Tuesday, April 26, 2011

1999 UCO MODEL DOCUMENTS

Hi all,
These Model Documents are adaptable to any Condominium Association, and many of our Associations have adopted them. However we strongly caution that you not do so without the assistance of an Attorney; these matters can be tricky, and these documents are presented here, with the permission of the UCO Attorney, for reference only.
Randall Borchardt, Chair of our Advisory Committee, may be available to assist your Association; as time and priorities allow.

Dave Israel
-
1999 UCO Model Documents, First Amendment (Scrivener's Error)
http://goo.gl/QbRhO


1999 UCO Model Documents, Exhibit 2, By-Laws
http://goo.gl/CsuGC


1999 UCO Model Documents, Master Declaration of Condominium
http://goo.gl/R5xQu


1999 UCO Model Documents, Master Amendment
http://goo.gl/WpuLm


1999 UCO Model Documents, Table of Contents
http://goo.gl/wDIqA


Dave Israel

Monday, April 18, 2011

Saturday, April 9, 2011

CONDO ASSOC RESIDENT - 2011 INFORMATION FORM

XX CONDO ASSOCIATION - 2011 INFORMATION FORM


Condo No. ______________ Residents of this unit are:

____________________________________E-mail address ___________________________

and _________________________________ Florida phone # __________________________

In case of EMERGENCY, please notify: _________________________________

Relationship ________________ Address __________________________________

Phone No. _________________________________

And/Or: __________________________________

FOR SEASONAL RESIDENTS - OFF-season information:

Address: __________________________________

Phone No. _________________________________ E-mail address ___________________________

All unit owners are required by Florida law, to carry HOMEOWNERS INSURANCE. Please advise:

My policy is held by (name of Insurance Company) __________________________________________

The renewal date is (month) (year) __________________________________________

2nd floor owners - Do you have a hatch to the attic in your unit? _______

SPECIAL NEEDS (need for insulin, cannot navigate stairs, kosher food only, oxygen
dependent or other considerations in emergency i.e. hurricane, power outage, etc.)


___________________________________________________________

* Please return or mail this information to XX, WPB, FL 33417

Thank You


Thursday, April 7, 2011

RIKON ARTICLE: TRAVEL: SOMETIMES A MELANCHOLY SIDE

ARTS AND ENTERTAINMENT BY IRV RIKON

TRAVEL: SOMETIMES A MELANCHOLY SIDE

Travel is educational, often stimulating, always an adventure, but sometimes it also has something of a melancholy side.

In December, my Lady Laura and I sailed on the maiden voyage of Royal Caribbean's "Allure of the Seas." The largest cruise ship afloat, almost four football fields in length, it can carry slightly over 6,000 passengers and is therefore almost a small city unto itself. The ship has received a lot of publicity: Oprah did a telecast on it and so did Kathie Lee and Hoda. It was featured in a Wall Street Journal piece, and even The Palm Beach Post wrote about it.

The ship technically is considered to be a state-of-the-art marvel, about which I can offer little comment. As far as entertainment goes, it has something for everyone: There's a big theater in which we saw an extremely well done production of the Kander and Ebb musical Chicago. There's a separate itheater presenting ice shows, another entity in which to see something called "The Blue Planet Show," a comedy club, an outdoor spectacular with divers, swimmers and acrobats. Dance at night? Of course! And bar lounges everywhere. Shopping? Roughly 40 stores, mostly upscale, can be visited. Too much excitement? Go to the well-stocked library! Or relax around the swimming pools, sit on chairs while taking in the good sea air. Hungry? Try any of 26 eateries, including a Starbucks and a store that dispenses free Nathan hot dogs. That's alongside an area known as "Coney Island." Nearby is "Central Park," the most tranquil place aboard ship, with trees and flowers and where there's a little restaurant serving no-cost delicious and bountiful tuna fish sandwiches.

So what are the downsides? We had a room with a small balcony, smaller than any similar stateroom we've had on any cruise ship. Dinners in the main dining room were not as good as that served on comparable cruise lines. Better meals can be had at specialty restaurants, but better food spells bigger bucks. Better cabins can be had, but they can get quite a bit pricey. You don't want to mingle with the hoi polloi? Okay; you can escape from the masses by paying additional and moving in segregated areas set aside just for you and others like you.

This actually is not my kind of ship. (Laura loved it.) For me, a ship is like a car, transportation to take me somewhere. Allure of the Seas is designed to be an entity all its own. For seven days in the Caribbean Sea, you don't have to leave the ship at all if you don't want to. I wanted to, as did my Lady, so we booked three tours, two in Mexico, for visiting Mayan ruins, and one is Labadee, Haiti, where Royal Caribbean owns a private beach.

Haiti, already one of the world's poorest countries, had just suffered a terrible earthquake. The 'quake's effects had mainly been felt on the opposite, the northern side of this mountainous island. We got off the ship slightly late and found ourselves on a cozy, isolated beach where people from the Allure were already swimming or sunbathing or had rented sailboats; some had apparently paid extra to ride on rafts down nearby rapids. Several large tents had been put up. Food, brought from the ship, was under them so folks could eat to their stomach's content. A few stalls stood nearby, where indigenous Haitains were selling mostly things they had made themselves. We bought trinkets: inexpensive jewelry; a small wood carving of a bird. When we'd finished paying for our items, the man selling the goods said, "We --" (four skinny men were at the booth where we'd made our purchases) "-- we are hungry. We haven't eaten today. Would you go over to the tents and bring us some food? You don't have to pay for it. We can't afford to buy, and if we could, they wouldn't sell it to us anyway." We asked what they wanted. "Anything!" They didn't care what. All they wanted was to eat. So we did go back to the tents. Most of the food by that time was gone, but we brought some of which remained. As we left, they started to wolf it down. We live in one of two or more different worlds. If only by hearsay, they know a lot about ours. For the most part, we're only vaguely aware of theirs. That's the melancholy side.

In February, we went to New Zealand. By the government's own estimation, slightly under 5,000,000 people inhabit the two main islands "down under." There are 38,000,000 sheep and Lord only knows how many cattle. It's a beautiful country, mountainous, water everywhere, including shooting geysers as in Yellowstone Park. There's just one large city, Auckland, which has perhaps a million and a quarter human population. The prettiest city (300,000 or so folks) is Christchurch, that name deriving from a college in Oxford, England. The city indeed has a lovely church, built along English lines, a lively university campus, several new and interesting museums, an enormous and beautiful botanical garden, and a narrow, tree-lined river running through the heart of it. This is the kind of place where people are friendly and go out of their way to be helpful, the kind of place where someones such as we wouldn't mind living. Four days after we left, an earthquake took down the very center of the city, including the church steeple and parts of the university. Many casualties, not a few deaths. More melancholy.

Finally, as noted, New Zealand has sheep. Sometimes one encounters shows featuring sheep. At one such show, thirteen varieties of sheep -- more than I knew existed! -- were put on display. Viewers were invited to pet the sheep, which we did. As I was petting one affectionate animal, it licked my hand. Now I have sworn off eating lamb shanks and lamb chops, anything at all having to do with a sheep, -- dishes that used to be favorites of mine. Moral of the story: Don't ever let a sheep lick your hand. When you think of what might happen to that poor sheep, -- ah, there's the melancholy again!

CODE ENFORCEMENT PART 4


Issac Feder Code Enforcement part 4 from David B. Israel on Vimeo.

CODE ENFORCEMENT HEARING PART 3


Issac Feder Code Enforcement Hearing Disc 3 from David B. Israel on Vimeo.

Wednesday, April 6, 2011

GOLF'S EDGE - ISSAC FEDER - CODE ENFORCEMENT HEARING- PART 2

Hi all,
Issac Feder, Code Enforcement Hearing, part 2


Dave Israel
...........................................................................................................

Code Enforcement part 2 from David B. Israel on Vimeo.

Thanks to the Channel 63 team for video conversion.
-

GOLF'S EDGE - ISSAC FEDER - CODE ENFORCEMENT HEARING- PART 1

Hi all,
This hearing was about using a unit for other than residential purpose; in this case, as a house of worship, this is part one of four parts: 
Dave Israel
................................................................

Code Enforcement Hearing 3-23-11 Part 1 from David B. Israel on Vimeo.

Thanks  to the Channel 63 team for video conversion
-

Tuesday, April 5, 2011

DELEGATE ASSEMBLY APRIL 01, 2011


Delegate Assembly April 01, 2011 from David B Israel on Vimeo.

Thanks to the Channel 63 Team for the video

Dave Israel
-

Monday, April 4, 2011

Delegate Assembly April 01, 2011


Century Village Delegate Assembly April 01, 2011 from David B Israel on Vimeo.

