The URL can be used to link to this page

REVIEW COMMENTS ~f, Michael From Sent: To Subject: Johnson, Eric Tuesday, April 05, 2005 11 40 AM Greene Quintus, Rumpf, Michael FW Quantum Code review FBC Quintus see below Thanks, Eric -Original Message----- From: Johnson, Eric Sent: Tuesday, April 05, 2005 11.28 AM To: Rumpf, Michael Subject: Quantum Code review FBC Mike, I spoke to Eugene this morning regarding his language for the Quantum Park height code review item scheduled for tonight's CC meeting According to Eugene, the Florida Building Code (FBC) becomes more stringent with structures that are six (6) stories and above The FBC requirements (per the high rise matrix) are based on the number of stories not feet (except in cases where the building is above 75 feet) Eugene says that he didn't want to get into fire or structural issues (that kick in blc of the FBC) but he also didn't want his buildings to be limited to 45 feet because a 5-story building is naturally higher than 45 feet. Futhermore, his intent was to keep building heights below six stories which would be considered as "high-rise classifications" Eric PS I just talked to Quintus and cited Ordinance No 04-005, which amended Chapter 9 of the City's Code or Ordinances (Requirements for High-Rise Buildings and Buildings with six or more stories). This ordinance deals with fire related requirements. 1 Development staff response to issues related to Code Review CDRV 05-006 1 Definition of five-story building -- without a companion height limitation, how high theoretically can the building be? There is nothing in the staff report to indicate how high a five-story building would be. Assuming a 12' ceiling height, a five-story building, exclusive of elevator and AC equipment would be 60 feet. Per the SMU code, the maximum building height by right is 55 feet. The petitioner in this instance has requested authorization of "five-story buildings" as opposed to the underlying PID allowance of buildings having a maximum height of 45 feet. Further, the SMU code as referenced in the staff report does allow for increased height of buildings in the SMU district between 55 feet and 75 feet subject to special review and setback regulations. In summary, I am concerned that the petitioner's request for authorization of a five-story building lacks specificity and will result in interpretive problems for the staff and Commission. The building height should be expressed in feet not stories. That said the visual impact of five-story buildings along Gateway must be addressed by staff. This was not done in the staff report. The Staff Report Summary recommends revising Section 7 P 1 e of the Planned Industrial District (PID) regulations to read as follows Section 7.P.1.e - Maximum Buildina Heiaht. The Mixed Use pods within the PIO shall allow for a heiGht of fifty-five (55) feet for mixed use and residential buildinGS. Buildina heiGhts between fifty-five (55) feet and a maximum of seventy-five (75) feet shall be processed as a Conditional Use. No exceptions to the maximum heiGht shall be allowed. Staff does not consider the 10 foot difference, between the currently allowed 45 foot height to the midpoint of a pitched roof with the possibility of being granted an undetermined height exception and the maximum 55 foot height to the top of a roof with no exceptions, to be significant. The 75-foot height limit can only be achieved by going through the conditional use process As a result staff does not consider the visual impact along Gateway to differ significantly from what can be built now 2. What does "shall fall below the Florida Building Code thresholds for a high-rise classification" mean? This is not explained in the staff report. If this is an exception to any fire code provisions, the FD may have objections to the proposed language. Will the new high-rise regulations to our fire code apply to the PID? The staff report needs to address this matter This statement should more correctly reference Ordinance No 04-005 which amended Chapter 9, Article 2 of the City Code concerning Fire Protection and Prevention, which defines "High Rise" as six stories or 75 feet. 3. The staff report recommends deploying the set-back provisions of the SMU in the Quantum PID -- however, as noted above, this may be a moot point as there is no contiguous single family property for vacant lots, I believe. The only area which I saw adjacent to single-family is the MU lots 23-31, which have been developed. As land use policy, the provisions of the SMU Code per Ordinance 04-011 are clear as to the intent that the SMU designation is a special case with limitations The only existina single family is Dos Lagos adjacent to lots 23 -31 However, it is possible that future single-family adjacencies could occur at parcels 83, 87 and 88 The recommendation by staff is based on a vision for the future, which would allow intensification, by height based on subsequent and required NOPC applications and/or substantial deviations to the DRI To add additional units or square footage above the current threshold of the DRI, formal applications would be required and reviewed accordingly Rather than creating a new system, based on the similarities in location and use with the SMU, the general components of the SMU were applied 4. I did not see any language that would seek to evaluate the SMU provisions for usable open space at the Quantum PID. Your staff needs to address whether such requirements are appropriate or beneficial to the MU area of Quantum PID. This is an important and integral element of balancing increased height and density How would and should the SMU Building and Site Regulations apply to the Quantum Site? I ask this because it appears that the staff report only addressed setback requirements associated with higher buildings. The Quantum Park PID has it's own open space requirements which it had originally met, including setting aside 40 acres of preserve, a 25' and 40' foot perimeter buffer, right-of-way plantings, and multiple retention ponds with littoral plantings The subject and preceding NOPC amendments have not represented intensifications of the DRI/Master Plan, but a shifting of uses under the maximum thresholds. The additional height allowed should not be viewed as an intensification but as a vertical use of capacity Therefore, this should not necessarily be viewed as the opportunity to apply more restrictions disproportional to the request. 5. What is the basis for the developer's desire to increase the DU's by 105 units? What is the hardship imposed that would allow such an increase in density? The only item I could see in the developer's presentation package is that the topography of the area is low (See page 2 of 4 of the Developer's justification statement.) With this proposal, what will be the final number and distribution of residential units in the area depicted as Exhibit B to the staff report? What is the density for the proposal? The question as to the basis for the developer's desire to increase DU's by 105 units would appear to be academic in light of the City Commission's Approval of Ordinance No 05-013 on February, 15 2005, which approved the NOPC allowing the additional 105 dwelling units. The DRI application does not state any hardship, nor is the applicant required to provide that type of justification. From day one, when residential units were initially allowed into the PID via the prerequisite amendments, residential units have been allowed consistent with the Comprehensive Plan subject only to a FAR and not a density limit. 6. What impact will this petition have, if granted, on the Mixed Use designated parcels in the Quantum PID? Based on what has been constructed and what is vacant in these areas, what can we expect? Also, could the commercial/office area on the north side of Gateway (Lots 83-88) be converted to residential, or has the development of these parcels been assured as non-residential? More residential development on Lots 83-88 could occur but would likely trigger a formal process to amend the master site plan for that mixed-use pod A certain level of additional units, if vertical or well integrated would be generally supported by staff .!!.!!2!Pf, Michael From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Johnson, Eric Monday, April 04, 2005 5:16 PM Rumpf, Michael Breese, Ed CDRV 05-006 Mike, Quintus was directed by the City Manager to answer some questions related to the above referenced code review application to allow building height of 55 feet in Quantum Park. As you know, Ed conducted the analysis and wrote the staff report for that item. In Ed's absence, I will attempt to answer the questions but I would request you to confirm my answers before sending back to Quintus. 1. Definition of 5-story building. City Manager says, "There is nothing in the staff report to indicate how high a five-story builidng would be". Background: According to the staff report, staff is proposing the following language: the buildino heioht shall be measured from the lowest finish floor slab elevation of the proposed buildinQ or from the minimum base flood elevation as established bv FEMA. which ever is hiohest. to the peak of the structure. includino any architectural details. rooftop eQuipment. stairwells. elevator shafts. etc. Background: According to the staff report, Mixed Use pods within the PID shall allow for a height of 55 feet for mixed use and residential buildings. Buildino heiohts between 55 feet and the maximum of 75 feet shall be processed as a Conditional Use. No exceptions to the maximum heioht shall be allowed. iV_ Answer: This means that buildings (on parcels designated mixed-use within the PID) can be as high as 55 feet as "'f a permitted use. Anything above this 55-foot threshold would be considered conditional use and would have to meet the standards for evaluating conditional uses. A five story building that exceeds 55 feet in height (when using the above methodology) would be considered for conditional use approval. City Manager comments that, "the building height should be expressed in feet, not stories. That said, the visual impact of five (5)-story buildings along Gateway must be addressed by staff. I think Ed covered that concern...see bold above. 2. City Manager, "What does fall below the Florida Building Code thresholds for a high-rise classification mean?" ""-- --- Background: According to the staff report, the applicant was proposing the following language, the maximum buildino heioht within a Mixed Use Pod shall not be oreater than five (5) stories and shall be below the Florida Buildino Code thresholds for a hiQh rise classification. Staff reviewed the proposed language and found that our version was more appropriate. I don't know the exact reasoning why staff proposed our version or what the "Florida Building Code thresholds" mean. At minimum, I would want to consult th the Building Division, Fire, and I or Ed before finalizing an opinion to give back to Quintus. 3. City Manager, "The staff report recommends deploying the setback provision of the SMU in the Quantum PID -- however, as noted above, this may be a moot point as there is no contiguous single family property for vacant lots, I !?elieve" . t I am guessing that the City Manager doesn't feel that it is appopriate to have the setback envelope of the SMU in Quantum Park. Again, I would have to consult with Ed and his reasoning before forming an opinion to give to Quintus. 4. City Manager, "I did not see any language that would seek to evaluate the SMU provisions for usable open space at the Quantum PID. Your staff needs to address whether such requirements are appropriate or beneficial to the MU area of the Quantum PID. This is an important and integral element of balancing increased height and density". 