REVIEW COMMENTS
TO:
THRU:
FROM:
DATE:
PROJECT NAME I NO:
REQUEST:
DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING AND ZONING DIVISION
MEMORANDUM NO. PZ 06-179
STAFF REPORT
Chairman and Members
Community Redevelopment Agency and City Commission
~t)~
Michael W. Rumpf tvr'
Planning and Zoning Director
Kathleen Zeitler (1
Planner - -
October 17, 2006
The Office at Bamboo Lane I ZNCV 06-011
Request for relief from the City of Boynton Beach Land Development
Regulations, Chapter 2, Zoning, Section 6.C.3., requiring a minimum lot area
of 15,000 square feet, to allow a minimum lot area of 11,578 square feet (a
variance of 3,422 square feet) for a proposed professional business office
building within the Community Commercial (C-3) zoning district.
Property Owner:
Applicantl Agent:
Location:
Acreage:
Proposed Use:
Zoning District:
Adjacent Uses:
North:
South:
East:
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Jaime Mayo, Nigel Development, Inc.
Michael Hanlon, HNM Architecture, LLC
3847 North Federal Highway (southeast corner of North Federal Highway
and Bamboo Lane)
0.265 acre (11,578 square feet)
Professional Business Office
Community Commercial (C-3)
Bamboo Lane (private ingress-egress easement), and farther north is property
classified High Density Residential (HDR) and zoned Infill Planned Unit Development
(IPUD) (forthcoming Estancia at Boynton Beach project);
Developed commercial property classified as Palm Beach County Commercial High
Intensity (CHIS) land use and zoned Palm Beach County General Commercial (CG)
(Carlson's Lawn and Garden Supply store);
Right-of-way for Palmer Road, and farther east is developed single-family residential
classified as Palm Beach County Medium Density Residential (MR-5) land use and
zoned Palm Beach County Single-Family Residential (RS); and,
Staff Report ZNCV 06-011
Memorandum No PZ-06-179
Page 2
West: Right-of-way for Federal Highway, then farther west is developed commercial property
classified as Palm Beach County Commercial High Intensity (CHIS) land use and zoned
Palm Beach County General Commercial (CG) (Cantway Building Specialties).
BACKGROUND
The subject property is currently an undeveloped lot located at the southeast corner of North Federal
Highway and Bamboo Lane (see Location Map - Exhibit "A"). The 0.265-acre parcel is situated within the
City's future annexation area and within Planning Area 5 of the Federal Highway Corridor Community
Redevelopment Plan, which has the role of being the southern entrance into the City. In conjunction with this
request, the applicant is also requesting annexation (ANEX 06-008), a future land use amendment to LRC and
rezoning to C-3 (LUAR 06-021), and new site plan approval (NWSP 06-023).
Prior to annexation, the subject property was in unineorporated Palm Beach County and zoned Commercial,
General (CG). The 0.265-acre (11,578 square feet) lot is considered a valid nonconforming lot by Palm
Beach County regulations, which require a minimum lot size of 1.0 acre (43,560 square feet) in the CG zoning
district. The requested C-3 zoning district requires a minimum lot size of 15,000 square feet (0.34 acre),
therefore the lot would be considered a valid nonconforming lot per City regulations as well. The Land
Development Regulations, Section 11.1.C.8.a., which addresses nonconforming lots states: "For
nonconforming lots which are vacant or are proposed to be cleared and redeveloped, a variance shall be
required prior to the construction of any structures or establishment of any use on the lot or parcel". The
applicant is requesting a variance of 3,422 square feet to the minimum lot size in C-3 in conjunction with the
new site plan. Variance approval would result in the subject property being considered a conforming lot.
The applicant is requesting a variance to minimum lot area to construct a professional business office
building, which is a permitted use in the C-3 zoning district. The subject property complies with all C-3
requirements, with the exception of minimum lot area of 15,000 square feet (see Survey - Exhibit "B"). The
project will comply with all other minimum requirements of the C-3 regulations as well as all other applicable
development regulations, including the Urban Commercial District Overlay Zone (Federal Highway Corridor
Community Redevelopment Plan).
