REVIEW COMMENTS
DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT
MEMORANDUM NO. DO 98-051
rn rn@rn~w~ 001
MA.~ 1 i 1OC;.Q
.I :v'V......
PLANNING AND
ZONING DEPT.
DATE:
Tambri Heyden, Planning and Zoning A~jfi1istrator
Don Johnson, Deputy Building OfficialftYj'
John Yeend, P.E., City Engineer ~
March 10, 1998
(C(g\p~
TO:
FROM:
RE: HILLS AT LAKE EDEN - MASTER PLAN MODIFICATION,
BUILDING SIZE & SETBACKS (REZN 98-001)
We have reviewed the subject plans and recommend that the request be forwarded for Board
revIew.
Buildin2 Division
No Comments
En2ineerin2 Division
No Comments
MH/SP/KH:ck
Xc: Bulent Kastarlak
Michael Haag
Sebastian Puda
Ken Hall
C:':\ly ))(l~III11..:nls'.llills at I.a\....: Fdcn.Chg.sdha~\..s & rCl(lnillg.J()~
RECREATION & PARK MEMORANDUM-Revised
rn rn@rn~w~ 00
MAR I 6 !$a
PlANNING AND
ZONING DEPT.
TO: Tambri Heyden, Planning and Zoning Director
Re:
Kevin John Hallahan, ForesterlEnvironmentalist 1<) If
Hills at Lake Eden
Master Plan Modification
FROM:
DATE:
March 13, 1998
Site SDecific Requirements
I have no comments pertaining to the individual requests to modify the Master Plan at the
above site.
Comments on issues not Dart of the Master Plan Modification.
I. The applicant should continue to meet all of the requirements of the Preservation Area
Management Plan (November 1995) document. [see document section 7.0 Long Term
Management p 10] This includes the areas of the two preserve areas comprised of .69
acres and .6 acres for a total of 1.29 acres contained inside the placement of the perimeter
fences. The Master Plan modification document should be revised to:
1. indicate the 3' buffer area is inside the fences containing the two preserve areas (tract
"B" and tract "C" and
2. indicate the installation of the preserve area fences to be placed on the individual
property rear lines and
3. indicate the accurate acreage of each of the two preserve areas once the fences have
been placed on the property lines.
II. The applicant must comply with the Development Order document (12 / 17 / 97) item
#11, and the requirement of the Master Plan document #18. These items pertain to the
height and specifications of the fence being installed around the two preserve areas.
These requirements can be addressed on the application for the re-submittal of the
preserve areas fence permit, in the Building Division.
Code Reference
Code of Ordinances Environmental, Chapter 7.5 Tree Protection.
Hills at Lake Eden. Preserve Area Management Plan. November 1995, C & N
Environmental Consultants, Inc, 222 South U.S. Highway 1, Suite 201, Tequesta, FI.
33469, #(561)- 744-7420
Kjh
file
RECREATION & PARK MEMORA~DUM
ill rn@rnawrn ill
MARIO.
PlANNING AND
ZONING DEPT.
FROM:
Tambri Heyden, Planning and Zoning Director
Kevin John Hallahao, ForesterlEnvironmentalist ~} r
Hills at Lake Eden
Master Plan Mo::lification
TO:
Re:
DATE:
March 9, 1998
Site Specific Requirements
I have no comments pertaining to the individual requests to modify the Master Plan at the
above site.
Comments on issues not part of the Master Plan Modification.
The applicant should continue to meet all of the requirements of the Preservation Area
Management Plan (November 1995) document. [see document section 7.0 Long Term
Management p 10] This includes the areas of the two preserve areas comprised of .69
acres and .6 acres for a total of 1.29 acres contained inside the placement of the perimeter
fences. The Master Plan modification document should be revised to:
1. indicate the 3' buffer area is within the individual rear property lot lines and not a
part of the two preserve areas and
2. indicate the installation ofthe preserve area fences to be placed on the individual
property rear lines and
3. indicate the accurate acreage of each of the two preserve areas once the property line
buffer of 3 'has been redrawn inside the property lines and the preserve fences have
been placed on the property lines.
Code Reference
,
Code of Ordinances Environmental, Chapter 7.5 Tree Protection.
Hills at Lake Eden. Preserve Area Management Plan. November 1995, C & N
Environmental Consultants, Inc, 222 South U.S. Highway 1, Suite 201, Tequesta, FI.
33469, #(561)- 744-7420
Kjh
file
00
Recreation & Park Department Memorandum
PlANNING AND
ZONING DEPT.
Re:
Tambri Heyden, Planning and Zoning Director
John Wildner, Parks Superintendent ~
J../,'l.l'::J () f l,Ak-t f~tJ'/ - ~Ast~pC.-A;'V riJ~h,;Ci"A Ti o",J
To:
From:
Date:
3j;J/1g
I
The Recreation and Park Department has reviewed the above listed plans. Thcre are
currently no outstanding recreation-related issues. The plans may continue through the
normal review process.
JW
CITY (}~' BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
INTER-OFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO:
Tambri Heyden
Planning & Zoning
DATE:
03/02/98
SUBJECT: Hills at Lake Eden
FROM: Ofc. .gl _ REFERENCES: PZ 98-062
Police Depart
ENCLOSURES:
I have no comment in reference to the purposed modification.
l~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .8: ~ ~.
PLANNING AND
FILE:; nEZ}~~~wr.-
RECREATION & PARK MEMORANDUM-Revised
rn rn@rnO\Yl~ rn
M6i I 6 IBl
PlANNING AND
ZONING DEPT.
Re:
Tambri Heyden, Planning and Zoning Director
Kevin John Hallahao, ForesterlEnvironmentalist 1<) If
Hills at Lake Eden
Master Plan Modification
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
March 13, 1998
Site Specific Requirements
I have no comments pertaining to the individual requests to modify the Master Plan at the
above site.
Comments on issues not part of the Master Plan Modification.
I. The applicant should continue to meet all of the requirements of the Preservation Area
Management Plan (November 1995) document. [see document section 7.0 Long Term
Management p 10] This includes the areas ofthe two preserve areas comprised of .69
acres and .6 acres for a total of 1.29 acres contained inside the placement of the perimeter
fences. The Master Plan modification document should be revised to:
1. indicate the 3' buffer area is inside the fences containing the two preserve areas (tract
"B" and tract "C" and
2. indicate the installation of the preserve area fences to be placed on the individual
property rear lines and
3. indicate the accurate acreage of each of the two preserve areas once the fences have
been placed on the property lines.
II. The applicant must comply with the Development Order document (12/17/97) item
#11, and the requirement of the Master Plan document #18. These items pertain to the
height and specifications of the fence being installed around the two preserve areas.
These requirements can be addressed on the application for the re-submittal of the
preserve areas fence permit, in the Building Division.
Code Reference
Code of Ordinances Environmental, Chapter 7.5 Tree Protection.
Hills at Lake Eden, Preserve Area Management Plan, November 1995, C & N
Environmental Consultants, Inc, 222 South U.S. Highway 1, Suite 201, Tequesta, FI.
33469, #(561)- 744-7420
Kjh
file
DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT
MEMORANDUM NO. on 98-051
rn m@rnowrn rn
tNIIIII
PLANNING AND
ZONING DEPT.
DATE:
Tambri Heyden, Planning and Zoning A~ni1istrator
Don Johnson, Deputy Building OfficialftYj'
John Yeend, P.E., City Engineer ~
March 10, 1998
TO:
FROM:
RE:
HILLS AT LAKE EDEN - MASTER PLAN MODIFICATION,
BUILDING SIZE & SETBACKS (REZN 98-001)
We have reviewed the subject plans and recommend that the request be forwarded for Board
revIew.
