News
Lois Taylor writes:
I can take six passengers – email me if you’d like a ride, or give me a call on my cell phone below.Tomorrow’s Board of County Commissioners Zoning meeting, 9:30am, Thursday, October 22, 6th Floor Chambers, 301 N. Olive, WPB.
On tomorrow’s agenda is a ULDC change proposesing no approval process for Places of Worship. A Church or Synagog only needs to be granted a building permit. There are, apparently, only a few easily met conditions about lot size. Please write the PBC Commissioners today. The letter below has all their email addresses. Below is the letter sent by JFR to the County Commissioners, it is also attached along with the actual draft of the proposed change in the ULDC to allow Churches and Synagogues to come into a neighborhood with no greater approval process than getting a building permit. This is wrong; places of worship should be made to notify the prospective neighbors and to meet with them with the goal of being as compatible to an established neighborhood as possible.
We are urging anyone and everyone who can make it to go down to the hearing tomorrow morning. You don’t have to speak if you don’t wish to – just stand up and be counted. It starts at 9:30AM, Thursday, October 22, Palm Beach County Commissioners Zoning meeting, 6th Floor, 301 N. Olive, West Palm Beach. It is towards the end of the agenda, so we could be there most of the morning.
The letter sent to all the County Commissioners
PMB 104, 10152 W. Indiantown Road, Jupiter Farms, FL 33478 Phone and Fax 561-746-0394
October 20, 2009
Letter sent to the County Commissioners:
Commissioner Karen T. Marcus, KMarcus@pbcgov.org
Commissioner Jeff Koons, Chairman, jkoons@pbcgov.org
Commissioner Shelly Vana, Svana@pbcgov.org
Commissioner Steven L. Abrams, SAbrams@pbcgov.org
Commissioner Burt Aaronson, Baaronso@pbcgov.com
Commissioner Jess R. Santamaria, jsantama@pbcgov.org
Commissioner Priscilla A. Taylor, ptaylor@pbcgov.org
Re: Proposed changes ULDC Supplementary Use Standards
Definitions and Supplementary Standards for Specific Uses:
#29 Place of Worship on the Thursday, October 22, 2009,
Board of County Commissioners Zoning Meeting Agenda
Dear Commissioners:
As we understand the intent of the proposed change, it is to allow places of worship to come into residential neighborhoods by right (requiring only a building permit if construction is involved), eliminating much of the current approval process. We also understand the driving force behind this proposed change to the Palm Beach County ULDC is a Federal mandate.
The Jupiter Farms community has had several churches that purchased land in a residential neighborhood in the last few years. In each case, the community was notified of the proposed non-residential use, and had the privilege of meeting with the churches and their land planners. In both cases, the impacted neighbors community were able to work with the churches to mitigate the effect of absorbing a place of worship into a residential neighborhood. It seems that, at a very minimum, a church planning to come into a residential neighborhood must notify, and meet with, the residents of the neighborhood, with the aim of being as compatible as possible with an established residential area.
As a community, we understand that a place of worship cannot be denied; it does, however, make a lot of sense for a church or synagogue, as would be required of any other non residential use, to make an effort to introduce themselves to the neighborhood with an aim to being as compatible as possible, and to being accepted by the neighbors.
Page Two Re: Proposed ULDC changes related to Places of Worship October 20, 2009
In addition, there should be standards as to the type of road on which a place of worship can be located related to the size of the proposed place of worship. There should be a correlation between the size of a home as related to parcel size and the size of the place of worship to its land. This ratio should decline ratio as the size of the church property increases. The compatibility to the neighborhood is particularly important in the rural tier where it is recommended that non-residential uses be clustered with other non-residential uses wherever possible.
We strongly believe that any ULDC changes regarding approval of Places of Worship in a residential area, be the very minimum required of the County by the Federal Government.
It is for these reasons that we would ask the Commission to deny this change as currently proposed and require that places of worship not only meet with their prospective neighbors, but to conform to guidelines (as allowed within the Federal mandate) in order to be compatible to the residential neighborhood in which they propose to locate.
This letter is written as directed by a motion approved by the JFR membership at its meeting on October 8, 2009.
Sincerely,
Jupiter Farms Residents, Inc.
