Map, because otherwise it is not clear what zones
mean.

Chairman Iceland recommended changing the last sentence on page 10 where it says if
a property is determined to have significant archaeological value. He stated that this might
be misinterpreted to mean a persons entire property. He feels it should read if the site is
determined to have significant archaeological value, because the site might be located in
JHRB M eeting M inutes
Novem ber 18, 2002
Page 13

the corner of the property not affecting the rest of the property.

Ms. Magrogan asked if anyone who digs for a pool in the Town of Jupiter will have to have
an archaeologist come in.

Ms. Harrison answered only if the property is within a zone, they would need the field
permit process to happen.

Ms. Harrison continued that she will work on a new chart. The field review would take
place first before the designation process.

Ms. Silver asked if approving this section locks us into specific zone boundaries?

Ms. Harrison responded that no this would not. This map that has been shown is in effect.
The current ordinance recommends updating the map when new information becomes
available.

Ms. Magrogan suggested that the people whose property had been designated high priority
archaeology through the newspaper and through Jim Pepe, need a letter from the Town
so there is no cloud on their title. She feels that the Town owes this to the people.

Ms. Silver recommended deleting the word “interred” on page 10 (4d).

Mr. Baird clarified the changes to the section for the motion: delete the word “interred” on
page 10; changing word “may” to “shall” on page 11; second paragraph should read “field
reviews shall be completed within 60 days”; changing the map to “Known Archaeological
Sites and Zones Map”; and on page 10 the word “property” to “site.”


Ms. Silver moved to approve Section 27-1675.7 with changes discussed; seconded by Ms.
Walsh; motion passed (4-1).

       Iceland       Magrogan      Silver Upthegrove Walsh
         Yes           No          Yes       Yes     Yes

Demolition of Historic Structures: Ms. Harrison stated that this a minor amendment
where they are proposing to move the two paragraphs (e) and (f) to a different section of
the ordinance and not changing any guidelines so that it is logical.

Emergency Conditions: Ms. Harrison stated that this was suggested by staff so that it
is clear that if you have a historic structure and something happens to that structure, then
you don’t have to leave it in a dangerous condition while waiting to get approvals. This is
a protection for the property owner.

Ms. Silver questioned the word immediately under emergency conditions. She felt there
should be a time limit.

Ms. Magrogan moved to approve Emergency Conditions section as written; no second.
JHRB M eeting M inutes
Novem ber 18, 2002
Page 14

Mr. Baird remarked that this section is to remedy an emergency, it seems that someone
would want to address it immediately and not wait.

Ms. Magrogan repeated the motion to approve section as written; seconded by Ms. Walsh;
motion passed (5-0).

       Iceland       Magrogan       Silver Upthegrove Walsh
         Yes           Yes          Yes       Yes     Yes

Ms. Magrogan brought up that she would like this Board to make sure that the people who
were in the last fiasco, that the Town would supply them with a letter on their property
stating that they are either not designated historically or archaeologically high or low
priority.

Ms. Silver agreed with this and she stated that in the future the Board should have a public
pamphlet available about this whole process.

Ms. Magrogan moved that the people who were targeted last time by the Janus Report
should be notified of the status of their property and if there is a cloud on their title;
seconded by Mr. Upthegrove; motion passed (4-1).

       Iceland           Magrogan   Silver Upthegrove Walsh
         Yes               Yes      No        Yes     Yes

Ms. Silver moved to encourage more public outreach on this part of the Town Code so that
there is a higher priority on communicating what the program means instead of risking
misunderstanding in the future; no second.

Chairman Iceland commented that the Board was faced with setting certain priorities and
our first priority was to review the ordinance and suggest any recommendations with input
from the residents including property owners. He stated that they are recommending
significant changes to the Council.

Ms. Harrison interjected that the Board has recommended changes and those changes will
be considered at the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting that is scheduled for
December 10th.

Mr. Shannon stated that the Planning and Zoning Commission may not necessarily change
anything, they may make a recommendation to the Council, but what the Board has
recommended will also go to the Council.

Ms. Harrison noted that ordinance changes must be heard at two public hearings, and this
Board is welcome at those meetings. She suggested that the Board discuss its work
program at the next Board meeting.

Mr. Shannon suggested that the public outreach should be in the work program so that
staff knows which direction that you want the staff to go.
JHRB M eeting M inutes
Novem ber 18, 2002
Page 15

PUBLIC COMMENTS

Mr. Magrogan commented that it sounds like this committee is done with all of the changes
that you are going to make, and you have not addressed private property owners
permission. We have given you a lot of public input, and he is very disappointed in this
Board.

Chairman Iceland expressed that this Board took into consideration recommendations of
the group, and read them carefully. The Board hasn’t accepted your views entirely, but we
have tried to find ways to meet those concerns.

ADJOURN

Ms. Silver moved to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Mr. Upthegrove; motion passed
unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 9:15 P.M.




______________________________                    ________________________________
Patti Thompson, Secretary                         Harry Iceland, Chairman




(Attachments: Exhibits A & B)

C:\W INDOW S\Temporary Internet Files\OLK7285\November182002Mtg..wpd

								
To top