[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6453965,"mediaKeyId","5873598-51204b1cbbd8e2d90238f59c25f6ff78","parentId",5873598,"title","Planning board split on Woodlands lot-coverage variance; motion fails 2-2 and heads to City Commission","audioSeconds",2810,"startMs",2699000,"endMs",5509000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5873598-51204b1cbbd8e2d90238f59c25f6ff78&start=2699&end=5509","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5873598-51204b1cbbd8e2d90238f59c25f6ff78/thumbnail_2699000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6453965/Tamarac/Broward-County/Florida/Planning-board-split-on-Woodlands-lot-coverage-variance-motion-fails-2-2-and-heads-to-City-Commission","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6453965-885ea7b48c8dc3c487d52e4ff7f8619c/orig.mp4?Expires=1773511051&Signature=ngo6MXbCDmKfSYvNGlsn1LE25-dYMkaFgIj8xy6Ri5YQUwhIgSWXnUTIT7-XB6q7FoGh0XnxU~1f49y2VQ~o3x-nWdFn3RL0lzXFOSMOK3Ap6XbsruJh2M3HV5p8K0EI87RkLLX6NccIHIIMHGzQI77fAq4YUXO34ihIjawHiOKhFLV-NrJp-T3qB0iyqJJet-bna6q65BBbwfcGIpSWJXYJr0yUu237aK-ZJwKWMt0RpLg2rLY8I8639dwsSJJ2c-psdO~plHVvyJDEBiLSvMFMiLFD-X2eShurrJHnoA4zmi62WCNXkXIF4SXVq~VU-B6Vc7oQL3gx-XZ9OfbJ3g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Tamarac","date","2025-10-01T00:00:00Z","article","The Tamarac Planning Board on Wednesday failed to approve a variance request from the developer of the Woodlands residential project seeking higher lot-coverage limits for new model homes, producing a 2-2 tie that means the matter will go to the City Commission without a favorable planning-board recommendation.

Christina Balenke, attorney for Thirteenth Floor (the developer), said the applicant seeks to add 14 new model home types and increase maximum home sizes to respond to market demand for more bedrooms and covered outdoor living spaces. \"Who wants to sit out on a patio without some form of coverage?\" Balenke asked while describing how porches and covered terraces count toward lot coverage under the city's code.

The variance petition asked relief from the code's lot-coverage limits for multiple pods within the Woodlands project: up to 53.2% in Pod A, up to 54.9% in Pods B, C, D and F, 53% in Pod G, and 46.8% in Pod H, compared with the 44% maximum set by an earlier administrative adjustment and the 40% otherwise permitted. The requested relief would apply to 242 of 335 lots (about 72.2% of the lots), according to staff.

Robert Johnson, senior planner for Community Development, summarized the project history: the Woodlands master plan covers about 276.48 acres with nine residential pods and 16 open-space pods; a development agreement and earlier approvals authorized 335 single-family homes and preserved approximately 160 acres of open space. Staff characterized the change to 14 additional models as a site-plan minor modification rather than a significant amendment to the development agreement.

Residents who spoke at the quasi-judicial hearing urged denial. Jeffrey Shapiro said increased bedrooms and patios could raise vehicle counts and traffic within the community and reduce yards, affecting drainage. \"If you go ahead and you add... now we're talking 3 or 4 [cars]... it's gonna affect traffic,\" Shapiro said. Eileen Lieberman, president of Section 4 of the Woodlands, said the developer promised the community the project would meet the existing code and argued the change represents \"a second bite at the apple.\" She also told the board the green space per lot would fall from 1,280 square feet under earlier commitments to about 620 square feet with the higher lot coverage.

Sergio Lazaroff Fitzpatrick, a nearby homeowner, said loss of backyard green space would affect his family's quality of life; he said he bought after the development received prior approvals and cited promises made by the developer. Residents also submitted written opposition and expressed concern about using Northwest 60th Avenue as an entrance/exit.

In response to questions from the board, the applicant and staff said the lots will meet minimum setback requirements, that two-story homes are confined to Pod G per the development agreement, and that drainage is being reviewed by Broward County through required master-drainage permits. Staff said traffic analysis for the development is based on the total number of single-family homes and uses standard ITE rates rather than a bedroom-by-bedroom split; the development agreement requires off-site roadway improvements, including turn lanes and related intersection work.

