PALM BEACH COUNTY PLANNING, ZONING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT ZONING DIVISION ZONING COMMISSION VARIANCE STAFF REPORT 8/5/2010

Transcription

1 PALM BEACH COUNTY PLANNING, ZONING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT ZONING DIVISION ZONING COMMISSION VARIANCE STAFF REPORT 8/5/2010 APPLICATION NO. CODE SECTION REQUIRED PROPOSED VARIANCE ZV V1 3.E.1.C.2.a.1 Planned Development Districts (PDD) Performance Standards 200 feet of frontage along an arterial or collector street 0 feet of frontage Eliminate frontage requirements V2 3.E.1.C.2.a.2 PDD Performance Standards Legal access on an arterial or collector street Legal access to an arterial or collector street Legal access to an arterial or collector street V3 3.E.3.D. Multiple Use Planned Development (MUPD) Property Development Regulations. CLO FLU minimum frontage of 200 feet 0 feet of frontage Eliminate frontage requirements V4 3.E.3D. MUPD Property Development Regulations. IND FLU minimum frontage of 300 feet 0 feet of frontage Eliminate frontage requirements V5 3.E.3.D. MUPD. Property Development Regulations. CL-O FLU minimum lot size of 3 acres 2 acres 1 acre V6 3.E.3.D. MUPD Property Development Regulations. IND FLU minimum lot size of 5 acres 2.79 acres 2.21 acres SITUS ADDRESS: th St. S., Boca Raton, FL AGENT NAME & Chris Barry ADDRESS: Jon E Schmidt & Associates 2247 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd. West Palm Beach, FL ZC August 5, 2010 Page 146

2 OWNER NAME & ADDRESS: Boca Raton Commerce Center II, LLC 751 Park of Commerce Dr. Boca Raton, FL PCN: ZONING Industrial Light (IL) with a Conditional Overlay Zone (COZ) DISTRICT: BCC DISTRICT: 05 PROJECT Carol Glasser, Site Planner II MANAGER: LEGAL AD: ZV Title: Resolution approving a Type II Zoning Variance application of Boca Raton Commerce Center II, LLC by Jon E Schmidt & Associates, Agent. Request: to allow the elimination of frontage requirements and legal access on an arterial or collector street and a reduction in minimum lot size for a Planned Development District. General Location: West of Boca Rio Road at the terminus of South 210th Street (BOCA RATON COMMERCE CENTER) ( ) FUTURE LAND Industrial (IND) S/T/R: USE (FLU): CONTROL #: LOT AREA: 4.79 acres +/- LOT DIMENSIONS: feet in width feet in length CONFORMITY OF Conforming lot size CONFORMITY N/A EXISTING LOT: Non-conforming lot frontage: Zero (0) frontage OF ELEMENT: BUILDING PERMIT #: N/A NOTICE OF VIOLATION: N/A CONSTRUCTION Construction per the previously approved plan ceased STATUS: APPLICANT REQUEST: To allow the elimination of frontage requirements and legal access on an arterial or collector street and a reduction in minimum lot size for a Planned Development District. STAFF SUMMARY This application precedes: 1) Application SCA requesting to change the land use designation of the north 2 acres from the IND FLU designation to the Commercial Low-Office (CL-O) FLU designation and, 2) Application PDD requesting to rezone the entire site from the IL Zoning District to the Multiple Use Planned Development (MUPD) Zoning District. Contingent upon Board of County Commissioner (BCC) approval of application SCA for the land use amendment the subject site will have a split land use: CL-O on the north 2 acres and IND on the south 2.79 acres. (See Figure 2, PDD Preliminary Site Plan included herewith for information only.) Contingent upon Zoning Commission approval of the variance requests, application PDD may be scheduled for the October 7, 2010 Zoning Commission hearing and both application SCA and PDD for the October 28, 2010 BCC hearing. TYPE II ZONING VARIANCE REQUEST Proposed are 6 Type II Variances from the Unified Land Development Code (ULDC) for the Boca Raton Commerce Center. Four variances are requested to eliminate frontage requirements and legal access on an arterial or collector street for a Planned Development District (PDD), and 2 variances are requested from PDD minimum lot size requirements. The 2 Type II Variances requests from PDD minimum lot size are based on the proposed split CL-O and IND land use designations. Contingent upon BCC approval of SCA for the land use amendment, a variance is requested for the proposed north CL-O portion of the site from the CL-O MUPD minimum lot size requirement of 3 acres to 2 acres (-1 acre) to support a 15,000-square foot office use; and, for the south IND FLU portion from the IND MUPD minimum lot size requirement of 5 acres to 2.79 acres ( acres) to support a 9,300-square foot warehouse use. The proposed office use in the CLO- ZC August 5, 2010 Page 147