1 The City of Boynton Beach OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER 100 E. Boynton Beach Boulevard P.O. Box 310 Boynton Beach. Florida 33425-0310 City Manager's OffICe: (561) 742-6010 FAX: (561) 742-6011 e-mail: city.manager@cLboynton-beachfl.us www.cLboynton-beachfl.us To: From: Date: Subject: Quintus Greene, Director of Development Kurt Bressner, City Manager April 4, 2005 Code Review CDRV 05-006 I reviewed the staff report dated March 4, 2005 on the proposed revision to allow five story buildings in the Quantum PID in lieu of the current 45 foot limitation. On March 22,2005, I sent you an e-mail as noted below requesting that the Planning and Development Board table the item at their meeting of March 22,2005 because I had concerns with the appropriateness ofthe staff recommendation. I have attached a copy of my e-mail to you. I have not received a response from you regarding my concerns. This memo is a recapitulation of my concerns in a more formal manner. On March 22, the Planning and Development Board rejected my request to have the matter tabled to allow additional staff review. I have attached excerpts of the Planning and Development Board's Minutes with the chair's comments about tabling the item. The City Commission is scheduled to discuss this matter on AprilS, 2005 having moved the item up from the regular schedule on April I?, 2005. This means that the issues must be addressed by the City staff now. The issues I have with the staff report are as follows: It appears that planning staff has attempted to import elements of the SMU into the Quantum PID. My concern is that the SMU setback regulations were mainly designed to deal with issues related to adjoining single family residential property. This does not' occur on Quantum so any enhanced setbacks are not relevant. The bottom line however is whether stal/wishes to recommend granting "SMU-like" development on the remaining mixed use parcels at Quantum. If so, I believe that your staff must review this item in more detail as I am concerned about the following: (!) Definition of five-story building -- without a companion height limitation, how high theoretically can the building be? There is nothing in the staff report to indicate how high a five- story building would be. Assuming a 12' ceiling height, a five-story building, exclusive of elevator and AC equipment would be 60 feet. Per the SMU code, the maximum building height by right is 55 feet. The petitioner in this instance has requested authorization of "five-story buildings" as opposed to the underlying PID allowance of buildings having a maximum height of I cannot respond to this comment. However, if need be, I will research and form an opinion at a later time. 5. City Manager, "What is the basis for the developer's desire to increase the DU's by 105 units? What is the hardship imposed that would allow such an increase in density". I would suppose that the developer believes it is more profitable to develop residential units over commercial I l1Q_retail space. I have personally witnessed a gradual decrease in the commercial square footage since this master <,j r.;r plan was originally approved in 2002 (Quantum Park and Village South Commercial). 6\\ 6. City Manager, "What impact will this petition have, if granted, on the Mixed Use designated parcels in the Quantum PID?" Based on what has been constructed and what is vacant in these areas, what can we expect? Also, could the commercial! office area on the north side of Gateway (Lots 83-88) be converted to residential, or has the development of these parcels been assured as non-residential". The Mixed-Use parcels would have additional units. All land development proposals must comply with the concurrency regulations that the City and state requires. The developer of the property to the north (Quantum Park and Village North) can always request to add residential units. Staff cannot prevent or reject a land development application. However, any plan or proposal would be reviewed accordingly, in part, with the regulations as set for in the City's LOR, Quantum Park ORI, and applicable state regulations. A formal staff recommendation (approve, approve with conditions, or deny) cannot be made prior to an application for a land development application. 2 The City of Boynton Beach OFFICE OF THE CI1Y MANAGER 100 E. Boynton Beach Boulevard P.O. Box310 Boynton Beach. Florida 33425-0310 City Manager's Offtce: (561) 742-6010 FAX: (561) 742-6011 e-maU: city. manager@ci.boynton-beachj1.us www.ci.boynton-beachj1.us To: From: Date: Subject: Quintus Greene, Director of Development Kurt Bressner, City Manager April 4, 2005 Code Review CDRV 05-006 I reviewed the staff report dated March 4, 2005 on the proposed revision to allow five story buildings in the Quantum PID in lieu of the current 45 foot limitation. On March 22,2005, I sent you an e-mail as noted below requesting that the Planning and Development Board table the item at their meeting of March 22, 2005 because I had concerns with the appropriateness of the staff recommendation. I have attached a copy of my e-mail to you. I have not received a response from you regarding my concerns. This memo is a recapitulation of my concerns in a more formal manner. On March 22, the Planning and Development Board rejected my request to have the matter tabled to allow additional staff review. I have attached excerpts of the Planning and Development Board's Minutes with the chair's comments about tabling the item. The City Commission is scheduled to discuss this matter on April 5, 2005 having moved the item up from the regular schedule on April 17, 2005. This means that the issues must be addressed by the City staff now. The issues I have with the staff report are as follows: It appears that planning staff has attempted to import elements of the SMU into the Quantum PID. My concern is that the SMU setback regulations were mainly designed to deal with issues related to adjoining single family residential property. This does not occur on Quantum so any enhanced setbacks are not relevant. The bottom line however is whether staff wishes to recommend granting "SMU-like" development on the remaining mixed use parcels at Quantum. If so, I believe that your staff must review this item in more detail as I am concerned about the following: 6) Definition of five-story building -- without a companion height limitation, how high theoretically can the building be? There is nothing in the staff report to indicate how high a five- story building would be. Assuming a 12' ceiling height, a five-story building, exclusive of elevator and AC equipment would be 60 feet. Per the SMU code, the maximum building height by right is 55 feet. The petitioner in this instance has requested authorization of "five-story buildings" as opposed to the underlying PID allowance of buildings having a maximum height of 45 feet. Further, the SMU code as referenced in the staff report does allow for increased height of buildings in the SMU district between 55 feet and 75 feet subject to special review and set- back regulations. In summary, I am concerned that the petitioner's request for authorization of a five-story building lacks specificity and will result in interpretive problems for the staff and Commission. The building height should be expressed in feet not stories. That said the visual impact of five-story buildings along Gateway must be addressed by staff. This was not done in the staff report. (j) What does "shall fall below the Florida Building Code thresholds for a high-rise classification" mean? This is not explained in the staff report. If this is an exception to any fire code provisions, the FD may have objections to the proposed language. Will the new high-rise regulations to our fire code apply to the PID? The staff report needs to address this matter. 13. >The staff report recommends deploying the set-back provisions of the SMU in the Quantum 'Pfn -- however, as noted above, this may be a moot point as there is no contiguous single family property for vacant lots, I believe. The only area which I saw adjacent to single-family is the MU lots 23-31, which have been developed. As land use policy, the provisions of the SMU Code per Ordinance 04-011 are clear as to the intent that the SMU designation is a special case with limitations as follows: G. SMU - Suburban Mixed Use Zoning District 1. Intent and Purpose. The Suburban Mixed Use zoning district, which shall only be applicable to lands located west of 1-95, allows for a diversity of land uses and accommodates and encourages a mixture of residential, office, retail, recreational, and other miscellaneous uses, which may be arranged either vertically or horizontally on assembled parcels along major arterials outside of the downtown redevelopment district. All development and redevelopment shall be guided by an approved plan through the use of the SMU master plan, planned unit development, conditional use, or other site plan review processes. The objectives of the Suburban Mixed Use zoning district is as follows: a. Support and enhance development and redevelopment efforts in suburban areas outside of the downtown redevelopment area; b. Create major new mixed-use areas in planned locations with appropriate densities, heights, and mixtures of uses; c. Create attractive pedestrian environments through appropriate separationfrom and design of vehicular circulation areas; d. Provide public plazas and gathering places that are both well- designed and integrated into the overall design of the development; e. Allow flexibility in architectural design and building bulk; while maximizing compatibility and harmony with adjoining development; 2 America's Gateway to the Gulfstream f Create higher quality environments for residents, businesses, employees, and visitors; and g. Encourage innovative design that achieves vertical and horizontal integration of uses. 2. SMU - Suburban Mixed-Use Zoning District. a. In order to complement the redevelopment and envisioned growth of the suburban area, the SMU zoning district shall only be applied to lands west of 1-95 classified as Development of Regional Impact (DRI) or other land use classifications subsequently established on the Future Land Use Map. b. The SMU district is appropriate for low- to mid-rise developments that provide for medium density residential uses. The district allows a maximum height of fifty-five (55) feet and a residential density of 20 dwelling units per acre for mixed-use projects. Building heights between 55 feet and up to 75 feet to the peak of the structure or any architectural details may be allowed only for interior buildings (those buildings separatedfrom property line by another project building or use), if approved as a conditional use. The review of SMU applications will emphasize aesthetics and design quality, and physical compatibility with adjacent land uses. All new suburban mixed-use developments within this district shall front on a major arterial and contain a mixture of retail commercial, office and residential uses. (j) I did not see any language that would seek to evaluate the SMU provisions for usable open space at the Quantum PID. Your staff needs to address whether such requirements are appropriate or beneficial to the MU area of Quantum PID. This is an important and integral element of balancing increased height and density. How would and should the SMU Building and Site Regulations apply to the Quantum Site? I ask this because it appears that the staff report only addressed setback requirements associated with higher buildings. Here are the regulations for open-space for the SMU district. 