Buildin2 Division
No Comments
En2ineerin2 Division
No Comments
MHlSP/KH:ck
Xc: Bulent Kastarlak
Michael Haag
Sebastian Puda
Ken Hall
C:\My ()o~ul11enls\llills at I.a\..e Edel1.Chg.sdha~\..s & raol1ing.do~
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
FIRE & LIFE SAFETY DIVISION
Memorandum No. 98-226
@
Tambri Heyden, Director
Planning & Zoning Division
~I!.
Bob Borden, Asst. Fire Marshal
March 10, 1998
Hills at Lake Eden
Between S. Seacrest Blvd. & Swinton Ave.
REZN 98-001
We have no objection to this project moving forward.
CC: File
ill~@~nw~
001
I
MAR l 0 1$8
PLANNING AND
ZONING DEPt
(C(Q)~1f
03/10/1998 14:17
5617310065 ~
CITY OF BOVNTON
l\1&\fORANDUM
UTILITIES DEPT. NO. 98 - 086
TO:
Tambri Heyden, Planning and Zo .
FROM:
John A. Guidry, Utilities Director
DATE:
March 10. 1998
SUBJECT: Hills at Lake Eden - Rezoning Request
We offer no connnents on the requested rezoning at this time.
PAGE 01
~ ~@rnowrn ill
iU
MAR I 0 11'I
PlANNING AND
ZONING DEPT.
Please refer any questions on this matter to Peter Mazzella of this office.
JAG/PVM
xc: Peter Mazzella
Skip Milor
File
PhMe t
Fe!( .
Phone It
flax'
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
FIRE & LIFE SAFETY DIVISION
Memorandum No. 98-226
~.
V
T ambri Heyden, Director
Planning & Zoning Division
Bob Borde{;{sst. Fire Marshal
March 10, 1998
Hills at Lake Eden
Between S. Seacrest Blvd. & Swinton Ave.
REZN 98-001
We have no objection to this project moving forward.
cc:
File
ill rn@rn~wrn rn
"'OIR
PlANNING AND
ZONING DEPT.
FIRE & LIFE SAFETY DIVISION
Memorandum No. 98-220
rn rn@~nw~ ill
MAR 5 1998
PLANNING AND
ZONING DEPT.
@
FROM:
Tambri Heyden, Director
Planning & Zoning Division
Steve Gale, Fire Marshal 90
Deputy Chief - Fire Rescue Department
TO:
DATE:
March 4, 1998
SUBJECT:
Hills at Lake Eden
Between S. Seacrest Blvd. & Swinton Ave.
REZN 98-001
The buildings should maintain a minimum separation of fifteen feet (15').
The Fire Rescue Department shall be consulted on the house address numbers.
Lots in Tract A and Tract C have the same lot numbers.
CC: File
m
Recreation & Park Department Memorandum
PlANNING AND
ZONING OEPT.
Re:
Tambri Heyden, Planning and Zoning Director
John Wildner, Parks Superintendent ~
)f,'l.l~ () f tAke GJiIiJf./ - ~Astl;(fC-A,-v n,o't:xh'''A Ti ot.-J
To:
From:
Date:
3jfl/rg
I
The Recreation and Park Department has reviewed the above listed plans. Thcre are
currently no outstanding recreation-related issues. The plans may continue through the
normal review process.
JW
TO:
CITY uF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
INTER-OFFICE MEMORANDUM
Tambri Heyden
Planning & Zoning
DATE:
03/02/98
SUBJECT: Hills at Lake Eden
Ofc. .gl _ REFERENCES: PZ 98-062
Police Depart
ENCLOSURES:
I have no comment in reference to the purposed modification.
FROM:
oo~@~u~ ~
~-291 \)
'.
PLANNING AND
FILE> RlZn-~~~~~~r.
APPLICATION TRACKING LOG
PROJECT TITLE: HILLS AT LAKE EDEN FILE N: REZN 98-001
PROJECT LOCATION: BETWEEN S. SEACREST BLVD AND SWINTON AVE.,JUST N.OF WESTWARD EXT OF
GULFSTREAM BLVD.
TYPE OF APPLICATION: REZONING
PUBLIC NOTICE REOUlRED: CY IN) 181 REVIEWER'S NAME MIKE RUMPF
AGENT: MIKE ZEMAN ADDRESS:
AGENT PHONE: FAX:
DATE REC'D: 2/17/98 AMOUNT:
RECEIPT NO.:
12 SETS OF PRE-ASSEMBLED PLANS SUBMIITED FOR REVIEW:
2 OF 12 SETS SIGNED AND SEALED D
SURVEY D
LANDSCAPE PLAN D
FLOOR PLAN D
SITE PLAN WITH SITE DATA D
APPLICATION/SUBMITTAL: DATE ACCEPTED:
D~NAGEPLAN D
ELEVATION VIEW DRAWINGS D
COLORED ELEVATIONS RECEIVED D
MATERIAL SAMPLES RECEIVED D
PHOTOGRAPHS RECEIVED D
DATE DENIED:
DATE OF LETTER TO APPLICANT IDENTIFYING SUBMISSION DEFICIENCIES:
DATE OF SUBMITTAL ACCEPTANCE LETTER:
INITIAL 1 ST REVIEW MEMO: DATE SENT:
2/27/98
MEMO NO. 98-062 RETURN DATE: 3/10/98
1 ST REVIEW COMMENTS RECEIVED
MEMON
UTIL. POLlCE-
P.W. PLANNING
PARKS BLDG/ENGR
FIRE "" FORESTER ____
~>-.~~(, '1Ic
DATE OF LETTER SENT TO SENTTO APPLICANT IDENTIFYING TRC REVIEW COMMENTS:
90 DAY CALENDAR DATE WHEN APPLICATION BECOMES NULL AND VOID:
DATE 12 COMPLETE (ASSEMBLED) SETS OF AMENDED PLANS SUBMITTED FOR 2ND REVIEW:
PRE-ASSEMBLED PLANS SUBMITTED FOR REVIEW:
AMENDED APPLICATION D
2 OF12 SETS SIGNED AND SEALED D
SURVEY D
LANDSCAPE PLAN D
FLOOR PLAN D
SITE PLAN WITH SITE DATA D
2ND REVIEW MEMO: DATE SENT:
DRAINAGE PLAN D
ELEVATION VIEW DRAWINGS D
COLORED ELEVATIONS RECEIVED D
MATERIAL SAMPLES RECEIVED D
TRANSPARENCY RECEIVED D
PHOTOGRAPHS RECEIVED D
MEMO NO.
RETURN DATE:
2nd REVIEW COMMENTS RECEIVED
PLANS MEMON DATE PLANS MEMON DATE
UTIL. D POLICE D
P.W. D PLANNING D
PARKS D BLDG/ENGR D
FIRE D FORESTER D
BOARD MEETING DATE:
BOARD:
LAND DEVELOPMENT SIGNS PLACED AT THE PROPERTY. DATE SENT / SIGNS INSTALLED:
DATE:
CITY COMMISSION: DATE:
DEVELOPMENT ORDER RECEIVED FROM CITY CLERK: D DATE:
DEVELOPMENT ORDER SENT TO APPLICANT: D DATE:
S:\FORMS\TRACKING LOG FORM
revised 4/25/97
lJEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM NO. PZ 98-062
FROM:
Kerry Willis, City Manager
Bulent Kastarlak, Director of Development
Steve Gale, Fire Marshal
Kevin Hallahan, Forester/Environmentalist
Don Johnson, Acting Building Official
Clyde "Skip" Milor, Utilities Dept. Chief Field Insp.
