AGENDA DOCUMENTS
LEGAL/APPROV AL DOCUMENTS
AGENDA DOCUMENTS
Page 2.
Technical Revit Committee Meeting
December 27, 1994
1.
PROJECT:
CITRUS
polO
,.,0
rO
....0
,",0
f-A1
~
~.
'f$f
GLEN
III. OTHER
A. MASTER PLAN MODIFICATION
LOCATION:
Southeast corner of Lawrence Road and
Miner Road
DESCRIPTION:
Approval to amend the master plan tc
reduce the side setback from 10 feet to :
feet to allow screened enclosures.
Please see attached drawings and memos.
Written comments (on legal sized paper), plans and/o~
documents to be returned within three (3) working days following
the meeting (Friday, December 30, 1994 at 5:00 p.m.).
cc: MEMO ONLY
City Commission (5)
Floyd Jordan, Fire Chief
Charles Frederick, Recreation & Parks Director
Thomas Dettman, Police Chief
John Guidry, Utilities Director
Pete Mazzella, Assistant to ~tilities Director
Steve Campbell, Fire Department
Bob Gibson, Public Works
Central File
Applicant
Tambri Heyden, Planning & Zoning Director
Mike Haag, Zoning and Site Development Administrator
Mike Rumpf, Senior Planner
Project File
Chronological File
TRC File (Original)
Bulletin board
a: trcagnd.d27
3
" \,'
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM NO. 96-623
Agenda Memorandum for
December 3, 1996 City Commission Meeting
TO:
Dale Sugerman
Acting City Manager
FROM:
Tambri J. Heyden, AICP
Planning and Zoning Director
DATE:
November 25, 1996
SUBJECT: Citrus Glen - Master Plan Modification
File No. MPMD 94-008 (reduce side setback to 10 feet)
NATURE OF REQUEST
Sherylyn McAlister, applicant, is requesting to modify the side setbacks of the following
amenities in the Citrus Glen PUD (see Exhibit "A" - Location Map):
. screen enclosure - from 15 feet to 10 feet
. pool, spa, jacuzzi - from 15 feet to 10 feet
The approved setbacks in the Citrus Glen PUD, taken together with the requested
setbacks, are as follows (see Exhibit "8" - Letter of Request):
Buildings (no change): front
rear
side (zero lot line)
side
20 feet
15 feet
o feet
1 5 feet
Pools, spas, jacuzzis: front
rear
side (zero lot line)
*side
20 feet
3 feet (units abutting lake)
13 feet (units abutting Lawrence
Rd. or Miner Rd.)
11 feet (all other units)
o feet
1 0 feet
Screen enclosures: front
rear
side (zero lot line)
*side
20 feet
o feet (units abutting lake)
10 feet (units abutting Lawrence
Rd. or Miner Rd.)
8 feet (all other units)
o feet
10 feet
The requested setback changes are indicated by an asterisk. For an illustration of the
requested setbacks see Exhibit "C" - Proposed Master Plan.
Page 2
Agenda Memorandum for City Commission Meeting
November 25, 1996
Citrus Glen PUD - MPMD #94-008
BACKGROUND
The Citrus Glen PUD is a residential development consisting of 196 existing, single family
units. All lots are "zero lot Iines" - where one of the side yards is reduced to zero. The lots
within this development are classified in four different categories:
· Lakefront lots - lots abutting the shore of one of the lakes
· Lawrence/Miner lots - lots abutting either Lawrence Road or Miner Road
· Courtyard lots - lots that contain a courtyard style house (also known as "Captivasll)
with the amenities located on the side of the house, rather than the typical rear of
the house
· Typical lots - all other lots in this development (amenities located in the rear)
The "non-zero lot line" side yard setbacks, as approved for this development, are 15 feet.
The applicant requested that the "non-zero lot line" side yard setback for house amenities
be reduced to 10 feet, however, the "non-zero lot line" side yard setbacks for residential
structures would remain unchanged (15 feet). Therefore, from view from the street,
amenities would extend five feet beyond the house.