Delegate Assembly Video courtesy of the Channel 63 team


Dave Israel
-

Saturday, April 2, 2011

RIKON REVIEW: CRAZY FOR YOU

ARTS AND ENTERTAINMENT BY IRV RIKON

PLAY REVIEW: CRAZY FOR CRAZY FOR YOU AT THE MALTZ JUPTER THEATRE

The most enjoyable show of this season is Crazy For You, and it's here right now at the MALTZ JUPITER THEATRE. This is theater you don't have to think about. Just sit back and listen to the classic songs of the Gershwin Brothers, George and Ira, (including "Embraceable You," "I Got Rhythm" and "Someone to Watch Over Me".) Laugh along with Ken Ludwig's witty book. Marvel at Shea Sullivan's inspired choreography and Mark Martino's imaginative directing. Ogle at Jose M. Rivera's saucy costumes and the sexy girls inside them. Delight in all the marvels created by the technical crew. Perhaps above all, note the terrific young cast that's ben assembled just for this production.

The plot? It's standard Mickey and Judy: We're broke, so let's put on an expensive musical, only this time the setting is Nevada, long before Las Vegas became "Las Vegas!" Boy meets girl, except that in Crazy for You, many boys meet many girls.

In other words, this show resembles the great MGM musicals of yesteryear, the major difference being this is "live" theater as good as it gets, and Metro hasn't made an energetic, fun-filled film like this in at least a generation.

I cannot emphasize enough how good the stars are. Matt Loehr sings the way you want a Broadway entertainer to sing; he does athletic dances ala Gene Kelly and comic dances vaguely reminiscent of Ray Bolger; he also taps. (My Significant Other says I shouldn't compare him to Gene Kelly. He hasn't Kelly's charm. I say he's charming, and if he isn't yet, he's a star-in-the-making. See him now!) Vanessa Sonon is the delectable love interest, perfect for this role. I could go on and rave about the entire cast, all of whom are deserving of applause and the standing ovation everyone gets, but I haven't the space here.

Just drive north to Jupiter or walk if you must, and see the show. Sit down, relax, and feel sorry for the theater-lovers of New York City, who won't have the opportunity to enjoy this production with you.

As with so many MALTZ JUPITER THEATRE productions, the run of this show is much too short. Closing date is April 17, and the musical is almost completely sold out. For possible reservations, -- at any given time, there can be cancellations, -- and additional information, including next season's schedule, telephone 575-2223 or online: www.jupitertheatre.org. There's an added note: The Maltz is inviting folks of all ages to "become the next big star". It's a takeoff on "American Idol," with talented people asked to audition at the theater April 30 from noon to 8:00PM, the actual program to go on July 9. The Maltz Jupiter Theatre Guild is the sponsor.

Friday, April 1, 2011

REFLECTION BAY - PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN

GOLF COURSE DEVELOPMENT - REFLECTION BAY JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT BY DEVELOPER

Urban Planning and Design

Landscape Architecture

Communication Graphics

JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT

477 S. Rosemary Avenue

Suite 225 - The Lofts at CityPlace

West Palm Beach, FL 33401

561.366.1100 561.366.1111 fax

www.udkstudios.com

LCC000035

REFLECTION BAY AT SOUTH HAMPTON PUD

AKA: TURTLE BAY COUNTRY CLUB

AT SOUTH HAMPTON PUD

DEVELOPMENT ORDER AMENDMENT APPLICATION

Submittal Date: March 16, 2011

Control Number: 1984-052

Application Number: tbd

REQUEST

On behalf of Fairways, LLC, Urban Design Kilday Studios has prepared and hereby

respectfully submits this application requesting a Development Order Amendment

(DOA) to modify the South Hampton PUD (Century Village Plat 14), Control Number

1973-215. The affected area is comprised of 70.15 acres of former golf course known

as Turtle Bay Country Club. The proposed project will be called Reflection Bay. It is

comprised of one (1) property control number. (PCN 00-42-43-23-40-037-0000)

Specifically, the proposed Development Order Amendment application is requesting the

following:

TO RE-DESIGNATE APPROXIMATELY 70.15 ACRES OF GOLF COURSE TO RESIDENTIAL

LAND AREA;

TO ADD 680 RESIDENTIAL UNITS AND 50,000 SQUARE FEET OF NON-RESIDENTIAL;

TO ADD ONE (1) EXTERNAL ACCESS POINT TO THE PUD FROM HAVERHILL ROAD AND

CROSS ACCESS TO ADJACENT COMMERCIAL CENTER;

TO REQUEST ONE REQUESTED USE FOR A TYPE III CONGREGATE LIVING FACILITY

TO RESTART THE COMMENCEMENT CLOCK;

TO REQUEST 5 - TYPE II CONCURRENT VARIANCES:

A more detailed description of these requests are included in this Justification

Statement.

HISTORY / BACKGROUND

South Hampton PUD is located at the northwest corner of Haverhill Road and

Okeechobee Boulevard. The official master plan for the

Southampton PUD indicates a total site area of 83.6 acres and

a total of 240 dwelling units.

According to the Palm Beach County Comprehensive Plan, the site lies within the

Urban/Suburban Tier and has a Palm Beach County Future Land Use (FLU)

designation of Commercial/High Residential 8 (CH/8) and Residential High 18 (HR 18)

as depicted on FLU Atlas Map 57. The property is designated as a Residential Planned

Unit Development (RS/SE/PUD) Zoning District per Quad Map 31. The following is a

summary of the past Zoning Approvals:

CONTROL NUMBER ACTION DATE RESOLUTION

NUMBER

1973-007 Rezone from CG to RH 05-08-1973 R-73-238

1973-215 Rezone from CG to RH and allow a PUD 12-18-1973 R-73-815

1973-215(A) SE to amend PUD to add access point 03-16-1993 R-93-333

OVERVIEW OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ORDER AMENDMENT

The applicant is proposing to re-designate the former Turtle Bay Country Club from Golf

Course use to Residential. This Pod is 70.15 acres in size. The golf course ceased

operations in May of 2009 and is currently vacant. The application is proposing to

construct the following utilizing a mixed-use neighborhood concept:

680 residential units (mixture of single family, townhome and multifamily style

units),

100 bed Congregate Living Facility (Type III),

15,000 square foot community center,

17,500 square feet of medical office

32,500 square feet of commercial space (all permitted uses)

The overall PUD will now have a total of 920 residential units (680 new plus 240

existing) plus a 100 bed CLF which equates to 43 units for a total of 963 units. The

overall acreage of South Hampton PUD is 83.6 acres equating to an overall density of

11.52 du/acre. The affected area is requesting the equivalent of 723 units which

equates to a density of 10.30 du/acre.

Designed to be “urban oasis”, Reflection Bay is a new urban style residential

development focused on providing its residents with a sense of neighborhood through

its wide variety of open space amenities. The project has two entrances from Haverhill

Road which leads into a naturalist grid pattern of streets and meandering drives. The

densest portion of the community, three (3) multi-story mixed-use buildings are oriented

on an internal “Main Street”. The “Main Street” provides for parallel parking on both

sides and wide sidewalks adjacent to the buildings. The buildings will have a strong

presence along the “Main Street” and will provide opportunity for commercial space to

be located on the bottom and second floors. The commercial area will provide services

Project No. #10-061.000 Reflection Bay at March 16, 2011

Control No. 1973-215 Southampton PUD

Page 2 of 28

to the residents such as a laundry mat, café, or barber shop. The Main Street

terminates on a large central green. The large, vast lawn will provide opportunities for

the residents to throw a frisbee, play tag or just enough the outdoors. Surrounding the

central green are townhomes on a radial design which transition into less dense single

family style units. Throughout the project are wonderful opportunities for distinct

neighborhoods to be created and each of these neighborhoods would have their own

open space. Along the western perimeter of the site an expansive, naturalist lake which

is both a visual and recreational amenity. It provides for beautiful views and vistas for

both residents for Reflection Bay and the residents in neighboring Century Village. The

buildings located along Haverhill Road are pulled up to the road to provide a strong

presence on the street. The central building is proposing to have a transit oriented

plaza providing for a safe and convenient gathering area for people and children using

buses. The southern portion of the site transitions back to less dense single family style

units. The meandering drive then passes through a passive Mediation Park and

terminates on a Community Center and baseball / multipurpose field.

The following is a breakdown of the proposed buildings and uses:

Building Units Non-residential Building

Height Stories

Single Family Style 58 --- Max. Ht. 35’ 2 stories max.

Townhouse Style 200 --- Max. Ht. 45’ 3 stories max.

Multifamily Bldg. A 40 --- Max. Ht. 45’ 3 stories max.