Signed: Lois Taylor
Lois Taylor, President
| ——————–draft of the proposed change in the ULDC to allow Churches and Synagogues to come into a neighborhood with no greater approval process than getting a building permit.———-
Table 3.E.1.B – PDD Use Matrix cont’d |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Use Type |
PUD |
MUPD |
MXPD |
PIPD |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Pods |
Land Use Designations |
Land Use Designations |
Use Zone |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
R |
C |
R |
C |
A |
C |
C |
C |
C |
C |
I |
I |
|
C |
|
C |
I |
C |
I |
M |
R |
N |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
E |
O |
E |
I |
G |
L |
H |
L |
H |
R |
N |
N |
|
H |
|
H |
N |
O |
N |
H |
V |
O |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
S |
M |
C |
V |
R |
|
|
O |
O |
|
D |
S |
|
|
|
O |
D |
M |
D |
P |
P |
T |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
/ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
T |
|
|
|
|
/ |
|
/ |
D |
D |
E |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
P |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
L |
|
G |
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Public and Civic Uses |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Place Of Worship |
|
P |
|
P |
|
P |
P |
P |
P |
P |
|
P |
|
P |
|
P |
|
P |
|
P |
|
29 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
| [Ord. 2005-002] [Ord. 2006-004] [Ord. 2006-013] [Ord. 2008-037] | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Notes: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
P |
Permitted by right | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
D |
Permitted subject to approval by the DRO | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
S |
Permitted in the district only if approved by Special Permit | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
R |
Permitted in the district only if approved by the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) as a requested use. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Table 3.E.1.B (above) indicates where Places of Worship can be located as a primary use in a Planned Development District (PDD). For example, a Place of Worship can only be located in a commercial or civic pod of a Planned Unit Development (PUD).
Table 4.A.3.A-1 – Use Matrix Continued |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Use Type |
Zoning District/Overlay |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Agriculture/ Conservation |
Residential |
Commercial |
Industry/ Public |
N |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
P |
A |
A |
AR |
R |
R |
R |
R |
C |
C |
C |
C |
C |
C |
I |
I |
P |
I |
O |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
C |
G |
P |
R |
U |
E |
T |
S |
M |
N |
L |
C |
H |
G |
R |
L |
G |
O |
P |
T |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
R |
|
S |
S |
|
|
|
|
|
O |
|
O |
|
E |
|
|
|
F |
E |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
A |
A |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Public and Civic Uses |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| …. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Place of Worship |
|
P |
|
P |
P |
P |
P |
P |
P |
P |
P |
P |
P |
P |
P |
|
|
|
P |
29 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| …. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| [Ord. 2005 – 002] [Ord. 2006-013][Ord. 2008-037] | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Key: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
P |
Permitted by right | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
D |
Permitted subject to approval by the DRO | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
S |
Permitted in the district only if approved by Special Permit | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
B |
Permitted in the district only if approved by the Zoning Commission (ZC) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
A |
Permitted in the district only if approved by the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Table 4.A.3.A-1 (above) indicates where Places of Worship can be located as a primary use in a Standard Zoning District.
CHAPTER B SUPPLEMENTARY uSE sTANDARDS
Section 1 Uses
A. Definitions and Supplementary Standards for Specific Uses
29. Place of Worship
A sanctuary which may include a retreat, convent, seminary or other similar use, owned or operated by a tax-exempt religious group that is used periodically, primarily or exclusively for religious worship, activities and related services. A place of worship may include collocated facilities that require additional approval, such as a day care, school, cemetery, or CLF that may require approval through an additional process. [Ord. 2005-041] [Ord. 2006-013]
a. Requirements
A place of worship shall be permitted pursuant to the requirements of Table 4.A.3.A-1, Use Matrix and Table 3.E.1.B-21, PDD Use Matrix of the ULDC. In addition to the applicable provisions of the ULDC, the facility shall comply with the following additional articles:
1) Art. 5, Supplementary Standards;
2) Art. 6, Parking;
3) Art. 7, Landscaping;
4) Art. 8, Signage, including Table 8.G.2.A-7, Freestanding Signs; and,
5) All other applicable articles of the ULDC.
