The URL can be used to link to this page

Agenda 11-25-14 CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD MEETING AGENDA DATE: Tuesday, November 25, 2014 TIME: 6:30 P.M. PLACE:Commission Chambers, 100 E. Boynton Beach Boulevard, Boynton Beach, Florida ___________________________________________ __________________________ ___________ 1. Pledge of Allegiance 2. Introduction of the Board 3. Agenda Approval 4. Approval of Minutes from October 28, 2014 meeting 5. Communications and Announcements: Report from Staff 6. New Business: Texas Roadhouse Restaurant (MSPM 14-005) A. – Approve major site plan modification request to construct a one-story, 7,420 square foot restaurant building and related site improvements, located on the north side of Old Boynton Road, immediately west of Winchester Park Boulevard/Mall entry drive, in front of Macy’s Department Store and zoned C3 (Community Commercial). Applicant: Bradley Miller, Miller Land Planning, Inc. 622 South Road Variance (ZNCV 14-001) B. – Approve request to grant a variance of seven (7) feet to allow a thirteen (13) foot rear setback instead of the twenty (20) foot rear setback required per Part III, Chapter 3, Article III, Section 2.B.3. of the Land Development Regulations, located at 622 South Road and zoned R1AA (Single-Family Residential). Applicant: Michael and Beth Miskiewicz. 7. Other 8. Comments by members 9. Adjournment The Board (Committee) may only conduct public business after a quorum has been established. If no quorum is established within twenty minutes of the noticed start time of the meeting the City Clerk or her designee will so note the failure to establish a quorum and the meeting shall be concluded. Board members may not participate further even when purportedly acting in an informal capacity. NOTICE ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL ANY DECISION OF THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD WITH RESPECT TO ANY MATTER CONSIDERED AT THIS MEETING WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS AND FOR SUCH PURPOSE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDING IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. (F.S. 286.0105) THE CITY SHALL FURNISH APPROPRIATE AUXILIARY AIDS AND SERVICES WHERE NECESSARY TO AFFORD AN INDIVIDUAL WITH A DISABILITY AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY TO PARTICIPATE IN AND ENJOY THE BENEFITS OF A SERVICE, PROGRAM, OR ACTIVITY CONDUCTED BY THE CITY. PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE, (561) 742-6060 AT LEAST TWENTY (24) HOURS PRIOR TO THE PROGRAM OR ACTIVITY IN ORDER FOR THE CITY TO REASONABLY ACCOMMODATE YOUR REQUEST. (SGYQIRX MINUTES OF THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD MEETING HELD IN COMMISSION CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, 100 E. BOYNTON BEACH BOULEVARD, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 28, 2014, AT 6:30 P.M. PRESENT: Roger Saberson, Chair Mike Rumpf, Planning Director James Brake Hanna Matras, Senior Planner Sharon Grcevic Kathy Zeitler, Senior Planner David Katz Ed Breese, Principal Planner Brian Miller Brian Sherman, Assistant City Attorney Stephen Palermo, Alternate Aieshia Macon, Alternate ABSENT: Ryan Wheeler, Vice Chair Gregory Murphy Chair Saberson called the meeting to order at 6:31 p.m. 1. Pledge of Allegiance The members recited the Pledge of Allegiance. 2. Introduction of the Board Chair Saberson introduced the members of the Board. He acknowledged Aieshia Macon and Stephen Palermo, Board Alternates, who would be sitting at the dais. 3. Agenda Approval MOTION made by Mr. Katz to approve the agenda, seconded by Mr. Brake. In a voice vote, the motion passed unanimously. 4. Approval of Minutes from August 26, 2014 meeting MOTION made by Mr. Katz to approve the minutes, seconded by Mr. Miller. In a voice vote, the motion passed unanimously. 5. Communications and Announcements: Report from Staff Mike Rumpf, Planning and Zoning Director, announced the outcome of items previously reviewed which have moved forward to the City Commission: High Ridge Landing PUD rezonings and corresponding Master Site Plan Planning and Development Board Meeting Minutes Boynton Beach, Florida October 28, 2014 st modification were approved on 1 reading and will go to the 11/5/14 meeting for final reading and approval. The Parking Code amendments (SMART growth of sustainable provisions) were nd approved on 2 reading, and are now in effect. 6. New Business: Attorney Sherman administered an oath to all those intending to testify. Casa Del Mar (LUAR 14-001) A.1. - Approve Casa Del Mar Future Land Use Map amendment (LUAR 14-001) from Low Density Residential (LDR) to Special High Density Residential (SHDR), located at 2632 North Federal Highway. Applicant: Dodi Buckmaster Glas, of Gentile Glass Holloway O’Mahoney & Associates, Inc. Ms. Dody Glas, 1907 Commerce Lane, Suite 101, Jupiter , represented the applicant. She went through the applicant’s presentation for the amendment, rezoning, abandonment, and new Master Plan, highlighting the following: There is currently an approval for a facility with dry dockage and slips. There had been a previous approval on the property minus the southeast corner of the site for an 82 unit, 4-story, condo/townhouse configuration. The proposal for consideration is to square off the property adding two additional parcels north of Dimick Road, for a total of 80 fee simple townhomes, along with a private dock and two visitor docks. The land use allows for the two lots under the same land use category with the companion rezoning application bringing them in under the IPUD. Lake Drive previously provided access to the two lots, as an extension north of Dimick Road; however, the abandonment application for it will serve as emergency access from the rear of the property back onto Lake Drive. There is an existing area providing access to the waterfront. There are four- story elements abutting the water. Wall and hedge screening, entry features, amenities, elevations, storm water issues, and architectural materials and color schemes were reviewed. In response to Mr. Katz’s questions, Ms. Glas stated that there would be 16 three-story townhomes on the south side abutting the single family homes. The front of the residential homes will face the rear of the townhomes. With regard to the possibility of making the abutting townhomes two stories, Ms. Glas felt three stories were appropriately sized for the transition to the south. Flood plain elevations, storm water structures/systems, rainwater retention, pedestrian connections, street ingress and egress, and garage utilization were discussed. In response to Mr. Katz’s question about parking requirements, Ms. Zeitler stated there will be 160 owner and 12 guest spaces, which calculates to .15 spaces per unit for the guest spaces. There is one handicap spot required, which is near the pool. Ms. Zeitler 2 Planning and Development Board