3 MUPD Zoning District and warehouse use in the IND-MUPD Zoning District are permitted uses subject to final site plan approval by the Development Review Officer (DRO). Staff is recommending approval of the 4 Type II Variances to eliminate frontage and legal access requirements subject to 5 Conditions of Approval as indicated in Exhibit C based on the findings. Staff is recommending denial of the 2 Type II Variances for a reduction in minimum lot size for a PDD based on the findings. GENERAL LOCATION, PREVIOUS APPROVALS AND EXISTING CONDITIONS The subject site is west of Boca Rio Road at the terminus of South 210th St. Legal access is via a 25-foot wide paved drive aisle through the adjacent Boca Rio Center Planned Industrial Park (PID) (84-30) parking area that is approximately 578 feet in length from Boca Rio Road to the east property line of the subject site. (See photo below.) The subject site is land-locked. Legal access is provided via an ingress/egress access easement that has been granted and revised in accordance with previous Development Orders for both the subject site and the adjacent Boca Rio Center (84-30). Ingress/egress easement (South 210th St.) through the adjacent Boca Rio Center parking area Previous Approvals on Northern 1.79-acre Portion On February 28, 1974, the BCC approved Resolution R to rezone the north 1.79 acres of the subject site from the Agricultural Residential (AR) Zoning District to the IL Zoning District. On October 31, 1985, the BCC approved Resolution R to add the north 1.79-acre portion to the Boca Rio Center PID lying adjacent to the east. On September 22, 2005, the BCC approved Resolution R for a Development Order Amendment (DOA) application of Public Storage, Inc to delete the 1.79 acres from the Boca Rio Center PID and a concurrent application to add the 1.79 acres to the Expert Auto Transport Inc. (97-32) 3-acre site to the south. Previous Approvals on Southern 3.0-acre Portion ZC August 5, 2010 Page 148

