1995-33 Referendum for Annexation Southwest Neighborhoodn
U
ORDINANCE Np. 33-95
AV ORDZNAVC= OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLA3F OF NORTu PALM
3EACH, FLORIDA, ANNEXING TO THE VILi:AGE CERTAIN AREAS OF ?ROPERTY
rnV3RAI,LY iCVOWN AS SOUTHWEST NEIGHBORHOOD III ARID gpr,~-VJED
3AST BY PROS? ERZTY FARMS ROAD, ON THE SOUTH BY NORTH'_,A{~ BOU:_,E
ON THE WEST 3Y FEC ^vN THE
RAILWAY AND ON TFi= NORTH BY THE NCRTH S_TDEROF
:C;~EY ROAD; ?ROVIDZNG A LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY PROPOSED
.O BE ANNEXED; REDEFINING TF.E BOUNDARIES OF Tr.E VILLAG? i0 TNCL'uD=
SAID PROPERTY; CALLING FOR A REFERVDUM ELECTION 'AIT-IN Tr'E AREA,
PROPOSED TO BE A'v~rE,NDUM, DIRc,CTI.7G TTHE VILLAGE CLERK TO PUBLIS::
NOTICE OF THE REFE AVD, PROVyJING FOR .:
AN EFFE,.TIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the Village Council o` the Village of Nort Pal-.
Sea-h, Florida, has determined that to subject real property to ~e
a::~:exed is a compact, contiguous carcel of land than neither
exceeds five percent of the total land area of the municipality r.or
exceeds five percent of the municipal population.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE VILLAGE CCUNCIL OF NORTH P.~M BEAC?~,
FLORIDA:
S= '==o •; 1
a::::axes to t~:e Village a ccmpac-
d=_sc__bed _.. `c'~t'g-o•,a parce_ ~_ land as
exhibit ~~~~~ attached __~_
• ---- _^e -_o`a^d Ta4o a car. nerec.
.~~ 2 ;~~
~_ _dg~ v. NC__.. ?3._.
Pal.., 3eac.. nere•^
• S'3c :io__da, are aereby reaO-fi::eQ tc include
the abc•.e desc__-.
.- Fen=y ar.~ said procertY_s hereby dec'_ared to b=_ wit^;-, t.
-~=pcrate '_imits of the Village of North Palm Beach, Florida.
section. 3. A referendum election shall be -,,-
:~c•-ember 5, 1996, within the above described property orcoos,; ,,.
be an.^.exed. For ease of identification in the referesdn^ `V
prcperty to be annexed herein. shall be identified as Section "A°?
The referendum shall be worded on the ballot as fol'_cws:
For annexation of the property described
in Ordir:ance No. ;~-9~ of the Village of
North Palm Beach, Florida.
Against annexation of the property described
in Ordinance No. ,3~3_3b of the Village of
North palm Beach, Florida.
Sect_ 1_ 'on q.
publish notice of the
two (2) consecutive ~
referendum and in a
otherwise comply with
Seq.
The Village Clerk is hereby directed to
referendum election at least once a week for
veeks immediately preceding the date of the
newspaper of general circulation, ar.d to
the requirements of Fla. Stat. 171.011, et.
Se__ction 5, This ordinance shall become effective
December 31, 1990, after approval by referendum of the proposed
annexation by a majority of those voting within the property to b=
annexed azd i.^. accordance wi
th other pertinent crcvisic~a c'
C!:apter 17' , Florida Sta-•~~
-~~es.
r~
L J
•
_ ~,~_~ orr . _R9T RE:~;_cG THIS a- *h- c=
DA'. ai;riiS- 1990.
:-f,C^J O!v ::J3:_,IC ?:EF..RIVG T?{IS ~7nr~ DF,Y Oc _ Alf:"ST
1996.
-..CED ON SECOND, r INAL READING AND PASSED '?'HIS
7~~~ DAY Or
AUGUST 1995.
!VILLAGE .`iEP•L) ~~~yn~ ~~Q
MAYOR
A:_ES_'.