Meeting Minutes Boynton Beach, Florida October 28, 2014 continued that each single family residence is required to have two parking spaces, which are typically in a garage or driveway, and the garage space counts as a parking space. Ms. Zeitler stated that parking provided in the plan meets Code. It will be stipulated that the garages will only be used for parking – the HOA would enforce the rule. In addition, parking in the street would be enforced by Code Enforcement. It would not be possible to widen the streets, as it would not allow for sufficient flow of traffic. Pedestrians would not walk on a sidewalk by the street; they are directed elsewhere. Green space would be located on the alternative side where the pedestrians would be. Ms. Zeitler said that staff recommends approval with conditions. Mr. Miller expressed concern with lack of parking around the pool and public areas, due to the distance from some of the dwellings. Regarding open space calculations, Ms. Zeitler replied that the boardwalk over the bio- swale is considered open space. The areas between the two waterfront buildings and the water are also considered open space, including the dock, as it is a recreational amenity. Discussion ensued on the inclusion of the pool and cabana in the open space calculation. Ms. Zeitler remarked there was explanatory data on the site plan and in the staff report. Chair Saberson opened the public hearing. Jason Evans , attorney, disclosed he had spoken to Jamie Ann in Planning and Zoning, who informed him he would not be constrained to any time limit for speaking at the meeting. Mr. Sherman stated it would be up to the board to decide how long he has to speak. Evans stated he was speaking for Lakeside Gardens (30 representatives who were present). Chair Saberson allowed Mr. Evans 15 minutes to speak. Mr. Evans stated his objection for the record. Mr. Evans, Leslie Robert Evans & Associates, 214 Brazilian Avenue, Suite #200, Palm Beach, Florida, 33480 , stated he represented the adjacent commercial owner at 2626 North Federal Highway and also resident Tony Mauro, at 2611 Lake Drive North. He acknowledged he was speaking for residents of Lakeside Gardens (a single-family home development to the south). Mr. Evans said he did not think the Boynton Beach Code of Ordinances was being respected by this application. He also felt the staff report overlooked the people who will have to deal with the amendment. Mr. Evans said there are 11 requirements in the Code in Article 2, Section D3. Referring to the staff report of October 20, 2014, Mr. Evans addressed the following requirements: 1. Demonstration of need a. Does not provide data that more single family homes are needed 3 Planning and Development Board Meeting Minutes Boynton Beach, Florida October 28, 2014 2. Availability of public services and infrastructure a. Lower level of land will increase flooding, raised level of land will produce runoff (health and safety issue) b. Difficult access from home to pool c. Massive parking issues d. No data given for drainage, sewage and parking e. That garages not be used for storage is requested, not required 3. Sustainability a. Surge/flooding, no analysis 4. Compatibility a. Unsupported staff recommendation that the project will not affect adjacent properties (parking, values, flooding) b. Aesthetics inconsistent with environment Mr. Evans stated that now is the time to do due diligence; the developer, City and residents should meet. Mr. Katz asked Ms. Glas if there would be any access to the project off Dimick Road. Ms. Glas replied the vehicular access is from Federal Highway, although there is emergency access on North Lake Drive. She added there is pedestrian access via a sidewalk along Dimick Road. There are gates along the fence on the south side. In response to a question by Mr. Katz, Ms. Glas commented that it would be possible to prevent any access from Dimick Road by eliminating the gates on that side. Mr. Evans confirmed there were 16 access points (gates) on Dimick Road. Robert Moore, 318 Boca Ranch Road, West Palm Beach , said he is a Planning, Zoning and Building consultant, and was there to represent Tony Mauro. Mr. Moore spoke in opposition to the project, citing small setback, lack of driveways to individual units, one handicap parking space, no area to walk from one house to the next safely, and no area for service vehicles to park. He summarized there is too much development for the property, and forecast that the amendment would meet opposition in Tallahassee. Robert Gonzalez, attorney, 636 Potter Road , represented himself and his wife. He expressed concern about the project, desiring conversation with the developers and planners regarding how the development would tie in with their community. He also cited a serious issue with drainage and questioned the parking calculation. Margaret Ann Lembo, Matilda Holdings LLC, 2610 North Federal Highway , stated her LLC owns about 2.97 acres between Dimick and Potter Roads. She advised that her property is not available for excess/overflow vehicle parking or for construction vehicles or equipment. Ms. Lembo also commented on a property at 615 Potter Road, which has become a swale area; she did not want that to flood and further decay her land. 4 Planning and Development Board Meeting Minutes Boynton Beach, Florida October 28, 2014 Mike McCleary, 2600 Lake Drive North , pointed out that a car was parked next to the gates on one of the drawings and predicted people would park on the street. He also expressed concern about the drainage, noting that all the storm drains lead to one pipe going out the wall. In addition, he wondered if ladder trucks (fire trucks) could navigate in the development, and said there are too many units. Susie Kay, lots #114 and #115 in Lakeside Garden (aka 640 Potter Road, 33435), recalled the following issues which were addressed in 1978 regarding a condominium (Inlet Harbor Club) built behind her property: land elevation of four feet above grade did not allow for proper drainage or surface water neighboring homes suffer flooding damage, debris in street (distributed photographs) John Trach, 2623 Lake Drive North , expressed concern about the 40-foot setback/right-of-way being too small and felt 50 or 60 feet should be used. June Trach, 2623 Lake Drive North , said she had an independent surveyor measure the width of Dimick Road, which was an average of 15 feet of pavement. (She distributed photos of Dimick Road and flooding.) Ms. Trach stated that Florida Statute 553.5041 requires six handicap parking spots. John Colewell, 628 Dimick Road , did not see the purpose of the gates on Dimick Road since the townhouses do not have an address on Dimick Road – he thought they would be used for service deliveries and loading/unloading. If so, two cars would not be able to pass on the road. He thought the gates should be eliminated. Mike Mrotek, 2624 Lake Drive North , opposed the