In 1994, a similar application for reduction of the "non-zero lot linell side yard setbacks for
screen enclosures, pools, spas and jacuzzi from 15 feet to 5 feet was filed with the city.
However, because of severe access limitations to the back of the residential structures, the
Technical Review Committee strongly opposed the request and eventually, the petitioner
decided not to go forward to the Commission with the request.
Chapter 2.5, Planned Unit Development, of the city's land development regulations states
that changes in planned unit developments shall be processed as follows:
Section 12. Changes in plans.
"Changes in plans approved as a part of the zoning to PUD may be permitted by the
Planning and Zoning Board upon application filed by the developer or his
successors in interest, prior to the expiration of the PUD classification, but only
[after] a finding that any such change or changes are in accord with all regulations
in effect when the change or changes are requested and the intent and purpose of
the comprehensive plan in effect at the time of the proposed change. Substantial
changes shall be proposed as for a new application of PUD zoning. The
determination of what constitutes a substantial change shall be within the sole
discretion of the City Commission. Non-substantial changes as determined by the
City Commission in plans shall not extend the expiration of the eighteen month
approval for the PUD classification. "
As a point of information, the proposed changes to the land development regulations would
change the above master plan modification procedure which now requires a Commission
determination of substantial change prior to forwarding to the Planning and Development
Board. The proposed procedure would place the Planning and Development Board1s
review prior to Commission review. Whether or not a change is substantial would be
delayed to the Commission level.
ANAL YSIS
Staff has reviewed this request for consistency with the PUD development standards, and
the intent and purpose of planned unit developments as stated in the following sections of
Chapter 2.5 of the city's land development regulations:
Page 3
Agenda Memorandum for City Commission Meeting
November 25, 1996
Citrus Glen PUD - MPMD #94-008
Section 1. Intent and purpose
'~ Planned Unit Development District (PUD) is established. It is intended that this
district be utilized to promote efficient and economical land use, improved
amenities, appropriate and harmonious variety in physical development, creative
design, improved living environment, orderly and economical development in the
City, and the protection of adjacent and existing and future City development. The
district is suitable for development, redevelopment and conservation of land, water
and other resources of the City.
Regulations for planned unit developments are intended to accomplish the
purposes of zoning, subdivision regulations and other applicable City regulations to
the same degree that they are intended to control development on a lot-by-Iot basis.
In view of the substantial public advantages of planned unit development, it is the
intent of PUD regulations to promote and encourage development in this form
where tracts suitable in size, location and character for the uses and structures
proposed are to be planned and developed as unified and coordinated units. "
Section 9. Internal PUD standards.
"B. INTERNAL LOTS AND FRONTAGE. Within the boundaries of the PUD, no
minimum lot size or minimum yards shall be required; provided, however, that PUD
frontage on dedicated public roads shall observe front yard requirements in
accordance with the zoning district the PUD use most closely resembles and that
peripheral yards abutting other zoning districts shall be the same as required in the
abutting zone. "
As previously mentioned, when viewed from the street front, the requested side setback
reduction would allow a screen enclosure projection five feet beyond the side of a unit.
Although this is not considered aesthetically desirable, due to the floor plans constructed
within this PUD, it is reasonable to limit this request to only the 69 courtyard units. This is
because the courtyard units are constructed with a side yard patio plat, rather that a rear
yard patio, of 30 feet by 15 feet, see Exhibit "0" - Housing Units Typology, where amenities
such as pools, enclosures, etc., would be logical and functional in order to tie in to the
room arrangement of that floor plan. The floor plan configuration of all remaining types of
houses and their location on the lots would make construction of any side yard amenities
impractical, as the amenities would be limited to five feet in width; the difference in the
width that is gained by this request and the location of the side wall of the unit.
In order to further evaluate the side yard emergency and utility access problems perceived
with this request, City staff visited the PUD. During the field investigation, special
emphasis was placed on the courtyard units and any conflicts with existing utility
easements and existing encumbrances, such as side yard fences and gates which would
conflict with the provision of appropriate access for emergency vehicles.