Sebastian Puda, Engineering Division
Ofc. Robert Riggle, Police Department
Larry Roberts, Public Works Director/City Engineer
John Wildner, Acting Recreation and Parks Director
John Yeend, Engineering Division
fP'lr:wf2- ~
Tambri J. Heyden, AICP
Planning & Zoning Director
TO:
DATE:
February 26, 1998
RE:
Project
Hills at Lake Eden
Location - 15.40 acres of property located between S. Seacrest Boulevard and
Swinton Avenue, just north of the westward extension of Gulfstream
Boulevard (10 Lake Eden Drive).
Description- To modify the master plan for the Hills at Lake Eden Planned Unit
Development (PUD) as follows:
1) To reduce the required minimum rear setback for pools and screen
enclosures from 29 feet to 20 feet on lots #1 through #9 and on lots
#17 through #25; and
2) To reduce the required minimum side building setback from 10 feet
to 7% feet on lots #1 through #8.
To modify two conditions of the original PUD rezoning approval:
1) To reduce the required minimum dwelling unit size from 2,400
square feet (under air) to 2,250 square feet (under air); and
To reduce the required minimum average dwelling unit size from
2,600 square feet (under air) to 2,450 square feet (under air).
Agent - Mike Zeman
File No. - REZN 98-001
Find attached for your review the plans and exhibits for the above-referenced project. Please review the
plans and exhibits and brina written comments to the TRC Meetina on March 10. 1998. When
preparing your comments, please separate them into two categories; code deficiencies with
code sections referenced and recommendations that you believe will enhance the project.
RETURN PLANS ALONG WITH COMMENTS AS THERE WILL BE ONLY ONE REVIEW.
Page 2
Hills at Lake Eden
TO: TRC Members
RE: Planning and Zoning Memo 98-062
Adhering to the following review guidelines will promote a comprehensive review and enable the
applicant to efficiently obtain Technical Review Committee approval:
1. Use the review standards specified in Part III, Land Development Regulations, Chapter 3, Master
Plan Review and the applicable code sections of the Code of Ordinances to review and formulate
comments.
2. The documents submitted for the project were determined to be substantially complete, however,
if the data provided to meet the submittal requirements is insufficient to properly evaluate and
process the project based on the review standards or the documents show code deficiencies,
additional data and/or corrections should be requested by the reviewer by contacting Mike
Rumpf.
3. Each comment shall reference the section of the code that is incorrectly depicted on the
documents.
4. Technical Review Committee member(s) shall identify in their comments when the plans depict or
when the location and installation of their departmental required improvements may conflict with
other departmental improvements.
5. When a TRC Member finds a code deficiency that is outside of his/her review responsibility, the
comment and the specific code section may be included in their review comments with the name
of the appropriate TRC Member that is responsible for the review specified.
6. If a TRC member finds the plans acceptable, he/she shall forward a memorandum, within the time
frame stated above, to Planning and Zoning. The memorandum shall state that the plans are
approved and that they do not have any comments on the plans submitted for review and that they
recommend the project be forwarded through the approval process.
All comments shall be typed, addressed and transmitted to the Director of the Planning and Zoning
Division for distribution to the applicant. Please include the name and phone number of the reviewer on
this memorandum. Mike Rumpf will be the Planning and Zoning staff member coordinating the review of
the project.
T JH:bme
Attachment
XC: (Memo Only)
William Bingham, Fire Chief
Marshall Gage, Police Chief
John Guidry, Utilities Director
Central File
s:\projects\REZN 98-001 \1 streview-plans
,.-- --.
L JELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM NO. PZ 98-060
TO:
FROM:
Sue Kruse
City Clerk
~II
Tambri J. Heyden, AICP lz:~
Planning and Zoning Director
DA TE:
February 19, 1998
RE:
Re-zoning of Hills at Lake Eden Planned Unit Development (PUD)
REZN 98-001
Accompanying this memorandum you will find one (1) copy of the application and related
documents for the above-reference application. The application fees for staff processing
and review have been forwarded to the Finance Department.
A legal advertisement for same has been prepared for the March 24, 1998 Planning and
Development Board Public Hearing and the April 7, 1998 City Commission Public
Hearing, and will be forwarded to your office after review by the City Attorney and City
Manager. Please be advised that due to last minute revisions to the applicant's master
plan, in order to accommodate the application, my staff mailed the property owner
notices, which occurred February 20, 1998.
T JH:bme
xc: Central File
Attachments
s:\projects\HILLEDEN\REZNlegalnot. wpd
7.A.2
HILLS AT LAKE EDEN PUD
REZONING
DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM NO. PZ 98-080
TO: Chairman and Members
Planning and Development Board
THRU: Tambri J. Heyden, AICP '1j?iJ
Planning and Zoning Director
FROM: Michael W. Rumpf
Senior Planner
DATE: April 7, 1998
SUBJECT: The Hills at Lake Eden PUD (REZN 98-001)
Request for Modification of Master Plan and Rezoning Conditions
INTRODUCTION
Robert Trautman, President of Kennedy Properties, Ltd., property owners, is requesting that the
Hills at Lake Eden Planned Unit Development (PUD) be revised through the modification of
approved setbacks and the minimum and minimum average unit sizes required as a condition of
approval. The Hills at Lake Eden PUD is located on the west side of the intersection of
Seacrest Boulevard and Gulfstream Boulevard (see attached location map in Exhibit "A").
According to the petitioner, the requested changes are necessary to allow for the construction of
four (4) model homes as currently designed, and to increase the number of lots and models that
can be designed to include pools and screen enclosures.
PROJECT HISTORY
The City Commission, on March 19, 1996, adopted the rezoning ordinance for The Hills at Lake
Eden PUD, which action rezoned 15.45 acres of property from R-1-AAB Single Family
Residential to Planned Unit Development with a Land Use Intensity of 5 (PUD w/LUI=5). This
request included a master plan for 56 single family detached dwelling units at a gross density of
3.6 units per acre.
The Hills at Lake Eden PUD was approved with certain design characteristics and conditions of
approval intended to preserve natural site resources and to maximize compatibility of the
appearance and property values with those of the Lake Eden Plat 4 subdivision located to the
west of this project. The design characteristics and conditions regarded, in part, access,
preservation of sensitive lands, buffering and landscaping, minimum and average unit size, and
setbacks. A description of the original project and analysis, and the conditions on which the
rezoning was approved, are contained within Planning and Zoning Department Memorandum
No. 95-648 and the corresponding development order.
On May 21, 1996 the applicant requested the City to decrease the minimum living area
requirement from 2,400 square feet to 1,800 square feet, and to reduce the minimum average
living area requirement from 2,600 square feet to 2,400 square feet. The applicant based this
request upon the claim that the market would not support the housing product produced by
these requirements, which is influenced by the variety of homes (which creates a wide range of
/
REZN 98-001
Page 2
values) found within the neighborhoods that surround the subject property. Although a market
study was not submitted with this request, the applicant indicated that the range of property
values for adjacent properties is $75,000 to $240,000 (including Barrett Heights, Mission Hill,
and Lake Eden Plat 4). This request was denied by the Commission who felt that the request
was not justified, and therefore, the original conditions and intent to maximize compatibility with
the more valuable homes within this area, remained unaltered.