/ ~%//x~
/ ~ VILLAGE CLERK
r
~J
3
EXHIBIT A
Description Sketch For:
VILLAGE OF NORTH PALM BEACH
e policy or commitment affecting title or boundary to the subject property has
been provided. It is possible there are deeds and easements, recorded or unrecorded,
which could affect the subject property. No search of the Public Records has been
made by this office.
2• This plat is not valid unless sealed with an embossed surveyors seal.
3• This sketch cannot be transferred or assigned without the specific written permission of
Wallace Surveying Corporation.
4. This is not a survey!
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
Ease Palm Beach Co ntyeFSo~~est Quarter of Section 17, Township 42 South, Range 43
being more particulany described as follows:
Begin a; the Southeast comer of said Southwest Quarter of Section 17; thence Northerty,
along the North-South quarter section line of said Section 17, a distance of 1748.3 feet, more
of Kelsey Acr es t as recor~yede~ plat IBookt22, Page 6~ Public Records o~ pajm ~gea~h a Plat
County, Florida; thence Westerly, along said prolongation and the North line of Lot 16 and
Lots 18 through 2g, a distance of 1446.5 feet more or less, to a point on the Easterly right of
way line of State Road Altemate A-1-A, as recorded in Road Plat Book 6, Page 180, public
Records of Palm Beach County, Florida; thence Southerly along said Easterly right of way
line, a distance of 889.3 feet to a point; thence Westerly, at right angles to the preceding
course, a distance of 108 feet to a point on the Westerty right of Way line of said State Road
Altemate A-1-A; thence Northerly, along said right of way line, a distance of 100,00 feet, more
or less, to a point in the South line of that certain parcel described in Official Record Book
2865, Page 1178, Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida; thence Westert
South line, a distance of 282.8 feet, more or less, to a point in the Easterly right of way line of
the Florida East Coast Railroad; thence Southerly, along said Eastery right of Way li eloag said
distance of 983 feet, more or less, to a point in the South line of said Southwest Quarter of
Section 17; thence Easterly, along said South line, a distance of 1098 feet, more or less, to
said Southeast comer of the Southwest Quarter and the Point of Beginning.
Containing in all 51.4 acres, more or less.
NOTES;
1 • No till
CERTIFICATION:
I HEREBY ATTEST that the description sketch shown hereon meets a inimum technical
standards set forth by the Florida Board of Land Surveyors pu uant s
Florida Statutes, and atlopted in Chapter 81617-6, Florida A ns 472'027•
September i, 1981, nislr tiv e, effective
Craig L. allace
Professi nal Land Surveyor
c~,,,,ac,,,•~sso-,su, Florida Certificate No. 3357
•-t115~ WRLLACE SURVEY117G
I I C O N O O w• T, O N
\. ~-/ i~ apawt;.,, wa~a... aril ,n
M/[R i4u p[y7, I~ JYO/ ...,4q SnJ Jtn ~
-:•.~
Ol r;~l
CKp
,,w~
S'IEE I
,x<
pin
tim;
<Z
~R~
n Dr
~,~0
/ee6 5 ~ •~-
~~ ~wm
~ { ~ p
~~
.~
.,
m
i
v
~ z
Sbm
CQp
O~C~
m
'D
( z
v~
jO6 m
~l •(
. ~
A Z
~m
O `o
b ~
Y~ ~
~{
Y p ~
~~
v~
~ ~m
~ S~
s ~~ ~~
-~ $ m
-~
m
S/4 ACRES,,'
____ ~
.wORTyLAKC /' /096~f/-
BLVp L. S. LiN
E, Sw//4, SEC /7
PO B. SE CORNER,
SW//4 SEC./7~aS/43
a~ ~ u~B~S,aoo LO'r-3O oy~-
/3dS E'
J
~~ WA~.LA~.~ 51JRVEYIflG
n..~e., war ++xr.o- r/~t .~, M. S' AW ac¢~~. noac. »+w . ;.p,; ~.o u;.
Q
m
Q Z
~ J
'c
~~
~ c~
~I T
1.