project, citing too little distance between his home and the proposed buildings. He also cited the narrow width of Dimick Road, property value decline, and increased water running down Dimick Road. Dr. James Devoursney, 2625 Lake Drive North , expressed concern that a four-story building would be right next to his two-story house, overlooking his property. He was also concerned about the effect of another retaining wall to be built about five feet away from his property. Dr. Devoursney wondered what the new development would do to the settlement of his home, built in 2007. Monica Devoursney, 2625 Lake Drive North , was opposed to the project, citing the abandonment of the 3,000-square foot road that their daughter plays on, a four-story building looking at her house, and a decrease in property value. She felt a two-story development would blend in better. Liliana Devoursney, 2625 Lake Drive North , said she is allowed to play only on the dead-end road because people speed on the other roads. In addition, she expressed opposition, saying that the proposed buildings would face her bathroom and bedroom windows. 5 Planning and Development Board Meeting Minutes Boynton Beach, Florida October 28, 2014 Tony Mauro, 2611 Lake Drive North , stated he also has an office at 2626 North Federal Highway. He wondered what the acreage was without the road and southeast corner, believing it to be much less than four acres. Mr. Morrow thought too much was unknown about the project. Chair Saberson pointed out that the Code measures gross density in terms of the overall land area. That density is applied to the unit of land area. Chair Saberson closed the public hearing. Mr. Katz was curious if the amendment would take the property from low to high residential density. Ms. Matras said the majority of the development is already classified special high density, and the land use amendment only applies to two lots. She stated that the majority of issues that have been raised (storm water, parking, and road width) do not pertain to the land use. Ms. Matras continued that if the land use of those two lots were not amended, then they could only be used for single-family homes. Mr. Katz confirmed that if this request is denied, only those two single-family lots would be affected. Ms. Matras added that the density is below 17. It was confirmed that other than the two single-family lots, the rest of the property is already high-density residential, and already approved for 96 units. Mr. Brake was curious what the level of divider was between the low density and high density. Ms. Matras said measures are taken to mitigate the impact by Code regulations. Ms. Glas commented that at the high-density lots, there are Code requirements based on the I.P.U.D. There is also language in the Code requiring that they meet the standards of the R1AA since there is an existing single-family south of the property. A side setback of 10 feet is required, and that is exceeded. Ms. Glas explained the setback using a diagram. Mr. Katz established that the site minus the two single-family vacant lots is 4.4 acres. If that acreage was developed under the Special High Density, it could allow 20 dwelling units per acre, which would be 90 maximum. Mr. Katz wondered what the developable size of the land would be minus the road, park area, sidewalks, swales, etc. Ms. Matras reiterated that the previous approved development had 82 units, but she would have to calculate the specific answer to Mr. Katz’s question. Mr. Katz thought they were putting too many units onto the land. Mr. Brake requested an explanation of the flood mitigation system and if the swale area Howard Jablon, A.J. Hydro Engineering, along Dimick Road is part of the system. 5932 Northwest 73 Court, Parkland , replied there are two parts to the system. The first is a small motor system onsite, and the City Engineer has been provided the final detailed storm water calculations along with the final detailed grading plans, drainage plans, etc., that indicate exactly how the storm water system will function. Mr. Jablon stated that they are required to retain all of the water onsite and discharge it somehow onsite within a reasonable time. No water that falls on the site will be discharging offsite; the perimeter walls help retain the water onsite. Secondly, there is a series of storm water structures throughout the site to collect the water, exfiltration systems, and 6 Planning and Development Board Meeting Minutes Boynton Beach, Florida October 28, 2014 a bio-swale. All of the water quality treatment that is required by the State is contained onsite. Mr. Jablon continued that everything from the perimeter of the site is graded into the property. When the water builds up, injection wells will take up the water. There is also a storm structure beyond the 25-year storm requirement, which will, if it overflows, send the water out to the Intracoastal prior to breaching the perimeter walls. Mr. Jablon emphasized there is no way for the site to impact the offsite area. Mr. Brake asked Mr. Jablon to explain the swale area long Dimick Road. Mr. Jablon stated that the current proposal would place a five-foot wide sidewalk on the north side of Dimick Road a minimum of six feet from the edge of the pavement. That six-foot area would be a grassy swale. It begins at US 1 heading east and will be graded down to the intersection at Dimick Road and Northwest Lake Drive, which is the low level. He pointed out that the subject site, for the most part, is graded higher and then flattens out at Dimick Road and Northwest Lake Drive. Since water will pond in that area, Mr. Jablon said they plan to install storm structures there to capture the water and bring it back into the site to drain into the site. Water will flow in, but not out, through a series of valves. Ms. Grcevic was curious if the success of the development was based solely on the two lots, and Ms. Glas replied the two lots were an integral part of the way the project is designed and the client owns the lots. MOTION made by Mr. Katz, seconded by Mr. Brake, to deny approval of LUAR 14-001, Casa Del Mar Future Land Use Map amendment (LUAR 14-001) from Low Density Residential (LDR) to Special High Density Residential (SHDR), located at 2632 North Federal Highway, applicant: Dodi Buckmaster Glas, of Gentile Glass Holloway O’Mahoney & Associates, Inc. In a vote by roll call, the motion passed (5-2) as follows: Ms. Macon, yes; Mr. Palermo, yes; Mr. Miller, yes; Mr. Katz, yes; Ms. Grcevic, yes; Mr. Brake, no; Chair Saberson, no. Casa Del Mar (REZN 14-005) A.2. - Approve Casa Del Mar rezoning (REZN 14-005) from an IPUD (Infill Planned Unit Development) with the Master Plan for a marina use, and from R-1AA (Single-Family Residential District) to an IPUD with a Master Plan for 80 fee-simple townhouse units, located at 2632 North Federal Highway. Applicant: Dodi Buckmaster Glas, of Gentile Glass Holloway O’Mahoney & Associates, Inc. Ms. Glas stated that they will have discussions with the neighborhood and provide education to clear up misinformation regarding the project. Chair Saberson opened the public hearing. Robert Moore, 318 Boca Ranch Road, West Palm Beach , stated the only way the garage issue (not be used for storage) can be enforced is by warrant if the resident does not want the officer to look in the garage. He also stated there should be 7 Planning and Development Board Meeting Minutes Boynton Beach, Florida October 28, 2014 additional guest and/or service parking in the “planned unit development,” and staff, neighbors and developers should work on the plan so that it works for the neighborhood. Mr. Katz hoped that staff would be included in the developer’s discussions with the neighborhood. Jason Evans requested that his objections to Item A.1 be adopted to Items A.2, A.3, and A.4. Mike McCleary, 2600 Lake Drive North, stated there used to be homes there on the two lots and it should be left that way. He also noted a marina had been approved for the area in 2006. He wanted to keep Lakeside Gardens as is. Susie Kay,640 Potter Road, presented a letter dated July 14, 1978. She also pointed out that all the water on her property and other nearby lots comes from a condominium project behind them which could not contain their water. When the Intracoastal rises, there will be no place for water to go. She also said they were told a marina, not townhomes, had been approved in the past. Ms. Glas clarified that the entire site is being rezoned because it is a full master plan. Dr. James Devoursney, 2625 Lake Drive North, reiterated that the proposed buildings to the east of his property will look right into his children’s rooms. The easement abuts his property and will be “inviting” to outsiders. Chair Saberson closed the public hearing. MOTION made by Mr. Katz, seconded by Mr. Miller, to deny approval of Casa Del Mar rezoning (REZN 14-005) as stated in the agenda. In a vote by roll call, the motion passed (5-2) as follows: Ms. Macon, no; Mr. Palermo, yes; Mr. Miller, yes; Mr. Katz, yes; Ms. Grcevic, yes; Mr. Brake, no; Chair Saberson, yes. Casa Del Mar (ABAN 14-001) A.3. - Approve request for abandonment of a portion of Lake Drive, immediately north of Dimick Road. Applicant: Dodi Buckmaster Glas, of Gentile Glass Holloway O’Mahoney & Associates, Inc. The applicant had no comments, noting comments had been said and done. Chair Saberson opened the public hearing. Mike McCleary, 2600 Lake Drive North , commented that the part of the road under discussion is not abandoned, but is a dead-end going to the property, and it is not part of the developer’s property. Chair Saberson closed the public hearing. 8 Planning and Development Board Meeting Minutes Boynton Beach, Florida October 28, 2014 MOTION made by Mr. Katz, seconded by Mr. Miller, to deny approval of Casa Del Mar, (ABAN 14-0001), as stated on the agenda. In a vote by roll call, the motion passed (6- 1) as follows: Ms. Macon, yes; Mr. Palermo, yes; Mr. Miller, yes; Mr. Katz, yes; Ms. Grcevic, yes; Mr. Brake, yes; Chair Saberson, no. Casa Del Mar (NWSP 14-003) A.4. - Approve request for a new Master Plan/Site Plan (NWSP 14-003) for 80 fee-simple townhouse units, waterfront amenity area, and related site improvements located at 2632 North Federal Highway. Applicant: Dodi Buckmaster Glas, of Gentile Glass Holloway O’Mahoney & Associates, Inc. The applicant had no comments, but would answer questions. Ms. Zeitler stated that staff recommended approval of this item with conditions. Chair Saberson opened the public hearing. John Trach, 2623 Lake Drive North, said he was a registered land surveyor in the State of Florida. He asserted that the three to four-inch water line running down to the fire hydrant on Dimick Road was inadequate for fire safety and suggested it be connected to the fire hydrant at six or eight inches. Regarding sewer, he thought the new site should have its own lift station. Chair Saberson closed the public hearing. Mr. Palermo asked Mr. Trach if he referenced storm sewers or pump sewers, and Mr. Trach replied he meant sanitary sewers. In regards to a question by Mr. Palermo, Mr. Trach remarked there were two catch basins on Northwest Lake Drive. He clarified he was discussing the sanitary sewer structure, noting that the sewer matter would bubble up out of the manholes. Howard Jablon, A.J. Hydro Engineering, 5932 Northwest 73 Court, Parkland, reported they had had lengthy discussions with the Utility Department and have received a letter of sufficient capacity for the wastewater system from the Utility Director. Regarding the water system, they will be connected to an existing stub located on the north side of the property. They plan to run an eight-inch water main on the north side of Dimick Road from Northwest Lake Drive back to U.S. 1; that will significantly improve pressure in that area. Ms. Macon was curious if there was any other property on Federal Highway comparable in number of units and size of land to the proposed project. Ms. Glas responded there is such a development adjacent to the north. Ms. Macon asked if that development is currently experiencing (or had in the past experienced) drainage issues. Mr. Rumpf responded that it is a relatively new project, and they have not heard any complaints relative to parking or drainage. MOTION made by Mr. Katz, seconded by Mr. Miller, to deny approval of Casa Del Mar, 9 Planning and Development Board Meeting Minutes Boynton Beach, Florida October 28, 2014 new Master Plan/Site Plan (NWSP 14-003) as stated on the agenda. Mr. Katz opined that the site would be developed one way or another and suggested the affected parties work together to iron out their differences. Mr. Miller also commented he would like to see the property developed, but felt there should be more communication between the residents and the developer. He recommended that the developer create more green space and more parking, and create something that will benefit not only the new residents, but the ones already residing in the surrounding neighborhoods. In a vote by roll call, the motion passed (5-2) as follows: Ms. Macon, no; Mr. Palermo, no; Mr. Miller, yes; Mr. Katz, yes; Ms. Grcevic, yes; Mr. Brake, yes; Chair Saberson, yes. 7. Other 8. Comments by members 9. Adjournment Upon motion duly made and seconded, the meeting was adjourned at 8:57 p.m. [Minutes prepared by J. Rubin, Prototype, Inc.] 10 NEW BUSINESS 6.A. Texas Roadhouse Restaurant (MSPM 14-005) Major Site Plan Modification Staff Report – Texas Roadhouse (MSPM 14-005) Memorandum No PZ 14-038 Page 2 Goods and Off Broadway Shoes) a Local Retail Commercial (LRC) future land use classification, and zoned Community Commercial (C3); and West: Mall parking lot, and farther west are developed single-family residential properties within unincorporated Palm Beach County. Site Details: The project site is part of the 116 