Loading...
Aldi Grocery (CDPA 17-006 through 17-009) DEVELOPMENT ORDER OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA PROJECT NAME: Aldi Grocery (CDPA 17-006 through 17-009) APPLICANT: Bonnie Miskel, Esq. of Dunay, Miskel & Backman, LLP APPLICANT'S ADDRESS: 14 SE 4th Street, Suite 36, Boca Raton, FL 33432 DATE OF HEARING RATIFICATION BEFORE CITY COMMISSION: December 5, 2017 APPROVAL SOUGHT: Requests for Community Design Appeal of 1) Chapter 4, Article III, Section 3.G., "Overhead doors facing rights-of-way"; 2) Chapter 4, Article III, Section 7.D.2., "Parapet roof return requirements"; 3) Chapter 4, Article III, Section 7.G.2. "Covered walks along building facades"; and 4) Chapter 4, Article III, Section 7.J.1. "Off-street parking locational criteria". LOCATION OF PROPERTY: 3452 W. Boynton Beach Boulevard DRAWING(S): SEE EXHIBIT "B" ATTACHED HERETO. THIS MATTER was presented to the City Commission of the City of Boynton Beach, Florida on the date of hearing stated above. The City Commission having considered the approval sought by the applicant and heard testimony from the applicant, members of city administrative staff and the public finds as follows: 1. Application for the approval sought was made by the Applicant in a manner consistent with the requirements of the City's Land Development Regulations. 2. The Applicant HAS HAS NOT established by substantial competent evidence a basis for the approval requested. 3. The conditions for development requested by the Applicant, administrative staff, or suggested by the public and supported by substantial competent evidence are as set forth on Exhibit "C" with notation "Included." 4. The Applicant's request is hereby 1/GRANTED subject to the conditions referenced in paragraph 3 above. DENIED 5. This Order shall take effect immediately upon issuance by the City Clerk. 6. All further development on the property shall be made in accordance with the terms and conditions of this order. 7. Other: DATED: //,V/f �� Cit erk S:\Planning\SHARED\WP\PROJECTS\Aldi Grocery\CDPA 17-006 through 17-009\DO.doc EXHIBIT "D" CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Project Name: Aldi Grocery File number: CDPA 17-006 through CDPA 17-009 Reference: 4th review plans identified as a New Site Plan with a October 10, 2017 Planning and Zoning Department date stamp marking. DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT 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. Approval is subject to approval of the concurrent applications for Land Use & Rezoning, Major Site Plan Modification and Variance. X COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY • Comments: N/A. PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD CONDITIONS Comments: None. Aldi Grocery(CDPA 17-006 through CDPA 17-009) Conditions of Approval Page 2 of 2 DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT CITY COMMISSION CONDITIONS Comments: To be determined. -fes S:\Planning\SHARED\WP\PROJECTSWIdi Grocery\CDPA 17-006 through CDPA 17-009\COA post P&D.doc EXHIBIT A SITE LOCATION MAP -•i 1 rt- • • 4, r 1 N . y. r 4,..' - P• A..0, '` t .,yr fr. er . A LT I f.l f. a J 'Y�..—h.r ..,s^-_..a1i'� 1�1Y �ig llii 011it , , _ I . t..,.... „. .. 1 .: ., . . . •. •. •• . it • -,re ._ ilit i . E. .• - ....,, i r r r r r r r r r t t1T,, F .. AL . • .. ' • 7.'•- 1 4 I* ��xAa-*� �� • a ..Yer. sem... II -, W Boynton Beach Blvd44 , w-: r 7 •r-.. ' N !` - � • r SiTE• '''' - ' a igil 10. r�,� 0 liti II: jI r �� Zi !rte v tt '1 '''. ' :: rr",' *!1‘. g • *' , _ N . IilL *VI. 44.-:.' -,-. _:. . . I - as lr :I, '... - • ^. . ILl'.:::':.::.:.11, -it,. .1•--iii*/iiii,_,,,,p,.. ,>',. :,-'' 44 . •-• 1 ,.-• 4 i i liffitai- RI..• ,.- , ilkm , ,.. , H.,.: _-_,L i 1 - ...ea . a . 0 3060 120 180 240 Feet M P N O0%11 ,, 0M SV IN 0 H, o®®8illiiii1 �`', a ai 1 pe ®000•••••••• _ l....,. a 2 ♦�� __ F s Z--+4) I! g i CA Z" $ A 6 z ;g _ o g m a I�®F .. F rYi W i g a o , . .a.. . g B . a ! r r 3 0 . g s s R s . - - i _ C7 b E 1 a X33 3 1 III 1 1 1 s - E X18 ;a g _ 4 . n C 3 3 III7 Y Y 9 G UP g �I 3 a � ,�yy � En A C\ ®.. �- Al II Y 1k 'ti\ o d 1 ,°; �� m m om..- - 1 $ IW" :E �� 0 i e V 'i: t t I ' ill a oii 0, L'N 1filnI- [ a e1F4:14 ,......,,h, .,.. - ,.. • ,_ , 1 f 1— ciao --, Gain i4 I �i1 A del 1.__ ii \.Y 'a. drum® 1 �I 9l I s 4 41 1 1� e s ` °a e I - em �� —7/ µ�' _ L 'CiMillii sc.- all _ na...,_rr... r m .r, l _ aov►z== _ ©ffll.a I I IN I i l I I II ,,( I II 17 li I I- 1 r. I 4 J _ RIGHT-OF-WAY _o_ f� r -%'-_'- - ___(2 DPI 2 PGS,__AP.B.0sL , WEST-BOYNTON BEACH-BOULEVARD _--- _ _ (STATE-ROAD R-804) , 4.00-mew Jrerr,ate,r, r ... o a�_ _mow ••.r.'t NA c-..42`-70 `; i t!< C_ v,k VR' R r: ;���/ ; f ,..,..fail Oi,nrr=0 r7 4 am rarer 11 Jf.O „e' ll rr, -i. ` SMF .- pp Y,71 ` .. ulli I 4 rO.T , ITN O I linli©•.� df 0 t I tr if 1: it II �� i t * mgrva' ��l �y • I -- il'I ,'�-� '�+I err .;►....MI j1_IIi__ •-•. �� Al, I: it I 'g II i 7 ii. , .' + t III, .„11.1grirmorips I'41' III 11 64)11 ' , '''M INT: IIII A 1 1 wa ...--- , 1 il 0 ,.. - II, 1 ..,, . of, ,,, g I I' /# 1 „_,_,.. lad A Fietif,,,....v iiti,l''.1 "4d® k 11 !li ,I: p- kliiii --1-03jlok;ia.x r I _ Mrr"f1°�° I soirirl ■ I '� ii v 1 11:11 r 1 I . IL ALDI ''1. 