here - Tamarac

Transcription

here - Tamarac

CLARION ASSOCIATES, LLC
In association with
ILER PLANNING
TAMARAC, FLORIDA
Assessment of Current Land Development Regulations &
Annotated Outline of a New Land Development Code
March 2015
Contents SUMMARY AND PROJECT OVERVIEW ................................................. 1 Background ........................................................................................................................... 1 Project Overview ................................................................................................................. 1 Report Organization ............................................................................................................ 3 Summary of Recommendations ......................................................................................... 3 KEY THEMES FOR IMPROVEMENT ....................................................... 7 Ensure the Regulations are User-Friendly......................................................................... 7 Create a Unified Land Development Code ................................................................................. 7 Create a Separate Administrative Manual .................................................................................... 9 Reformat the Development Regulations ...................................................................................... 9 Include Illustrations and Other Visual Aids ................................................................................ 10 Define Key Terms and Consolidate Definitions ....................................................................... 12 Update Zoning Districts and Uses.................................................................................... 13 Update the Lineup of Zoning Districts ....................................................................................... 13 Update the Use Classification System ......................................................................................... 18 Improve the Development Quality Standards................................................................ 23 Focus on Infill and Redevelopment .............................................................................................. 23 Update Site Design Standards ....................................................................................................... 24 Upgrade the Building Design Standards ...................................................................................... 28 Streamline the Development Review Procedures ......................................................... 31 Clarify the Decision-Making Responsibilities ............................................................................. 31 Establish Common Review Procedures ...................................................................................... 31 Consider Delegating Some Decisions Down to the Planning Board or Staff ..................... 33 Consider Requiring Early Neighborhood Notice and Meeting for
Major Developments ...................................................................................................................... 35 Modify, Add, and Clarify Specific Development Review Procedures ................................... 36 Prepare Targeted Comprehensive Plan Updates .......................................................... 38 Update Non-Residential Land Use Categories.......................................................................... 38 Review Neighborhood Protection and Quality-of-life Policies .............................................. 42 Specific Focus Area Amendments ................................................................................................ 43 Other Comprehensive Plan Updates .......................................................................................... 44 ANNOTATED OUTLINE FOR TAMARAC’S
LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE ............................................................... 46 Article 1 – General Provisions .......................................................................................... 46 Article 2 – Zoning Districts ............................................................................................... 47 Article 3 – Use Regulations ............................................................................................... 49 Article 4 – Development Standards ................................................................................. 50 Article 5 – Administration................................................................................................. 52 Article 6 – Definitions and Rules of Construction .......................................................... 54 Tamarac Development Regulations Assessment – March 2015
1
SUMMARY AND PROJECT OVERVIEW Background Located in the western part of the Fort Lauderdale metropolitan area and bounded by
the Everglades Wildlife Management Area to the west, the City of Tamarac is mostly
built-out, with only two percent of the city’s land area remaining undeveloped.
However, the city is well-positioned for future infill and redevelopment as Broward
County continues to grow. Traditionally viewed as an active adult community, Tamarac
for the past several years has been experiencing slow demographic shifts, as new families
move into the area. Today, like many Florida communities, Tamarac faces the challenge
of providing young families with growth opportunities and amenities while also
continuing to provide its older residents with the community services and lifestyle to
which they have grown accustomed.
With many vacant properties and buildings ripe for infill and redevelopment, the city has
initiated a project to rewrite its land development regulations (not comprehensively
updated since 1975) and prepare targeted updates to its 2007 Comprehensive Plan, to
ensure that these properties are revitalized in accordance with the city’s vision for
innovative, high-quality, financially sound, and environmentally sustainable development,
The City of Tamarac retained a team led by Clarion Associates, including Iler Planning,
to assist with this project and bring experience and perspective from working with
communities throughout Florida and the nation.
Project Overview This project will be accomplished through the following three tasks:



Task 1: Project Initiation and Orientation
Task 2: Assessment of Land Development Regulations and Comprehensive Plan
(current task)
Task 3: Draft Land Development Code (LDC) and Targeted Comprehensive
Plan Amendments
Task 1: Project Initiation and Orientation The Clarion/Iler team completed the initial reconnaissance portion of Task 1 in
December 2014. We visited and toured Tamarac, met with representatives from
various city departments and public officials, interviewed members of a newly created
citizen Advisory Committee, and conducted our own independent review of the existing
regulations and Comprehensive Plan to understand:




Ways in which the current regulations work well;
Ways in which the current regulations are ineffective or difficult to use;
Areas of consistency and inconsistency between existing city policies and
practices, the adopted plans, and the existing code language; and
Ways to make the revised documents more user-friendly.
Tamarac Development Regulations Assessment – March 2015
1
Summary and Project Overview Task 2: Assessment of LDRs and Comprehensive Plan Task 2 involved summarizing the consultant team’s analysis in this Assessment
Report and Annotated Outline. This report evaluates the current regulations and
Comprehensive Plan. It is intended to build project support, identify key issues, and set
the direction for the new LDC and targeted Comprehensive Plan updates. Prior to
finalization of this report, we made preliminary presentations of our initial assessments
and analysis to the City Commission and Advisory Committee and at a public meeting in
January 2015.
Based on initial stakeholder feedback, we understand that an overarching project goal is
to “raise the bar for Tamarac.” The project themes identified in this report are based
on the following project goals expressed to us during Task 1:




Implement the Comprehensive Plan. The development regulations should
be aligned with the goals, policies, and strategies in the plan to be the bridge
between policy and action.
Encourage High-Quality Infill and Redevelopment While Protecting
Neighborhoods. Draft regulations that encourage high-quality new
development, especially at aging shopping centers, while also protecting
Tamarac’s well-established, stable neighborhoods and existing businesses.
Use the New Code as a Tool for Placemaking. The development
regulations and plan updates can be a major catalyst in distinguishing Tamarac
from other nearby communities and first-ring suburbs in the larger Ft.
Lauderdale metro area.
Focus on Efficiency and Effectiveness. This project should illustrate how
development regulations could be more efficient and effective by making them
user-friendly with streamlined procedures, additional graphics, and clearlywritten standards that enhance predictability for the future of Tamarac.
Task 3: Draft LDC and Targeted Comprehensive Plan Updates The actual drafting of the new LDC and targeted Comprehensive Plan amendments will
begin in Task 3, following the review and discussion of this report, and once a clear
direction for the new code’s organization and content is determined. Because the new
LDC will include a substantial amount of reorganized and new information, and it is
difficult for any review body, or the public, to digest this information at one time, the
drafting process will be divided into two stages:


Stage 1: Draft Zoning Districts and Use/Administration
Stage 2: Draft Development and Design Standards
Each stage will include Staff and Public Drafts of the new regulations. The Staff Draft will
be sent first to City staff for review and comment, primarily to check factual accuracy.
Based on staff feedback, a revised Public Draft will be created for distribution to the
public, Citizen Advisory Committee, Planning Board, and City Commission for review
and comment.
2
Summary and Project Overview
Report Organization Following this Summary and Project Overview, the document is organized into two
main parts:
 Key Themes for Improvement; and
 Annotated Outline for Tamarac’s LDC.
A detailed review of the current development regulations has also been prepared for
discussion with staff and provides more detailed guidance regarding specific issues that
do not rise to the high-level themes discussed in this report.
Key Themes for Improvement This section identifies major themes that emerged from our review of the city’s plans
and regulations, the stakeholder interviews, and our knowledge of best practices in
drafting ordinances in Florida and across the nation. The discussion of each issue
includes recommendations or suggestions on how a new code might modify current
regulations to better address concerns pertinent to that issue. The major
recommendations are organized in the following categories:





Ensure the Regulations are User-friendly
Update Zoning Districts and Uses
Improve the Development Standards
Streamline the Development Review Procedures
Prepare Targeted Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan
Annotated Outline for Tamarac’s Land Development Code The Annotated Outline for Tamarac’s LDC provides an overview of the proposed
structure of the new development regulations, assuming that recommendations from
the assessment are implemented. This section of the report gives the reader the
framework of the new code structure and the logical grouping of like provisions.
Summary of Recommendations The following is a summary of the recommendations made in this report, by section.
Specific recommendations are discussed in further detail throughout the document.
Ensure the Regulations are User-Friendly Create a Unified Land Development Code
Consolidate the current primary and secondary land use code chapters in the existing code into a
unified code as described in the text.
Create a Separate Administrative Manual
Remove technical material (e.g., guardrail specifications) for placement in a separate administrative
manual.
Reformat the Development Regulations Implement a new numbering system and document layout to facility the transition to a unified LDC
and establish a clear hierarchy of provisions.
Cite cross-references and state law references immediately after the applicable provision.
Remove editor’s notes.
Include Illustrations and Other Visual Aids
Introduce graphics and visual aids (summary tables, photographs, flowcharts, illustrations, etc.) to
explain regulations.
3
Summary and Project Overview Define Key Terms and Consolidate Definitions
Define all key terms.
Revise complex or confusing definitions for clarity.
Update the Lineup of Zoning Districts
Clarify the Purpose of Each District
Develop clear purpose and intent statements for each residential zoning district.
Review existing purpose statements for nonresidential districts for accuracy and to ensure they still
match the city’s planning goals.
Consolidate Similar Zoning Districts
Consider district consolidations, following clarification of district intent. For example, consider
consolidating the RM-5 (multifamily), RD-7 (duplex), R-3 (low density multifamily), and R-3U (row
house) districts.
Consolidate or consider converting B-5 (limited business) and B-6 (business) to mixed-use business
or office districts.
Increase Mixed-Use Zoning Options and Other New Districts
Modify the MXD district to better encourage infill and redevelopment.
Consider establishing additional mixed-use business, office, and neighborhood business districts.
Consider creating a Business Park (BP) district.
Consider creating a new heavy industrial district.
Eliminate Obsolete Districts
Eliminate the R-5 (motel and hotel) and A-5 (agricultural-excavation) districts.
Consider eliminating or replacing the T-1 (trailer park) district.
Remove the Woodlands Overlay District.
Update the Use Classification System
Develop a Consolidated Use Table
Create a consolidated use table that includes all districts and uses found in various code chapters
(e.g., Chapters 12 and 24).
Categorize and Define All Use Types
Categorize use types within larger categories and subcategories.
Update definitions to ensure clarity, legal consistency, and that all uses are defined.
Remove obsolete uses.
Introduce new use types to reflect contemporary uses.
Revisit the Allowable Uses within Tamarac’s Zoning Districts
Revise the allowable uses per zoning district to best reflect the intent of a district.
Align the uses in the Comprehensive Plan with those in the LDC.
Eliminate the pyramid zoning structure as part of the residential district-by-district consolidations.
Introduce More Use-Specific Standards
Consolidate existing use-specific standards (e.g., those in Chapters 12 and 24) in the new permitted
use table.
Codify Ordinance No. 2014-10 (establishing new development standards pertaining to schools) as
use-specific standards.
Establish new use-specific standards to mitigate potential impacts associated with certain use types
and to allow more consistent, predictable, and efficient regulation of uses.
Consider whether any uses could be considered “by-right” rather than subject to the “special
exception” process in certain zoning districts.
Improve the Development Quality Standards
Focus on Infill and Redevelopment
Review dimensional standards and development standards under a lens of accommodating infill and
redevelopment projects.
Consider allowing additional uses on properties that have remained vacant for a pre-determined
period of time.
Update Site Design Standards
Incorporate Sustainability Measures
Enhance landscaping, drainage, and stormwater standards by incorporating low-impact development
standards and other water conservation measures found in the Florida-friendly landscape model
ordinance.
4
Summary and Project Overview
Align landscaping, drainage, and stormwater standards with the city’s updated stormwater master
plan and Broward County’s updated regulations (will be done to the greatest extent practicable since
these update projects are concurrent with the LDC rewrite).
Update stormwater and drainage provisions to reflect NPDES permitting requirements.
Revise lighting standards to cover all exterior lighting and incorporate energy efficient lighting
standards.
Provide height requirements for exterior pole and fixture lights to minimize glare.
Incorporate CPTED principles into lighting standards.
Encourage solar-oriented site designs using density bonuses.
Promote wind energy conversion equipment.
Improve Parking, Access, and Circulation Standards
Reduce minimum parking requirements for some developments or use types.
Consider parking maximums for some developments or use types.
Allow reduced parking requirements in certain situations (e.g., shared parking, valet parking,
proximity to public transportation, availability of on-street parking; proximity to other off-street
parking).
Require or encourage parking lots to be located behind or to the side of buildings in pedestrianoriented districts.
Confirm exemption of buildings under 5,000 sf of gfa from loading requirements.
Reduce loading requirements.
Upgrade the Building Site Design Standards
Develop broadly applicable nonresidential design standards based on the good design features
included in the new Walmart Neighborhood Market and the existing design standards required under
the current MXD district.
Do not carry-forward the single-family building design standards contained in the Woodlands Overlay
District.
Update and apply the multi-family design standards required under the current RM-10 and R-4a
zoning districts to multi-family districts and uses more broadly.
Consider whether design standards (mandatory), guidelines (aspirational), or a combination of the
two is most appropriate for Tamarac.
Clarify the Decision-Making Responsibilities
Include a summary table of development review procedures and roles played by key decision makers
(i.e., city staff, the Planning Board, and the City Commission).
Establish Common Review Procedures
Consolidate procedural steps and requirements commonly found as part of various review
procedures into a single set of common review procedures.
Follow the standard review procedures with application-specific review procedures.
Consider Delegating Some Decisions Down to the Planning Board or Staff
Expand the scale and types of development treated as minor development subject to site plan
approval by city staff.
Allow the Planning Board (instead of the City Commission) to decide site plan approval applications
for major development (i.e., developments not subject to staff approval).
Consolidate subdivision plat reviews (sketch plat, overall plan, preliminary plat, final plat, and
delegation requests) into a single one-step plat review procedure decided by staff, and allow it to
occur concurrently with site plan review and improvements permit review.
Allow the Planning Board (instead of the City Commission) to decide applications for approval of a
special exception and variances from sign regulations..
Clarify the staff-level decisions by replacing references to multiple city positions with references to
the City Manager, and clarify that these references also include designees of the City Manager.
Establish an administrative adjustment procedure for minor deviations from code requirements.
Consider Requiring Early Neighborhood Notice and Meeting for Major Developments
Consider requiring a neighborhood meeting for: site specific rezonings, special exceptions,
and major site plan approval.
Include provisions addressing how the neighborhood meeting is conducted in the standard
review procedures (e.g., meeting must be held at a location convenient for affected
property owners).
Modify, Add, and Clarify Specific Development Review Procedures
5
Summary and Project Overview Expand and fill out the variance review procedure.
Authorize recovery of costs for application review by external consultants.
Consolidate procedural provisions for improvement permits and final engineering plans.
Add a temporary use procedure to accommodate miscellaneous temporary development approvals
such as for emergency housing units and use of public rights-of-way.
Modify the newsrack certificate of compliance procedure to clarify applicable review criteria,
especially relating to public need.
Prepare Targeted Comprehensive Plan Updates
Update Non-Residential Land Use Categories
Commercial Category
Modify Commercial land use category title to Commercial Mixed Use.
Define and expand “residential mixed use” category.
Define and restrict “wholesale storage.”
Define “community facilities” and “special residential facilities.”
Add “public and private schools” as a permitted use.
Modify the 35% lot coverage standards.
Industrial Category
Remove “ancillary commercial uses” as a permitted use.
Define “limited commercial and retail businesses.”
Consider removing “hotels and motels” as a permitted use.
Evaluate 30% lot coverage standard.
Office Park Category
Remove or modify the office park category.
Review Neighborhood Protection and Quality-of-life Policies
Modify and supplement land use objective and policies.
Specific Focus Area Amendments
Define a new Mixed-Use land use category.
Modify the existing Commercial category.
Other Comprehensive Plan Updates
Promote “green” development.
Use Florida-friendly landscape standards.
Implement low impact development (LID) standards.
Increase multi-modal transportation connections.
Create active and interesting public spaces.
Become a Blue Zone Community.
6
KEY THEMES FOR IMPROVEMENT The current development regulations in Tamarac have some components that are
working well, some that require minor edits and adjustments, and some that could
benefit from a substantial overhaul. This section discusses the major, overarching areas
where Tamarac’s regulations could be improved and offers potential solutions to those
issues.
Five major themes for improving Tamarac’s current development regulations emerged
from the Clarion team’s interviews and our document review:





Ensure the Regulations are User-Friendly
Improve the Development Standards
Prepare Targeted Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan
Ensure the Regulations are User‐Friendly Many different parts of Tamarac’s Municipal Code address issues relating to land use,
development, and zoning. Some parts have not been updated since 1975. Many other
sections have been amended piecemeal over the years to address specific issues, but not
in a coordinated or consistent fashion. The result is a relatively complex set of
documents that lack a logical, intuitive organization. We heard from several ordinance
users that it can be challenging to quickly find the information they need. These
concerns are not unusual in our experience. Generally, regulations that have been
amended multiple times over decades without a comprehensive rewrite strategy often
become difficult for both staff and the community to understand and administer.
This section discusses several solutions that Tamarac can pursue to improve the userfriendliness of the development regulations.
Create a Unified Land Development Code The current Tamarac development regulations have a challenging organization, with land
use regulations spread across at least 13 code chapters, identified below. We heard in
interviews that this current organization is frustrating to city staff in multiple
departments (e.g., planning, engineering, building, business review, and code
enforcement), making it difficult to coordinate administration of the code across
departments and with the public.
A main objective for this project, identified in the city’s request for proposals, is the
creation of a unified Land Development Code (LDC). Many communities in Florida and
around the country have consolidated multiple ordinances addressing land development
into a unified LDC. At the most basic level, this consolidation involves merging
subdivision and zoning regulations, but other regulations relating to resource protection,
signage, etc., may also be integrated. Such consolidation offers significant advantages
compared to maintaining separate land development chapters, including:
7
Key Themes for Improvement An example of an
inconsistency in the
current Tamarac
regulations: three
different definitions of
“lot width”:
Lot width: the horizontal
distance between the
sidelines of a lot measured
at the street setback line.”
Sec. 10-153.
Lot width: the horizontal
distance between the
sidelines of a lot at the
front yard line or at the
front lot line where no
front setback is required.”
Sec. 21-1.
Lot width: the average
distance between side lot
lines, measured at right
angles to the line used to
determine the depth of
the lot. Sec. 24-1.
Greater Consistency. A unified approach prevents the repetition of
information across chapters, reducing the possibility of inconsistent provisions
resulting in inconsistent application of the regulations. For example, current
chapters 10 (Land Development Regulations), 21 (Subdivision), and 24 (Zoning)
define some of the same terms, such as lot, lot depth, and lot width. “Lot
width” is currently defined and measured differently in each of these chapters,
as shown in the example on this page.
 Shorter Document. Consolidating information allows the reader to quickly
compare standards and procedures for various types of development activities.
It also provides for a shorter document in most instances, since repetition is
removed. For example, use standards are currently spread across Chapter 24
(Zoning) and some higher-impact uses are also regulated under Chapter 12
(Licenses and Business Regulations). As discussed later in this report, all of
these uses should be consolidated in the new LDC.
 Easier to Administer. Many communities that have adopted LDCs believe
that they are easier to administer in terms of providing direction to applicants,
finding information expeditiously, and enforcement. Under the existing Tamarac
regulations, it can be difficult for an applicant to understand how the city grants
(or does not grant) approval for a certain development to proceed because the
sections identifying the procedures for reviewing and approving development in
Tamarac are spread across Chapters 2 (Administration) and 24 (Zoning). As
discussed later in this report, the new LDC will consolidate all sections relating
to review and decision-making bodies in one article.
To maximize the user-friendly nature of Tamarac’s new LDC, we propose consolidating
the current primary and secondary code chapters as shown below. The annotated
outline in Part 3 of this report provides additional detail and recommendations for how
the new LDC could be organized.

Current Structure
Primary Code Chapters (7)

10: Land Development Regulations

11: Landscaping

12: Licenses and Business Regulations1

18: Signs and Advertising

20: Streets and Sidewalks

21: Subdivisions
 24: Zoning
Secondary Code Chapters (6)

2: Administration

5: Buildings and Building Regulations2

3: Alcoholic Beverages

5.6: Telecommunications

9: Health, Sanitation, & Nuisances

17: Planning and Development
Primary code chapters
directly relate to land
development (e.g.,
zoning). All materials in
these chapters will be
folded into the new
consolidated LDC.
Secondary code chapters
contain some regulations
related to land
development, but may
also contain other
material as well. Only
portions of the secondary
chapters will be folded
into the new LDC.
Proposed Structure
One Code Chapter (Articles 1-6)

1: General Provisions

2: Zoning Districts

3: Use Regulations

4: Development Standards

5: Administration
 6: Definitions and Rules of
Construction
Recommendation:
Consolidate the current primary and secondary code chapters into a unified code as
described above.
1
Revised from a secondary to a primary code chapter, since interim assessment presentation on Jan. 13, because of the importance of including the use regulations in this chapter in the unified LDC. Revised from a primary to a secondary code chapter, since interim assessment presentation on Jan. 13, because most of the material in this chapter relates to obtaining a building permit and not a land development permit. 2
8
Key Themes for Improvement
Create a Separate Administrative Manual Chapter 10 (Land Development Regulations) contains a significant amount of detailed
technical information that does not necessarily have to be in the LDC, such as diagrams
of acceptable guardrails, approved potable water design flows, and specific impact fees
amounts.
We recommend removing such technical information to a separate document to
improve the user-friendliness of the code. If outside the code, it is much easier to
amend these technical specifications and fee amounts administratively. During this
rewrite process, Clarion will flag the technical and administrative content that should be
removed from the code and place it in a separate “bin” document for inclusion in a new
manual by the city.
Recommendations:
Remove technical material for placement in a separate administrative manual.
Reformat the Development Regulations The current format of Tamarac’s regulations, including the numbering system, layout,
and fonts, make it a challenging document to read and easily understand. Several types
of revisions are necessary.
First, a new, simpler numbering system should be adopted in the LDC to allow that is
easier to understand. Also, a new document layout will establish a clear hierarchy of
provisions and enable code users to understand more quickly where in the document a
particular provision is located. In addition to a clearly defined hierarchy, this new layout
should include headers, footers, page numbers, and illustrations with captions to make
the code more user-friendly.
The following graphic compares the current Tamarac layout to a sample improved
layout from another code.
Current Tamarac Layout
Option for New Layout
Page one of current Ch. 10
(Land Development Regulations)
Improved layout example
9
Key Themes for Improvement Additionally, as shown in the below snapshot of Tamarac’s current format, code
chapters, articles, divisions, and sections often begin with lengthy paragraphs of cross
references, state law references, and editor’s notes, which are distracting to a reader.
While cross references and state law references are an integral part of any legal
document, leading off with such material distracts a reader.3 It implies that the
information the code user needs may be scattered across multiple code chapters, rather
than the one being reviewed. It also leads to confusion because cross-references are
not located alongside applicable provisions, making it challenging to maintain accurate
references and making it easy for a user to lose her place in the overall document as she
combs through other chapters to find related provisions.
Recommendations:
 Implement a new numbering system and document layout to facility the transition to
a unified LDC and establish a clear hierarchy of provisions;
 Cite cross-references (using internal hyperlinks where possible) and state law
references immediately after the applicable provision; and
 Remove editor’s notes.
Include Illustrations and Other Visual Aids Photographs, tables, flowcharts, illustrations, and other graphics are helpful in conveying
information concisely. Tamarac’s current development regulations make limited use of
such tools, aside from a few technical tables and drawings that show engineering details
(which we suggest removing from the code and including in an administrative manual).
Graphics A well-illustrated code helps people from all backgrounds visualize the type and form of
development that are required by particular code standards. Visual aids like photos and
computer-generated illustrations can show how dimensional standards (height, setbacks,
etc.) are measured and how development standards (parking, landscaping, building
3
The current code also contains a substantial amount of editor’s notes documenting the ordinances that amended or repealed certain provisions. This is unnecessary history to include in a code. Because an entirely LDC will be adopted at the end of this project, all of the editor’s notes will be removed. 10
design, etc.) are applied. In the case of new or updated design standards, this becomes
particularly important. Examples of how graphics can be integrated into the new LDC
are provided below.
The following examples show how graphics can better convey development standards than lengthy text.
Left: Sample showing an illustrative format for zoning district
summaries, including dimensinal standards.
Right: Sample showing example images of appropriate signage in a
Main St. District.
Additional examples showing the advantages of using graphics rather than text to convey development
standards.
Left: Sample combining the use of SketchUp modeling
and word processing to convey the relationship of
surrounding development to the Town Center Residential
District.
Right: Sample depicting lot standards for a residential
district.
11
Key Themes for Improvement Tables Tables are a simple way to convey a significant amount of information without having to
refer to several sections or pages of the code. For instance, consolidating all of the
permitted uses for each zoning district into a unified table allows for a side-by-side
comparison of appropriate district uses, and takes much less space than the lengthy lists
found in Tamarac’s current code. Similarly, summarizing dimensional standards allows
for easier comparison of zoning districts. We have found that these specific tables are
helpful quick-reference tools for prospective landowners, developers, and staff.
The following examples from other communities exhibit the clarity and convenience of using tables to understand and
compare development standards.
Left: Summarizes dimensional standards for a
residential zoning district, providing a quick snapshot
of the regulations for that district.
Right: A portion of a consolidated use table, indicating which household living uses
are permitted in each zoning district, and what process is required for approval.
Recommendation:
Introduce graphics and visual aids (summary tables, photographs, flowcharts, illustrations, etc.)
to explain regulations.
Define Key Terms and Consolidate Definitions In terms of user-friendliness, the use of clear and precise language is just as important as
document organization and format. All operative terms should be defined in the new
LDC, and all definitions should be consolidated in a single location. In the current
Tamarac regulations, definitions are spread throughout every primary and secondary
code chapter identified above. Many key terms, like “drive-through,” are currently
undefined. The regulations also contain multiple, often conflicting definitions of the
same terms. For example, there are at least three different definitions of “building”
(one in Chapter 5 and two in Chapter 10). In the new LDC, all key terms will be defined
and inconsistent definitions will be reconciled in one consolidated set of definitions.
Any regulatory language will be removed and relocated into the main body of the code.
Recommendations:
 Define all key terms; and
 Revise complex or confusing definitions for clarity.
12
Update Zoning Districts and Uses The foundation of any zoning ordinance is the set of zoning districts into which the
community is divided and the uses allowed within those districts. As part of this rewrite
of the Tamarac regulations, it is essential to confirm the lineup of zoning districts and to
ensure that they are appropriate to meet the needs of Tamarac now and in the future,
and sufficient to implement the City’s Comprehensive Plan.
Several key updates are addressed in the following sections, including:





Updating the lineup of zoning districts;
Amending the allowable uses available within each district;
Developing a better use classification system;
Rethinking the permitted use and special exception permitting processes; and
Updating use-specific standards to provide more predictability for certain uses.
Update the Lineup of Zoning Districts The zoning districts in any community should accommodate a wide range and mixture
of housing types, commercial and industrial businesses, institutional uses, and
recreational opportunities, within and across districts. In evaluating the lineup of zoning
districts in any code update, we typically consider the following:






Is the intent of each district clear and does the district name match the intent?
Is the district currently used, or is it unnecessary or obsolete?
Are new districts needed (e.g., new mixed-use districts)?
Are any districts so similar in purpose and standards that they overlap and could
be consolidated?
Are the dimensional standards for each district (setbacks, density, and height)
appropriately tailored to the purpose of the district?
Do the uses allowed in each district match the district’s intent?
The current Tamarac regulations establish 22 base zoning districts and one overlay
district. While there is no “right” number of districts for any community, in our
experience the number of districts in Tamarac is relatively large, particularly since some
districts overlap and others were narrowly created for specific uses. For example, the
R-3U (Row House) district was designed just for row houses or townhouses containing
three or more dwelling units, and the RD-7 (Duplex Residential) district was specifically
created to accommodate duplexes. Accordingly, there may be opportunities for
consolidation and/or elimination of some districts.
Our findings and recommendations are discussed in the following subsections.
Clarify the Purpose of Each District Nearly half (11 of 24) of Tamarac’s zoning districts are residential districts; however,
none of these districts include clear purpose statements that clarify the intent of the
respective districts. This is in contrast to most nonresidential districts, which do have
purpose statements. For example, Sec. 24-326 clarifies that the B-1 district is “intended
primarily to meet the neighborhood shopping and service needs of surrounding
residential areas.”
13
Key Themes for Improvement Clear purpose and intent statements help provide a framework for future land use
decisions and a basis for determining whether the list of uses allowed in a district is
appropriate. Such statements should generally outline what the community expects in a
particular zoning district and help decision makers determine the appropriateness of
rezoning requests.
Pompano Beach, Florida, is an example of a community with a code that provides clear
intent statements for residential zoning districts. For example, the RS-1 district “is
established and intended to accommodate primarily single-family dwellings at low
densities on lots greater than 12,000 sf in area. The district also accommodates
accessory dwelling units and limited nonresidential uses usually found in urban singlefamily neighborhoods, generally as Special Exceptions.” This intent distinguishes this
district from others and summarizes how the district should be applied throughout the
town. Tamarac should develop similar statements for its residential zoning districts, and
also should review existing purpose statements for nonresidential districts for accuracy
and to ensure they still match the city’s planning goals.
Recommendation:
 Develop clear purpose and intent statements for each residential zoning district.
 Review existing purpose statements for nonresidential districts for accuracy and to
ensure they still match the city’s planning goals.
Consolidate Similar Zoning Districts As mentioned, nearly half of Tamarac’s zoning districts are residential districts, and the
distinctions between many of these districts are subtle (e.g., allowable uses and
dimensional standards are similar or identical). Typically, districts with such minor
distinctions should be considered for consolidation, which can lead to simplification and
streamlining of the overall code.
For example, the R-3 (low density multifamily), R-3U (row house), RM-5 (multifamily
residential), and RD-7 (duplex residential) have nearly identical setback standards, and
only slight variations in density, lot size, and floor area. Rather than maintaining four
multiple-family districts, many communities provide two — a limited or low-density
option and a general or higher-density option — and establish greater dimensional
differences between the two than Tamarac currently allows across four districts. Also,
it is not necessary to retain individual districts for duplexes and row houses, because
each is simply a type of multiple-family use.
Close attention will be paid to appropriate dimensional standards when districts are
consolidated. For example, the new code will correct the fact that currently, R-3 (low
density multifamily residential district) allows for a greater density (10 units/acre) than
RM-5 (multifamily residential district) which only allows five units/acre. Once new
residential purpose statements are drafted, it will be possible to make more specific
recommendations on potential residential consolidations.
Tamarac’s five business districts also present opportunities for consolidation. For
example, according to the current zoning map, only three properties are zoned B-5
(limited business district) and this district allows for all the same uses as the B-6
(business district), suggesting that consolidation is a viable option. Additionally, because
B-6 is much more restrictive in terms of allowed uses than the B-3 (general business
14
district), this is not clearly understood from the city’s current naming convention. Not
only will this ordinance rewrite consolidate similar zoning districts, but it will ensure
that a district’s title correctly portrays its intent.
Recommendations:
 Consider district consolidations, following clarification of district intent. For example,
consider consolidating the RM-5 (multifamily), RD-7 (duplex), R-3 (low density
multifamily), and R-3U (row house) districts; and
 Consolidate or consider converting B-5 (limited business) and B-6 (business) to
mixed-use business or office districts.
Increase the Mixed‐Use Zoning Options and Add Other New Districts Mixed-use development offers many advantages over traditional zoning that segregates
uses. It is designed to allow residential and nonresidential uses to be developed as part
of the same project or site, such as when condominiums are built over or next to smallscale retail stores or offices. The combination can allow people to live, work, and shop
in one location without necessarily getting into a car for every trip. Mixed-use
development thus can help lower vehicle miles traveled, reducing overall traffic
congestion and air pollution. While mixed-use development is not appropriate in all
areas of a community, it does have advantages that make it a good option for Tamarac
to consider closely in the code update – particularly as an option for some
redevelopment areas, like aging shopping centers.
If properly crafted, mixed-use districts are designed to allow for a broader combination
of uses by-right. Generally, this appeals to developers because they no longer have to
jump through multiple hoops (e.g., variances, special exceptions, planned development
approval, etc.) to get a creative combination of uses approved. While streamlining
current districts is important, Tamarac may need to consider creating additional mixeduse districts as part of this process, to complement the current MXD district. We
recommend the following new approaches:

Modify the current MXD district to transform it into a more
attractive zoning tool for Tamarac Village. The MXD district was
established for a specific purpose: to incentivize an innovative, place-making
development at Tamarac Village, one of the few remaining large undeveloped
areas of the city. Some district standards (in particular the two-acre minimum
lot size) are designed for a large master-planned concept and discourage smaller
projects. Other standards, such as the 10- or 15-foot minimum building
setbacks from street frontages, may discourage the type of pedestrian-friendly
development that usually is sought in contemporary mixed-use zoning districts.
Though currently unused, we recommend that the MXD district be retained.
To encourage the innovative, high-quality, mixed-use development it was
intended to create, we recommend that the MXD district be amended to not
require a minimum lot area or a minimum building setback from street
frontages. We also recommend that it be modified to require a process
(perhaps a conditional use permit or concept plan review) in which the city
could work with the applicant to provide increased flexibility in exchange for
better infill and redevelopment, more diverse housing options, and higherquality standards that ensure a more walkable built environment, at Tamarac
15
Key Themes for Improvement 

Village and in other areas of the city to which it may be applied. Consider
incentives (such as reserve/flex units or greater density) for project that meet
higher-quality standards.
Clarify that the current B-5 (limited business) and B-6 (business)
districts are actually mixed-use districts. These districts, discussed above
as good candidates for consolidation, should also be classified as mixed-use
business and/or office districts because both currently allow for the integration
of residential, business, office, and retail uses. (Note that this is conveyed in
“uses permitted” sections (24-388 and 24-408), but not the permitted uses
master list (Sec. 24-434)).
Consider creating a mixed-use neighborhood business district that
allows smaller-scale retail appropriate for residential areas. The name
of the B-1 (neighborhood business) district suggests that it is appropriate for
smaller-scale retail uses in a residential district. However, this district is
generally found on major commercial thoroughfares like Commercial Boulevard
and University Drive, alongside B-2 (planned community business) and B-3
(general business) districts, allowing big-box type retail development. As a
result, the distinction between the scale of commercial uses allowed across
these districts is unclear. Creating a new mixed-use neighborhood business
district (or recreating the existing B-1 district) that only allows small-scale,
neighborhood retail would clarify this distinction. Additionally, by placing more
emphasis on neighborhood business districts, the city could provide Tamarac
residents with desired placemaking opportunities within their own
neighborhoods.
Beyond mixed use, other new districts should be considered, including:


Consider creating a Business Park (BP) district.
The city should consider introducing a business park district (BP) to better
distinguish the business and office uses found in the city’s corporate park,
currently zoned LI-1, from the more impactful uses (e.g., recycling centers and
junk yards), generally allowed in a light industrial district.
Consider creating new Heavy Industrial district.
The city should consider introducing a new Heavy Industrial district that would
allow the most intense types of industrial activities, including outdoor
operations, primarily in the eastern part of the city for areas that have been
annexed. In combination with the existing Light Industrial district, which is
intended for less-intensive activities, conducted primarily indoors, the districts
would allow a wider range of industrial activities in Tamarac.
Recommendations:
 Modify the MXD district to better encourage infill and redevelopment;
 Consider establishing additional mixed-use districts as noted above; and
 Consider creating a Business Park (BP) district.
 Consider creating a new heavy industrial district.
Eliminate Obsolete Districts There are several Tamarac zoning districts that are not being used today, including the
R-5 (motel and hotel), A-5 (agricultural-excavation), and T-1 (trailer park) districts.
Generally, we recommend eliminating unused districts because the allowed uses can be
16
(and currently are in Tamarac) easily accommodated in other districts. (The exception
is the MXD mixed-use district, which should be maintained to serve a future purpose
and is discussed in a later subsection.)