4 On October 23, 1997, the BCC approved Resolution R to rezone the southern approximately 3-acre portion of the site from the AR Zoning District to the IL Zoning District with a COZ to allow the development of a 2,400 square foot office building for an auto transport facility. On January 14, 1998, the Development Review Committee approved the Final Site Plan of Expert Auto Transport, Inc. On January 31, 2002, the BCC approved SR to grant a 2-year time extension for development of the property to be initiated to December 4, On January 23, 2003, the BCC approved SR to grant a time extension to June 10, On August 28, 2003, the BCC approved SR to grant a 2-year time extension to June 10, On August 25, 2005, the BCC approved SR to grant a 2-year time extension to June 10, Previous Approvals for Entire 4.79-acre Parcel On September 22, 2005, the BCC approved a DOA application for Space Plus via Resolution R to add the northern 1.79 acre portion to the existing 3-acre Expert Auto Transport, Inc. on the southern portion of the subject site and to reconfigure the site plan to allow 71,692 square feet in 2 warehouse buildings. The Boca Raton Commerce Center Final Site Plan dated October 10, 2007 indicates 58,356 square feet of warehouse use in 2 buildings. On January 29, 2009, the BCC approved SR for a 3-year time extension to September 22, 2011 for commencement of development and a revocation of concurrency for the approved unbuilt warehouses. Previous Variance from frontage requirements The Board of Adjustment (BofA) approved BA on November 18, 2004 to allow a variance from ULDC Article 3.E.1.C.2 for zero frontage along an arterial or collector street for the subject site. On December 15, 2005, the BofA approved a 12-month time extension to November 18, 2006 for commencement of development to vest the variance. Variance BA to allow zero frontage on an arterial or collector expired and is not vested. A previous variance from pervious surface area granted by the BofA on April 21, 2005 under BA has also expired. Minimum pervious area is no longer a Code requirement. COMPATIBILITY WITH SURROUNDING LAND USES NORTH FLU: Zoning District: Supporting: SOUTH FLU: Zoning District: Supporting: EAST FLU: Zoning District: Supporting: WEST FLU: Zoning District: Supporting: Medium Residential, 5 units per acre (MR-5) Agricultural Residential (AR) West Lakes of Boca Raton Inc. Co-op Mobile Home Park (MHP) IND General Industrial (IG) Post Office IND IL with a Special Exception for a PID Boca Rio Center (84-30) Warehouse, Self Storage, Auto Repair High Residential, 8 units per acre (HR-8) Planned Unit Development (PUD) Townhomes Via Ancho (96-48) aka Mizner Point ZC August 5, 2010 Page 149

5 NORTH: West Lakes of Boca Raton Inc. Co-op Mobile Home Park (MHP) SOUTH: Post Office (loading area) ZC August 5, 2010 Page 150

6 EAST: Boca Rio Center (84-30) WEST: Townhomes Via Ancho (96-48) aka Mizner Point ZC August 5, 2010 Page 151

7 ULDC REQUIREMENTS V1,V2,V3,V4 Per ULDC Article 3.E.1.C.2.a.1 PDD Performance Standards, a PDD is required to have 200 feet of frontage along an arterial or collector street for a PDD. Per ULDC Article 3.E.1.C.2.a.2 PDD Performance Standards, a PDD must have legal access on an arterial or collector street. Per ULDC Article 3.E.3. MUPD Property Development Regulations as indicated in Table 3.E.3.D, an MUPD with a CLO FLU is required to have a minimum frontage of 200 feet and an MUPD with an IND FLU is required to have a minimum frontage of 300 feet. The requested variances to allow the elimination of frontage requirements and legal access on an arterial or collector street are inextricably tied together; therefore, V1,V2,V3, and V4 are analyzed together for each of the 7-variance standards V5,V6 ULDC Article 3.E.3 MUPD. Property Development Regulations as indicated in Table 3.E.3.D requires a MUPD utilizing a CL-O FLU to have a minimum lot size of 3 acres and a MUPD utilizing an IND FLU minimum lot size of 5 acres. The proposed CL-O portion is 2.0 acres and a variance of 1-acre is requested. The remaining IND portion would be 2.79 acres, thus a variance of 2.21 acres is requested. The requested variances to allow a reduction in minimum lot size for the proposed CL-O portion and the remaining IND portion are inextricably tied together; therefore, V5 and V6 are analyzed together for each of the 7 variance standards. FINDINGS OF FACT The proposed project is an infill project located in a predominately developed area that is adjacent to residential to the north and west and is land-locked to the rear of a PID. The approved survey dated May 17, 2010 indicates a 50-foot wide ingress/egress easement known as South 210 th St. exists through the Boca Rio Center PID per deed (ORB 5590 PG 1385 and ORB 5711 PG 1271) allowing access to the subject site per a Condition of Approval for the adjacent Boca Rio Center PID. Variance BA to allow zero frontage on an arterial or collector has expired and is not vested. The applicant must seek new variances from frontage and legal access requirements. A variance from legal access/frontage requirements for the land-locked site would be required of any proposed Zoning District. Access to the previously approved Expert Auto Transport on the southern 3-acre portion of the site was via a 30-foot wide ingress/egress easement through the Boca Rio Center PID and through the northern 1.79-acre undeveloped portion (ORB 3171 PG 16). The subject 4.79-acre site has existed in its current configuration since September 22, 2005 with BCC approval of concurrent applications to delete the northern 1.79 acres from the Boca Rio Center PID, and add the northern 1.79 acres to the existing 3-acre Expert Auto Transport, Inc. site (97-32). The 1.79-acre portion maintained its IL Zoning District when added to and deleted from the adjacent PID. The deed to the current property owner, Boca Raton Commerce Center II, LLC, is dated October 31, To implement the previously approved Final Site Plan dated October 10, 2007 for 58,356 square feet of warehouse use, approval of a new traffic statement for traffic concurrency and a Type II Variance to allow zero (0) frontage is required. ZC August 5, 2010 Page 152

