PALM BEACH COUNTY PLANNING, ZONING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT ZONING DIVISION

Transcription

1 PALM BEACH COUNTY PLANNING, ZONING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT ZONING DIVISION ADMINISTRATIVE VARIANCE TYPE I B - STAFF PUBLIC MEETING STAFF REPORT 2/27/2014 AGENDA ITEM CODE SECTION REQUIRED PROPOSED VARIANCE AVB B.1.A.2 Accessory uses and structures: Fences, walls & hedges 6 feet Maximum Wall Hieght 10 feet 4 feet SITUS ADDRESS: 12008, 12020, 12012, Acme Dairy Road Boynton Beach AGENT NAME & ADDRESS: OWNER NAME & ADDRESS: Gladys DiGirolamo G.L. Homes 1600 Sawgrass Corporate Pkwy Sunrise FL Delray Beach Associates I, LLC GL Homes1600 Sawgrass Corporate Pkwy Sunrise FL PCN: ZONING DISTRICT: AGR-PUD BCC DISTRICT: 05 PROJECT MANAGER: Barbara Pinkston C., Principal Site Planner Elliott O Roark, Zoning Technician LEGAL AD: Gladys Digirolamo representative for GL Homes, agent, for Delray Beach Associates I, LLC, owners, to allow a wall to exceed the maximum height permitted. LOC: Adjacent to the Florida Turnpike approximately 2 miles south of Boynton Beach Blvd and.96 miles east of Lyons Road within the Valencia Cove Agricultural Reserve Planned Unit Development (PUD) in the PUD Zoning District. LAND USE: AGR S/T/R: PETITION #: LOT AREA: LOT DIMENSIONS: CONFORMITY OF LOT: CONFORMITY OF ELEMENT: TYPE OF ELEMENT: ELEMENT SIZE: BUILDING PERMIT #: NOTICE OF VIOLATION: CONSTRUCTION STATUS: APPLICANT REQUEST: Approximately 1814 ft x 2525 ft Conforming N/A Wall 10 ft High N/A N/A Proposed To allow a wall to exceed the maximum height limitations. 1

2 STAFF SUMMARY This acre site is located at Acme Dairy Road, approximately 300 feet West of Florida's Turnpike and two miles South of Boynton Beach Boulevard within the Valencia Cove Planned Unit Development (PUD). The site has a Future Land Use (FLU) Designation of Agricultural Reserve (AGR) and a Zoning Designation of Agricultural Reserve PUD (AGR-PUD). The site is divided into three parcels bordered on the east by Florida's Turnpike, and surrounded by existing PUDs to the north and west, and agricultural land to the south and west. Pursuant to Article 5.B.1.A.2 walls located in the AGR-PUD Zoning District are limited to a maximum height of six feet. The applicant is requesting a variance due to the unique circumstances surrounding this site. The request is to increase the height of a proposed sound wall an additional four feet resulting in a ten foot barrier within the perimeter buffer adjacent to the Florida Turnpike. This wall is intended to serve the purpose of mitigating noise generated by turnpike traffic. The factors which contribute to the justification of this variance include: 1. There are currently established projects of a similar nature with sound walls (constructed by the State) equal to or greater than ten feet in height abutting the Turnpike; 2. Increasing the height of this projects perimeter wall will provide an ability to mitigate noise generated from the Turnpike traffic; and 3. The Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) requires the developer of new residential projects adjacent to the turnpike to mitigate noise generated by traffic. Initial design proposals for the development included providing a 300 foot buffer separating the project from the Turnpike, ensure adequate mitigation of traffic noise. However, as the project has progressed recent noise decibel studies for a similarly situated development (Bridges PUD) have demonstrated that the existing 300 foot wide buffer does not provide sufficient relief. These studies suggest that a 15.5 foot combination of berm and wall is able to maintain satisfactory decibel levels within a residential community. In the case of Valencia Cove, the variance request of an additional four feet (resulting in a ten foot sound wall along the eastern edge of the PUD adjacent to the Florida Turnpike) will be sufficient for the project to meet these residential decibel standards. 2

3 Findings of Fact 3

4 STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS When considering a Development Order application for a Type IB Variance, the Zoning Director shall consider Standards 1 through 7 listed under Article 2.D.3.G.2 of the ULDC. The Standards and Staff Analyses are as indicated below. A Type IB Variance which fails to meet any of these Standards shall be deemed adverse to the public interest and shall not be approved. Based upon the satisfaction of the Standards by the Applicant, Staff recommends APPROVAL of the request subject to 1 Condition of Approval. ANALYSIS OF ARTICLE 2, SECTION 2.D.3.G.2 VARIANCE STANDARDS 1. SPECIAL CONDITIONS AND CIRCUMSTANCES EXIST THAT ARE PECULIAR TO THE PARCEL OF LAND, BUILDING OR STRUCTURE, THAT ARE NOT APPLICABLE TO OTHER PARCELS OF LAND, STRUCTURES OR BUILDINGS IN THE SAME ZONING DISTRICT: Yes. Special conditions and circumstances exist that are peculiar to the parcel of land, building or structure, that are not applicable to other parcels of land, structures or building in the same zoning district. A number of Agricultural Reserve Planned Unit Developments (AGR-PUDs) are located along Florida's Turnpike. In this case a 300 foot preserve parcel is separating the eastern boundary of Valencia Cove PUD from the Turnpike. This separation was thought to serve as an adequate sound buffer for the PUD but upon further study it was determined that additional sound mitigation measures would be necessary. It is for this reason that a variance of an additional four feet in height has been requested. This will result in a sound wall totaling ten feet in height that effectively mitigates the influence of noise generated by traffic along the Turnpike. This ten foot wall will maintain decibel levels at those appropriate to a residential community. In summary the circumstance which exists that is peculiar to this project is its relative location and proximity to Florida's Turnpike and the resulting noise pollution generated from this. 2. SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES AND CONDITIONS DO NOT RESULT FROM THE ACTIONS OF THE APPLICANT: Figure 1 (East Border) Distance Between Homes and Turnpike Yes. Special circumstances and conditions do not result from the actions of the applicant. The circumstances which deem the sound wall necessary are driven by the projects relative location to the Turnpike. The only viable option to effectively mitigate the sound generated by traffic along the Turnpike is the construction of a sound wall. As mentioned above a number of other PUD's along the Turnpike have been granted variances for sound walls or combination of a berm and sound wall height increases which exceed the variance requested here at Valencia Cove. Sound walls at similar PUD's are as much as 15.5 feet in height. In the case of Valencia Cove, given the 300 foot preserve parcel separating the PUD from the Turnpike, it has been determined that a ten foot sound wall will be adequate to meet the necessary decibel levels appropriate to a residential community. 4