O ` \
z
~''E S..EE r
R c. 2 oF-
~ QED
z~
o~
}v
J
J N
°~~~ ~
O N
y N m ~~
~..4.
ti s,~;
Q
":..:~ ?.
- ~
____-~_I_^!~.--~,-___~_ ____•--~_~. 'I 36:2.36.1 11 r~' ,1 a ,I~,-1 i ~ I _ ~ ~~
.~ .. .T -~ Mp V4Y _
~ ~_ E n:
., ~ - ~ 7 6 5 ~ 4 i
-~\ I I I - _ - ~ I .~
i , 3 i
15 I ~ .r_ ~ i I ~ J
~~ r .,
~, _ _ _ _h 18 ( 19 "I cC 21 i I ~ a 23
,~. I - _ 22 23 I ~~ 23 27 I -
~' 2 6 _ 28 i `?
. .< - -- 22
HONEY ~ 21
=,~ a ,.. ,.. ROAD
'p2 _ Q - ~--' I ... .. 2C
.~ 4_Q 39 39 I .
i ~,`~ {' 136 3S 34 33 ,
~ r r 32 - 31 30 ~ ~ 16
' v. .: .. '
~ STS 58 6S 34 53 152 '~ ~ ro ~ ~ 't,~
O~\ ~ _ r _ 49 1S8 47 46 y~ I .{4 i!43`. 17
CONROY I
I ~ r~ DRIVE le
~ 42 4 34 i 8 ~ _ ,. .. I .
I 40 - 3 7 _
_ _ 38~ 36 3< 33 32 ~ 30 2S 128 `.
" - -
O,i y 5 I - - _ 22 21 20 18. 18 IT~ 16 IS _ ~. li
' .,..:
'I' ~„°~ ~~ LORRAINE COURT I,
_..~
`° ~~ 12 I_'I 10 9 ~~
o .'Q.. D - i 8 7 6 3 q ~ 3 ?
~, : _ .,~,
o - -
10 12
_~- _ ° _
> 9 Ill_.~ ~
s >>r a
~': r ~ 13
u ~ .. ~ :.
4 00- T06. $ '~~ ~~
~_
~p~s
PARK ROAD ,I , Iz
La~,o ,.a„~ .. ,ro
,o r . .
s. z 3.1 .~.6-I I I4
`~,~ ,., _ 4 S ~
,., .
~ ' f ~ y '
~-. -~ _~ '- -. -- 1 -- T I
r~
u
ATTACH~IErT C
Background Data For Lawnmower Shop
•
D rpartment of Pia nning,
2oninq 6~ Building
'°`'~ ~~ ~~,n~e March 13, 1998
.. _~ F'ti ri 3e]c~_ PL 3i-47o
` - -;,._,~;o Jim Fleischmann
._, .. _:~~~~-~.br~~n::v~ LRM Inc.
1300 N. Congress Ave., Ste C
West Palm Beach, FL 33409
^
Re: Village Shopping Center, Petition 76-086
Palm Beach County
9267-9271 Prosperity Farms Rd., 68-43-42-17-00-000-0300
Board of County
commissioners Dear Mr. Fleischmann:
s~;r~ ~a;~ns-~ cr.al`n"° Prior to the annexation into the Village of North Palm Beach, the
"'°=' =cr7 .re t,<e chair ' subject property had a Palm Beach County Zoning designation of
~~rrn - ,,,r_„s Neighborhood Commercial (CN). The property's zoning is
inconsistent with the present Palm Beach County Comprehensive
Carol A Roberts ' Plan Future Land Use designation of Low Residential-3 (LR-3).
tlarrrn H Sewell
Marv ~;c Cary
~ In 1976, the owner was permitted to rezone the property so that
_ I the existing garden shop and store would conform with the district.
`°~"` In 1979, the owner was permitted to construct an addition pursuant
to Board of Adjustment case 78-55 (attached) and in accordance
with the attached site plan.