8 Figure 1 Aerial ZC August 5, 2010 Page 153

9 Preliminary Site Plan dated June 21, 2010 for application PDD included herewith for information only. ZC August 5, 2010 Page 154

10 STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends approval of V1, V2, V3, and V4 subject to conditions and denial of V5 and V6, based upon the following application of the standards enumerated in Article 2.B.3.E Type II Variance Standards of the Palm Beach County Unified Land Development Code (ULDC), which an applicant must meet prior to making a motion for approval of a zoning variance. Zoning Commission (ZC) Hearing July 1, 2010 At the July 1, 2010 ZC Hearing, this application was postponed to the August 5, 2010 ZC Hearing for failure to post the property in accordance with ULDC Article 2.A.1.J.3. Motion to postpone carried by a vote of 8-0. ANALYSIS OF ULDC ARTICLE 2.B.3.E TYPE II VARIANCE STANDARDS 1. SPECIAL CONDITIONS AND CIRCUMSTANCES EXIST THAT ARE PECULIAR TO THE PARCEL OF LAND, BUILDING OR STRUCTURE, THAT ARE NOT APPLICABLE TO OTHER PARCELS OF LAND, STRUCTURES OR BUILDINGS IN THE SAME ZONING DISTRICT: V1,V2,V3,V4 YES. The subject 4.79-acre site is land locked. The site does not have frontage on any street. The site is in the IL Zoning District with a COZ to mitigate the potential negative impact of industrial development to the adjacent residential uses to the north and the west and to ensure compliance with the engineering conditions of approval. Previously, the northern 1.79-acre portion of the site was included with the Boca Rio Center PID (84-030). A variance from frontage requirements was needed to delete the 1.79 acres from the PID. BA was granted on November 18, 2004 along with a time extension to vest the variance, but the variance has expired and is not vested. Thus the applicant must seek new variances to eliminate frontage and legal access requirements for the landlocked site. It is important to note that a variance from legal access/frontage requirements for the land-locked site would be required for any proposed Zoning District. V5,V6 NO. The subject 4.79-acre lot was created on September 22, 2005 by combining the northern 1.79-acre parcel with the southern 3 acres Control to allow an auto transport facility. The existing Zoning District is consistent with the IND FLU for the entire parcel and conforms to the minimum lot size of 1 acre. The applicant is proposing to change the FLU of the northern 2.0 acres only to CL-O pursuant to SCA to allow the development of a 15,000 square foot Business or Professional Office. The proposed Zoning District pursuant to application PDD is MUPD. The applicant is requesting a variance from 3.0 acres to 2.0 acres (-1 acre) to allow a MUPD utilizing a CL-O land use and from 5.0 acres to 2.79 acres (2.11 acres) for a MUPD utilizing an IND land use for the southern portion of the site. Neither request will meet the minimum lot sizes pursuant to ULDC Table 3.E.3.D. In addition, the ULDC does not allow uses interchangeably corresponding to both the CL-O FLU and the underlying IND FLU. These circumstances are applicable to all MUPDs and are not peculiar to the subject site. The applicant could revise application SCA to request a CL-O FLU for the entire site to allow the proposed Office Business or Professional building. The minimum lot size of an MUPD with a CL-O FLU is 3 acres so the 4.79-acre site would meet the minimum lot size requirement without the need for any variance. However, the warehouse use would not be permitted. Commercial uses are generally considered less incompatible to adjacent residential uses than industrial uses per ULDC Table 7.F.9.B Required Incompatibility Buffer Types. 2. SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES AND CONDITIONS DO NOT RESULT FROM THE ACTIONS OF THE APPLICANT: V1,V2,V3,V4 YES. The applicant, Boca Raton Commerce Center II, LLC, purchased the land-locked site on October 31, 2007 pursuant to the existing ingress/egress easements to Boca Rio Road. The subject 4.79-acre site was created in its current configuration with no frontage on or legal access on Boca Rio ZC August 5, 2010 Page 155