Based on that analysis, the following courtyard units do not pose utility and emergency
vehicle access problems if the side yard setback were reduced to 10 feet: Lots 2, 11, 12,
14,16,18,19,21,53,63,99,126,131,132,133,134,135,136,137,138,143,145,146,
147,149,150,151,152,154,156,157,190,192,193,195 and 196.
Page 4
Agenda Memorandum for City Commission Meeting
November 25, 1996
Citrus Glen PUD - MPMD #94-008
RECOMMENDA liON
On Tuesday, November 5, 1996, the Technical Review Committee (TRC) met to review
the requested master plan modification. The majority of the Committee members
recommended that the City Commission deny this request. The reason given was that
although the code sets forth the master plan modification process to reduce setbacks, a
Board of Zoning Appeals variance on a case by case basis makes sense in this situation
given the inappropriateness to apply this request across the board to all units in the PUD.
However, due to the field investigation and analysis conducted by staff, no technical
problems are anticipated with this request, this problem can be resolved if it is limited to
certain courtyard units, rather than if it is allowed for all units. Also, since the floor plans
were not submitted with the original master plan approval (the time when lot sizes and
setbacks are established), it was not known that there would be a unit constructed that
would have a side patio. Special setback provisions were made for rear yard amenities
with the approval of the master plan. Therefore, the Planning and Zoning Department
recommends the City Commission make a finding of no substantial change for the
proposed modification, and that the Planning and Development Board approve the
request, subject to the comments in Exhibit "E" - Conditions of Approval, which would limit
the request to only those courtyard units listed on page 3 of this report.
d:\share\agendas\cilycomm\citrglen, wpd
EXHIBIT "A"
-
LOCAT\ON MAP
C\TRUS GLEN
""..---:""'*';
I ~ -
r"'-.'S::" .'- ~
" .~
- ...' ."
--
--:-:-: ___ ~:-:A 'b""---r~------- ~t=':;;..--~'
___ '- v 0'- ,," . -~~
~ ," _\ .." . c- ~ C3
>-~ \ g , ...
l..-- ~ '1-" ~ I
'- ~ \
~j~_ L.---
,.- .
\:=
iL\~2:
~~
l\ill\ \ ,\ rLJ) III
_, fr~" T T 1 .' -:" """'f I-
_I- \' H. .~,~"\ ,-
h ./ 1" H' . +-
_~-41l-1'- ::.';L,.. h',' : 1=
__ !:: UU~ ,.J I-
,; _ : - - - :1"1.....
-:1, _ I- . :\--- '- ^G
~ r:.. : ~ i::" ~ t: ,....
,:;,~~~_. &\\;;,~~
.~ ~ 1 W~ttL~/::::-
[7~~nt1J"" . . .
'I,,-c.r:t T~
\ " :r_ ~.."- "'r .....
\ ~~-- : J 1
I 1..:.., ,( ."
I: J l~":/ .c
'~ eX i fiL> ~,.:')
(!Jill-" ~: ~
r;1iM>
s aIf. .J lr~ "
,_ l~ ~\./ '.iJ,~._,,~ rnI
.--" .
~- .:' ?~ : :
\ - fi:'
-, >-- '
;::: " "
.-
"\ IT Ff1\ "\ fT1
"'Ie
pUO
",Ie
~
\
I
t
III
~
oj
~
'"
'4
~
, ,-
I I I\:C: -
,~,\~,
t'" \Nll-~ ltO^O
~ - ~ -
...... Ill/,
I
~ ~
\\~~
iJE=
\ ..~~~us ~~I~~~r ~I~
. ...,; ,~EO,
t:::
, ~
_ ~,\p.p. v" I
"e..~-e"L-'~!?6. -~~,~__I_>~ ~~-\;.~-~~s
G"O"~ -, - II"!"'" "' ..-" ~
L-':.~'~';' ~ ",::' \f""~'" ~::' f'il~OB\\\
"" ~.. 'I. ' . In \ .':il:; r-' l':i:iI
I .." 1 \ l~};': ~. '.. \ R-
o 1/8 M\L~SV~ - -, ~ ?;;~~,,"'~V"" --r::-;.... ,
'\\\\\ \ \. . '" ~ j) \/\1 r:=..le
,_ ..00800 fEEl -~ 111\\l \~ji' \,\\ . ~I
u., 06P~ 1\ 11\\ 11 f1"'\I ~\ 1\ (. '1 '\ I
l- ,#()
[J ~..,
i://l"~ l-
AG
H~
I;.,t=
\ \ it:.. __eo'fN"1"Ol'1
.,~\rr~ NURseRIes"
. .~_....,. \ ~\ II -
,: : l\ -
i"; \'-V p\JO
,\ "_. , ,.\_'_ ,-ut:4.O
\ ,.,~ .-~. --~.
