The 2600 N. Ocean home design has two living floors, basement and rooftop terrace with pool. Renderings provided
The proposed 2600 N. Ocean home as viewed from A1A.
By Steve Plunkett
The city and a developer that for years has wanted to build on a vacant parcel east of State Road A1A have put two contentious lawsuits behind them and agreed to decide within 90 days whether to allow the home to go up on the beachfront.
The City Council on Aug. 27 authorized a “full settlement” of the lawsuits and other legal matters with Delray Beach-based Azure Development LLC and its affiliate 2600 N Ocean LLC over property the developer owns at 2600 N. Ocean Blvd., which is east of the Coastal Construction Control Line.
“Importantly,” Assistant City Attorney Joshua Koehler wrote in a memo to council members, “approval of the settlement agreement does not constitute approval of the CCCL variance, with the City Council reserving its regulatory and review authority throughout the process.”
Council member Andy Thomson emphasized that fact before voting in favor of authorizing the settlement.
The resolution authorizing it “does not in any way indicate that I by voting for it or not, support a variance for this underlying piece of property. I’ve not formed an opinion on that application, nor can I until we hear evidence at a public hearing,” said Thomson, who voted to deny Azure/2600’s first request for a CCCL variance in 2019.
“And I don’t think, speaking for myself, it would not operate as a bias in favor of or against the application for this applicant if we were to approve this (settlement agreement) today,” he said.
Mayor Scott Singer and the other council members concurred with Thomson.
“It will be the first time that I would be hearing this application, so I agree,” Deputy Mayor Yvette Drucker said.
Notable in the settlement is this statement: “The City recognizes that 2600 is entitled to construct a single-family home on the Property, subject to satisfying the CCCL variance criteria as set forth in the City’s Code of Ordinances and all other zoning, building and other applicable regulatory requirements.”
In 1971, state legislators created the Coastal Construction Setback Line, which banned construction seaward of the line. That was altered in 1978 to become the Coastal Construction Control Line, which does not prohibit such construction but puts the buildings under increased review. The line is supposed to preserve and protect beaches from construction that can harm the beach-dune system, speed up erosion, endanger adjacent properties or interfere with public beach access.
Boca Raton passed its own coastal construction line in 1981. With that resolution, the city also scrutinizes any oceanfront projects within its borders.
To get a variance to build seaward of the CCCL, an applicant must meet six criteria, including that special and unique conditions exist that are peculiar to the case and that those special and unique conditions are not directly attributable to the actions of the applicant.
The settlement calls for both sides to pause legal activity for at least 90 days or until the City Council makes its decision on the CCCL variance. If the variance is denied, the settlement becomes void and legal action will resume.
The agreement also calls for the developer and the city to pay their own attorneys’ fees and costs. Boca Raton lawyer Robert Sweetapple, who represents Azure and its affiliate, has said the legal tabs on his side exceed $1 million.
“Obviously we’re pleased that we’re moving forward,” he said after the council’s vote to settle.
The Azure team is waiting to see the city staff’s report on Azure’s current variance application either this month or in October, he said, then for hearings before the city’s Environmental Advisory Board and the City Council itself.
“There’s nothing else to be done other than those hearings,” Sweetapple said.
Azure originally wanted to build a duplex on the parcel with four living floors, an uninhabitable basement and a rooftop terrace with pool. It now wants to construct a single-family residence with two living floors, the basement and rooftop terrace with pool. The four-bedroom home would have 6,931 square feet of air-conditioned space. The rooftop would also have a gym room, a summer kitchen and a spa.
The new design has 2,550 square feet of glass facing the Atlantic Ocean, down about 29% from the original plan’s 3,600 square feet.
“In keeping with the city’s suggestion to maintain modest home designs, the house has been thoughtfully designed to harmonize with its surroundings,” the project’s architect wrote in his submission to the city’s Development Services Department.
2600 N Ocean LLC appealed the City Council’s 2019 denial of a CCCL variance to the Palm Beach County Circuit Court. In September 2020, a three-judge panel ordered a rehearing of the CCCL variance request and disqualified then-Council members Andrea O’Rourke and Monica Mayotte from voting on it based on email messages they sent to constituents and to each other that showed they were not impartial.
Also in 2019, Azure sued the city alleging a violation of the state’s Public Records Act over its late or non-production of officials’ electronic messages. Last February, Circuit Judge Donald Hafele in a case concerning public records requests said Facebook Messenger messages that then-Council member Jeremy Rodgers sent to a constituent also showed bias against the Azure proposal.
The judge noted that “timely production of the Rodgers Facebook Messenger exchanges might well have led to a determination that a majority of Council members had prejudged 2600’s application” and ordered the city to pay Azure’s attorneys’ fees.
In a separate matter brought by the owner of 2500 N. Ocean Blvd., Boca Raton’s only other undeveloped beachfront parcel, U.S. District Judge Rodney Smith disqualified O’Rourke, Mayotte and Mayor Singer from involvement in future issues regarding development there, similarly citing bias on their part. Smith’s final judgment in that case was handed down in March.
Comments