Commission approves rezoning for Westgate micro‑unit project but denies parking variance

Palm Beach County zoning commissioners recommended approval of a zoning map amendment and the class A conditional use for the Neighborly Living Westgate mixed‑use project but denied the applicant’s type‑2 parking variance request, citing the code’s variance standards.

The applicant, represented by Bradley Miller of Urban Design Studio, sought rezoning to CG, a subdivision variance recognizing an existing narrow pavement width, approval of a class‑A conditional use to allow 38 multifamily units under the Westgate density‑bonus program, and a type‑2 variance to reduce parking from the required 53 spaces to 50 (45 on‑site plus five on‑street spaces counted by the applicant). Miller described the project as 38 units (including 26 micro‑units, 10 studios and 2 one‑bedrooms), roughly two‑thirds of an acre with 1,585 square feet of ground‑floor commercial and 50 counted parking spaces. He said the development would use the county’s new Westgate density bonus pool and targeted workforce and non‑family renters who rely on transit.

Why it matters: The project is one of the first to attempt to use Westgate’s density bonus pool and to propose a high proportion of micro units intended to serve single‑person households and workforce renters. The parking variance became the central dispute at the hearing: staff recommended denial of the variance, arguing the proposal failed the strict type‑2 variance standards; the applicant and Westgate redevelopment officials argued on‑street parking and a professional on‑site manager would mitigate the shortfall.

Support and opposition: Westgate CRA Executive Director Elize Michel and Denise Pinnell, the CRA’s planning director, gave the commission letters of support and argued the project aligns with Westgate’s form‑based code and recent streetscape work, noting on‑street parallel parking installed along Westgate Avenue. Delray Housing Group and the Lord’s Place submitted letters of support and the Westgate board voted unanimously to endorse the proposal. Neighbor and public‑comment concerns focused on counting on‑street spaces that are not yet built or are on undeveloped lots across the street, and on the fairness of using future or adjacent on‑street parking to meet required parking standards.

Staff and technical positions: County zoning staff supported the rezoning and the class‑A conditional use but recommended denial of the type‑2 variance for parking. Staff explained variance criteria require an unusual hardship and cannot be based on financial hardship or on anticipated future changes to nearby streets. Staff noted the county is preparing targeted parking reductions for Westgate and separate affordable‑housing parking waivers, but those text amendments did not, at the time of the hearing, eliminate the need for the variance requested by the applicant.

Commission action and disposition: The commission adopted a resolution approving the rezoning (item 6a). The board then adopted a resolution denying the type‑2 parking variance (item 6b) without prejudice, allowing the applicant to return with a materially different application before the commission within a year. The commission recommended approval of the subdivision variance (item 6c) and the class‑A conditional use (item 6d) and will forward those recommendations to the Board of County Commissioners for final action.

Project details and mitigation measures: Miller said the project would provide 45 on‑site spaces (including two handicapped spaces) and count five existing or proposed on‑street spaces in front of the site. He also described on‑site management, vehicle‑sticker parking control, a policy limiting micro units to one car each, bike racks and an offer to provide free bus passes to tenants without vehicles. The applicant submitted a parking demand letter from the Institute of Traffic Engineers that concluded projects with similar unit mixes required fewer parking spaces than conventional counts.

Next steps: The rezoning and conditional‑use recommendations will be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners. Because the denial of the type‑2 variance was without prejudice, the applicant may return with a revised application or rely on forthcoming county text amendments (Westgate‑specific parking waivers and affordable housing parking reductions) to seek relief.

Sources: Applicant presentation by Bradley Miller; staff presentation by Matthew Boyd (Zoning Division); testimony by Westgate CRA executive Elize Michel and Denise Pinnell; public comment; commission roll‑call votes during the hearing.