\ "".;, ~_.-
\ r'---' .
\ \ \ ~
"~;.~~
- ~ .~
~ ~
~
;;
EXHIBIT "B"
IfDJ rn @ ~ u w ~ In)!
SHERYLYN MCALLISTER ~ ::: i ;-, ./@
195 Otr.JS Tral'~ Circle. Boynton Beach, FL 33436.561-734-0494. Fax: 6!~9'LANNING AND
.~ ZONING DEPT.
September 16, 1996
Ms Tambri J. Heyden, Director
Planing & Zoning Department
100 East Boynton Beach Blvd
P. O. Box 310
Boynton Beach, Fl 33425
Re: Master plan modification to change
the exisitng non-zero setbacks for
pools, jacuzzi or spas and screen
roof enclosure from 15 feet to 10
feet - Communities of Citrus Glen,
Lawrence Rd, Boynton Beach, Florida
Dear Tambri:
This is a follow-up to conversations my parents, Art & Sandi
Albrecht, had with you regarding the subject master plan
modification request...and subsequent discussions with Mike
Haag and, more recently, with Jerzy Lewicki.
This request modifies our earlier request to change the
setback from 15 feet to 5 feet. Per Mike's instructions, I'm
enclosing 12 sets of the following:
. An official request for the subject modification
signed by the president of the Executive Estates
of Boynton Beach Homeowners Association on behalf
of the residents of the Communities of Citrus Glen.
. A l7X22 document showing the layout of the Communities
of Citrus Glen and spelling out the requested modification
...indicating site plans which illustrate the request
and a list of the lots which are involved.
. Plat maps of Executive Estates and Citrus Trail which
constitutes the Communities of Citrus Glen.
Please call me at 561-734-0494 or my parents at 561-393-9985
re: next steps. Thanks you so much for your he1~-and cooperation
regarding this request.
Si~cerely, .
~oAuQA~) h;C~/'tJ
~~~~;;(~~Allister
EXHIBIT "C"
i. I' r'.' .-
I.. I r'" r-" roo- ....
L:. i.~, l: :: I! i: I:: !:
. _. ,..., L.. L_ L I
__ l........
lI'~I:) jlAU.n:):iXJ
- ,.. ~
==
Otrj
ttj(i
~O
a~
t:". ~
<
fl:>e
~Z
tl)~
;;-.-3
..., . "1 .-.\ c;n ~
:1 ==1 ~ I %. ~
__J ...~ ...J ~\ 00
r-o- roo, 0
,-.... t
p: ,= \.. .
l._. ~___ I. j El~
t........ " .
on
\
.... ~
2~
Vl~
~~
:::00
tn
C1
~
~
11:
Z
1ft
XI
XI
0 \
)0
0
n
0.... ....tntllri:;d
HI. oOtIJOt'l
~8 10
III Ul "1t1Jtnnc::
....10 t'lt'l;t>t:J:t'l
....rt' t'lzn~(J)
tJ" 8 ~Z8
10 III . ~UlfJ'"'l
III 0
l/l~ 0":1 0
10 (J\ ":I08:xl
a tIJ:;dg;)>'
(I) III
::l I"l Z'd
rt'1O OOtIJ~
(J\ t"O><
. UI Ot"HUl
c:: UlUltll8
tJ" c:: ~ H t'l
u. ?; 8:;d
10 tIlH
0 'dZ"tl
rt' "1)>'C)t"
:xlUl )>'
rt' O~ Z '21
0 :3: 0
C-lZ:;
I"l ....)010
III U1n~O
UI c::tlJH
rt' t<J~~"1
11 t'l~OH
.... tlJH n
0 >'3 tIl)>'
rt' ~H8
.... >'3 t:lH
0 OOt'lO
::l Z
III
~
~
(')
~
c:
~.
