PALM BEACH COUNTY PLANNING, ZONING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT ZONING DIVISION ZONING COMMISSION VARIANCE STAFF REPORT February 07, 2013 APPLICATION NO. CODE SECTION REQUIRED PROPOSED VARIANCE ZV-2012-03383 3.D.1.A 10 percent Building Coverage increase SITUS ADDRESS: AGENT NAME & ADDRESS: OWNER NAME & ADDRESS: 12539 Acme Dairy Road Boynton Beach, FL 33473 8880 122nd Pl S Boynton Beach, FL 33473 Maximum building coverage of 40 percent for single family units 12008 Acme Dairy Road Boynton Beach, FL 33473 Collene Walter Urban Design Kilday Studios 477 S Rosemary Ave West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Delray Beach Associates I, LLC; and, GL Homes of Palm Beach Associates 1600 Sawgrass Corporate Pkwy Fort Lauderdale FL 33323 Maximum Building coverage of 44 percent for single family units PCN: 00-42-43-27-05-063-0460; 00-42-46-05-01-025-0000; 00-42-46-05-02-001-0000; 00-42-46-05-04-001-0000 00-42-45-32-05-001-0000 ZONING DISTRICT: Agricultural Reserve Planned Unit Development (AGR-PUD) BCC DISTRICT: 05 PROJECT Carol Glasser, Site Planner II MANAGER: LEGAL AD: ZV-2012-03383 Title: Resolution approving a Type II Variance application of G L Homes of Palm Beach Assocs Ltd, Delray Beach Associates I, LLC by Urban Design Kilday Studios, Agent. Request: to allow an increase in building coverage for Single Family dwelling units General Location: Approximately 2 miles south of Boynton Beach Boulevard on the east side of Lyons Road (VALENCIA ASSEMBLAGE) (2004-00369) LAND USE: Agricultural Reserve (AGR) S/T/R: 18-46-42 CONTROL #: 2004-00369 LOT AREA: AGR PUD Development Area 324 acres +/- Single Family Minimum Lot Size: LOT DIMENSIONS: Minimum Lot Width: 65 feet Minimum Lot Depth: 75 feet LOT CONFORMITY: Conforming 6,000 square feet ZC February 07, 2013 Page 164
TYPE OF ELEMENT: BUILDING PERMIT #: CONSTRUCTION STATUS: APPLICANT REQUEST: Building Coverage: The percentage of lot area occupied by the ground floor square footage of a building or structure. N/A Unconstructed ELEMENT SIZE: A maximum 10% increase in building coverage for Single Family Units NOTICE OF VIOLATION: N/A To allow an increase in building coverage for Single Family dwelling units Proposed is a Type II Variance for the Valencia Assemblage Agricultural Reserve Planned Unit Development (AGR PUD). The 698-acre site was last approved by the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) on July 26, 2012 to allow a 274-acre development area for 698 dwelling units consisting of 82 Single Family and 616 Zero Lot Line (ZLL) dwelling units, and 413 acres of preserve areas. The applicant is requesting a Variance to allow an increase in building coverage from 40% to 44% (+10%) for the 82 Single Family 1-story Single Family units previously approved by the BCC in Pod C and 2 Single Family units in the Model Row pursuant to approval of pending application ZV/PDD/DOA-2012-2436. Access will be provided from Lyons Road (1) and Acme Dairy Road (1). PROJECT HISTORY Application No. Resolution and Request Approval Date PDD-2004-504 R-2005-390 and 391; Rezoning from AGR to AGR PUD February 24, 2005 and Waiver (cul-de-sacs). Note: The applicant's request for an Optional Residential (OR) Pod to allow deviations from Property Development Regulations, which included a request to allow an increase in building coverage from 40% to 45% on select Single Family lots was not approved. PDD/W-2004-504 R-2005-1620; Corrective legal August 25, 2005 PDD/W-2004-504 R-2007-1235; Corrective legal July 26, 2007 PDD-2007-1610 R-2008-264 and 265; Rezoning and DOA to add and delete preserve area February 28, 2008 PDD/DOA-2008-1911 R-2009-706 and 707; Rezoning and DOA to add and April 23, 2009 delete preserve area ZV/PDD/DOA-2012-384 R-2012-1064 and 1065, and ZR-2012-022; Type II Variance to allow a reduction in the AGR PUD perimeter buffer width, rezoning from AGR to AGR PUD, and DOA to reconfigure the Master Plan, add and delete land area, increase the number of units from 380 to 698 (+318), designate the Model Row, delete Conditions of Approval in R-2009-707, and restart the commencement July 26, 2012 ZV/PDD/DOA-2012-2436 clock Resolution N/A; Type II Variance to allow a reduction in the AGR PUD perimeter buffer width, a rezoning from AGR to AGR PUD, and DOA to reconfigure the Master Plan, add land area, add units from 698 to 823 (+125), relocate the Model Row, and modify Condition of Approval (Planning) Application is scheduled for the February 2013 public hearings ZC February 07, 2013 Page 165