11 Road with BCC approval on September 22, 2005 of a DOA application for Space Plus via Resolution R to add the northern 1.79 acre portion to the 3-acre Expert Auto Transport, Inc. site (Control ). The special circumstance of the 4.79-acre size of the overall parcel and that the parcel is land-locked behind an existing PID and Post Office loading area, and adjacent to residential on 2 sides, which requires creativity and flexible property development regulations to adequately address incompatibilities, access, screening, and lack of visibility issues to develop. V5,V6 NO. The subject site conforms to minimum lot size of its current IL Zoning District and is consistent with the corresponding IND FLU. However, the 15,000-square foot office use proposed by the applicant would not be permitted in this location. Even though the subject site is negatively impacted by the lack of control over the access point and limited control over the access drive aisle, an existing lot that conforms to minimum lot size requirements cannot rezone to create a non-conforming lot or lots as in the case of the proposed split 2-acre CL-O FLU and 2.79-acre IND FLU. Property development regulations for minimum lot size can be met for a MUPD utilizing a CL-O FLU for the entire site to develop the land-locked infill site and allow for uses permitted in the CLO Zoning District. 3. GRANTING THE VARIANCE SHALL NOT CONFER UPON THE APPLICANT ANY SPECIAL PRIVILEGE DENIED BY THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THIS CODE TO OTHER PARCELS OF LAND, BUILDINGS OR STRUCTURES IN THE SAME ZONING DISTRICT: V1,V2,V3,V4 YES. The subject site was not included with the original approval of the Boca Rio Center PID adjacent to the east. At that time, an Engineering condition of approval was approved by the BCC requiring the Boca Rio Center to grant an ingress/egress easement to Boca Rio Road. The subject site has legal access to, not legal access and frontage on an arterial or collector street. Granting of the variance to eliminate frontage requirements and the literal interpretation of the ULDC requirements will not confer a special privilege upon the applicant. The subject site has no control over the access point from Boca Rio Road. The subject site benefits from and is also encumbered by various ingress/egress easements that have been recorded pursuant to previous development orders. The ingress/egress easement was determined to be sufficient by Engineering with the recommendation of a condition of approval to allow access for the land-locked site through the Boca Rio Center drive aisle. Adequate ingress/egress was reaffirmed with the approval of the DOA application to delete the 1.79-acre portion from the PID and allow the creation of the subject landlocked 4.79-acre site. V5,V6 NO. Infill development and redevelopment is encouraged in the Plan and the Code. One of the purposes of a Planned Development District is to provide opportunities for development patterns which exceed the expectations of the standard zoning district and to allow for the creative use of land to encourage infill development. One pedestrian amenity is required per 100,000 square feet of gross floor area of all PDDs. MUPD property development regulations require minimum lot sizes for the corresponding FLUs including CLO and IND. The ULDC does not allow interchangeable uses corresponding to both the CL-O FLU an underlying IND FLU in a MUPD. However, the subject infill site could request a CL-O FLU for the entire site to meet MUPD property development regulations for minimum lot size to allow the proposed Office, Business or Professional building and for the efficient use of the land within a MUPD. 4. LITERAL INTERPRETATION AND ENFORCEMENT OF THE TERMS AND PROVISIONS OF THIS CODE WOULD DEPRIVE THE APPLICANT OF RIGHTS COMMONLY ENJOYED BY OTHER PARCELS OF LAND IN THE SAME ZONING DISTRICT, AND WOULD WORK AN UNNECESSARY AND UNDUE HARDSHIP: V1,V2,V3,V4 YES. The subject site was not included in the Boca Rio Center adjacent to the east under the original approval of the PID. At that time, an Engineering condition of approval was approved by the BCC requiring the Boca Rio Center to grant an ingress/egress easement to Boca Rio Road. The subject site has legal access to, not legal access and frontage on an arterial or collector street. Literal interpretation and enforcement of the terms of the Code would not allow the parcel to develop as a MUPD and cause an unnecessary hardship. ZC August 5, 2010 Page 156