4. Building and site regulations. Minimum Parcel Size SMU ZONE Residential or Lod2in2 Use Group Hotel 3 acres 1 Residential. single Family Detached 5,000 sq. ft. Residential. Single Family Detached w/Accessory 7 ,500 sq. ft. Unit 3 America's Gateway to the GulJstream Residential. Single Family Attached 2,500q. ft. Residential. Multi - Family 15,000 sq. ft. Community Facilitv Use Group Public Park no mInImUm All other Use 10,000 sq. ft. 10 rt f d t t 1 3 rna o a mIxe use orOl ec a east -acres In SIze Maximum Densitv/Intensitv SMU ZONE Maximum F .A.R. (excluding parking structures) 1.0 Maximum Density 20 du/ac Minimum Usable Open Spacel SMU ZONE Residential. Single Family Detached2 40% Residential. Single Family Attached2 30% All Other U ses3 20% 1 Usable Open Space shall provide active or passive recreational space and shall not be occupied by water bodies, streets, drives, parking areas. or structures other than recreational structures 2 At least 50% of the required usable open space for single family residential uses shall be contained in one or more common pooled areas and a rectangle inscribed within each common pooled area shall have no dimension less than seventy-five feet. 3 UP to 50% ofthe usable open space required for All Other Uses may be hardscaped plazas and public gathering places. o What is the basis for the developer's desire to increase the DUs by 105 units? What is the hardship imposed that would allow such an increase in density? The only item I could see in the developer's presentation package is that the topography of the area is low. (See page 2 of 4 of the Developer's justification statement.) With this proposal, what will be the final number and distribution of residential units in the area depicted as Exhibit B to the staff report? What is the density for the proposal? G What impact will this petition have, if granted, on the Mixed Use designated parcels in the Quantum PID? Based on what has been constructed and what is vacant in these areas, what can we expect? Also, could the commercial/office area on the north side of Gateway (Lots 83-88) be converted to residential, or has the development of these parcels been assured as non-residential? The staff report (page 2) states: "It would appear, at the present time, the only Mixed Use (MU) designated parcels that may be able to take advantage of the additional 105 dwelling units would be either Quantum Park and Village Park or Quantum Park and Village North, since the office and retail components of these projects have not begun construction. The subdivision master plan for either of these sites would require a formal modification and review in front of the Board and City 4 America's Gateway to the Gulfstream what is the hardship imposed that would allow such an increase in density? I am concerned about the precedent the proposed change may have on other property. I think this item needs to be reviewed further by you in conjunction with your staff and I ask that you consider requesting the item being tabled tonight. Thanks, Kurt From Planning and DeveloDment Board Minutes of March 22. 2005 A. Code Review 1. Project: Agent: Owner: Location: Description: Quantum Park MU Height (CDRV 05-006) Eugene Gerlica, P.E., Quantum Group of Companies Quantum Group of Companies Quantum Park PID Request amendment to the Land Development Regulations to increase the allowable building height from 45 feet to 5 stories in Mined Use (MU) PODs of the Planned Industrial District (PID) regulations. Chairman Wische stated that Staff approved it with slight recommendations to the Planned Industrial District regulations. David Norris, 712 US Highway 1, attorney for the applicant, assumed the podium and stated that they accept the staff recommendations. Ed Bresse, Principal Planner stated that the City Manager requested that Staff recommend that the item be tabled so he can have more time to review the information submitted. Chairman Wische stated it was not on the agenda to table, and he was only interested in whether the request was approved. Motion Mr. Saberson moved to table the request for one month until the next Planning and Development meeting. Ms. Jaskiewicz seconded the motion. Chairman Wische objected to tabling and stated the item was already held back from the February meeting. Mr. Breese informed the Board that the City Manager had been ill and has not had a lot to time to spend on those types of Items. 6 America's Gateway to the Gulfstream Vice Chair Casaine stated he did not believe that enough reason had been presented to table the item. He stated that motions must be presented in an order, and you have to give the opportunity for it to be presented to the public and the Board for discussion before a motion can be presented. Mr. Hay stated that based on the City Manager's illness he felt the City Manager should have the opportunity to review the item. Mr. Nora pointed out that the item was originally part of the request for NOPC #15, and staff requested them to remove it from that request so that they would have more time to review. They gave staff the additional month and a half to review the item, which Staff gave their recommendation that they agree with. He did not think it was fair for them to ask for more time at the last minute. He stated that it is a big project and every request is time sensitive. Mr. Broening pointed out that after the Board makes its recommendations that the item then goes to the City Commission for approval, which will provide sufficient time for any further review that may be necessary. Mr. Breese pointed out that Mr. Nora stated Staff asked them to remove the item from the NOPC #15 to give them more time to review, and that was not a factual statement. He stated that it is not a part of the NOPC and is not something that is reviewed by the State. He stated that they did ask him to remove the item because it would not be appropriate to deal with it within an NOPC and suggested they move it to tonight's meeting. Vote The motion failed 2-5 (Chairman Wische, Vice Chair Casaine, Mr. Cwynar, Mr. Hay, Mr. Broening dissenting). Motion Vice Chair Sergio moved that the request to amend the Land Development Regulations to increase the allowable building height from 45 feet to 5 stories in Mixed Use (MU) PODs of the Planned Industrial District (PID) request and following staff's recommendations be approved. Motion seconded by Mr. Cwynar. Vote The motion carried 5-2 (Mr. Saberson and Ms Jaskiewicz dissenting). 7 America's Gateway to the Gulfstream 8 America's Gateway to the Guifstream C'W.. ... ...~ CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH AGENDA ITEM REQUEST FORM Requested City Commission Date Final Form Must be Turned Requested City Commission Date Final Form Must be Turned Meetinl! Dates in to City Clerk's Office Meetinl! Dates in to City Clerk's Office D April 5,2005 March 14,2005 (Noon,) D June 7, 2005 May 16,2005 (Noon) ~ April 19, 2005 April 4, 2005 (Noon) D June 21, 2005 June 6, 2005 (Noon) D May 3, 2005 April 18, 2005 (Noon) D July 5, 2005 June 20, 2005 (Noon) D May 17, 2005 May 2, 2005 (Noon) D July 19, 2005 July 5,2005 (Noon) D Administrative D Development Plans NATURE OF D Consent Agenda D New Business AGENDA ITEM D Public Hearing ~ Legal D Bids D UnfInished Business D Announcement D Presentation D City Manager's Report RECOMMENDATION: Please place this request on the April 19, 2005 City Commission Agenda under Legal, Ordinance - Second Reading. The City Commission recommended that the subject request under Public Hearing and Legal, Ordinance - First Reading be approved on April 5, 2005. For further details pertaining to the request, see attached Department of Development Memorandum No. PZ 05-040. EXPLANATION: PROJECT: AGENT: OWNER: LOCATION: DESCRIPTION: Quantum Park MU Height (CDRV 05-006) Eugene Gerlica, P.E., Quantum Group of Companies Quantum Group of Companies Quantum Park Pill Request amendment to the Land Development Regulations to increase the allowable building height from 45 feet to 5 stories in Mixed Use (MU) PODs of the Planned Industrial District (Pill) regulations. PROGRAM IMP ACT: FISCAL IMPACT: ALTERNATIVES: N/A N/A N/A Development Department Director City Manager's Signature Planning and Zoning Director City Attorney / Finance / Human Resources S:\Planning\SHARED\WP\SPECPROJ\CODE REVIEw\CDRV 05-006 QP MU Height\Agenda Item Request Quantum Pk MU Height CDRV 05-0064-19- 05 2nd,dot S:\BULLET1N\FORMS\AGENDA ITEM REQUEST FORM,DOC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PLANNING AND ZONING DIVISION MEMORANDUM NO. PZ 05-040 -f ~JS.{ ~<Y '1!{ cur pr ;(5a-~ r+ . . ,J:- l tc "J) (A. ~ ~e- ~l/ c...'- IS --{ -i'" ~ y~~ .t' TO: Chair and Members Planning and Development Board THROUGH: Michael W. Rumpf Director of Planning and Zoning FROM: Ed Breese ~ Principal Planner DATE: March 4, 2005 SUBJECT: CODE REVIEW (CDRV 05-006) Quantum Park PID (Maximum Building Height in Mixed Use Pods) tL Q~~~~ NATURE OF REQUEST . Cat\..Y~ e.- Mr. Eugene Gerlica, represen mg uantum Grou f Com anies~ re ue Land Development Re lations to allow an increase in the maximum allow he' in excess of the 45- . oot lirmtation contained within the Quantum Park Planned Industrial District (PID). ~~ J . specific to the Mixed Use (MU) pods in Quantum Park (see Exhibit "A" - Justification Statemerlfr'- 'pc:o..T7~ is ,kff~ -ric '''':._~ '- d-~ (Y"';~'5i- fr f=cG'Jj.~L -0'-. ,-<;. ,"; f _ lek. f<:i k.~~ ~ Y60.~t1. r~ t '(ii...., BACKGROUND 1J'r_. P'1t( 't'-5' +:~. The City's Land Development Regulations Chapter 2, Section 7.H.14 establishes the maximum building height within Planned Industrial Districts (Pill). According to the current regulations, "No building or appurtenances thereof shall exceed forty-five (45) feet in height". To date, the residential construction occurring within Quantumtf)~k ~f~J pe~B.rimarilY;o es and apartments, which complied with the 45-foot height limitation. ~ .~ft{o'ft'~ ent uantum P k DR! amendment (NOPC #15), a ved b the City Conimission on February 15, 2005, provid for an increase in e a owable number of dwelling umts by 05, . . ~--:- ~"":n- ~Yl9iQ8Htilll8fJti81\. R. -f _ is <::t..\.??<!.." ct' i'Y\ ~ (\. -f ~)c,..I..J..': 4.. I"(Q ~ 4 q.,JJ,& ,'Ii~ ( Ur.'j,{--s. fe (,<- ~"'s',,,"""'... .1>\ c..... c.<:Jro...h>~~- ~ f - -r;, . \.- ANALYSIS 0 ~. I l1. c> The requeste amendment would affect onl those ro erties within a Planned Industrial District ID designated with a Mixed Use (MU) land us~ )(e'<tUse pods only exist within the Quantum Park PID. Staff reviewed the Quantum Park Master Plan (see Exhibit "B" - Quantum Park Master Plan), and the only lots containing the "Mixed Use (MU)" designation are noted as follows: Lots 7-11 & 23-31: These lots are located on Quantum Boulevard, north of Gateway Boulevard and were approved for a townhouse development by DR Horton in 2002 known as Quantum Townhomes East & West (now called Parkside). This project is nearly built-out. Page 2 CDRV 05-006 Lots 59-61 & 101: These lots are located on Quantum Lakes Drive, south of Gateway Boulevard and were approved for a rental apartment development by Olen Development in 2000 known as Quantum Lakes Villas. This project is complete. Lots 62-67 & 100: These lots are located on the south side of Gateway Boulevard, just west of High Ridge Road and were approved for an office, retail and rental apartment development by Olen Development in 2002 known as, Quantu}neat:k and_Yillag~ ~Qll!h. The rental apartment component of this project is under construction. Lots 83-88 & 89-B: These lots are located on the north side of Gateway Boulevard, abutting High Ridge Road and were approved for an office, retail and townhouse development in 2002. The townhouse project (now called Canterbury) is actually on both sides of High Ridge Road, north of Gateway Boulevard and is currently under construction by Westbrooke Homes. el ',6k 6-d The total acrea e e ated for "Mixed Use (MU)" within Quantum Park I~ iJ .86 acre~ ~.:. ,.::.... approxi~ely ,17% of the tota~ acreage of the DR! ~~~.H.J1.:r. s)'. Addi~iona~ly,. ~ ad1JWo of the "Mlxed Use (MUj pods are near the fringe of the Pill, abuttm sm - a~ly reSldentla1.z l'P~ First is the Quantum Park an 1 age ort proJec, w lC a uts a vacan tract of land to the west tiiaHs~ zoned single-family. Second is the Parkside townhouse project, which, as stated earlier, is nearly built-out and which abuts the L WDD E-4 Canal to the west and across the canal is the Dos Lagos residential community. A ~~ ~ vvOt:dEl El}lpettf, a resent' the onl "Mixed Use )" designated arcels ab e to take advantage of the additional 105 dwellin units would be either uantum Park and Village South or ~antum Park and Vi lage North, since the office and retal ~o~p~nents of these projects has ot begun ~onstruction. The subdivision master plan for either ofthese~~uld require _ formal r: j and ~. 