11':..1 '., ,r 1, + ', PROTO 7,0 "'��� ��'% � `"°`18,848 SF TOTAL i i I way -"`° " N X17,880 SF INTERIOR) rf �� . II (ioTKA VIr I I i • i t \, Atir / �* FFE= 15.90 NAVD i�i s �,� �,, 4_ _,3 1Q► i i !i I d, 14s®� ii !i I ;.,fib y■�. i i !i 1 Y 'I rsw It'll- i i Ii • 1( '' '''rE131k j'----- - A KWdee.. , -.mem Pursuant to LDR Part III, Chapter 2,Article II, Section 4.B.3,the Petitioner will demonstrate that the requested CDA meets the intent of the affected standard, does not diminish its practical 2 DUNAY •••••-- M I S K E L Gary Dunay Hope Calhoun Christina Bilenki Bonnie Miskel Dwayne Dickerson Heather Jo Allen BACK M A N LLP Scott Backman Ele Zachariades Andrea Keiser Aldi 3452 W. Boynton Beach Boulevard Southeast Corner of W. Boynton Beach Boulevard and Knuth Road Aldi, Inc. ("Petitioner") is the contract purchaser of the +/- 2.04 acre parcel, whose Parcel Control Number is 08-43-45-30-01-008-0031 and generally located on the southeast corner of West Boynton Beach Boulevard and Knuth Road ("Property") within the City of Boynton Beach, Palm Beach County,Florida ("City"). The Property is designated as Office Commercial ("OC") on the City's Future Land Use Map and is zoned Office Professional ("C-1"). Currently,the Property is developed with a rundown,one-story office building over thirty(30)years old and is in need of redevelopment. The Petitioner proposes to redevelop the Property with a +/- 18,848 square foot ALDI specialty grocery store ("Project"). In order to develop the Project, Petitioner requested a future land use map ("FLUM")amendment,rezoning,site plan approval,and a variance for the rear(south)setback. Here, Petitioner also respectfully requests Community Design Appeals for the following (each will be addressed in separate justification narratives): I . Code Section Subject 1 Part III, Chapter 4,Article III, Section 3.G Overhead Bay Doors 2 Part III, Chapter 4,Article III, Section 7.D.2 Parapet Return 3 Part III, Chapter 4,Article III, Section 7.G.2 Covered Walkways 4 Part III, Chapter 4,Article Ill, Section 7.J.1 Off-Street Parking CDA Justification for Relief from Chapter 4, Article Ill, Section 3.G (Overhead Bay Door) In order to bring City residents Aldi's specialty products with savings afforded to communities all over the world, Petitioner respectfully requests a Community Design Appeal ("CDA"). The purpose of a CDA is to provide a relief process that allows for deviations from any community design standard of Chapter 4 of the City's Land Development Regulations ("LDR"). Pursuant to LDR Part III, Chapter 4,Article III, Section 3.G, overhead bay doors shall not be located on building facades visible from Knuth Road. Petitioner is proposing an overhead bay door in the southeastern corner of the Property. See illustration below. The overhead bay door is oriented toward Knuth Road,but it's visibility has been significantly reduced. Thus,a CDA is required. 14 S.E.4th Street,Suite 36,Boca Raton, FL 33432 Tel:1561)405-3300 Fax:1561)409-2341 www.dmbblaw.com w V+ ' r 33W 0 I' ti / �I��I,I" 2u 5� r 1r 1 Ill ' VICZT.. 'Aill ... in .1 0 `I Ir III • , ugu i' a T dhi,l 11a� si I a v = i„i t;-.It .. ... r--) r: 1 I g. 1:, a etci I •I ! 1 Ij t WORD / 291E MDlS I I � - MOP,' J gI01tatit (dICWI�.tG* / I 10.5 Tv •tb = )(1 I g�roy I � � ,I: ��� I� � r ALDI wwiie / .. t .1 ii V .l--, .. ..-. , pv ;; PROTO 7.0 • , , 2 , -' -- o ',Ale:i_p ''18,848 SF TOTAL 1 -_- = a b. a ''1 (17,880 SF INTERIOR) i wj re MOM 1 ilii "t hig 4 pii / 5�� FFE = 15.90 NAVD 3 A I /— — 11 . I • Il „...;. .i--wt-N. - 71* �.t ®1 • I .w« /gymu '. I t c6 I, Ili __ ..7 ai i i �� = I . I NOWT Iilk _ •”. f• �� 1 ? r ; ,..Ls.1 p..- 7:: . : , 1 iFii,'IlAri Liorjj I 2 PAPS 1 vaiamr� 5Q• tSD' V I N) I Pursuant to LDR Part III, Chapter 2, Article II, Section 4.B.3,the Petitioner will demonstrate that the requested CDA meets the intent of the affected standard, does not diminish its practical application, and that an acceptable development product and/or design is achieved. First, the overhead bay door is located within a recessed portion of the building with a downward slope of up to four and a quarter (4.25) feet. The recessed portion of the building and downward slope inherently reduces visibility from Knuth Road while the west facade of the building shields most of its visibility. Second, the overhead bay door is camouflaged by painting it the same color as the building to blend in with the west facade. Third,the curb cut on the south side of the drive aisle and Knuth Road has been slightly adjusted from approximately fourteen feet (14') to seventeen feet (17') to further reduce visibility from Knuth Road. Fourth, a denser landscape buffer, consisting of groupings of Sabal Palms and Green Buttonwoods plus a forty-eight inch (48") hedge height, even further reduces the overall visibility of the loading area and overhead bay door. Considering the foregoing, the Petitioner has significantly reduced the visibility of the overhead bay door in order to meet the intent of the LDR without diminishing its practical application. Furthermore, the location of the loading area and overhead bay door on the southeastern portion of the Property achieves the best design for this site. The northern portion of the Property contains most of the pedestrian activity, visibility and vehicular access for patrons from a major public right-of-way,Boynton Beach Boulevard. By locating the loading area and overhead bay doors 2 furthest from the pedestrian activity ensures the safety of Aldi's patrons. The eastern portion of the Property is adjacent to a residential neighborhood and locating the loading area closest to residential homes would be undesirable. The proposed location uses the building itself and a thirty- foot (30') setback to screen and to protect the residential community from any impacts of the commercial activity. The western portion of the Property also contains pedestrian activity and has visibility from another public right-of-way,Knuth Road. The loading area is located on the southern portion of the property and is adequately screened by denser landscaping, a forty-eight (48) inch hedge, and a downward slope of up to four and a quarter (4.25) feet. The overhead bay doors are oriented toward the Knuth Road so loading trucks can access the downward sloped, loading area from the southwest corner of the site, which has the least amount of impact to any pedestrians on site. The overhead bay doors are located furthest from Knuth Road in the recessed portion of the building and its visibility is further reduced by the west facade, the adjusted curb cut, and the additional landscaping. As such,the proposed location of the loading area and overhead bay doors achieves the best development product and design for this site while significantly reducing its visibility from Knuth Road in order to meet the intent of LDR Part III, Chapter 4,Article III, Section 3.G. Below, the Petitioner will also justify that the requested CDA sufficiently addresses