12 V5,V6 NO. Attempts to develop the subject site under separate approvals on the northern and the southern portions have been unsuccessful. The subject site is encumbered by significant easements, must mitigate incompatibilities to the north and west, has very limited control if any over the access to the property boundary, and is land-locked with no visibility from any right-of-way for potential customers. The 4.79-acre site could develop as an MUPD meeting the minimum lot size requirements for a CL-O FLU for the entire parcel subject to the approval of revised SCA application to request a CL-O FLU for the entire site. The CL-O FLU would allow the proposed Office, Business and Professional building under the flexibility of the MUPD property development regulations. The CL-O FLU would allow 1 primary building and an additional building on the site without the need for unnecessary buffering between the buildings. 5. GRANT OF VARIANCE IS THE MINIMUM VARIANCE THAT WILL MAKE POSSIBLE THE REASONABLE USE OF THE PARCEL OF LAND, BUILDING OR STRUCTURE: V1,V2,V3,V4 YES. The land-locked site has no frontage and could not meet the minimum property development regulations for any zoning district without the grant of the variance. Variance BA has expired and is not vested. The subject site could not be developed under the previously approved plan without the grant of a new variance to eliminate frontage requirements. V5,V6 NO. The 4.79-acre site could develop as an MUPD meeting the minimum lot size requirements for a CL-O FLU for the entire parcel subject to the approval of revised SCA application to request a CL-O FLU for the entire site. The CL-O FLU would allow the proposed Office, Business and Professional building under the flexibility of the MUPD property development regulations. The CL-O FLU would allow 1 primary building and an additional building on the site without the need for unnecessary buffering between the buildings. 6. GRANT OF THE VARIANCE WILL BE CONSISTENT WITH THE PURPOSES, GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND POLICIES OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THIS CODE: V1,V2,V3,V4 YES. Grant of the variance to allow the land-locked infill site to be developed as a PDD will be consistent with the Plan and the ULDC as it will encourage infill development and allow for a development that exceeds the expectations standard zoning districts, provides for the efficient use of land by the integration of multiple uses within a unified development, protects adjacent residential uses from potential adverse impacts, provides interconnection between uses in and adjacent to the project, allow for a landscape design that enhances the appearance of the project. V5,V6 NO. The goal of infill development could be accomplished without the need for a variance from minimum lot size for a MUPD. The 4.79-acre site could develop as an MUPD meeting the minimum lot size requirements for a CL-O FLU for the entire parcel subject to the approval of revised SCA application to request a CL-O FLU for the entire site. The CL-O FLU would allow the proposed Office, Business and Professional building under the flexible MUPD property development regulations. The CL-O FLU would allow 1 primary building for the proposed Office, Business and Professional use and an additional building on the site without the need for unnecessary buffering between the buildings. 7. THE GRANT OF THE VARIANCE WILL NOT BE INJURIOUS TO THE AREA INVOLVED OR OTHERWISE DETRIMENTAL TO THE PUBLIC WELFARE: V1,V2,V3,V4 YES. Access to the subject site has been through the Boca Rio Center since recordation of the first easement required by condition of approval under Resolution R approved by the BCC on March 29, Engineering condition 3 was carried forward in Resolution R when the northern 1.79 acres portion was deleted from the Boca Rio Center. The Final Site Plan for 58,356 square feet of industrial warehouse use was approved by the DRO on October 10, Grant of the ZC August 5, 2010 Page 157