Planning board members were divided on whether the circumstances cited by the applicant constituted an exceptional hardship tied to the land rather than conditions created by the developer. A motion to approve the variance, moved and seconded, failed on a 2-2 vote (Nicole Claire and Sejean Bell Clark voted no; Jacques Moise and Mara English voted yes). With no affirmative recommendation, staff said the application will proceed to the City Commission for final action at its Oct. 22 meeting.

The board's discussion and the resident opposition will be part of the record the City Commission reviews before making a final decision.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Tamarac - Planning Board","oneSentenceSummary","The board deadlocked 2-2 on a developer request to increase allowed lot coverage for new model homes in the Woodlands subdivision; proponents said the change allows modern amenities and larger floorplans while neighbors raised concerns about drainage, traffic and loss of green space.","taxTitle","Tamarac, Broward County, Florida","taxId",8839,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6453970,"Planning board forwards zoning update to implement Live Local Act; reduces required nonresidential share to 10%",1198,1499000,2697000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5873598-51204b1cbbd8e2d90238f59c25f6ff78&start=1499&end=2697","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5873598-51204b1cbbd8e2d90238f59c25f6ff78/thumbnail_1499000.jpg","/articles/6453970/Tamarac/Broward-County/Florida/Planning-board-forwards-zoning-update-to-implement-Live-Local-Act-reduces-required-nonresidential-share-to-10","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6453970-9228a187c61e43838cc5a102d2ef6596/orig.mp4?Expires=1773511051&Signature=EyTF9J9FNYZD70rdIkxi4biSaagFGE3igcP9tv8IhrppQsfVhUOP7XaXbK8Po5OJKmDjD80xuzCVUSs4yFPP23RX2q2x75AgXUJNcDRgmj0v3~XwOGIkYows~b4rUDwBAcADpUh1PZrC3XlvWuXP9zEo0JxpmG3BJx~WUSrddtn8NlY-RikkZskRH2DVu5vDb2ddIIKEdgETJp8SWBswgGVUHVD1IFQ7RmAKtTdfcS3jZ~IQ~u6fjXJ6v9Yl3nZFTtJ0OYSIMFC190GI~cZ8683uQRzLuIv0Mobty3mOK6QOW2UD9jm6scJFitiplStNNupCPmFaEIg8WM0XClRLsw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Tamarac Planning Board on Wednesday voted 4-0 to forward a zoning text amendment to the City Commission that updates city code to comply with the Live Local Act and subsequent state changes.

Maham Mansour, assistant director of community development, told the board the amendment incorporates provisions of the original Live Local Act and later changes that were enacted in 2024 and 2025. \"The Live Local Act passed in 2023 is a major statewide effort to boost affordable housing,\" Mansour said, summarizing the statute's intent and the local code changes.

The key change is procedural and substantive: municipalities may no longer require a 35% minimum nonresidential component in qualified mixed-use developments; the updated code implements a 10% minimum nonresidential requirement while still requiring developers to provide at least 65% residential. Mansour said the 10% minimum applies to what cities can require, though developers may voluntarily include up to 35% nonresidential if they choose.

The amendment also adds planned development (PD) districts to the eligible zoning categories for qualified mixed-use projects, aligns local parking rules with the state requirement of a minimum 15% parking reduction for sites within a quarter-mile of a major transit stop, and preserves administrative review pathways so eligible projects may be processed without public hearings when the state criteria are met.

Mansour told the board that because Tamarac has less than 20% of its land designated for industrial or commercial uses, qualifying projects must be mixed-use developments. The presentation included a reminder that the Live Local Act ties affordability definitions to area median income and that the statute has associated incentives, including state funding and some tax benefits.

Board members asked clarifying questions about whether the Live Local route is mandatory for affordable housing projects; Mansour said it is optional for developers and that the city has not yet received a complete Live Local application since 2023. Staff also emphasized that some elements remain subject to local review: the city may require a parking demand and circulation study but cannot use that study to impose parking in excess of the state limits.

After discussion, the board voted 4-0 to make a favorable recommendation to the City Commission. Staff recommended the ordinance be scheduled for first reading at the Oct. 22 City Commission meeting and second reading on Nov. 12.