ANALYSIS
Staff reviewed the requested variance focusing on the applieant's response to criteria a.- g. below (see Exhibit
"C"). The code states that the zoning eode variance cannot be approved unless the board finds the following:
a. That special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the land, structure, or building
involved and which are not applicable to other lands, structures or buildings in the same zoning
district
The subject property is considered a nonconforming lot because it does not meet the minimum lot
size of the C-3 zoning district regulations. The applicant requested the City's C-3 zoning for the
following reasons: (1) C-3 corresponds with the property's current CG zoning district; (2) C-3
eorresponds with the City's LRC future land use designation for the area; (3) C-3 is the only
commercial zoning district in this area along Federal Highway; and (4) C-3 regulations state it is
intended for commercial facilities located adjacent to at least one major thoroughfare. The parcel was
created many years ago, and is considered a valid nonconforming lot based on both County and City
requirements. Section 11.1.C.8.a Non-Conforming Lot regulations, requires a variance prior to
construction on any nonconforming lot which is vacant or to be redeveloped. A variance to the
minimum lot area of 15,000 square feet in the C-3 zoning district is necessary in order to build on the
lot.
Staff Report ZNCV 06-011
Memorandum No PZ-06-179
Page 3
The applicant's justification statement for the variance request explains that if the unplatted Bamboo
Lane ingress-egress easement had been eonstructed per the unfiled plat of R.P. Swetman, the
location of the road would be north of its present location, and the subject parcel would have
complied with the minimum lot area of 15,000 square feet required in the C-3 zoning district.
b. That the special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant
The applicant purchased the subject property in its current configuration in February, 2005. Based on
available public records, it appears that the subject parcel was created many years ago and
grandfathered as a valid, noneonforming lot (due to lot size) in unincorporated Palm Beaeh County.
The applicant requested the City's C-3 zoning for the following reasons: (1) C-3 corresponds with the
property's current CG zoning district; (2) C-3 corresponds with the City's LRC future land use
designation for the area; (3) C-3 regulations state it is intended for commereial facilities loeated
adjacent to at least one major thoroughfare; and (4) C- 3 is the only commercial zoning district in this
area along Federal Highway and other commercial zoning would be considered "spot" zoning.
The parcel is bound on the east and west by rights-of-way and on the north by an ingress/egress
easement. The applicant has attempted to meet the minimum lot area requirement by trying to
purchase the adjacent lot to the south (Carlson Lawn and Garden Center) to assemble with the
subject property. However, the adjaeent property owner is unwilling to sell.
c. That granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is
denied by this ordinance to other lands, buildings, or structures in the same zoning district
The Land Development Regulations set forth the minimum requirements for the development of a lot.
In addition, the provisions for nonconforming lots (if vacant or to be redeveloped) require a variance
prior to the issuance of a permit for eonstruction or use of the lot. Many lots in the area of the
subject property are similarly nonconforming lots due to lot size. The area is slated for future
annexation and redevelopment, and these parcels, unless assembled, are not of sufficient size to
support a residential project. Therefore they will likely be similarly rezoned to C-3 and will require
variances to the lot area prior to development. The proposed office building project will comply with
all other applicable requirements.
d. That literal interpretation of the provisions of this ordinance would deprive the applicant of rights
commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same zoning district under the terms of the ordinance
and would work unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant.
Precedent has been set, as City records indicate that many variances have been granted over the
years for minimum lot size. Many lots in the area of the subject property are nonconforming to lot
size and were developed years ago. Many of these lots are now in poor condition and in need of
redevelopment. Literal interpretation of this criteria would deprive the applieant the right to develop
the property. The proposed office building would be a positive benefit to the general area which is
located at the southern entrance into the City.
e. That the variance granted is the minimum variance that will make pOSSible the reasonable use of the
land, building, or structure.