R-5 can be eliminated. Motels and hotels are customarily permitted in business
and commercial districts, and often allowed in light industrial districts.
A-5 can be eliminated. Agricultural excavation should be a permitted use in any
agricultural district.
T-1 should be eliminated or modernized. This district will likely be eliminated
because “trailer park” is an obsolete term not found in modern zoning codes
and the district does not exist in the city.
Remove the Woodlands Overlay District The Woodlands Overlay District (Ch. 24, Art. X) should be removed because it adds an
unnecessary level of regulatory complexity to an area already governed by the code (R1B&C zoning districts) and the Woodlands Homeowner’s Association (HOA).
Generally, an overlay district is applied to a unique or sensitive area of a community,
such as an airport or a floodplain, where additional regulations are necessary to
supplement the base zoning district. Unlike Tamarac, most communities do not apply a
special overlay district to select residential areas to “preserve neighborhood character,
promote high quality and appearance, maintain property values, and protect the public
health, safety, and welfare.” (Sec. 24-800). Such protections are provided generally
throughout the community through the base zoning district and development standards.
The Woodlands Overlay District is unique to Tamarac because it charges the city with
the “implementation, interpretation, and enforcement” of a higher level of regulations
that go beyond the minimum standards typically imposed by cities on residential
neighborhoods, and that are typically enforced by an HOA. (Sec. 24-801). For example,
Sec. 24-807 requires the city to regulate the color of homes in the district by issuing
paint permits in accordance with the “Woodlands Color Palette” and enforcing
compliance with the color palette. To do so sets a precedent that would overburden
any city’s regulatory enforcement capacity and remove the ability of individual
homeowners or voluntary homeowners’ associations to make choices about such
detailed architectural features they want in their homes or in the neighborhoods they
represent. Additionally, because the overlay blurs the line between zoning code
regulations and HOA bylaws, we heard from many stakeholders that understanding and
interpreting the regulations is confusing for Woodlands residents, city staff, and
community decision makers.
We understand the historical reasons why the district was initially established (during a
lull in enforcement powers of the HOA), but those reasons no longer exist and we
recommend that the district not be carried forward into the new LDC. In lieu of the
overlay district, we recommend incorporating neighborhood protection standards,
applicable to all of Tamarac’s established neighborhoods, in the new LDC.
Recommendations:
 Eliminate the R-5 (motel and hotel) and A-5 (agricultural-excavation) districts;
 Consider eliminating or replacing the T-1 (trailer park) district; and
 Remove the Woodlands Overlay District.
17
Key Themes for Improvement Update the Use Classification System The identification and control of specific uses of land allowed within the community is
an important element of any successful zoning code. Even newer form-based codes,
which minimize the regulation of uses in exchange for stronger controls on building
form, still typically regulate uses to some extent. Tamarac’s Comprehensive Plan
provides allowable uses for each land use category identified on the city’s Future Land
Use Map. It is the role of the LDC to regulate these uses. To do this, the uses allowed
in the code must be consistent with those found in the plan. This update will ensure
proper alignment between the two.
Beyond ensuring plan compliance, other updates to the city’s use regulations should be
considered. For example, many stakeholders suggested revisiting and updating the
current lists of allowable uses to better address recent developments such as charter
schools, churches, and massage parlors. Another important component of this update is
to consolidate all allowable uses spread across various chapters.
The following subsections offer recommendations for addressing uses in Tamarac.
Develop a Consolidated Use Table Under the existing code, permitted, temporary, and accessory uses are spread
throughout multiple locations. Many uses are identified in Chapter 24 (Zoning).
However, certain uses subject to state and/or local government licensing requirements
(e.g., adult entertainment businesses, amusement center businesses, secondhand goods
dealers, and various temporary uses), are in Chapter 12’s license and business
regulations. Administering these uses across two chapters has led to inconsistent
provisions and interpretations. There is no tool for understanding all these uses in one
location. The current Sec. 24-434 (Permitted uses master list) begins to create a
consolidated table but covers only the business and mixed-use districts.
We recommend creating a new consolidated use table that includes all districts from all
chapters. This will allow for side-by-side district comparisons and help the consultant
team and the city evaluate whether or not the allowed uses are aligned with the intent
of each district. Accessory and temporary uses will also be consolidated in the table,
but they will be identified separately (i.e., grouped at the end of the table) to stress the
difference between primary and accessory uses. An example of a well-organized use
table from another community is provided below.
Recommendation:
Create a consolidated use table that includes all districts and uses found in various code
chapters (e.g., Chapters 12 and 24).
18
The example above from another jurisdiction shows a consolidated use table for each
district. Uses are categorized generally, and applicable use-specific standards are crossreferenced in the right-hand column.
19
Key Themes for Improvement Categorize and Define All Use Types As part of the creation of a master use table, we recommend categorizing individual
“use types” within larger categories and subcategories. For example, a broad category
of “residential uses” could include a subcategory of “household living,” which could
include specific use types such as “single-family detached dwelling.” Similarly, a broad
“commercial use” category could include a “retail” subcategory, which could include
specific use types such as “general retail, small” and “general retail, large.” This is a
more systematic and logical way to organize allowable uses than the current system,
which attempts to list any conceivable use. Standards in the ordinance can simply refer
to a category of uses and, by definition, include all of the uses within that category
rather than listing them individually.
This improved categorization will help to reduce the size of the use lists in Tamarac.
For example, the current business and commercial uses master list (Sec. 24-434),
includes a “retail, general” subcategory. However, the list goes on to identify numerous
specific uses including “antique shop,” “bakery,” “barber/beauty supply,” “bicycle sales
and repair,” “bookstore,” “consignment shop,” “drugstore or pharmacy, general,”
“florist,” etc. Because the land use impacts of a “antique shop” are typically no different
than a “bookstore” or “drugstore,” including such lengthy lists of allowable uses only
makes the development regulations longer, more difficult to understand, and requires
continual inclusion of uses not previously considered by the city. In this example, all the
general retail uses listed could simply be identified in the definition for “retail, general.”
Importantly, this update will ensure that each use listed in the table has a corresponding
and clear definition, plus examples of activities that meet that definition. Clear
definitions save applicants and decision makers time and allow for better decisions
because all parties can agree on what constitutes the use at hand. Clarifying use
definitions will go a long way in making outside developers and design professionals
more comfortable with the idea of submitting a development proposal in Tamarac.
Lastly, to help modernize the new LDC, this rewrite should eliminate obsolete uses
(e.g., pawnshops, which are prohibited under the current code, but still regulated in Ch.
12, Article XV) and also include new contemporary uses such as industrial flex space,
live/work units, accessory dwelling units, sustainable energy production, shared office
spaces, and uses associated with urban agriculture (e.g., community gardens, produce
stands, etc.).
Recommendations:
 Categorize use types within larger categories and subcategories;
 Update definitions to ensure clarity, legal consistency, and that all uses are defined;
 Remove obsolete uses; and
 Introduce new use types to reflect contemporary uses.
Revisit the Allowable Uses within Tamarac’s Zoning Districts The allowable uses within each district should be compatible with the intent of the
district. Much like the overlapping dimensional standards (e.g., height, setbacks), the
current lists of uses in each district are often so similar that it becomes difficult to
discern the districts from one another. For example, the uses in the B-5 and B-6
districts (identified as good candidates for consolidation above) are identical.
20
The code update and creation of a new master use table will allow for a district-bydistrict evaluation of the uses allowed within each district. We will, for example,
identify those districts most appropriate (or not) for some of the specific uses (e.g.,
charter schools, massage parlors) that the community would like to regulate further.
Additionally, this step will compare allowable uses in the LDC with those in the
Comprehensive Plan and align the two. For example, the Comprehensive Plan allows
for “special residential facilities” in various land use designations; however, the
existing code does not regulate these facilities. Similarly, any land use designation
updates made in the Comprehensive Plan will be reflected in the new LDC.
Like many cities with outdated codes, Tamarac uses a pyramid zoning structure, in
which a zoning district allows the permitted uses of a previously listed zoning district
through a cross reference. For example, the R-2 district allows “any use permitted in an
R-1B, R-1C, or R-2 district, subject to the limitations and requirements specified for
such use.” While simple in concept, pyramid zoning often allows lower-intensity uses to
be carried over in higher-intensity districts where they may not be appropriate. The
system is used in Tamarac just for residential districts. The pyramid zoning will be
removed as part of the detailed, district-by-district review of allowable uses.
Recommendations:
 Revise the allowable uses per zoning district to best reflect the intent of a district;
 Align the uses in the Comprehensive Plan with those in the LDC; and
 Eliminate the pyramid zoning structure as part of the residential district-by-district
consolidations.
Introduce More Use‐Specific Standards We also recommend introducing a broader range of use-specific standards in order to
mitigate the impacts of certain uses regardless of the underlying zoning district. Such
standards typically address how certain uses must operate, (e.g., size limitations, specific
parking requirements, separation requirements, additional buffering standards, etc.).
One benefit of this approach is consistency, so that such standards may be uniformly
applied rather than negotiated anew for each application.
Another benefit is that it may allow the use to be permitted by right, subject to
conformance with the standards, rather than requiring discretionary review. By making
more uses permitted, but ensuring compatibility with surrounding areas and mitigating
impacts through new objective standards, the development review process can be
streamlined and made more predictable. In the example use table above, the usespecific standards are identified by cross-references in the right-hand column. These
references confirm that every required use-specific standard is in one location, giving a
user confidence that there are no “hidden” use standards elsewhere in the code.
The current Tamarac ordinance already includes many of these standards scattered
throughout Articles 12 and 24, addressing uses such as day care, adult businesses, and
telecommunication facilities. There are many standards for uses subject to state
licensing requirements in Chapter 12. We recommend adding new use-specific
standards for other common uses that are currently being addressed through conditions
in the development approval process. Also, if certain permitted or special exception
uses are almost always being approved, they should be considered for conversion to byright uses, subject to use-specific standards. For example, under current Sec. 24-434,
“Day care, child, adult, or family” facilities are only permitted by “special exception” in
21
Key Themes for Improvement B-1, B-2, and B-3. Many communities allow this use by-right in business districts subject
to standards regulating the number of clients, hours of operation, etc. We recommend
that the city consider doing the same.
Tamarac recently adopted another example of use-specific standards (for schools) in
recent Ordinance 2014-10, which establishes “additional substantive criteria and
development standards for the review of uses that are subject to the special exception
process.” The ordinance reflects the city’s attempt to make its special exception
process more predictable, consistent, and efficient, in order maintain compatibility
amongst uses while also encouraging a good mix of uses. This ordinance is an important
step in the right direction and underscores the premise of use-specific standards. By
establishing objective standards for particular uses, the city can consistently promote
high-quality development without always requiring a special exception (i.e., the use can
be permitted by-right because it is subject to higher standards)—though recognizing that
some uses, such as schools, will always need higher-level review. In addition to
promoting consistency, these standards streamline the review process by giving the city
confidence to allow a use by-right, or by curtailing applicant negotiations over unclear
use standards.
Recommendations:
 Consolidate existing use-specific standards (e.g., those in Chapters 12 and 24) in the
new permitted use table;
 Codify Ordinance No. 2014-10 (establishing new development standards pertaining
to schools) as use-specific standards;
 Establish new use-specific standards to mitigate potential impacts associated with
certain use types and to allow more consistent, predictable, and efficient regulation
of uses; and
 Consider whether any uses could be considered “by-right” rather than subject to
the special exception process in certain zoning districts.
22
Improve the Development Quality Standards While Tamarac welcomes new development, citizens stressed their desire for highquality projects that will enhance the character of the community. The Comprehensive
Plan addresses the quality of development in all land use contexts (see sample policy
language from the plan at right). The current code has relatively few standards
regarding development quality, apart from basic controls addressing site layout issues
such as parking and landscaping. The new code should raise the bar by setting objective
minimum standards for the entire community, yet not make code-based development
cost-prohibitive. Standards should address both site design—how buildings relate to
their site and surrounding development—and building design. Improved development
standards can contribute to the vitality of the city’s economy, without being overly
burdensome on Tamarac’s residents and business owners.
The recently completed Walmart Neighborhood Market and the planned Mural Plaza
development are two examples of higher-quality site and building design that will help
Tamarac compete for sales tax with surrounding communities. Moving forward,
Tamarac can build on these and other recent and current projects to create a stronger
LDC that sets a new model for high-quality development.
Generally, for all types of development standards, the city should provide greater
certainty in the code by avoiding the use of purely subjective language, disconnected
from any measurable criteria. For example, current standards for the Planned
Apartment District require the use of landscaping to “enhance architecture and bring
harmony, balance and interest to a site.” Staff, decision makers, developers, and the
community could all interpret those terms differently. This provision could be made
enforceable by referring to standards that might create harmony (e.g., trees and shrubs
planted alongside blank walls). Site and building design issues should be addressed
through objective standards whenever possible, with subjective language only playing a
secondary role. Objective standards offer a win-win opportunity for both the
community and the developer. Clearly stating the city’s standards up-front can save
time and money for both the city and the owner, as the need for lengthy negotiation on
those items is removed.
It also will be important to achieve a balance between ensuring objectivity while also
allowing for the flexibility needed to meet unusual circumstances and encourage
creativity. To strike this balance, we recommend using menus of alternatives where
possible and allowing the property owner options in how compliance with the standards
is achieved, rather than prescribing a one-size-fits-all approach. Incentives, menus of
options, and similar tools can raise the bar while still allowing room for flexibility and
creativity.
In addition to following these general approaches to regulating development quality, we
have identified several substantive areas where revisions or additions to current
standards are recommended.
Focus on Infill and Redevelopment Because most new development opportunity in Tamarac will be in the form of infill or
redevelopment, the standards in the new LDC must be calibrated to encourage and
achieve high-quality reinvestment on these important sites. Infill and redevelopment
parcels often present specific challenges ranging from environmental cleanup (e.g., a
23
“The City will continue to
promote “quality
development” in all land
use categories by the
establishment and
implementation of design
criteria and development
standards in the Land
Development Code (LDC)
which promote the highest
standards of urban
development and
community aesthetics.”
Policy1.5, Tamarac
Comprehensive Plan
Key Themes for Improvement former gas station site) to compatibility with surrounding, built-up neighborhoods.
Although site-specific challenges cannot be eliminated altogether, well-drafted
regulations need not add an unnecessary layer of complexity to these context-sensitive
areas.
For redevelopment parcels in particular, many existing development standards were
adopted after the original development of a property. Often, compliance with the more
recent requirements acts as a deterrent to redevelopment due to a lack of physical land
area or financial burdens. More extensive stormwater and detention requirements,
mandated by the state, are one example of such a deterrent. Vacant or underutilized
lots can be overlooked when a quick read of the development regulations renders the
investment infeasible. Tamarac must balance more aggressive and more flexible
standards on these lots. This can be done by capitalizing on existing infrastructure, an
improving public transportation system, and the stable neighborhoods throughout the
city. Examples of areas where infill and redevelopment should be addressed in the new
regulations include:



Dimensional requirements. Setbacks, heights, minimum lot areas, and
minimum open space can diminish the possibility for redevelopment or infill on a
vacant lot. For example, a half-acre lot in the B-2 or B-3 districts will be
immediately overlooked for redevelopment since the minimum lot size is one
acre.
Development standards. For particularly challenging infill and
redevelopment lots, every inch of the site matters. Once required landscaping,
parking, and loading standards have been met, many infill sites prevent a project
from “penciling out” financially. One way to help make a development more
financially feasible is to reduce minimum parking requirements, where possible,
without harm to surrounding neighborhoods. For example, most communities
find that 1 space/400 square feet (sf) of gross floor area (gfa) is adequate to
accommodate general office uses, including financial institutions. Currently,
Tamarac requires either 1 space/200 or 300 sf of gfa.
Permitted uses. Some communities have integrated vacant property
development in their allowable use tables by allowing additional uses in some
districts if a property has been vacant for a defined period of time. A broader
list of allowable uses (discussed previously) will also help Tamarac to encourage
infill and redevelopment.
Recommendations:
 Review dimensional standards and development standards under a lens of
accommodating infill and redevelopment projects;
 Consider allowing additional uses on properties that have remained vacant for a predetermined period of time.
Update Site Design Standards Site design standards address issues related to the physical placement and organization
of buildings on a site. Standards typically address landscaping, stormwater management,
parking lot layout, and building location, among other issues.
24
Incorporate Sustainability Measures Tamarac is a Florida Green Local Government. This shows the city’s dedication to
improving the environment through conservation efforts and using community
resources wisely to ensure Tamarac is a sustainable community for years to come. To
continue along this sustainable path, a variety of new provisions can be incorporated
into the new LDC. Many of these provisions will be reflected in updated landscaping,
low-impact development, and energy-efficient lighting requirements.
Florida‐Friendly Landscaping One of the biggest water quality issues facing the State of Florida is excessive nutrient
loading to surface and ground water. To encourage all communities to address this
issue, the state prepared a model ordinance containing Florida-friendly landscaping
principles that local governments should consider adopting in their land development
regulations. The new LDC should carry forward those elements of the model
ordinance related to land development (e.g., site planning and design, soil requirements,
appropriate plant selection, location, and arrangement, etc.). Other elements of the
model ordinance address issues typically outside the scope of an LDC, such as
management requirements (e.g., yard waste management, composting and use of
mulches; fertilizer management; pesticide management; and landscape and irrigation
maintenance). These provisions should be included in a property management code.
Stormwater Management and Low‐Impact Development Low-impact development (LID) is a natural approach to stormwater management and
water conservation. Because the main intent of the Florida-friendly model ordinance is
to prevent stormwater pollution, many low-impact development principles and best
management practices will be incorporated in the new LDC by way of the model
ordinance. For example, LID practices encourage more pervious surfaces, to allow for
more functional and aesthetically pleasing site drainage, and Sec. 9.A.3 of the model
ordinance provides, “The site plan shall consider natural drainage features to minimize
runoff. The use of pervious surfaces and areas is preferred, therefore impervious
surfaces and materials within the landscaped area shall be limited to borders, sidewalks,
step stones, and other similar materials, and shall not exceed, a certain percentage of
the landscaped area.”
Other LID principles that will be incorporated to implement the Florida-friendly
ordinance and promote water conservation include:




Limitations on the percentage of turf areas (a high-water use);
Promotion of swales and rain gardens;
Encouraging the use of drought-tolerant species; and
Allowing and encouraging xeriscaping
In addition to incorporating the Florida-friendly ordinance, depending on timing, the
drainage standards in existing Chapter 10 should be updated to reflect the city’s new
stormwater master plan (update is currently in process) and to reflect any new
stormwater requirements necessary to obtain a National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permit. We also will coordinate with Broward County to
incorporate their new stormwater management standards, being drafted at the same
time as Tamarac’s new LDC.
25
Key Themes for Improvement Energy‐Efficient Lighting Tamarac’s existing standards regulate street lighting (Sec. 10-191) and parking lot lighting
(Sec. 24-579) but not exterior lighting generally. These existing standards will be
updated and new exterior standards will be incorporated with a greater focus on energy
efficiency (e.g., LED bulbs). Aside from requiring energy-efficient fixtures, an increasing
number of cities are requiring businesses to turn off their signage (not simply parking lot
lights) at night, when the business is closed, to reduce energy consumption. We
recommend including a similar provision in the new LDC. We will also address the
city’s interest in incorporating community protection through environmental design
(CPTED) principles in the revised lighting standards by promoting more uniform lighting,
rather than “hot spots” of light, which cast adjacent areas into deeper shadows.
Although less of a sustainability update and more of a neighborhood protection update,
we also suggest that the existing lighting standards provide for better glare protection.
Sec. 24-579(b) requires parking lot lighting “to be either shaded or screened to limit spillover
of lighting onto adjacent properties,” but even downcast and shielded lighting creates a
glare when mounted too high. To better reduce lighting spillover, height limits for
exterior light poles and fixtures will be suggested.
Renewable Energy The intent of Sec. 24-615 (Rooftop photovoltaic solar systems), in part, is to “remove
barriers to the installation of alternative energy systems.” To further this intent, the city
should consider offering a solar orientation density bonus for developments situated
within fifteen degrees of true-east west. This increases potential solar gain for the
development and strengthens the appeal for installing solar panels. In addition to
encouraging solar panels, the city should consider including a similar renewables
section to promote the use of wind energy conversion equipment.
Recommendations:
 Enhance landscaping, drainage, and stormwater standards by incorporating lowimpact development standards and other water conservation measures found in the
Florida-friendly landscape model ordinance;
 Align landscaping, drainage, and stormwater standards with the city’s updated
stormwater master plan and Broward County’s updated regulations (will be done to
the greatest extent practicable since these update projects are concurrent with the
LDC rewrite);
 Update stormwater and drainage provisions to reflect NPDES permitting
requirements;
 Revise lighting standards to cover all exterior lighting and incorporate energy efficient
lighting standards;
 Provide height requirements for exterior pole and fixture lights to minimize glare;
 Incorporate CPTED principles into lighting standards;
 Encourage solar-oriented site designs using density bonuses; and
 Promote wind energy conversion equipment.
Improve Parking, Access, and Circulation Standards Parking Large expanses of empty parking lots are a common sight in Tamarac because the
existing code requires high levels of parking and many of the buildings subject to the
26
current parking requirements stand vacant. This project provides an opportunity to
strike a better balance between providing enough parking and too much parking.
Some of the minimum off-street parking requirements (Sec. 24-581) are stricter
than the industry standards. These standards should be lowered to the greatest
extent possible, as recommended by national standards, without causing harm to
surrounding neighborhoods. The city may also wish to consider applying maximum
parking requirements to prevent over-parking in the future. Parking maximums
can be implemented in a variety of ways:



Apply both minimum and maximum parking requirements for each use in
the use table,
Apply only parking maximums for each use in the use table and eliminate
minimum parking requirements, and/or
Develop a maximum percentage threshold above the minimum parking
requirements that any development can provide.
The third approach is the most common, and maximums are typically applied to
nonresidential uses (especially commercial), and to specific areas (such as Tamarac
Village) where the community does not want too much land devoted to parking.
Tamarac staff members have indicated that they agree with this approach.
More flexible parking regulations capable of promoting innovative infill and
redevelopment should also be considered. For example, currently only the MXD
district allows reduced parking when two or more uses share the same parking area, but
the concept should be allowed in other districts. The code also may allow reduced onsite parking if the property is located near a bus line, or on-street parking is provided in
front of the property within a minimum distance.
Additionally, to encourage lively, high-quality designs in the MXD district and other
pedestrian-oriented commercial areas, the city should either restrict parking lots in
front of buildings, or provide incentives (e.g., more density, reduced parking
requirements, reduced permitting fees) to encourage developers to locate parking lots
behind or to the side of buildings.
Loading The city’s loading requirements should also be updated. Loading and delivery practices
have changed, especially for smaller storefronts and services. Today, deliveries
frequently occur several times throughout the day, on the street, with smaller trucks or
vans. To accommodate this shift, the new LDC will clarify that businesses with fewer
than 5,000 square feet of gross floor area are exempt from off-street loading
requirements (appears to be the attempt of Sec. 24-582(a)(1)(a)). The current loading
requirements in Sec. 24-582, which generally require one loading space for every 10,000
square feet of gross floor area will also be reduced (by approximately half) because the
existing requirements are high and result in unnecessary loading areas. Sites that have
no loading spaces meeting code requirements typically are required to come into
compliance upon major redevelopment.
Access and Circulation As in many communities, Tamarac residents are sensitive to traffic and want to minimize
any congestion or safety issues that may result from new development. To ensure that
the city is conducting a thorough review of the traffic impacts associated with a
27
Key Themes for Improvement proposed site, we suggest including a more standardized approach to addressing traffic
impacts. For example, developments over a certain size could be required to include a
traffic impact study as part of the proposed development application. The city is
requiring some traffic studies now, but we understand they have been inconsistently
applied and not always accepted by the community.
Roadway design (e.g., lane width and stacking requirements), intersection, and access
spacing are technical requirements set by engineering design standards. However, this
code update project provides an opportunity for the city’s planning, engineering, and fire
departments to assess the adequacy of those standards and update them accordingly to
ensure consistency with the new code.
Recommendations:
 Reduce minimum parking requirements for some developments or use types;
 Consider parking maximums for some developments or use types;
 Allow reduced parking requirements in certain situations (e.g., shared parking, valet
parking, proximity to public transportation, availability of on-street parking; proximity
to other off-street parking);
 Require or encourage parking lots to be located behind or to the side of buildings in
pedestrian-oriented districts;
 Confirm exemption of buildings under 5,000 sf of gfa from loading requirements;
 Reduce loading requirements.
Upgrade the Building Design Standards “Land Development
Code revisions should
address criteria to be
used in reviews for
determining whether
there is compatibility
among adjacent land
uses.”
Policy1.4, Tamarac
Comprehensive Plan
Tamarac is interested in refining and improving its building design standards in order to
improve the general aesthetic character of new development and create attractive
destinations within the community. In part, higher quality development can help set
Tamarac apart from its neighbors, allowing a person to distinguish where Tamarac starts
or stops and the next community begins.
Because Tamarac has many established neighborhoods and commercial areas poised for
redevelopment, it is important to develop standards that include neighborhood
protection provisions and represent the desires of the community well into the future.
The main focus of this section are building design standards. However, because of the
overlap between building design and site design in the public realm, additional site design
recommendations are made.
Develop New Nonresidential Design Standards As mentioned, the new Walmart Neighborhood Market provides a good example of a
redevelopment that physically and visually enhances an existing and aging shopping plaza
at a prominent city intersection. Good neighborhood commercial design principles
exhibited by this project include:
A pedestrian walkway linking the building entrance to the sidewalk on McNab
Road;
 A pedestrian zone that visually enhances and buffers the building façade;
 Architectural banding along the sides of the building to add variety to the
building façade;
 Parapets and projections to better articulate the roofline;

28



A entryway façade and southern elevation covered with “Spanish tile” roofing to
accentuate the entrance and conceal the pharmacy drive-through;
New, wide landscaped parking islands; and
Energy efficient building construction.
Although subject to Broward County’s C-1 zoning district (based on past litigation), the
applicant worked with the city to also apply Tamarac’s B-3 (General Business) district
regulations. Based on our review of the B-3 zoning district, none of the design features
identified above are required under the district’s property development (Sec. 24368)(covering dimensional standards) or special regulations (24-369)(addressing lighting,
outdoor storage, and off-street parking and loading). Nor does the County’s C-1
district require these design elements. Rather, the inclusion of these design features
appears to have been voluntary, suggesting that the community and the applicant may
have had to engage in design negotiation to agree on site and building designs
appropriate for Tamarac.
Under the current code, none of the city’s nonresidential districts provide design
standards addressing factors that influence the function and appearance of the public
realm (i.e., the visual and physical relationship between the building and the adjacent
streets and open spaces), such as façade articulation, street-facing doors and windows,
streetscape, and pedestrian connectivity, except the MXD district. For example, Sec.
24-540 (MXD, Special Regulations) provides building design standards for “bulk and
massing,” “functionality,” “architecture” as well as “streetscape” design standards.
Design standards that will promote the design elements exhibited by the new Walmart
Neighborhood Market and required under the existing MXD district should be applied
more broadly across all nonresidential zoning districts to require high-quality infill and
redevelopment in Tamarac. These standards will send a clearer message to the
development community about the type and form of development that the city wishes
to build, without engaging in lengthy discussions and negotiations.
Reconsider Application of Residential Design Standards Tamarac has a large number of well-established residential neighborhoods, almost all of
which are subject to HOA bylaws. As identified above, a major change in the new LDC
will be the removal of the Woodlands Overlay District (Ch. 24, Art. X), which blurs the
lines between local government and HOA authority over a residential subdivision.
Unlike in nonresidential districts (explored above), and multifamily residential districts
(discussed below), a local government does not typically regulate building design
aesthetics of single-family homes. For this reason, we recommend removal of the
Woodlands Overlay District, and we do not intend to carry forward specific singlefamily building design and maintenance requirements (e.g., Sec. 24-807 color palette
requirements) more broadly in new residential design standards.
However, the new LDC should expand the design standards for multi-family uses more
broadly. For example, site design and performance standards for the city’s planned
apartment districts, RM-10 (Sec. 24-229) and R-4A (Sec. 24-250) currently regulate
“building length,” “building separation,” and “building and streetscape design” (i.e.,
building design as it relates to the streetscape). These standards should be revised to be
more objective and applied more broadly to all multi-family buildings in the new LDC.
The site design standards contained in this section, including provisions regulating
“vehicular, pedestrian, and bicycle circulation,” “open space and recreational
29
Accompanying design
standards with graphics helps
the community depict the
level of quality desired.
Design standards can be
illustrated using drawing
software such as SketchUp
(above), photographic
examples, or simple handdrawn diagrams (below).
Key Themes for Improvement opportunities,” “buffer treatment,” and “safety through design” will also be carried
forward more generally in multi-family use design and residential neighborhood
protection standards.
Design Standards v. Design Guidelines Design standards – requirements that MUST be complied with – have been the focus of
the discussion throughout this section. In place of or supplemental to mandatory design
standards, many communities also provide building and site design guidelines –
recommended/encourage design elements – to further improve the overall aesthetic
character and quality of design in their community. As part of this update, we will work
with the city to determine whether design standards, guidelines, or a combination of the
two is best to achieve the community’s development goals. So far, staff has indicated
generally that they expect a hybrid approach of both standards and guidelines may work
best for Tamarac, though specific details will be discussed during the actual code
drafting.
Also, as noted later in the section on procedures, we recommend including
authorization in the code to allow the city to recover costs of architectural review by
outside professionals on major projects.
Recommendations:
 Develop broadly applicable nonresidential design standards based on the good
design features included in the new Walmart Neighborhood Market and the
existing design standards required under the current MXD district;
 Do not carry-forward the single-family building design standards contained in the
Woodlands Overlay District;
 Update and apply the multi-family design standards required under the current RM10 and R-4a zoning districts to multi-family districts and uses more broadly;
 Generally, consider whether design standards (mandatory), guidelines (aspirational),
or a combination of the two is most appropriate for Tamarac.
30
Streamline the Development Review Procedures Generally, development review procedures should strike a good balance between the
need for the careful analysis and public review of applications and the need for
regulatory efficiency. Unduly cumbersome policies can discourage the type of
development that the city wants to see happen. Ideally, well-written procedures should
be easy to understand and should:
Promote decisions that are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan;
Provide parties potentially affected by a development proposal adequate notice
of the proposal and a meaningful opportunity to provide input on it;
 Provide certainty about the steps involved in the review process; and
 Provide consistent and unbiased decisions.
Some of the challenges involved with the current Tamarac procedures result from the
fact that they are scattered across multiple chapters; the consolidation discussed earlier
should address that issue. But there are other opportunities for improvement. For
example, some developers said development review in Tamarac requires too much time
and has too much uncertainty. Some residents indicated that opportunities to learn
about and provide input about a development proposal come too late, when changes
are not likely to be easily accommodated.


The sections below discuss several ways to develop streamlined and efficient review
procedures for Tamarac.
Clarify the Decision‐Making Responsibilities Development codes should clearly outline the development review process, making it
easy for staff, local elected and appointed officials, the development community, and the
general public to know exactly what is required for approval of development
applications. Because of the organization issues discussed earlier, it is difficult for code
users in Tamarac to find all the procedures applicable to a particular development
proposal. Such provisions are scattered among the various codes making up the City’s
development regulations, and even provisions for a single review procedure are
scattered within a particular chapter. The recommended reorganization and
consolidation of code provisions will do much to make it easier to navigate and
understand the code’s review procedures. Beyond that reorganization, we recommend
creation of a summary table of all review procedures that clearly identifies every
procedure in the new LDC and the respective roles of the City Commission, Planning
Board, and staff in each procedure.
Recommendation:
Include a summary table of development review procedures.
Establish Common Review Procedures Development regulations typically call for a number of different permits and approvals.
There are some procedural steps that are common to all, or a substantial number, of
the application types—e.g., application submittal, application acceptance as complete,
staff review, advisory board review, decision-making board review, and public hearing
notice requirements.
31
Key Themes for Improvement In Tamarac’s regulations, these basic procedural steps are found in a number of review
procedures. Because they were often written at different times and with specific issues
in mind, there is a lot of inconsistency in how the apparently same step or requirement
is addressed in the various procedures. Some procedures spell out a review step or
requirement in great detail, while others merely mention the step or requirement (or
only imply it), leaving it up to the applicant, interested parties, other code users, and
City staff to guess about whether and how it applies to a particular review procedure.
Such an arrangement also results in unnecessary duplication of provisions addressing the
same or similar steps and requirements. Such duplication also burdens the City with the
need to be very careful that when amending a step or requirement in one review
procedure, it must consider making the same amendment to the same step or
requirement in other review procedures; otherwise, the review procedures will end up
inconsistent again.
Rather than address basic procedural steps and requirements in each application review
procedure, modern development codes frequently consolidate them into a single
section of standard review procedures. Doing so helps code users better understand
the City’s basic review procedural steps and requirements, avoids unnecessary
duplication of provisions, ensures consistent application of generally applicable
procedural steps and requirements, and eliminates the need to amend multiple sections
of the development regulations if a standard procedural provision is revised.
Standard review procedures generally address the following procedural steps and
requirements:

Common review
procedures can be
illustrated using a
flowchart similar to the
graphic above to indicate
which procedures are
applicable for different
types of development
applications.


