| | | | | | | | TOWN OF PALM BEACH
Town Council Meeting Development Review on: November 14, 2018
|
| | | | | | | | Section of Agenda
Development Review - New Business
|
| | | | | | | | Agenda Title
Z-18-00143 SITE PLAN REVIEW WITH VARIANCE(S) Zoning District: R-B Low Density Residential The application of 212 Seaspray, LLC, Applicant, relative to property located at 212 SEASPRAY AVE, legal description on file, is described below. Site Plan Review to allow the redevelopment of a landmarked house on a non-conforming lot which is 50 feet in width in lieu of the 100-foot depth required in the R-B Zoning District. Because the house is being redeveloped in excess of 50% of its current value, the following variance is being requested: 1) Section 50-114: Request to develop the property in excess of 50% of its current value, including the raising of the rear (south side) of the house, such that the entire house will have an elevation of 5.9 N.A.V.D. in lieu of the minimum 7.0 N.A.V.D. required by Code. In addition, the following variances are requested in connection with the redevelopment: 2) Section 134-893(7)b): Request to raise the rear (south side) of a landmarked house with a west second story side yard setback of 3.0 feet in lieu of the 15-foot minimum required. 3) Section 134-893(9)b): Request to raise the rear (south side) of a landmarked house with a second story rear yard setback of 4.7 feet in lieu of the 15-foot minimum required. 4) Section 134-893(13): Request to raise the rear (south side) of a landmarked house, thereby increasing the cubic content ratio from 6.89 to 7.11 in lieu of the 4.39 maximum allowed. 5) Section 134-893(7)b): Request to add an awning to the house with an east side yard setback of 0.0 feet in lieu of the 12.5-foot minimum required. [Applicant’s Representative: David E. Klein Esq.] [Landmarks Preservation Commission Recommendation: Implementation of the proposed site plan review with variances will not cause negative architectural impact to the subject landmarked property. Carried 7-0. The proposed development will not preclude the building's continued designation as a historic building and the variance is the minimum necessary to preserve the historic character and design of the building. Carried 7-0.]
|
|