'ec.fi~ . .!n front of the Board and City q~munission to incorporate the additional umts~' ....t. ~ - . ..,..i~~~ .:... -- ~.~ Based upon discussions staff has had with Olen Development, and their recent submittal for a Master Plan Modification and Major Site Plan Modification, they would intend to amend the plans for Quantum Park and Village South to accommodate the additional dwelling units, while redesigning the office and retail components. As justification for the request for additional height, Quantum states that "An increase in height will encourage the conservation of natural amenities by accomplishing the vested development intensities in a vertical manner in contrast to the land sprawl oflower height development". During discussions with The Quantum Group of Companies, they were encouraged to review the Suburban Mixed Use (SMU) regulations to understand how the City previously addressed a similar request. As a result, Quantum proposes the following changes to the Planned Industrial Development (Pill) regulations: Revise Section 7 .H.14 - Maximum Building Height, as follows: Section 7.H i4 - Maximum Building Height. No building or appurtenances thereof within the PID zoning district shall exceed forty-five (45) feet in height. with the exception of buildinf!s in a Mixed Use POD pursuant to Section 7.P.i.e.i. Renumber and revise Section 7.P .1.e - Maximum Structure Height, as follows: SeeMan 7.P.f.c ltltedmum Strfleture Height. Afeohcmiosl clfNipxwnt which &€ehttJi'"ely sones the strueture shs//nat be inelNded in ihe os/eN/stian 8f height. Section 7.P.i.e.n Maximum Buildinl! Heil!ht. The maximum buildinfl heiflht within a Mixed Page 3 CDRV 05-006 Use Pod shall not be greater than five (5) stories and shall be below the Florida Building Code thresholds for a high-rise classification. Add two (2) new subsections, as follows: Section 7.P.J.e.2) Buildinll Heillht Measurement. Building height shall be measured from the lowest finish floor slab elevation of the proposed building to the peak of the structure. including any architectural details. stairwells. elevator shafts. etc. Section 7.P.J.e.3) Heillht Setback Envelop. Minimum building setbacks shall be based on building heights for buildings weater than fortv-Q-ve (45) feet in height. The height setback envelop is applicable where the Mixed Use development is adiacent to an existing developed single-family residential zoning district outside the PID. This minimum setback shall be three (3) times the building height for anv multifamily or nonresidential structure. The setback shall be measured from the common boundary of the PID and the existing single-family residential zoning district or the midpoint of any intervening rif!ht-of -way. As part of the requested code review, staff studied the Suburban Mixed Use (SMU) regulations, which allow mixed use in a vertical configuration, allow a height comparable to that being requested by the applicant, make provisions to safeguard adjacent single family residential communities, and is being utilized in the immediate vicinity in conjunction with the Renaissance Commons project. j Revise Section 7.H.14 - Maximum Building Height, as follows: Section 7.H.J4 - Maximum Building Height. No building or appurtenances thereofwithin the PID zoning district shall exceed forty-five (45) feet in height. with the exception of buildings in a Mixed Use Pod pursuant to Section 7.P.J. e. Amend Section 7.P.1.e. - Maximum Structure Height, as follows: Scctien 7.P.!. C AfilXiIHIlIH S1rlletwre Height. Mechanical equipment which &reJusi'.'ely servos 1\ t~ struetur-c shall net he inchuied in the eeleNlatien efheight. ~ t,.U ::? .. -\ v.J;",e-~ Section 7.P.J.e - Maximum Buildinll Heillht. The Mixed Use pods within the PID shall allow ,.Q ;( ~ \ . ~ '" ~. ~ for a heif!ht of fifty-five (55) feet for mixed use and residential buildings. Building heights \ ~..\. 0,): 6=> r between fiftv-five (55) feet and the maximum of seven tv-five (75) feet shall be processed as a \ X, ,\Y i -It>..r.;-J onditional Use. No exce tions to the maximum hei ht shall be allowed. Additionall the ~ J... 6 ty -+- ~~ I following reJ!Ulations shall apply: ~ ~a ~ X ~k\r- ,\' ,,(o l Y:O) The building heif!ht shall be measured from the lowest finish floor slab elevation of ~~ \). \ ~ J t? 11 tZ-..f-' _ ~. the proposed building or from the minimum base flood elevation as established bv .1') {~ A:.l b-- X'd- 'or ,J 0) (' .':;' - \S'.p t,U e;, . (\ \..0 pr. ~ ) ~ 'f.P I./~ rP t. "",\: '\ \-= , \ v ~ 'I(l t>-i" Page 4 CDRY 05-006 ',,'(" J i ~~ · e,.; 'EMA. whichever is hi~hest. to the peak of the structure. includin~ anv '9. Ji!-~ architectural details. rooftop equipment. stairwells. elevator shafts. etc. ..r;; >> -<' JU ~ ~ Hei ht Setback Envelo e. Minimum buildin setbacks shall be based on .(.l ~ -cf;, building hei~hts for buildini!s greater than forty-five (45) feet in hei~ht. The hei~ht _ .rf\~\ ~ setback envelope is applicable where the Mixed Use development is adiacent to an '"\ '} ~ \. tu. . (k - existing developed single-familv residential zoning district outside the PID. This ~ . it b J. !. ' minimum setback shall be three (3) times the buildini! heiflht for anv residential or Q'" ' ~ ~6-( mixed use structure. The setback shall be measured from the common boundary , -t \~ ''I-. of the PID and the existing single-familv residential zonin~ district or the midpoint L-J4 1 T"". ') of anv intervening ri~ht-of-wav. t- . if: b~ ''? D:9 e sli~t changes recommended by staff, from the language proposed by the applicant, involve: (one)- ,{ the further defining (clarifying) of height in feet, rather than in stories; (two) - the utilization of SMU ~. anguage in requiring structures between 55 and 75 feet in height to be treated as a Conditional Use and \.. (0 l.. denoting that height exceptions are not allowed; (three) - the addition of FEMA floodplain criteria as an ~ &~ ~-t. additional option in determining the base of measurement for height. ~ RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that staff's proposed amendments to Chapter 2. Zoning of the City's Land Development Regulations, specific to height regulations within the Mixed Use pods of PID zoning districts, be approved. It is staff's opinion that the Mixed Use components of Quantum Park share many of the traits of the Suburban Mixed Use (SMU) zoning district being utilized at Renaissance Commons (former Motorola site), and similar regulations appear appropriate. <-100 W-( (<. ,ec~( ( -1-1<. ~s.~~ ""~4'-f J S e.-f bO-C K ~ -r- V <: (o1(e q ~5~..s ( r-'l (0. c.~ C~~ f cJV'-e:",- -r<;, ~-( T-i~ .' 1:\SHRDATAIPLANNINGISHAREDlWPIPROJECTS\QUANTUM PARK\MU POD HEIGHT CDRV,DOC Z i.N- -; .,~ A:, " ~; ~-1; , b .uc <Jo.: 5-"" ..f ~ ~ ~ 1-"5 ,,,,- P ~ . "- ~ n.Q. .j'" ,...-... ~-'1 k.e~- u ~~' S, -t--\f' "<>-.5. ~I~~Q #es<=- i ~('! ve-fa r ~~...-:t ~ feLM c:Cd.~..c~ fr~..w-.. ~<=- S ~ Uf)I'7~_V~ ~ -f-1~5<eoJ fee., f k.,. 6. ,^-cfL j L-Y'\.e..-<<.<_ ( ~'-\- t ><.<!'..Q- uS e.. ~ ',( ~.. (G...r(~ +7~s J ~ 'r" _c~ '-..>--n. L ~ ~ -f L.. r" s:: &-- ,. c9...: "2.. ~ ClJ L~. ( c::.... f ....5; S -;..6c::'? T ""'- ~<:.. -r +< .......'" c..:r <-_ f- ~ 1\ <C. <J 6--.....& '-^r-.t()~ ,(",C::jJ(~+~S, K c..J c". r .!l. 'i n /~!:t~ ~~: :,~J~ :-;,q~~,,<<-?/ <;~( ;:~rf.C;;~'J ,k~~ " .. J --.-..>- T-=..t <-J.::'~", 7""'" 7 rc /C ~ c.-.,-7_' 7- /l. r-c. rr~ f7 rr-~ - 14<- Cc...r. I./'-~' ."" T"i=.-~ ~:5 'f'&- -A~ .., / y;~"( ,'. r ~'-'~ rb J'l.-\o ...C::' (it'\. 5.r.;:: ~~-y '() F c;&... ""'.... (' L2>>-~ ; <:.. -(-- ?t . ; I-tf.i'-,~",c..<"...o 6 y r' k ,{ 'l/ ~'^<.,. ? r{ .. ~ ;..... I . Prc"^,,o-fiZv-.. .....f -+/.e <.~s,.,(l<=-<"c.--fi.~ "'{ /./: . - _.. ........ II <:.J<-<....c:..<1 ., ~'n <,,~ 'f "-' 't",<::" T"'C ZJ. (h,'~ Pc::.. v cJ.. p""'<: Y- -E~, w~ -- Co- '^' ~ _OJ ~ ~~~ Co.- ~-.. fG- (~-z..~'j, cv..... t>-+r-o.-......<<;/J...~:b., J. -+s -/ r p"X'-~ ~-( -I:- /\. 1"<. ~__ r H ,.~ G2.. k ~ ^-<::J2 f">- <e...~' 0... cco,...........c-.. +J ~ @J!,(};--ri=,..-( /.....c.iJ (.y ;,,, 0- ;jc:.-.-A(:~,-(" (,J~Y> fr R'OoC5 '\e-(- a.r"r;:;c.j f I" Icfl5;;.;;~:t~..::..f__~.._!:!~ (y!~c{ IS_~~.~<-",-~~\ _~(7 .f'~~=.~-c..o.... -p~ I 'f\. e+ ~C'n (~ J Y." r;:. hQ ",f" -I--f.<:... v;\..e. '0 s:. t1I\ U A <:!J ~~ QUAN .-Ufv\ ..:iiItrr- G R 0 U P 0 F COM PAN I E S EXHIBIT A January 18,2005 Mr. Michael W. Rwnpf, Director City of Boynton Beach Department of Development Planning & Zoning Division 100 East Boynton Beach Boulevard Boynton Beach, FL 33425 RE: Quantum Park DR! CODE REVIEW - PID - MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT Dear Mr. Rwnpf: Pursuant to a proposed development order condition for the pending NOPC for the above referenced project we are requesting a code review, or more precisely a zoning code text change, to accommodate the intended development. Provided with this request are the following items. 1. Code Review Application Fee of $250.00, Check No. 1331, made payable to The City of Boynton Beach. 2. Quantum Park PID Code Review Request Justification Statement and Discussion, dated January 2005. Please review the enclosed Justification Statement and schedule this Request for consideration at the earliest possible date by the Planning and Development Board and subsequently by the City Commission. Final consideration of this Request by the City Commission on or before February 15, 2005 will not adversely impact the Project development schedule. If you should have any further questions, please feel free to contact me at any time. Sincerely, Eugene A. Gerlica, P .E. cc: Doug MacDonald David Norris, Esq. Cohen, Norris, et. aI., (w/encl) Igor Olenicoff, Olen Development, (w/encl) Steve Fike, Olen Development, (w/encl) F:\Quantum LimitedWOPC15 CODE REVIEW Bldg HtIRumpf-ltr-CDRV2005-J-JO.doc 2500 Quantum lakes Drive, Suite 101 Boynton Beach. Fl33426 (5611740-2447 · Fax: 15611740-2429 e-mail: quantgrp@qgc.cc QUANTUM PARK PID CODE REVIEW REQUEST JUSTFICATION STATEMENT AND DISCUSSION INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE Quantum Park is zoned PID; it is greater than 500 acres in size and contains a Mixed Use POD consisting of four (4) locations. This Code Review is requested to propose a zoning text change that will allow building heights in excess of the current maximum building height of 45 feet within the Mixed Use POD of Quantum Park Pill. This Code Review request is submitted pursuant to a proposed development order condition of the pending DR! - NOPC} and Master Site Development Plan amendment currently under consideration by the City. JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT AND DISCUSSION A maximum building height greater than 45 feet will allow Quantum Park to optimize the stated intent and purpose of the PID district as set forth in the Code. Please consider the following. An increased building height will better satisfy current demands for Mixed Use lands by encouraging development which reflect changes in land development trends relating to the topographic variety of the Quantum Park site. An increased building height will encourage the conservation of natural amenities by accomplishing the vested development intensities in a vertical manner in contrast to the land sprawl of lower height developments. An increased building height will permit economies in providing public servIces. 