The URL can be used to link to this page

Agenda 01-27-15 CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD MEETING AGENDA DATE: Tuesday, January 27, 2015 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 November 25, 2014 meeting 5. Communications and Announcements: Report from Staff 6. New Business: Boynton Village & Town Center (MPMD 15-001) A.1 – Approve Master Plan Modification request to Boynton Village & Town Center to amend a 0.42-acre portion of SMU Parcel #5 from 16 townhomes to a four (4) story, 24,000 square foot mixed use building with medical use on the first two (2) floors and four (4) dwelling units on each of the next two (2) floors. Applicant: James Comparato, Compson Associates Group, Inc. Boynton Village & Town Center (MSPM 15-001) A.2. – Approve Major Site Plan Modification request to construct a four (4) story, 24,000 square foot mixed use building with medical use on the first two (2) floors and four (4) dwelling units on each of the next two (2) floors, and related site improvements.Applicant: James Comparato, Compson Associates Group, Inc. Interim LDR Amendments (CDRV 15-001) B. – Approve proposed amendments to the Land Development Regulations (LDR), including 1) Provisions for the new zoning use Medical Care or Testing (In-Patient); 2) Continued codification of the Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) overlay development standards; 3) Amendments to the sign standards applicable to commercial uses in certain M-1 zoning districts; 4) Amendments to sign regulations to facilitate certain improvements to non-conforming signs at shopping centers; and 5) The decrease in parking requirements for hotels. Applicant: City-initiated. 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 Planning and Development Board Meeting Agenda Page 2 January 27, 2015 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 NEW BUSINESS 6.A.1 Boynton Village & Town Center (MPMD 15-001) Master Plan Modification Boynton Village & Town Center MPMD 15-001 Staff Report Memorandum No. 14-042 Page 2 Adjacent Uses: North: Right-of-way for the Boynton Canal (C-16), then farther north is the Renaissance Commons mixed use development, zoned SMU (Suburban Mixed Use); South: Right-of-way for Old Boynton Road, then farther south is a mix of multi- family and single-family residential, zoned R-3 and R1-AA and commercial development (Oakwood Square shopping center), zoned C-3 (Community Commercial); East: Right-of-way for the Lake Worth Drainage District (E-4) Canal, then farther east is single-family residential (Sky Lake), zoned R1-AA (Single- Family Residential); and West: Right-of-way for Congress Avenue, then farther west are developed commercial properties, zoned C-3 (Community Commercial). BACKGROUND Compson Associates Group, Inc. is requesting a Master Plan Modification to the Boynton Village & Town Center Master Plan to redesignate a 0.42-acre portion of SMU Parcel #5 within Boynton Village & Town Center from the previously approved 16 townhomes to 12,000 square feet of medical use and 8 apartments (see “Exhibit A” – Location Map). The property is a former dairy farm that received land use amendment and rezoning approval in 2005. The portion of the property containing the Target and Best Buy stores was zoned C-3, Community Commercial, and the balance of the site was zoned SMU, Suburban Mixed Use, and approved with a corresponding master plan for development. Staff requested a master plan for the entire site, as the interconnectivity and shared amenities warranted a comprehensive review of the 106 acres. This original master plan depicted 405,328 square feet of commercial space (retail, restaurant, & office) plus 1,120 dwelling units. A Master Plan Modification (MPMD 12-003) request was approved on July 17, 2012 to redesign the Cortina portion of the site from 458 townhomes to 34 townhomes, 348 apartments and 80 single-family detached homes, including the relocation and re-sizing of the park land dedication. Chapter 2, Article II, Section 2. D. 6., Master Plans, of the Land Development Regulations states that changes in planned developments shall be processed through the Planning and Development Board and the City Commission. ANALYSIS The applicant is proposing to decrease the number of dwelling units within the master plan from 1,124 to 1,116 and increase the non-residential building area by 12,000 square feet, from 420, 749 square feet to 432,749 square feet. The original Master Plan approval was subject to a CRALLS (Constrained Roadway At Lower Level of Service) designation for the Congress Avenue and Old Boynton Road intersection. A CRALLS designation is a tool utilized by Palm Beach County under their Traffic Performance Standards (TPS) review of projects, when there is not adequate right-of-way for intersection expansion to accommodate additional turn lanes and/or longer vehicle stacking for those turn lanes. The County required other on and off-site Boynton Village & Town Center MPMD 15-001 Staff Report Memorandum No. 14-042 Page 3 improvements to assist with improved vehicle, bicycle and pedestrian movement facilitation, including the construction of the 3 and 5 lane segments of Old Boynton Road from Congress Avenue to Boynton Beach Boulevard, the continuation of Renaissance Commons Boulevard across the C-16 Canal and connecting with Old Boynton Road, the widening of Gateway Boulevard from Congress to High Ridge Road to 6 lanes, and the construction of the greenway path along the E-4 and C-16 canals. All of these improvements have been completed with the exception of the greenway path, which is to be constructed during the development of the Cortina portion of the site. The applicant submitted an updated traffic study to Palm Beach County Traffic Engineering relative to the proposed decrease in residential units and increase in non-residential building square footage. The County has reviewed the study and has determined the proposed changes meet the Traffic Performance Standards (TPS) and note that all previously approved TPS conditions and mitigation conditions related to the original CRALLS approval that may not have been completed, remain applicable. As previously noted, the proposed master plan (Sheet MP) depicts a four (4) story mixed use building to replace the previously approved 16 unit townhouse building. The proposed building would be placed within the footprint of the previously approved building, located at the east end of the “main street” portion of the site, along the northeast edge of the easternmost traffic circle, close to the center of the overall site. The details of the building and site will be discussed in greater detail in the Major Site Plan Modification staff report accompanying this application. However, the medical uses proposed are intended to provide in-patient care which is not permitted by current zoning regulations. The subject application indicates that a “medical center” would be located on the second floor of the proposed building, and is intended to provide 24- hour, medical services. The City’s zoning regulations currently limit uses that provide “in-patient” (e.g. overnight) medical care to hospitals, which are only allowed in the Public Usage (PU) Zoning District. The applicant originally requested preliminary zoning approval for the intended use in the form of a zoning verification letter, at which time staff informed the applicant of the current restrictions preventing such a use at that location. The applicant then commenced discussions with city staff regarding the intended use as a residential detoxification clinic, and the requirements of the City to provide “Reasonable Accommodation” for such uses. The City’s LDR was amended in 2013 by Ordinance No. 13-033 in order to provide a “Reasonable Accommodation” process to maintain its defensibility and compliance with federal requirements. In short, the City must provide reasonable accommodation to both housing and related services as necessary by those individuals protected by the Federal Fair Housing Act (FHA) and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). In the subject case, the protected individuals are those who are currently being treated for substance abuse and addictions. Therefore the conditions of approval include the requirement to either change the proposed uses for compliance with the City’s Zoning Regulations, or seek and obtain approval for said uses through the City’s Reasonable Accommodation process. Additional site or building modifications may be required if an agreement is reached for reasonable accommodation between the City and the applicant. Such modifications, if not shown on the subject site plan prior to final approval, would be processed subsequently as an amendment to the approved plan. It should also be noted that planning staff has been working closely with staff of the City Attorney’s Office on proposed amendments to the zoning regulations to address the current deficiencies relative to in-patient medical care uses in an attempt to provide appropriate locations, and therefore reasonable accommodations, for these more intense medical uses. Lastly, there are no changes proposed to the commercial portion of the master plan, other than Boynton Village & Town Center MPMD 15-001 Staff Report Memorandum No. 14-042 Page 4 to update the plan with those slight modifications that have occurred since the last approval, such as the change of the former RBC Bank to a retail use. Staff considers the modifications to the approved master plan to be non-substantial. RECOMMENDATION The Planning and Zoning Division recommends that this request for Master Plan Modification be considered non-substantial, and approved subject to the comments included 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\Boynton Village & Town Center\ Master Plan\MP 15-001\Staff Report MPMD 15-001.doc EXHIBIT A BOYNTON VILLAGE AND TOWN CENTER (MPMD) Montoro Way Old Boynton Rd ¯ 062.5125250375500 Feet I - 95 LEGEND SITE EXISTING BUILDINGS NOT YET CONSTRUCTED Congress Ave. Site Location Map Section 20, Township 45s, Range 43eN.T.S. 2060 NW BOCA RATON BLVD. SUITE 2 BOCA RATON, FL 33431 TEL: 561-392-3848 FAX: 561-392-5402 LIMIT OF CONSTRUCTION LINE RENAISSANCE BUILDING A TARGET 180,668 S.F. RETENTION POND BUILDING D 1 STORY RETAIL 28,000 S.F. BUILDING C 1 STORY BEST BUY 45,000 S.F. 1 STORY BUILDING F BUILDING H-1RETAIL MIXED USE10,425 S.F. 8,486 S.F.1 STORY 1 STORY BUILDING H-2 BUILDING G MIXED USE RETAIL 7,491 S.F. 9,800 S.F. 1 STORY 1 STORY BUILDING J BUILDING E RETAIL RETAIL 8,075 S.F. 25,290 S.F. 2nd FLOOR 1 STORY OFFICE 5,000 S.F. OUTLOT 1 5,087 S.F. OUTLOT 4OUTLOT 2 BUILDING I PAUL J. SLATTERY BUILDING M BUILDING LBUILDING KBANK 3,289 S.F.OUTLOT 3 2nd FLOORRETAIL 13,316 S.F.3,920 S.F. RETAIL RETAIL RETAIL1 STORY 7,040 S.F. RESTAURANTRETAIL OFFICE1 STORY 12,120 S.F. 16,000 S.F.9,952 S.F. 1 STORYRESTAURANT 5,000 S.F.1 STORY 1 STORY 1 STORY 1 STORY CONGRESS AVENUE MASTER PLAN SCALE: 1"=100' NOTE: INFORMATION ON THIS PLAN WAS OBTAINED FROM THE MASTER PLAN FOR BOYNTON VILLAGE SMU AND C3 BY COVELLI DESIGN ASSOCIATES INC. DATED 4-16-12 2060 NW BOCA RATON BLVD. SUITE 2 BOCA RATON, FL 33431 TEL: 561-392-3848 FAX: 561-392-5402 PAUL J. SLATTERY Exhibit C CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Project Name: Boynton Village & Town Center File number: MPMD 15-001 rd Reference: 3review plans identified as a Master Plan Modification with an January 12, 2015 Planning and Zoning Department date stamp marking. INCLUDEREJECT DEPARTMENTS ENGINEERING / PUBLIC WORKS / FORESTRY / UTILITIES Comments: None FIRE Comments: None POLICE Comments: None BUILDING DIVISION Comments: None PARKS AND RECREATION Comments: None PLANNING AND ZONING Comments: 1. 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. 2. Applicants who wish to utilize City electronic media equipment for recommended PowerPoint presentations at the public hearings must notify the project manager in Planning and Zoning and submit a CD of the presentation at least one week prior to the scheduled meeting. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Boynton Village & Town Center (MPMD 15-001) Conditions of Approval Page 2 of 2 DEPARTMENTSINCLUDEREJECT Comments: N/A PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD CONDITIONS Comments: To be determined. CITY COMMISSION CONDITIONS Comments: To be determined. S:\Planning\SHARED\WP\PROJECTS\Boynton Village & Town Center\Master Plan\MPMD 15-001\COA.doc DEVELOPMENT ORDER OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA PROJECT NAME: Boynton Village & Town Center (MPMD 15-001) APPLICANT’S AGENT: Bradley Miller, Miller Land Planning, Inc. AGENT’S ADDRESS: 508 E. Boynton Beach Boulevard, Boynton Beach, FL 33435 DATE OF HEARING RATIFICATION BEFORE CITY COMMISSION: February 17, 2015 TYPE OF RELIEF SOUGHT: Master Plan Modification to the Boynton Village & Town Center development to amend a 0.42-acre portion of SMU Parcel #5 from 16 townhomes to a four (4) story, 24,000 square foot mixed use building with medical uses on the first two (2) floors and four (4) dwelling units on each of the next two (2) floors. LOCATION OF PROPERTY: NE corner of Congress Avenue and Old Boynton Road DRAWING(S): SEE EXHIBIT “C” ATTACHED HERETO. ________ 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 “D” 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\Boynton Village & Town Center\Master Plans\MPMD 15-001\DO.doc NEW BUSINESS 6.A.2 Boynton Village & Town Center (MSPM 15-001) Major Site Plan Modification Staff Report – Boynton Village & Town Center (MSPM 15-001) Memorandum No PZ 14-043 Page 2 MX-S (Mixed Use Suburban) future land use classification, and zoned SMU (Suburban Mixed Use); South: Right-of-way for easternmost traffic circle and “main street” roadway, then farther south is improved commercial development (Michael’s, Target, & Best Buy) within the Boynton Village & Town Center development, with a Local Retail Commercial (LRC) future land use classification, and zoned Community Commercial (C3); East: Drainage retention area, then farthereast is right-of-way for Renaissance Commons Boulevard and farther east is SMU Parcel 2, currently a vacant tract with Cortina master plan approval for 34 townhomes, 348 apartments and 80 single-family detached homes, having a MX-S (Mixed Use Suburban) future land use classification, and zoned SMU (Suburban Mixed Use); and West: “Main Street” portion of the master development with developed commercial buildings, then farther west is right-of-way for Congress Avenue and the Boynton Beach Mall. Site Details: The project site is a 0.42-acreportion of the 106.499-acre Boynton Village & Town Center master planned development, and is located at the east end of the “main street” portion of the site, along the northeast edge of the easternmost traffic circle and west of Renaissance Commons. The parcel is currently vacant and has approval for 16 townhomes. BACKGROUND Proposal: Bradley Miller, of Miller Land Planning, Inc., representing Compson Associates Group, Inc., is proposing to construct a four (4) story, 24,000 square foot mixed use building with medical uses on the first two (2) floors and four (4) dwelling units on each of the next two (2) floors, and related site improvements. The property is a former dairy farm that received land use amendment and rezoning approval in 2005. The portion of the property containing the Target and Best Buy stores was zoned C-3, Community Commercial, and the balance of the site was zoned SMU, Suburban Mixed Use, and approved with a corresponding master plan for development. Staff requested a master plan for the entire site, as the interconnectivity and shared amenities warranted a comprehensive review of the 106.499 acres. The original master plan depicted 405,328 square feet of commercial space (retail, restaurant, & office) plus 1,120 dwelling units. A Master Plan Modification (MPMD 12-003) request was approved on July 17, 2012 to redesign the Cortina portion of the site from 458 townhomes to 34 townhomes, 348 apartments and 80 single-family detached homes, including the relocation and re- sizing of the park land dedication. The original Master Plan approval was subject to a CRALLS (Constrained Roadway At Lower Level of Service) designation for the Congress Avenue and Old Boynton Road intersection. A CRALLS designation is a tool utilized by Palm Beach County under their Traffic Performance Standards (TPS) review of projects, when there is not adequate right-of-way for intersection expansion to accommodate additional turn lanes and/or longer vehicle stacking for those turn lanes. The Staff Report – Boynton Village & Town Center (MSPM 15-001) Memorandum No PZ 14-043 Page 3 County required other on and off-site improvements to assist with improved vehicle, bicycle and pedestrian movement facilitation, including the construction of the 3 and 5 lane segments of Old Boynton Road from Congress Avenue to Boynton Beach Boulevard, the continuation of Renaissance Commons Boulevard across the C-16 Canal and connecting with Old Boynton Road, the widening of Gateway Boulevard from Congress to High Ridge Road to 6 lanes, and the construction of the greenway path along the E-4 and C-16 canals. All of these improvements have been completed with the exception of the greenway path, which is to be constructed during the construction of the Cortina portion of the overall development. With respect to the proposed uses, the medical uses proposed are intended to provide in-patient care which is not permitted by current zoning regulations. The subject application indicates that a “medical center” would be located on the second floor of the proposed building, and is intended to provide 24-hour, medical services. The City’s zoning regulations currently limit uses that provide “in-patient” (e.g. overnight) medical care to hospitals, which are only allowed in the Public Usage (PU) Zoning District. The applicant originally requested preliminary zoning approval for the intended use in the form of a zoning verification letter, at which time staff informed the applicant of the current restrictions preventing such a use at that location. The applicant then commenced discussions with city staff regarding the intended use as a residential detoxification clinic, and the requirements of the City to provide “Reasonable Accommodation” for such uses. The City’s LDR was amended in 2013 by Ordinance No. 13-033 in order to provide a “Reasonable Accommodation” process to maintain its defensibility and compliance with federal requirements. In short, the City must provide reasonable accommodation to both housing and related services as necessary by those individuals protected by the Federal Fair Housing Act (FHA) and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). In the subject case, the protected individuals are those who are currently being treated for substance abuse and addictions. Therefore the conditions of approval include the requirement to either change the proposed uses for compliance with the City’s Zoning Regulations, or seek and obtain approval for said uses through the City’s Reasonable Accommodation process. Additional site or building modifications may be required if an agreement is reached for reasonable accommodation between the City and the applicant. Such modifications, if not shown on the subject site plan prior to final approval, would be processed subsequently as an amendment to the approved plan. It should also be noted that planning staff has been working closely with staff of the City Attorney’s Office on proposed amendments to the zoning regulations to address the current deficiencies relative to in-patient medical care uses in an attempt to provide appropriate locations, and therefore reasonable accommodations, for these more intense medical uses. ANALYSIS Concurrency: Traffic: The applicant submitted an updated traffic study to Palm Beach County Traffic Engineering relative to the proposed decrease in residential units and increase in non-residential building square footage. The County has reviewed the study and has determined the proposed changes meet the Traffic Performance Standards Staff Report – Boynton Village & Town Center (MSPM 15-001) Memorandum No PZ 14-043 Page 4 (TPS) and note that all previously approved TPS conditions and mitigation conditions related to the original CRALLS approval that may not have been completed, remain applicable. School: School concurrency is not required, as the request reduces the proposed number of approved residential units by eight (8). 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. Vehicular Access: As a master planned development, there are a number of ways to access the site, as well as cross-access through existing on and off-site developments. The Master Plan (Sheet MP) depicts three (3) points of ingress from Congress Avenue, two (2) points of ingress from Old Boynton Road and three (3) points of ingress off of Renaissance Commons Boulevard, which runs in a north/south direction, from Old Boynton Road to Gateway Boulevard. The Site Plan (Sheet SP-1) shows the proposed new building immediately north of the easternmost traffic circle, located at the east end of the “main street” portion of the Boynton Village & Town Center development. The main point of access to the new building would be the existing drive aisle branching off the north side of this traffic circle. No new driveways or access points are proposed or required. Circulation: Vehicular circulation would include two-way circulation that continues throughout the parking lot. Parking exists on the west side of the proposed building and would be slightly modified to create two (2) handicap parking spaces and a striped crosswalk to connect with the buildings to the west. A connection to the sidewalk around the traffic circle is also proposed. This connection point is intended to provide greater pedestrian access to the larger Boynton Village & Town Center development, as well as Renaissance Commons Boulevard, which connects to sidewalks on Old Boynton Road and Gateway Boulevard. Parking: The parking for this parcel was originally constructed in the development of the surrounding commercial buildings. However, the originally approved 16 townhouse units only required 24 parking spaces. The proposed new building would require 16 parking spaces for the 8 apartments, 2 guest parking spaces, and 60 parking spaces for the medical office space (12,000 sf at 1 parking space per 200 sf). Therefore, a total of 78 parking spaces would be required for the new project. The Boynton Village & Town Center Master Plan, as amended in 2012, notes that 4,227 parking spaces are required for all built and proposed development not yet constructed. The Plan also depicts the provision of 4,270 Staff Report – Boynton Village & Town Center (MSPM 15-001) Memorandum No PZ 14-043 Page 5 parking spaces, providing a surplus of 43 parking spaces throughout the entire development. The proposed new development would create a deficit 11 parking spaces (78 spaces required for the new project minus 24 for the original project = 54 parking spaces now required. With a surplus of 43 parking spaces, 54 spaces required minus the surplus of 43 leaves a deficit of 11 parking spaces). However, Chapter 4, Article V, Section 3.B. of the Land Development Regulations (LDR) provides a reduction of required parking up to 10% for developments that have common access drives and interconnectivity for both vehicular and pedestrian use, in an effort to encourage fewer vehicular trips. As a result of the reduction allowed under this code provision, there is no longer a parking deficit per code, but a parking surplus of 184 parking spaces for the entire Boynton Village & Town Center development. Based upon staff observations throughout the year and over the holiday shopping season, the parking supply on site will not be adversely impacted by the proposed new 24,000 square foot development. 