DESCRIPTION/ANALYSIS
The current rezoning petition inc.ludes a request to modify the master plan as follows:
1) Reduce the minimum rear setback for pools and screen enclosures from *25 feet to
20 feet on lots #1 through #9, and on lots #17 through #25; and
2) Reduce the required minimum side building setback from 10 feet to 7% feet on lots
#1 through #8.
*(It should be noted that a typographical error was found in the application after processing was
initiated and notices were mailed. Whereas the application requests to modify the rear pool and
screen enclosure setback of 29 feet, the current approved rear setback for pools and screen
enclosures for lots #1 through #9 and lots #17 through #25 is 25 feet)
This petition also includes a request to modify certain conditions on which the Hills at Lake Eden
PUD master plan was approved, and are described as follows:
1) Reduce the required minimum dwelling unit size from 2,400 square feet (under air) to
2,250 square feet (under air); and
2) Reduce the required minimum average dwelling unit size from 2,600 square feet
(under air) to 2,450 square feet (under air).
These proposed changes are also indicated on the revised master plan as submitted which has
been reduced and included within Exhibit "B".
Applicant's Justification:
The applicant has stated that the four (4) model homes to be sold and constructed in this PUD
were designed not knowing that the square footage (required) would be equal to the air
conditioned space within the home, rather than based on the standard methodology provided
within the city's zoning code for all zoning districts. The established methodology within the
city's land development regulations allows portions of the unit that are not air conditioned to
contribute toward the tabulation of total living area in the home. According to this methodology,
10% of screen rooms, 25% of carports and roofed open porches, and 50% of garages and utility
rooms can contribute toward total living area. In contrast to this methodology, the subject PUD
was approved with the special requirement that living area would be only the air conditioned
space within each dwelling unit. The applicant has apparently designed and begun marketing
homes which do not meet the minimum living area required for each unit within the PUD, 2,400
square feet, when only the air conditioned space is tabulated. As currently designed, two (2) of
the four (4) models are less than the required minimum of 2,400 square feet. The smallest unit
is currently 2,251 square feet under air, which is 149 square feet less than the required
minimum (if the standard methodology for calculating living area was used, this home would
equal nearly 2,600 square feet). The second deficient model is currently 2,333 square feet,
which is 67 square feet less than the required minimum.
Z-
REZN 98-001
Page 3
The second issue to be addressed by this request relates to setbacks and their restrictive effect
on pools and screen enclosures. As the models are currently designed, insufficient space
remains on many lots to allow for pools and screen enclosures. Specifically, only two (2) of the
developer's four (4) models, including the two-story model, are feasible with pools and screen
enclosures on 31 or more of the 56 lots in the PUD. Furthermore. whereas the "Oak" model (2-
stOry) can be built with a pool on all but 3 lots. the "Birch" model (2400 sauare feet) can only fit
with a pool on 4 of the 56 lots (see Table 1 in Exhibit "C"). The developer is willing to accept
this restriction on most lots; however, the developer's desire to create a more diverse
streetscape (Le. not limited to just two-story homes) along Seacrest Boulevard and Swinton
Avenue is the reason for requesting the setback modifications for the 15 lots along the east and
west sides of the project. Without this change, the developer would be prevented from including
pools and/or screen enclosures on any of these lots, or must limit those lots to the two-story
model. As the developer is anticipating a typically high demand for the pool feature, and would
prefer not to limit these lots to the two-story model, for both marketing and appearance reasons,
they are motivated to request the setback modifications. Prior to application submittal, staff met
with the applicant to attempt to resolve the problems through redesigning of the models.
However, the conflict between the minimum unit size requirement and the setback restrictions
on pools and screen enclosures made this solution not viable. For example, to fit the pool within
the required setbacks, the unit must be reduced in size. However, by reducing the size of the
models, the unit may be reduced, or reduced further below the size threshold. With respect to
the reduction in the side building setback on only lots #1 through #8, from 10 feet to 7 ~ feet,
this requirement has also been specifically requested to allow for the pool and screen enclosure
features with the "Maple" model. which is the smallest model and desianed as a "courtyard" unit.
In summary. althouGh the focus of this analysis is on the pool and screen enclosure issue. it
must also be emphasized that all sinGle stOry models just fit within the special buildina setbacks
on most of the lots. As explained to staff by the applicant. throuGh the use of scaled down
templates representinG each model. the units as currently desiGned, just fit within the reauired
buildina setbacks for the PUD. Therefore. the models cannot be increased in size without
encroachinG into the special setbacks established for this PUD.
Comparison with Approved Plan:
Although the required minimum living area, 2,400 square feet, exceeds the minimum living area
required within the adjacent R-1-AAB zoning district, 1,800 square feet, it was the adjacent
subdivisions of Lake Eden Plat 4 and Mission Hill on which this project was reviewed for
conformity and compatibility. With respect to living area, the 2,400 square feet minimum, and
2,600 square feet minimum average requirements were established by the City Commission.
To evaluate the compatibility of this request with adjacent neighborhoods, staff collected current
data on dwelling unit sizes for the four (4) adjacent neighborhoods that are nearest to the
subject project. As a source for this data, staff used the ISC computer data base which is
acquired through membership dues paid annually by the City. Samples of data were collected
on single family homes within the subdivisions located to the east (Barrett Heights, Debonaire
Estates, Gulfstream Estates, Plat 2), north (Mission Hill), west (Lake Eden Plat 4) and south
(various parcels within Delray Beach) of the Hills at Lake Eden PUD. From the data base, staff
utilized the field (data) labeled "living area", which staff assumes to be comparable to the "under
air" measurement on which this project is being designed and evaluated. The lowest average
unit sizes were found to the east and south. The average unit size to the south, generated from
a sample of four (4) homes, is 1,459 square feet. The largest unit totals 1,943 square feet. The
average unit size to the east is 1,641 square feet, which sample of 13 homes was led by a
2,337 square foot unit. Dwelling unit sizes to the north further increased to an average of 2,268
..3
REZN 98-001
Page 4
square feet, and from a sample of the nearest 15 homes, the largest unit contained 4,071
square feet. A sample of 31 homes from the west generated an average unit size of 2,563
square feet, which sample was led by a 3,615 square foot dwelling unit (the 31 homes were
those located generally the nearest to the subject PUD, and excluded those larger, distant
properties located as to have lake frontage as well as canal frontage). It should be noted that
the neighborhoods to the north and west contain units that range as low as 1,494 square feet
and 1,883 square feet, respectively.
Compared with housing data collected on homes to the west of this project, the smallest home
allowed in the Hills at Lake Eden PUD project, if this request was granted, would exceed the
size of the smallest home in the sample taken from the west by 367 square feet. Furthermore,
the average home size within the subject PUD would be no more than 113 square feet less than
the average home size observed in the Lake Eden Subdivision to the west.
With respect to changes to minimum setbacks for pools and screen enclosures (on selected
lots), staff estimates that the adjacent neighborhoods to the west and north contain rear
setbacks for pools or screen enclosures that range between 10 feet and 40 feet. This significant
range is a factor of the existence of canal easements within Lake Eden Plat 4, which adds to lot
depth, and the city's minimum rear setback requirement for conventional residential zoning
districts of 8 feet. The original purpose for this more restrictive minimum rear setback (the
minimum setbacks for the remaining lots are 5 feet and 10 feet) on lots #1 through #8 and #17
through #25 is based on the proximity of those lots to Seacrest Boulevard and Swinton Avenue.