-
o.
VI
o
'"'"\
o
-
2
V'
o
0'
~
I
I
" ,.
I
I
I,
I
t_
~
w
. \
i
...
~.
~
..
if
.
i,.,
..
'.;
:.c
"
..
..
..:
~
.
...
...'
~
i!~
rt'W N
::r.
m
0 ~Ul Ul'd tn Ul
::r< tIln t'l0 c:: III
.....(1) n:xl >'30 H rt'
..c11 ~~ Illt" t" tJ"
::rill ;t>t- t:l 1Il
(1).... t'lZ O(J) H 0
UI.... Z ::OPd '21 ~
rt' :xlt'l Ul)>' G'l UI
::r 0'21 -
"ClIO 00 C-l Ul III
01-"' t<Jt" f; t'l I"l
....<Q 0 ri III
::3::r Otll c:: III
rt'rt' ZC:: ~ )>' III
t":xl N n UI
00 ...: t1j H ~
HI HI " Ul HI
0
I1lUl ....
XO ....
1-",11 Ultll :xl "1 Ultll :xl"IJ UlUl:xl"IJ ~
(J\(1) 1-"..... 1011 ....1-". (1) I"l 1-"''''' III 11
rt'1ll p.p. ilia p.p. III 0 0.p.1\I0 III
.....::3 m m 11::3 III III 11::3 III (I) 11 ::l ..
::l .. rt' .. rt' .. II II r1"
<QUI ..
::r
11\l1
0.... .... .... N .... .... ....N .... ....N
0.... 0000000 00\.)\.)....0 1.1101.110
HI . - - - - . - . . . . . . . .
. ::l --- t:it:i~
0 t"t"8
rt' \lIOl'"< Ollll'"<
( ~"Cl ( :>I""Cl
III 11 m 1-" I"l m .....
x ro-o ro--O
0 ::l 1lI ::l III
(I) 0 ..... 0 ....
lD lD lD --
Po - -
:s:: :s::
1-" ....
::s ::s
0 0
11 11
z~
'.
EXHIBIT "D"
; J
~ f :
.~ t
lei L-..r
,0
.1 .: ~
:1'
"':t\i
~~
. I
~, 1
! !,"
0
::
'-'
co
....
.. _... ' _TL"M
~
~
ii:
c
0(
o
II:
II:
....
0- ~
:i
a:.c
0'%
01<
..I' Ul
Ll.1 g
~::l!
I- ~
en, :5
TL"M
.i~C1 &
~
t3
U)
~ tJ)
E-<
,b 3 ....
z I):; ..,.
0 ....
:z
H ..,.
):; 1.0
...... I
iii If)
U If)
:z
iii ,
I):; M .
~ N N
...1 I ..,.
.... ....
l "
~
.; '()
~ ,
. (/) , <Xl
~ N 1.0
I"'- ....
I
I- , O'l .
0 ..,. O'l If)
Z If) O'l
I , ....
<Xl 1.0 I
<> l- N O'l CO
~ .. 0 I CO
1 .. -J , M ....
L-l~ zllJ I"'- C\
C(!::! N ,
-J ~, I , I"'-
..,. If) I"'-
-'- n.:l N
(Xl ....
0::)
o~
o~
....l::i
-!:&oi .. 1 u.-J
.'- 00(
.'''0& WU
1-0: z
->-
I f/)I- l>~
ILl
I '"i I):;
UI):;
.~--- 11 UlO
--,
!I :r;:H
E-<N
. HN
~I ~::.>
el i 1iI~
1):;.-,
I ~ ::>
Ul
a. ..1 I O~
un S
.. . I ...10..
