Loading...
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______._,. ...__ ---_.__...._-_.~-----"'--