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 (Sheet L1) for the proposed new building site. The landscape plan depicts the use of Mahogany and Pink Tabebuia canopy trees relocated out of the proposed building footprint, and Royal, Montgomery and Christmas palm trees. Typical accent plants include Pygmy Date palms , Hibiscus, White Bird of Paradise and Bougainvillea, and typical shrubs include Podocarpus, Small Leaf Clusia, Spanish & Simpson’s Stopper, and Croton. The plan also depicts a decorative fence along the east and north sides of the building, with Spanish Stopper, Pink Muhly Grass and Fakahatchee Grass on the outside, and a six foot tall decorative wall along the south side and south west corner of the property in order to properly screen the proposed pool. The wall will be enhanced with Small Leaf Clusia, Dwarf Yaupon Holly and Green Island Ficus plantings in front. Building and Site: The proposed building is designed as a four (4)-story structure with a mix of flat roof areas with parapet walls at approximately 46 feet in height, as well as hip roof features approximately 49 feet in height, measured at the midpoint of the slope, and matching the standing seam metal material used throughout the entire development. The highest point of the roof is the standing seam metal hip roof at the top of the elevator shaft, at a total height of 54 feet 5 inches. The floor plans (Sheets A201 & A202) indicate the proposed first and second floors would be utilized as for medical purposes, and the third and fourth floors would have four (4) three-bedroom apartments each. There are also a couple of benches under the covered walk along the front of the building, as well as a couple covered bicycle racks within the stairwell areas on the north and south side of the building. A pool and deck area are proposed along the south side of the building. Building Height: The building elevations (Sheet A401) indicate the highest point of the structure would be the standing seam metal hip roof at the top of the elevator shaft, at a total height of 54 feet 5 inches, just below the maximum height of 55 feet allowed in the Staff Report – Boynton Village & Town Center (MSPM 15-001) Memorandum No PZ 14-043 Page 6 SMU zoning district without benefit of Conditional Use approval, which would allow a height up of 75 feet. The proposed building is comparable in height to other buildings proposed to be constructed within the development and with others in the immediate vicinity. Design: The proposed building is designed to reflect the architecture already existing within the Boynton Village & Town Center development. According to the “Material/Color Legend” shown on Sheet A401 the base of the building will consist of sandstone split face block, with textured stucco walls painted a cream color, “Cachet Cream” and off-white color, “Vanillin” from Sherwin-Williams, with white trim and banding painted Sherwin-Williams “Extra White”, and red brick pilasters in a Terra Cotta color. The roof will consist of a standing seam metal material, painted Terra Cotta and the balcony railings and decorative wall light fixtures will be black. The Bahama louvered shutters will also be paintedSherwin-Williams “Extra White’ and the canvas awnings will be Terra Cotta. 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: No new freestanding light fixtures are proposed with this project, only the wall mounted light fixtures depicted on the building elevations (Sheet A401). Signage: No freestanding signage is proposed for the new building. Any wall signage or other signs would be required to comply with the adopted Sign Program for Boynton Village & Town Center. RECOMMENDATION The Development Application Review Team (DART) has reviewed this request for major site plan modification approval and recommends approval contingent upon approval of the accompanying master plan modification and 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\Boynton Village & Town Center\Master Plan\MSPM 15-001\Staff Report.doc EXHIBIT A BOYNTON VILLAGE AND TOWN CENTER (MSPM) SITE Montoro Way Old Boynton Rd ¯ 062.5125250375500 Feet AREAS SHADED LIE IN FLOOD ZONE "B", THE REMAINDER OF THE PROPERTY LIE IN FLOOD ZONE A5 (ELEV 11'), COMMUNITY PANEL NO. 120196 0005C, DATED SEPTEMBER 30, 1982. TX-9 2060 NW BOCA RATON BLVD. SUITE 2 BOCA RATON, FL 33431 TEL: 561-392-3848 FAX: 561-392-5402 (* SITE PLAN SCALE: 1/16"=1'-0" BUILDING DATA : GROUND FLOOR AREA:= 6,000 S.F. SECOND FLOOR AREA:= 6,000 S.F. SIDE ELEVATION THIRD FLOOR AREA: 6,000 S.F. FOURTH FLOOR AREA: 6,000 S.F. SITE TOTAL= 24,000 S.F. OCCUPANCY GROUP- I-2 PER FBC 308 CONSTRUCTION TYPE- IB PER FBC TABLE 503 PARKING DATA : OFFICE SPACE = 1SP. PER 200 S.F.= 60 SPACES RESIDENTIAL = 2 SP.PER UNIT= 16 SPACES LOCATION MAP NOTE: NO ADDITIONAL PARKING REQUIRED TO BE BICYCLE RACK DETAIL PROVIDED PER THE LDR PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER 4, ARTICLE 5, SECTION 3.B. (10% JOINT ACCESS REDUCTION). SEE SHEET MSD OF FRONT ELEVATION THE BOYNTON VILLAGE & TOWN CENTER MASTER PLAN, SITE DATA : DATE STAMPED 10/3/14, FOR FURTHER DETAIL. GUEST PARKING REQUIRED 2 SPACES PROPERTY LOCATION: 800 N. CONGRESS (SEE SURVEY) EXISTING LAND USE CLASSIFICATION: MXS (MIXED USE SUBURBAN) PARKING REQUIRED: 76 SPACES EXISTING ZONING DISTRICT: SMU (SUBURBAN MIXED USE) PARKING PROVIDED: 76 SPACES PROPOSED USE: MEDICAL OFFICE/8 RESIDENTIAL UNITS PROPOSED GROSS BUILDING AREA: 24,000 S.F. NOTES: PROPOSED LOT (BLDG.) COVERAGE: 6,000 S.F. 1. THIS PLAN IS BASED ON SURVEY INFORMATION PROVIDED BY CAULFIELD & SITE AREA:18,204 S.F. (.41 ACRES) WHEELER, INC. DATED 5-17-11 PAUL J. SLATTERY PROPOSED BUILDING HEIGHT (PER BLDG ELEVATIONS):54'-6" 2. AFFECTED AREA DELINEATES THE AREA OF SITE MODIFICATION. ALL OTHERMAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT ALLOWED:55'-0" AREAS TO REMAIN AS EXISTING.REFER TO MASTER PLAN SHEET MP FLOOD ZONE: A5 (ELEVATION 11'-0") SEE SURVEY IMPERVIOUS AREA: 10,325 S.F. 3. EXISTING PARKING SPACES ARE 9'-6" X 18'-0". PROPOSED MODIFIED PERVIOUS AREA: 7,879 S.F. PARKING SPACES WITHIN THE EFFECTED AREA SHALL COMPLY WITH CURRENT CODE. THE PROPOSED FINISH FLOOR ELEVATION 14.65' NGVD IS ABOVE THE HIGHEST 100-YEAR BASE FLOOD ELEVATION APPLICABLE TO 4. ALL PLANS SUBMITTED FOR PERMITTING SHALL MEET THE CITY'S CODES THE BUILDING SITE, AS DETERMINED BY THE SFWMD'S SURFACE AND THE APPLICABLE BUILDING CODES IN EFFECT AT HE TIME OF PERMIT WATER MANAGEMENT CONSTRUCTION DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION. REGULATIONS 5. A FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEM, FIRE ALARM SYSTEM AND FIRE SEPARATION BETWEEN OCCUPANCIES WILL BE PROVIDED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DASHED LINE DELINEATES THE PATH OF TRAVEL FOR 2010 FLORIDA PREVENTION CODE. ACCESSIBLE ROUTE DUMPSTER DETAILFENCE POST DETAILWALL DETAIL 12 12 55 MATERIAL/COLOR LEGEND 12 12 12 12 5 5 5 5 STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF - TERRA COTTA RED BRICK PILASTERS - TERRA COTTA ALUMINUM RAILINGS - SHERWIN WILLIAMS SW 6989 DOMINO-BLACK SPLIT FACE CONC. BLOCK - SANDSTONE CANVAS AWNING OVER METAL FRAME - TERRA COTTA SMOOTH STUCCO BANDING - SHERWIN WILLIAMS SW 7006 EXTRA WHITE 12 5 SMOOTH STUCCO CORNICE - SHERWIN WILLIAMS SW 7006 EXTRA WHITE TEXTURED STUCCO FINISH-SHERWIN WILLIAMS C/M CACHET CREAM TEXTURED STUCCO FINISH-SHERWIN WILLIAMS 6371 VANILLIN LIGHT FIXTURE - SHERWIN WILLIAMS SW 6989 DOMINO-BLACK ALUMINUM BAHAMA LOUVERED SHUTTER-SHERWIN WILLIAMS WEST ELEVATION SW 7006 EXTRA WHITE SCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0" ELEVATION NOTES: ALL MATERIALS, DETAILS AND COLORS TO MATCH EXISTING ADJACENT 2060 NW BOCA RATON BLVD. BUILDINGS IN BOYNTON VILLAGE AS APPROVED ON MASTER PLAN 1212 SUITE 2 55 12 1212 12 BOCA RATON, FL 33431 5 NOTES 5 55 TEL: 561-392-3848 1. THE HEIGHT AND AREA FOR BUILDINGS OR STRUCTURES OF THE DIFFERENT TYPES FAX: 561-392-5402 OF CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE GOVERNED BY THE INTENDED USE OR OCCUPANCY OF THE BUILDING, AND SHALL NOT EXCEED THE LIMITS SET FORTH IN THE 2010 FBC, TABLE 503. 2. THE EXTERIOR WALL OPENINGS COMPLY WITH 2010 FBC, TABLE 705.8, OR THE 2010 FBC RESIDENTIAL VOLUME, TABLE R302.1. 3. THE EXTERIOR WALL CONSTRUCTION COMPLIES WITH 2010 FBC, TABLE 602. 4. BUILDINGS, STRUCTURES AND PARTS THEREOF SHALL BE DESIGNED TO WITHSTAND THE MINIMUM WIND LOADS OF 170 MPH. WIND FORCES ON EVERY BUILDING OR STRUCTURE SHALL BE DETERMINED BY THE PROVISIONS OF ASCE 7 AND THE PROVISIONS 0F 2010 FBC, SECTION 1609 (WIND LOADS) 5. BUILDING SHALL BE EQUIPPED WITH AN AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER SYSTEM PER F.S. 553.895, FIRE PROTECTION PLANS AND HYDRAULIC CALCULATIONS SHALL BE INCLUDED WITH THE BUILDING PLANS AT THE TIME OF PERMIT APPLICATION AND SHALL COMPLY WITH CHAPTER 9 OF THE FBC 6. RAINWATER LEADERS/DOWNSPOUTS WILL BE CONCEALED WITHIN THE BUILDING OR ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES AS REQUIRED BY CODE. 7. THERE WILL BE NO ROOFTOP EQUIPMENT. ALL EQUIPMENT WILL LOCATED ON THE GROUND. NORTH ELEVATIONSOUTH ELEVATION SCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0"SCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0" 1212 1212 55 5 5 PAUL J. SLATTERY KEY PLAN EAST ELEVATION SCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0" BALCONYBALCONY BALCONYBALCONY BAHAMA SHUTTERBAHAMA SHUTTER ABOVEABOVE MEDICAL CENTER (6,000 S.F.) UPDN. DN.UPCOVERED WALKCOVERED WALK 2060 NW BOCA RATON BLVD. SUITE 2 ELEV. ROOF BELOW BOCA RATON, FL 33431 TEL: 561-392-3848 FAX: 561-392-5402 SECOND FLOOR PLAN BAHAMA SHUTTER ABOVE SCALE: 1/8"=1'-0" 6,000 S.F. CANVAS AWNINGS ABOVECANVAS AWNINGS ABOVE CANVAS AWNINGS ABOVECANVAS AWNINGS ABOVE PATIOPATIO PATIOPATIO M. ST. MEDICAL CLINICMEDICAL CLINIC (3,000 S.F.)(3,000 S.F.) W. UPUP COVERED WALK TO POOL PAUL J. SLATTERY MECH. ELEC. ELEV. CANVAS AWNINGS ABOVECANVAS AWNINGS ABOVE GROUND FLOOR PLAN SCALE: 1/8"=1'-0" 6,000 S.F. DASHED LINE DELINEATES THE PATH OF TRAVEL FOR ACCESSIBLE ROUTE PASSING SPACES WILL BE PROVIDED AT INTERVALS NOT TO EXCEED 200' BALCONYBALCONY BALCONYBALCONY APARTMENT 6APARTMENT 7 APARTMENT 5APARTMENT 8 DN.DN. COVERED WALKCOVERED WALK 2060 NW BOCA RATON BLVD. SUITE 2 ELEV. BOCA RATON, FL 33431 ROOF BELOW TEL: 561-392-3848 FAX: 561-392-5402 FOURTH FLOOR PLAN SCALE: 1/8"=1'-0" 6,000 S.F. BALCONYBALCONY BALCONYBALCONY APARTMENT 2APARTMENT 3 APARTMENT 1APARTMENT 4 UPDN. COVERED WALKCOVERED WALK DN.UP ELEV. ROOF BELOW PAUL J. SLATTERY DATA: APARTMENTS THIRD FLOOR PLAN THIRD FLOOR 4 UNITS @ 1,500 S.F. EACH6,000 S.F. FOURTH FLOOR 4 UNITS @ 1,500 S.F. EACH6,000 S.F. SCALE: 1/8"=1'-0" 6,000 S.F.TOTAL 8 UNITS12,000 S.F. DASHED LINE DELINEATES THE PATH OF TRAVEL FOR ACCESSIBLE ROUTE 1. PASSING SPACES WILL BE PROVIDED AT INTERVALS NOT TO EXCEED 200' 2. ALL RESIDENTIAL UNITS WILL BE HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE AS REQUIRED BY FHA Exhibit C CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Project Name: Boynton Village & Town Center File number: MSPM 15-001 rd Reference: 3review plans identified as a Major Site Plan Modification with an January 12, 2015 Planning and Zoning Department date stamp marking. INCLUDEREJECT DEPARTMENTS ENGINEERING / PUBLIC WORKS / FORESTRY / UTILITIES Comments: 1. The Landscape Architect should tabulate the total diameter inches of existing trees on the site proposed to be preserved in place, relocated or removed and replaced [diameter inches] on the site. The replacement trees should be shown by a separate symbol on the formal landscape plan sheet. 2. All shade trees must be listed in the plant schedule as a minimum of 4” caliper, measured at 6” off of the ground. The height of the trees may be larger than 12’-14’ to meet the 4” caliper requirement. 3. Please verify the roof line, balconies, etc. will not interfere with the mature growth size of all trees and palms. 