Multifamily Bldg. B 42 --- Max. Ht. 45’ 3 stories max.

Multifamily Bldg. C 120 28,000 SF Max. Ht. 65’ 5 stories max.

Multifamily Bldg. D 120 7,000 SF Max. Ht. 65’ 5 stories max.

Multifamily Bldg. E 100 15,000 SF Max. Ht. 65’ 5 stories max.

Community

Center

--- 15,000 SF Max. Ht. 35’ 2 stories max.

TOTAL: 680 DU 65,000 SF

Project No. #10-061.000 Reflection Bay at March 16, 2011

Control No. 1973-215 Southampton PUD

Page 3 of 28

Landscape buffers are proposed along the perimeter of the property. Twenty foot wide

ROW buffers are proposed along Haverhill Road and Century Village Boulevard and

five foot compatibility buffers and fifteen foot incompatibility buffers are proposed

adjacent to the neighboring existing residential and commercial properties. In addition

to the landscape buffers, a large lake, parks and open space provide for additional

buffering.

WORKFORCE HOUSING PROGRAM

The Workforce Housing program (WHP) is applicable to new or existing projects

proposing 10 or more dwelling units provided they are located within the

Urban/Suburban Tier and have a residential FLU of LR-1, LR-2, LR-3, MR-5, HR-8, HR-

12, or HR-18. For existing projects, the program applies to those units being added.

Therefore, the proposed 680 units are subject to the program requirements.

Reflection Bay will provide for the required number of WFH units and the units will be

dispersed through-out the community. At this time, the applicant has not committed to a

specific WFH option.

OPEN SPACE:

The affected area included in this application will meet all open space criteria as a stand

alone development providing a minimum 28.0 acres (40% of 70.15 acres) of open

space in the form of landscape buffers, retention, and outdoor recreation facilities as

shown on the Conceptual Site Plans. In addition, the open space provided within the

affected area exceeds the open space requirement for the South Hampton PUD as a

whole. Therefore, the overall requirement for Open Space will be continued to be met

by the PUD as a whole after the development of the application parcel.

Project No. #10-061.000 Reflection Bay at March 16, 2011

Control No. 1973-215 Southampton PUD

Page 4 of 28

PDD AND PUD OBJECTIVES AND STANDARDS

PDD DESIGN OBJECTIVES:

Article 3.E.1.C requires Planned Developments to meet the following PDD Design

Objectives:

a. Contain sufficient depth, width, and frontage on a public street, or appropriate

access thereto, as shown on the PBC Thoroughfare Identification Map to

adequately accommodate the proposed use(s) and design;

The South Hampton PUD is consistent with this PDD Design Objective. The PUD

has frontage on Okeechobee Boulevard and Haverhill Road. The overall PUD

contains 83.6 acres.

b. Provide a continuous, non-vehicular circulation system which connects uses,

public entrances to buildings, recreation areas, amenities, usable open space,

and other land improvements within and adjacent to the PDD;

The South Hampton PUD provides a continuous, non-vehicular circulation system

through both sidewalks and open space linking the buildings and recreational areas

of the project.

c. Provide pathways and convenient parking areas designed to encourage

pedestrian circulation between uses;

The project disperses parking through-out the project including providing parking

adjacent to buildings by incorporating parking structures into the building. Not only

does this design consideration create the opportunity for additional open space it

also allows for convenient, safe and pedestrian friendly parking locations. In

addition to dispersed parking, the project also successfully links uses through

sidewalks, drive and open space.

d. Preserve existing native vegetation and other natural/historic features to the

greatest possible extent;

Being a former golf course, there is not natural, existing stands of native vegetation.

The applicant intends to relocate and preserve specimen trees and native trees to

the greatest extent possible.

e. Screen objectionable features (e.g. mechanical equipment, loading/delivery

areas, storage areas, dumpsters, compactors) from public view and control

objectionable sound;

It is the intent of the project to properly screen objectionable features from public

view. Much of this can be done by placing the mechanical equipment, etc., inside

the parking structures.

Project No. #10-061.000 Reflection Bay at March 16, 2011

Control No. 1973-215 Southampton PUD

Page 5 of 28

f. Locate and design buildings, structures, uses, pathways, access, landscaping,

water management tracts, drainage systems, signs and other primary elements

to minimize the potential for any adverse impact on adjacent properties;

Great care was taken in the building placement and design of the open space

amenities for the project. Not only was it the desire to successful design the

community for its future residents, a lot of thought was put into how the existing

residential buildings in South Hampton and the adjacent buildings in Century Village

would be impacted. (Please refer to Visual Impact Analysis) The design places a

large, naturalist water body along the western property line adjacent to Century

Village. The existing condominium buildings will now have beautiful views of lake

and littorial plantings. On the parcel of land between the South Hampton

condominium buildings and Century Village, low density single family style units

were placed between building views. The buildings were also setback a great

distance from the property line. A passive Meditative Park and a ball field were also

located in this area. When the ball field is not in use, it will provide a view of a large

green field.

g. Minimize parking through shared parking and mix of uses.

The project minimizes parking through-out the project by incorporating parking

structures into the mixed-use buildings and using on street parking between uses.

h. For PDD only, a minimum of one pedestrian amenity for each 100,000 square

feet of GFA or fraction thereof shall be incorporated into the overall development

to create a pedestrian friendly atmosphere. Suggested amenities include, but

are not limited to:

1) public art;

2) clock tower;

3) water feature/fountain;

4) outdoor patio, courtyard or plaza; and

5) tables with umbrellas for open air eating in common areas and not

associated with tenant use (i.e. restaurant) or outdoor furniture.

This PDD standard appears to apply to non residential PDD uses. South Hampton PUD

is an existing PUD which is primarily residential in nature. The affected area will

however be designed to include appropriate focal points within each neighborhood.

PDD PERFORMANCE STANDARDS:

Planned developments shall comply with the following standards:

a. Access and Circulation

1) PDDs shall have a minimum of 200 linear feet of frontage along an

arterial or collector street;

Project No. #10-061.000 Reflection Bay at March 16, 2011

Control No. 1973-215 Southampton PUD

Page 6 of 28

Finding: South Hampton PUD exceeds this standard.

2) PDDs shall have legal access on an arterial or collector street;

Finding: South Hampton PUD has access points on an arterial street.

3) Vehicular access and circulation shall be designed to minimize hazards to

pedestrians, non-motorized forms of transportation, and other vehicles. Merge lanes,

turn lanes and traffic medians shall be required where existing or anticipated heavy

traffic flows indicate the need for such controls;

Finding: South Hampton PUD meets all standards for road design.

4) Traffic improvements shall be provided to accommodate the projected traffic

impact;

Finding: Traffic improvements have been provided to meet existing traffic impacts and

any additional improvements will be conditioned as necessary as part of the approval of

the affected area.

5) Cul-de-sacs

The objective of this provision is to recognize a balance between dead end

streets and interconnectivity within the development. In order to determine the

total number of local streets that can terminate in cul-de-sacs, the applicant shall

submit a Street Layout Plan, pursuant to the Technical Manual. The layout plan

shall indicate the number of streets terminating in cul-de-sacs, as defined in

Article 1 of this Code, and how the total number of streets is calculated. During

the DRO certification process, the addressing section shall confirm the total

number of streets for the development, which would be consistent with how

streets are named. Streets that terminate in a T-intersection providing access to

less than four lots, or a cul-de-sac that abuts a minimum 20 foot wide open space

that provides pedestrian cross access between two pods shall not be used in the

calculation of total number of cul-de-sacs or dead end streets.

a) 40 percent of the local streets in a PDD may terminate in a cul-de-sac

or a dead-end by right.

Finding: South Hampton PUD is not proposing any dead-ends or cul-de-sacs.

6) Nonresidential PDDs shall provide cross access to adjacent properties where

possible, subject to approval by the County Engineer;

Finding: Not applicable.

7) Streets shall not be designed nor constructed in a manner which adversely

impacts drainage in or adjacent to the project;

Project No. #10-061.000 Reflection Bay at March 16, 2011

Control No. 1973-215 Southampton PUD

Page 7 of 28

Finding: All streets were constructed with appropriate drainage and permitted either by

Palm Beach County or the Florida DOT.

8) Public streets in the project shall connect to public streets directly

adjacent to the project. If no adjacent public streets exist, and the County

Engineer determines that a future public street is possible, a connection to

the property line shall be provided in a location determined by the County

Engineer. This standard may be waived by the BCC.

Finding: Project is proposing to keep existing access point to Century Village (with the

approval from Century Village) and is proposing cross-access to the adjacent

commercial parcel.

b. Street Lighting

Streetlights shall be a maximum of 25 feet in height and shall be installed along all

streets 50 feet in width or greater. The light fixture shall be designed to direct light away

from residences and onto the sidewalk and street and shall comply with Article 5.E,

PERFORMANCE STANDARDS.