5 3. GRANTING THE VARIANCE SHALL NOT CONFER UPON THE APPLICANT ANY SPECIAL PRIVILEGE DENIED BY THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THIS CODE TO OTHER PARCELS OF LAND, BUILDINGS OR STRUCTURES IN THE SAME ZONING DISTRICT: Yes. Granting the variance shall not confer any special privilege. As mentioned above there are numerous PUDs which have already been developed in the vicinity of Valencia Cove along Florida's Turnpike which have been granted variances for sound walls exceeding fifteen feet in height. Granting the request of a variance to construct a ten foot wall along the eastern border of Valencia Cove shall not confer any special privilege denied by the comprehensive plan or the ULDC to other parcels of land, buildings or structures in the same zoning district. 4. LITERAL INTERPRETATION AND ENFORCEMENT OF THE TERMS AND PROVISIONS OF THIS CODE WOULD DEPRIVE THE APPLICANT OF RIGHTS COMMONLY ENJOYED BY OTHER PARCELS OF LAND IN THE SAME ZONING DISTRICT, AND WOULD WORK AN UNNECESSARY AND UNDUE HARDSHIP: Yes. Literal interpretation and enforcement of the terms and provisions of this code would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other parcels of land in the same zoning district, and would work an unnecessary and undue hardship. As mentioned above there are numerous PUDs along the Turnpike which have been granted variances to construct sound walls exceeding six feet in height. A literal interpretation of the ULDC would only allow a six foot wall along the rear of the development, which would not adequately mitigate traffic noise. 5. GRANT OF VARIANCE IS THE MINIMUM VARIANCE THAT WILL MAKE POSSIBLE THE REASONABLE USE OF THE PARCEL OF LAND, BUILDING OR STRUCTURE: Yes. Granting of the variance to allow a ten foot wall is the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the property. The property is already screened with dense vegetation as shown in Figure four to the left. The developer has considered these other options and initially believed this vegetation would serve as an adequate sound buffer. Upon further study it was determined that the a sound wall would be required and the minimum height necessary would be ten feet. Granting this variance will make possible the reasonable use of the land and structures. 6. GRANT OF THE VARIANCE WILL BE CONSISTENT WITH THE PURPOSES, GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND POLICIES OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THIS CODE: Yes. Granting of the variance will be consistent with the purposes, goals, objectives, and policies of the Comprehensive Plan and this Code. One of the primary goals and objectives of the Plan and the ULDC is to permit the reasonable use of land by residents, including protection from noise intrusions. 5

6 7. THE GRANT OF THE VARIANCE WILL NOT BE INJURIOUS TO THE AREA INVOLVED OR OTHERWISE DETRIMENTAL TO THE PUBLIC WELFARE: Yes. The grant of the variance will not be injurious to the area involved or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. The variance request is intended to alleviate conditions that would be detrimental to future residents of the Valencia Cove PUD. It is for this reason that the developer has requested a variance for a ten foot sound wall based on noise decibel studies carried out in similar projects adjacent to the Turnpike as referenced above in the justification statement. This proposed variance will allow the developer to meet the needs of the future residents of Valencia Cove. 6

7 DEVELOPMENT ORDER The development order for this particular variance shall lapse on February 27, 2015, one year from the approval date. A building permit shall be obtained by the applicant prior to February 27, (DATE: MONITORING: Zoning) ADMINISTRATIVE VARIANCE TYPE I B STAFF PUBLIC MEETING CONDITIONS 1. On or prior to April 28, 2014, the current Final Master Plan (Page 1-2) Plan shall be amended to reflect this Type IB Variance Approval. (DATE: MONITORING - Zoning) (DATE/DRO: ZONING - Zoning) 2. At time of application for a Building Permit, the Property Owner shall provide a copy of this Variance Result Letter along with copies of the approved Master Plan to the Building Division. (BLDG PERMIT: BLDG - Zoning) (BLDGPMT: ZONING - Zoning) 3. On or prior to February 27, 2015, the Property Owner/Applicant shall have received the Final Building Inspection and the Certificate of Completion for the wall. (DATE: MONITORING-Building) (BLDGPMT/CC/DATE: ZONING - Zoning) 7