. UUl
lo' W , :z
=1 J~ , 00 ILl 0
N l"'-
t b O'l .... Z ,..,
I liIod;
.. Z 1.0 , IiI~J
'.. 00 1.0
Ul I"'- 1):;00
,,; E-< uoo
, .. , ....
0 ..,. , tJ)l):;o..
I i % ...1 (Xl O'l
.. <( E-< I \D
.. ~ ~ -J M .... ~
D.l/I :z I"'-
rnrn/ill- . a:" 0 ,
---L og I):; , (Xl
_._~ ~ ~ .... O'l
0.. ILl l"'-
I ...__0 , ~z :.:: I .
- I , O'l
I CO --~ , 1 &1.0 < It'I I"'-
..... ITol ,a: ...1 \D r-
~~ O'l ....
,"10&
iii:5
cc
0,
~\
;1\-
:=>SI
0:'"
~I!
1
I
I
',. nP,tll, IIal.L $>
..11fT[/WU , IIIIlF .
.IU<< 0SVU1
"49' 30' 00' N 109. 10'
72.:td
CAPllVA
m
~
~
(/)
,0
,I-
6
Z
b
~~
c:~
:J~
(t)~
oJ
w5
~~
O.
OJ
~~
o
z~
5@
a.. 0:(
~~
Ui8
.. ..
l"'l
00 , ..,.
.... l"'l ....
O'l r-
,
\D , If)
tJ) .... 00 ....
E-< l"'l M
0 \D .... ,
...1 ..,. I \D
.... , .... If)
M M ....
fi! I If) ....
....
,:( .... .. ..
>< ..,. 1.0
.... 1.0
~ .. N If) C\
N N r-l ....
P .... I I
,
0 .. O'l I '" CO
U C\ ..,.
r-l ..... C\ 0\
.... ....
EXHIBIT "E"
EXHIBIT "E"
Conditions of Approval
Project name: Citrus Glen
File number: MPMD 94-008
Reference: The plans consist of 1 sheet identified as 2nd Review, Master Plan Modification New Site Plan, File
#MPMD 94-008 with a Seotember 17, 1996 Planning and Zoning Deoartment date stamo marking,
I DEPARTMENTS I INCLUDE I REJECT I
PUBLIC WORKS
. N()NF
UTILITIES
Comments:
1. Due to existing easements the following lots may not be allowed to
have the requested reduction in side yard setback: Lot #1, 5, 7, 13, 23,
28,31,3743,46,48,50,54,61,68,75,82,89,93,97,100, 141, 144,
148,153,159,163,172,176,181,191, and 194, As this proposal was
submitted for the entire PUD, the request cannot be approved due to
th"" nt " , in th"" c::irl"" vards of~lots
FIRE
Comments:
2, Many of the side yards have extra foliage, fences, etc, that may intrude
on the Fire Department's access, All models with the exception of the
"Courtyard" models seem to have completed their desired
improvements,
3, Noting the situation with the courtyard models we have no further
objections to the request for a ten (10') foot side yard (specifically lots -
2, 11, 12, 14, 16, 18, 19,21,53,63,99, 126, 131-138, 143, 145-
147,149-152,154,156,157,190,192,193,195,196,
POLICE
- , NONF
DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
, N()NF
PARKS AND RECREATION
[ , N()NF
FORESTER/ENVI RONMENT ALlST
[ , N()NF
PLANNING AND ZONING
Comments:
4, The chart listing amended setbacks indicates different requirements for
pools/spas/jacuzzis and screen enclosures, Illustrate these different
setback requirements on separate drawings for the following
categories:
a, building
b, pool/spa/and jacuzzi, and
c, screen enclosure
5, Provide a statement on the master plan that within the 10 feet, non-zero
lot line setback area trees, decorative elements and other access
obstructions do not exist or, if they do, will be removed or relocated
prior to receiving a building permit for a pool, spa, jacuzzi, or screen
enclosure,
6, To maintain an unobstructed access to the lot it is recommended that
a 10 feet wide access easement be established and dedicated along
the non-zero lot line at time of oermit.