Finding: Street lighting has been provided in accordance with Article 5.E.

PERFORMANCE STANDARDS.

c. Median Landscaping

Refer to the most recent Land Development Regulation Manual, available from the PBC

Engineering Department.

Finding: Where medians exist they have been landscaped in accordance with the

standards in place at the time of construction of said medians.

d. Street Trees

Canopy trees meeting the requirements of Article 7, LANDSCAPING, shall be spaced

an average of 50 feet on center along both sides of all streets 50 feet in width or

greater.

Finding: Any new streets will be landscaped in accordance with Article 7,

LANDSCAPING.

f. Mass Transit

All nonresidential PDDs over five acres and 50,000 square feet, and all PUDs over 50

units, shall comply with the following, unless waived by the DRO:

1) The location of a Bus Stop, Boarding and Alighting Area shall be shown on the

master plan and/or final site plan prior to approval by the DRO, unless written

conflicts that one is not required. The purpose of this easement is for the future

construction of Mass Transit infrastructure in a manner acceptable to Palm Tran;

Project No. #10-061.000 Reflection Bay at March 16, 2011

Control No. 1973-215 Southampton PUD

Page 8 of 28

2) Prior to the issuance of the first building permit, the property owner shall

convey to PBC an easement for a Bus Stop, Boarding and Alighting Area, in a

location and manner approved by Palm Tran. As an alternative, prior to

Technical Compliance of the first plat, the property owner shall record an

easement for a Bus Stop, Boarding and Alighting Area in a manner and form

approved by Palm Tran. The property owner shall construct continuous paved

pedestrian and bicycle access compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act

(ADA) to and through the Bus Stop Boarding and Alighting Area; and

3) All PDDs with more than 100 units shall comply with the following requirement:

Prior to the issuance of the building permit for the 100th unit, the petitioner shall

construct a Palm Tran approved mass transit shelter with appropriate access

lighting, trash receptacle and bicycle storage. The location of the shelter shall be

within an approved Bus Stop Boarding and Alighting Area easement. Any and all

costs associated with the construction and perpetual maintenance shall be

funded by the petitioner.

Finding: The central building is proposing to have a transit oriented plaza providing for a

safe and convenient gathering area for people and children using buses. Reflection

Bay requests to have the Palm Tran Bus Stop, Boarding and Alighting Area to be

placed adjacent to this area, as shown of the preliminary site plan.

g. Utilities

All utility services located in a utility easement, such as telephone, cable, gas, and

electric, shall be installed underground or combination/alternative acceptable to the

DRO.

Finding: All utility services for the built portion of South Hampton are in place. Utility

services for the affected area shall comply with this Standard.

h. Parking

1) Residential Uses

Parking for residential uses shall comply with Article 6, PARKING. The DRO

may require a covenant to be recorded limiting the affected area to a specific use

or uses.

Finding: Residential uses comply with parking requirements which were in affect

at the time of the construction of these uses. Any new residential units will

comply with Article 5, PARKING.

2) Nonresidential Uses

Nonresidential uses located within a PDD may apply the parking standards

indicated in Table 6.A.1.B, Minimum Off-Street Parking and Loading

Requirements or the minimum/maximum parking standards below. The site plan

shall clearly indicate which parking standards are being utilized for the entire site.

Project No. #10-061.000 Reflection Bay at March 16, 2011

Control No. 1973-215 Southampton PUD

Page 9 of 28

Finding: Proposed nonresidential uses comply with the minimum off-street

parking and loading standards.

3) Design

Parking areas open to the public shall be interconnected and provide safe

efficient flow of traffic. Parking areas directly adjacent to other parking areas in

the same project shall have cross access.

Finding: Reflection is primarily a residential Planned Unit Development. All

residential parking is private. The minimal non-residential uses will comply with

the Code. There are no adjacent parking areas which would require cross

access.

4) Cross Access

Cross access shall be provided to adjacent internal uses/properties, if required

by the DRO.

Finding: Reflection Bay is providing cross access to both adjacent and internal

properties.

5) Location-Non-residential PDDs

A minimum of ten percent of the required parking shall be located at the rear or

side of each building it is intended to serve.

Finding: Not applicable.

6) Distance

All parking spaces shall be located within 600 linear feet of a public entrance of

the building which it is intended to serve.

Finding: The parking provided at Reflection Bay meets this requirement.

i. Way Finding Signs

Off-site directional signs, consistent with the on-site directional sign standards in Article

8, SIGNAGE, may be allowed along internal streets in the R-O-W, subject to approval

by the County Engineer.

Finding: Any new off-site directional signs shall comply with this standard.

j. Recreation Clubhouse Emergency Generators

A permanent emergency generator shall be required for all PDD clubhouses 2,500

square feet or greater, and shall meet the standards of Art. 5.B.1.A.18, Permanent

Generators.

Finding: Any new recreation construction will comply with this Standard as applicable.

Project No. #10-061.000 Reflection Bay at March 16, 2011

Control No. 1973-215 Southampton PUD

Page 10 of 28

PUD DESIGN OBJECTIVES:

As a requirement of Article 3.E.2.A.4., Exemplary Standards, a Development Order

Amendment application shall only be granted to a project exceeding the goals, policies

and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan, the minimum requirements of the ULDC and

the design objectives and performance standards which include such items as creative

design, recreational opportunities and mix of unit types. The requested DOA

application meets the following PUD Design Objectives and Performance Standards:

a. The proposed development is predominantly residential. We are

proposing 680 residential units and a 100 bed Congregate Living Facility.

b. The proposed development provides a continuous non-vehicular

circulation system for pedestrians. Each pod area has a continuous sidewalk

along the roadway and leading to a public right-of-way.

c. The proposed development provides perimeter landscape buffers along

sides of the pods. (See variance request for exceptions)

d. Reflection Bay is proposing 50,000 square feet of commercial uses to be

used primarily by the residents of the PUD.

e. Reflection creates neighborhood character and identity. Throughout the

project are wonderful opportunities for distinct neighborhoods to be created and

each of these neighborhoods would have their own open space.

f. The proposed development preserves the natural elements to the greatest

extent possible. Where possible, the native trees will be preserved in place or

relocated.

g. Reflection Bay is proposing a 1.5-acre Private Civic parcel.

PUD PERFORMANCE STANDARDS

The following performance standards are required:

a. Proximity to other uses: All residential pods with 5 or more residential

units per acre shall be located within 1,320 feet provide a neighborhood park,

recreation pod, private civic pod, commercial pod or public recreation facility.

b. All residential pods are located within 1,320 feet from a neighborhood

park, recreation pod, private civic pod, commercial pod or public recreation

facility.

c. Focal Points: A focal point shall be provided at the terminus of 15% of the

streets of the project.

Project No. #10-061.000 Reflection Bay at March 16, 2011

Control No. 1973-215 Southampton PUD

Page 11 of 28

The proposed development features focal points within all of the terminus of the

project, exceeding the minimum 15% requirement. Additional landscape focal

points will be added through-out the pods.

d. Neighborhood Parks: Neighborhood parks shall have a direct connection

to the pedestrian system and include a tot lot, gazebo, fitness station, rest station

or similar recreation amenity.

The proposed development proposed three neighborhood parks throughout the

project. These parks will contain features such as tot lots, gazebos and rest

areas.

e. Decorative Street Lighting: Decorative street lighting shall be provided

along the development entrances.

Decorative street lighting will be provided along the development entrances.

In addition, the following two standards are being provided:

f. Fountains: A minimum of one fountain shall be located in the main or

largest lake or water body.

A fountain will be provided within the large lake creating a visual focal point at the

terminus of the street.

g. Interspersed Housing: Workforce Housing Units shall be interspersed with

market rate units within a pod.

The required Workforce Housing Units will be interspersed with the market rate

units.

Project No. #10-061.000 Reflection Bay at March 16, 2011

Control No. 1973-215 Southampton PUD

Page 12 of 28

TYPE II VARIANCES

The Type II Variances being requested are:

CODE SECTION REQUIRED PROPOSED VARIANCE

1 Table 3.D.1.A RM Zoning District –

Minimum Front Setback 25’

0’ 25’

2. Article 3.E.1.D.2.b. All land within the PUD shall

be designated one of the

use types in Table 3.E.1.B,

PDD Use Matrix.

2 use types To propose

two use

types.

3.a. Article

3.E.2.E.2.b.2.a

PUD Commercial Pod

Setback – Commercial pod

shall be setback a minimum

of 1000 feet from the

perimeter of the PUD.

