This chapter shall be known and may be cited by the short title of "Zoning Ordinance of the Village of Royal Palm Beach, Palm, Beach County, Florida."

(Ord. No. 220, § 101, 5-20-86)

It is the purpose of this chapter to promote, protect, and improve in accordance with present and future needs, the public health, safety, comfort, good order, appearance, convenience, morals and general welfare of the citizens of the Village of Royal Palm Beach; to conserve the value of land, buildings, and resources; to protect the character and maintain the stability of areas; and to provide for efficiency and economy in the process of development, for the appropriate and best use of land, for preservation, protection, development, and conservation of the natural resources of land, water, and air, for convenience of traffic and circulation of people and goods, for the use and occupancy of buildings, for healthful and convenient distribution of population, for adequate public utilities and facilities, for promotion of the civic amenities of beauty and visual interest, and for achieving unified civic design by establishing zoning districts and by regulating the location and use of buildings, signs and other structures, and land or water for trade, industry, and residence, by regulating and limiting or determining the height, bulk, and access to light and air of buildings and structures, the area of yards and other open spaces, and the density of use. To accomplish these objectives, the regulations and districts and accompanying maps have been designed with reasonable consideration, among other things, for the character of the districts and their peculiar suitability for particular uses.

(Ord. No. 220, § 102, 5-20-86)

This chapter is adopted pursuant to Article VIII, section 2, of the Florida Constitution, section 166.011 et seq., Florida Statutes, and section 163.3161 et seq., Florida Statutes.

(Ord. No. 220, § 103, 5-20-86)

(a)

Effect and intent. This chapter shall be interpreted and applied in all instances in a manner that is consistent with, and implements, the comprehensive plan. It is the intent of the chapter to ensure that adequate potable water, sanitary sewer, solid waste, stormwater management, park, road, public school facilities, mass transit public facilities, and fire-rescue public facilities are available to accommodate development concurrent with the impact of development on such public facilities, consistent with the LOS standards for those public facilities adopted in the comprehensive plan. The policies adopted in the comprehensive plan shall serve as a framework and guideline for decisions by the village council, the planning and zoning commission, the board of zoning adjustment, the director, and all other municipal boards, commissions and agents as may be empowered to administer or apply the terms of this chapter from time to time. All actions taken in regard to amendments to the zoning map, amendments to the text of this chapter, applications for development orders or site-specific development orders, petitions for annexation or deannexation, and any other application filed pursuant to [or] subject to this chapter shall be consistent with all policies and provisions of the comprehensive plan.

(b)

LOS for public schools. The following definition, level of service (LOS) standards shall apply to the review of public school facilities.

LOS for public schools means the following for public school facilities: To ensure the capacity of schools is sufficient to support student growth at the adopted level of services for each year of the five-year planning period and through the longterm planning period for each concurrency service area ("CSA"), the school concurrency agreement established LOS as set forth below. The actual LOS for each type of school in each CSA shall be established each year in each CSA by the first student count of the second semester.

(1)

Tiered levels of service shall be in force pursuant to the tiered level of service table in the public school facilities element until August 1, 2004. Individual schools of each type may exceed the tiered LOS during the period in which tiered LOS are in effect, provided that the CSA's tiered LOS is not exceeded. However, each individual school's LOS which exceeds the tiered LOS, during the time that the tiered LOS is in effect, shall not exceed the utilization standards for that school type as shown in the maximum utilization table of the public school facilities element. During the time that the tiered level of service standard is in effect, the school district shall initiate necessary program and/or boundary adjustments so that the tiered LOS is not exceeded in each CSA.