The amendment will allow certain affordable housing projects to proceed via administrative review if they meet state criteria, while preserving neighborhood notification and some local technical review steps.","The board recommended approval 4-0 of a text amendment aligning the City of Tamarac's land-development code with the state's Live Local Act and its 2024-2025 amendments, lowering the minimum nonresidential component for qualifying mixed-use projects from 35% to 10%, expanding eligibility and adopting new parking reductions near transit.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6453975,"Tamarac planning board backs 25% cap on updated impact fees, recommends city commission adoption",1101,396000,1497000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5873598-51204b1cbbd8e2d90238f59c25f6ff78&start=396&end=1497","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5873598-51204b1cbbd8e2d90238f59c25f6ff78/thumbnail_396000.jpg","/articles/6453975/Tamarac/Broward-County/Florida/Tamarac-planning-board-backs-25-cap-on-updated-impact-fees-recommends-city-commission-adoption","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6453975-db823f459fc13cff8888e1b266fecfec/orig.mp4?Expires=1773511051&Signature=QIcCxSOcOn~cyf9uoZgdFv84yI8bg0hKqROfDQhMyogmafBFxGiQlFaL-QrfSJryxAHmW6ZGS-b~0-hy2U4GE549AFn27dcXlUd5BXgMDNgm6Fv0b4AylRDbLSqrX~LyRnHwV9WaklaxQwykOqRNjhKKMq6pwiMvRvvZDuyz-73AA8-Yigdzb2FxG5v42f6KWtuMR4ZCYt1YihS9MeNr6NDu9JH6QaP7WXKMK6nWQYkqgnuhzeBS-68nm1cWqiMIzOCksKBK7PeKJ-LfZDn~AnNlYgIcHc~kRtxQyBNZ~-rM0PjqxyGlePf9u8m~PwiOVTtrPzAemgIchGqL7zfeLQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Tamarac Planning Board on Wednesday unanimously recommended the City Commission adopt a temporary ordinance to update the city's development impact-fee program, endorsing staff's recommendation to implement a 25% increase in fees in a two-year, phased schedule.

The proposal, presented by the city's consultant, Carson Vice of TischlerBise, would revise fees for parks and recreation, governmental facilities and multimodal transportation and simplify nonresidential fee categories into five broad groups. \"It's not a tax, but more like a contractual arrangement to provide infrastructure,\" Vice said while explaining the legal tests that an impact-fee study must meet.

The board was presented a ten-year growth projection the consultant used to establish need and proportionality: roughly 6,300 more residents, about 3,000 new housing units, about 1,540 new jobs and about 650,000 square feet of additional nonresidential floor area over the next decade. The consultant recommended increasing fee levels by up to 25% rather than adopting the larger maximums the study would allow; the recommendation was framed as preserving competitiveness while meeting legal requirements.

Under the recommended schedule, parks fees would be assessed only on residential development and would cover parkland, park improvements and community centers. Governmental facilities fees would apply citywide to both residential and nonresidential development and include land and building costs. Multimodal transportation fees would fund sidewalks, bike lanes, shared paths and related pedestrian-scale improvements rather than major arterial expansions.

Carson Vice said the study also compresses many current nonresidential categories into five types'commercial, institutional/office/other service, general industrial and warehousing'to reduce punitive effects on certain uses and to ease economic recruitment. The ordinance will allow applicants the option of independent fee calculations if they can demonstrate a different proportional impact.

Board members asked how collected fees could be used. The consultant and staff said state statute limits impact-fee spending to defined public facilities and precludes using these fees for business or general housing development; however, the city uses separate tools and incentives, such as density bonuses and other local mechanisms, to encourage affordable housing outside the impact-fee program.

Vice showed draft fee numbers in the presentation. Examples cited by staff included government-facility fees ranging roughly from $359 for certain multifamily senior units to $966 for the largest single-family units in the draft schedule. Staff recommended a 25% increase across the board instead of adopting the statute's higher maximums, which would require additional procedures.

After questions, the board voted 4-0 to forward a favorable recommendation to the City Commission. Planning staff said the temporary ordinance and revised schedule would come before the commission for consideration as the next step.

The planning board record of the item will go to the City Commission for final action and codification if the commission votes to adopt the ordinance.","The Tamarac Planning Board voted 4-0 to recommend the City Commission adopt a temporary ordinance updating the city's development impact-fee schedule, recommending a 25% increase as the phased maximum and adopting a new fee schedule for parks, government facilities and multimodal transportation based on a new 10-year growth forecast.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Planning board split on Woodlands lot-coverage variance; motion fails 2-2 and heads to City Commission

Planning board forwards zoning update to implement Live Local Act; reduces required nonresidential share to 10%

Tamarac planning board backs 25% cap on updated impact fees, recommends city commission adoption