200’ 800’

3.b. Article

3.E.2.E.2.b.2.b

PUD Commercial Pod

Setback – Commercial pod

shall be setback a minimum

of 1000 feet from a public

arterial or collector street

traversing the PUD.

300’ 700’

4. Article

3.E.2.E.2.c.2

PUD Commercial Pod

Design - A Type 3

Incompatibility landscape

buffer, including a six foot

high opaque concrete wall,

shall be required adjacent to

a residential pod.

Waive Buffer

Requirement

Waive

Buffer

Requirement

5. Table 7.F.9.B. Required Incompatibility

Buffer Types for Residential

adjacent to Commercial,

Recreational and Civic uses

Waive Buffer

Requirement

Waive

Buffer

Requirement

VARIANCE JUSTIFICATION

The property owner, Fairways, LLC, is requesting the aforementioned variances for the

Reflection Bay at South Hampton PUD in order to promote a more urban form of

development, as well as more social interaction between the future residents of the

development. Palm Beach County has been in the process of creating overlays to

foster this exact type of development. Two of the areas of focus of the efforts to date

have been the creation of the Urban Redevelopment Area Overlay (URAO) and the Infill

Redevelopment Overlay (IRO). While this project does not lie within either of these

overlay areas, it is directly west of and contiguous to lands to the east which are

included within the URA boundaries. Also, while the land is not within a designated IRO

Project No. #10-061.000 Reflection Bay at March 16, 2011

Control No. 1973-215 Southampton PUD

Page 13 of 28

area, which at this point in time is limited to certain commercial corridors within the

County, aspects of the proposed permitted uses within the commercial pod areas are

consistent with those targeted in that overlay and the form of development envisioned.

The premises of both of these overlays is to create a more urban form of development

by locating structures closer to the road to create a greater presence and foster a more

urban development, as do the placement of the structures closer to Haverhill Road. The

first variance requested applies to the code required front setback on Haverhill Road.

While the greatest front setback variance requested of zero feet applies to the proposed

parking structures and buildings located to the north of the southernmost entrance off of

Haverhill Road, there still remains the appearance of adequate landscape area, as the

required twenty foot (20’) landscape buffer, as well as ten feet (10’) of green area

associated with the required utility easement along the roadway, remain in place. So,

while the goal of the urban form is furthered by locating the structure 25’ closer to the

roadway, the goal of providing aesthetically pleasing landscape in this area is not

compromised. The other setback variances provide for setback to the buildings south of

this entrance down to 5.2 feet, but still allow for the project to create an urban presence

along Haverhill Road.

The second variance being request is to allow for two use types within the residential

pod, one being residential and the second being commercial. Again, the granting of this

variance will allow for a more urban form of development by allowing the placement of

commercial uses on the first and second floors, totaling 50,000 square feet, of certain

areas of the buildings along the main internal roadway, while allowing for residential

uses to be located in the upper floors of the structures. In affect, the allowed area of the

commercial pod for the Planned Unit Development (PUD) will be ‘overlayed’ by the

residential pod. The Preliminary Development Plan places the commercial pod areas in

the buildings which front on the main drive with either parallel parking or angled parking

directly in front of the buildings, with parking garages providing additional parking for

Buildings C, D, and E. The commercial uses intended to serve the residents of the PUD

will allow for greater ease of access to the residential units contained therein.

The third variance is requested to two separate code sections which are very similar in

nature and are therefore addressed as one variance in regard to addressing the criteria.

Article 3.E.2.E.2.b.2.a. and b. require that the commercial pod be setback a minimum of

1,000 feet from the perimeter of the PUD and 1,000 feet from a public arterial or

collector street traversing the PUD. Many of the PUD development regulations

contained in the ULDC were written at a time when large PUD’s were being processed

throughout Palm Beach County. These larger PUD’s had the land area available to

locate the commercial pods so as to meet these distance separation requirements. This

affected site area being only 70.15 acres in size, somewhat limits the placement of the

commercial pod areas, as do considerations for existing residential uses in the

surrounding area. The Preliminary Development Plan depicts retention areas to the

west of the main development area, to provide for a buffering and separation distance to

address any perceived compatibility issues with the existing residential structures to the

west, as well as to meet the drainage permitting requirements for the development. The

placement of the commercial pods areas more internal to the site, with residential uses

Project No. #10-061.000 Reflection Bay at March 16, 2011

Control No. 1973-215 Southampton PUD

Page 14 of 28

on the upper stories and additional structures to the east separating them from Haverhill

Road, will promote the ULDC’s goal that the uses are primarily intended for the

residents while creating a centralize urban area for the residents’ access to the services

they will provide.

Variances four and five, while to two different code sections, are also similar in nature

and will be addressed together for the purposes of addressing the variance criteria in

this justification statement. Variance 4 is to Article 3.E.2.E.2.c.2. which requires a Type

3 Incompatibility Buffer, including a six foot wall, separating the commercial pod areas

from the Residential Pod. Variance 5 is to Table 7.F.9.B. which requires Incompatibility

Buffers between Residential uses and the Commercial, Recreation, and Civic

Pods/uses. Again, this Preliminary Development Plan is designed to create a more

urban environment for the PUD, in order to foster a greater social interaction between

the residents of the community, and to create a ‘sense of community’. The ULDC has in

some sense already determined that all of these uses, residential, commercial,

recreational, and civic uses, are critical components within Planned Unit Developments.

In fact, Table 3.E.2.C. – PUD Land Use Mix, mandates that civic and recreational uses

be components of the PUD. Civic uses are actually allowed to occupy up to 65% of the

land area within the PUD. Commercial uses are allowed to occupy up to one percent

(1%) of the land area.

However, the requirement to buffer these uses from the residential uses inhibits meeting

the goal of promoting a more socially intergrated community and encouraging the

participation of the residents in civic and recreational activities. In addition, the

Preliminary Development Plan locates the civic use in the most western portion of the

site and the code required fifteen foot (15’) Type II Incompatibility buffer is provided

along the west and north property lines of the pod. The clubhouse itself is located

further to the north, away from the existing multi-family structures located in the

unaffected area of the PUD, alleviating any impacts on these existing units. These

existing units are also separated from the Civic Pod by a portion of the Residential Pod.

An incompatibility buffer is not required between the civic and recreational uses on the

site. As such, the variance for the civic pod buffer only applies to the southern portion

of the pod line adjacent to the residential pod to the south.

Likewise, the recreation area is also located in the western portion of the affected area

of redesign, south of the proposed multi-family units. The code required fifteen foot

(15’) Incompatibility Buffer is provided along the north property line of the pod. As such,

the variance to waive the buffer requirement between the recreation use and the

residential use only applies to the area along the pod line from the north perimeter

buffer to the point where the recreation pod touches the civic pod to the west. The goal

of providing an urban environment is clearly evidenced by the design of the Preliminary

Development Plan and any potential purchasers within the future development will be

well aware of the intent to create an integrated environment by creating a seamless,

cohesive plan of development.

Project No. #10-061.000 Reflection Bay at March 16, 2011

Control No. 1973-215 Southampton PUD

Page 15 of 28

Finally, it is requested that staff please consider that some of the issues that have

arisen during the planning of this development plan may be the result of revisions to the

PUD section of the code that have taken place over time. For instance Ordinance

2006-004 created thresholds wherein projects with HR8, HR12 or HR18 may be

approved as Planned Unit Developments with as little as three (3) acres of land area. It

appears that there are areas of the Code that have not subsequently been revised to

take into account the affect of the existing PUD property development regulations on

properties of smaller size, or to promote a more compact, sustainable form of

development in the urban areas of the County.

VARIANCE CRITERIA

Section 2.B.3.E. of the Palm Beach County ULDC states that in order to authorize a

variance, the Palm Beach County Zoning Commission shall and must find that the

seven criteria listed below have been satisfied. The criteria for each variance request

follows.

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:

VARIANCE 1: The subject land area represents a conversion of area from a

previous use of a golf course to residential, commercial, recreational and civic

uses, in the continued form of a Planned Unit Development. The project is

located within the Urban/Suburban Tier and has frontage on two major roadways,

Haverhill Road and Okeechobee Blvd. The land area to be developed is

constrained by the previous design of the golf course, resulting in an irregular

shape. Existing multifamily residential development included in the original PUD

is located to the west and to the south. The combination of the irregular shape

and the existing residential to the south and west which need to be respected are

special conditions associated with the property which are peculiar to the site and

not applicable to other land in the same zoning district.

To accommodate the existing residential to the south and the residential that

extends eastward, the design of the development has located parking structures,

multifamily units and non-residential uses as close as possible to Haverhill Road.