SURROUNDING LAND USES: NORTH: FLU Designation: Agricultural Reserve (AGR) Zoning District: Agricultural Reserve Planned Unit Development (AGR PUD) Supporting: Residential (Trails at Canyon, Control No 2006-550; Canyon Springs, Control No 2002-069) SOUTH: FLU Designation: Agricultural Reserve (AGR) Zoning District: Agricultural Reserve Planned Unit Development (AGR PUD) Supporting: Farming (Canyon Isles preserve area, Control No 2002-068) EAST: FLU Designation: Low Residential, 3 units per acre (LR-3) Zoning District: Planned Unit Development (PUD) Supporting: Residential (San Michele PUD, Control No 2000-098) WEST: FLU Designation: Agricultural Reserve (AGR) Zoning District: Agricultural Reserve Planned Unit Development (AGR PUD); Agricultural (AGR) Supporting: Residential and Farming (Canyon Springs, Control No 2002-069; Control No N/A) Summary of Table 3.D.1.A., Property Development Regulations The purpose and intent of Table 3.D.1.A is to provide the minimum lot dimension, minimum and maximum density, maximum FAR, maximum building coverage, and minimum setbacks in each zoning district. The front, side, side street and rear setbacks shall be applied in accordance with the lot orientation as defined by lot frontage. This ensures that development within the County occurs in such a way to minimize any potential adverse impacts on surrounding properties, and ensure compliance with the Florida Statutes by implementing and complying with the policies and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. ZC February 07, 2013 Page 166
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends denial of the request, based upon the following application of the standards enumerated in Article 2, Section 2.B.3.E 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, SECTION 2.B.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. No special circumstances exist that are peculiar to this development that are not applicable to other developments within the same Zoning District. The applicant indicates in their Justification Statement that other AGR PUDs were allowed to have an increase in building coverage via Flexible Regulations. PUDs with approved Flexible Regulations submitted the application under a prior Ordinance. PUDs approved since the adoption of the 2004 Code must meet the maximum building coverage of 40% for Single Family lots or the applicant must meet all 7 criteria for the Zoning Commission to authorize a variance. Even though the Flexible Regulations were no longer available to developers following the adoption of the 2004 Code, Optional Residential (OR) Pod regulations were. The BCC did not approve the applicant's request for an Optional Residential (OR) Pod to allow deviations from Property Development Regulations with the original rezoning in 2005; thus, the request to allow an increase in building coverage from 40% to 45% on select Single Family lots in 2005 was not approved. Subsequently, the Unified Land Development Code (ULDC) was amended via Ordinance 2006-004 effective February 23, 2006 to delete the Code provisions for an OR Pod. The applicant fails to justify why this parcel of land is peculiar and warrants a need to increase building coverage. The circumstance that the developer chooses to offer only 1-story models to prospective buyers and a buyer chooses a larger model is not a peculiar circumstance. The buyer must then also choose a lot of sufficient size to not exceed the Code's maximum building coverage requirement. The circumstance that the community is restricted to buyers aged 55+ is a circumstance of the Traffic Statement submitted for the project and is not peculiar to this AGR PUD project. If the prospective buyer desires one of the two larger 1-story models, then the buyer must be restricted to the available lots that will support the chosen model (and any customizing/expansion) without exceeding the maximum building coverage requirement of 40%. 2. SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES AND CONDITIONS DO NOT RESULT FROM THE ACTIONS OF THE APPLICANT: NO. The applicant designed the models to offer to buyers. The applicant designed the size of the lots to offer to buyers. The applicant is cognizant of the requirement to meet the Code as of the date an application is submitted. The Development Order Amendment application (ZV/PDD/DOA-2012-384) requesting to relocate the Valencia Assemblage (formerly known as Ascot-Lyons and Atlantic PUD) development area to the vicinity of the Canyon Lakes, Canyon Isles, Canyon Springs, Trails at Canyons communities was required to meet current Code. All of the "Canyon" developments (Lakes, Isles, Springs, Trails at) were originally approved pursuant to applications submitted under a prior Code. The circumstance that two of the four 1-story models will exceed maximum building coverage on a portion of the subdivided lots in Pod C and the Model Row are a result of the applicant's actions. 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: ZC February 07, 2013 Page 167