(2)

After August 1, 2004, the following LOS standards shall be established for all schools of each type within each CSA and each individual school: a.) one hundred ten (110) percent of capacity (utilization) as determined by the Florida Inventory of School Houses (FISH); or b.) a higher LOS up to one hundred twenty (120) percent of FISH capacity (utilization/LOS) for individual schools subject to the results of a school capacity study (SCS) undertaken by the technical advisory group (TAG), in consultation with all local governments with jurisdiction within the CSA and the school district to determine if a particular school can operate in excess of one hundred ten (110) percent capacity. The SCS shall be required if a school in the first student count of the second semester reaches one hundred eight (108) percent or above of FISH capacity, once the level of service above is achieved. If the SCS concludes that the school can operate within the FISH guidelines and not exceed one hundred twenty (120) percent LOS, then that school shall be considered to operate within the adopted LOS and the CSA LOS shall be amended.

(3)

School concurrency shall be measured and applied on the basis of twenty-one (21) CSAs as described in the public school facilities element. In determining whether capacity is available, the school district shall consider any new capacity which will be in place or under actual construction in the first three (3) years of the school district five-year capital facilities plan. In determining whether capacity is available, the school district shall consider adjacent CSA capacity as specified in the school concurrency agreement.

(4)

These standards shall not apply to proposed new residential development until the commencement of the school concurrency program as specified in article V, section A of the agreement.

(c)

Exempted development orders. The following applications for development orders are exempted from the LOS for public school facilities:

(1)

In the event termination or suspension of the school concurrency program occurs as set forth in the school concurrency agreement.

(2)

Single-family lots of record, existing as such at the time this section is adopted.

(3)

Any residential development that received final approval of a site-specific development order prior to the commencement of the school concurrency program, as specified in article V, section A of the school concurrency agreement, or is exempt from concurrency under a local government's concurrency regulations is considered vested for that which was previously approved and shall not be considered as proposed new residential development for purposes of school concurrency. Any residential development which is exempt from school concurrency under the village's concurrency regulations shall not be considered as new residential development for purposes of school concurrency.

(4)

Any new residential development that has filed a complete application for a site-specific development order or any amendment to previously approved development order pending prior to the commencement of the school concurrency program, as specified in article V, section A of the school concurrency agreement.

(5)

Any residential development which is restricted to elderly and meets the requirements under the Federal Fair Housing Act to be designated as an adults-only community.

(6)

Any amendment to any previously approved residential development which does not increase the density of the development.

(7)

Any previously approved residential development or any other previously approved development with a residential component located within any existing "transportation concurrency exception area," as defined in section 163.3180(5), Florida Statutes.

(Ord. No. 220, § 104, 5-20-86; Ord. No. 639, § 1, 6-20-02)

This chapter shall apply to all buildings and the use of land throughout the village. Existing buildings and uses which are inconsistent with the provisions of this chapter shall be permitted subject to the requirements imposed upon nonconforming uses and buildings in this chapter. All applications filed pursuant to this chapter shall be required to meet the requirements of this chapter which are in effect on the date of final decision on the application.

(Ord. No. 220, § 105, 5-20-86)

(a)

General concurrency required. It shall be unlawful for any person to carry out any development or use of real property in the village which is inconsistent with the requirements of this chapter and the comprehensive plan. The village shall coordinate the timing, provision and funding of potable water, sanitary sewer, solid waste, drainage, park and recreation, road mass transit, public school facilities and fire-rescue public facilities to maintain the LOS for such public facilities as adopted in the village's comprehensive plan and shall ensure that no development orders are issued unless the following conditions are met: either there are adequate public facilities available to serve the proposed development concurrent with the impacts of such development on the public facilities; or the development orders issued are conditioned upon the availability of public services concurrent with the impacts of such development on public facilities. The following types of development orders shall be reviewed for concurrency as follows:

(b)

Public school concurrency procedures.

(1)

At the time of and in conjunction with the application for an adequate public facilities review in accordance with the Village of Royal Palm Beach's Zoning Code, the applicant for a proposed new residential development shall submit to the Village of Royal Palm Beach a request for a school concurrency determination.

(2)

The village shall review the application for completeness and require the applicant to submit the school concurrency application to the school district within ten (10) days of finding the application complete. The applicable, nonrefundable application fee payable to the school district in accordance with the fee schedule set by the school district shall accompany the application.