This provides for retention area between the residential to the west and locates

the commercial uses closer to Haverhill Road and results in the requested

variance to waive the front setback requirement.

VARIANCE 2: Again, the land area to be developed is constrained by the previous

design of the golf course, resulting in an irregular shape. Existing multifamily

residential development included in the original PUD is located to the west and to

the south. The combination of the irregular shape and the existing residential to

the south and west which need to be respected are special conditions associated

Project No. #10-061.000 Reflection Bay at March 16, 2011

Control No. 1973-215 Southampton PUD

Page 16 of 28

with the property which are peculiar to the site and not applicable to other land in

the same zoning district. The proposal to locate the Commercial Pod areas

‘under’ a residential use pod, allows the development to provide the needed

commercial services for the benefit of the residents of the PUD without impacting

the surrounding area.

VARIANCES 3.A. & 3.B.: The request for the variances to the locational criteria for

the commercial pod areas are again a result of the existing irregular configuration

of the prior golf course land area, and the proximity of the existing residential

uses in the immediate vicinity of the project. Allowing the commercial pods areas

to be placed closer to Haverhill Road assists in protecting the existing residential

uses in the area.

VARIANCE 4 & 5: The special conditions associated with these variances

requests also revolve around the irregular shape of the property associated with

the design of the prior golf course use, and the proximity of the existing

residential multi-family units in the area developed based on the prior use’s

design. The applicant intends to meet the purpose and intent of the Planned Unit

Development by utilizing imaginative design approaches to the residential living

environment for the project.

2. SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES AND CONDITIONS DO NOT RESULT FROM THE ACTIONS OF

THE APPLICANT:

VARIANCE 1: The special conditions associated with the constraints created

by the previous design of the golf course are not the results of actions by the

applicant, but rather an existing condition created years ago with the original

design of the PUD.

VARIANCE 2: The special conditions associated with the irregular shape of the

property and the existing residential units in the area are not a result of the

applicant but a result of development and the market over time.

VARIANCE 3.A. & 3.B.: The irregular shape of the property and the proximity of

the existing residential uses to the west and south are not a result of actions

of the applicant.

VARIANCE 4 & 5: The special condition of the irregular shape of the property

and the proximity of the existing residential is not a result of the applicant’s

actions, but a result of the design of the prior golf course use for the property.

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:

Project No. #10-061.000 Reflection Bay at March 16, 2011

Control No. 1973-215 Southampton PUD

Page 17 of 28

VARIANCES 1 THROUGH 5: The granting of the variances will not confer any

special privilege denied by the plan or code to other parcels, as both

documents allow for the granting of variances based on meeting the criteria

set forth in the code. Granting these variances will further the goals of the

Comprehensive Plan and ULDC, as it will allow for the creation of a

community which provides for commercial, recreational and civic uses to

alleviate the necessity for the residents to leave the development for such

uses and activities.

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:

VARIANCE 1: The literal interpretation of this ULDC requirement would create

an unnecessary hardship for the applicant if this variance is not approved.

The intent of this code in regard to the requirement for minimum front

setbacks in PUD’s is to provided for the required landscape buffer area, as

well as to alleviate any issues associated with vehicular access to the

residential units and non-residential buildings. In this case, the intent of the

code is met as a twenty foot (20’) foot landscape buffer, as well as a ten foot

(10’) utility easement area is provided along the Haverhill Road right of way

frontage. This provides for a total green area 30’ in width along the right of

way. Additionally, all access to the residential multifamily units that required

the setback waiver will be from internal to the project, providing for adequate

distance from the drive aisles.

Variance 2: The literal interpretation of the code would deprive the applicant

from developing a project that utilizes an anticipated mix of uses in a form

more compact and sustainable, as allowed by other types of PDD’s. By

requiring the development to be planned to segregate the commercial uses

provided from the residents, an unnecessary and undue hardship would be

affected.

Variance 3.a. & 3.b.: The intent of the code is being met by the provision of

the commercial pod areas as indicated on the Preliminary Development Plan.

These regulations were put in place to further the premise that the

commercial services offer within the boundaries of a PUD should be intended

to serve the residents within the development. The placement of the

commercial pods areas in the buildings located to the immediately west of the

parking structures and multifamily units fronting on Haverhill Road meet this

intent. The aforementioned structures serve to screen the existence of the

commercial uses from the right of way, thereby furthering the goal of the

provision of same being primarily for the residents.

Project No. #10-061.000 Reflection Bay at March 16, 2011

Control No. 1973-215 Southampton PUD

Page 18 of 28

Variances 4 & 5: The literal interpretation of the code would work an undue

hardship on the applicant. In the case of the specific Type 3 Landscape

Buffer requirements for a commercial pod (Variance 4), the code requirement

appears in conflict with the provision in the plan that allows for the commercial

uses within the multi-family tract or in high density buildings. It is anticipated

that these buildings would be classified as ‘high density buildings’. In that

regard, no buffers surrounding the commercial uses are necessary or

practical. This rational also applies to the commercial variance portion of

Variance 5.

In regard to the Recreational and Civic buffers required as part of Variance 5,

the south pod line of the Civic Pod which is the subject of a portion of the

variance request is adjacent to a Residential Pod of the affected area of the

PUD where no units are proposed. Additionally, the Pod line is separated

from the existing multi-family residential structure to the south by

approximately 250 feet. This distance effectively mitigates any impact the

Civic Pod would have on the existing residential use. Fifteen foot (15’) Type 2

Incompatibility Buffers are provides along the west and north pod lines of the

Civic Pod, meeting ULDC requirements. No buffer is required between the

Civic Pod and the Recreation Pod to the east.

The Recreational Pod also provides a fifteen foot (15’) buffer along the north

pod line, adjacent to existing multi-family residential development, meeting

ULDC requirements. The variance request for this pod applies to the

remainder of the pod boundary adjacent to the affected area of the

Residential Pod. In this case, the separation distance from the closest point

to the existing residential multi-family structure to the south is approximately

200 feet, again providing for adequately separation to mitigate the waiver for

the buffer. In regard to the land area to the west of the pod line south of the

Civic Pod, again, no residential units are proposed in this area.

5. GRANTING OF THE VARIANCE IN THE MINIMUM VARIANCE THAT WILL MAKE POSSIBLE

THE REASONABLE USE OF THE PARCEL OF LAND, BUILDING OR STRUCTURE:

VARIANCE 1: The granting of the variance is the minimum necessary to allow

the applicant to achieve a reasonable density in relation to the HR-18 and

CH/8 land use associated with the land, as well as to provide for a design that

allows for the existing residential uses to the west to be buffered by the

greatest extent possible by locating uses closer to the Haverhill Road right of

way. The design further benefits the development by providing for a more

urban design along the right of way.

VARIANCE 2: The granting of the variance is the minimum necessary to make

reasonable use of the land. By separating the commercial uses from the

residential uses, and by meeting the code locational requirements associated

with Variance 3, the commercial uses would have to be located closer to the

Project No. #10-061.000 Reflection Bay at March 16, 2011

Control No. 1973-215 Southampton PUD

Page 19 of 28

existing multifamily uses to the north, west and south. Allowing the two uses

to be permitted in their current proposed locations allows reasonable use of

the land and protects the interest of the surrounding residential area.

VARIANCE 3.A. & 3.B.: The granting of the variance is the minimum necessary

to make reasonable use of the land. The placement of the commercial pods

area as indicated on the Preliminary Development Plan provides for the most

mitigation to any perceived impacts to the residential uses to the west and the

south, while still screening the uses from Haverhill Road. The design of the

plan additionally provides for retention areas and compatible residential units

between the commercial uses and existing residential.

VARIANCE 4 & 5: The variances are the minimum necessary to make

reasonable use of the land and to provide for a more integrated land use

pattern for the future residents of the development. The waiver for the

Commercial Pod Type 3 Incompatibility Buffer, which also includes a wall

requirement, is not feasible when proposing to locate the Commercial Use

Pods in ground floor areas of the multi-family buildings. Likewise, the

requirement for internal buffers between the Civic Pod/Recreation Pod is not

necessary while the applicant is proposing to create a compact sustainable

development. The Residential Pod in the affected area to the south of the

Civic Pod that would typically require buffering is not proposing any

residential units in that area. The proposed multi-family units to the north of

the Recreation Pod are envisioned to attract purchasers that would want easy

access to the recreation area. The provision of the buffers in these areas

would serve no purpose in buffering any existing residential uses in the

vicinity.