County r~dminis[ra[or ~ I am enclosin
Robert tceamar.. PE. Dlvlslon feCOfdS, the eezoning Relsol ution (Rd76--700) aBcopynof the
Future Land Use Map in effect prior the annexation of the property,
and Palm Beach County's current CN District uses.
• ;~~..,.
-`, pnr!red ar reryc:ed paper
r~
~J
If you have questions, please contact Genevieve Messina at (561)
233-5165.
Sincerely,
n~~;
CP
Zoning Director
L. Martin Hodgkins AI
cc: Petition file 76-86
LMH reading file
•
•
V °-
~` ~~~
~~ ~
~~~~J :~~
4 ~ ~
i~
~~
~IE~IORANDliM
TO: Mayor & Village Council
FROM: Dennis W. Kelly, Village Man er
DATE May 11, 1998
~~ Comp Plan Amendment-Zonirtg/Rezoning of Convenient Food Store/Garden
Shop on Prosperity Farms Road
The attached letter to Kelly from Royce dated May 6, 1998 will be on the workshop agenda of
May 28, 1998 regarding the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Should you have any questions
regarding the letter, please advise.
c~ ~:
~ ~~~~
DWK:sh
Attachment
cc: George W. Baldwin, Village Attorney
Tom Hogarth, Public Services Director
Ray Royce (w/o attach.)
6~~7io f
•
1
COTT
• ROYCE
• ~ ~ •j 11 Y , ~ J • ' l 1 M
rc~rr. Rr,rce, [-L~seu, Bs; r.[,v, B.vte.~ & JosoE~;ex. P.:\.
bfay 6, 1998
Mfr. Dennis Kelly,
Village Manager
Village of North Palm Beach
501 US Highway #1
North Palm Beach, FL 33408
RE: Comprehensive Land Use Plan Amendment 98-1
Our File No. 37256
Dear Dennis:
You requested that I advise the Village concerning the zoning and future land use
designation of the property located at the southwest comer of Prosperity Farms Road and Honey
Road (the "Property").I have reviewed the information that you forwazded to me and have
reseazched the applicable case law,
It is my understanding that the Property has been used as a convenience store and gazden
shop for many yeazs. The Property had a Palm Beach County zoning designation of
Neighborhood Commercial and a Palm Beach County Comprehensive Plan future land use
designation of Low Residential- 3. The Palm Beach County zoning was thus inconsistent with
the future land use plan designation, contrary to Florida law. In 1997 the Property was annexed
into the Village of North Palm Beach. It has been zoned R-1 Single Family Dwelling District by
Village Ordinance No. 34-97, 'that Ordinance further provides, however, that it shat! only take
effect upon adoption of a comprehensive plan amendment by the Village.
There are several alternatives as to the zoning and comprehensive land use plan
designation for the Property, The purpose of this letter is to briefly discuss various alternatives
and the advantages, disadvantages and legal implications of each alternative.
1 • Residential alternarivP• The Village could implement the proposed single family
residential zoning established by Ordinance 34-97 and adopt the appropriate Comprehensive Plan
.-\.mendment designating the Property as residential. The Property would be non-conforming as
to its use and perhaps the building would be non-confomting. The Property would then be
• land andior scru ~tures~nSe tiont45 63lgovemeszthe non confblarmingtuses of land It p ovides that
Clil Idcn K RUfC~ • illl] L BCTAS, IC. • I. [1illAl'b:1.NVli
k`us 4. IC[tJISiE] . Ik7R V.\.l A.10R.\I' • C\T.VQ.\'0 L RTiI
[\tll; [T i. tiC7T II V'S.IW] • Rti\'IS V. T.1GSIi\ • tlCl.\S K T.\K4.\]
11UU P[:.~ Bu,•Lt ve m, Sclrt~ 8U0 • P.u.a B.acn 1•a ROF.Bl. F[ono.~ 3~1 tt1
(5011 0_'i.JODU Fn.Y (3611 62i~]57) EY.\IL: ,pott TOycc~ i6m.net
~L-. Denni; K~IIv. Villagt ~(anag_r
• ~%il!az'of`'orh Palm Szach
PaQ:__
`ca o. 1~9s
a non-conforming use cannot be enlazged or removed and that if any non-conforming use ceases
for any reason for a period of 90 consecutive days, the property shall conform to the zoning
regulations which are applicable. Section 45-64 governs non-conforming structures, It provides
that no non-conforming structure may be enlarged or altered in any war• to increase its non-
conformity, but that it may be altered to decrease its non-conformity, 'T'hat section further
provides that should any such structure be destroyed to the extent of more than 50% of its
replacement costs at the time of destruction, it shall not be reconstructed except in conformity
with the provisions of the zoning ordinance.