Staff Report ZNCV 06-011
Memorandum No PZ-06-179
Page 4
The proposed professional business office building will comply with all development regulations such
as lot frontage, applicable setbacks, maximum lot coverage, and building height, with the exeeption of
meeting the minimum lot area of 15,000 square feet required in the C-3 zoning district. The applieant
has requested annexation, land use amendment and rezoning, and new site plan approval in addition
to the variance request. Without the requested variance, the applicant will not be able to obtain a
building permit to construct the office building and will therefore not have reasonable use of the land.
f. That the granting of the variance will be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of this
chapter [ordinance] and that such variance will not be injurious to the area involved or othelWise
detrimental to the public welfare.
The area of the subject property includes many substandard lots by current regulations. The
establishment of the nonconforming lot provisions clearly dictate the requirements for variances to
vacant lots and those to be redeveloped. Approval of the subject variance would not represent a
further reduction in the minimum development standards within this redevelopment area, and will
provide a minimal contribution to the economic value of the area and tax base for the city. Further,
property size will limit development to a lower intensive use, such as a small office use, which would
be reasonably compatible with the adjacent neighborhood.
g. For variances to minimum lot area or lot frontage requirements, that property is not available from
adjacent properties in order to meet these requirements, or that the acquisition of such property
would cause the adjacent property or structures to become nonconforming. Applicant shall provide an
affidavit with the application for variance stating that the above mentioned conditions exist with
respect to the acquisition of additional property.
The applicant provided a statement confirming that adjacent properties are not available to make the
subject parcel conforming in order to eliminate this variance request. The property fronts roads on
three (3) sides. The only adjacent property is the parcel to the south (Carlson's Lawn and Garden
Supply store) whieh is a developed commercial property classified as Palm Beach County Commercial
High Intensity (CHIS) land use and zoned Palm Beach County General Commercial (CG). This
adjacent parcel is currently considered to be a noneonforming lot due to lot size, since the minimum
lot size in the CG zoning district is one (1) acre. If the adjacent property owner sold a portion of their
developed property to the applicant, their nonconforming lot would beeome even more
nonconforming to minimum lot size, and potentially other development regulations as well. The
applieant states that the purchase of the entire adjacent parcel is not possible due to the property
owner's refusal to sell.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the requested variance based on the finding of "hardship". Staff concurs with
the applicant that special conditions and circumstances exist that are not the result of actions by the
applicant. This request will not be injurious or detrimental to the area, and the variance requested is the
minimum necessary to make pOSSible the reasonable use of the land. Staff also concludes that approval of
the requested varianee will not contradict the vision the community has for this area.
No conditions of approval are recommended; however, any conditions of approval added by the Community
Redevelopment Agency Board or the City Commission will be placed in Exhibit "D" - Conditions of Approval.
MR/kz
S:\Planning\SHARED\WP\PROJEcrS\Bamboo Lane\ZNCV 06-011\Staff Report.doc
EXHIBIT "A" - LOCATION MAP
-./
i
~
"
NIC
o 25 50 100 150 200
~..-- ,Fem
N
w.'
s
,tS'S8il
,
,
,
I
I
I
1 I
8'<1lI I
;r~ I
,WI,'
11&1' "
j,& rq I
.. I
...~ I
~~ I
1 I
I
l:i
=l~
~!
",Ii
I-ll.
15~
~S
I- ...
~~
<t
~
&1 "
I
I wi I
~~ I
~~ I ...I I
b~ I B wi
~~S I ~ ~ Ii: 1
ei'!~ I ~ t ; I C.. ii;
81 I r;if r ;i'
R~e I \ in ~ ii,
~ \<J1/
I ,,!. ~
EXHIBIT B
!Lc....,
~'i:i;;n
/
/
/
/
/
/
Ifi /
1&1 /
~ i!1 /
i , /)1
;\~;/
... /
~ /
~~
~ ~ /
e~
Ill",
l!; J, /
!Z~ /
~ ~ /
r. I ~j
~i t:!
j ~~
"If
~o!. (6t
B-
w ..i /
5 Glf / ~
g tl~ d "
ii,ll:~~
IX) '~ 0 1\Il:l
~ s/ < C s
<0
. I/')
~Ifi
v5~
'b ,,&~ :!;
'"
'" ~ ~
i ~ ([33([ ,00'02~",. ~ '.............