6. GRANTING OF THE VARIANCE WILL BE CONSISTENT WITH THE PURPOSES, GOALS,

OBJECTIVES, AND POLICIES OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THIS CODE:

VARIANCE 1: The granting of the variance is consistent with the purposes,

goals, objectives, and policies of the Comprehensive Plan and Code. The

form of development proposed which necessitates the requested variance is

consistent with objectives within the Managed Growth Tier System, such as

Objective 1.1. The proposed development plan accommodates future growth

but prohibits further urban sprawl by the use of compact forms of sustainable

development and enhances existing communities to improve livability,

character, mobility, and identity. The variance requested is consistent with

the Code as the code anticipates the granting of variances in certain

situations, upon satisfactorily addressing the criteria. Additionally, the

variance meets the intent of providing appropriate vehicular access and an

aesthetically pleasing right of way landscape.

Project No. #10-061.000 Reflection Bay at March 16, 2011

Control No. 1973-215 Southampton PUD

Page 20 of 28

VARIANCE 2: The granting of the variance is again consistent with Objective

1.1 of the Plan and is not inconsistent with the purposes and policies of the

Code. Furthermore, it is consistent with Policy 4.4.3-a of the Plan as the

County shall allow Planned Residential Developments to include a limited

amount of low intensity commercial and institutional uses intended to serve

the residential development. The commercial uses may be located in:

1. A commercial pod, but must be integrated into the development;

2. A clubhouse in the interior of the development, accessible to the

residents; or,

3. A multifamily structure which either independently supports high density

or is in a tract containing multi-family development. Allowing the ‘overlap’

of the commercial uses and the residential uses still provides for the mix

envisioned by the Plan and the Code to further the goal of allowing the

residents to be able to access commonly needed goods and services

without venturing out of the development to other parts of the County and

appears to specifically comply with locational criteria 3 of the plan as they

are proposed to be located in a tract containing multi-family development.

In this regard, it appears that the Code may not be entirely consistent with

the Plan as it does not currently allow for the commercial uses in the same

pod as the residential.

VARIANCE 3.A. & 3.B.: The granting of the variance is again consistent with

Objective 1.1 of the Plan and Policy 4.4.3-a of the Plan. The proposed

locations of the Commercial Pod areas as shown on the Preliminary

Development Plan accommodates future growth but prohibits further urban

sprawl by the use of compact forms of sustainable development and the

enhancement of existing communities to improve livability, character,

mobility, and identity. The commercial uses are located within commercial

pod areas integrated into the development as well as within a tract containing

multi-family development.

VARIANCES 4 & 5: The granting of the variances will be consistent with the

purposes, goals, objectives, and policies of the Comprehensive Plan and this

Code as previously stated. The waiver of the buffer requirements will provide

for improved livability, character, mobility and identity for the new

development, consistent with compact, urban forms of development

associated with sustainable communities. Recreation areas and civic uses in

the urban environment are not meant to be segregated from the residential

environment, but easily accessible.

7. THE GRANTING OF THIS VARIANCE WILL NOT BE INJURIOUS TO THE AREA INVOLVED

OR OTHERWISE DETRIMENTAL TO THE PUBLIC WELFARE:

VARIANCE 1: The granting of the variance will not be injurious to the area

involved or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. The reduced setback

Project No. #10-061.000 Reflection Bay at March 16, 2011

Control No. 1973-215 Southampton PUD

Page 21 of 28

will provide for an esthetically pleasing right of way landscape buffer and

sufficient setback from the property line. The placement of the buildings will

also serve to provide a greater presence on Haverhill Road and promote a

more urban design, both of which have become a major focus of the Planning

and Zoning Division for other similar corridors in the Urban/Suburban Tier.

VARIANCE 2: The granting of the variance will not be injurious to the area

involved or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. In fact, the overlap

of the two uses in the pod will allow for the residents to access needed goods

and services closer to their units, potentially avoiding the necessity to utilize a

vehicle to do so, and decreasing the risk of mishaps during vehicular travel.

VARIANCE 3.A. & 3.B.: The granting of the variance will not be injurious to the

area involved or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. The proposed

locations of the commercial uses will provide a benefit to the residents of the

development by allowing them to access goods and services without

venturing outside of their community and the location is not detrimental to

either the residents or the public.

VARIANCE 4 & 5: The granting of the variance will not be injurious to the area

involved or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. The location of the

commercial uses provide for more integration with the residential uses in the

development and the lack of a Type 3 Incompatibility Buffer will not be

injurious. Additionally, the lack of the buffer along the requested areas of the

Recreation Pod and Civic Pod will not be injurious to the public as there are

no residential units proposed to the south of the Civic Pod and the units

proposed to the east of the Recreation Pod will be market toward a target

group that will want to be in the immediate vicinity of an easily accessible

recreation area.

Project No. #10-061.000 Reflection Bay at March 16, 2011

Control No. 1973-215 Southampton PUD

Page 22 of 28

STANDARDS FOR DEVELOPMENT ORDER AMENDMENT

This proposal meets all requirements set forth in ULDC Article 2.B.2.B, Standards for

considering a development order application for a development order amendment:

1. CONSISTENCY WITH THE PLAN:

The proposed amendment is consistent with the purposes, goals, objectives and

policies of the Palm Beach County Comprehensive Plan. The Future Land Use (FLU)

element of the Palm Beach County Comprehensive Plan designates the affected area

as partially Commercial/High Residential 8 (CH/8) and partially Residential High 18 (HR

18) as depicted on FLU Atlas Map 57. According to the letter from Mr. Lorenzo Aghemo,

Planning Director, dated October 18, 2010,(attached) the effected area has a potential

based upon its Land Use Designations of 1,267 units.

The applicant further took into account the existing Land Use designation (CH/8) for the

remaining acreage within the South Hampton PUD which includes existing 240 units on

11.8 acres, and calculated the allowable density of the entire Planned Unit Development

and determined a maximum potential of 1,355 units. Deducting the existing units (240),

the remaining land (affected area) would have the potential of 1,115 additional units.

(see Chart below).

LAND USE ACREAGE UNITS

ALLOWED

EXISTING

UNITS

UNITS

REMAINING

HR 8 South

Hampton 11.1 AC 88 240 -152

HR 8 Reflection Bay 3.62 AC 28 0 28

HR 18 Reflection Bay 68.88 AC 1,239 0 1,239

TOTAL 83.6 AC 1,355 240 1,115

This application is proposing to increase the total unit count by 680 units and 100 beds

of ACLF use (equivalent to 43units) for an equivalent total of 723 units. The proposed

density of the affected area will be 10.3 units per acre. The overall density of the South

Hampton PUD will be 11.5 units per acre. In both calculations the density is well below

the allowable 18 units per acre and, therefore, consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.

Project No. #10-061.000 Reflection Bay at March 16, 2011

Control No. 1973-215 Southampton PUD

Page 23 of 28

2. CONSISTENCY WITH THE CODE:

The proposed amendment complies with all applicable standards and provisions of the

Code for the use, layout, function, and general development characteristics.

Specifically, the proposed uses comply with all applicable portions of Article 4.B,

Supplementary Use Standards. The application is proposing three residential product

types: single family-style, townhome-style and multifamily. Additionally, the

neighborhood will include 100 beds of congregate living facilities, a community center,

nonresidential and commercial uses, and accessory recreation and civic facilities. The

various housing types and nonresidential uses will be integrated into neighborhood and

urban village patterns with the commercial and multifamily uses vertically integrated into

the same buildings. The application is consistent with both the Article 4.B,

Supplementary Use Standards and the additional property development regulations for

specific house types found in Article 3 of the Code. In order to accommodate New

Urbanism design principals, the Applicant is requesting several variances.

GOLF COURSE REVISIONS:

Further, the request is consistent with Article 3 of the Code as it pertains to

Modifications to Reduce or Reconfigure Existing Golf Courses. Prior to submittal of this

application, all residents of the South Hampton PUD were notified via certified mailing

and signs were posted in common areas documenting the proposed modification to the

PUD. The subject site is adjacent to 3-80unit condominium buildings within the Planned

Unit Development and multiple other multifamily condominiums adjacent to the site

outside of the Planned Unit Development but within the larger area know as Century

Village. The applicant has met with officers of the Century Village Master Association

and informed them of his intent to make an application for the golf course conversion.

The applicant intends to meet with all communities wishing to meet

As a part of this application, documentation has been provided indicating that the

reduction of the former golf course area will not result in a reduction of required open

space. It has been demonstrated that the affected 70.15 acres complies with the

current ULDC requirements of open space. Lastly, the necessary Visual Impact

Analysis is provided using the methodology consistent with the purposes and intent of

the Code.

3. COMPATIBILITY WITH SURROUNDING USES:

The proposed layout of single family, townhouse and multifamily units have been

carefully designed to take into account the surrounding existing development in terms of

types of homes (all multi-family), existing buffers, existing views, proximity to the

proposed development area, and dimensions of the proposed development area. All of

these factors helped determine the placement and type of the proposed homes as well

as buffers, access locations, retention areas, and recreation areas.