The case law of Florida indicates that the zoning of property so that it becomes non-
conforming does not constitute a taking and is a reasonable exercise of police power so long as
the non-conforming use and building aze allowed to remain. If the Village attempted to prohibit
the continued use of the Property for the existing commercial purposes, the Courts would
invalidate any such action. The Village could amend Article VII relating to non-conforming uses
and structures to provide for the amortization of those uses and structures over a reasonable
period of time so that non-conformity would not be allowed to continue indefutitely. Further
reseazch would be required to determine what periods of time would be reasonable and thus
sustained by the Courts if the Council decides to undertake such amendments.
The reported cases referred to above were decided prior to the enactment of Chapter
%0.001, the Bert J. Harris, Jr. Private Property Rights Protection Act or the Florida Statute 70.51,
the Florida Land Use and Environmental Dispute Resolution Act. There are no reported cases
interpreting either of these Acts.
The Harris Act provides that when an action of government has "inordinately burdened"
an eristiag use of real property, the property owwer of that ,,.al property is entitled to relief which
may include compensation for the actual loss of the fair market value of the real property caused
by the government action. The term inordinately burdened means that the action of a
governmental entity has directly restricted or limited the use of real property such that the
Property owner is permanently unable to attain the reasonable investment backed expectation for
the existing use of the real property or a vested tight to a specific use of the real property or that
the property owner is left with an existing or vested uses that are unreasonable such that the
property owner bears permanently a disproportionate shaze of a burden imposed For the good of
the public, which in fairness should be born by the public at large. These are obviously
somewhat subjective standards and, as indicated, there is no case law interpreting or explaining
the meaning of these terms. The Harris Act provides for a claims settlement process prior to the
• tiling of a lawsuit and the government has an opportunity to settle the dispute during a six month
period of time.
`fr. Denni; (LZII}, Villagz ~(anager
• Villazz of `'orth Palm Bzach
Pa2z 3
~[ay 6, 1993
The Florda Land Use and Em'irotunental Dispute Resolution Ac[ provides that any
owner who believes that a development order unreasonably or unfairly burdens the use of the
property, may apply For relief..gdoption of a comprehensive plan is no[ a development order, but
zoning is a dzcelopment order. That Act also provides for an administrative settlement process
before a special master.
Since the terms in the two acts referenced above aze subjective, and since there are no
cases interpreting those acts, it is impossible to predict the outcome if the Property owner sought
relief under either of those acu. I believe that a very strong argument could be made that
rezoning the property to the residential category and allowing the business to continue as non-
conforming uses would not "inordinately burden" the Property or "unreasonably or unfairly
burden" the Property. The businesses could continue and the only burden would be that they
would be subject to discontinuance in the event that the building was destroyed to the extent of
more than ~0% of its replacement cost. That "burden" is quite contingent. Nevertheless, there is
no guarantee as to the final result. More likely, the matter would be settled or resolved in
accordance with the processes of either act. Legal counsel for the Property owner called me and
advised that if the property was rezoned and planned in the residential category, the owner would
object and initiate the appropriate action against the Village.