the required review criteria in accordance with LDR Part III, Chapter 2,Article II, Section 4.B: a. Whether the proposed request will demonstrate consistency with the Comprehensive Plan; Granting the requested CDA is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan ("Plan"). As discussed above, the proposed location of the overhead bay doors achieves the best design for this site,significantly reduces its visibility,ensures the safety of pedestrians,and protects the adjacent residential community. Moreover, granting the requested CDAs allows the Petitioner to propose a Project for a Property greatly in need of redevelopment. As such,the CDA is consistent with the goals,policies and objectives outlined in the City's Plan as follows: Policy 1.3.1.b - By granting the CDA, the Petitioner can most effectively provide commercial retail services which support the resident and visitor populations as well as creating employment opportunities for the adjacent residential communities. Policy 1.4.1 -The City shall encourage a mixture of quality light industrial, commercial and office uses within commercial and industrial districts where such projects would not create significant land use conflicts and adequate public facilities are available to serve such uses. The Project proposes a commercial use that is more consistent with the future land use designations and zoning districts of neighboring communities and adequate public facilities are available for the proposed use. Thus, the Project minimizes land use conflicts and maintain the character of the community (Goal 1). Policy 1.4.2 - The City shall continue to modify land development regulations as needed to make them more effective or less burdensome in achieving goals and objectives of this Plan, and to seek innovative regulatory solutions to promote economic development and sustainability initiatives. The purpose of the CDA is to provide a relief process that allows 3 for deviations from any community design standard of LDR Chapter 4. This process stimulates economic development by providing relief from site design layouts that meet the general intent of the LDRs, but not the literal application of the LDRs which can be more burdensome in achieving the goals and objectives of this Plan. Here,the requested CDA for the overhead bay doors meets the general intent of the Code without diminishing the practical application of the design standard and results in the most favorable development design. Policy 1.7.3 - The City shall require that designs for redevelopment and infill projects encourage the use of public transit, pedestrian and bicycle travel as alternatives to the car and shall maximize personal safety. The Petitioner is proposing a Project on a Property greatly in need of redevelopment. The site plan encourages the use of public transit by coordinating a bus shelter with Palm Tran on the Property. It also encourages bicycle travel by providing bicycle racks and other pedestrian amenities such as seating and covered trellises. The requested CDA maximizes the safety of pedestrians by locating the loading area and overhead bay doors the furthest away from pedestrian activity. Policy 1.7.4 - The City is required to evaluate the continuing need for redevelopment plans in specific areas of the City that are not within the City's designated Community Redevelopment Area ("CRA"). This Property has been developed with the same, rundown office building over thirty(30)years and is greatly in need of redevelopment. Thus,the CDA facilitates the much needed redevelopment of the Property, which is not located within a CRA. Policy 1.17.3 - By the end of 2014, the City shall review the Land Development Regulations to improve approval processes and to remove unnecessary hurdles hindering industrial and commercial uses that create jobs, contribute to the tax base, and accommodate market trends. As noted above, the requested CDA removes an unnecessary hurdle hindering redevelopment of this site with a commercial use that will create jobs,contribute to the City's tax base,and provide an internationally recognized brand name. b. Whether the proposed request will not significantly detract from the livability or appearance of the city and will be consistent with the established or desired character of the area, or with the redevelopment plan, where applicable; The requested CDA will not significantly detract from the livability or appearance of the City and will be consistent with the established or desired character of the area. Proposing the loading area and overhead bay doors on the most southeastern corner of the Property and in a recessed portion of the building with a downward slope achieves the best site design with the most reduced visibility of the overhead bay doors. The denser landscaping enhances the livability and appearance of the City,and the camouflaging of the overhead bay door blends in with the façade of the building,which is consistent with the character of the area. 4 c. On balance, whether the proposed request will be consistent with the purpose of the standard for which a deviation is requested. Granting the request will equally or better meet the purpose of the standard to be appealed; The requested CDA is consistent with the purpose of the standard for which a deviation is requested. As discussed above, the requested CDA still meets the general intent of the standard,which is to reduce the visibility of the overhead bay doors. Furthermore, granting the requested CDA will better meet the purpose of the standard being appealed. The proposed location of the loading area and overhead bay doors creates a safer environment for pedestrians and protects the adjacent residential community while still reducing the overall visibility. d. Whether the proposed request is intended to save or preserve existing trees or desired flora. (1)Whether the applicant is unable to design or locate proposed buildings, structures, or improvements and preserve the tree(s) and comply with all provisions of these community design standards without causing the applicant