1 DR! - Development of Regional Impact, NOPC - Notice of Proposed Change QUANTUM PARK PID - CODE REVIEW REQUEST January 2005 F:\Quantum LimitedWOPCl5 CODE REvmw Bldg HtlCODE REVIEW-Rv3.doc Page 1 of4 An increased building setback is proposed for buildings greater than 45 feet in height. The height setback envelope criteria will eliminate adverse impacts to existing adjacent single-family zoned lands. Over the years Quantum Park has evolved into a complex Mixed Use development. Please consider the following historical perspective. In 1984, Quantum Park was envisioned to be an emulation of the Silicon Valley type development in California. Quantum Park with over 4.0 million square feet of building area proposed for research and development companies would compliment the newly constructed Motorola Plant and the ffiM campus in Boca Raton. In 2005, the Motorola Plant is gone, ffiM is gone and the development in Quantum Park includes nearly 2.0 Mil square feet of warehouse/distribution space, a High School, a commuter train station, a City Park, a private drug and alcohol rehabilitation facility, 1,000 residential units and a proposed police and fire station. Quantum Park and the City of Boynton Beach have evolved to include these desirable Mixed Use pockets of development complete with high-density residential and commercial space in close proximity. The high density and close proximity are key to promote the pedestrian use of connectivity facilities. Other examples of the mixed-use developments are the marina project, the CRA and the Rennisance project. These mixed-use projects include building heights in excess of 45 feet, some as great as 75 feet. Quantum Park may well be the most unique site topographically in Palm Beach County. The water management tracts are some of the lowest in the County at elevation 8.00, while the natural grades are some of the highest at elevations in excess of 40.00. The constructed finish floor elevations vary from elevation 14.50 to in excess of elevation 35.00. An increased maximum building height, particularly at the lower elevations, is not only appropriate, but also desirable. The proposed text amendment regarding the increased maximum building height will provide the Code criteria that will allow taller multifamily residential buildings. The individual homes may be a single floor product in contrast to the multistory residential units now existing in Quantum Park. An additional housing product of this nature can be offered consuming less land area provided the maximum building height is increased. QUANTUM PARK. PID - CODE REVIEW REQUEST January 2005 F:\Quantum LimitedWOPCl5 CODE REVIEW Bldg HtlCODE REVIEW-Rv3.doc Page 2 of 4 CODE SECTION REFERENCE Chapter Two of the Code of Ordinances is the Boynton Beach Zoning Code. Section Seven (7) is the Planned Industrial Development District Code. Text amendments to the following subsections of this Section are proposed to address the maximum building height request. Section 7 .H.14 - Maximum Building Height Section 7.P.1.b - Definitions Section 7.P .l.e - Maximum Structure Height [This area left intentionally blank] QUANTUM PARK PID - CODE REVIEW REQUEST January 2005 F:\Quantum LimitedWOPC15 CODE REVIEW Bldg HtlCODE REVIEW-RvJ.doc Page 3 of4 PROPOSED ZONING TEXT CHANGES Revise Section 7 .H.14 - Maximum Building Height, as follows: Section 7.H.14 - Maximum Building Height. No building or appurtenances thereofwithin the PID zoning district shall exceed forty-five (45) feet in height, with the exception of buildings in a Mixed Use POD pursuant to Section 7.P.l.e.l). Renumber and revise Section 7.P .t.e - Maximum Structure Height, as follows: Section 7.P.l.e.l) Maximum Building Height. The maximum building height within a Mixed Use Pod shall not be greater than five (5) stories and shall be below the Florida Building Code. thresholds for a high-rise classification. Two (2) new subsections are proposed, as follows: Section 7.P. 1. e.2). Building Height Measurement. Building height shall be measured from the lowest finish floor slab elevation of the proposed building to the peak of the structure, including any architectural details, stainvells, elevator shafts etc. Section7.P.1.e.3). Height Setback Envelop. Minimum building setbacks shall be based on building heights for buildings greater than 45 feet in height. The height setback envelope is applicable where the Mixed Use development is adjacent to an existing developed single-family residential zoning district outside the PID. This minimum setback shall be three (3) times the building height for any multifamily or nonresidential structure. The set back shall be measured from the common boundary of the PID and the existing single-family residential zoning district or the midpoint of any intervening right-of-way. QUANTUM PARK PID - CODE REVIEW REQUEST January 2005 F:lQuantum LimitedINOPC15 CODE REVIEW B/dg HtlCODE REVIEW-Rv3.doc Page 4 of 4 .. .., \ \ \ \ ~ \, \ \ \\ .. , \ i' \ \ \ \ \ \\ '. \\\l\\i\~ \\ \tt\, \\\\ 11 \ \ \ "n \ \ \ \ i ~~ \ ~ \ \ . \ \' . \ \ \ ~ \ \ ~ ~ ,,-0 \ ~ c:!;!~%!;!O \lI'6i ~ ~\!.~ \~\~i - J;i::j I6IUl";;! ~ ~ \\\\\ , i~ ~ .. .. ~p Vi ~~~i~~~\it~~ ~ ~ ~~\\\\\\\\\\ \ ~ ~ t:.^lll .. €. \ i \ ~ O"ee8 ~~~%!;! ~)s i .\ .\\~~U\,\\ ' \ .~W \\F \ \j \t i\ \ I. 'l L " ------ _.----- .-- -- 7.D.l QUANTUM PARK MU HEIGHT (CDRV 05-006) CODE REVIEW DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PLANNING AND ZONING DIVISION MEMORANDUM NO. PZ 05-040 TO: Chair and Members Planning and Development Board THROUGH: Michael W. Rumpf Director of Planning and Zoning FROM: Ed Breese ~ Principal Planner DATE: March 4, 2005 SUBJECT: CODE REVIEW (CDRV 05-006) Quantum Park PID (Maximum Building Height in Mixed Use Pods) NATURE OF REQUEST Mr. Eugene Gerlica, representing Quantum Group of Companies, is requesting an amendment to the City's Land Development Regulations to allow an increase in the maximum allowed height in excess of the 45- foot limitation contained within the Quantum Park Planned Industrial District (Pill). The request is specific to the Mixed Use (MU) pods in Quantum Park (see Exhibit "A" - Justification Statement). BACKGROUND The City's Land Development Regulations Chapter 2, Section 7.H.14 establishes the maximum building height within Planned Industrial Districts (Pill). According to the current regulations, "No building or appurtenances thereof shall exceed forty-five (45) feet in height". To date, the residential construction occurring within Quantum Park has been primarily townhomes and apartments, which complied with the 45-foot height limitation. As a result of the most recent Quantum Park DR! amendment (NOPC #15), approved by the City Commission on February 15, 2005, providing for an increase in the allowable number of dwelling units by 105, the Quantum Group would like to make provision for a vertical condominium residential option. ANALYSIS The requested amendment would affect only those properties within a Planned Industrial District (Pill) designated with a Mixed Use (MU) land use. Mixed Use pods only exist within the Quantum Park Pill. Staff reviewed the Quantum Park Master Plan (see Exhibit "B" - Quantum Park Master Plan), and the only lots containing the "Mixed Use (MU)" designation are noted as follows: Lots 7-11 & 23-31: These lots are located on Quantum Boulevard, north of Gateway Boulevard and were approved for a townhouse development by DR Horton in 2002 known as Quantum Townhomes East & West (now called Parkside). This project is nearly built-out. Page 2 CDRV 05-006 Lots 59-61 & 101: These lots are located on Quantum Lakes Drive, south of Gateway Boulevard and were approved for a rental apartment development by Olen Development in 2000 known as Quantum Lakes Villas. This project is complete. Lots 62-67 & 100: These lots are located on the south side of Gateway Boulevard, just west of High Ridge Road and were approved for an office, retail and rental apartment development by Olen Development in 2002 known as Quantum Park and Village South. The rental apartment component of this project is under construction. Lots 83-88 & 89-B: These lots are located on the north side of Gateway Boulevard, abutting High Ridge Road and were approved for an office, retail and townhouse development in 2002. The townhouse project (now called Canterbury) is actually on both sides of High Ridge Road, north of Gateway Boulevard and is currently under construction by Westbrooke Homes. The total acreage of the above-noted projects and designated for "Mixed Use (MU)" within Quantum Park is 94.86 acres, which is approximately 17% of the total acreage of the DR! (553.13 acres). Additionally, only two of the "Mixed Use (MU)" pods are near the fringe of the Pill, abutting single-family residential. First is the Quantum Park and Village North project, which abuts a vacant tract of land to the west that is zoned single-family. Second is the Parkside townhouse project, which, as stated earlier, is nearly built-out and which abuts the L WDD E-4 Canal to the west and across the canal is the Dos Lagos residential community. It would appear, at the present time, the only "Mixed Use (MU)" designated parcels that may be able to take advantage of the additional 105 dwelling units would be either Quantum Park and Village South or Quantum Park and Village North, since the office and retail components of these projects has not begun construction. The subdivision master plan for either of these sites would require a formal modification and review in front of the Board and City Commission to incorporate the additional units while reducing other approved uses on the site. Based upon discussions staff has had with Olen Development, and their recent submittal for a Master Plan Modification and Major Site Plan Modification, they would intend to amend the plans for Quantum Park and Village South to accommodate the additional dwelling units, while redesigning the office and retail components. As justification for the request for additional height, Quantum states that "An increase in height will encourage the conservation of natural amenities by accomplishing the vested development intensities in a vertical manner in contrast to the land sprawl oflower height development". During discussions with The Quantum Group of Companies, they were encouraged to review the Suburban Mixed Use (SMU) regulations to understand how the City previously addressed a similar request. As a result, Quantum proposes the following changes to the Planned Industrial Development (Pill) regulations: Revise Section 7.H.14 - Maximum Building Height, as follows: Section 7.H.14 - Maximum Building Height. No building or appurtenances thereofwithin the PID zoning district shall exceed forty-five (45) feet in height. with the exceTJtion of buildinJ!s in a Mixed Use POD pursuant to Section 7.P.I.e.I. Renumber and revise Section 7.P .1.e - Maximum Structure Height, as follows: Seetien l.P.f.e lllmN"''''' SlI'IIelfll'e Height. Mechanical cljblipmcnt which (>>fchtsi...ely sen.'Cs thc structl;{.r-c s.1all nat bc inell;{.ded in the caleb/kitien 81 height. Section 7.P.I.e.n Maximum BuildinJ! Heiflht. The maximum buildinJ! heiJ!ht