As these lots back up to these two rights-of-way, the applicant had established a rear setback
that was more similar to a front setback than the 8 foot rear setback required by city regulations
for pools and screen enclosures in order provide a buffer zone between the right-of-way and the
backs of the homes. The request would reduce this minimum setback from 25 feet to 20 feet (to
the edge of the buffer area along the street), which would be 5 feet less than the required front
setback, and 5 feet greater than the required rear setback for structures within the R-1-AAB
zoning district.
Lastly, the applicant requests to reduce the side building setback on lots #1 through #8 from 10
feet to 7 % feet. Whereas the original setback was established based on similarity with the side
setback required within the original and adjacent R-1-AAB zoning district, the requested setback
of 7 % feet is the same side setback provided on the remaining 48 lots. Again, this 2 % foot
reduction in side setback would increase the number of models that would fit on these eight lots
with pools and screen enclosures, from one model to three models.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff has evaluated this request using applicable city regulations, based on compatibility with
adjacent properties, and considering the original intent of the conditions placed on this master
plan by the City Commission when approved in 1996. Staff recommends that the rezoning
request submitted by Kennedy Homes, Ltd., for the Hills at Lake Eden PUD, be approved
unconditionally (see Exhibit "0"), based, in part, on the following general points that summarize
the impact of the proposed changes to unit size and setback requirements:
1) There will likely be no impact on adjacent properties from the change in the minimum
unit size of 150 square feet (from 2,400 square feet to 2,250 square feet), as this change
would not produce a noticeable difference in the PUD, and since approximately one-third
of the sample of homes evaluated from the adjacent Lake Eden subdivision are less
than 2,250 square feet;
r
REZN 98-001
Page 5
2) There will likely be no impact on adjacent properties from the change in the minimum
unit size of 150 square feet (from 2,400 square feet to 2,250 square feet), as this change
would not produce a noticeable difference in the PUD, and since approximately one-third
of the sample of homes evaluated from the adjacent Lake Eden subdivision are less
than 2,250 square feet 113 square feet greater than the proposed minimum average;
3) While the proposed change would allow the smallest units to be 2,250 square feet, or
less than the original average size of 2,400 square feet, nearly an equal number of units
will be in excess of 2,300 square feet in order to maintain the required minimum average
size;
4) The change in minimum unit size to 2,250 square feet still exceeds, by 450 square feet,
the minimum unit size permitted in the original, and adjacent zoning district, R-1-AAB,
Single Family Residential; and
5) To accommodate pools and screen enclosure features in this PUD would increase the
ultimate proiect property values and therefore further the intent to maximize its
compatibility with the adiacent properties within the adiacent Lake Eden Subdivision.
6) The effects or benefits of granting the changes in setbacks (e.g. diversity in home types,
more aesthetic streetscape, greater land values) would be preferable over the effects of
these requirements on the PUD, which include a predominance of two-story units along
the visible perimeter of the development, and the lack of pools and screen enclosures
which would otherwise produce a more valuable residential development (this point is
based on the assumption that the units could not be altered in a preferable way that
would allow each unit to fit onto each lot and meet both unit size and all setback
requirements).
7) Given the conflict between the buildina setbacks and the minimum livina area
reauirement. the chanaes reauested represent a preferable compromise to satisfyina the
intent of both area and setback restrictions to maximize the compatibility of this proiect
with adiacent properties.
Attachments
S:\Planning\SHARED\WP\PROJECTS\HlllEDE N\REZN 98.001 \StaffReport.doc
-
...::J
LO~ATION MAo
HILLS OF LAKE EDEN
~~ fj': j1i!fJj/.~L~' ~1 ;' . f!//Ilr~~T"i';~ ~tfl::. ~, ' ~11Lr1~~';V;
I)) 1:7L r, ,111,/,1-: ~.:' / / J: ~-- -..,' ,', 9 1/ lJt- ,T' I,;"!: " r "!!l ~ ~J Lf'
F ,-----:--l ~ ~ ,./ ~,' '~rll-]ll I I I If I I I I . b.:.:. : / /~, - j ,. N-/:U,',~
~ r I I : I .t i,' / I J-Jr :1 I r ( I I I - -<- ,
'"~., :-, fl'" I ';-:,;' ," ; '; /1 F;~ 11 I fI 1111111=_=_ ==_ =_ ': 'fT.;~: ::: IIi I IIIIIII~' :;
v ~- . . " <i1 -1 I I - ;'''' rt:.."'i/ I -
Jfh't I~' .H-1,:'" ,il 1 II J ----; I 1;- I ....._ _ ;', ' If..lL T ~~~ r I Lf r in!
" ~ ; 'l L:T I I I i( ....- """... -' ITiIT I - ~H iiI
f-., ; ~ j ++ H-1 : : J r / I 1 I I. ..,', II I :" CD L.JJ- ....'-1: 1
, ';/) 'J T I I 1 'rill I I -, .Ff::u I I I -.... !
r : . 1 i I I I i \ 'llj 'flj . ~;II! "":"" ~ '~n fl I I I . - f' "
-, '~/(! J Ie: '\ ',!- ~_.' i . .=- 1i['7 I T _.{ ,I
~"1::' f, !'l,~,/I;~ cE- ~ill~PIO~ ~1~ ~.~ '-H ~ t: :, I' / 11'1 = ~ ,~I
\ \: ,:t' '/ J~ . (~....1 Lili I I I I P " r").
,Ii ~?0/ \ -~-~ ~1r5',;'i i'i'Jf TlI'IR-'lAA'-;" I ~C:j'
C /1 ~ . I I , '" -; , ~. '" I il If -r= - -, --- I;" ~
, .: i~ I, "." . ~-j,--'
:'''% /",J- ,'It I ...1"~~ ,n a1~~ ~ ..1 ;
I " " Pi \ 'it; , i
I ,-....... \ l' I J I I! I I Jl1~" .
: i/:'j ... --: IJ-::::., ~ '" : ',' '.~" I I : ,.:.-fr.~ \,l. 1/1,'
, /1" i/ .k- I- 1 ! ~JL~.l ~. ~------: _~=! L~L~ 1J t , .
'/ / I..' 1't . \ , 1. ........ ..p:o:ts........ . . T ' , . c.
,'/ /:' /1 ,,,,;~ I T -. "m!r;- ; _: ? :::.::(:..t.,tJi'15~~6. It" L . ! . NOT .~ ! .'
/ ' " :' I, . ' / :' - " ~ ~~ '~~~:'~::':-'::~::~~:~::~~:~::l t-i- ~L= I:!I J ~ C I' TNy ~ 1/; r
, " f' I I ~..;::<_~___ . .' .' ..~., . .' . .' . '-=1= r'J1l ~I .
.1 ,'.I' , ,i' .. L/-..,' ~~. ~.I ~~. ~r' .' 1" ...:....:...:... .....:...:....:...:....:. ct:J,1o I:' ' -'; J r r T I r ~ " ~ I I
" / ' !. I '" ~loJ. _ . .. . ...- .. . .. ..- jl : I '.
" , I .!' ,<( ~ .-.....? \ J '- ... '- ~ ....... '.' .... .... . .............. tii .' ,~.-! _. "
i,l/ '. '_ ),~' ..,,~ ' i Tl~(l j" , i - ! I \! m' ;
/ . i . ,I ,'~ t.~ ~,r~/ ,~LJ.~ [~ I , ,I', . -= 1-illI ,I ~~10-I'Jj ,'~:' I ,t.:~.
