For the Palm Beach Architectural Commission, a simple change in material could be enough to prevent a project from being approved or sent back to the drawing board.
That was the case for North End homeowners Manuel and Evan Castelo, who received commission approval May 29 for a zoning code change to extend landscaping on their property beyond the boundaries implemented by the city. after commissioners rejected a similar proposal in April. The city council must still approve the exemption request.
The difference between the two presentations?
The proposal presented at the April 24 meeting tied the zoning code waiver to the installation of artificial turf, a failure for commissioners, who feared setting a precedent by supporting zoning code waivers tied to the installation fake grass.
Instead, when landscape architect Dustin Mizell of Environment Design Group returned in May, he presented a site plan that expanded the back deck of the property at 1464 N. Ocean Blvd. on the northwest corner of the property, contrary to the previous site plan which called for the installation of artificial turf.
Both proposals aimed to create much-needed open space in the overly shady courtyard, where the grass struggles to survive.
“I think you’ve looked at and evaluated all the different things that can be done, and I think in this situation, no matter what you do, to have usable space, you’re going to end up with a gap,” a said Commissioner KT Catlin at the May meeting.
His colleagues agreed, with alternate commissioner Dan Floersheimer pointing out the unusual challenges posed by the location and size of the lot. He also pointed out the large circular driveway that the Castelos were forced to build because of the danger associated with backing up on North Ocean Boulevard, near its intersection with Onondaga Avenue.
“If you had just had that original (singular) border cut, there would be no variation,” Floersheimer said.
The commission’s support brings the couple closer to resolving a code violation regarding unauthorized fake lawn installation.
Code Violation Kickstarted Couple’s Bureaucratic Journey
As newcomers, the couple purchased the land, which measures just under a quarter of an acre, in 2020 for around $2.3 million while they were still living in California. By the time the house was completed in 2023, grass planted in the property’s backyard and side yards was having trouble growing, Manuel Castelo said at the commission’s April meeting. Adjoining homes and their mature foliage keep much of the property in shade, he said.
After replacing the section of turf several times, their original landscaper recommended installing artificial turf, the couple’s attorney, John Eubanks, said at the April meeting.
Having previously resided in California, the Castelos were unaware of the city’s strict laws governing fake turf, Eubanks said, noting that the Golden State encourages the use of artificial turf for water conservation.
In October, code enforcement officers were alerted to the unauthorized installation and issued a stop-work order, code enforcement officer John Moriarty said at the meeting of the Code Enforcement Council. The board imposed a $150 administrative fee and ordered the Castelos to come into compliance by April 15.
However, the Castelos’ proactivity and close communication with code enforcement officials led the code committee in April to give the couple until July 17 to come into compliance. After reducing the use of artificial turf to just under 5 percent of the property’s surface area, the project was presented to the Architectural Commission at its April meeting.
Although the commission has a history of denying homeowners’ requests for artificial turf, often criticizing it as unsightly and unsustainable, some commissioners — including Floersheimer and Caitlin — said they were not completely against installing artificial turf in specific circumstances.
But commissioners spoke with one voice when it came to the zoning variance, saying they could not support setting a precedent by approving variance requests related to the installation of fake grass.
When the project returned in May, virtually all of the artificial turf had been removed, in favor of expanding the backyard patio toward the northwest corner where the grass refused to grow, Mizell said. He said the artificial turf would only be placed as a minor detail between the tiles on the south and northeast corners of the patio.
Influenced by Commissioner Betsy Shiverick’s comments at the April meeting, the northwest corner will also feature a small garden, he noted.
There are also plans to replant grass in the side yards of the property, along the gravel paths that will lead to the front yard.
Commissioners praised Mizel and the Castelos for joining the board’s guidance, noting that they were much more comfortable voting in favor of a variance related to expanded patio space rather than a artificial turf.
The commission voted 6-1, with Chairman Jeff Smith voting no, to approve the project design. The council voted along the same lines in favor of the zoning variance. The variance request will be heard at the City Council’s June 12 development review meeting.
The Architectural Commission is generally responsible for approving the appearance of all architecture in the city, except for projects involving historic buildings overseen by the Landmarks Preservation Commission.
Diego Diaz Lasa is a journalist at Palm Beach Daily News, part of the USA TODAY Florida network. You can reach him at dlasa@pbdailynews.com.
This article was originally published on Palm Beach Daily News: Palm Beach Board Accepts Couple’s Request After Ditching Fake Grass