within a Mixed Page 3 CDRV 05-006 Use Pod shall not be f!reater than five (5) stories and shall be below the Florida Buildiml Code thresholds for a high-rise classification. Add two (2) new subsections, as follows: Section 7.P.J.e.2) Buildinff Heiffht Measurement. Buildin!l heif!ht shall be measured from the lowest finish floor slab elevation of the proposed building to the peak of the structure. includinf! anv architectural details. stairwells. elevator shafts. etc. Section 7.P.J.e.3) Heiffht Setback Envelop. Minimum buildinf! setbacks shall be based on building heights for buildings f!reater than forty-five (45) feet in heif!ht. The heif!ht setback envelop is applicable where the Mixed Use development is adiacent to an existin!l developed sinf!le-familv residential zoning district outside the PID. This minimum setback shall be three (3) times the building height for anv multifamilv or nonresidential structure. The setback shall be measured from the common boundary of the PID and the existinf! sin!lle-familv residential zoninf! district or the midpoint of anv interveninf! rif!ht-of -wav. As part of the requested code review, staff studied the Suburban Mixed Use (SMU) regulations, which allow mixed use in a vertical configuration, allow a height comparable to that being requested by the applicant, make provisions to safeguard adjacent single family residential communities, and is being utilized in the immediate vicinity in conjunction with the Renaissance Commons project. SUMMARY As a result of staff s analysis of the proposed changes submitted by the applicant and staff s review of the existing SMU regulations, staff recommends the following amendments to the Pill district regulations, which vary slightly from those suggested by the applicant: Revise Section 7.H.I4 - Maximum Building Height, as follows: Section 7.H.J4 - Maximum Building Height. No building or appurtenances thereof within the PID zoning district shall exceed forty-five (45) feet in height. with the exception of buildin!ls in a Mixed Use Pod pursuant to Section 7.P.J.e. Amend Section 7.P .I.e. - Maximum Structure Height, as follows: Scctien 7.P.!.0 "'Iax/m,,,,, &truetflre Height. Mechanioal ofJ/;tipment which cxcooi';cly serW$ the St-fflOt/;tFC shall net he i1'lchukd in 1hc caloHla#e1'l el height. Section 7.P.1.e - Maximum Buildinff Heiffht. The Mixed Use pods within the PID shall allow for a hei!lht of fifty-five (55) feet for mixed use and residential buildinf!s. Buildinf! heights between fifty-five (55) feet and the maximum of seventy-five (75) feet shall be processed as a Conditional Use. No exceptions to the maximum heif!ht shall be allowed. Additionallv. the followinf! regulations shall applv: (1) The buildin!l height shall be measured from the lowest finish floor slab elevation of the proposed building or from the minimum base flood elevation as established bv Page 4 CDRV 05-006 FEMA. whichever is highest. to the peak of the structure. including any architectural details. rooftop equipment. stairwells. elevator shafts. etc. (2) HeiJ!ht Setback Envelope. Minimum building setbacks shall be based on building heights for buildings greater than forty-five (45) feet in height. The height setback envelope is applicable where the Mixed Use development is adjacent to an existing developed single-family residential zoning district outside the PID. This minimum setback shall be three (3) times the building height for any residential or mixed use structure. The setback shall be measured from the common boundary of the PID and the existing single-family residential zoning district or the midpoint of any intervening right-of-wav. The slight changes recommended by staff, from the language proposed by the applicant, involve: (one) - the further defining (clarifying) of height in feet, rather than in stories; (two) - the utilization of SMU language in requiring structures between 55 and 75 feet in height to be treated as a Conditional Use and denoting that height exceptions are not allowed; (three) - the addition of FEMA floodplain criteria as an additional option in determining the base of measurement for height. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that staff's proposed amendments to Chapter 2. Zoning of the City's Land Development Regulations, specific to height regulations within the Mixed Use pods of Pill zoning districts, be approved. It is staff's opinion that the Mixed Use components of Quantum Park share many of the traits of the Suburban Mixed Use (SMU) zoning district being utilized at Renaissance Commons (former Motorola site), and similar regulations appear appropriate. J:\SHRDATAIPLANNING\SHAREDlWPIPROJECTSIQUANTUM PARKIMU POD HEIGHT CDRV,OOC ~~ QUANTUN\ ..,=jJ~ G R 0 U P 0 F COM PAN I E S EXHIBIT A January 18, 2005 Mr. Michael W. Rumpf, Director City of Boynton Beach Department of Development Planning & Zoning Division 100 East Boynton Beach Boulevard Boynton Beach, FL 33425 RE: Quantum Park DR! CODE REVIEW - PID - MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT Dear Mr. Rumpf: Pursuant to a proposed development order condition for the pending NOPC for the above referenced project we are requesting a code review, or more precisely a zoning code text change, to accommodate the intended development. Provided with this request are the following items. 1. Code Review Application Fee of $250.00, Check No. 1331, made payable to The City of Boynton Beach. 2. Quantum Park PID Code Review Request Justification Statement and Discussion, dated January 2005. Please review the enclosed Justification Statement and schedule this Request for consideration at the earliest possible date by the Planning and Development Board and subsequently by the City Commission. Final consideration of this Request by the City Commission on or before February 15, 2005 will not adversely impact the Project development schedule. If you should have any further questions, please feel free to contact me at any time. Sincerely, Eugene A. Gerlica, P .E. cc: Doug MacDonald David Norris, Esq. Cohen, Norris, et. aI., (w/enel) Igor Olenicoff, Olen Development, (w/encl) Steve Fike, Olen Development, (w/enel) F:\Quantum LimitedWOPC15 CODE REVIEW Bldg HtIRumpf-Itr-CDRV2005-1-10,doc 2500 Quantum Lakes Drive, Suite 101 Boynton Beach. FL 33426 (561) 740-2447. Fax: (561) 740-2429 e-mail: quantgrp@qgc.cc QUANTUM PARK PID CODE REVIEW REQUEST JUSTFICATION STATEMENT AND DISCUSSION INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE Quantum Park is zoned PID; it is greater than 500 acres in size and contains a Mixed Use POD consisting of four (4) locations. This Code Review is requested to propose a zoning text change that will allow building heights in excess of the current maximum building height of 45 feet within the Mixed Use POD of Quantum Park Pill. This Code Review request is submitted pursuant to a proposed development order condition of the pending DR! - NOPC. and Master Site Development Plan amendment currently under consideration by the City. JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT AND DISCUSSION A maximum building height greater than 45 feet will allow Quantum Park to optimize the stated intent and purpose of the PID district as set forth in the Code. Please consider the following. An increased building height will better satisfy current demands for Mixed Use lands by encouraging development which reflect changes in land development trends relating to the topographic variety of the Quantum Park site. An increased building height will encourage the conservation of natural amenities by accomplishing the vested development intensities in a vertical manner in contrast to the land sprawl of lower height developments. An increased building height will permit economies in providing public servIces. 1 DR! - Development of Regional Impact, NOPC - Notice of Proposed Change QUANTUM PARK Pill - CODE REVIEW REQUEST January 2005 F:\Quantum LimitedWOPCl5 CODE REVIEW Bldg Ht\CODE REVIEW-Rv3.doc Page 1 of4 An increased building setback is proposed for buildings greater than 45 feet in height. The height setback envelope criteria will eliminate adverse impacts to existing adjacent single-family zoned lands. Over the years Quantum Park has evolved into a complex Mixed Use development. Please consider the following historical perspective. In 1984, Quantum Park was envisioned to be an emulation of the Silicon Valley type development in California. Quantum Park with over 4.0 million square feet of building area proposed for research and development companies would compliment the newly constructed Motorola Plant and the IBM campus in Boca Raton. In 2005, the Motorola Plant is gone, IBM is gone and the development in Quantum Park includes nearly 2.0 Mil square feet of warehouse/distribution space, a High School, a commuter train station, a City Park, a private drug and alcohol rehabilitation facility, 1,000 residential units and a proposed police and fire station. Quantum Park and the City of Boynton Beach have evolved to include these desirable Mixed Use pockets of development complete with high-density residential and commercial space in close proximity. The high density and close proximity are key to promote the pedestrian use of connectivity facilities. Other examples of the mixed-use developments are the marina project, the CRA and the Rennisance project. These mixed-use projects include building heights in excess of 45 feet, some as great as 75 feet. Quantum Park may well be the most unique site topographically in Palm Beach County. The water management tracts are some of the lowest in the County at elevation 8.00, while the natural grades are some of the highest at elevations in excess of 40.00. The constructed finish floor elevations vary from elevation 14.50 to in excess of elevation 35.00. An increased maximum building height, particularly at the lower elevations, is not only appropriate, but also desirable. The proposed text amendment regarding the increased maximum building height will provide the Code criteria that will allow taller multifamily residential buildings. The individual homes may be a single floor product in contrast to the multistory residential units now existing in Quantum Park. An additional housing product of this nature can be offered consuming less land area provided the maximum building height is increased. QUANTUM PARK Pill - CODE REVIEW REQUEST January 2005 F:lQuantum LimitedWOPC15 CODE REVIEW Bldg HtlCODE REVIEW-Rv3.doc Page 2 of 4 CODE SECTION REFERENCE Chapter Two of the Code of Ordinances is the Boynton Beach Zoning Code. Section Seven (7) is the Planned Industrial Development District Code. Text amendments to the following subsections of this Section are proposed to address the maximum building height request. Section 7 .H.14 - Maximum Building Height Section 7.P.I.b - Definitions Section 7.P .l.e - Maximum Structure Height [This area left intentionally blank] QUANTUM PARK Pill - CODE REVIEW REQUEST January 2005 F:\Quantum LimitedWOPC15 CODE REVIEW B/dg HtlCODE REVIEW-Rv3.doc Page 3 of 4 PROPOSED ZONING TEXT CHANGES Revise Section 7 .H.14 - Maximum Building Height, as follows: Section 7.H.14 - Maximum Building Height. No building or appurtenances thereofwithin the PID zoning district shall exceed forty-five (45) feet in height, with the exception of buildings in a Mixed Use POD pursuant to Section 7.P.1.e.1). Renumber and revise Section 7.P.l.e - Maximum Structure Height, as follows: Section 7.P.1.e.1) Maximum Building Height. The maximum building height within a Mixed Use Pod shall not be greater than five (5) stories and shall be below the Florida Building Code thresholds for a high-rise classification. Two (2) new subsections are proposed, as follows: Section7.P.1.e.2). Building Height Measurement. Building height shall be measured from the lowest finish floor slab elevation of the proposed building to the peak of the structure, including any architectural details, stairwells, elevator shafts etc. Section7.P.1.e.3). Height Setback Envelop. Minimum building setbacks shall be based on building heights for buildings greater than 45 feet in height. The height setback envelope is applicable where the Mixed Use development is adjacent to an existing developed single-family residential zoning district outside the PID. This minimum setback shall be three (3) times the building height for any multifamily or nonresidential structure. The set back shall be measured from the common boundary of the PID and the existing single-family residential zoning district or the midpoint of any intervening right-of-way. QUANTUM PARK PID - CODE REVIEW REQUEST January 2005 F:\Quantum LimitedWOPCl5 CODE REVIEW Bldg Ht\CODE REVIEW-Rv3.doc Page 4 of 4 ! ~I ~ ~~~t~ ~eJi~2~~QO"e~ I ~ Gl"''' o~ ll' ll' " ~ ~ ~ ~~ % - 2 )> ~ g ~ Ill; ! };\ ;ll UlJ1~ IIi5 !!I i ~ ~ !: p~~~P~~;N~~r;= ~ ~ .... 