undue hardship; (2)Whether it is not feasible to transplant the trees to another location on the subject site considering the following: 1) shape and dimensions of the real property; 2) location of existing structures and infrastructure improvements; and 3)size, age, health, and species of trees sought to be protected; The criteria in d(1) and d(2) is inapplicable to this CDA. The overhead bay doors do not impact existing trees or flora. In fact, additional landscaping has been provided to meet the general intent of the LDR. e. Whether the proposed request will have adverse environmental impacts that cannot be prevented by the imposition of conditions; This criterion is inapplicable to this CDA. The visibility of the overhead bay doors does not have any environmental impacts. I Whether the proposed request will have an adverse impact on property values of abutting or adjacent land; The requested CDA will not have an adverse impact on property values of abutting or adjacent land. In fact, the proposed location of the loading area and overhead bay doors within the recessed portion of the building protects the property values of the adjacent residential community. 5 g. Whether the proposed request will seriously reduce the quality or quantity of light and air available to adjacent properties; This criterion is inapplicable to this CDA. The visibility of the overhead bay doors does not have any impacts on the quality and quantity of light and air available to adjacent properties. There will be no operations on site that will emit smoke or odors and the proposed building height (25'4") is far less than the maximum requirement (45'). h. Whether the proposed request is necessary to further the objectives of the city to assist with economic development and business promotion;and The requested CDA is necessary to further the objectives of the City to assist with economic development and business promotion. Policy 1.17.3 requires the City to improve approval processes and to remove unnecessary hurdles hindering industrial and commercial uses that create jobs, contribute to the tax base, and accommodate market trends. As already mentioned, the requested CDA achieves the best site design while still meeting the general intent of the LDR and removes an unnecessary hurdle hindering a much needed redevelopment of Property with a commercial use that will create jobs, contribute to the City's tax base, and provide an internationally recognized brand name. i. Whether the proposed request meets the purpose and intent of these regulations but conflicts with another site development standard or requirement, including sustainable development and green initiatives. The Petitioner has demonstrated throughout this justification that the requested CDA meets the relief criteria. The requested CDA does not conflict with another site development standard or requirement. 6 I— H 1I 1 ...... 11 1li NNW 5Z4 i, I ��±LL .{r1). .. tfil© w� .. ,---- -. warm-at :1 tom_ r i: i * NIt. * - SID �� D g : ollli'�, I I �; 11 ; r.4 D �� �8 iso M I. Ania01e i.':ems•'\\� A® �. ,1 y -31 lil' 1 ! � _ I M CO co 13 III 1E1 E, til 4Ea �' ohne D ©� © ©, ;.; ' m 11 �1 i lro .\ ag- - ----siatii.I IIS i!" 11114,:r4 4 4 erg - _ _ . it Y 1rel I 1 1 11 1. III,;1 D ;fie ,wf P. 1 $ l51 iEti 11 ! EFA 0 it iigiiis F I f +III g g i l a i V � 1 '1 ! 1 3 ° 2 i l ! g a-� s o g w R. Y w v v w N & i0.1a A 8 s, 2 _ 1 1 a w Q A a a a 1s s n 2 g Czz�1 a 5z ri En i e -4?=-2 A � I , e /03 4� I1I1 mom. A l V pipit §]] lixa],yg Q 83 S S p S OEC ,*ms ,. •" cw. 44 tIl i 551' S e Yg f1 0� _ i F'�^ 41 #11 r casorn • w.14440 nmw«owrOwx RD .I aiEI ` 1 a e a Ewan DUNAY MISKEL Gary Dunay Hope Calhoun Christina Bilenki BAC K M A N LLP Bonnie Miskel Dwayne Dickerson Heather Jo Allen Scott Backman Ele Zachariades Andrea Keiser Aldi 3452 W. Boynton Beach Boulevard Southeast Corner of W. Boynton Beach Boulevard and Knuth Road Aldi, Inc. ("Petitioner") is the contract purchaser of the +/- 2.04 acre parcel, whose Parcel Control Number is 08-43-45-30-01-008-0031 and generally located on the southeast corner of West Boynton Beach Boulevard and Knuth Road ("Property") within the City of Boynton Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida ("City"). The Property is designated as Office Commercial ("OC") on the City's Future Land Use Map and is zoned Office Professional ("C-1"). Currently,the Property is developed with a rundown,one-story office building over thirty(30)years old and is in need of redevelopment. The Petitioner proposes to redevelop the Property with a +/- 18,848 square foot ALDI specialty grocery store ("Project"). In order to develop the Project, Petitioner requested a future land use map ("FLUM")amendment,rezoning,site plan approval,and a variance for the rear(south) setback. Here, Petitioner also respectfully requests Community Design Appeals for the following (each will be addressed in separate justification narratives): No., Code Section Subject 1 Part III, Chapter 4,Article III, Section 3.G Overhead Bay Doors 2 Part III,Chapter 4,Article III,Section 7.D.2 Parapet Return 3 Part III,Chapter 4,Article III,Section 7.G.2 Covered Walkways 4 Part III, Chapter 4,Article III, Section 7.J.1 Off-Street Parking CDA Justification for Relief from Chapter 4, Article III, Section 7.D.2 (Parapet Return) In order to bring City residents Aldi's specialty products with savings afforded to communities all over the world, Petitioner respectfully requests a Community Design Appeal ("CDA"). The purpose of a CDA is to provide a relief process that allows for deviations from any community design standard of Chapter 4 of the City's Land Development Regulations ("LDR"). LDR Part III,Chapter 4,Article III,Section 7.D.2 is a big box design standard and requires a parapet return with a length equal to or exceeding the parapet articulation. Petitioner is proposing the following and requires a CDA: Tower Parapet Articulation Parapet Return Main Tower 4 feet 2 feet Secondary Tower 4 feet 8 inches 2 feet 14 S.E.4th Street,Suite 36,Boca Raton, FL 33432 Tel:(5611 405-3300 Fax:(561)409-2341 