acre Boynton Beach Mall property, and is located on the north side of Old Boynton Road, immediately west of Winchester Park Boulevard/ Mall entry drive. The parcel is a 1.4 acre outparcel currently utilized as parking, on the south side of the Mall internal loop road, immediately abutting Old Boynton Road, and in front of Macy’s Department Store. The parcel is part of the 15.4 acre portion of the Mall property owned by Burdines (occupied by Macy’s and parking on three sides of the store) and shares cross access and cross parking with the balance of the Mall property. BACKGROUND Proposal: Bradley Miller, of Miller Land Planning, Inc., representing PH Developers LLC, is proposing to construct a one-story, 7,420 square foot Texas Roadhouse restaurant building in the Macy’s Department Store parking lot abutting Old Boynton Road. As a part of the project, a section of the parking lot will be reconfigured to accommodate the new building. ANALYSIS Concurrency: Traffic: A traffic statement for the proposed project was sent to the Palm Beach County Traffic Division for concurrency review in order to ensure an adequate level of service. A traffic concurrency approval letter was received from Palm Beach County indicating that 4 AM peak hour trips and 31 PM peak hour trips would be generated as a result of this project and that no permits are to be issued after the build-out date of 2019. School: School concurrency is not required for this type of project. Utilities: The City’s water capacity, as increased through the purchase of up to 5 million gallons of potable water per day from Palm Beach County Utilities, would meet the projected potable water for this project. Sufficient sanitary sewer and wastewater treatment capacity is also currently available to serve the project, subject to the applicant making a firm reservation of capacity, following site plan approval. Police / Fire: Staff reviewed the site plan and determined that current staffing levels would be sufficient to meet the expected demand for services. Drainage: Conceptual drainage information was provided for the City’s review. The Engineering Division has found the conceptual information to be adequate and is recommending that the review of specific drainage solutions be deferred until time of permit review. Staff Report – Texas Roadhouse (MSPM 14-005) Memorandum No PZ 14-038 Page 3 Vehicular Access: The site plan (Sheet SP-1) shows that two (2) points of ingress/egress are proposed for the restaurant from the Mall’s internal loop road, on the west side of the building. Both driveways are proposed to be 25 feet in width and accommodate full traffic turning movements. Access to the internal loop road, which completely encircles the Mall buildings, is provided from two (2) access drives off of Old Boynton road and three (3) access drives off of Congress Avenue. Circulation: Vehicular circulation from each driveway would include two-way circulation that continues throughout the parking lot. Parking is proposed on the north and west sides of the building and a walkway has been provided to connect with the building entrance from both the parking abutting the building and from the Old Boynton Road sidewalk. A second walkway is proposed off of the Old Boynton Road sidewalk, at the west end of the site. This connection point is intended to provide greater pedestrian access to the larger Mall property, and in the future be extended through a pedestrian crosswalk within the loop road and a walkway continued on to the Mall buildings. Parking: The outparcel proposed for the restaurant currently consists of 147 parking spaces, landscape islands and light poles. The site is where the Mall management typically places the carnival every year, as it is remote from any of the Mall store entrances and is seldom utilized by Mall patrons. The site plan (Sheet SP-1) depicts the provision of 79 parking spaces on the outparcel, once the building is located and the remaining parking area is reconfigured. Based upon the number of seats proposed with the new restaurant (281), 113 parking spaces would be required for the new use, based upon the code provision of 1 parking space per 2.5 seats. The Mall has an approved shared parking analysis in effect, which is updated with each new development proposed for the property. The analysis was last updated when the Movie Theater was added to the Mall. As part of the proposed development of the Texas Roadhouse, an updated parking analysis was prepared by Simmons & White Engineers. The Shared Parking Statement notes that the Mall currently contains 5,478 parking spaces and construction of the new restaurant building will decrease that number to 5,411, a reduction of 67 spaces. The analysis determined that peak demand for parking (4,903 spaces) occurs at 3:00PM on a weekend day in December. The City code requires a 10% buffer to account for any unforeseen parking demand peculiar to the site or operational characteristics that might not be captured in a standard analysis. Adding the buffer increases the total demand for parking to 5,393 spaces, resulting in a surplus of 18 parking spaces during peak demand. Once the 67 parking spaces immediately around the restaurant are full, the parking spaces immediately across the Mall loop road will be utilized, similar to overflow parking for Longhorn Steakhouse utilizing Dick’s Sporting Goods parking, Carolina Ale House utilizing other Boynton Commons parking, and Chili’s Restaurant utilizing other Boynton Shoppes parking. All proposed parking stalls, including the size and location of the handicap space, were reviewed and approved by both the Engineering Division and Building Division. In addition, all necessary traffic control signage and pavement markings will be provided to clearly delineate areas on site and direction of circulation. Landscaping: The applicant has submitted a landscape plan for areas immediately surrounding Staff Report – Texas Roadhouse (MSPM 14-005) Memorandum No PZ 14-038 Page 4 the building (Sheet LP1) and one for the parking area and buffers (Sheet LP-1). The existing Mall landscape buffer along Old Boynton Road would not be impacted by the development of this parcel. The landscape plan surrounding the building depicts the use of East Palatka Holly, Live Oak and Cassia canopy trees and Areca palm trees. Typical shrubs would include Cocoplum, Blue Plumbago, Dwarf Allamanda and Green Island Ficus. The plan also depicts the use of sod along the east side of the building, which will be required to be converted to WaterWise shrub and/or groundcover materials (see Exhibit “C” – Conditions of Approval). Additionally, staff recommends the addition of taller plant material along the north side of the building to further enhance the north façade and better screen the back- of-house operations (see Exhibit “C” – Conditions of Approval). The balance of the site landscaping, as depicted on Sheet LP-1, indicates the use of East