Pre-application staff conference—a meeting of a prospective applicant with
City staff that provides an opportunity for the prospective applicant to learn
about or confirm application requirements and to present conceptual
development plans for informal preliminary staff input regarding potential code
compliance issues (and suggestions on how best to resolve such issues)
Pre-application neighborhood meeting—a meeting at which prospective
applicants for major development proposals present conceptual development
plans to the owners and residents/occupants of properties surrounding
proposed development site
Application submittal and acceptance
o
o

Staff review and action
o
o
o
o
o
o

Distribution of the application to City staff and outside agencies for review and
comment as to its compliance with applicable regulations
Collection, consolidation, and finalization of staff review comments
Transmittal of staff review comments to the applicant with an invitation to
revise the application to address them
Applicant preparation and submittal of a revised application
Acceptance and staff review of and comments on the revised application
Either a final decision by staff or a staff report and recommendation to forward
to an advisory board and/or decision-making board
Public hearing scheduling and notice
o
32
Who may sign and submit the particular type of application
Application submittal and staff review of the application to determine whether
it is complete—i.e., contains all prescribed plans and information necessary to
make an adequately informed decision about the proposal’s compliance with
applicable development regulations—and thus can be accepted for review
Scheduling of any required public hearing on the application by an advisory
board and/or decision-making board
o

Advisory board review and action
o
o


Review of (and hearing on) the application
Either a final decision by the board or a recommendation to forward to a
decision-making board
Decision-making review and action
o
o

The types (published, posted, mailed), content, and timing of hearing notices
required for the various types of application
Review of (and hearing on) the application
A final decision of approval, approval with conditions, or denial
Public hearing proceedings—how public hearings are conducted (e.g., order
of speakers, limitations on speakers) and special requirements for quasi-judicial
hearings (e.g., sworn testimony, opportunity for cross-examination)
Post-decision actions and limitations
o
o
o
o
Notice of the final decision to the applicant (and other interested parties)
Opportunity for the applicant and affected parties to appeal the final decision to
an appeal board or the courts
Approval expiration—i.e., how long an application approval is valid as
authorization to start development or apply for subsequent development
permits and approvals, and how that time period might be extended
Possible limitations on the submittal of applications for the same or similar
development proposal (to avoid attempts to wear down the City until the
proposal is approved)
Recommendations:
 Include formalized standard review procedures for the procedural steps and
requirements described above; and
 Follow the standard review procedures with application-specific review procedures
that reference applicable standard procedures and note any variations and additions
particular to that type of application.
Consider Delegating Some Decisions Down to the Planning Board or Staff Many current development applications in Tamarac requiring only technical review of
development elements or involving only small-scale development are subject to review
by the Planning Board or City Commission. For example, final plats are subject to staff
review and recommendation, Planning Board review and recommendation, and City
Commission review and decision—even though a final plat merely provides recordable
documentation of a subdivision whose primary attributes (layout, density, infrastructure
design and impacts) were already approved as part of an earlier preliminary plat review.
Similarly, although some site plan applications are subject to staff approval, the
thresholds triggering Planning Board review are relatively low (e.g., 5,000 square or new
floor area, or a 10% increase in added floor area).
Because of these low thresholds, many development proposals are subject to
unnecessarily long development reviews at the expense of the applicant, to whom time
equals money. Also, the Planning Board and City Commission are unnecessarily
burdened with technical reviews, leaving them less time to address more substantial city
issues. There is significant room to delegate addition approval authority to the City’s
professional staff, or from the City Commission to the Planning Board.
The current Tamarac approach stands in contrast to most jurisdictions in Florida and
around the country, which delegate decisions down to staff or the Planning Commission
33
Key Themes for Improvement because it makes the development review process faster, makes efficient use of elected
and appointed bodies’ time, and typically saves money and other staff resources
associated with preparing and conducting public hearings (preparing staff reports, mailing
notices, overtime hours, etc.).
Consider Shifting Some Decision‐Making Down to Staff or Planning Board We recommend the following steps to shift some decision-making down for efficiency:






Expand the scale and types of development treated as minor development
subject to site plan approval by City staff—e.g., have staff approve site plans for
developments involving by-right uses and proposing less than 15,000 square feet
or new or additional floor area and less than 20,000 square feet of land
disturbance.
Allow the Planning Board (instead of the City Commission) to decide site plan
approval applications fir major development (i.e., developments not subject to
staff approval). Alternatively, split major development site plan applications in
two, with those types of major development most likely to raise communitywide concerns or be controversial to continue to be subject to City
Commission approval and all others subject to Planning Board approval.
Consolidate subdivision plat reviews (sketch plat, overall plan, preliminary plat,
final plat, and delegation requests) into a single one-step plat review procedure
decided by staff, and allow it to occur concurrently with site plan review and
improvements permit review (where infrastructure improvements are
involved)—recognizing that the city is largely built out, with little call for other
than small, simple subdivisions and replats.
Allow the Planning Board (instead of the City Commission) to decide
applications for approval of a special exception—to reduce burdens on the City
Commission and reflect the fact that the Planning Board already is responsible
for deciding other quasi-judicial applications (variances and appeals).
Allow the Planning Board or staff (instead of the City Commission) to decide
applications for variances from sign regulations—to reflect the fact that the
Planning Board already is responsible for deciding applications for all other types
of variance.
Clarify the staff-level decisions by replacing references to multiple City positions
with references to the City Manager, and clarify that such references also
include City employees designated by the City Manager as responsible for
certain tasks—to simplify procedures and eliminate conflicts and provide the
City Manager flexibility to adapt appointed designees to changing conditions and
personnel.
Establish an Administrative Adjustment Procedure Many communities use an administrative adjustment procedure to authorize staff to
approve minor deviations from certain dimensional or development standards (such as
those listed below) based on specific criteria. The procedure is intended to provide
relief where strict application of the standards would otherwise create unnecessary
difficulties. Such a procedure could specifically identify standards that are commonly
adjusted in Tamarac. The extent of the deviation is typically limited to 5 or 10%;
however, greater percentages could be considered for areas where redevelopment is
encouraged or additional flexibility is desired. Applications seeking flexibility beyond
34
those allowed by this administrative adjustment process would typically require a
variance (due to hardship) or a rezoning. Criteria for administrative adjustments should
require that the deviation not undermine the intent of the underlying regulation, and
that the deviation would not impose greater impacts on adjacent properties than would
through strict compliance. Examples of standards that are more frequently subject to
administrative adjustments include:







Minimum lot width and minimum lot coverage
Minimum setbacks
Maximum building, lighting, fence, or screening height
Minimum required number of parking spaces
Minimum planting rate
Minimum perimeter landscaping area width
Maximum lighting levels
Recommendations:
 Expand the scale and types of development treated as minor development subject to
site plan approval by City staff.
 Allow the Planning Board (instead of the City Commission) to decide site plan
approval applications for major development. Alternatively, split major development
site plan applications in two as noted above.
 Consolidate subdivision plat reviews (sketch plat, overall plan, preliminary plat, final
plat, and delegation requests) into a single one-step plat review procedure.
 Allow the Planning Board (instead of the City Commission) to decide applications for
approval of a special exception and variances from sign regulations.
 Clarify the staff-level decisions by replacing references to multiple City positions with
references to the City Manager.
 Establish an administrative adjustment procedure for minor deviations from code
requirements.
Consider Requiring Early Neighborhood Notice and Meeting for Major Developments As noted above, pre-application neighborhood meetings are recommended as part of
the LDC’s set of standard review procedures—and to be required prior to submittal of
applications for major development.
Neighborhood meetings are used by an increasing number of local governments as a
means by which a prospective development applicant informs the owners and residents
or occupants of properties near the proposed development site about the proposed
development, hears their concerns, and hopefully revises development plans to resolve
many of those concerns. Such meetings provide an informal opportunity for the
prospective applicant and neighbors to have an honest, good faith, and meaningful
discussion of concerns about the proposed development before the positions of the
applicant and neighbors are hardened—as they so often are by the time an application
gets to a public hearing. Even if opposition to the development continues after the
neighborhood meeting, the relevant issues tend to be identified early and the applicant’s
and opponents’ positions during subsequent review meetings and hearings tend to be
more focused on those issues—and thus helping to streamline the review and decisionmaking process.
35
Key Themes for Improvement Most communities require neighborhood meetings only for major development
applications and make them optional for all other applications. Some communities allow
the planning director to determine whether the application triggers a required
neighborhood meeting based on whether the development proposed is anticipated to
generate a certain level of impact on adjacent lands, roads, or public facilities.
Some communities require neighborhood meetings to be held before the development
application is submitted. Others require them to be held after application submittal, but
before the application goes to a board for review. We believe the most appropriate
time to conduct a neighborhood meeting is before the application is submitted. At this
time, the prospective applicant is less likely to have committed time and money to
preparation of detailed or final plans and thus is less likely to be tied to a particular
development design. Also, the neighbors learn of the development proposal at a time
when a number of concerns can be resolved before formal proceedings begin.
For discussion purposes, we recommend that the new Tamarac LDC require a
neighborhood meeting for the following major development applications:
 Site-specific rezonings
 Special exceptions
 Major site plan approval
Further, we recommend that the standard review procedures require neighborhood
meetings to be conducted according to the following requirements:




The prospective applicant must provide written notification of the meeting to
surrounding property owners and affected neighborhood organizations a
reasonable period of time before the meeting;
The meeting must be held at a location convenient to the affected neighborhood
or properties;
At the meeting, the prospective applicant must explain the development
proposal, provide neighbors an opportunity to ask questions and voice
concerns, and make an good faith effort to resolve or otherwise address those
concerns; and
The prospective applicant must prepare a written summary of the meeting and
include it with the application (providing neighbors an opportunity to review
and add their comments to the summary).
Recommendation:
Draft a new neighborhood meeting requirement that meets the parameters outlined in the
text above.
Modify, Add, and Clarify Specific Development Review Procedures A number of development review procedures are split up into different sections of the
current land development regulations, are duplicative of other review procedures, or
are just unclear. This makes those procedures difficult for code users to understand and
administer. For example: variance review procedures are mixed in among appeal
procedures; the improvements permit purpose and procedural provisions largely mirror
those for final engineering plans; there is no defined permit or procedure addressing
temporary approvals; and, although review provisions for newsrack certificates of
compliance refer to demonstration of public need, review criteria for such certificates
do not address public need.
36
Recommendations:
 Expand and fill out the variance review procedure;
 Authorize recovery of costs for application review by external consultants.
 Consolidate procedures for improvement permits and final engineering plans;
 Add a temporary use procedure to accommodate miscellaneous temporary
development approvals such as for emergency housing units and use of public rightsof-way; and
 Modify the newsrack certificate of compliance procedure to clarify applicable review
criteria, especially relating to public need.
37
Key Themes for Improvement Prepare Targeted Comprehensive Plan Updates An important project goal is to examine the city’s current Comprehensive Plan and
recommend targeted updates to the plan’s goals, objectives, and policies. Unlike the
LDC rewrite, which is a comprehensive update, targeted amendments will be made to
the Comprehensive Plan to reflect new city priorities (e.g., redevelopment strategies
proposed in the recent Commercial Arterial Redevelopment Study (Redevelopment
Study)) and ensure consistency with the new LDC. This consistency is important
because the Comprehensive Plan is the main policy document guiding future growth and
development in Tamarac and the LDC includes the regulatory tools to implement that
desired development.
Accordingly, these targeted updates will focus on:
Increasing flexibility and incentives for commercial and mixed use
redevelopment along the city’s roadway corridors;
 Strengthening existing neighborhood protection and quality-of-life policies; and
 Updating the Future Land Use Plan (FLUM), a critical component of the Plan, to
address possible land use amendments to encourage mixed-use and other
innovative types of urban development identified in the Redevelopment Study.
Based on the project goal discussed above and stakeholder involvement to-date, the
proposed targeted updates are summarized below.

Update Non‐Residential Land Use Categories This section will assess the commercial, mixed use, office and industrial land use
categories, and suggest options for updating and ensuring they are consistent with the
City’s goals for this project. The existing categories are defined in the Future Land Use
Element of the Comprehensive Plan and applied on the adopted Future Land Use Map
(FLUM) presented in Figure 1.
Commercial Land Use The City’s Future Land Use Element and Map has a single commercial land use category
which also permits residential use. The specific uses allowed are as follows:
 Retail, office and business
 Wholesale storage
 Hotels and motels
 Recreation
 Community facilities
 Public utilities
 Special residential facilities
 Transportation and communication facilities
 Residential mixed use.
The only development standard prescribed in the Commercial category is a maximum
lot coverage of 35%. This category has been in place for over 20+ years with little or no
change. Commercially-designated parcels are distributed along the City’s major and
minor roadway corridors as shown in Figure 1. The “residential mixed use’ listed above
is not defined as to the proportion and/or density of residential use allowed on
commercial parcels which should be addressed in this update.
38
Figure 1: Tamarac Future Land Use Map Local Activity Center The Comprehensive Plan also provides for a ‘Local Activity Center’ (LAC) land use
designation which has been applied along the north side of Commercial Boulevard
between University Drive and NW 94th Avenue. The LAC option requires Broward
County Planning Council approval which Tamarac secured in 2010. It’s a mixed use
category that specifies residential and non-residential development limits for the entire
134-acre LAC area. The LAC development program is summarized below.