Currently, the application property abuts midrise multi-family units on its south and west

property lines. The property abuts a major arterial road (Haverhill Road) on its east

Project No. #10-061.000 Reflection Bay at March 16, 2011

Control No. 1973-215 Southampton PUD

Page 24 of 28

property line and a major collector road (Century Village Haverhill Entrance) on its North

Property line. In terms of density, these existing developments average similar to

greater densities than the densities proposed by the new units.

Additionally, access, dwelling unit location, and landscape buffer areas have been

designed to provide to minimize the affect of the new development on the surrounding

existing communities. Taking all these factors into account, the new project meets all

standards utilized to make a determination of compatibility. Finally, as is the case in all

projects reviewed by the County staff where a project abuts existing development,

appropriate Conditions of Approval can provide for additional standards of buffering to

assure compatibility.

4. DESIGN MINIMIZES ADVERSE IMPACT:

As stated above in the discussion of Compatibility, great care was utilized in developing

a Master Plan for the application property. Included in the project’s initial analysis was a

determination of the types and intensities of surrounding properties, existing views, and

existing access points. Several housing types were considered and the current mix of

single family, townhouse and multifamily (and the type of multifamily in terms of size,

unit count, and architectural features) is the result of designing multiple layouts utilizing

aerials in order to determine which design would provide minimum impact and

maximum benefit in terms of utilizing an abandoned golf course for a residential project

which provides quality new homes which will enhance existing conditions and values.

As the property abuts residential uses on only two sides (south and west) specific care

was taken to provide sufficient separation between the new residential uses and the

existing residences and utilizing the space for either large lake retention areas or

significant green space.

The type of design provides for landscape buffers and open space exceeding the

minimum code requirements which will be maintained by the new homeowners’

association to the benefit of the new development as well as the benefit of the

surrounding developments, as discussed further under Changed Conditions and

Circumstances.

5. DESIGN MINIMIZES ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT:

The proposed amendment does not result in significantly adverse impacts to the natural

environment. The affected area contains limited amounts of existing native vegetation.

There are several mature ficus trees on the property that will be preserved or relocated

to provide focal points for the new development.

6. DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS:

As previously discussed in the sections discussing Compatibility and Impacts, the

proposed development of single and multi-family homes on this property is consistent

Project No. #10-061.000 Reflection Bay at March 16, 2011

Control No. 1973-215 Southampton PUD

Page 25 of 28

with the established development multi-family homes currently existing on the abutting

properties. Additionally, on the East side of Haverhill Road there is an established

mobile home park also developed at a higher density. In laying out the various units

types within the project, the densest uses were located in closest proximity to the major

transportation network along Haverhill Road with actual provisions made to locate a

mass transit center along Haverhill Road in close pedestrian proximity to the multifamily

units. The areas closest to existing development have been sited with less dense

housing types and most significantly large areas of open space in the form of lake areas

and/or significant green space. Due to the intense development already existing in the

general area there are already many commercial services, employment opportunities,

and transportation infrastructure located in close proximity.

7. CONSISTENCY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD PLANS:

South Hampton PUD is not located within the boundaries of a neighborhood plan study

area and therefore is not in conflict with this ULDC standard.

However, it should be noted that Reflection Bay represents a mixed use development

infill development project which is consistent with many Goals, Objectives, and Policies

of the Comprehensive Plan along with the principles of Eastward Ho!

7. ADEQUATE PUBLIC FACILITIES:

As part of this application, a Concurrency Application has been submitted indicating that

the project meets off Adequate Public Facility Requirements

9. CHANGED CONDITIONS OR CIRCUMSTANCES:

Due to the passage of time, some of the circumstances concerning the South Hampton

PUD have been lost. However, it is known that the construction of the South Hampton

PUD was the last piece of a long term straight zoning development known as Century

Village. Most of the area where the three South Hampton Condominiums were

constructed was designated commercial requiring a change of zoning resulting in the

creation of the Planned Unit Development which consisted of the three buildings and the

golf course. Originally, the entrance to the golf course was connected to the internal street

network of Century Village requiring players to either already live in Century Village or to

enter Century Village through its two guard gates to reach the Course. Ownership of the

Course appears to have been private and not part of the greater Century Village

recreation facilities which include a major clubhouse in the center of the project.

In 1993, a new owner of the golf course petitioned Palm Beach County (Petition 73-215A)

to allow a direct entrance to the golf course (now known as Turtle Bay Country Club) from

Haverhill Road. In approving the petition, a design was created with two separate parking

areas: one for residents of Century Village to continue to use the internal access and one

Project No. #10-061.000 Reflection Bay at March 16, 2011

Control No. 1973-215 Southampton PUD

Page 26 of 28

for the general public from Haverhill Road. The two parking areas were not

interconnected to preserve Century Village’s security.

The reason for requesting the entrance was to allow for a greater use by the general

public as day to day use by the Century Village residents had declined with time to the

point that the club could not be profitable without significant outside use and advertising.

At that time, several improvements were also made to the golf course and the driving

range.

Subsequently, the current owner and applicant bought the property and continued to

operate it as a public course. However, due to the general decline in the popularity of golf,

changes in area demographics, and style of this older course, the course was not longer

able to support itself, even with use by the general public and convenient access from a

major arterial, and closed in May of 2009.

Studies have indicated consistently that golf play has declined in recent years as has

previously been cited. (New York Times overview at

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/21/nyregion/21golf.html). The net result is that fewer players

meant less revenue which meant less funds to keep up the course resulting in many golf

courses. Since that time the vacant land which formerly included the golf course has been

maintained to County minimum standards due to lack of income creating a blighted

condition for surrounding property owners. (Note: The Board of County Commissioners

recognized several years ago that the economic problems then facing golf courses would

lead to the need for a method to evaluate conversions. An entire new section of the

Unified Land Development Code was created providing additional notification and study

of the effects of conversions through evaluations such as view shed analysis to permit a

logical methodology for golf course conversions.)

This blighted condition is a change of circumstances which currently affects the

communities which abut the property. The blight affects these communities in many

ways. First, the residences which enjoyed the previous golf course views now look out

at an open space which receives the minimum maintenance required by the County.

Without any revenue, the property owner can only provide what is required. Photos of

the existing property clearly indicate that the property is a visual eyesore when

compared to the landscaping existing adjacent to it, which is maintained by individual

property owners or homeowners’ associations.

The current status quo has become an economic blight for surrounding property

owners. While, in the past, these owners would advertise a residential property as

having “golf course views”, now adjacent to the former golf course is considered a

negative attribute due to the uncertainty of what the future holds for the property as well

as the previous issues discussed.

A reasonable redevelopment of the property can correct all of these issues. First, the

proposal will provide for an upgraded landscape environment. Due to the size and

shape of the existing property and the development of a compact walkable design

Project No. #10-061.000 Reflection Bay at March 16, 2011

Control No. 1973-215 Southampton PUD

Page 27 of 28

significant spaces have been created to provide large lake areas and active and passive

green spaces which benefit both the new and existing residents as well as provide

continued security. Great care has been taken to allow sufficient room for upgraded

landscape edges. These landscape areas will become the responsibility of the new

homeowners’ association of the application property. It is in the interest of the

homeowners’ association to maintain the new landscape to protect the value of the new

development which at the same time protects the interest of the adjacent property

owners.

Finally, the new development will remove the current uncertainty as to the future of the

site. The new homes will be built and sold at values which match or exceed the

surrounding community values. Once in place, the new development provides a finished

product (both homes and landscape buffers) which allows a potential homebuyer of

adjacent property to know what to expect.

In addition to the proposed project acting as a catalyst to cure an existing blighted

condition, the proposed development is in the right place. As previously discussed in

this justification, the property is ideally suited for residential development in an area that

provides a full range of services for the new residents. This particular property at the

density proposed can meet all concurrency criteria while being located in the Eastward

Ho! Corridor which is now supported by many Comprehensive Plan policies promoting

Eastern infill.

The proposed amendment when viewed in the context described in this justification

statement, meets all standards including Change of Conditions.

On behalf of Fairways, LLC., Urban Design Kilday Studios respectfully requests

favorable review and consideration of this Development Order Amendment Application.

The project managers/agents at Urban Design Kilday Studios are Kerry Kilday and

Wendy Tuma. Please feel free to contact the agents with any questions or for additional

information in support of this development order amendment application.

Project No. #10-061.000 Reflection Bay at March 16, 2011

Control No. 1973-215 Southampton PUD

Page 28 of 28

Blog Archive