www.dmbblaw.com Pursuant to LDR Part III, Chapter 2,Article II, Section 4.B.3, the Petitioner will demonstrate that the requested CDA meets the intent of the affected standard, does not diminish its practical application, and that an acceptable development product and/or design is achieved. The intent of big box design standards is to eliminate adverse aesthetic impacts of large square or rectangular- shaped buildings with limited architectural enhancements. The minimum required parapet return is an architectural enhancement intended to minimize those impacts. Here, Petitioner's building proposes a plethora of architectural enhancements that result in a building design far more aesthetically pleasing than your typical big box building. The two most visible elevations are the front elevation (north) and the right elevation (west). &o ,., ta •�c� cc..o:MO H 1.11111111 NM= .1.1111. s, I •ti _ _417;• FRONT ELEVATION (NORTH) •A...— r _.,r. •M L umI _...- ...__. : I IIS. RIGHT ELEVATION(WEST) Both elevations are visible from public rights-of-way, Boynton Beach Boulevard and Knuth Road. Both elevations provide the main tower element with the illuminated Aldi sign and secondary tower elements. This creates movement along the roof line as opposed to flat roofs typically seen on big box buildings. The facades offer a variety of colors and materials with different tones and consistency to create a visually aesthetic blend of architectural enhancements. They include vintage wood cedar, a brick like split-face CMU in Aldi Autumn, a prairie clay stucco, and aluminum composite panels in slate gray, bright silver, and gravel stop firestone white. Cornice treatments are provided on all four elevations to create a finished look. The varying tower and parapet heights create architectural enhancements that better meet the intent of the LDR than simply extending the parapet return. In fact,increasing the width of the parapet return for this particular building design would not be visible,and thus,have no additional impact on the architectural enhancements given the size of the building and existing tower elements. Therefore, the Petitioner has adequately addressed the intent of the LDR by providing architectural enhancements to the roof line that far exceed the minimum parapet return requirement. Below, the Petitioner will also justify that the requested CDA sufficiently addresses the required review criteria in accordance with LDR Part III, Chapter 2,Article II, Section 4.B: 2 a. Whether the proposed request will demonstrate consistency with the Comprehensive Plan; Granting the requested CDA is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan ("Plan"). As discussed above, the Petitioner's proposed building design does not qualify as a big box building and provides architectural enhancements that far exceed a minimum required parapet return. Moreover, granting the requested CDAs allows the Petitioner to propose a Project for a Property greatly in need of redevelopment. As such,the CDA is consistent with the goals,policies and objectives outlined in the City's Plan as follows: Policy 1.3.1.b - By granting the CDA, the Petitioner can most effectively provide commercial retail services which support the resident and visitor populations as well as creating employment opportunities for the adjacent residential communities. Policy 1.4.1 -The City shall encourage a mixture of quality light industrial,commercial and office uses within commercial and industrial districts where such projects would not create significant land use conflicts and adequate public facilities are available to serve such uses. The Project proposes a commercial use that is more consistent with the future land use designations and zoning districts of neighboring communities and adequate public facilities are available for the proposed use. Thus, the Project minimizes land use conflicts and maintain the character of the community (Goal 1). Policy 1.4.2 - The City shall continue to modify land development regulations as needed to make them more effective or less burdensome in achieving goals and objectives of this Plan, and to seek innovative regulatory solutions to promote economic development and sustainability initiatives. The purpose of the CDA is to provide a relief process that allows for deviations from any community design standard of LDR Chapter 4. This process stimulates economic development by providing relief from site design layouts that meet the general intent of the LDRs, but not the literal application of the LDRs which can be more burdensome in achieving the goals and objectives of this Plan. Here,granting the requested CDA provides relief from a design standard that is over burdensome because its application has little to no impact on the aesthetics of the building if the parapet return is not visible. Policy 1.7.3 - The City shall require that designs for redevelopment and infill projects encourage the use of public transit, pedestrian and bicycle travel as alternatives to the car and shall maximize personal safety. The Petitioner is proposing a Project on a Property greatly in need of redevelopment. The site plan encourages the use of public transit by coordinating a bus shelter with Palm Tran on the Property. It also encourages bicycle travel by providing bicycle racks and other pedestrian amenities such as seating and covered trellises. The requested CDA maximizes the safety of pedestrians by locating the loading area and overhead bay doors the furthest away from pedestrian activity. Policy 1.7.4 - The City is required to evaluate the continuing need for redevelopment plans in specific areas of the City that are not within the City's designated Community 3 Redevelopment Area ("CRA"). This Property has been developed with the same, rundown office building over thirty(30)years and is greatly in need of redevelopment. Thus,the CDA facilitates the much needed redevelopment of the Property, which is not located within a CRA. Policy 1.17.3 - By the end of 2014, the City shall review the Land Development Regulations to improve approval