PALM BEACH COUNTY PLANNING, ZONING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT ZONING DIVISION ZONING COMMISSION VARIANCE STAFF REPORT 6/7/2007

Transcription

1 PALM BEACH COUNTY PLANNING, ZONING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT ZONING DIVISION ZONING COMMISSION VARIANCE STAFF REPORT 6/7/2007 APPLICATION NO. CODE SECTION REQUIRED PROPOSED VARIANCE ZV Table 5.B.1.A-3- Pool/Spa Setbacks Front 28-feet 16.5 foot front setback 11.5 feet Table 5.B.1.A-3- Pool/Spa Setbacks Side Street 18-feet 12.3 foot front setback 5.7 feet 5.B.1.A.1.b Accessory Uses & Structure Location No accessory structure shall be located in the front or side street yard. SITUS ADDRESS: 490 Tulip Tree Dr Lake Worth AGENT NAME & None ADDRESS: To allow a pool in the front yard. To allow an accessory structure in the front yard. OWNER NAME & ADDRESS: Emil and Nancy Gadd 490 Tulip Tree Dr Lake Worth FL PCN: ZONING DISTRICT: RM BCC DISTRICT: 07 PROJECT MANAGER: Whitney Carroll, Zoning Consultant LEGAL AD: ZV Title: Resolution approving a Type II Variance application of Nancy Gadd. Request: To allow a reduction of front and side street setbacks for a swimming pool and to allow an accessory use in the front and side street yard. General Location: Approximately 0.23 miles south of Hypoluxo Road and 0.24 miles east of Seacrest Blvd. (GADD VARIANCE) ( ). LAND USE: MR-5 S/T/R: CONTROL #: LOT AREA: 0.25 acres +/- LOT DIMENSIONS: Approximately 100 feet x 71 feet corner lot CONFORMITY OF Conforms CONFORMITY OF None LOT: ELEMENT: TYPE OF ELEMENT: Pool ELEMENT SIZE: +/-18 foot diameter BUILDING PERMIT #: PR# NOTICE OF C VIOLATION: CONSTRUCTION STATUS: Existing APPLICANT REQUEST: To reduce front and side street setbacks for a pool and to allow an accessory use in the front yard. Control No

2 STAFF SUMMARY Proposed is a request to approve several variances as necessary to allow an existing above ground swimming pool to remain. The variances are requested from Article 5 - Supplementary Standards of the Unified Land Development Code (ULDC). The requested variances are specifically from Article 5.B.1.A.1.b (accessory use locations) and Table 5.B.1.A-3 (Pool/Spa Setbacks) to allow the pool to be located within the front and side street yard and to encroach into the front and side street setbacks. According to Article 5.B.1.A.1.b no accessory structures shall be located in the front or side street yard therefore the applicant has requested a variance from this requirement. In addition, the applicant is requesting a 16.5-foot front setback (11.5-foot variance) and a 12.3-foot side street setback (5.7-foot variance) for the existing pool. Typically a 28-foot front setback and an 18-foot side street setback are required for swimming pools. The applicant s purchased the existing home in In June 2006 after numerous other renovations to the property the applicant s installed an above ground swimming pool in their front/side street yard. Code Enforcement cited the applicant s for the installation of the pool without obtaining a building permit. Subsequent to filing for a permit were told they would require the variances as requested. Within Palm Beach County a permit is required for any pool that holds water above 24 inches. The applicant s have stated in their justification statement that no other viable alternatives exist for relocation of the existing pool or the installation of any other type of pool. The justification cites the fact that the home was built in 1959 and constructed on an angle at the intersection of two streets. The home was built in a configuration typical of the past where family living was predominately done in the front of the home. The applicant suggests that through the installation of a fence surrounding their property, an access gate and the planting of mature shrubbery that they have mitigated any negative impacts to adjacent neighbors and passer by traffic. AERIAL POOL LOCATION 204