2• General Commercial Altem five .The Village could zone the Property one of the
several commercial categories in the zoning code and designate the property as commercial in the
Comprehensive Land Use Plan. Under this scenario, the Property could be used for whatever
commercial purposes were allowed in the commercial zoning category selected. This scenario
would provide the Property owner with the maximum protection and benefit. The Property could
not orily remain commercial, but the tue could be changed from its current use to the commercial
use specified is L4e cotnrt-,ercial categery designated by the Village. From the standpoint of the-
Village and the surrounding property owners, however, this could present an obvious
disadvantage because the relative passive commercial use of the Property could be changed to a
commercial use which would be less compatible with the neighboring residential area.
The legal azgument against this action is that zoning the property commercial might very
well be found to constitute "spot zoning". Spot zoning results when small parcels of land are
zoned to a greater density or intensity than the surrounding azea. Spot zoning occurs where
preferential treatment is given to a parcel of real property and the use is incompatible with or
contrary to the general pattern of zoning in the area. Avery logical argument could be made that
granting the Property a commercial designation would constitute spot zoning. The re rted
• cases, however, generally describe spot zoning in the context of vacant land rather than an
already existing use. In other words, in the instant case the spot zoning or inconsistent use
dlr. Denni; Kelly, ~"illage ~(anager
• ~'illa~ta of `'unh Palm Beach
Paz°
`ta; o. 1993
already exists and has appazently existed for a lengthy period of time. To the extent that the
commercial category designated by the Village provided for more intensive commercial uses than
preseatly exis[, the spot zoning argument would cam, more weight, however.
An affected third party, such as a neighbor, or neighborhood organization could bring an
action for spot zonin¢ against the Village. Whether such an action would in fact be brought,
since the Property has already been used for commercial purposes is questionable, but could
depend upon the nature of the commercial uses allowed under the new zoning designation.
3. CC Transitional Commercial District Alternative,
zone the roperty CC Transrtronal Commercial. This district would al ow certain uses whichbazeo
not particulazly intense commercial uses. These uses would be more compatible with the
residential area than those commercial uses permitted in other commercial categories. Section
45-32.1 lists those uses. To the extent that the Property is currently being used as a convenience
store and gazden shop, those uses could continue as non-conforming uses. Those uses could not
be expanded. The owner could, in addition to the non-confomung uses, utilize the property for
the uses specified in the CC Transitional Commercial District.
A copy of Section 45-32.1 is attached for your information. Section 45-32.1 states: "The
CC district shall serve as a transition between residential azeas and intense commercial
development". h would appeaz that the intent was to create a buffer district between residential
and intense commercial development. In this case, the Property is in the middle of a residential
district, rather than between a residential district and an intense commercial development azea.
Thus, if the Council selects this alternative, I would suggest that it might be appropriate to amend
Section 45-32.1 to state as follows:
"The CC District may serve as a transition between residential areas and intense
commercial development or may be used 1o provide jor low intensity business
uses ro serve nearby residential areas." (new wording italicized)
If the CC Transitional Commercial District zoning is assigned to the Property, the Land
use Plan should also reflect a commercial type designation. In order to explain w•hy a small azea
in the middle of a residential area is being given any kind of a commercial designation, it would
be appropriate to either establish a transitional type Land Use Plan category, or in the altemadve
provide a detailed narrative explanation as to the reasons that a commercial land use plan
designation is being afforded a small parcel of property in the middle of a residential area. Two
• P~Poses would be served by such action. First, the Department of Community Affairs, which
will review the land use plan amendment, will understand that this is not a case of objectionable
~Ir. Dennis Ktlly, Village Manager
• ~'illa2t of forth Palm Btxh
Page j
`(aq 6. 1993
spo[ zoning or spot land use planning, but rather is a reasonable effort to accommodate a prior
c~cisting use while at the same time limiting the future expansion of that commercial tue to the
detriment of the surrounding residential neighborhood. Second, it would provide a record so that
the present or some future owner of the Property would not be in a position to seek a future
rezoning to a more intense commercial use based upon the fact that the Land Use Plan indicated
that the property could be used for commercial purposes. In other words, if the property is to be
given the CC Transitional Commercial District Designation, the reasons therefore and the
limitations that the Town intends to impose should be made evident in the Comprehensive Land
Use Plan.