;1 ~ /f'6€'I:06S "H.l.9N3'7 J~II '" .
';';',0;' 00 snl([lI~ _ ~
~ '" 11.1.'73([ ~
~
I1'U
'-i
~
........
<:..
'01.
~
~
-;;
I~~
.w
I~~
g;..,
IZ:J
oW
~1:
~ ~ ~
I Q !h
I ~ zfi
I ii!~
I~ <.>
I ;!U
-
~
fi.
"
..,
"'.
. <:c
-..,..-""41
I
I
~~ ,I
,
I
I
I
I
I
If'
Sill I
11-/
il"
~11
~ ,
I
---
---
NIGEL DEVELt:::..t=lMENT, INC.
3705 NORTH FEDERAL HigHWAY
OELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA 334B3
TEL: 561.733.2225
FAX: 561.733.23B3
EXHIBIT C
RE: 3B47 NORTH FEDERAL Hwv. OELRAY BEACH, FL 334B3
PROoJECT NAME: THE OFFICE AT BAMBOO LANE
ZONING CODE VARIANCE ApPLICATION FOR MINIMUM LOT AREA OF 15,000 a.F.
A. THE SUB....ECT PROPERTY HAS EXISTING CONDITIONS AND SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES
THAT ARE PECULIAR TO THE LAND AND THAT ARE NOT APPLICABLE TO OTHER
PROPERTIES IN THE SAME ZONING DISTRICT. THE SUB....ECT PROPERTY HAS AN
INGRESS-EGRESS EASEMENT FROM BAMBOO LANE. BAMBOO LANE HAS NEVER BEEN
PLATTED AND WAS NEVER CONSTRUCTED PER THE UNFILLED PLAT OF R.P.
SWETMAN. PER THE SURVEY, THE 30 FT. RIGHT OF WAY FOR BAMBOO LANE SHOULD
HAVE BEEN LOCATED FURTHER NORTH. THIS WOULD HAVE LEFT A SMALL-
TRIANGULATED PARCEL TO THE NORTH OF THE SUB....ECT PROPERTY. THE ADDITION
OF THAT SMALL PARCEL, IF PLATTED PER R.P. SWETMAN, WOULD HAVE MADE THE
SUB....ECT PROPERTY CONFORMING. IN FACT, THE SUB....ECT PROPERTY IS ACTUALLY
INCORRECTLY RECORDER IN THE PALM BEACH PROPERTY APPRAISER AS A
1 5,000 S.F. LOT.
B. THE ABOVE SPECIAL CONDITIONS WERE INTACT WHEN THE SUB....ECT PARCEL WAS
PURCHASED AND ARE NOT A RESULT OF ANY ACTIONS TAKEN BY THE OWNER.
C. THE GRANTING OF A VARIANCE WILL NOT CONFER ANY SPECIAL PRIVILEGES THAT ARE
DENIED BY THIS ORDINANCE TO OTHER PARCELS IN THE SAME ZONING DISTRICT. THE
BUILDING WILL FULLY COMPLY WITH ALL C-3 ZONING AND FEDERAL HIGHWAY
CORRIDOR COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS.
D. THE PROVISIONS OF THIS CHAPTER WOULD PROHIBIT THE RIGHTS COMMONLY
EN....OYED BY OTHER PROPERTIES IN THE SAME ZONING OISTRICT. DUE TO THE
PARKING RE~UIREMENTS AND CONSTRAINTS OF THE SITE, THE BUILDING WILL BE AN
ELEVATED STRUCTURE WITH PARKING UNDERNEATH. THE HEIGHT OF THE OFFICE
BUILDING WILL BE AT AN APPROPRIATE SCALE CONFORMING TO THE HEIGHTS OF
STRUCTURES ALONG THE FEDERAL HIGHWAY CORRIDOR. WITHOUT A VARIANCE THIS
WOULD NOT BE POSSIBLE.