The use shall be subject to review by the Building Division and other applicable agencies.
ab. Frontage and Access
….
bc. Use Limitations
1) DRO Approval
A place of worship not exceeding 3,000 square feet of GFA or 150 seats, including collocated or accessory uses, shall be permitted in the CN, CC, CG, MUPD, MXPD, TMD districts, and a commercial pod in a PDD or TDD subject to DRO approval. [Ord. 2005 – 002] [Ord. 2006-013]
21) Accessory/Collocated Use
A place of worship not exceeding 3,000 square feet of GFA or 150 seats shall be permitted as an accessory use to an assembly, civic, educational or recreational use in any non-residential district, except IL, IG or a PDD with an IND FLU designation, subject to approval by the DRO. Religious services may be conducted as an accessory use to an existing single-family dwelling that is also utilized for residential purposes. A place of worship may include collocated uses such as but not limited to a retreat, convent, seminary or other similar use. [Ord. 2006-013] [Relocated from A.29 above]
32) Temporary Sales
43) Limited Day Care
A limited day care shall be permitted as a collocated use to a place of worship with a minimum of 3,000 square feet of GFA or 150 seats subject to DRO the approval criteria of Table 4.A.3.A-1, Use Matrix and Table and Table 3.E.1.B-21, PDD Use Matrix. [Ord. 2005 – 002] [Ord. 2006-013]
54) INST
….
65) AGR District
The use shall be limited to that which serves the needs of farm workers or residents of the AGR Tier and shall not be located west of SR 7/US 441. [Ord. 2006-013]
d. Prior Approvals
Previously approved places of worship that are not abandoned shall be subject to the requirements of Art. 1.E, Prior Approvals.
e. Abandonments
Existing places of worship that were previously subject to Class A Conditional Use, Requested Use, or DRO approval may be abandoned pursuant to Art. 2.A.1.Q, Development Order Abandonment.
1. Administrative
The Zoning development order for a place of worship may be abandoned administratively pursuant to the following:
a) Existing collocated uses must be permitted by right in the zoning district in which they are located; and,
b) The facility will continue to be utilized as a place of worship.
2. Legislative
The Zoning development order for a place of worship may be abandoned legislatively pursuant to the following:
a) Existing collocated uses are not permitted by right in the Zoning district in which they are located; or,
b) The facility will no longer be utilized as a place of worship.
Notes:
Underlined language indicates proposed new language.
Language crossed out indicates language proposed to be deleted.
.… (ellipses) indicates language not amended which has been omitted to save space.
Relocated language is shown as italicized with reference in parenthesis.
—————————————–Old News———————————————————
Please forward to your friends, neighbors, and email lists
THE REGULAR MONTHLY MEETING OF THE SIRWCD BOARD OF SUPERVISORS HAS BEEN CANCELLED!
APPARENTLY “THERE WERE NO ISSUES TO COME UP BEFORE THE BOARD.”
THE NEXT REGULARLY SCHEDULED SIRWCD MEETING IS THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 19, 7:30PM AT THE JUPITER HIGH SCHOOL.
Lois Taylor
252-9004
SIRWCD Board Re Water & Sewer motion Thursday, Oct. 15, 7:30 pm Jupiter High
Please all come to this meeting – Jupiter Farms needs to pack the room for this SIRWCD Board of Supervisors meeting.
The Board has promised to review its August 20 motion to seek the legislative changes needed to be able to respond positively should any Jupiter Farms residents petition for water or sewer in the future.
At the annual meeting, SIRWCD Board said they’d revisit that motion, with the intent of rescinding the motion, since so many Jupiter Farms residents are totally against it - the cost for water alone would be phenomenal for each parcel, probably well in excess of $20,000 between cost to run the pipes, the Town of Jupiter impact fee, and the connection to each home. The feeling is that city water is not needed in Jupiter Farms; our wells are functioning well, and as one letter writer wrote to SIRWCD copying the County Commissioners, ‘if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it!’
If you’d like to come early to the meeting, we’ll be tailgating in the JHS parking lot from 6:45pm to meeting time.
Palm Beach County’s Supervisor of Elections, Susan Bucher will no longer count votes for SIRWCD.
Since her office does not control the mailing of SIRWCD ballots to the landowners, does not design the ballots, does not draft the instructions sent with the ballots, her office can no longer certify the election results. This decision was made necessary also because SIRWCD was referring anyone who had questions about balloting, whether on paving or for the Board of Supervisors to the Elections office – even to a specific individual in the office – chewing up a lot of their time on subjects about which they had no information or answers.
At the JFR meeting, JFR members voted to establish a committee charged with becoming more knowledgable about SIRWCD’s enabling statutes, and to explore how to get more representation for Jupiter Farms on the Board. If you would like to join this committee, please give me a call.
See you Thursday night!
Lois Taylor
JFR President
252-9004
JFR President