NO. All subdivided Single Family lots in the AGR PUD Zoning District proposed under the current Code must be designed to support the ground floor area of the models proposed to be constructed. The Code is clear. Maximum building coverage for a Single Family lot is 40%. Moreover, the minimum size of the development area for a 60/40 AGR PUD is 100 acres, sufficient to allow a quality design for the Single Family housing type without conferring a special privilege. The pod for the Single Family units, Pod C, was approved for 30.17 acres. The applicant also has the ability to administratively modify the Master Plan if the modifications are consistent with the representations regarding the original approval, the Conditions of Approval, and the development order, which includes the reconfiguration of pods if determined to be an improvement to the project and no adverse impact on adjacent properties. 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. An unnecessary/undue hardship would not be created. The applicant is requesting to apply only a portion of a prior Code. No property owner in the AGR PUD Zoning District may choose to apply only a portion of a prior Code. 5. GRANT OF VARIANCE IS THE MINIMUM VARIANCE THAT WILL MAKE POSSIBLE THE REASONABLE USE OF THE PARCEL OF LAND, BUILDING OR STRUCTURE: NO. Per the applicant's Justification Statement, the applicant assumes that not every single family lot will utilize the variance due to the variety of models proposed. The applicant is requesting a 10% variance for all 82 lots within Pod C. Therefore, the applicant has not requested the minimum variance. 6. GRANT OF THE VARIANCE WILL BE CONSISTENT WITH THE PURPOSES, GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND POLICIES OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THIS CODE: NO. The Code provides the Type 1B Administrative Variance process for the review of the building coverage regulation. If an increase in building coverage results in a decrease in pervious area, Conditions of Approval may need to be applied to that particular lot. 7. THE GRANT OF THE VARIANCE WILL NOT BE INJURIOUS TO THE AREA INVOLVED OR OTHERWISE DETRIMENTAL TO THE PUBLIC WELFARE: No. An application for Development Order must comply with the ULDC to ensure that all Development Orders are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The Code establishes comprehensive and consistent standards and procedures for the review and approval of all proposed development of land in unincorporated PBC. The intent of the Code as relative to this Variance request is to prevent the overcrowding of land, facilitate adequate drainage, and consistency in established regulations. [Art. 1.A.1.C.] ZC February 07, 2013 Page 168
ZONING COMMISSION CONDITIONS EXHIBIT C Type II Variance - Standalone VARIANCE 1. This Variance is approved based on the Final Subdivision Plan for Pod C Variance Exhibit dated December 19, 2012 for eight-two (82) Single Family units; and, for the two (2) Single Family units in the Model Row. Only minor modifications by Board of County Commissioners or Development Review Officer shall be permitted provided the changes are consistent with this Subdivision Plan. (ONGOING: CODE ENF - Zoning) 2. The Development Order for this Variance shall be tied to the Time Limitations of the Development Order for ZV/PDD/DOA-2012-2436. (ONGOING: MONITORING - Zoning) 3. Prior to application for a Building Permit for any Single Family unit with a building coverage greater than 40%, the Final Subdivision Plan shall be amended to indicate the actual building coverage applicable to that lot. (BLDG PERMIT: BLDG - Zoning) 4. Prior to issuance of a Building Permit for any Single Family unit with a building coverage greater than 40%, a Landscape Plan must be submitted for review and approval showing the location of the required trees with a minimum of one (1) tree per each eight hundred (800) square feet of gross lot area. (BLDG PERMIT: BLDG - Landscape) 5. 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) 6. 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; 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; the 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 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 February 07, 2013 Page 169
Figure 1 Aerial ZC February 07, 2013 Page 170
Figure 2 Final Subdivision Plan for Pod C Variance Exhibit dated December 19, 2012 ZC February 07, 2013 Page 171
Figure 3 Final Master Plan FMP-1 dated September 12, 2012 ZC February 07, 2013 Page 172
Figure 4 Final Master Plan FMP-2 dated September 12, 2012 ZC February 07, 2013 Page 173
Figure 5 Final Master Plan FMP-3 dated September 12, 2012 ZC February 07, 2013 Page 174
Figure 6 Preliminary Master Plan PMP-1 dated January 8, 2013 (consistent with pending application ZV/PDD/DOA-2012-2436 Valencia Assemblage) ZC February 07, 2013 Page 175
Figure 7 Preliminary Master Plan PMP-2 dated January 8, 2013 (consistent with pending application ZV/PDD/DOA-2012-2436 Valencia Assemblage) ZC February 07, 2013 Page 176
Figure 8 Preliminary Master Plan PMP-3 dated January 8, 2013 (consistent with pending application ZV/PDD/DOA-2012-2436 Valencia Assemblage) ZC February 07, 2013 Page 177
Exhibit D: Disclosures ZC February 07, 2013 Page 178
ZC February 07, 2013 Page 179
ZC February 07, 2013 Page 180
ZC Application No.ZV-2012-03383 February 07, 2013 BCC District 05 Page 181
ZC February 07, 2013 Page 182
ZC February 07, 2013 Page 183
ZC February 07, 2013 Page 184
ZC February 07, 2013 Page 185
ZC February 07, 2013 Page 186
ZC February 07, 2013 Page 187
Exhibit E: Justification Statement ZC February 07, 2013 Page 188
ZC February 07, 2013 Page 189
ZC February 07, 2013 Page 190
ZC February 07, 2013 Page 191