processes and to remove unnecessary hurdles hindering industrial and commercial uses that create jobs, contribute to the tax base, and accommodate market trends. As noted above, the requested CDA removes an unnecessary hurdle hindering redevelopment of this site with a commercial use that will create jobs,contribute to the City's tax base,and provide an internationally recognized brand name. b. Whether the proposed request will not significantly detract from the livability or appearance of the city and will be consistent with the established or desired character of the area, or with the redevelopment plan, where applicable; The requested CDA will not significantly detract from the livability or appearance of the City and will be consistent with the established or desired character of the area. As discussed above, the Petitioner has proposed a building design that is not the typical big box building and has many architectural enhancements that create a positive aesthetic impact in the community. c. On balance, whether the proposed request will be consistent with the purpose of the standard for which a deviation is requested. Granting the request will equally or better meet the purpose of the standard to be appealed; The requested CDA is consistent with the purpose of the standard for which a deviation is requested. As discussed above, the requested CDA still meets the general intent of the standard,which is to reduce the visibility of the overhead bay doors. Furthermore, granting the requested CDA will better meet the purpose of the standard being appealed. The Petitioner has provided better and more architectural enhancements than the minimum required parapet return. d. Whether the proposed request is intended to save or preserve existing trees or desired flora. (1)Whether the applicant is unable to design or locate proposed buildings, structures, or improvements and preserve the tree(s) and comply with all provisions of these community design standards without causing the applicant undue hardship; (2)Whether it is not feasible to transplant the trees to another location on the subject site considering the following: 1) shape and dimensions of the real 4 property; 2) location of existing structures and infrastructure improvements; and 3)size, age, health, and species of trees sought to be protected; The criteria in d(1) and d(2) is inapplicable to this CDA. The parapets do not impact existing trees or flora e. Whether the proposed request will have adverse environmental impacts that cannot be prevented by the imposition of conditions; This criterion is inapplicable to this CDA. The parapets do not have any environmental impacts. f Whether the proposed request will have an adverse impact on property values of abutting or adjacent land; The requested CDA will not have an adverse impact on property values of abutting or adjacent land. In fact, a more aesthetically pleasing building design protects the property values of the adjacent residential community. g. Whether the proposed request will seriously reduce the quality or quantity of light and air available to adjacent properties; This criterion is inapplicable to this CDA. There will be no operations on site that will emit smoke or odors and the proposed building height (25'4"),including parapets,is far less than the maximum requirement (45'). h. Whether the proposed request is necessary to further the objectives of the city to assist with economic development and business promotion;and The requested CDA is necessary to further the objectives of the City to assist with economic development and business promotion. Policy 1.17.3 requires the City to improve approval processes and to remove unnecessary hurdles hindering industrial and commercial uses that create jobs, contribute to the tax base, and accommodate market trends. As already mentioned, the requested CDA provides a better building design while still meeting the general intent of the LDR and removes an unnecessary hurdle hindering a much needed redevelopment of Property with a commercial use that will create jobs, contribute to the City's tax base,and provide an internationally recognized brand name. 5 i. Whether the proposed request meets the purpose and intent of these regulations but conflicts with another site development standard or requirement,including sustainable development and green initiatives. The Petitioner has demonstrated throughout this justification that the requested CDA meets the relief criteria. The requested CDA does not conflict with another site development standard or requirement. 6 DUNAY �.� M I S K E L Gary Dunay Hope Calhoun Christina Bilenki Bonnie Miskel Dwayne Dickerson Heather Jo Allen B A C K M A N LLP Scott Backman Ele Zachariades Andrea Keiser Aldi 3452 W. Boynton Beach Boulevard Southeast Corner of W. Boynton Beach Boulevard and Knuth Road Aldi, Inc. ("Petitioner") is the contract purchaser of the +/- 2.04 acre parcel, whose Parcel Control Number is 08-43-45-30-01-008-0031 and generally located on the southeast corner of West Boynton Beach Boulevard and Knuth Road ("Property") within the City of Boynton Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida ("City"). The Property is designated as Office Commercial ("OC") on the City's Future Land Use Map and is zoned Office Professional ("C-1"). Currently,the Property is developed with a rundown,one-story office building over thirty(30)years old and is in need of redevelopment. The Petitioner proposes to redevelop the Property with a +/- 18,848 square foot ALDI specialty grocery store ("Project"). In order to develop the Project, Petitioner requested a future land use map ("FLUM")amendment,rezoning,site plan approval,and a variance for the rear(south)setback. Here, Petitioner also respectfully requests Community Design Appeals for the following (each will be addressed in separate justification narratives): NAL Code Section Subject 1 Part III, Chapter 4,Article III, Section 3.G Overhead Bay Doors 2 Part III, Chapter 4,Article III, Section 7.D.2 Parapet Return 3 Part III, Chapter 4,Article III, Section 