It is still possible that some affected party could bring an action declaring that even the
CC Transitional Commercial District Designation constitutes spot zoning. Under the present
circumstances and with the limitations contained in the CC District, however, the likelihood of
such an action would be diminished and the chances of sustaining the CC District would be
enhanced.
In conclusion, the Village has the power to select any of the above alternatives. The third
alternative, the CC Transitional Commercial District with the appropriate Land Use Plan change,
represents a compromise which will lessen the chance of litigation, protect the business of the
Property owner and afford reasonable protection to the surrounding residents. If this alternative
is viewed favorably by the Council, I would suggest that the Village staff discuss this matter with
the Department of Community Affairs so that all concerned will understand the rationale of the
decision.
If you have any questions or I can provide any further information, please let me know.
Sincerely yours,
Raymon W. R ce
RWR/kp
•
~
1
I
1 +
Sec. 45.32.1. CCTransitionalcommercialdis- 2
• trict. . nese-red.
Ctnerc: dtscr;ptior,. This residental/com- •
F. t='ds.
mercjal transitional disrict is to provide for the 1
r
:
F
-
development of low-intensity business o@'ices and .
.
.
o
vcr;,. ~,;1 buildings ;`.ail be c.
-
other complementary uses. The CC district shall s
cructed from t!:eAlternate.~-:-A~a,t_
serve as a transition bet•.veen residents] areas
and intense commercial development v
a• t° Provide a front yard of not k
char' ihiry (30) feet. All bui!d:ags mall
.
B. Uses permitted. The following uses aze per-
itr
d i
h set back from the right-of-u•aj• of scr~<
which intersect with Alte
m
e
s t
e CC transitional commercial district: ^ate A-l.A P:
viding a Yazd of not les; ;:
1. Financial institutions ;ay rv,n~.-p
(25) feet.
2. Professional offices 2. Side ycrds. Ail buildings s^a:'. be set b
3. Florists a
from side lot lines so as to o,-ovide si
4. Clothing stores yards oCaot less than fifteen (15) feet.
5. Stationary (statonery] stores 3. Rear yards. All buildings shall be set bat
from rear lot lines
6. Photo studios/camera shops so as to provide a re;
yard of not less than fifteen (15) feet.
7. Sporting goods stores G. Ofjstreet parking regulations. OrF size
8. Gift shops :
Pazking shall be provided the same as for the C
9. Candy shops commercial district.
\ 10. Seamstress tailor shop H. Of~'street parking layoue
corstn
ti
I
11. Barber shops ,
lc
on ar.
maintenance shall be the same as for the C
commercial district.
12. Hair salons (Ord. No. 31-97, § 1(Ezhibit A), 7-10-97)
13. Nail salons
C. Conditions for permitted uses:
1. All activities, sales and storage of dtsirict.
goods must be conducted entirely
within completely enclosed b
ild A• U permitted. Within any C-1 n ghbo:
hood tom
i
u
-
ings with permanent nonmoving out- erc
al district, no building, ctuz~
land or wa r shall be used
except f one (1) c
side walls. ,
more of the llowing uses:
2. No outside sidewalk of pazldag lot 1. Any us permitted in a C-lA litnite
storage (ar) display of merchandise commerc district
will be permitted. .
3. No manufacturing or production of 2. Any retail usin or commercial us
which d
'
products for retail or wholesale will oes a t
olve the maaufacturin
be permitted. or processing products.
D. Building height regulations. No building or 3' Personals 'c establishments, incluc
structure shall exceed two (2) stories or twen
t3' mg• but of limt d to, banks, bazbe:
5ve (25) feet. shops, wling alle , beauty salotss, met
E. Building site area regulations: ical d dental Clint ,professions] an
1. ,tlazimum lot coverage. Main and aeces- of r offices, funeral omes, filling stn
~ ns, shoe repair shop laundry picku,
sory buildings shall cover no more than stations and self-senice 1 u.^.dries, furr.'.
thirty-five (35) percent oC the total lot cure display stores and dru stores.
a: ea. 4. Theaters, but not dnve•in th recs.