. ,/( ~ .' !--< ".-~)' t,il' '.' 't~ ',T ':~ '="Bnjl~ II' : '~.:'
i'i '.\j" .--.-1,", ~L;.dJ~'J.J. J'i · ~;' ~1
I -\\~,. T) ,-,,;.--.,;"[-, l, - '. ~
I\'~ - P"" ' 't~ : ~ '1_:~, ' . , '~ -- :' /~
[ . \ 'I \ . ~' .,.~-,~ ' , I I! j , "...!
- \.~,- ,.,~...... . (:.' .'.:' ~,'. ,; i ,"'1; I
. '. . - -,- ~--~ \ \ ~ I "//1
" ,,~ [n.clj__, .' =.0. \ \---1 ,: I
~\.., ~"~t_L_- ._-~ \r-- I ,-- n_ r .1/1',' L.' .,: ./
~" t--. .. -~~-_. '. '.. \\.r'--! .-, ',..., -" llL .1 i'; --.{~ .: - '. ; 'I !
,,~-, z ~ I' 1 "." - ~ I
~-..""': ~ . ~---- _. .-. /,~.. . ~
[Jf]J'_fI ryJ~t~;l~~~ lIII11tl.MI~ES
, ~lJ_L_, #0400. '800 FEET
"'( _PMNNINIi pepr. ":J~9'
J
/
\
~Hro+t.: ~ ""PUH-~ RJJIM.I
mz...,~J!: r;Ll'L.,:'YlT,'-"'"
;. .t..__,,,...=
:1lll ''''1'''-'
I.iii. LAKE EOEN
'i'''l <P' '0 'U'OIVI510
il';~l ' '0 1221 H 'LA' NO I
,-,,; ,
ZOHE ,,.., i~ <:,~
11m a. ,: ::
JIW I' -! " a ')
".:; _._ c-.--.----- . z
':I" _.._." ._0'. ._' - -! - . - - ~ I, ~,~ ,~.
illl !! .~~~;,~:]~ ".. ...::.. .:' ~;:~:-,~"~lli~~9~:-' - ':.~ ,:-"'!f~:=+
, 0 . ",~%r;~ ~ ,~ - ~"~ · i' '
~g~' ~ '" i -<_ ,:.:'''(" \ : I 'i; I I -
..,_, I; " .' ,,=" ~" '\ . 1 ii z ~
,'" ~' " ,,~c · 0
.i',' ' / _'~' ,"'""" .._ ~" ~., . . " 'l ~ ;; ~
;,.. " f / ."..i';c' ,~!"~" - ,,-.. C', I" ' ." :
(T1 ~
;.:' ~: l;"~~~: ' . II~P" ~
1~ii!.il;1 ' ! ~.~,~ ~;.:11, ".. ;.<. .,. I~" . ~ 'I Z . ~~ '
. ~ !J; 'w..w....._. ,~ " .0 ...
:;;;1\, ; '.0
:'iU;,~ ; 0 ~g'
':~i''iill ' ·
~i~ I-~ t
~.,.u~
~Isr. \ '"
~!::. .Ir ~ ,-,. · ..
!r~:!~. II :~~' ,.~ _ ....4 .;z<n
~ ~ :::~.I!;I~~ ~. . . .<... .' .' ... ~... 14N.'N~;;Y' _ ~ ~
l;~;,ii l...n -0 1 ~ ~,,,,,':' _ T --, --
" .. ~ .=' . . ," ' , ' ,. ' .. - .
~!'I ~~ !I:~, ': ;:1 '.;I.'~i'I' .0 ~l~J:~ '0' \I~ .~~}.l,j "'1. ~;;
,,_. , . \ ~ .' . ~ .. ,,' , -
~.~..\:i ! : ~II--: ,\l .', " ,~ ~. i !!~ ~
~' ! ; \.: !:: ~,., I, /' '''w'~';,,,~': /'" ,,' , f'o, :l! .~ ""- ~
:::: i '
_ I 1" "
; ,~ !. ""~ ~ 1~ i~,:~ .... .. _ '~ ; i . \!;!Ul
il!!illlllillll" "'\~~" "<C. ' , "" ., , ," .. ,,~,r !;!~mm
1~lllJiif,ln _..~ " -" I .. L" C ~'~" '....I "I~~ - ~;mt iI1,[
~Jbn ~1:11111P, - ,,~ ~. I'" : !;' !
:~il'li IRI'II 'I ~-=~_ .. ,~. . il ,~!!1~ ; i:;;_ ~
1,1 I" ,I!, ,_, -At. _ __ ~ _ '" " I -(I; - i
~, 'Ill II!. , ';:'~~~;...' '" E - . - , ....1.JO I'D i~ : :
,!" __," ,. _ '.' , " _ ,'""'0' .. ,L, _ ,_ .. ~. -' I" .G. ;;
~,-- ...._~ ' ' , ""'''''' 8 ,'-" ,,J, 1>17" ;;
,. I ,b" ',~ · ." ~_...",.", "0. ".- - "
. ~ ~ ~F~! Hifl' " d ~i'" ..' ' ' , " i~ '1
:z :.; ~ ~:'~, I! 1'1" . .. I i i1lll111Jl11 " ... · . , ' ' '.' -. 'e' , - .
;:;~~ i' ~;i :ilhiU ' : ' --~i i l!i,,~li,l' ~1~IIPiln!Pll~n!jlllml!ilI!I'!I!!i':I,i'E;''';:':';'''2- '
,!:~~ i !; Il!l!j!ll' ' ' ~ 11!! 11~1!!II,il ii,:It!!II:!u!!lI-iU!lllii!l!i~ j!l~!I:!l'h'n!:l:fH'UH1 1l!IH"i'
.,' ~~ ' 'lJ' i i 1,1 .' PlI I"l!!il~ l,'ilpil i'dlll~I!III1' iJ',iliIi ,-W?'i'I'FlIi":' 11 H;X U : ,!: ;;:1,
I: ~ ~Cl~ ~ -:: ~I' fi Ill" '- ii' .; ti,1 IIW,",III!Ur1iiiJi IU dm "j"i!Uhll Illi,lni!ilnlli,HWI nl!imm~m~~H~,I! ,'i;~mE
,'0 .. ;i !' i\ " ,,'" ''",'' ,., ~,.. ,..'.. ,I "'oI''"! "," ' ..', 0.--...--"...'..... ,.,..,
\ y ~I i t' ~': ;.:..',; ., ': Ill!!l!!!!ii!hll !ili! 111;UIlI.i liHilU1tiJ.i nll! \ n~! mn\;\~' m, :Hi!;' ,; !\
'I", ""'~ ~..: <:''' ; ~ ~' iil,- ':i'! n~p ij; lip!l ~iili HmH 1m Himii 1!\:i!lij\ 1 !
,. ,_~,_, ._", _ ,..___ q I! '!":^ ).",1,...\, ",\ ,; ""'1'1' l :.;;:;: _.ii~. ,I,
-'.n' ,-."'.., ..,
. ""-" L
;::~P\
~~j~
.. ~
m
! ~:r~:~
~ .x~~'.:;j'!:
! :~1I ~~~
~ ~~-~.~
~ ... ~~;~;
: ~~~~~~
a ~~:~:~
~ ~;~ i~
'" I: -....
ii ~<<S:;~~
...,.. ~e~~-
_o,.,:r< ;li
ni~i;
o~....o::::.
Jo"''''''''-
n : 'i
<; ~
z
HILLS AT LAKE EDEN PUD REZN 98-001
TABLE 1: IMPACT OF DEVELOPMENT RESTRICTIONS ON PROPOSED MODELS
(The "X" indicates where a model could be constructed, given the setback restrictions on pools/screen enclosures. For example, on lot #1,
of block #1, the "Birch" model can only fit without a pool, and the "Oak" model canfit with or without a pool. The underlined lot numbers
represent those lots to be affected by the proposed setback changes.)