7.G.2 Covered Walkways 4 Part III, Chapter 4,Article III, Section 7.J.1 Off-Street Parking CDA Justification for Relief from Chapter 4, Article Ill, Section 7.J.1 (Off-Street Parking) In order to bring City residents Aldi's specialty products with savings afforded to communities all over the world, Petitioner respectfully requests a Community Design Appeal ("CDA"). The purpose of a CDA is to provide a relief process that allows for deviations from any community design standard of Chapter 4 of the City's Land Development Regulations ("LDR"). Pursuant to LDR Part III, Chapter 4,Article III,Section 7.J.1,no more than sixty percent(60%) of the off-street parking may be located between the building facade and a public street. Petitioner is proposing the following to meet the general intent of this LDR, but will require a CDA in order to achieve the most efficient and safe site design: • A designated, stamped concrete pedestrian crosswalk that bisects the parking lot; • Hard roof trellises for three(3)areas in between the stamped concrete crosswalk that bisects the parking lot (see illustration below and area circled in orange); and • Curbed landscaped areas throughout the site (see illustration below and area boxed in green). 14 S.E.4th Street,Suite 36,Boca Raton, FL 33432 Tel:(561)405-3300 Fax:15611 409-2341 www.dmbblaw.com application, and that an acceptable development product and/or design is achieved. The intent of this percentage limitation for off-street parking is to reduce the appearance of a large parking field in front of the building. However, in order to achieve the most efficient and safe site design, the Petitioner must provide a site layout that is compatible with the existing dimensions for this Property, that does not compromise the natural surveillance of patrons in the parking lot, that provides for efficient traffic flow, and that protects the adjacent residential community to the east. The Property is uniquely long and narrow. It is approximately 235 feet wide and 375 feet long. Its length is a third greater than its width. As a result,the proposed building location achieves the best site design because it provides the most efficient traffic flow,best screens the loading area,provides the least amount of impact to the adjacent residential community to the east, and allows for the natural surveillance of the parking lot from the public rights-of-way. To meet the intent of the LDR for this necessary site design, the Petitioner has provided site amenities to reduce the overall area of the paved surface in between the building facade and the public right-of-way. Petitioner proposes a seven (7) foot, stamped concrete pedestrian crosswalk that bisects the parking lot. In between the crosswalk, hard covered trellises provide an aesthetically pleasing site amenity as well as weather related relief to patrons entering and exiting the store. Furthermore, curbed landscaped areas throughout the site create aesthetically pleasing green areas that visually reduce the overall area of the paved surface. In totality,the Petitioner's proposed site layout with site amenities meets the intent of the LDR without diminishing its practical application by reducing the appearance of a large parking field while still achieving the best and safest site design. Below, the Petitioner will also justify that the requested CDA sufficiently addresses the required review criteria in accordance with LDR Part III, Chapter 2,Article II, Section 4.B: a. Whether the proposed request will demonstrate consistency with the Comprehensive Plan; Granting the requested CDA is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan ("Plan"). As discussed above,the requested CDA gives the Petitioner the flexibility to achieve an efficient and safe site design suitable for the proposed use while still meeting the general intent of the LDR. Moreover, granting the requested CDAs allows the Petitioner to propose a Project for a Property greatly in need of redevelopment. As such, the CDA is consistent with the goals, policies and objectives outlined in the City's Plan as follows: Policy 1.3.1.b - By granting the CDA, the Petitioner can most effectively provide commercial retail services which support the resident and visitor populations as well as creating employment opportunities for the adjacent residential communities. Policy 1.4.1 —The City shall encourage a mixture of quality light industrial, commercial and office uses within commercial and industrial districts where such projects would not create significant land use conflicts and adequate public facilities are available to serve such uses. The Project proposes a commercial use that is more consistent with the future land use designations and zoning districts of neighboring communities and adequate public facilities are available for the proposed use. Thus, the Project minimizes land use conflicts and maintain the character of the community (Goal 1). 3 Policy 1.4.2 - The City shall continue to modify land development regulations as needed to make them more effective or less burdensome in achieving goals and objectives of this Plan, and to seek innovative regulatory solutions to promote economic development and sustainability initiatives. The purpose of the CDA is to provide a relief process that allows for deviations from any community design standard of LDR Chapter 4. This process stimulates economic development by providing relief from site design layouts that meet the general intent of the LDRs, but not the literal application of the LDRs which can be more burdensome in achieving the goals and objectives of this Plan. Here,the requested CDA for the reducing the overall paved surface with site amenities meets the general intent of the Code without diminishing the practical application of the design standard and results in the most efficient and safe site design. Policy 1.7.3 - The City shall require that designs for redevelopment and infill projects encourage the use of public transit, pedestrian and bicycle travel as alternatives to the car and shall maximize personal