4. At time of permit submittal, please provide an Irrigation Plan following the Florida Friendly - Waterwise principles using water saving components and depict turf and landscape components on different zones and time duration. Also, trees should have separate irrigation bubblers to provide water directly to the root ball. FIRE Comments: 5. Please schedule a water flow test with Gina Morency of the Fire & Life Safety Division of the Fire Rescue Department at 561-742- 6600. This is required to in order to determine adequate water supply and fire flow, and shall be conducted before construction begins. POLICE Comments: None, all previous comments addressed. BUILDING DIVISION Comments: None, all previous comments addressed. Boynton Village & Town Center (MSPM 15-001) Conditions of Approval Page 2 of 3 DEPARTMENTSINCLUDEREJECT PARKS AND RECREATION Comments: 6. The Recreation Impact Fee for the eight (8) apartments is based upon $595 per dwelling, for a total of $4,760. PLANNING AND ZONING Comments: 7. 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. 8. The fence and wall appear to encroach into existing utility easements. Please provide utility easement consent forms from all utility providers or relocate the proposed improvements outside the easements. 9. Please note that approval of this Major Site Plan Modification application is subject to approval of the companion application for Master Plan Modification. 10. Application is understood to propose one or more uses to provide in- patient medical care for substance abuse treatment, which is not an allowed use by current Zoning Regulations. Prior to issuance of permits, application must be modified to comply with Zoning Regulations, or approval justified and achieved through the Reasonable Accommodation process. 11. At time of permitting, 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). 12. Applicants who wish to utilize City electronic media equipment for recommended PowerPoint presentations at the public hearings must notify the project manager in Planning and Zoning and submit a CD of the presentation at least one week prior to the scheduled meeting. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Comments: N/A PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD CONDITIONS Boynton Village & Town Center (MSPM 15-001) Conditions of Approval Page 3 of 3 DEPARTMENTSINCLUDEREJECT Comments: To be determined. CITY COMMISSION CONDITIONS Comments: To be determined. S:\Planning\SHARED\WP\PROJECTS\Boynton Village & Town Center\Master Plan\MSPM 15-001\Staff COA.doc DEVELOPMENT ORDER OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA PROJECT NAME: Boynton Village & Town Center (MSPM 15-001) APPLICANT’S AGENT: Bradley Miller, Miller Land Planning, Inc. AGENT’S ADDRESS: 508 E. Boynton Beach Boulevard, Boynton Beach, FL 33435 DATE OF HEARING RATIFICATION BEFORE CITY COMMISSION: February 17, 2015 TYPE OF RELIEF SOUGHT: Major Site Plan Modification to the Boynton Village & Town Center development to amend a 0.42-acre portion of SMU Parcel #5 from 16 townhomes to a four (4) story, 24,000 square foot mixed use building with medical uses on the first two (2) floors and four (4) dwelling units on each of the next two (2) floors. LOCATION OF PROPERTY: NE corner of Congress Avenue and Old Boynton Road DRAWING(S): SEE EXHIBIT “C” ATTACHED HERETO. ________ 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 “D” 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\Boynton Village & Town Center\Master Plans\MSPM 15-001\DO.doc NEW BUSINESS 6.B Interim LDR Amendments (CDRV 15-001) Code Review MEDICAL CARE – IN-PATIENT (ZONING USE) 1. The City’s Zoning Regulations accommodate uses that provide medical testing and treatment in the following three general categories; 1) hospitals; 2) medical offices; and 3) imaging, testing and support services. Of the three uses, the only one where in-patient medical care is permitted is hospitals. Hospitals, in summary, are institutional uses providing comprehensive medical treatment and care. Although nursing and convalescent homes provide basic, 24-hour medical care, they are currently labeled a Type 3 Group Home in the City’s LDR and function more as permanent or long-term housing for residents/patients rather than a medical service. Until recently there has not been a demonstrated demand for medical services that provide 24-hour care to patients. However, in response to the recent demand for services that provide 24-hour care, treatment and/or testing pertaining to sleep apnea, eating disorders, labor and delivery, hospice care, and substance abuse, staff has analyzed the zoning regulations and proposes amendments to address this deficiency by accommodating these uses as well as other excluded businesses that similarly provide overnight medical care and treatment. The definition of “Hospital” is currently indicated in the LDR (Chapter 1, Article II) as: An establishment typically referred to as an institution (excluding “Group Home, Type 4”) that provides comprehensive, inpatient and outpatient healthcare, including typical emergency medical, surgical, diagnostic, rehabilitation and treatment services, as well as other specialized services ranging from bariatrics to wound care. This use would also include accessory meeting/conference facilities, limited retail sales, and administrative offices. Most significant to this analysis is that Hospitals are limited to the Public Usage (PU) Zoning District. The PU Zoning District is a unique district defined to “apply to those areas within the city whose ownership and/or operation is public, or whose use is primarily institutionally-oriented. When we think of “institutional” uses, we typically consider those uses that are public or public/private in nature and that engage in public service such as schools, places of worship, lodges and charitable organizations, government-operated facilities, and hospitals. Historically, communities would have only one hospital, which corresponded with a unique and tailored zoning district appropriate for the scale of the use, size of property affected, and surrounding land uses. However, given the number and variety of possible medical uses that similarly provide services around-the-clock, and the unique and limited locations of the PU Zoning District, other appropriate zoning districts should be considered that match the type of intensity and locational requirements of these medical uses. The proposed amendments to the zoning regulations are intended to ensure that the City’s zoning regulations are defensible, by not unjustifiably zoning out certain uses, and more importantly, maintaining compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Fair Housing Act (FHA). In general, both acts prohibit discrimination against the “handicapped” or “disabled”. Of course the FHA emphasizes the access to housing, and - 2- {00050878.1 306-9001821 } the ADA targets access to services, programs, or activities of a public entity. Most relevant to this code review and analysis are the following points: The application or coverage of the ADA and FHA was expanded so that “physical or mental impairment” includes alcoholism and drug addiction, and expanded to also apply to those businesses providing related services and treatments; Zoning is an activity specifically referenced in the Technical Assistance Manual for the ADA in discussing this function and its importance to be monitored for compliance with the ADA and FHA; Zoning that does not regulate equitably those uses with like characteristics and purposes, which affect handicapped individuals, could raise concerns under the ADA and FHA; and When zoning fails to allow the integration of handicapped individuals into society, such as a when zoning narrowly classifies drug and alcohol treatment facilities as “institutional” while simultaneously excluding them from districts that allow related or similar medical businesses and services, such zoning could impede the integration expectation of the ADA and FHA. Therefore, staff proposes the subject code amendments that have identified several uses currently excluded from the zoning regulations that provide 24-hour patient care and treatment. The proposed changes also provide the necessary definition for said uses; identify the zoning districts appropriate for such intense medical uses; and include additional location standards and operational requirements to ensure land use compatibility and adherence to proper review processes. Definitions (LDR, Chapter 1, Article II) : Medical Care or Testing (In-patient) A facility, including emergency clinics and hospitals, which are open 24-hours per day or provides 24-hour healthcare, treatment, and/or examinations, typically requiring overnight stays, and are based either on emergency, planned, or scheduled admittance to facilities with controlled and secured access to ensure appropriate care of patients. Such facilities include: Hospitals licensed pursuant Chapter 395, Florida Statutes; Alcohol or chemical dependency treatment centers licensed pursuant to Chapter 397, Florida Statutes; Mental health treatment facilities licensed pursuant to Chapter 394; Florida Statutes Urgent care centers (24-hour); Inpatient testing services such as sleep disorder centers; Birth centers licensed pursuant to Section 383.305; Florida Statues; Hospice facilities licensed pursuant to Part IV of Chapter 400; Florida Statues; Eating disorder treatment centers; and - 3- {00050878.1 306-9001821 } Nursing homes and physical rehabilitation centers licensed pursuant to Section 400.062, Florida Statutes. Additionally, the subject amendments warrant other modifications to the definitions, as shown below in underlined and crossed-out text: Hospital - An establishment typically referred to as an institution (excluding "Group Home, Type 4") that provides comprehensive, inpatient and outpatient healthcare, including typical emergency medical, surgical, diagnostic, rehabilitation and treatment services, as well as other specialized services ranging from bariatrics to wound care. This use would also include accessory meeting/conference facilities, limited retail sales, and administrative offices. see Medical Care or Testing (In-patient); Medical or Dental Imaging/Testing/Support Services(Out-patient); Medical or Dental Office (Out-patient) – A facility or clinic operated by one (1) or more physicians, dentists, chiropractors, or other licensed practitioners of the healing arts for the examination and treatment of persons solely on an outpatient basis including intensive out-patient treatment. Images, body fluids or other……; Mental Health and Substance Abuse – see “Group Home, Type 4 Medical Care or Testing (In-patient). Zoning Matrix (LDR, Chapter 3, Article IV, Section 3.D.): See Exhibit “A” for an excerpt of the Zoning Matrix with the proposed changes shown in underlined and crossed-out text. The proposed new use is seen added to the matrix, to be a permitted use in the C-3 (Community Commercial), PCD (Planned Commercial Development) and PU (Public Usage) Zoning Districts. The C-3 Zoning District is the most intensive commercial district in the City’s Zoning Regulations based on typical project size (i.e. land area and square footage) and customer traffic, and is intended to accommodate large commercial centers located with direct access from arterial roadways. Distances to residential areas are typically greatest, and design and buffering requirements are intended to match the scale of the project and mitigate impacts upon adjacent properties. The C-1, C-2, and C-4 Districts are not appropriate given the intense nature of such businesses, the need for greater land area than the minimum size required by the zoning districts, and need for appropriate separation from residential areas. Whereas the C-1 (Office Commercial) Zoning District accommodates offices including medical and dental offices, this district is often considered a “transitional” zone between residential zoning districts and more intense