(3)

The school concurrency application shall contain the following information: location of the development; the build-out time frame of the development; and the number, type, and size of all the residential units anticipated to be occupied each calendar year.

(4)

The school district shall review the application in accordance with the provisions of article V, section F of the school concurrency agreement within fifteen (15) working days of receipt of the application.

(5)

Once the school district has reviewed the application, it shall issue a letter of determination of concurrency if the impacts of the proposed development's student growth do not cause the adopted LOS to be exceeded. If the development is not in compliance, the letter of determination of concurrency shall detail why the development is not in compliance and shall offer the applicant the opportunity to enter into a ninety-day negotiation period. During the ninety-day negotiation period, the applicant shall meet with the school district in an effort to mitigate the impact from the development. Mitigation shall be limited to those options which the school district recognizes and assumes the responsibility to operate and which will maintain the adopted LOS standards for the first five (5) years from receipt of the school district's letter of determination of concurrency; however, the village shall have the opportunity to review the mitigation options. If the school district and the developer agree to mitigation, the letter of determination of concurrency shall be issued, conditional approval upon the agreed mitigation measures, and an agreement between the school district and the developer. If mitigation is not agreed to, the letter of determination of concurrency shall be detailed why mitigation proposals were rejected and detail why the proposed new residential development is not in compliance. In this case, no development order shall be issued.

(6)

Letter of determination of school concurrency finding the development in compliance shall be valid for one (1) year from the date of issuance unless extended by the school district. Once the village's site-specific development order is issued, the concurrency determination shall run with the development order.

(c)

Development order approval.

(1)

No development order for a proposed new residential development shall be approved unless there is a valid letter of determination of concurrency from the school district finding the development in compliance.

(2)

If the letter of determination of concurrency requires conditions or mitigation to be placed on the development, the development order issued by the village shall incorporate those conditions.

(3)

If the letter of determination of concurrency requires the development to be phased to mitigation, the conditions of approval of the development order shall implement the phasing requirements by specifying that building permit applications will not be accepted if the conditions are not fulfilled.

(4)

In no case shall a development order be issued unless provisions are made through conditions of approval or by agreement between the developer and school district to provide performance security when required.

(d)

Appeals. Applicants seeking relief from school district decisions shall appeal such decisions as provided for by law.

(Ord. No. 220, § 106, 5-20-86; Ord. No. 639, § 2, 6-20-02; Ord. No. 771, § 1, 11-16-06; Ord. No. 940, § 1, 1-19-17)

(a)

Purpose and intent. The purpose of this section is to establish a method whereby the impacts of development on transportation facilities can be mitigated by the cooperative efforts of the public and private sectors, to be known as the proportionate fair-share program, as required by and in a manner consistent with F.S. § 163.3180(16).

(b)

Applicability. The proportionate fair-share program shall apply to all developments that fail to meet the standards of this chapter and the village's comprehensive plan on a roadway within the village that is not the responsibility of Palm Beach County, the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) or another agency. The proportionate fair-share program does not apply to the following:

(1)

Collector and arterial roads which are not the responsibility of the village pursuant to section 1.3(4) of the Charter of Palm Beach County, Florida. However, a traffic concurrency letter from the county is required to be submitted by the applicant certifying compliance with the county-wide traffic performance standards ordinance adopted pursuant to the County Charter prior to the issuance of a development order by the village.

(2)

Developments of regional impact (DRIs) using proportionate fair-share under F.S. 163.3180(12).

(3)

Projects exempted from this chapter by state law.

(4)

Projects that received traffic concurrency approval prior to December 1, 2006.

(5)

Individual single-family homes.

(6)

Vested projects.

(c)

General requirements. An applicant may choose to satisfy the LOS for transportation by making, a proportionate fair-share contribution, so long as each of the following requirements is met:

(1)

The proposed development is consistent with the comprehensive plan and applicable land development regulations.