Palatka Holly and Yellow Elder canopy trees and Areca palm trees. Typical shrubs would include Indian Hawthorn, Podocarpus, Croton and Green Island Ficus. The pervious area for the restaurant outparcel would total 30%, and consists of foundation landscaping, buffer/perimeter areas and landscape islands. The landscape code requires that 50% or more of the plant material be native species or low to medium water demand varieties. The plant list (Sheet LP-1) indicates that 68% of the trees and 75% of the shrubs and groundcover materials would be native and/or drought tolerant species. There are existing trees within the parking area that are to be removed as part of the building construction and redesign of the parking lot. These trees, totaling 118 diameter inches are required to be mitigated and placed within the boundaries of the site. However, should the site not be capable of accommodating the number of trees needed for mitigation purposes, these trees may be placed elsewhere on the mall grounds (see Exhibit “C” – Conditions of Approval). Building and Site: The proposed building is designed as a one (1)-story structure with parapet walls at approximately 22 feet in height, as well as a hip roof features approximately 29 feet in height, with a gable roof above the building entrance at approximately 16 feet in height. The proposed building placement complies with the minimum setbacks of the C3 zoning district, which are 20 feet for the front and side corner, and zero (0) feet for the interior side setback. The rear setback would not apply, as the building is an outparcel of the Mall. The proposed building would be setback 20 feet from the south property line abutting Old Boynton Road, as recommended by staff, so that the building is the prominent feature on the outparcel, not parking in front of it. The floor plan (Sheet A1.0) indicates the proposed restaurant would have 281 seats inside, with no outdoor dining. The interior seating consists mainly of booths, with some table and chairs, and limited seating at the small bar area. There are benches proposed under the roof canopy north of the entry door for the outdoor waiting area, as well as an indoor waiting area. There are also a couple of benches along the walkway leading from the sidewalk along Old Boynton Road, as well as a covered bicycle rack just to the south of the building entry. Building Height: The building elevations (Sheet A2.0a) indicate the highest point of the structure would be the two (2) hip roof features, at a height of 28’–10”, with the typical parapet wall at 22’–2”, well below the maximum of 45 feet allowed in the C3 zoning district and comparable with other buildings in the vicinity. Staff Report – Texas Roadhouse (MSPM 14-005) Memorandum No PZ 14-038 Page 5 Design: The proposed building is designed to reflect the western motif prevalent in several restaurant chains (Longhorn Steakhouse, Western Sizzlin, Texas Roadhouse). According to the “Legend” shown on Sheets A-2.0a the base of the building will consist of a ledgestone veneer, stucco walls painted a creamy tan, “Believable Buff” – SW 6120 and green trim color, “Dark Green” from Porter Paints. The roof will consist of five rib metal material, painted brown and the window trim and shutters will be a medium brown stained cedar wood. Public Art: The applicant is undecided at this point and may consider paying into the Art in Public Places fund rather than placing art on site. Should they decide to provide art on site, ultimate review and approval of the artist and artwork would be under the purview of the Arts Commission. Site Lighting: The photometric plan (Sheet E-1) proposes a total of six (6) new freestanding lights in the parking lot. The light fixtures would be placed upon concrete poles at a height of 25 feet. The applicant also proposes decorative black gooseneck light fixtures on the building and under soffit lighting around the building. Staff recommends the soffit lighting be recessed rather than surface mounted, in an effort to conceal the light source (see Exhibit “C” – Conditions of Approval). All lighting would conform to the maximum illumination level of 5.9 foot-candles for spot readings on-site. Signage: Wall signage would consist of internally illuminated channel lettering. Actual sign details were not provided as part of this submittal, only mock-up signage on the building elevations. At time of permit submittal, the applicant will be required to provide detailed drawings of the proposed signage and square footage calculations to ensure compliance with City codes (see Exhibit “C” – Conditions of Approval). Additionally, exposed neon tubing is prohibited in wall signage under the sign code regulations. RECOMMENDATION The Development Application Review Team (DART) has reviewed this request for major site plan modification approval and recommends approval contingent upon satisfying all comments indicated in Exhibit “C” – Conditions of Approval. Any additional conditions recommended by the Board or City Commission shall be documented accordingly in the Conditions of Approval. S:\Planning\SHARED\WP\PROJECTS\Texas Roadhouse\MSPM 14-005\Staff Report.doc EXHIBIT "A" TEXAS ROADHOUSE SITE LOCATION MAP ¯ 075150300450600 Feet TEXAS ROAD HOUSE Alan D. Holt, A.S.L.A. L A N D S C A P E A R C H I T E C T, PA BOYNTON BEACH FL LA #1659 FL LC #26000193 P.O. BOX 2549, PANAMA CITY, FL 32402 TELEPHONE: (850)914-9006 E-MAIL:alan@alandholtasla.com City of Boynton Beach, FL Texas Roadhouse EXHIBIT “C” Conditions of Approval Project Name: Texas Roadhouse File number: MSPM 14-005 rd Reference: 3review plans identified as a Major Site Plan Modification with an November 5, 2014 Planning and Zoning Department date stamp marking. INCLUDEREJECT DEPARTMENTS ENGINEERING / PUBLIC WORKS / FORESTRY / UTILITIES Comments: 1. On the boundary survey, please verify the road right-of-way line doesn’t extend beyond the current 40 feet distance from the centerline of the road, or clarify if there is a dedicated instrument to justify sidewalk, HC path, signal box encroachments as shown on the sketch. Same consideration for the overhead lines and utility poles north of the adjoining south boundary line. 2. The proposed 5’ pedestrian crosswalk is located outside the boundary parcel and will require the approval of the adjacent parcel owner. Same considerations for the on-site drainage modifications and sanitary sewer connections. 3. Please indicate on the Site Plan the provision of a minimum outside turning radius of 55 feet to allow for turning movements solid waste and emergency vehicles. 4. Due to the age, health, and physical condition (not Florida #1 quality) of the 9 existing Black Olive trees on the site, the Landscape Architect should propose the total 118 diameter inches of the trees to be removed and replaced [diameter inches] on the site. The replacement trees should be shown by a separate symbol on the formal landscape plan sheet and can be placed anywhere on the Boynton Beach Mall common areas. 