commercial land uses given its compatibility with residential environments due, in part, to the limited hours of business operation and locations along the periphery of residential neighborhoods. Similarly, the C-2, (Neighborhood Commercial) Zoning District is to be compatible in scale and operation with residential zoning districts, and in fact is intended to be located in close proximity to residential land uses to facilitate access to convenient retail goods and services. The C-4 District would - 4- {00050878.1 306-9001821 } also be inappropriate for such uses given the smaller parcels that comprise most of the existing C-4-zoned properties, and their close proximity to local streets and residential areas. The PCD District corresponds with the C-3 District with the principal difference being the requirement for a master plan as part of the rezoning process. Additional changes to the matrix would also include adding the same “(Out-patient)” description to the “Medical or Dental Office” use title, the individual “Hospital” use item currently in the matrix would be removed, and an unrelated change but necessary for consistency in the matrix is the addition of a “P” and footnote “#22” to the “Counseling” use item to allow such uses within the M-1 District similar to the treatment of general business offices if, in part, they are located along an arterial roadway. Zoning Matrix Notes (LDR, Chapter 3, Article IV, Section 3.D.): Existing Notes: No. 3. (to be amended) Amend #3 to read “Conditional use approval shall be required if located within two one hundred (200) (100) feet from a residential zoning district or mixed use zoning district.” No. 14. (to remain unchanged) The subject use is only allowed on a lot that fronts on an arterial or collector roadway street as defined in Part III, Ch. 1, Art. 2 of the LDR under definitions for “Street-Arterial” and “Street-Collector”. The following amendment is an unrelated, “house-keeping” amendment intended to remove the cap on maximum seats, with maximum floor area remaining to achieve the intended objective of limiting eligible sites to quick turn-over, convenience retail. No. 58. Restaurant. a. All Districts. See Chapter 3, Article V, Supplemental Regulations regarding the sidewalk café permit. b. C-1 District. A restaurant is allowed as accessory use to a business or professional office and/or a medical or dental office but subject to the following conditions: (1) Signage. No external signage for the restaurant use shall be allowed; (2) Hours of operation shall be limited to coincide with the hours of operation of the principal use. c. M-1 district. This non-industrial use is allowed within the M-1 district, provided that it 1) is located within a multiple-tenant development on a lot that fronts on an arterial or collector roadway; 2) does not exceed two thousand, five hundred (2,500) square feet; 3) contains a maximum of twelve (12) seats; 4 3) excludes a drive-up, drive-through, or drive-in facility; and 5 4) complies with all off-street - 5- {00050878.1 306-9001821 } parking requirements of Chapter 4, Article V. In addition, the sale of used merchandise is only allowed as accessory to the sale of new merchandise. New Notes: No. 101. Medical Care or Testing (In-patient) Other requirements and site standards: a.Minimum building setback shall be 50 feet when abutting a residential or mixed use zoning district to enable proper site design regarding secured access, private outdoor patron amenities, buffering, etc.; b.Site security shall be ensured through a minimum of surveillance cameras, limited and controlled access points, and operational procedures to restrict unauthorized and/or unarranged accessing or exiting of the facility and/or property; c.Privacy and access control shall be ensured through a minimum of perimeter fencing and landscape buffering intended to support the objective to control access and increase privacy of areas intended for client or patient use. d.Permitted locations shall exclude the Community Redevelopment Area to limit the CRA to those complimentary uses available to the public and which contribute to the synergy of successful downtown commerce pursuant to an applicable redevelopment plan. No. 102. Pre-existing. Such pre-existing uses which are no longer allowed uses pursuant to amendments to the Zoning Matrix shall not be construed as non-conforming uses. However, major modifications to such uses shall be in accordance with the conditional use approval process if required pursuant to the Zoning Matrix, and adhere to the site design and operational restrictions of the applicable footnotes. TOD (OVERLAY PROVISIONS INCLUDING DENSITY BONUS) 2. The proposed amendments would further the codification of TOD regulations that commenced in 2013, and continued in 2014 with the establishment of a Downtown Transit-Oriented Development District within the Comprehensive Plan. Specifically, the proposed amendments would implement Future Land Use Element Policy 1.18.1, which established a Downtown TOD District, and Policy 1.18.2.b, which allows twenty five percent (25%) density increase for selected future land use classifications within the District. For the past eight years, the City has been participating with the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) and other agencies to expand the Tri-Rail commuter system to include new service on the FEC Railroad. The expanded service, named the “Tri-Rail Coastal Link,” would add a series of new passenger rail stations on the FEC Railroad in - 6- {00050878.1 306-9001821 } Palm Beach, Broward, and Miami-Dade Counties, including a new Boynton Beach station just south of Boynton Beach Boulevard. FDOT and its transportation partners, including the South Florida Regional Transportation Authority (SFRTA), Palm Beach Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council (TCRPC), have all prioritized the need to improve land development patterns in advance of station development for the following reasons: (1) transit-oriented development (TOD) improves ridership for transit service, thereby increasing efficiency; (2) transit service increases access to station areas, thereby increasing potential for higher intensity and density land development; (3) TOD equally accommodates all modes of transportation (car as well as pedestrian, bicycle, and transit), further increasing access to station areas and potential for increased development capacity; and (4) TOD encourages a park-once environment, which reduces vehicular demand on the roadway network, further improving efficiency and reducing carbon emissions. The most significant features of a TOD are (1) increased density and intensity of development, with minimum levels of development recommended by FDOT; (2) walkability and interconnectivity throughout the area; and (3) a mix of uses appropriate to the service and area. In June of 2013, the City Commission approved amendments to the Land Development Regulations to create provisions for TOD and the corresponding standards in the mixed use zoning regulations, including the minimum density and intensity standards for mixed use districts within the Transit Core and the Station Area, defined as a ¼ mile and ½ mile radius around the future station, respectively. The Comprehensive Plan policies adopted in 2014 gave a broad support to these regulations. First, they established a Downtown TOD District with boundaries coinciding with the Station Area. In addition, they instituted a density increase of up to twenty five percent (25%) for projects located within the District and classified Special High Density Residential, Mixed Use or Mixed Use-Core Future Land Use. The amendments increased maximum densities for these Future Land Use categories to twenty five (25), fifty (50) and one hundred (100) dwelling units per acre, respectively. Currently, the total number of units within the District is estimated at about 3,100, resulting in the gross area-wide density of 7.027 dwelling units per acre. The Community Center station, a model for the Boynton Beach Downtown TOD District, stipulates optimal densities between 11 and 16 dwelling units per acre. (The density of 11 dwelling units per acre corresponds to 4,862 units in the subject area). The proposed amendment would potentially help to reach this desirable threshold. Significant areas east of the FEC Railroad right-of-way are already classified as either Mixed-Use Core or Mixed Use (see Exhibit A) and more are targeted for higher density and intensity mixed-use development both east and west of the tracks. There are no properties currently classified as Special High Density Residential within the District, but some may be reclassified to this category in the future. - 7- {00050878.1 306-9001821 } AMENDMENT TO SIGN STANDARDS APPLICABLE TO 3. COMMERCIAL USES IN CERTAIN M-1 ZONING DISTRICTS This proposed amendment would allow maximum sign area for commercial uses proposed in the M-1 zoning district that are located along arterial and collector roadways, to be based on the ratio applicable to the commercial zoning district rather than the industrial (M-1) zoning district. Staff is recommending a “cleanup” of the sign code regulations applicable to those areas of the M-1 (Industrial) zoning district located on road rights-of-way in which non- industrial uses are allowed. Based upon the M-1 Corridor Study conducted several years ago, in an effort to create an improved visual image of industrial zoned properties abutting major thoroughfares within the City, the allowed uses were expanded to accommodate limited office and commercial type businesses. However, at the same time, the sign regulations were not updated to reflect this expanded use list. Office and retail properties are allowed a maximum wall signage allocation based upon the lineal front footage of the building/tenant space, multiplied by a factor of 1.5. For example, a tenant with a 30 foot front lease space would be allowed up to 45 square feet of wall signage (30 LF X 1.5 SF = 45 SF). However, industrial zoned properties are limited to one (1) square foot of wall signage based upon the front footage calculation, due to their typical locations along roadways of lower classification and traffic, such as local and collector streets. Using the same example as above (30 LF X 1.0 SF = 30 SF), the amount of wall signage is reduced by one-third. Since it is generally recognized that office and commercial tenants rely more heavily on signage than industrial businesses, due to customer traffic, and locations along roads with higher classification and design speeds, it seems appropriate that the sign regulations be updated to reflect the fact that non- industrial uses are now allowed on major thoroughfares in the industrial zoning district, and that such uses be afforded the same signage allotment as other office and retail businesses on the same corridor. This amendment would allow the limited list of non- industrial businesses accommodated on an arterial roadway within the M-1 zoning district to utilize the same signage calculation as office and commercially-zoned properties. REGULATING OF NON-CONFORMING SIGNS AT SHOPPING 4. CENTERS TO BENEFIT PHYSICAL APPEARANCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. The proposed amendments would increase flexibility in altering a non-conforming sign at a commercial shopping center for the purpose of accommodating additional tenant space, as long as the modifications would not worsen the magnitude of non-conformity, and result in some physical improvement to the design of the sign. The City has a number of nonconforming pole signs throughout commercial zoning districts, mainly located at the larger retail centers. Pole signs are tall signs, typically supported by one or more poles/posts, which provide a list of tenants within the shopping center. When the majority of these shopping centers were constructed, poles signs were a - 8- {00050878.1 306-9001821 } permitted type of sign and the code at that time allowed sign heights up to 20 feet, regardless of property size and roadway classification. As a result, these signs continue to be maintained by the center owners in order to maintain the height and visibility the signs afford. Current sign regulations require these types of signs to be Monument Signs, which are defined as signs mounted to the ground or pedestal/foundation, completely along the bottom of the cabinet/sign. Monument signs are limited to a maximum of 12 feet in height, which is typically about one-half the height of the pole signs in existence today. Therefore shopping center owners make every attempt to maintain their existing signs, concerned that removal due to maintenance or damage may result in diminished visibility and advertising associated with a new code-compliant sign. The Nonconforming Signs portion of the code does not allow signs to be modified except for re-lettering or change of sign copy, unless the modification brings the sign into compliance with the sign code. While staff has permitted typical maintenance such as color changes or adding minor architectural enhancements that do not further the nonconformity, and in many cases lessen the nonconformity and enhance the appearance, there are few other changes that are allowed to these signs. Because many of the shopping centers have grown over the years, added outparcels or attracted well known national tenants that require larger signage in their leases, sign cabinets were added/modified over the years (when the signs were still deemed conforming), which has resulted in a hodge-podge, less than desirable appearance of these signs. Many times the center owners are the first to acknowledge this and desire improvements, but the code will not permit the structural modifications necessary to improve the design because of the nonconforming status. Over the last several years, a number of shopping centers have undergone major renovations and only minimal work could be permitted on these pole signs. Staff proposes to modify the Nonconforming Signs section of the Land Development Regulations (LDR) with the objective to allow certain modifications to nonconforming signs that would improve the image along the rights-of-way without worsening nonconformities. Staff recommends that wording be added to this section of the LDR to allow modification of nonconforming pole signs at shopping centers, when regulated by, or to be regulated by a Sign Program, as long as the mass of the sign structure is not increased (i.e. height, length, and width). Such work may be structural in nature and may involve removal/replacement of sign cabinets. The sign owner would be required to make improvements that bring the sign structure(s) further into compliance with current sign regulations and shall, under no circumstance, worsen the nonconformity. The Nonconforming Signs section of the code already allows repairs to damaged signs up to 50% of the original cost of the sign, so it is logical to allow the owner to make aesthetic enhancements to these signs, again, as long as the mass of the sign structure is not increased. Staff firmly believes these signs are not going away, unless removed by a hurricane or other destructive force, therefore we believe additional latitude is necessary to improve their look and the image of the City. - 9- {00050878.1 306-9001821 } As part of these regulations, and as further incentive for shopping center owners to upgrade their signs, staff recommends wording that would change the allowed amount of repair of these renovated signs from the current language of “50% of original cost of the sign construction” to read “50% of the value of the upgraded sign”. As part of the above discussion, staff envisions another opportunity to address the visual quality of these nonconforming signs and at the same time further economic development efforts to bring more and larger tenants to shopping centers experiencing vacancies. As noted previously, one of the key points in lease negotiations with prospective tenants is the amount and location of their signage, in order to gain maximum visibility. In many instances, this older shopping center sign is completely filled with tenant signage leaving no space on the sign for new, larger and/or potentially beneficial tenants . Most leases clearly denote the amount and location of signage granted to each tenant. Unless existing tenants are willing to modify the language within their leases, the prospective tenant will look elsewhere, possibly outside the City. Therefore, staff proposes to allow additional tenant signage on these nonconforming structures, again under the same requirements as noted above that requires approval of a Sign Program to support the proposed modifications as well regulate all other signage for the project, and results in the overall aesthetic improvement of the sign as reviewed and approved through the City’s site plan amendment process. Staff does not envision these regulations being applied to single tenant property signs, as they tend to be of a smaller scale (only one tenant panel versus several) and less costly to replace. Therefore, staff recommends no further changes regarding the single tenant signs, but remains open to further review in the future. MINIMUM PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR HOTELS 5. The purpose of this proposed amendment is to lower the minimum parking ratio for hotel rooms to better reflect actual demand as justified by the parking requirements of several other cities, as well as the user characteristics at a hotel located in the City. The proposed minimum parking ratio would minimize the construction of unnecessary impervious areas of a project and therefore support the City’s green initiatives. Staff has been made aware that our parking requirements for hotels outside the Mixed Use High (MU-H) district are greater than nearly all other communities. Staff has taken pride in the fact that we have been able to reduce unnecessary parking for many uses, created overlay areas where parking requirements have been reduced and designed code language to cap maximum parking, all in an effort to preserve more green space/pervious area on site and reduce development costs. Reducing parking requirements furthers Green Initiatives championed by the City Commission and the leadership team. The City Code requires one and a quarter (1.25) parking spaces per a one bedroom hotel room and two (2) parking spaces per two bedroom hotel room, other than in the Mixed Use High (MU-H) zoning district (downtown), in which the requirement is one (1) - 10 - {00050878.1 306-9001821 } parking space per hotel room, regardless of the number of bedrooms. Staff reviewed the parking codes of twenty-five (25) cities within Palm Beach County and the State and various counties within the State. The results indicated that none of those surveyed differentiated between one and two bedroom hotel rooms, likely due to the fact that most occupants arrive in one vehicle, such as a family on vacation, therefore making the required second parking space unnecessary. The survey also noted that only one jurisdiction, Volusia County, required a parking ratio in excess of 1.25 parking spaces per hotel room (1.5). Nineteen of the twenty-five surveyed required 1.0 parking space or fewer, with the majority of those also requiring additional parking for employees and/or meeting space. Staff conducted an analysis utilizing a recently approved hotel (Towne Place Suites in Quantum Park) for the scenarios, calculating parking based upon the various formulas of the surveyed jurisdictions. Our code as currently written requires 151 parking spaces for the project. Only two (2) of the twenty-five (25) jurisdictions required more parking (159 and 156 parking spaces). The mean parking requirement averaged out to 137 parking spaces. Had this project been constructed in the City of Delray Beach, their code would have required only 97 parking spaces. In determining the mean average, staff discarded the two highest parking requirements (159 & 156) and the three lowest (83, 97 & 97) to provide a fair and more accurate portrayal of the median numbers. As a result of this analysis, staff believes our requirement for a separate parking calculation for the two (2) bedroom hotel room to be unnecessary and unjustified. Staff recommends the code be modified to a single calculation of 1.25 parking spaces per hotel room, which would have resulted in 145 parking spaces required in the above scenario, instead of 151 for the 116 unit hotel. This calculation is still higher than the mean number of 137 from the study, and would more than account for employees and social functions. This recommendation is based upon survey results treating all hotel units identically with a single parking calculation, regardless of the number of bedrooms, the fact that our minimum parking requirement exceeded nearly all others surveyed, and that the proposed amendment furthers the City’s Green Initiatives. Staff additionally recommends an amendment to the code to address a hotel that has an internal restaurant or lounge open not only to the guests, but to the general public. In these instances, staff would recommend that parking be provided for those uses open to the general public at a rate of 50% of their requirement of a standalone operation. CONCLUSION / RECOMENDATION Staff is recommending approval of the proposed amendments. Overall, these amendments are intended to achieve regulatory compliance, promote Transit Oriented Development, encourage/promote business/economic development by allowing businesses that otherwise may be discouraged from finding suitable locations in the City, maximize compatibility among land uses and improve the aesthetics of the streetscape. Attachments S:\PLANNING\SHARED\WP\SPECPROJ\CODE REVIEW\IN-PATIENT MEDICAL CARE\STAFF REPORT - COMBINED TEXT ITEMS.DOCX - 11 - {00050878.1 306-9001821 } ITEM No. 1 MEDICAL CARE – IN-PATIENT (ZONING USE) EXHIBITS EXHIBIT1A: UseMatrixTable328(Excerpt)LDR,Ch.3,Art.IV,Section3.D. Residential Commercial Mixed-Use Industrial Misc. P: Permitted Use C: Conditional Use A: Accessory Use OFFICE & HEALTH CARE continued P PPPPPP PP P P P Counseling 27 116 16 16 16 16 31 PP P 33 MedicalCareor14 1414 Testing(Inpatient)101 101101 102 102102 P MedicalorDental PPPPPP 24 Imaging/Testing/PPPPP 27 11616161616 SupportServices 31 MedicalorDentalPP P Laboratory1329 P MedicalorDentalPPPPPPP PPPPP27 Office(Outpatient)1161616161622 31 P Hospital 72 EXHIBIT 1 - B ITEM No. 1 - MEDICAL CARE – IN-PATIENT (ZONING USE) Definitions (LDR, Chapter 1, Article II) : Medical Care or Testing (In-patient) A facility, including emergency clinics and hospitals, which are open 24-hours per day or provides 24- hour healthcare, treatment, and/or examinations, typically requiring overnight stays, and are based either on emergency, planned, or scheduled admittance to facilities with controlled and secured access to ensure appropriate care of patients. Such facilities include: Hospitals licensed pursuant Chapter 395, Florida Statutes; Alcohol or chemical dependency treatment centers licensed pursuant to Chapter 397, Florida Statutes; Mental health treatment facilities licensed pursuant to Chapter 394; Florida Statutes Urgent care centers (24-hour); Inpatient testing services such as sleep disorder centers; Birth centers licensed pursuant to Section 383.305; Florida Statues; Hospice facilities licensed pursuant to Part IV of Chapter 400; Florida Statues; Eating disorder treatment centers; and Nursing homes and physical rehabilitation centers licensed pursuant to Section 400.062, Florida Statutes. Additionally, the subject amendments warrant other modifications to the definitions, as shown below in underlined and crossed-out text: Hospital - An establishment typically referred to as an institution (excluding "Group Home, Type 4") that provides