(2)

The road improvement necessary to maintain the LOS for transportation is identified in the five-year schedule of capital improvements in the CIE.

(3)

Any improvement project proposed to meet the developer's fair-share obligation shall meet the village's design standards for locally maintained roadways.

(d)

Intergovernmental coordination. Pursuant to policies in the intergovernmental coordination element of the comprehensive plan, the village shall coordinate with Palm Beach County and other affected jurisdictions such as FDOT regarding mitigation to impacted facilities not under the jurisdiction of the local government receiving the application for proportionate fair-share mitigation.

(e)

Application process.

(1)

In the event of a lack of capacity to maintain the LOS for transportation, the applicant shall have the opportunity to satisfy LOS for transportation requirements through the proportionate fair-share program subject to the requirements of subsection (c).

(2)

Prior to the submittal of an application, eligible applicants shall schedule a preapplication meeting with village staff. Subsequent to the preapplication meeting, eligible applicants shall submit a completed development application and all documentation requested by the village. The applicant shall be required to pay a reasonable fee for the cost of reviewing the application, said fee to be set by resolution of the village council. If the impacted facility is on the strategic intermodal system (SIS), then FDOT will be notified and invited to participate in the preapplication meeting. The village shall also have the option of notifying and inviting Palm Beach County.

(3)

Village staff shall review the application and certify that the application is sufficient and complete within fourteen (14) working days. If an application is determined to be insufficient, incomplete or inconsistent with the general requirements of the proportionate fair-share program as indicated in subsection (c), then the applicant will be notified in writing of the reasons for such deficiencies. If such deficiencies are not remedied by the applicant within thirty (30) days of receipt of the written notification, then the application will be deemed withdrawn and all fees forfeited to the village, unless the village determines that the applicant is working toward a remedy of the stated deficiencies in good faith, in which case the village may extend the deadline as deemed appropriate by the village.

(4)

Pursuant to F.S. 163.3180(16)(e), proposed proportionate fair-share mitigation for development impacts to facilities on the SIS requires the concurrency of the FDOT. The applicant shall submit evidence of an agreement between the applicant and the FDOT for inclusion in the proportionate fair-share agreement.

(5)

When an application is deemed sufficient and complete in accordance with subparagraph (3) above, the applicant shall be advised in writing and a proposed proportionate fair-share obligation and binding agreement prepared by the village shall be executed by the applicant and delivered to the appropriate parties for review, including a copy to the FDOT for any proposed proportionate fair-share mitigation on a SIS facility, no later than sixty (60) days from the date at which the applicant received the notification of a sufficient and complete application. If the agreement is not received by the village within these sixty (60) days, then the application will be deemed withdrawn and all fees forfeited to the village, unless the village determines that the applicant is working toward a remedy of the stated deficiencies in good faith, in which case the village may extend the deadline as deemed appropriate by the village.

(6)

No proportionate fair-share agreement will be effective until approved by the village through an administrative approval.

(f)

Determining proportionate fair-share obligation.

(1)

Proportionate fair-share mitigation for transportation LOS impacts may include, without limitation, separately or collectively, private funds, contributions of land, and construction and contribution of facilities.

(2)

A development eligible for participation under the proportionate fair-share program shall not be required to pay more than its proportionate fair-share. The fair market value of the proportionate fair-share mitigation for the impacted facilities shall not differ regardless of the method of mitigation.

(3)

The methodology used to calculate a development's proportionate fair-share obligation shall be as provided for in F.S. 163.3180(12) as follows:

The cumulative number of trips from the proposed development expected to reach roadways during peak hours from the complete build out of a stage or phase being approved, divided by the change in the peak hour maximum service volume (MSV) of roadways resulting from construction of an improvement necessary to maintain the adopted LOS, multiplied by the construction cost, at the time of developer payment, of the improvement necessary to maintain the adopted LOS.