8~8illOlll:~g~;e: CD ~ ~ ~~~~QQ~QM~~ '" ~~ Gl!:l~lil12[;l~ ~ ~ ~ !l I ~ .- ~ i ..~ ~i~~ ~'*.g~ ... ~c tl!!lI:~ '!'~~ii\ t. ",0 ....6"'-0 ~~~~ ~~~\i _N~" ~OIO~ 1 -p .. ~ ti: HII ~ , Ii i ~ e ~ ~ ~i I I ii' ; i" ii Ii B II h i I! P 'j i q i If! I iii II I ~ I a; I ~ i ;: a~ a la~lil~ i ~ I l~ I i J Ii J: ~ I 8 p~ & ~ ! I ~ = ;; ~ ~ i e i!lr;j I ~ i il 1 ~ EXHI IT B ; ~ CON\lRESS A\OIUE , ~ ...2 lC % !:l ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ; . g ~ i g z o :> '" -< ~ ~~QQ2 o..,zz~ \02 o:r:n ~~cE i ~ " ;a~~~ 3~ni ~ III iii !"I" '" f;\'" ~Vl\:l ~ ~~~~ ~~~~ c cC: c z r- ,... ~ ~~~ ~~ ~ ~~~ U c: >>' - ::: ~ ~5~ ~~ 5~ ~= ~~ ~ o 'f: 'f: i i :, n~ ~ ~ ~ p Ii ; 'I '- f III I~ p ~ to: ,.... USI i ~ ~ USl II ,; i i ~~ ; a ;! ~ ~ -_._--~_.-,_._-._-----_.-- --- Breese, Ed From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Johnson, Eric Wednesday, February 16, 200510:24 AM Breese, Ed Coale, Sherie; Rumpf, Michael; Hudson, Dick (Orran) CDRV 05-006 Ed, Late last month, you asked Mike, Dick, and I to review and comment on Eugene Gerlica's request for code review to increase building height in the PID. Generally, I have no problem with their request. However, there is one aspect of the zoning text change that raises a red flag for me. His proposed change: Section 7.P.1.e.1. Maximum Building Height. The maximum building height within a Mixed Use Pod shall not be greater than five (5) stories and shall be below the Florida Building Code thresholds for a high-rise classification. My comment would be for Eugene to specify an actual building height (measured in feet) in conjunction with the aforementioned number of stories. In my opinion, the proposed height (in feet) should be comparable to the SMU maximum building height and should compliment his proposed site plan. My three cents. Thanks, Eric 1 Breese, Ed From: Sent: To: Subject: Rumpf, Michael Wednesday, January 26,20053:12 PM Breese, Ed comments on Quantum Ht. Amendment The justifications for the proposed amendment are not substantiated. The proposed amendment to the mixed-use pod master plan (south) does not appear to represent a more efficient use of land than represented by the existing approved mixed use pod master plan, and therefore would not "encourage the conservation of natural amenities" nor prevent "land sprawl". Applicant should indicate what lands would be conserved through development under the proposed amendment. Increase in height should be conditioned upon actual land conservation or the establishment of new open or public space. Also, the intensification of height should not be supported unless it contributes to vertical mixture. Comments for our ultimate discussion prior to final comments. Mike 1 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT Memorandum PZ TO: Michael Rumpf, Dick Hudson, Eric Johnson FROM: Ed Breese DATE: January 25, 2005 RE: Quantum Park PID CDRV 05-006 Please review the attached application for code review requesting a change in maximum building height in the Quantum Park PIO. Provide comments to Sherie by Wednesday, February 2, 2005. Thank you in advance for your cooperation. January 14,2005 ~ \~\ Mr. Michael W. Rumpf, Director City of Boynton Beach Department of Development Planning & Zoning Division 100 East Boynton Beach Boulevard Boynton Beach, FL 33425 RE: Quantum Park DR! CODE REVIEW - PID - MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT Dear Mr. Rumpf: Pursuant to a proposed development order condition for the pending NOPC for the above referenced project we are requesting a code review, or more precisely a zoning code text change, to accommodate the intended development. Provided with this request are the following items. 1. Code Review Application Fee of $250.00, Check No. 1331, made payable to The City of Boynton Beach. 2. Quantum Park PID Code Review Request Justification Statement and Discussion, dated January 2005. Please review the enclosed Justification Statement and schedule this Request for consideration at the earliest possible date by the Planning and Development Board and subsequently by the City Commission. Final consideration of this Request by the City Commission on or before February 15, 2005 will not adversely impact the Project development schedule. If you should have any further questions, please feel free to contact me at any time. Sincerely, Eugene A. Gerlica, P .E. cc: Doug MacDonald David Norris, Esq. Cohen, Norris, et. aI., (w/encl) Igor Olenicoff, Olen Development, (w/encl) Steve Fike, Olen Development, (w/encl) F:IQuantum LimiledWOPCJ5 CODE REVIEW B/dg HI\Rumpf-ltr-CDRV2005-1-JO.doc QUANTUM PARK PID CODE REVIEW REQUEST JUSTFICATION STATEMENT AND DISCUSSION INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE Quantum Park is zoned PID; it is greater than 500 acres in size and contains a Mixed Use POD consisting of four (4) locations. This Code Review is requested to propose a zoning text change that will allow building heights in excess of the current maximum building height of 45 feet within the Mixed Use POD of Quantum Park PID. This Code Review request is submitted pursuant to a proposed development order condition of the pending DR!- NOPCl and Master Site Development Plan amendment currently under consideration by the City. JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT AND DISCUSSION A maximum building height greater than 45 feet will allow Quantum Park to optimize the stated intent and purpose of the PID district as set forth in the Code. Please consider the following. An increased building height will better satisfy current demands for Mixed Use lands by encouraging development which reflect changes in land development trends relating to the topographic variety of the Quantum Park site. An increased building height will encourage the conservation of natural amenities by accomplishing the vested development intensities in a vertical manner in contrast to the land sprawl of lower height developments. An increased building height will permit economies in providing public servIces. I DR! - Development of Regional Impact, NOPC - Notice of Proposed Change QUANTUM PARK PID - CODE REVIEW REQUEST January 2005 F:\Quantum LimitedWOPC/5 CODE REVIEW B/dg Ht\CODE REVIEW-Rv2.doc Page 1 of 4 An increased building setback is proposed for buildings greater than 45 feet in height. The height setback envelope criteria will eliminate adverse impacts to existing adjacent single-family zoned lands. Over the years Quantum Park has evolved into a complex Mixed Use ~ development. Please consider the following historical perspective. In 1984, Quantum Park was envisioned to be an emulation of the Silicon Valley type development in California. Quantum Park with over 4.0 million square feet of building area proposed for research and development companies would compliment the newly constructed Motorola Plant and the IBM campus in Boca Raton. In 2005, the Motorola Plant is gone, IBM is gone and the development in Quantum Park includes nearly 2.0 Mil square feet of warehouse/distribution space, a High School, a commuter train station, a City Park, a private drug and alcohol rehabilitation facility, 1,000 residential units and a proposed police and fire station. Quantum Park and the City of Boynton Beach have evolved to include these desirable Mixed Use pockets of development complete with high-density residential and commercial space in close proximity. The high density and close proximity are key to promote the pedestrian use of connectivity facilities. Other examples of the mixed-use developments are the marina project, the CRA and the Rennisance project. These mixed-use projects include building heights in excess of 45 feet, some as great as 75 feet. Quantum Park may well be the most unique site topographically in Palm Beach County. The water management tracts are some of the lowest in the County at elevation 8.00, while the natural grades are some of the highest at elevations in excess of 40.00. The constructed finish floor elevations vary from elevation 14.50 to in excess of elevation 34.00. An increased maximum building height, particularly at the lower elevations, is not only appropriate, but also desirable. The proposed text amendment regarding the increased maximum building height will provide the Code criteria that will allow taller multifamily residential buildings. The individual homes may be a single floor product in contrast to the multistory residential units now existing in Quantum Park. An additional housing product of this nature can be offered consuming less land area provided the maximum building height is increased. QUANTUM PARK PID - CODE REVIEW REQUEST January 2005 F:\Quantum LimitedWOPCl5 CODE REVIEW Bldg HtlCODE REVIEW-Rv2,doc Page 2 of 4 CODE SECTION REFERENCE Chapter Two of the Code of Ordinances is the Boynton Beach Zoning Code. Section Seven (7) is the Planned Industrial Development District Code. Text amendments to the following subsections of this Section are proposed to address the maximum building height request. Section 7 .H.14 - Maximum Building Height Section 7.P.1.b - Definitions Section 7.P.l.e - Maximum Structure Height [This area left intentionally blank] rw< ~~ QUANTUM PARK PID - CODE REVIEW REQUEST January 2005 F:\Quantum LimitedWOPCl5 CODE REVIEW Bldg HtlCODE REVIEW-Rv2,doc Page 3 of 4 PROPOSED ZONING TEXT CHANGES Revise Section 7 .H.14 - Maximum Building Height, as follows: Section 7.H.14 -Maximum Building Height. No building or appurtenances thereof within the PID zoning district shall exceed forty-five (45) feet in height, with the exception of buildings in a Mixed use POD pursuant to Section 7.P.1.e.l). Renumber and revise Section 7.P .l.e - Maximum Structure Height, as follows: Section 7.P.1.e.1) Maximum Building Height. The maximum building height within a Mixed Use Pod shall not be greater than five (5) stories and shall be below the Florida Building Code thresholds for a high-rise classification. Two (2) new subsections are proposed, as follows: Section 7.P. 1. e.2). Building Height Measurement. Building height shall be measured from the lowest finish floor slab elevation of the proposed building to the peak of the structure, including any architectural details, stairwells, elevator shafts etc. Section7.P.1.e.3). Height Setback Envelop. Minimum building setbacks shall be based on building heights for buildings greater than 45 feet in height. The height setback envelope is applicable where the Mixed Use development is adjacent to an existing developed single-family residential zoning district. This minimum setback shall be three (3) times the building heightfor any multifamily or nonresidential structure. The set back shall be measuredfrom