Supp No t~ 2501
Law Offces
•
F..\LVtTi`) PERRY
-~.~OR B. FL~lpQtl,Y•
F. Martin Perry & Associates, P.A.
7"Q~PIIO\E (3611 Jll-J30'
FAX (361) 634311:
•
'(O•q C(IT(~[y'M Yll MI(IR. UW
22 May 1998
501 U.S. Highway #1
North Palm Beach, FI. 33408-4906
16J5 Palm Beach Lakrs Blvd.
Suite 1100
West Palm Brach, Florida 33101
Mr. Dennis Kelly, Village Manager
Village of North Palm Beach
Dear Mr. Kelly,
I am in receipt of a copy of the letter dated May 6, 1998 to you from Raymond Royce, Esq.
We have reviewed the three proposals with our client and believe that third option made
by Mr. Royce, that the property be zoned CC Transitional Commercial with a
corresponding Commercial Land Use designation, would be the most favorable solution
to the situation.
In order to implement the commercial use and zoning for Mr. Lynn's property, Mr. Royce
has suggested that the Zoning Code be amended and the draft the Comprehensive Plan
Amendment be revised to include a detailed explanation regarding the site specific land
use. While amending the Zoning Code, we would like to request that you consider adding
the existing uses on Mr. Lynn's property as permitted uses, as well as any other uses
which the Council feels serve the convenience needs of a residential neighborhood.
We have taken the liberty of drafting language to accomplish this alternative and hope that
it will help facilitate your completion of this process.
Zoning Code: Section 45-32.1 shall be amended to add as follows:
A. Genera/ description. This residential/commercial transitional district is to provide
for the development of low-intensity business offices and other complementary uses of a
convenience n t re which r di i II N i nil i rhos. The CC district
shall may serve as a transition between residential areas and intense commercial
development Qr may be used to provide for low int ncln~ buc~~QCC I lcA~ r
residential areas e^t- a nearby
B. Uses permitted.
14. Convenience store with no aac caiAc
15. Small appliance and lawn mower r Hair
D?nnis K.~fl/
22 ~Llay 1393
Pale 2
• Comprehensive Plan: Amendmen[ 98-1.2. In addition to making the appropriate
modification to the tables listing total acreage for particular uses to reflect the .43 acres as
Commercial and noting the Commercial Use on the Map, we would like to suggest that an
additional paragraph be Included in Section 2.2.
G. The .43 acre lot located on Prosperity Farms Road, which is designated with a
Commercial Land Use, has a unique history. When it was annexed Into the Village, this site
carried a Low Residential-3 Land Use designation. In 1976, the County approved a petition
to zone the lot as Neighborhood Commercial (Resolution No. R-76.700). The County never
amended the Land Use designation to make It consistent with the zoning.
The Village Council has found that the existing uses, a lawnmower repair shop and a
convenience score, are similar to the permitted uses in the CC Zoning District, in that they
serve the convenience of the local residenu. This specific site has serviced the needs of the
local residents for more than 30 years. The decision to allow the use to continue by zoning
the site CC and adopting a consistent Land Use Designation, will protect the property owner
as well as the surrounding residential community. Cun'entiy, the purpose of CC Zoning is to
serve as a buffer between residential areas and high intensity commercial uses. The Village
is amending the Zoning Code to recognize that low intensity commercial CC zoning also serves
the convenience of nearby residents.
We look forward to discussing the Comprehensive Plan with the Council at the May 28`"
workshop. Please feel free to share this draft language with your staff or the Council, as It is
our hope that it will facilitate an easy resolution to the problem of how to zone Mr. Lynn's
property. '
If you have any questions or if I can be of any assistance to you, please do not hesitate to
contact me. Thank you.
Sincerely yours, ~~ -
~_
I
~_~ ~ ,\
Ellie Halperin
c: Don Lynn
Raymond Royce, Esq.
Tom Hogarth
F. Martin Perry, Esq.
• H:\CLIEN1lLynn'.itlly 520-98.IV.wpd