OR, as such is expressed by the following mathematical formula:

(4)

For the purposes of determining proportionate fair-share obligations, the village engineer shall determine improvement costs based upon the actual and/or anticipated cost of the improvement in the year that construction will occur.

(5)

If an improvement is proposed by the applicant, then the value of the improvement shall be based on an engineer's certified cost estimate provided by the applicant and approved by the village engineer or by some other method approved by the village engineer.

(g)

Impact fee credit for proportionate fair-share mitigation.

(1)

Proportionate fair-share contributions shall be applied as a credit against road impact fees to the extent that all or a portion of the proportionate fair-share mitigation is used to address the same capital infrastructure improvements contemplated by road impact fees which have been established or amended by the village as set forth in chapter 10, at article V, Impact fees.

(2)

The proportionate fair-share obligation is intended to mitigate the transportation impacts of a proposed project. As a result, any road impact fee credit based upon proportionate fair-share contributions for a proposed project cannot be transferred to any other project.

(h)

Proportionate fair-share agreements.

(1)

Upon execution of a proportionate fair-share agreement ("agreement"), the applicant shall receive a certification of concurrency reservation for capital road facilities. Should the applicant fail to apply for a development permit within twelve (12) months, then the agreement shall be considered null and void, and the applicant shall be required to reapply, unless the village and the applicant mutually agree to an extension.

(2)

Payment of the proportionate fair-share contribution is due in full no later than issuance of the first building permit, and shall be nonrefundable. If the payment is submitted more than ninety (90) days from the date of execution of the agreement, then the proportionate fair-share cost shall be recalculated at the time of payment, pursuant to subsection (f) and adjusted according1y.

(3)

In the event an agreement requires the applicant to pay or build one hundred (100) percent of one (1) or more road improvements, all such improvements shall be commenced prior to issuance of a building permit and assured by a binding agreement that is accompanied by a performance security, as determined by the village, which is sufficient to ensure the completion of all required improvements.

(4)

Dedication of necessary rights-of-way for facility improvements pursuant to a proportionate fair-share agreement shall be completed prior to issuance of the first building permit.

(5)

Any requested change to a development subsequent to the issuance of a development order may be subject to additional proportionate fair-share contributions to the extent the chance would generate additional traffic that would require additional mitigation.

(6)

Applicants may submit a letter to withdraw from the proportionate fair-share agreement at any time prior to the execution of the agreement. The application fee and any associated advertising costs paid to the village will be nonrefundable.

(i)

Appropriation of fair-share revenues.

(1)

Proportionate fair-share revenues shall be placed in the appropriate project account for funding of scheduled improvements in the CIE, or as otherwise established in the terms of the proportionate fair-share agreement. Proportionate fair-share revenues may be used as the fifty (50) percent local match for funding under the FDOT TRIP, or any other matching requirement for state and federal grant programs as may be allowed by law.

(2)

In the event a scheduled facility improvement is removed from the CIE, then the revenues collected for its construction may be applied toward the construction of another improvement within the village that would mitigate the impacts of development pursuant to the requirements of subsection (c).

(Ord. No. 771, § 2, 11-16-06)

This chapter shall not adversely affect the right to commence or continue construction under a building permit lawfully issued prior to the effective date of this chapter, provided that construction authorized by such permits has been commenced prior to, or within six (6) months after, the effective date of this chapter [May 20, 1986].

(Ord. No. 220, § 107, 5-20-86)

Editor's note— Ord. No. 771, § 2, adopted Nov. 16, 2006, adopted a new § 26-7 and renumbered §§ 26-7 and 26-8 as 26-8 and 26-9.

All lands annexed into the village prior to the effective date of this chapter, or after the effective date of this chapter, shall remain subject to the terms of any conditions attached to said annexations. In those instances in which the terms of this chapter are at variance with conditions imposed upon such annexations, the more restrictive requirements shall apply.

(Ord. No. 220, § 108, 5-20-86)

Editor's note— See editor's note following § 26-8.