comprehensive, inpatient and outpatient healthcare, including typical emergency medical, surgical, diagnostic, rehabilitation and treatment services, as well as other specialized services ranging from bariatrics to wound care. This use would also include accessory meeting/conference facilities, limited retail sales, and administrative offices. see Medical Care or Testing (In-patient); Medical or Dental Imaging/Testing/Support Services(Out-patient); Medical or Dental Office (Out-patient) – A facility or clinic operated by one (1) or more physicians, dentists, chiropractors, or other licensed practitioners of the healing arts for the examination and treatment of persons solely on an outpatient basis including intensive out-patient treatment. Images, body fluids or other……; Mental Health and Substance Abuse – see “Group Home, Type 4 Medical Care or Testing (In- patient). Zoning Matrix Notes (LDR, Chapter 3, Article IV, Section 3.D.): Changes to Existing Notes: No. 3. (to be amended) Amend #3 to read “Conditional use approval shall be required if located within two one hundred (200) (100) feet from a residential zoning district or mixed use zoning district.” EXHIBIT 1 - B No. 14. (to remain unchanged) The subject use is only allowed on a lot that fronts on an arterial or collector roadway street as defined in Part III, Ch. 1, Art. 2 of the LDR under definitions for “Street- Arterial” and “Street-Collector”. The following amendment is an unrelated, “house-keeping” amendment intended to remove the cap on maximum seats, with maximum floor area remaining to achieve the intended objective of limiting eligible sites to quick turn-over, convenience retail. No. 58. Restaurant. a. All Districts. See Chapter 3, Article V, Supplemental Regulations regarding the sidewalk café permit. b. C-1 District. A restaurant is allowed as accessory use to a business or professional office and/or a medical or dental office but subject to the following conditions: (1) Signage. No external signage for the restaurant use shall be allowed; (2) Hours of operation shall be limited to coincide with the hours of operation of the principal use. c. M-1 district. This non-industrial use is allowed within the M-1 district, provided that it 1) is located within a multiple-tenant development on a lot that fronts on an arterial or collector roadway; 2) does not exceed two thousand, five hundred (2,500) square feet; 3) contains a maximum of twelve (12) seats; 4 3) excludes a drive-up, drive-through, or drive-in facility; and 5 4) complies with all off-street parking requirements of Chapter 4, Article V. In addition, the sale of used merchandise is only allowed as accessory to the sale of new merchandise. New Notes: No. 101. Medical Care or Testing (In-patient) Other requirements and site standards: a.Minimum building setback shall be 50 feet when abutting a residential or mixed use zoning district to enable proper site design regarding secured access, private outdoor patron amenities, buffering, etc. b.Site security shall be ensured through a minimum of surveillance cameras, limited and controlled access points, and operational procedures to restrict unauthorized and/or unarranged accessing or exiting of the facility and/or property. c.Privacy and access control shall be ensured through a minimum of perimeter fencing and landscape buffering intended to support the objective to control access and increase privacy of areas intended for client or patient use. EXHIBIT 1 - B d.Permitted locations shall exclude the Community Redevelopment Area to limit the CRA to those complimentary uses available to the public and which contribute to the synergy of successful downtown commerce pursuant to an applicable redevelopment plan. No. 102. Pre-existing. Such pre-existing uses which are no longer allowed uses pursuant to amendments to the Zoning Matrix shall not be construed as non-conforming uses. However, major modifications to such uses shall be in accordance with the conditional use approval process if required pursuant to the Zoning Matrix, and adhere to the site design and operational restrictions of the applicable footnotes. ITEM No. 2 TOD (OVERLAY PROVISIONS INCLUDING DENSITY BONUS) EXHIBITS EXHIBIT 2-A DOWNTOWN TRANSIT-ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FUTURE LAND USES NE 8TH AVE NE 4TH AVE SE 2ND AVE EDITH AVE 5 01252505007501,000 Feet Legend Land Use SPECIAL HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (SHDR)AGRICULTURE (A)MIXED USE SUBURBAN (MXS) LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (LDR) Max. 5.00 D.U./Acre OFFICE COMMERCIAL (OC)RECREATIONAL (R)DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT (DRI) MODERATE DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (MODR) Max. 7.5 D.U./Acre LOCAL RETAIL COMMERCIAL (LRC)PUBLIC & PRIVATE GOVERNMENTAL/INSTITUTIONAL (PPGI)CONSERVATION (CON) MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (MEDR) Max. 10.00 D.U./Acre GENERAL COMMERCIAL (GC)MIXED USE (MX)CONSERVATION OVERLAY (C/O) HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (HDR) Max. 11.00 D.U./Acre INDUSTRIAL (I)MIXED USE CORE (MXC) EXHIBIT 2 - B TOD (OVERLAY PROVISIONS INCLUDING DENSITY BONUS) Definitions (LDR, Chapter 1, Article II) : STATION AREA- A geographic area established for planning and regulatory purposes, and which is characterized by "Compact Development" within a one-half (1/2) mile radius around a transit station. Within the framework of TOD and transit station planning, this area includes the "Transit Core." See "Transit Core."The Station Area of a ½ mile radius around the intersection of Ocean Avenue and the Florida East Coast rail corridor, the anticipated location of the Downtown Boynton Beach Station for the planned commuter Tri-Rail Coastal Link service on the FEC Corridor, coincides with the DowntownTransit-Oriented Development District (TODD). EXHIBIT 2 – C TOD (OVERLAY PROVISIONS INCLUDING DENSITY BONUS) Zoning Districts and Overlay Zones (LDR Ch. 3. Art. III. Sec. 1.Overview) Mixed Use Urban Building and Site Regulations (Table 3-4). E. MIXED USE, MU-L1MU-L2MU-L3MU-H URBAN Lot Area, Minimum (acres): Public park: N/A N/A N/A N/A All other uses: 0.50 0.75 11 Lot Frontage, 100 100 150 200 12 Minimum (feet): Structure Height, 30 30 30 30 Minimum (feet): Maximum Building/Structure Height (HT), Density (DU), and Floor-Area-Ratio (FAR): Classification of project frontage on type of roadway: HT DU FAR HT DU FAR HT DU 14,16 FAR HT DU 14,16 FAR 14, 1653, 14, 16355, 6 3.0/ Arterial: 45 20 1.0 65/100 30/40 2.0/2.575/100 40 150/12580 4.0 33141415 3.5 3, 15 Collector: 45 20 1.0 65 30/40 2.0/2.5n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Local Street : 45 20 1.0 45 30/40 2.0/2.5n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 4 Build-to-line (feet) : 11 Front abutting a 0 0 0 0 10101010 public right-of-way: Rear: 0 0 0 0 10101010 Interior side: 0 0 0 0 10101010 Building Setbacks, : Minimum (feet) 11 Rear abutting : 12 Residential single- 25 /0 25 25 25 78777 family: Intracoastal 25 25 0 0 99 waterway: Side abutting : 12 Residential single- 25 /0 25 25 25 77, 8777 family: Usable Open Space, Minimum (square 2% 13 feet): EXHIBIT 2 – C 1. May be reduced if frontage extends from right-of-way to right-of-way. 2. Minimum of fifty (50) feet, if frontage is on a collector/local collector roadway. 3. For property abutting the MU-H district located west of US 1, the area of increases in height, density and FAR shall extend a distance of one hundred (100) feet from the MU-H zoning district line and shall require conditional use approval. For properties abutting the MU-H district located east of US 1, the area of increase for height shall extend a distance of one hundred (100) feet from the MU-H zoning district line and shall require conditional use approval; however, no increases in density and FAR are allowed. Must also have principal frontage on arterial roadway. 4. Must also have frontage on local collector or higher roadway classification. 5. Maximum height on any street frontage is forty-five (45) feet. Maximum height on Intracoastal Waterway is thirty-five (35) feet. Heights may require reduction where adjacent to a single-family zoning district where necessary to achieve the compatibility requirements of these regulations. 6. Maximum height reduced to one hundred twenty-five (125) feet for the entire project where property abuts any MU-L or residential zoning district not separated by a right-of-way. 7. Plus one (1) additional foot for each foot of height over thirty-five (35) feet. 8. Where there is an intervening right-of-way of at least forty (40) feet. 9. Subject to permitting agency approval. 10. Buildings and structures shall be located no farther than zero (0) feet from the property line, excluding those instances where strict adherence hereto would cause visual obstructions to vehicular traffic, particularly within the triangular-shaped area of property formed by the intersection of two (2) rights-of-way. See Section 5.C.2. below for additional relief provisions from build-to line requirements. 11. Listed eligible historic structures are not required to meet these standards. 12. The ultimate setback is also a factor of height and application of the Sky Exposure Plane in accordance with Section 5.C.3. below. 13. Usable open space shall be required for all developments two (2) acres in size or larger. A minimum of two percent (2%) of the site shall be devoted to usable open space, consisting of plazas or public open space, excluding private recreation. See Chapter 4, Article III, Section 8 for additional regulations. 14. Projects within the transit core shall have minimum densities as follows: MU-1 - eleven (11), MU-2 - twenty (20), MU-3 - thirty (30) and MU-H - forty (40) dwellings per acre (except that minimum density for the MU-H district applies to projects located within the entire station area). 15. Projects within the transit core shall have a minimum FAR as follows: MU-L3 - one and three-quarters (1.75) and MU-H - two (2.0) (except that minimum FAR for the MU-H district applies to projects to be located within the entire station area). 16. The maximum density for projects within the Downtown Transit-Oriented Development District Overlay Zone (the Station Area) may be increased up to twenty five percent (25%) over the maximum density allowed in the underlying zoning district. EXHIBIT 2 - D TOD (OVERLAY PROVISIONS INCLUDING DENSITY BONUS) Zoning Districts and Overlay Zoning (LDR Ch 3. Art. III. Sec. 5) Mixed-Use (Urban) Districts. General. A. 2. Description of Districts. a. Mixed Use-Low Intensity 1 (MU-L1). The MU-L1 district implements the mixed use (MX) future land use map (FLUM) classification of the Comprehensive Plan and has a maximum residential density of twenty (20) dwelling units per acre, and a minimum density of eleven (11) dwelling units per acre if located within the transit core. except within the Downtown Transit- Oriented Development District (DTODD) Overlay Zone (the Station Area), where the maximum density is twenty five (25) dwelling units per acre. In addition, projects located within the transit core of the Station Area shall have a minimum density of eleven (11) dwelling units per acre. This minimum density requirement shall be applicable to any such project regardless of whether the site is partially or entirely located within the transit core. b. Mixed Use-Low Intensity 2 (MU-L2). The MU-L2 district implements the mixed use (MX) future land use map (FLUM) classification of the Comprehensive Plan and has a maximum residential density of thirty (30) dwelling units per acre, and a minimum density of twenty (20) dwelling units per acre if located within the transit core. ,except within the Downtown Transit- Oriented Development District (DTODD) Overlay Zone (the Station Area), where the maximum density is thirty seven and a half (37.5) dwelling units per acre. In addition, projects located within the transit core of the Station