safety. The Petitioner is proposing a Project on a Property greatly in need of redevelopment. The site plan encourages the use of public transit by coordinating a bus shelter with Palm Tran on the Property. It also encourages bicycle travel by providing bicycle racks and other pedestrian amenities such as seating and covered trellises. The requested CDA maximizes the safety of pedestrians maximizing the natural surveillance of the parking lots from the public right-of-way. Policy 1.7.4 - The City is required to evaluate the continuing need for redevelopment plans in specific areas of the City that are not within the City's designated Community Redevelopment Area ("CRA"). This Property has been developed with the same, rundown office building over thirty(30) years and is greatly in need of redevelopment. Thus,the CDA facilitates the much needed redevelopment of the Property, which is not located within a CRA. Policy 1.17.3 - By the end of 2014, the City shall review the Land Development Regulations to improve approval processes and to remove unnecessary hurdles hindering industrial and commercial uses that create jobs, contribute to the tax base, and accommodate market trends. As noted above, the requested CDA removes an unnecessary hurdle hindering redevelopment of this site with a commercial use that will create jobs,contribute to the City's tax base,and provide an internationally recognized brand name. b. Whether the proposed request will not significantly detract from the livability or appearance of the city and will be consistent with the established or desired character of the area, or with the redevelopment plan, where applicable; The requested CDA will not significantly detract from the livability or appearance of the City and will be consistent with the established or desired character of the area. The pedestrian crosswalk and hard roof trellises provide a practical site amenity that visually reduces the overall paved area. Additionally, the curbed landscaped areas around the north and west building facade create an aesthetically pleasing green area. 4 c. On balance, whether the proposed request will be consistent with the purpose of the standard for which a deviation is requested. Granting the request will equally or better meet the purpose of the standard to be appealed; The requested CDA is consistent with the purpose of the standard for which a deviation is requested. As discussed above, the requested CDA still meets the general intent of the standard,which is to reduce the appearance of a large parking field in front of the building. Granting the requested CDA will better meet the purpose of the standard being appealed because an efficient and safe site design layout is achieved while still reducing the overall appearance of the paved surface. d. Whether the proposed request is intended to save or preserve existing trees or desired flora. (1)Whether the applicant is unable to design or locate proposed buildings, structures, or improvements and preserve the tree(s) and comply with all provisions of these community design standards without causing the applicant undue hardship; (2)Whether it is not feasible to transplant the trees to another location on the subject site considering the following: 1) shape and dimensions of the real property; 2) location of existing structures and infrastructure improvements; and 3)size, age, health, and species of trees sought to be protected; The criteria in d(1) and d(2) is inapplicable to this CDA. The parking area is not intended to save or preserve trees or flora. e. Whether the proposed request will have adverse environmental impacts that cannot be prevented by the imposition of conditions; The requested CDA will not create any additional adverse environmental impacts. Regardless of the location of the parking,the required number of parking spaces remain the same for this use and any conditions imposed to minimum environmental impacts will remain the same. f Whether the proposed request will have an adverse impact on property values of abutting or adjacent land; 5 The requested CDA will not have an adverse impact on property values of abutting or adjacent land. The site design achieves the most efficient layout. Moreover,the brand name, product offerings, aesthetic enhancements of the trellises, landscaped areas,and pedestrian friendly amenities increase property values. g. Whether the proposed request will seriously reduce the quality or quantity of light and air available to adjacent properties; This criterion is inapplicable to this CDA. The location of parking does not have any impacts on the quality and quantity of light and air available to adjacent properties. There will be no operations on site that will emit smoke or odors and the proposed building height (25'4") is far less than the maximum requirement (45'). h. Whether the proposed request is necessary to further the objectives of the city to assist with economic development and business promotion;and The requested CDA is necessary to further the objectives of the City to assist with economic development and business promotion. Policy 1.17.3 requires the City to improve approval processes and to remove unnecessary hurdles hindering industrial and commercial uses that create jobs, contribute to the tax base, and accommodate market trends. As already mentioned, the requested CDA achieves the better and safer site design while still meeting the general intent of the LDR and removes an unnecessary hurdle hindering a much needed redevelopment of Property with a commercial use that will create jobs, contribute to the City's tax base, and provide an internationally recognized brand name. i. Whether the proposed request meets the purpose and intent of these regulations but conflicts with another site development standard or requirement,including sustainable development and green initiatives. The Petitioner has demonstrated throughout this justification that the requested CDA meets the relief criteria. The requested CDA does not conflict with another site development standard or requirement. 6