E. THE VARIANCE GRANTED IS THE MINIMUM VARIANCE THAT WILL ALLOW REASONABLE
USE OF THE LAND. IT WILL PERMIT THE SUB....ECT PROPERTY TO CONSTRUCT A
BUILDING THAT WILL CONFORM TO THE BUILDING HEIGHTS ALONG THE FEDERAL
HIGHWAY CORRIDOR.
F. THE GRANTING OF THE VARIANCE WILL BE IN HARMONY WITH THE GENERAL INTENT
AND PURPOSE OF THIS CHAPTER AND WILL NOT BE IN....URIOUS TO THE AREA
INVOLVED OR DETRIMENTAL IN ANY WAY TO THE PUBLIC WELFARE. IT WILL, IN FACT,
ALLOW THE PARCEL TO CONFORM TO THE APPROPRIATE SCALE OF THE FEDERAL
HIGHWAY CORRIDOR.
G. THE SUB....ECT PROPERTY IS A CORNER LOT FRONTING FEDERAL HIGHWAY TO THE
WEST, BAMBOO LANE TO THE NORTH AND PALMER ROAD (PRIVATE ROAO) TO THE
EAST. THE ONLY PARCEL, TO THE SOUTH, HAS A CURRENT LOT AREA OF 15,DDDs.F
(1 DDFT X 150 FT.>. THE PURCHASE OF THE ENTIRE PARCEL IS NOT POSSIBLE DUE
TO CURRENT OWNER'S REFUSAL TO SELL, AND THE AC~UISITION OF A PARTIAL PIECE
OF LAND WOULD MAKE THE AD....ACENT LOT NONCONFORMING AS WELL.
IF YOU HAVE ANY ~UESTIONS OR NEED ANY FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT ME.
THANK YOU.
NIGEL DEVELOPMENT, INC.
ZONING CODE VARIANCE ApPLICATION
To THE CITY CLERK - CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH
AFFIDAVIT
RE: 3B47 NORTH FEDERAL HWY. DELRAY BEACH, FL 334B3
PROo.lECT NAME: THE OFFICE AT BAMBOO LANE
FILE #:
THE BUBo.IECT PROPERTY IS A CORNER LOT FRONTING FEDERAL HIGHWAY TO THE WEST,
BAMBOO LANE TO THE NORTH AND PALMER ROAD (PRIVATE ROAD) TO THE EAST. THE
ONLY PARCEL, TO THE SOUTH, HAS A CURRENT LOT AREA OF 1 5,CCCS.F (1 CCFT X
150 FT.>. THE PURCHASE OF THE ENTIRE PARCEL IS NOT POSSIBLE DUE TO CURRENT
OWNER'S REFUSAL TO SELL, AND THE ACl\IUISITION OF A PARTIAL PIECE OF LAND WOULD
MAKE THE ADo.IACENT LOT NONCONFORMING AS WELL.
EXHIBIT "D"
Conditions of Approval
Project name: The Office at Bamboo Lane
File number: ZNCV 06-011
DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT
PUBLIC WORKS- General
..
Comments: None
PUBLIC WORKS- Traffic
Comments: None
UTILITIES
Comments: None
FIRE
Comments: None
POLICE
Comments: None
ENGINEERING DIVISION
Comments: None
BUILDING DIVISION
Comments: None
PARKS AND RECREATION
Comments: None
FORESTER/ENVIRONMENT ALIST
Comments: None
PLANNING AND ZONING
Comments: None
CRA STAFF
Comments: None
Conditions of Approval
Bamboo Lane ZNCV 06-011
P 2
age
I DEPARTMENTS I INCLUDE I REJECT I
ADDITIONAL COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD
COMMENTS
Comments:
1. To be determined.
ADDITIONAL CITY COMMISSION COMMENTS
Comments:
1. To be determined.
S:\Planning\SHARED\WP\PROJECTS\Bamboo Lane\ZNCV 06-011\COA.doc
Table 3.D.1.A-5 - Pro e Develo ment Re ulations
Ag ricultu relConservation
PC 1 ac. - - - - - - 50 50 50 50
AP 10 ac. 300 300 - .1 (1) .10 10% 100 50 80 100
AGR 5ac. 300 300 - .2 .15 15% 100 50 80 100
Residential
AR (2) (3)(4) 300 300 - (5) .15 15% 100 50 80 100
RE 2.5ac. 200 200 - 0.4 - 20% 50 40 50 50
RT 14,000 100 125 - 2.0 - 30% 25 15 25 25
RS 6,000 65 75 - 5.0 - 40% 25 7.5 15 15
RM (6) 65 75 5.0 - 40% 25 15 25 15(11 )
Commercial
CN 0.5ac. 100 100 - - .25 25% 30 30 (9) 30
CC 1 ac. 100 200 - - .35 25% 30 30 (9) 30
CG 1 ac. 100 200 - - .35 25% 50 15 (9) 20
CLO 1 ac. 100 200 - - .25 25% 30 15 (9) 20
CHO 1 ac. 100 200 - - .35 25% 40 15 (9) 20
CRE 3ac. 200 300 - - .50 40% 80 50 80 50
Industrial
IL II 1 ac. 100 200 II - - II .45 II 45% II 40 15 I 25 I 20
IG II 2 ac. I 200 200 II - I - II .45 II 45% II 45 20 I 45 I 20
Institutional/Civic
IPF 1 ac. 100 200 - - .35 25% 50 15 25 20
PO -
- - - - - - - - - -
lOrd. 2005 - 002]
Notes for Table 3.D.1.A-5:
1. The only density allowed in the AP zoning district is for properties in the LR-1 FLU category located north of Pahokee, on the east
side of US 441, for the unincorporated community of Canal Point, in the Glades Tier only. lOrd. 2005 - 002]
2. The minimum lot size in the AR district corresponds to the FLU category as follows: RR20 - 20 acres; RR10 -10 acres; RR5 - 5
Acres; RR2.5 - 2.5 acres; U/S Tier - 5 acres.
3. Nonconforming lots in the AR district may use the setback provisions in Art.1.F .4, Nonconforming Lots.
4. AR lots in the RR-2.5-FLU designation may use the RE PDR's. lOrd. 2005 - 002]
5. The maximum density in the AR district corresponds to the FLU category as follows: RR20 - 1 uniU20 acres; RR10 - 1 uniU10
acres; RR5 - 1 unit/5 acres; RR2.5 - 1 unitl2.5 acres; U/S Tier - 1 uniU5acres. lOrd. 2005 - 002]
6. Density is determined by the FLU designation on each parcel of land in the Plan. The number of units permitted on a parcel of
land which complies with the applicable property development regulations and design standards, therefore, is an acceptable
minimum lot size. lOrd. 2005 - 002]
7. The minimum allowable density may be less if a project is granted a minimum density exception pursuant to the Plan. lOrd. 2005
-002]
8. The maximum allowable density may be greater if the project is granted the right to develop above the standard density pursuant
to the applicable provisions in the Plan or this Code, such as WHP, TDR, or a provision in an Overlay. lOrd. 2005 - 002]
9. Setback equal to width of R-O-W buffer pursuant to Art. 7, Landscaping. lOrd. 2005 - 002]
10. Buildings over 35 feet in height may be permitted in accordance with Art.3.D.1.E, Multifamily, Non-residential Districts and
POD's. lOrd. 2005 - 002]
11. Property previously developed with a RM or RH rear setback of 12' shall be considered conforming and subject to Art. 1.E, Prior
Approvals. lOrd. 2005 - 002]
B. General Exceptions
1. Single Family Housing Type in Multifamily Districts
The property development regulations for single family housing in the RM district shall be in
accordance with the RS district PDRs in Table 3.D.1.A-5, Property Development Regulations.
2. Infill Subdivisions
Single family dwelling units in projects which meet the criteria in Policy 1.2.2.a of the Plan or utilize
the TDR Program may develop according to the Residential Single Family RS PDRs in the Code.
3. Density Bonus Programs
Special density programs for affordable housing are available through the use of VDBs, TNDs, and in
the Westgate CRAG and may use regulations below.
Unified Land Deve/opment Code
07/05 Supplement NO.1 (Effective February 2, 2005)
Article 3 - Overlays & Zoning Districts
41 of 134