13 proposed variance to eliminate legal access and frontage requirements to allow the development of less intensity will not be injurious or detrimental to the public or the area involved. V5,V6 YES. Commercial uses are generally more desirable adjacent to residential than industrial uses per ULDC Table 7.F.9.B Required Incompatibility Buffer Types. The more restrictive Type 3 incompatibility buffer is required in any area of a MUPD adjacent to a residential use type regardless if the FLU is IND or CL-O. Grant of the variance would not be injurious to the area or to the public welfare. ZC August 5, 2010 Page 158

14 EXHIBIT C ZONING COMMISSION CONDITIONS VARIANCE-1. The Development Order for this variance shall be tied to the Time Limitations of the Development Order for PDD (ONGOING: MONITORING - Zoning) VARIANCE-2. Prior to final approval by the Development Review Officer (DRO), the approved variance(s) and any associated conditions of approval shall be reflected on the Final Site Plan. (DRO:ZONING-Zoning) VARIANCE-3. At time of application for a building permit, the property owner shall provide a copy of this variance approval along with copies of the approved site plan to the Building Division. (BUILDING PERMIT:ZONING-Landscape) VARIANCE-4. In granting this approval, the Zoning Commission relied upon the oral and written representations of the property owner/applicant both on the record and as part of the application process. Deviations from or violation of these representations shall cause the approval to be presented to the Board of County Commissioners for review under the compliance condition of this approval. (ONGOING: MONITORING - Zoning) VARIANCE-5. Failure to comply with any of the conditions of approval for the subject property at any time may result in: a. The issuance of a stop work order; the issuance of a cease and desist order; the denial or revocation of a building permit; the denial or revocation of a Certificate of Occupancy (CO); the denial of any other permit, license or approval to any developer, owner, lessee, or user of the subject property; the revocation of any other permit, license or approval from any developer, owner, lessee, or user of the subject property; revocation of any concurrency; and/or b. The revocation of the Official Map Amendment, Conditional Use, Requested Use, Development Order Amendment, and/or any other zoning approval; and/or c. A requirement of the development to conform with the standards of the Unified Land Development Code (ULDC) at the time of the finding of non-compliance, or the addition or modification of conditions reasonably related to the failure to comply with existing conditions; and/or d. Referral to code enforcement; and/or e. Imposition of entitlement density or intensity. Staff may be directed by the Executive Director of PZ&B or the Code Enforcement Special Master to schedule a Status Report before the body which approved the Official Zoning Map Amendment, Conditional Use, Requested Use, Development Order Amendment, and/or other zoning approval, in accordance with the provisions of Section 2.E of the ULDC, in response to any flagrant violation and/or continued violation of any condition of approval. (ONGOING: MONITORING - Zoning) ZC August 5, 2010 Page 159

15 EXHIBIT D: DISCLOSURE ZC 8/5/2010 Page 160

16 ZC 8/5/2010 Page 161

17 ZC 8/5/2010 Page 162

18 ZC 8/5/2010 Page 163

19 ZC 8/5/2010 Page 164

20 ZC 8/5/2010 Page 165

21 ZC 8/5/2010 Page 166

22 ZC 8/5/2010 Page 167

23 ZC 8/5/2010 Page 168

24 ZC 8/5/2010 Page 169