5. The applicant should show landscape improvements to break up the wall expanse along the North side of the building. FIRE Comments: None, all previous comments satisfied. POLICE Comments:None, all previous comments satisfied. BUILDING DIVISION Texas Roadhouse (MSPM 14-005) Conditions of Approval Page 2 of 3 DEPARTMENTSINCLUDEREJECT Comments:None, all previous comments satisfied. PARKS AND RECREATION Comments: None PLANNING AND ZONING Comments: 6. It is the applicant’s responsibility to ensure that the application requests are publicly advertised in accordance with Ordinance 04- 007 and Ordinance 05-004 and an affidavit provided to the City Clerk. 7. Prior to submittal of building permit application, please provide a copy of the Traffic Performance Concurrency approval letter from PBC Traffic Engineering. 8. Is a FPL transformer box required? If so, it shall not be placed between the building and Old Boynton Road. 9. Will all meters and typical back-of-house equipment be located within a meter room? If not, indicate the placement on the appropriate wall(s) and depict the method of screening. Additionally, please place a note on building elevations that all equipment attached to the building shall be required to be painted to match the building and screened with landscaping. 10. Proposed soffit lighting shall be recessed into the soffit and not surface mounted, in an effort to conceal the light source. 11. At time of permit submittal, please update all sheets to ensure uniformity of walkway alignment, roof overhangs and dumpster enclosure design. 12. Please revise the site plan, landscape plan and all other appropriate plans to depict location of required public art. It is recommended you coordinate this effort with Debby Coles-Dobay, Public Arts Administrator (561-742-6026). 13. At time of permit submittal, please provide signage details, including square footage calculations, sign types (i.e. channel letters), lighting source, materials, colors, logo percentage of entire sign, etc., for staff determination of compliance with the City’s sign code regulations. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Texas Roadhouse (MSPM 14-005) Conditions of Approval Page 3 of 3 DEPARTMENTSINCLUDEREJECT Comments: N/A PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD CONDITIONS Comments: To be determined. CITY COMMISSION CONDITIONS Comments: To be determined. S:\Planning\SHARED\WP\PROJECTS\Texas Roadhouse\MSPM 14-005\COA.doc DEVELOPMENT ORDER OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA PROJECT NAME: Texas Roadhouse (MSPM 14-005) APPLICANT: Bradley Miller, Miller Land Planning APPLICANT’S ADDRESS: 508 E. Boynton Beach Blvd., Boynton Beach, FL 33435 DATE OF HEARING RATIFICATION BEFORE CITY COMMISSION: December 15, 2014 APPROVAL SOUGHT: Major Site Plan Modification approval to construct a one-story, 7,420 square foot restaurant building and related site improvements, located on the north side of Old Boynton Road, immediately west of Winchester Park Boulevard/Mall entry drive, in front of Macy’s Department Store and zoned C3 (Community Commercial). LOCATION OF PROPERTY: Boynton Beach Mall outparcel, in front of Macy’s, along Old Boynton Road DRAWING(S): SEE EXHIBIT “B” ATTACHED HERETO. ________ THIS MATTER was presented to the City Commission of the City of Boynton Beach, Florida on the date of hearing stated above. The City Commission having considered the approval sought by the applicant and heard testimony from the applicant, members of city administrative staff and the public finds as follows: 1. Application for the approval sought was made by the Applicant in a manner consistent with the requirements of the City’s Land Development Regulations. 2. The Applicant ___ HAS ___ HAS NOT established by substantial competent evidence a basis for the approval requested. 3. The conditions for development requested by the Applicant, administrative staff, or suggested by the public and supported by substantial competent evidence are as set forth on Exhibit “C” with notation “Included.” 4. The Applicant’s request is hereby ___ GRANTED subject to the conditions referenced in paragraph 3 above. ___ DENIED 5. This Order shall take effect immediately upon issuance by the City Clerk. 6. All further development on the property shall be made in accordance with the terms and conditions of this order. 7. Other: _______________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________ DATED:__________________________ _____________________________________________ City Clerk S:\Planning\SHARED\WP\PROJECTS\Texas Roadhouse\MSPM 14-005\DO.doc NEW BUSINESS 6.B. 622 South Road Variance (ZNCV 14-001) Zoning Variance Page 2 Miskiewicz Variances ZNCV 14-001 ANALYSIS The City Commission has the authority and duty to authorize upon appeal such variance from the terms of a city ordinance as will not be contrary to the public interest when, owing to special conditions, a literal enforcement of the provisions of the city ordinance would result in unnecessary and undue hardship. In order to authorize any variance from the terms of an ordinance, the applicant must demonstrate that the request meets the following criteria (a-g). The applicant’s justification and response to these criteria is attached (see Exhibit “D” - Justification Statement). a. That special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the land, structure, or building involved and which are not applicable to other lands, structures or buildings in the same zoning district. The platted Harbor Estates land configuration is not typical of most single family neighborhoods. Typically, the lots are rectangular in shape, with the narrow portion abutting the street and the longer portion being the depth of the lot. Setback regulations are developed for this typical scenario; the greater setbacks being the front and rear and the lesser being the sides, in order to more efficiently occupy the land. Harbor Estates’ typical lot dimensions are 80 ft. deep by 180 ft. wide; a lot size of 14,400 sq. ft. For comparison, another subdivision within the City and with the same zoning designation has typical lot dimensions of 140 ft. deep by 85 ft. wide; a lot size of 10,500 sq. ft. b. That the special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. The applicant’s justification (see Exhibit “D”) notes that the owner purchased this property without knowledge of the unpermitted addition. The applicant states that all the appropriate research was done by the professionals that were hired to aid in the purchase of the home. c. That granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this ordinance to other lands, buildings, or structures in the same zoning district. Granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this ordinance to other lands, buildings, or structures in the same zoning district. Historically, Harbor Estates has had several properties