Page 2
Citrus Glen
File No. MPMD 94-008
DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT
7, Provide a statement by a registered engineer that the drainage can be
handled by the existing drainage system when amenities on all lots are
constructed.
8, It is recommended that modified setback requirements, as proposed by
petitioner will apply only to the following courtyard houses, as these are
the only courtyard houses that currently have no existing utility
easements in the side yard and pose no Fire Department access
problems: 2,11,12,14,16,18,19,21,53,63,99,126,131-138,143,
14~_1A7 1AO_1~? 1~4 1~n 1~7 10n 10? 10~ 1~~ ::lnrl1~n
ADDITIONAL PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD CONDITIONS
~ Tn h", .
ADDITIONAL CITY COMMISSION CONDITIONS
10, To be determined,
Ibme
d :\citrg len\condappr, wpd
EXHIBIT "E"
Conditions of Approval
Project name: Citrus Glen
File number: MPMD 94-008
Reference: The clans consist of 1 sheet identified as 2nd Review. Master Plan Modification New Site Plan. File
#MPMD 94-008 with a Seotember 17, 1996 Planning and Zoning Department date stamo marking,
DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT
PUBLIC WORKS
- , NONF
UTI L1TI ES
Comments:
1, Due to existing easements the following lots may not be allowed to
have the requested reduction in side yard setback: Lot #1, 5, 7, 13, 23,
28,31,3743,46,48,50,54,61,68,75,82,89,93,97,100, 141, 144,
148,153,159,163,172,176,181,191, and 194, As this proposal was
submitted for the entire PUD, the request cannot be approved due to
th"" . of ,,+il;+;oo- in thp. c:irl"" \/~rrlc: nf th""c:"" Intc:
FIRE
Comments:
2, Many of the side yards have extra foliage, fences, etc, that may intrude
on the Fire Department's access, All models with the exception of the
"Courtyard" models seem to have completed their desired
improvements.
3, Noting the situation with the courtyard models we have no further
objections to the request for a ten (10') foot side yard (specifically lots -
2, 11, 12, 14, 16, 18, 19, 21, 53, 63, 99, 126, 131-138, 143, 145-
147,149-152,154,156,157,190,192,193,195,196,
POLICE
, NONF
DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
, NONF
PARKS AND RECREATION
. NONF
FORESTER/ENVI RONMENT ALlST
, NONF
PLANNING AND ZONING
Comments:
4, The chart listing amended setbacks indicates different requirements for
pools/spas/jacuzzis and screen enclosures, Illustrate these different
setback requirements on separate drawings for the following
categories:
a. building
b. pool/spa/and jacuzzi, and
c. screen enclosure
5, Provide a statement on the master plan that within the 10 feet, non-zero
lot line setback area trees, decorative elements and other access
obstructions do not exist or, if they do, will be removed or relocated
prior to receiving a building permit for a pool, spa, jacuzzi, or screen
enclosure,
6, To maintain an unobstructed access to the lot it is recommended that
a 10 feet wide access easement be established and dedicated along
the non-zero lot line at time of oermit.
Page 2
Citrus Glen
File No. MPMD 94-008
DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT
7, Provide a statement by a registered engineer that the drainage can be
handled by the existing drainage system when amenities on all lots are
constructed,
8, It is recommended that modified setback requirements, as proposed by
petitioner will apply only to the following courtyard houses, as these are
the only courtyard houses that currently have no existing utility
easements in the side yard and pose no Fire Department access
problems: 2,11,12,14,16,18,19,21,53,63,99,126,131-138,143,
14fi-147 14q-1fi? 1Fi4 156 1fi7 1qn 1q? 1q:\ 1Q,\ ~nrl1qR
ADDITIONAL PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD CONDITIONS
9 Tn ...
ADDITIONAL CITY COMMISSION CONDITIONS
10, Delete Comment No, 1
11, Delete Comment No, 2
12, Delete Comment No, 3
MEH:dim
d: \citrg len\condappr, wpd