Model Name> > > > > > > "Birch" "CVDress" "MaDle" "Oak"
Model Size (sq.ft) > > > > > 2,400 2,333 2,251 2,868
Model Type> > > > > > > > conventional I-story conventional I-story cou tvard conventional 2-story
Lot No. no pool with pool no pool with pool no pool with pool no pool with pool
Block #1- 1 X X X X X
2 X X X X X
3. X X X X X
4 X X X X X
.2 X X X X X
6 X X X X X
1 X X X X X
8 X X X X X
2 X X X X X X X X
10 X X X X X X
11 X X X X X X
12 X ~ X X X X X
13 X X X X X X
14 X X X X X X
15 X X X X X X
16 X X X X X X
11 X X X X X X X X
1.8 X X X X X
12 X X X X X
2Q X X X X X
21 X X X X X
22 X X X X X
23. X X X X X
24 X X X X X
25. X X X X X X X X
26 X X X
27 X X X
28 X X X
29 X X X X X X X X
30 X X X X X X
31 X X X X X X
32 X X X X X X
33 X X X X X X
34 X X X X X X
35 X X X X X X
36 X X X X X X
37 X X X X X X
38 X X X X X X
39 X X X X X X
40 X X X X X X
41 X X X X X X
42 X X X X X X
43 X X X X X X
44 X X X X X X
/1
Cont. TABLE 1: IMPACT OF DEVELOPMENT RESTRICTIONS ON PROPOSED MODELS
Model Name > > > > > > > "Birch" "CYDress" "Manle" "Oak"
Model Size (sq.ft) > > > > > 2,400 2,333 2,251 2,868
Model Type > > > > > > > conventional I-storv conventional I-storv COll tvard conventional 2-storv
Lot No. no pool with pool no pool with pool no pool with pool no pool with pool
Block #2- 1 X X X X X X
2 X X X X X X
3 X X X X X X
4 X X X X X X
5 X X X X X X
6 X X X X X X
7 X X X X X X
8 X X X X X X
9 X X X X X X
10 X X X X X X
11 X X X X X X
12 X X X X X X
12
17.
Developer or Builaer:
Kennedy Properties, Ll _
18. Architect:
19. Landscape Architect:
20.
Site Planner:
Gentry Engineering
21.
Civil Engineer:
Ken Krueger
22. Traffic Engineer:
23.
Surveyor:
Atlantic Caribbean & Mapping
II. MATERIALS TO BE SUBMITTED WITH APPLICATION
The following materials shall be submitted in two (2) copies, unless otherwise indicated:
(please check)
_a. This application form.
_b. A copy of the last recorded warranty deed.
_c. The following documents and letters of consent:
_(1) If the property is under joint or several ownership: a written consent to the application
by all owners of record,
_(2) If the applicant is a contract purchaser: a copy of the purchase contract and written
consent of the owner and seller, and
_(3) If the applicant is represented by an authorized agent: a copy of the agency
agreement, or written consent of the applicant, and
_(4) If the applicant is a lessee: a copy of the lease agreement, and the written consent of
the owner, and
_(5) If the applicant is a corporation or other business entity: the name of the officer or
person responsible for the application, and written proof that said person has the
delegated authority to represent the corporation or other business entity, or in lieu
thereof, written proof that he is in fact an officer of the corporation.
_d. A sealed boundary survey of the subject parcel by a surveyor registered in the State of Florida,
dated not more than six (6) months prior to the date of submission of the application, at a scale
prescribed by the Planning Department, and containing the following information:
_(1) An accurate legal description of the subject parcel.
_(2) A computation of the total acreage of the subject parcel to the nearest hundredth
(1/100) of an acre.
Page 3
_(3) A tree survey, '^ , conforms to the requirements of thr -"ity of Boynton Beach Tree
Preservation Oroll jance. (Also refer to Page 6, Sec. I, ,].(12) of this application if
property is occupied by native vegetation.) This requirement may be waived by the
Planning Director where found to be unrelated to the land use or zoning issues
involved with the application.
_e, A complete certified list of all property owners, mailing addresses, and legal descriptions for all
properties within at least four hundred (400) feet of the subject parcel as recorded in the latest
official tax rolls in the county courthouse shall be furnished by the applicant. Postage, and
mailing labels or addressed envelopes must also be provided. Said list shall be accompanied
by an affidavit stating that to the best of the applicant's knowledge said list is complete and
accurate. Notification of surrounding property owners will be done by the City of Boynton
Beach.
_f. A copy of the Palm Beach County Property Appraiser's maps showing all of the properties
referred to in paragraph e. above, and their relation to the subject parcel.
_g. A statement by the applicant justifying the zoning requested, including reasons why the
property is unsuitable for development under the existing zoning and more suitable for
development under the proposed zoning,
_h. A comparison of the impacts that would be created by development under the proposed
zoning, with the impacts that would be created by development under the proposed zoning,
with the impacts that would be created by development under the existing zoning, which will
include:
_(1) A comparison of the potential square footage of number and type of dwelling units
under the existing zoning with that which would be allowed under the proposed zoning
or development.
_(2) A statement of the uses that would be allowed in the proposed zoning or development,
and any particular uses that would be excluded.
_(3) Proposed timing and phasing of the development.
_(4) For proposed zoning of property to commercial or industrial districts, where the area of
the subject parcel exceeds one (1) acre, projections for the number of employees. '
(5) A comparison of traffic which would be generated under the proposed zoning or
development, with the traffic that would be generated under the current zoning; also,
an analysis of traffic movements at the intersections of driveways that would serve the
property and surrounding roadways, and improvements that would be necessary to
accommodate such traffic movements. For projects that generate move than five
hundred (500) net trips per day, a traffic impact analysis must be submitted which
complies with the Municipal Implementation Ordinance of the Palm Beach County
Traffic Performance Standards Ordinance.
(a) For projects that generate two thousand (2,000) or more net trips per day, the
traffic impact analysis must be submitted to the City at least 30 days prior to the
deadline for land use amendment and/or rezoning, in order to allow for timely
processing of the application and review by the City's traffic consultant and
Palm Beach County. The applicant shall be billed for the cost of review by the
City's traffic consultant.
Page 4
(b) For projects that generate between five hundred (500) and two thousand
(2,000) net trips per day, the traffic impact analysis must be submitted at the
application deadline for land use amendment and/or rezoning, in order to allow
for timely processing of the application and review by Palm Beach County.
However, if it is the desire of the applicant to utilize the City's traffic consultant
for review of the traffic impact analysis prior to review by Palm Beach County,
then the procedure and requirements outlined under item "a" above shall be
followed.
NOTE: Failure to submit traffic impact analysis in the manner prescribed above may delay
approval of the application.
_(6) For parcels larger than one (1) acre, a comparison of the water demand for
development under the proposed zoning or development with water demand under the
existing zoning. Water demand shall be estimated using the standards adopted by the
Palm Beach County Health Department for estimating such demand, unless different
standards are justified by a registered engineer. Commitment to the provision of
improvements to the water system shall also be included, where existing facilities
would be inadequate to serve development under the proposed zoning.
_(7) For parcels larger than one (1) acre, a comparison of sewage flows that would be
generated under the proposed zoning or development with that which would be
generated under the existing zoning. Sewage flows shall be estimated using the
standards adopted by the Palm Beach County Health Department for estimating such
flows, unless different standards are justified by a registered engineer. Commitment to
the provision of improvements to the sewage collection system shall also be included,
where the existing facilities would be inadequate to serve development under the
proposed zoning.