Residential: 1,874 units
Non-residential: commercial/mixed use 122 acres; community facilities, parks,
and open space 11 acres.
Industrial Land Use The Future Land Use Element contains an industrial land use category as well and it
allows:












Light and heavy industrial
Heavy commercial
Research laboratories and facilities
Offices
Transportation and communication facilities
Recreation
Cemeteries
Community facilities and utilities
Non-residential agriculture
Ancillary commercial uses
Limited commercial and retail businesses
Hotels and motels.
39
Key Themes for Improvement This category also has one development standard permitting a maximum of 30% lot
coverage. Similar to commercial, Industrial land use has been in place for many years in
the Comprehensive Plan with little or no change. The Tamarac Commerce Center,
located at the western end of Commercial Boulevard, is the primary industriallydesignated parcel in Tamarac. Otherwise there a few other Industrial parcels in the City
as shown in Figure 1. One parcel is situated just east of the Commerce Center on
Commercial Boulevard and several other industrial parcels are located on the eastern
edge of Tamarac, north of Commercial. The Industrial category has several areas where
updating could be beneficial and these options will be discussed later in the report.
Office Park The City’s FLUM shows an “Office Park (Broward County)” land use category, however
the Future Land Use Element does not provide a definition. It appears this category was
added as a result of the annexation of an unincorporated area into Tamarac. The only
location where Office Park is applied in the entire city is on a parcel located on Prospect
Road, north of Commercial Boulevard, on the City’s eastern edge.
Assessment and Recommendations In consultant analysis and discussions with staff, City officials and the public, a number of
significant modifications to the non-residential land use categories discussed above have
been identified and are outlined below. In addition, a new Mixed Use land use category
is also suggested as an option.
Consider a New Mixed Use Category An important goal of this project is to implement the recommendations of the
“Commercial Arterial Redevelopment Study.” Primary among the recommendations is
to facilitate mixed use and commercial development and redevelopment along the City’s
major transportation corridors. Three focus areas were also identified for specific land
use analysis.
While it was pointed out earlier that the Commercial land use category already permits
“residential mixed use” and the City has also implemented a County-approved LAC
designation, another option is to create a new, distinct mixed use land use category.
Such a category would permit commercial, institutional, and residential on the same
parcel and provide some level of intensity ranges for each use type. For example, on a
mixed use parcel, residential use might be limited to no more than 50% of all uses onsite. The Commercial Redevelopment Study recommended utilizing the “Mixed Use –
Residential” category from the Broward County Land Use Plan which will be considered
if this option is chosen.
An important consideration in developing this new category is whether to allow mixed
use parcels to also develop or redevelop with a single use, either commercial or
residential. To allow single use development would increase the flexibility of the new
category for property owners and developers, especially those considering
redevelopment. A land use change would not be needed if a mixed use owner wanted
to redevelop with all commercial or all residential. If a new mixed use category is
pursued, allowing single use development should be strongly considered. With respect
the residential density, an incentive could be provided allowing residential development
up to one land use density category higher than the existing land use in adjacent or
nearby residential areas.
40
It should be noted that any amendments to the City’s land use categories which permit
residential development on parcels designated for Commercial land use will need to be
consistent with the Broward County Land Use Plan and associated “Flex Zone” system
for residential units.
Modify the Commercial Land Use Category The City’s current Commercial land use category has been described previously. It
already allows ‘residential mixed use’ however contains no definition or development
parameters for this use. An opportunity exists to supplement and fine-tune this existing
category to encourage and appropriately regulate mixed use and commercial
development. This could be in addition to, or instead of, the new and separate mixed
use category presented above. The following options are suggested to revise the
existing Commercial land use designation:




Define and expand ‘residential mixed use.’ This use is currently undefined in the
Comprehensive Plan. With the appropriate definition and standards, it would
give the renamed Commercial Mixed Use category an effective and flexible
residential component. As was suggested previously for the mixed use category,
residential use could be permitted at a density one residential land use category
higher than the land use of the adjacent and nearby existing residential areas.
The issue of whether to allow Commercial Mixed Use parcels to be developed
entirely with residential should be considered and evaluated for consistency
with the Broward County Land Use Plan.
Define and restrict ‘wholesale storage.’ The definition should describe any type
of residential storage facility and consideration given to a prohibition of such
uses on commercial and mixed use properties along University Drive and
Commercial Boulevard. These two major corridors comprise Tamarac’s
“mainstreet” with the most valuable development land in the City. These highvalue frontages should be reserved for commercial, residential and mixed use
development capable of producing the greatest property value growth. Storage
uses are important to the community but do not generate significant valueadded growth in comparison to most other commercial uses. They can be
accommodated in other commercial and industrial locations on the City’s minor
corridors. If this recommendation is implemented, current storage facilities
located on University Drive and Commercial Boulevard would be able to
remain, however if ever damaged by over 50% of building value, the storage use
would have to be discontinued.
Define ‘community facilities’ and ‘special residential facilities.’ They are
currently listed as uses within the Commercial category but are not defined
either in the Comprehensive Plan or Land Development Regulations.
Modify the 35% lot coverage standard. This site development standard refers to
the amount of building coverage allowed on a site and the Commercial
designation currently limits it to 35% of the entire parcel. Staff has indicated a
desire to either delete or modify it. State law requires land use categories to
have one or more development standards which regulate parcel development.
Given that lot coverage is the only development standard in the category, it
either must be retained and modified, or replaced by another development
standard such as height or floor area ratio. It is recommended that lot coverage
be retained and modified to be consistent with the highest lot coverage
percentage contained in the City’s commercial zoning districts.
41
Key Themes for Improvement Modify the Industrial Category While the City currently has little industrial land outside of the planned Tamarac
Commerce Park, this is still a vital category for the health of Tamarac. A city’s industrial
base generates jobs and tax base growth. Several options and recommendations for this
category are described below. All of the recommendations below will be reviewed to
ensure they are consistent with the Broward County Land Use Plan.




Remove ‘ancillary commercial uses” as a permitted use. This separate use listing
is redundant because limited commercial use is already permitted in industrial
and uses ancillary to a permitted use are also allowed with limitations as
specified in the Land Development Regulations. It is recommended this use be
removed.
Define “limited commercial and retail businesses.” Typically, commercial and
retail uses in industrial areas are restricted to no more than 10% of the floor
area of the primary industrial use. This limit should be added.
Consider removing ”hotels and motels” as permitted use. A city’s industrial
areas are precious to its future employment and fiscal health. Tamarac is
especially limited in its amount of industrial land. Hotels and motels are already
permitted on the Commercial and LAC parcels. It should be noted the hotel on
Commercial Boulevard in Tamarac Commerce Park is developed on a
Commercial land use parcel. The City should consider prohibiting these uses
from industrial areas.
Evaluate 30% lot coverage standard. The Industrial designation currently limits
lot coverage to 30% of the entire parcel. This standard should be evaluated for
consistency with the industrial zoning districts and modified if necessary.
Remove the Office Park Category As noted previously, this category has no definition provided in the Comprehensive Plan
and applies only to a small area in eastern Tamarac annexed from Broward County. Staff
has indicated a desire to amend the property land use designation to Commercial and
thereby obviate the need for the Office Park category altogether. The change to
Commercial land use is recommended.
Review Neighborhood Protection and Quality‐of‐life Policies There are a number of existing policies in the Future Land Use Element addressing the
City’s quality-of-life and protection of neighborhoods as presented below.




42
FLUE Policy 1.5: “The City will continue to promote “quality development” in all
land use categories by the establishment and implementation of design criteria
and development standards in the Land Development Code which promote the
highest standards of urban development and community aesthetics.”
FLUE Policy 9.3: “The City’s Land Development Code shall protect, whenever
possible, existing and planned residential areas, including single-family
neighborhoods, from disruptive land use and nuisances.”
FLUE Policy 10.2: “ The Tamarac Land Development Code shall continue to
provide for differing intensities of commercial development which are
compatible with adjacent and surrounding land uses.”
FLUE Policy 10.8: “Facilitate the development of commercial, industrial, utilities,
and other non-residential land use to ensure they are located in a manner


compatible with adjacent land uses and does not adversely affect the health,
safety, welfare, or aesthetics of existing or future residential areas.”
FLUE Policy 12.1: “By December 2009, the City shall adopt guidelines for unified
urban design, architectural, and landscape regulations for major corridors to
further assist in creating a sense of place and enhancing aesthetics throughout
the City.”
Objective 14: “Maintain a concurrency management system to assure the
availability of facilities and services, which meet the adopted level of service
standards as identified in the City’s Comprehensive Plan, concurrent with the
impacts of new development.”
Assessment and Recommendations These policies form a good basis in the Comprehensive Plan for the protection of
neighborhoods and Tamarac’s quality-of-life, and provide for more specific and detailed
standards to be included in the Land Development Regulations. Of particular
importance is Objective 14 which commits the City to maintain specific level-of-service
(LOS) standards for traffic, potable water, parks and other community infrastructure.
These standards have a direct bearing on a community’s quality-of-life. Excessive traffic
has been noted as a problem in community workshops and this may indicate a need to
further evaluate the roadway LOS and how it is applied to specific development
proposals. The objectives and policies appear appropriate and adequate at this time,
however several modifications are recommended below.

Modify and supplement land use objective and policies. The terms
“disruptive land use,” “nuisances,” and “compatibility” should be defined in the
subject policies. This is important for the public and in any land use disputes that
might arise in the future involving compatibility and similar issues. FLUE Policy
12.1 also needs to be revised with respect to the 2009 date and implementation
of the subject guidelines.
Specific Focus Area Amendments The Commercial Study identified 3 primary focus areas for consideration of mixed use
application as follows:
 Nouveau Quarter
 University Medical Mile
 Four Corners
These areas are shown in Figures 2-4. In addition 3 alternative focus areas were also
identified. They are: McNab Road between University Drive and Pine Island Road;
Commercial Boulevard from NW 73rd Avenue to NW 64th Avenue; and the Tamarac
Square West Shopping Center.
Assessment and Recommendations All focus areas are currently designated for Commercial land use and are essentially
built-out with commercial development. The introduction of mixed use as envisioned by
the Redevelopment Study will be via redevelopment which is typically a long-term
process. Two options have been previously discussed to create new mixed use
opportunities in the focus areas on the Future Land Use Map as follows:
43
Key Themes for Improvement Define a new Mixed Use land use category and apply it to the focus areas.
This option would require a land use map and text amendment to the
Comprehensive Plan; and/or
 Modify the existing Commercial category text to add a defined residential
use component which would require only a text amendment.
The implementation of these options must be consistent with the Broward County Land
Use Plan.

Other Comprehensive Plan Updates The Commercial Arterial Redevelopment Study recommended several additional issues
be addressed by the Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Regulations including:






Promote “green’ development
Utilize Florida-friendly landscape standards
Implement Low Impact Development (LID) standards
Increase multi-modal transportation connections
Create active and interesting public spaces
Become a Blue Zone Community
Assessment and Recommendations These issues are not currently addressed in the Comprehensive Plan. New policies will
be developed that describe the City’s intent and implementation of these important
community initiatives.
44
Figure 4: Nouveau Quarter Focus Area Map Figure 3: University Medical Mile Focus Area Map
Figure 2: Four Corners Focus Area Map Tamarac Development Regulations Assessment – March 2015
45
ANNOTATED OUTLINE FOR TAMARAC’S LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE This part of the report provides an overview of the proposed structure and general
content of a Tamarac’s new Land Development Code (LDC).4 This outline consolidates
the zoning, subdivision, land development regulations, and other related chapters of the
Tamarac Code (listed earlier in this report). The Annotated Outline provides general
guidance for how the new ordinance should be structured and is intended as a starting
point for further dialogue. This suggested outline is tailored for Tamarac, using best
practices from successful code projects throughout Florida and the nation. Additional
modifications to the content and order of the articles and sections in this preliminary
outline may be considered during the drafting process.
Article 1 – General Provisions This article will contain general provisions that are relevant to the LDC as a whole. It
will consolidate and clarify existing provisions scattered throughout (and often
reiterated) in current code chapters, as well as introduce new provisions to establish
the title, rules of authority, and other pertinent over-arching provisions for the code,
including:









Title: Establish the official title and other terms by which the LDC may be
known;
Authority: Cite the sources of Florida statutory authority for the development
regulations;
Purpose: State the general purpose and intent of the LDC;
Applicability and Jurisdiction: Clarify the applicability of the LDC;
Compliance Required: Require consistency with Tamarac’s Comprehensive
Plan and identify other city-adopted plans that serve as policy guides for the
LDC and its implementation;
Relationship to Other Regulations: Clarify that the stricter provision
applies if LDC provisions conflict with other regulations;
Official Zoning Map: Formally incorporate the Official Zoning Map and zoning
district boundaries as part of the LDC and identify how it is maintained;
Transitional Provisions: Establish rules governing the effect of the LDC on
violations of the previous ordinances, development approved under previous
ordinances, and development applications still pending a decision on the LDC’s
effective date (transitional provisions); and
Severability: Provide for the continued validity of the remaining LDC
provisions if any part is ruled invalid (severability).
4
Staff: Since our interim assessment of the report, delivered in January 13 presentations, we have removed the article devoted to subdivisions. After further review, we determined that it is best to incorporate the subdivision standards into Articles 4 (Development Standards) and 7 (Administration), rather than retaining a separate article. Tamarac Development Regulations Assessment – March 2015
46
Annotated Outline
for Tamarac’s Land Development Code
This article also will include provisions for the regulation of nonconformities, or
development that was legal at the time it was constructed but that no longer complies
with the LDC. The text will distinguish between nonconforming uses, nonconforming
lots, nonconforming structures, and other specific nonconforming site features like
street access, lighting, and signs. The text will clarify the extent to which properties
with nonconforming site features are required to come into compliance with updated
code standards upon redevelopment.
Recommended Content
Examples of regulations from Tamarac’s existing code to be folded into this
article include:







Chapter 9 – Health, Sanitation and Nuisances
(nonconforming uses and structures)
Chapter 10 - Land Development Regulations (land
development code composition, consistency required)
Chapter 11 – Landscaping (applicability, nonconforming
properties)
Chapter 12 – Licenses and Business Regulations (applicability
of state law)
Chapter 17 – Planning and Development (comprehensive land
use plan, adopted)
Chapter 21 – Subdivisions (conformance with land development
regulations)
Chapter 24 – Zoning (official zoning map, interpretation of
chapter, permits authorizing violations or cancellations of chapter,
effect when plans and specifications are in error, conditions
governing annexed lands, nonconforming uses and structures)
Article 2 – Zoning Districts Like current Chapter 24 (Zoning), this article will establish Tamarac’s base zoning
districts (i.e., residential, mixed-use, nonresidential), special purpose and overlay
districts, and any planned development districts. The article will include new purpose
statements, graphic examples of the form of development permitted in each district, and
summary tables for the district-specific regulations. As discussed below, the use
standards will be relocated to Article 3 (Permitted Uses) and the development
standards will be relocated to Article 4 (Development Standards). These updates will
better convey the intents of the districts and show how the districts relate to one
another.
Lineup of Zoning Districts The current lineup of districts will be modified as discussed in Part 2 of this report. This
may include new zoning districts (e.g., mixed-use and business park) and the
consolidation or elimination of several current districts. The new lineup of districts will
be presented in a table comparing the current list of established districts (Sec. 24-2) to
the new list. As shown below, this comparison table will help facilitate the transition to
the new LDC. Please note the table is a DRAFT only and likely will be modified following
additional discussion during the drafting process.
47
Annotated Outline
for Tamarac’s Land Development Code Tamarac, FL – Zoning Districts ‐ Comparison Current Districts Proposed District Examples Base Zoning Districts R‐1B Single‐Family R‐1 Single ‐ Family R‐1C Single‐Family R‐2 Two‐Family R‐2 Two‐Family RD‐7 Duplex R‐3 Low Density Multifamily R‐3U Row House RM – 3 Low Density Multifamily RM‐5 Multifamily RM‐10 Planned Apartment RM – 4 Multifamily R‐4A Planned Apartment R‐5 Motel and Hotel Not carried forward T‐1 Trailer Park Not carried forward MXD Mixed Use B‐1 Neighborhood Business B‐2 Planned Community Business B‐3 General Business B‐5 Limited Business MU – B Mixed‐Use Business B‐6 Business A‐1 Limited Agricultural A‐5 Agricultural – Excavation Not carried forward I‐1 Institutional‐Educational‐Governmental S‐1 Recreational S‐2 Recreational LI – 1 Light Industrial SU Special Utility Woodlands Overlay Overlay or Other Special Purpose Zoning Districts Not carried forward Dimensional Standards For each zoning district, the applicable intensity and dimensional standards will be
included and summarized in tables wherever possible. These individual district
summary tables would be in addition to a consolidated table of dimensional standards
for all zoning districts (see table example in Part 2 of this report).
Under the current code, tables of dimensional standards are only provided for the
residential zoning districts — Ch. 24, Table 1 (Miscellaneous Residential Zoning District
Requirements) and Table 2 (Setback Lines in Residential Zoning Districts). The
combination of individual district tables and a consolidated table will help a user focus
on certain district standards and compare standards across districts. Like existing
Tables 1 and 2, these summary tables will generally include the following standards:



48
Minimum lot dimensions (width, depth)
Minimum floor area
Minimum or maximum height
Annotated Outline



Minimum or maximum setbacks
Minimum or maximum density
Maximum lot coverage
Recommended Content
Most regulations from Tamarac’s existing code to be folded into this article
are found in Chapter 24, Article III (District Regulations). Generally, all the
divisions regulating individual zoning districts will be folded in, including any
purpose statements and dimensional standards (e.g., height, plot size, yard
and setback requirements).
Article 3 – Use Regulations This article will include the consolidated master use table and use-specific standards
discussed in Part 2 of this report. The uses and regulations to be relocated to this
article are currently scattered throughout Chapters 24 (embedded in zoning district
divisions) and Chapter 12 (disguised as license and business regulations, although they
also regulate land use).
The main components of this article will include:
Permitted (Allowable Uses) The heart of this section is the consolidated use table (see example graphic in Part 2
above). It will summarize allowable uses by zoning district, type of approval (by-right vs.
conditional or special exception), and include a cross-reference to applicable use-specific
standards.
Use‐Specific Standards Use-specific standards are drafted for certain uses, such as adult businesses, wireless
telecommunications facilities, and other uses that have unique impacts. As explored
above in Part 2, the current code already contains a variety of use-specific standards.
This section will consolidate any use-specific standards found in existing definitions,
zoning districts, development standards, and business and licensing regulations that
identify additional requirements for particular uses. A few examples of current Tamarac
regulations to be folded into the use-specific standards section include:
Sec. 12-77 – Adult Entertainment Businesses, Zoning districts and distance
limitations
 Sec. 12-150 – Additional requirements for primary use and accessory use
amusement centers
 Sec. 24-229 – RM-10 planned apartment district site design an and performance
standards (this section is a good example of standards that could be included in
this article as use-specific standards for multi-family uses or included in Article 4
(Development Standards) and applied more generally across zoning districts).
When the current list of permitted uses is analyzed during the drafting process, it likely
will shed light on the need for additional use-specific standards.

49
Annotated Outline
for Tamarac’s Land Development Code Accessory Uses and Structures Accessory uses (e.g., home occupations), and accessory structures (e.g., detached
garages) will be included in this section. The code should include general standards that
apply to all accessory uses (i.e., the accessory use should not be developed without a
primary use) and also any specific standards that apply to particular accessory uses (e.g.,
limiting the operational hours of a home occupation). Accessory uses could be included
in the permitted use table with an “A” for accessory, or at the end of the table as their
own category. This decision will depend largely on whether some permitted uses are
allowed by-right in some districts and only as an accessory in others. Use-specific
standards will also be applied to accessory uses.
Temporary Uses and Structures This article will regulate temporary uses and structures. Temporary uses (such as
produce sales and construction offices) could be included in the permitted use table as a
“T,” near the end of the table. Temporary structures (such as produce stands and
model homes) will also be included, not in the table (because structures aren’t uses) but
in the use-specific standards section. Temporary uses should be coordinated with
adopted building codes for consistency with timeframes and permitting processes.
Recommended Content
article include:




Chapter 3 – Alcoholic Beverages (Sunday sales, off-premises
sale, delivery prohibited during certain hours, on-premises sale
prohibited during certain hours, special permit requirements)
Chapter 12 – Licenses and Business Regulations
(occupational licenses, adult entertainment businesses, amusement
center businesses, child care centers, temporary sales)
Chapter 18 – Signs and Advertising (temporary signs)
Chapter 24 - Zoning (lists or tables of permitted, special
exception, and accessory uses contained within individual zoning
district divisions)
o Article VI – Accessory Uses
o Article IX – Telecommunications Towers and Antennas
Article 4 – Development Standards This article will incorporate all of the regulations associated with the physical layout,
design, and use of development, including subdivision design, site layout, building design,
and operations and maintenance issues (e.g., lighting). Under the existing code, one
could incorrectly assume that all of these standards are found in Chapter 10 (Land
Development Regulations), but this is not the case. Chapter 10 includes many standards
that should be incorporated into this article (e.g., Sec. 10-226 stormwater management),
but these standards are also found in many other chapters (e.g., Chapter 11 –
Landscaping).
Specific technical requirements, fees, and application criteria associated with these
standards will not be carried forward in the code. This information will be removed for
50
Annotated Outline
placement in an administrative or technical manual separate from the code, allowing for
easier administrative amendments to the content. Additional updates to these
standards (e.g., sustainability measures) will be made as recommended in Part 2 of this
report. The main components of this article will address:
Site Layout Site design and layout standards will be included in this section and organized “from the
ground up.” These standards include:




Access and circulation
Parking, loading, and stacking requirements
Landscaping and tree preservation (incorporating the Florida-friendly model
ordinance)
Stormwater drainage and erosion control (aligning these standards with the
city’s updated stormwater master plan and Broward County’s revised
regulations to the greatest extent practicable, as these updates are concurrent
with the code rewrite).
Building Design Standards Building design standards not already covered in the individual zoning districts or
included as use-specific standards will be included here, and may include additional
standards as follows:






Dimensional standards (general; not covered by individual zoning districts)
Exceptions and encroachments
Special standards (e.g., neighborhood protection standards requiring an
additional setback or buffering between uses).
Screening, walls, and fences
Exterior lighting
Signs
Operation and Maintenance Standards Operation development standards mitigate impacts of structures and uses and include
key operational elements such as signage and lighting. These standards address:





Noise
Vibration
Odor
Radiation
Other nuisance-like impacts
Maintenance standards require approved development to maintain required design and
development elements (e.g., landscaping) in good condition and to replace them if they
become inconsistent with the conditions under which the approval was given. They
allow for enforcement of the city’s quality expectations after a certificate of occupancy
is granted.
51
Annotated Outline
for Tamarac’s Land Development Code Subdivision Standards As part of our interim assessment of the current regulations (January 13 presentations
to City Commission, Citizen Advisory Committee, and the public), we suggested
carrying current Chapter 21 (Subdivisions) forward in Article 5. After further review,
however, we believe that a separate Subdivision Article is not necessary. Generally,
subdivision regulations address procedures (e.g., platting) or development standards
(e.g., lots and blocks; streets and alleys). Our suggested better approach is to relocate
subdivision procedures to the new Article 5 (Administration) and subdivision design and
development standards to the new Article 4 (Development Standards). In Article 4,
subdivision standards could be included in their own subsection or incorporated into
access, circulation, or street standards.
Recommended Content
article include:








Chapter 5 – Buildings and Building Regulations (accessory
equipment on roof, irrigation, antenna and aerials, pools, exterior
trash receptacles)
Chapter 9 – Health, Sanitation and Nuisances (noise
ordinance, neighborhood beautification)
Chapter 10 – Land Development Regulations (standards and
criteria for a variety of environmental, natural resource protection,
public infrastructure, and transportation design elements; relocate
technical specifications and application requirements to an
administrative manual)
Chapter 11 – Landscaping
Chapter 18 – Signs and Advertising (location and design
standards, dimensional requirements)
Chapter 20 – Streets and Sidewalks
Chapter 21 – Subdivision (lots and blocks, streets and alleys,
waterways)
Chapter 24 – Zoning (generally applicable site and building design
and performance standards contained within individual zoning
districts; off-street parking and loading; exceptions and
modifications; fences, walls and hedges)
Article 5 – Administration The Administration article will include provisions and updated procedures as described
in Part 2 of this report. The main components of this article address:
Boards and Commissions This section consolidates, summarizes, and verifies the roles of groups and individuals
(e.g., the community development department, Planning Board, and City Commission)
involved in reviewing and approving proposed development in Tamarac.
Approval Procedures This section will identify the standard procedures that apply to most development
applications (e.g., authority to file applications, determination of application
52
Annotated Outline
completeness, and determining consistency with the Comprehensive Plan). Additionally,
it will include the application and approval processes for each specific regulatory
procedure (e.g., site plan review and special exceptions).
To improve the user-friendliness of the new LDC and bridge the connection between
the city’s boards and commissions and approval procedures, this section will contain a
table summarizing the department and decision making body responsible for the review
and approval of each regulatory procedure identified in the LDC. It will consolidate and
verify who reviews each type of application, who makes the decision, whether a hearing
is needed, and who hears an appeal of the decision. It will also include cross-references
directing the reader to the specific section outlining the procedure.
As discussed in part 2 of this report, many current procedures will be carried forward,
but simplified for readability, and flowcharts will be used to further clarify these
procedures. New provisions addressing early neighborhood notice for major
developments and temporary use procedures will be added as well as other new
procedures that are developed during the drafting process.
Enforcement Procedures Enforcement procedures will describe the City of Tamarac’s enforcement processes,
including procedures, violations, appeals, and penalties.
Recommended Content
article include:











Chapter 2 – Administration (city commission, code
enforcement board, community development department, urban
forestry committee)
Chapter 5 – Buildings and Building Regulations (expedited
permitting)
Chapter 5.6 – Telecommunications (registration, ROW
applications)
Chapter 9 – Health, Sanitation and Nuisances (portable
storage unit permit)
Chapter 10 – Land Development Regulations (administration,
planning board, development review committee, site plan
submission, improvement permits, concurrency procedures)
Chapter 11 – Landscaping (landscaping plan, tree removal
permit, enforcement)
Chapter 17 – Planning and Development (local planning
agency)
Chapter 18 – Signs and Advertising (application and permit
procedures, variances, violations, penalties, enforcement)
Chapter 20 – Streets and Sidewalks (improvement permits,
ROW vacation, temporary use permit, newsrack permit)
Chapter 21 – Subdivisions (platting, delegation request,
exception permits, enforcement, violations, penalties)
Chapter 24 – Zoning (enforcement officer, planning board, public
notice, appeals, rezoning, variances, zoning in progress, moratorium,
penalty, enforcement)
53
Annotated Outline
for Tamarac’s Land Development Code Article 6 – Definitions and Rules of Construction Each chapter of the current code contains definitions. Additionally, these definitions are
often found in multiple sections of one chapter. As discussed above in Part 2, this is a
challenging organization for code users and invites inconsistencies into the code and
interpretations of the code. We propose consolidating and moving definitions to the
last article of the LDC because readers are more likely to look for defined terms at the
end of a document, similar to glossaries found in the back of many technical books.
Definitions Clear definitions of important words, phrases, and uses make life easier for those who
must interpret and administer the regulations, and the general public. The general
public need to know what is permitted and/or required but may not have as complete
an understanding of zoning terms as staff, public officials, and frequent code users (e.g.,
developers, builders, and consultants).
This article will be based mainly on the existing definitions scattered throughout the 13
code chapters identified for incorporation. However, only relevant definitions from each
chapter will be consolidated. (e.g., definitions relating to a licensing provision in Chapter
12 that is not carried over will not be included). Regulatory language will be removed
to the main body of the code. We will verify that key definitions are consistent with
federal and state laws.
Definitions will be divided into the following categories:
Terms of measurement (height, lot, yard, etc.),
Use categories and use types (“general retail,” “live-work unit,” etc; consistent
with the permitted use table), and
All other terms defined (other essential definitions for terms used throughout
the ordinance).



Rules of Construction This section will include the basic rules established by the LDC for common regulatory
words (e.g., “shall vs. should”), identify key abbreviated titles or references, and establish
how time limits are set throughout the code. Rules of Construction are currently
located in Chapter 1 (General Provisions) of the City’s Code, but they will be reiterated
here and supplemented if necessary.
Recommended Content
article include:


Relevant definitions from all 13 current code chapters identified for
consolidated in this unified LDC
Chapter 1 (Definitions and Rules of Construction)
54

here - Tamarac

Transcription

Similar documents

July/August 2013 - Tamarac Chamber of Commerce

Tamarac Talk - TrustedPartner

ePermits - Tamarac

TR 12605 Exhibit A Master Plan Pages 116-121

bad weather 2 - Tamaqua Area School District

NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONDUCT A ZONING ADMINISTOR

Creekside at Berkeley Hills

Community Leaders Presentation