3 SURVEY AREAS OF VARIANCE POSSIBLE AREA OF RELOCATION LOOKING SOUTH ON SAN CASTLE BLVD. HOUSE ON RIGHT 205

4 SUBJECT PROPERTY POOL LOCATED BEYOND SHRUBS EXISTING ABOVE GROUND POOL SUBJECT PROPERTY POOL TO LEFT OF GATE 206

5 Denial, without Prejudice, based upon the following application of the standards enumerated in Article 2 of the Palm Beach County Unified Land Development Code (ULDC), which an applicant must meet before the Zoning Commission who may authorize a variance. ANALYSIS OF ARTICLE 2, CHAPTER B SECTION 3.E 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: NO. This project is located in a subdivision dating back to the 1950 s. The area is within a Redevelopment and Revitalization area of the County and within the San Castle Countywide Community Revitalization Team (CCRT) target area. The subject parcel is similar to a majority of other parcels located on corners within the community in lot size and structure orientation. From staff s research a majority of properties within the area do not have swimming pools. In a redeveloping area such as the San Castle neighborhood, the Palm Beach County Code Enforcement Division and the Planning Division have made great progress to impart pride for redevelopment and maintenance of property within the perimeters of the Unified Land Development Code (ULDC) and it is uncommon in this area to see accessory uses within the front and side street setbacks as a result of these efforts. Staff can recognize through pictures provided by the applicant and staff site visits that the applicant s have made numerous improvements to their property, which have significantly impacted the appearance of the property in a positive way. However, staff cannot find adequate justification that this parcel is more unique than other similar lots in the same area. In addition according to the survey provided by the applicant s there are alternative design options that exist. Due to the swimming pool being an above ground removable structure the applicant s could potentially relocate the pool to the rear yard within a dedicated drainage easement, with stipulation the applicant obtain approval from the Palm Beach County Land Development Division. 2. SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES AND CONDITIONS DO NOT RESULT FROM THE ACTIONS OF THE APPLICANT: NO. There are no special circumstances that exist that were not the result of the applicant s. Unfortunately the homeowner s bought and installed the pool without confirming the requirements as imposed by Palm Beach County. In addition, the applicant s purchased the home in its current configuration and likely had the opportunity to research whether a pool would fit the parcel. The homeowner s installed the pool without a permit and were cited by Code Enforcement for the violation. Staff does recognize that the pool has limited visibility from the street because it has been embedded approximately 2 feet into the ground and shrub material has been installed along the entire perimeter of the property, which has matured to approximatley 6 feet in height. Though well mitigated, staff can not indicate that these circumstances were not imposed by the applicant s. 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: NO. The granting of these variances will confer upon the applicant s special privileges, which are denied by the Comprehensive Plan and the ULDC. The provisions for accessory uses within the front or side street yard are enforced to create uniformity within a neighborhood or development. In addition where special circumstances apply or where provisions have been enforced to allow pools in the front and side street the ULDC mandates greater setbacks than the principal use and these same standards apply to other accessory uses within the same zoning districts. In this situation the pool is creating a non-conformity in an area of Palm Beach County where much effort has been provided 207

6 through the ongoing efforts of the Planning Division working with area residents and the Code Enforcement Division whom make frequent visits to this neighborhood to ensure uniformity and code compliance. 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: NO. The literal interpretation and enforcement of the provisions within the ULDC will not deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other parcels in the same zoning district. The subject parcel was developed in 1959, similar to other parcels within the same zoning district in near proximity. As such these parcels were developed using standards in force during that time. Most of the homes in this area were not developed with swimming pools. Similar to today s Planned Unit Devlopments and Zero Lot Line homes lot size is a limiting factor when planning for a swimming pool. This parcel is not unique or unlike other parcels within the same zoning district and therefore the granting of these variances using this rationale could be provided by a large number of residents located in similar older subdivisions. 5. GRANT OF VARIANCE IS THE MINIMUM VARIANCE THAT WILL MAKE POSSIBLE THE REASONABLE USE OF THE PARCEL OF LAND, BUILDING OR STRUCTURE: NO. The grant of the variances as requested is not the minimum variance necessary to make reasonable use of the parcel. As stated earlier the above ground swimming pool could be relocated to the rear of the parcel with the proper sign off s from the PBC Land Development Division. Once again, staff recognizes that this area is within an easement and that a potential for removing exist and that it is located further away from a clear line of site of where the homeowner s do their daily living. It is however an area where the homeowner s could locate the above ground pool to without the need for variances. 6. GRANT OF THE VARIANCE WILL BE CONSISTENT WITH THE PURPOSES, GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND POLICIES OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THIS CODE: NO. The granting of these variances will not be consistent with the purposes, goals, objectives and policies of the Plan or the ULDC. Both the Plan and ULDC promote the redevelopment of existing residential communities with provisions for overlay districts and special development regulations. However, the ULDC does not have standards applicable to a swimming pool for the application of special criteria. Staff agrees that the applicant s have made a positive contribution to the neighborhood through their efforts to revitalize the existing property. Unfortunately their overall contribution is not the subject of the variance request. The pool, although well screened and well maintained, it is an amenity to this residence and in this location is inconsistent with the neighorhood in general. 7. THE GRANT OF THE VARIANCE WILL NOT BE INJURIOUS TO THE AREA INVOLVED OR OTHERWISE DETRIMENTAL TO THE PUBLIC WELFARE: NO. The grant of this variance could be injurious to the area due to the fact that the area is in a redevelopment mode and the approval of this variance could prompt other homeowners to seek the same or similar relief. It should be noted that the applicant s have installed a gate to their drive way which connects to a perimeter fence to secure their property which would meet the requirements as enforced by the Building Division for the grant of a pool permit. Therefore the threat of accidental intrusion by uninvited guests into the pool is reduced. 208

7 209