_(8) For proposed residential developments larger than one (1) acre, a comparison of the
projected population under the proposed zoning or development with the projected
population under the existing zoning. Population projections according to age groups
for the proposed development shall be required where more than fifty (50) dwellings, or
50 sleeping rooms in the case of group housing, would be allowed under the proposed
zoning.
_(9) At the request of the Planning Department, Planning and Development Board, or City'
Commission, the applicant shall also submit proposals for minimizing land use conflicts
with surrounding properties. The applicant shall provide a summary of the nuisances
and hazards associated with development under the proposed zoning, as well as
proposals for mitigation of such nuisances and hazards. Such summary shall also
include, where applicable, exclusion of particular uses, limitations on hours of
operation, proposed location of loading areas, dumpsters, and mechanical equipment,
location of driveways and service entrance, and specifications for site lighting.
Nuisances and hazards shall be abated or mitigated so as to conform to the
performance standards contained in the City's zoning regulations and the standards
contained in the City's noise control ordinance. Also, statements concerning the
height, orientation, and bulk of structures, setbacks from property lines, and measures
for screening and buffering the proposed development shall be provided. At the
request of the Planning and Development Board or City Commission, the applicant
shall also state the type of construction and architectural styles that will be employed in
the proposed development.
Page 5
City of Boynton Beach
Planning and Zoning
Boynton Beach Florida 33425
Kennedy Properties Ltd. would like to make a formal request to make a change to the
master plan for The Hills at Lake Eden. Kennedy Properties is proposing to change the
master plan for the minimum and the average square foot requirements. As well as pool
and screen enclosure setback requirements for lots 1 through 9 and 17 through 25 block
1.
Kennedy is asking to change the minimum alc area from 2400 sq. ft. to 2250 sq. ft. and
the average alc from 2600 sq. ft. to 2450 sq. ft. under air.
Kennedy's second request is to change the rear pool and screen enclosure setbacks on lots
1 through 9 and 17 through 25 from 29 feet to 20 feet as well as the side building setback
for lots 1 through 8 from 10 foot to 7.5 foot.
Kennedy is making these requests in order to build single story homes that will
accommodate pools and screen enclosures. As it stands at the present these lots with 29
foot set backs will barely fit a 2400 square foot single story home. Which is now the
minimum under air requirement.
Kennedy is including a package with charts and examples of each lot for the Hills at Lake
Eden to show which house will and will not fit with pools and or screen enclosures.
Michael Zeman
Project Manager
CG'~
10 Lake Eden Drive
Boynton Beach, FL 33435
-KENNEDY
-MOM..
Phone (561) 736-9188
Fax (561) 736-9467
The current setback requirments for the below listed lots are 29 foot rear for building
and 25 foot rear for pool and screen enclosure
Lots 1- 8 have a side setback of 10 foot
Uving AlC
Area 2400 2333 2251 2868
Model Birch Cypress Maple Oak
Block 1 House wi House House wi House House wi House House wi House
Lot # No Pool with pool No Pool with pool No Pool with pool No Pool with pool
1 Yes NO Yes NO Yes NO Yes Yes
2 Yes NO Yes NO Yes NO Yes Yes
3 Yes NO Yes NO Yes NO Yes Yes
4 Yes NO Yes NO Yes NO Yes Yes
5 Yes NO Yes NO Yes NO Yes Yes
6 Yes NO Yes NO Yes NO Yes Yes
7 Yes NO Yes NO Yes NO Yes Yes
8 Yes NO Yes NO Yes NO Yes Yes
18 Yes NO Yes NO Yes NO Yes Yes
19 Yes NO Yes NO Yes NO Yes Yes
20 Yes NO Yes NO Yes NO Yes Yes
21 Yes NO Yes NO Yes NO Yes Yes
22 Yes NO Yes NO Yes NO Yes Yes
23 Yes NO Yes NO Yes NO Yes Yes
24 Yes NO Yes NO Yes NO Yes Yes
· Please note: Lots 1-8 line Swinton Ave. Lots 18 - 24 line Seacrest blvd.
· Please note: Only A two story house design will meet both criteria
2400 minimum under air and pool setbacks as currently recorded.
· Please note: A 2600 square foot house would not fit pools on any lots
except 9-17-25 and 29. Lots 1 - 8 and 18 - 24 will not fit a 2600 square foot
single story home with or without a pool.
Please take time to consider the fact that allowing only one of these two changes will not
solve the problem. Not reducing the minimum square footage and average square foot
requirments make building a one story home with a pool or screen enclosure impossible
on above listed lots.
CG'~
10 Lake Eden Drive
Boynton Beach, FL 33435
KENNEDY
-HONtIil.
Phone (561) 736~9188
Fax (561) 736-9467
Living AlC
Area 2400 2333 2251 2868
Model Birch Cypress Maple Oak
Block 1 House wi House House wi House House wi House House wi House
Lot # No Pool v..4th pool No Pool v..4th pool No Pool v..4th pool No Pool v..4th pool
9 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
17 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
25 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
29 Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
26 Yes NO Yes NO NO NO Yes NO
27 Yes NO Yes NO NO NO Yes NO
28 Yes NO Yes NO NO NO Yes NO
30 Yes NO Yes Yes Yes NO Yes Yes
31 Yes NO Yes Yes Yes NO Yes Yes
32 Yes NO Yes Yes Yes NO Yes Yes
33 Yes NO Yes Yes Yes NO Yes Yes
34 Yes NO Yes Yes Yes NO Yes Yes
35 Yes NO Yes Yes Yes NO Yes Yes
36 Yes NO Yes Yes Yes NO Yes Yes
37 Yes NO Yes Yes Yes NO Yes Yes
38 Yes NO Yes Yes Yes NO Yes Yes
39 Yes NO Yes Yes Yes NO Yes Yes
40 Yes NO Yes Yes Yes NO Yes Yes
41 Yes NO Yes Yes Yes NO Yes Yes
42 Yes NO Yes Yes Yes NO Yes Yes
43 Yes NO Yes Yes Yes NO Yes Yes
44 Yes NO Yes Yes Yes NO Yes Yes
Living AlC
Area 2400 2333 2251 2868
Mode/-' Birch Cypress Maple Oak
Block; ... House wi House House wi House House wi House House wi House
Lot # No Pool v..4th pool No Pool v.ffh pool No Pool v..4th pool No Pool Wth pool
1 Yes NO Yes Yes Yes NO Yes Yes
2 Yes NO Yes Yes Yes NO Yes Yes
3 Yes NO Yes Yes Yes NO Yes Yes
4 Yes NO Yes Yes Yes NO Yes Yes
5 Yes NO Yes Yes Yes NO Yes Yes
6 Yes NO Yes Yes Yes NO Yes Yes
7 Yes NO Yes Yes Yes NO Yes Yes
8 Yes NO Yes Yes Yes NO Yes Yes
9 Yes NO Yes Yes Yes NO Yes Yes
10 Yes NO Yes Yes Yes NO Yes Yes
11 Yes NO Yes Yes Yes NO Yes Yes
12 Yes NO Yes Yes Yes NO Yes Yes
CG ,-=-'
10 Lake Eden Drive Phone (561) 736-9188
Boynton Beach, FL 33435 KENNEDY Fax (561) 736-9467
-NOM..
---- -
___.__m______._,. ...__ ---_.__...._-_.~-----"'--