Area shall have a minimum density of twenty (20) dwelling units per acre. This minimum density requirement shall be applicable to any such project regardless of whether the site is partially or entirely located within the transit core. c. Mixed Use-Low Intensity 3 (MU-L3). The MU-L3 district implements the mixed use (MX) future land use map (FLUM) classification of the Comprehensive Plan and has a maximum residential density of forty (40) dwelling units per acre,and a minimum density of thirty (30) dwelling units per acre if located within the transit core. except within the Downtown Transit- Oriented Development District (DTODD) Overlay Zone (the Station Area), where the maximum density is fifty (50) dwelling units per acre. In addition, projects located within the transit core of the Station Area shall have a minimum density of thirty (30) dwelling units per acre. This minimum density requirement shall be applicable to any such project regardless of whether the site is partially or entirely located within the transit core. EXHIBIT 2 - D d. Mixed Use-High Intensity (MU-H). The MU-H district implements the mixed use core (MX-C) future land use map (FLUM) classification of the Comprehensive Plan and has a maximum residential density of eighty (80) dwelling units per acre, except within the Downtown Transit-Oriented Development District (DTODD) Overlay Zone (the Station Area), where the maximum density is hundred (100) dwelling units per acre. In addition, projects located within the Station Area shall have a minimum density of thirty (30) dwelling units per acre.This minimum density requirement shall be applicable to any such project regardless of whether the site is partially or entirely located within the transit core. The intent of this district is to supplant the central business district (CBD) in the historic downtown and marina district. 3. Location and General Use Requirements. c. Mixed Use-High Intensity (MU-H). (2) The MU-H district is appropriate for high density/intensity development intended for the downtown area, which is generally located east of the FEC Railroad, including the marina district, and which extends out from the planned train station by approximately three (3) to four (4) blocks. Such developments shall include a mix of uses designed in a compact vertical style. Developments proposed within the Downtown Transit-Oriented Development District Overlay Zone (theSstation Aarea) must contain a residential component and have space on the first floor which shall be devoted to commercial uses for those portions of the project having frontage along Ocean Avenue or an arterial road. EXHIBIT 2 - E TOD (OVERLAY PROVISIONS INCLUDING DENSITY BONUS) Zoning Districts and Overlay Zones (LDR Ch. 3, Art. III., Sec. 5.) Building and Site Regulations. C. 1. Building and Site Regulation (Table 3-21). MIXED USE, MU-L1MU-L2MU-L3MU-H URBAN Lot Area, Minimum (acres): Public park: N/A N/A N/A N/A All other uses: 0.50 0.75 11 Lot Frontage, 100 100 150 200 12 Minimum (feet): Structure Height, 30 30 30 30 Minimum (feet): Maximum Building/Structure Height (HT), Density (DU), and Floor-Area-Ratio (FAR): Classification of project frontage on type of roadway: HT DU FAR HT DU FAR HT DU 14,16 FAR HT DU 14,16 FAR 14, 1653, 14, 16355, 6 3.0/ Arterial: 45 20 1.0 65/100 30/40 2.0/2.575/100 40 150/12580 4.0 33141415 3.5 3, 15 Collector: 45 20 1.0 65 30/40 2.0/2.5n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Local Street : 45 20 1.0 45 30/40 2.0/2.5n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 4 Build-to-line (feet) : 11 Front abutting a 0 0 0 0 10101010 public right-of-way: Rear: 0 0 0 0 10101010 Interior side: 0 0 0 0 10101010 Building Setbacks, Minimum (feet) : 11 Rear abutting : 12 Residential single- 25 /0 25 25 25 78777 family: Intracoastal 25 25 0 0 99 waterway: Side abutting : 12 Residential single- 25 /0 25 25 25 77, 8777 family: Usable Open Space, Minimum (square 2% 13 feet): EXHIBIT 2 - E 1. May be reduced if frontage extends from right-of-way to right-of-way. 2. Minimum of fifty (50) feet, if frontage is on a collector/local collector roadway. 3. For property abutting the MU-H district located west of US 1, the area of increases in height, density and FAR shall extend a distance of one hundred (100) feet from the MU-H zoning district line and shall require conditional use approval. For properties abutting the MU-H district located east of US 1, the area of increase for height shall extend a distance of one hundred (100) feet from the MU-H zoning district line and shall require conditional use approval; however, no increases in density and FAR are allowed. Must also have principal frontage on arterial roadway. 4. Must also have frontage on local collector or higher roadway classification. 5. Maximum height on any street frontage is forty-five (45) feet. Maximum height on Intracoastal Waterway is thirty-five (35) feet. Heights may require reduction where adjacent to a single-family zoning district where necessary to achieve the compatibility requirements of these Regulations. 6. Maximum height reduced to one hundred twenty-five (125) feet for the entire project where property abuts any MU-L or residential zoning district not separated by a right-of-way. 7. Plus one (1) additional foot for each foot of height over thirty-five (35) feet. 8. Where there is an intervening right-of-way of at least forty (40) feet. 9. Subject to permitting agency approval. 10. Buildings and structures shall be located no farther than zero (0) feet from the property line, excluding those instances where strict adherence hereto would cause visual obstructions to vehicular traffic, particularly within the triangular-shaped area of property formed by the intersection of two (2) rights-of-way. See Section 5.C.2. below for additional relief provisions from build-to line requirements. 11. Listed eligible historic structures are not required to meet these standards. 12. The ultimate setback is also a factor of height and application of the Sky Exposure Plane in accordance with Section 5.C.3. below. 13. Usable open space shall be required for all developments two (2) acres in size or larger. A minimum of two percent (2%) of the site shall be devoted to usable open space, consisting of plazas or public open space, excluding private recreation. See Chapter 4, Article III, Section 8 for additional regulations. 14. Projects within the transit core shall have minimum densities as follows: MU-1 - eleven (11), MU-2 - twenty (20), MU-3 - thirty (30) and MU-H - forty (40) dwellings per acre (except that minimum density for the MU-H district applies to projects located within the entire station area). 15. Projects within the transit core shall have a minimum FAR as follows: MU-L3 - one and three-quarters (1.75) and MU-H - two (2.0) (except that minimum FAR for the MU-H district applies to projects to be located within the entire station area). 16. The maximum density for projects within the Downtown Transit-Oriented Development District Overlay Zone (the Station Area) may be increased up to twenty five percent (25%) over the maximum density allowed in the underlying zoning district. 3. Additional Standards. See Chapter 4, Article III, Section 6.H. for additional standards related to urban design and building location for properties located in within the transit core of a the Downtown Transit-Oriented Development District Overlay Zone (the Sstation A area) . EXHIBIT 2 - F TOD (OVERLAY PROVISIONS INCLUDING DENSITY BONUS) Zoning Districts and Overlay Zones (LDR, Ch 3, Art. III., Sec. 8. Overlay Zones) E.Downtown Transit-Oriented Development District (DTODD) Overlay Zone 1.Intent. This overlay zone implements Policy No.1.18.1 of the Comprehensive Plan’s Future Land Use Element which establishes the DTODD to improve land development patterns around the future station of the planned commuter service. The overlay zone’s features further enhance the vision embodied by mixed-use zoning districts with increased density and intensity as well as strong emphasis on interconnectivity throughout the area. 2.Defined. The DTODD Overlay Zone coincides with the Station Area of a ½ mile radius around the intersection of Ocean Avenue and the Florida East Coast rail corridor, which is the anticipated location of the Downtown Boynton Beach Station for the planned commuter Tri-Rail Coastal Link service on the FEC Corridor. 3.General. See additional standards and requirements for mixed-use (urban) districts based on the proximity to the planned train station in Chapter 3, Article III, Section 5.A. 4.Use(s) Allowed. For the DTODD, allowed uses are based on the undelying zoning district. See “Use Matrix”, Table 3-28 in Chapter 3, Article IV, Section 3.D. 5.Building and Site Regulations. See Chapter 3, Article III, Section 5.C. 6.Additional Standards. See Chapter 4, Article III, Section 6.H. for additional standards related to urban design and building location for properties located within the transit core of the Station Area. EXHIBIT 2 - G TOD (OVERLAY PROVISIONS INCLUDING DENSITY BONUS) Exterior Building and Site Design Standards (LDR, Ch. 4, Art. III., Sec. 6.) B.Building Location. 1. General. The revitalization of urban places depends on safety and security, with building/street design having a symbiotic relationship. The location of a building and its proximity/interaction with the public realm is paramount when trying to create urban areas that have a "sense of place" that is consistent with smart growth principles and neo-traditional planning efforts. Development must adequately accommodate automobiles, but in ways that respect pedestrians and the forms of public space and gathering areas. 2. Standards. a. Each building shall meet the build-to line and reduced setback areas of the respective zoning district or Overlay Zone, whichever is applicable. The location of off-street parking areas is strongly discouraged between buildings and rights-of-way. However, in certain instances, this type of design may be impractical, and strict adherence may deter incremental improvements or upgrades to individual properties, which therefore, perpetuates the blighted conditions of the redevelopment areas. In these circumstances, deviations from the build-to line and reduced setback area requirements may be allowed, but only contingent the submittal of a Community Design Appeal application that satisfactorily addresses the evaluation criteria and when such application is approved by the City Commission. b. Within mixed-use and non-residential developments, structures proposed along arterial roadways shall be required to occupy the entire length of the street frontage, notwithstanding adjustments for cross-visibility, and open areas devoted to public gathering or pedestrian circulation. This building location requirement along the arterial roadway only applies to new construction or major site plan modifications to existing developments. Also see Chapter 4, Article II, Section 4.B.5. for additional streetscape design requirements. c. For properties fronting on arterial and collector roadways within Downtown Transit- Oriented Development District Overlay Zone (theSstationAarea), building location and design shall contribute to a "streetwall" of pedestrian scale, so as to prevent any interruptions to building massing, except in limited circumstances to promote project functionality as determined by the Director of Planning and Zoning. Interruptions in the streetwall shall be limited to those necessary to accommodate pedestrian pass-throughs, public plazas, entry forecourts, and permitted vehicular access driveways when access is not available from a local street. F.OffStreetParkingAreaStandards 5.MiscellaneousStandards. f.OffStreetParkingforStationArea.SeeSection6.H.belowforadditionalstandardsregarding Downtown Transit-Oriented Development District offstreetparkingareaslocatedwithinthe Overlay Zone ( theSstationAarea). NOTE: THERE ARE NO EXHIBITS FOR ITEMS 3 - 5