with similar circumstances. The City has granted similar variances within the subject subdivision. Both, Harbor Estates, Lot 38 and Lot 39, received variances to allow 10 foot rear setbacks. d. That literal interpretation of the provisions of this ordinance would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same zoning district under the terms of the ordinance and would work unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant. Literal interpretation of the provisions of the ordinance would not deprive the applicant of rights or cause undue hardship. However, due to the irregular land configuration of this specific subdivision the expansion of the dwelling is limited. Again, note that there has been variances granted within the subject subdivision for the rear yard setbacks. e. That the variance granted is the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, building, or structure. Page 3 Miskiewicz Variances ZNCV 14-001 Within the land development regulations, Administrative Adjustments are permitted with staff approval. This process could have granted the applicant up to a 5 foot deviation from the required 20 feet to allow a 15 foot rear yard setback. The subject structure requires a setback of 13 feet, only an additional two (2) feet from what is permitted through the Administrative Adjustment process. f. That the granting of the variance will be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of this chapter [ordinance] and that such variance will not be injurious to the area involved or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. Granting the variance would still allow the intent of the ordinance to be maintained. Building setbacks are generally intended to provide uniformity to a neighborhood, allow a certain measure of privacy between neighbors, provide space for light and air circulation, and provide distance between neighbors to mitigate noise and odors. Due to the circumstances discussed in this report, the intent is being met; also, the similar variance requests that have been granted to other properties within the subject subdivision. The subject property abuts an R-3, Multi-Family, zoning district at the southern edge of the neighborhood and the rear setback encroachment will be minimally visible from South Road. g. For variances to minimum lot area or lot frontage requirements, that property is not available from adjacent properties in order to meet these requirements, or that the acquisition of such property would cause the adjacent property or structures to become nonconforming. The requested variance is for reduced setback, rather than for lot area or frontage requirements, therefore this criteria is not applicable. CONCLUSIONS / RECOMMENDATION Staff’s recommends APPROVAL of this variance request, based on the following justification: 1. The minimum intent and purpose of setbacks within zoning regulations will be met, despite the granting of the variance, based on the unique land configuration of this subdivision; 2. That granting the variance is consistent with previous approvals granted to others within the same neighborhood under similar circumstances that exist on the subject property; and 3. That special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the land, structure, or building involved and which are not applicable to other lands, structures or buildings in the same zoning district. No conditions of approval are recommended; however, any conditions of approval added by the Planning & Development Board or the City Commission will be placed in Exhibit “D” – Conditions of Approval. S:\Planning\SHARED\WP\PROJECTS\Miskiewicz Variance\DRAFT_ Miskiewicz VARIANCE STAFF REPORT.doc Page 4 Miskiewicz Variances ZNCV 14-001 Exhibit “A” – Location Map Address: 622 South Road Page 5 Miskiewicz Variances ZNCV 14-001 Exhibit “B” – Survey Page 6 Miskiewicz Variances ZNCV 14-001 Exhibit “C”- Aerial Photographs Credit: Palm Beach Property Appraisers, Pictometry Page 7 Miskiewicz Variances ZNCV 14-001 Exhibit “D”- Applicant Justification Statement Page 8 Miskiewicz Variances ZNCV 14-001 Page 9 Miskiewicz Variances ZNCV 14-001 EXHIBIT "E" Conditions of Approval Project name: 622 South Road File number: ZNCV 14-001 Reference: DEPARTMENTSINCLUDEREJECT PUBLIC WORKS- General Comments: None PUBLIC WORKS- Traffic Comments: None UTILITIES Comments: None FIRE Comments: None POLICE Comments: None ENGINEERING DIVISION Comments: None BUILDING DIVISION Comments: None PARKS AND RECREATION Comments: None FORESTER/ENVIRONMENTALIST Comments: None PLANNING AND ZONING Comments: None ADDITIONAL PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD CONDITIONS Comments: To be determined. Conditions of Approval Page 2 of 2 DEPARTMENTSINCLUDEREJECT ADDITIONAL CITY COMMISSION CONDITIONS Comments: To be determined. S:\Planning\SHARED\WP\PROJECTS\Miskiewicz Variance\COA.doc DEVELOPMENT ORDER OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA PROJECT NAME: Miskiewicz Residence APPLICANT: Michael & Beth Miskiewicz APPLICANT’S ADDRESS: 622 South Road, Boynton Beach, FL 33435 DATE OF HEARING RATIFICATION BEFORE CITY COMMISSION: December 16, 2014 TYPE OF RELIEF SOUGHT:Variance approval for relief from the City of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations, Chapter 3, Article III, Section 2.B.3, requiring a rear building setback of 20 feet, to allow a seven (7) foot variance, and a rear building setback of 13 feet for an addition to a single-family residence in the R-1-AA zoning district. LOCATION OF PROPERTY: 622 South Road, Boynton Beach DRAWING(S): SEE EXHIBIT “B” ATTACHED HERETO. ____X____ THIS MATTER came on to be heard before the City Commission of the City of Boynton Beach, Florida on the date of hearing stated above. The City Commission having considered the relief sought by the applicant and heard testimony from the applicant, members of city administrative staff and the public finds as follows: 1. Application for the relief sought was made by the Applicant in a manner consistent with the requirements of the City’s Land Development Regulations. 2. The Applicant ___ HAS ___ HAS NOT established by substantial competent evidence a basis for the relief requested. 3. The conditions for development requested by the Applicant, administrative staff, or suggested by the public and supported by substantial competent evidence are as set forth on Exhibit “C” with notation “Included”. 4. The Applicant’s application for relief is hereby ___ GRANTED subject to the conditions referenced in paragraph 3 hereof. ___ DENIED 5. This Order shall take effect immediately upon issuance by the City Clerk. 6. All further development on the property shall be made in accordance with the terms and conditions of this order. 7. Other ____________________________________________________________ DATED:__________________________ __________________________________________ City Clerk S:\Planning\SHARED\WP\PROJECTS\Miskiewicz Variance\DO.doc