the common boundary of the PID and the existing single-family residential zoning district or the midpoint of any intervening right-of-way. QUANTUM PARK PID - CODE REVIEW REQUEST January 2005 F:lQuantum LimitedWOPC15 CODE REVIEW Bldg Ht\CODE REVIEW-Rv2,doc Page 4 of 4 Development staff response to issues related to Code Review CDRV 05-006 1. Definition of five-story building -- without a companion height limitation, how high theoretically can the building be? There is nothing in the staff report to indicate how high a five-story building would be. Assuming a 12' ceiling height, a five-story building, exclusive of elevator and AC equipment would be 60 feet. Per the SMU code, the maximum building height by right is 55 feet. The petitioner in this instance has requested authorization of "five-story buildings" as opposed to the underlying PID allowance of buildings having a maximum height of 45 feet. Further, the SMU code as referenced in the staff report does allow for increased height of buildings in the SMU district between 55 feet and 75 feet subject to special review and setback regulations. In summary, I am concerned that the petitioner's request for authorization of a five-story building lacks specificity and will result in interpretive problems for the staff and Commission. The building height should be expressed in feet not stories. That said the visual impact of five-story buildings along Gateway must be addressed by staff. This was not done in the staff report. The Staff Report Summary recommends revising Section 7. P .1.e of the Planned Industrial District (PI D) regulations to read as follows: Section 7.P.1.e - Maximum Buildina Heiaht. The Mixed Use pods within the PIO shall allow for a heiaht of fifty-five (55) feet for mixed use and residential buildinas. Buildina heiahts between fifty-five (55) feet and a maximum of seventy-five (75) feet shall be processed as a Conditional Use. No exceptions to the maximum heiaht shall be allowed. Staff does not consider the 10 foot difference, between the currently allowed 45 foot height to the midpoint of a pitched roof with the possibility of being granted an undetermined height exception and the maximum 55 foot height to the top of a roof with no exceptions, to be significant. The 75-foot height limit can only be achieved by going through the conditional use process. As a result staff does not consider the visual impact along Gateway to differ significantly from what can be built now. 2. What does "shall fall below the Florida Building Code thresholds for a high-rise classification" mean? This is not explained in the staff report. If this is an exception to any fire code provisions, the FD may have objections to the proposed language. Will the new high-rise regulations to our fire code apply to the PID? The staff report needs to address this matter. This statement should more correctly reference Ordinance No. 04-005 which amended Chapter 9, Article 2 of the City Code concerning Fire Protection and Prevention, which defines "High Rise" as six stories or 75 feet. 3. The staff report recommends deploying the set-back provisions of the SMU in the Qnantum PID -- however, as noted above, this may be a moot point as there is no contiguous single family property for vacant lots, I believe. The only area which I saw adjacent to single-family is the MU lots 23-31, which have been developed. As land use policy, the provisions of the SMU Code per Ordinance 04-011 are clear as to the intent that the SMU designation is a special case with limitations ... The only existina single family is Dos Lagos adjacent to lots 23 -31. However, it is possible that future single-family adjacencies could occur at parcels 83, 87 and 88. The recommendation by staff is based on a vision for the future, which would allow intensification, by height based on subsequent and required NOPC applications and/or substantial deviations to the DR!. To add additional units or square footage above the current threshold of the DRI, formal applications would be required and reviewed accordingly. Rather than creating a new system, based on the similarities in location and use with the SMU, the general components of the SMU were applied. 4. I did not see any language that would seek to evaluate the SMU provisions for usable open space at the Quantum PID. Your staff needs to address whether such requirements are appropriate or beneficial to the MU area of Quantum PID. This is an important and integral element of balancing increased height and density. How would and should the SMU Building and Site Regulations apply to the Quantum Site? I ask this because it appears that the staff report only addressed setback requirements associated with higher buildings. The Quantum Park PID has it's own open space requirements which it had originally met, including setting aside 40 acres of preserve, a 25' and 40' foot perimeter buffer, right-of-way plantings, and multiple retention ponds with littoral plantings. The subject and preceding NOPC amendments have not represented intensifications of the DRI/Master Plan, but a shifting of uses under the maximum thresholds. The additional height allowed should not be viewed as an intensification but as a vertical use of capacity. Therefore, this should not necessarily be viewed as the opportunity to apply more restrictions disproportional to the request. 5. What is the basis for the developer's desire to increase the DU's by 105 units? What is the hardship imposed that would allow such an increase in density? The only item I could see in the developer's presentation package is that the topography of the area is low. (See page 2 of 4 of the Developer's justification statement.) With this proposal, what will be the final number and distribution of residential units in the area depicted as Exhibit B to the staff report? What is the density for the proposal? The question as to the basis for the developer's desire to increase DU's by 105 units would appear to be academic in light of the City Commission's Approval of Ordinance No. 05-013 on February, 152005, which approved the NOPC allowing the additional 105 dwelling units. The DRI application does not state any hardship, nor is the applicant required to provide that type of justification. From day OAS, 'Nh8n r8sidential unite .....ere .-if:litially itHowed IlIlu the PID vid the I9roreClbliiite amer::ldrnp.nts. residential unit~ h::nLP, ,soon alle';,ed \';urJ::ii::ilcllt with the Cnmrrp.h~nsiv8 plan ~lJhjAd only to ~ F6R and not a ~ 6. What impact will this petition have, if granted, on the Mixed Use designated parcels in the Quantum PID? Based on what has been constructed and what is vacant in these areas, what can we expect? Also, could the commercial/office area on the north side of Gateway (Lots 83-88) be converted to residential, or has the development of these parcels been assured as non-residential? More residential development on Lots 83-88 could occur but would likely trigger a formal process to amend the master site plan for that mixed-use pod. A certain level of additional units, if vertical or well integrated would be generally supported by staff. QUANTUM PARK PID CODE REVIEW REQUEST JUSTFICATION STATEMENT AND DISCUSSION INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE Quantum Park is zoned PID; it is greater than 500 acres in size and contains a Mixed Use POD consisting of four (4) locations. This Code Review is requested to propose a zoning text change that will allow building heights in excess of the current maximum building height of 45 feet within the Mixed Use POD of Quantum Park Pill. This Code Review request is submitted pursuant to a proposed development order condition of the pending DR! - NOPC} and Master Site Development Plan amendment currently under consideration by the City. JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT AND DISCUSSION A maximum building height greater than 45 feet will allow Quantum Park to optimize the stated intent and purpose of the PID district as set forth in the Code. Please consider the following. An increased building height will better satisfy current demands for Mixed Use lands by encouraging development which reflect changes in land development trends relating to the topographic variety of the Quantum Park site. An increased building height will encourage the conservation of natural amenities by accomplishing the vested development intensities in a vertical manner in contrast to the land sprawl of lower height developments. An increased building height will permit economies in providing public servIces. 1 DR! - Development of Regional Impact, NOPC - Notice of Proposed Change QUANTUM PARK. Pill - CODE REVIEW REQUEST January 2005 F:\Quanium LimitedWOPC15 CODE REVIEW Bldg Ht\CODE REVIEW-Rv3.doc Page 1 of4 An increased building setback is proposed for buildings greater than 45 feet in height. The height setback envelope criteria will eliminate adverse impacts to existing adjacent single-family zoned lands. Over the years Quantum Park has evolved into a complex Mixed Use development. Please consider the following historical perspective. In 1984, Quantum Park was envisioned to be an emulation of the Silicon Valley type development in California. Quantum Park with over 4.0 million square feet of building area proposed for research and development companies would compliment the newly constructed Motorola Plant and the ffiM campus in Boca Raton. In 2005, the Motorola Plant is gone, IBM is gone and the development in Quantum Park includes nearly 2.0 Mil square feet of warehouse/distribution space, a High School, a commuter train station, a City Park, a private drug and alcohol rehabilitation facility, 1,000 residential units and a proposed police and fire station. Quantum Park and the City of Boynton Beach have evolved to include these desirable Mixed Use pockets of development complete with high-density residential and commercial space in close proximity. The high density and close proximity are key to promote the pedestrian use of connectivity facilities. Other examples of the mixed-use developments are the marina project, the eRA and the Rennisance project. These mixed-use projects include building heights in excess of 45 feet, some as great as 75 feet. Quantum Park may well be the most unique site topographically in Palm Beach County. The water management tracts are some of the lowest in the County at elevation 8.00, while the natural grades are some of the highest at elevations in excess of 40.00. The constructed finish floor elevations vary from elevation 14.50 to in excess of elevation 35.00. An increased maximum building height, particularly at the lower elevations, is not only appropri~te, but also desirable. The proposed text amendment regarding the increased maximum building height will provide the Code criteria that will allow taller multifamily residential buildings. The individual homes may be a single floor product in contrast to the multistory residential units now existing in Quantum Park. An additional housing product of this nature can be offered consuming less land area provided the maximum building height is increased. QUANTUM PARK PID - CODE REVIEW REQUEST January 2005 F:\Quantum LimitedWOPC15 CODE REVIEW Bldg Ht\CODE REVIEW-Rv3.doc Page 2 of 4 CODE SECTION REFERENCE Chapter Two of the Code of Ordinances is the Boynton Beach Zoning Code. Section Seven (7) is the Planned Industrial Development District Code. Text amendments to the following subsections of this Section are proposed to address the maximum building height request. Section 7 .H.14 - Maximum Building Height Section 7.P.l.b - Definitions Section 7.P .1.e - Maximum Structure Height [This area left intentionally blank] QUANTUM PARK PID - CODE REVIEW REQUEST Page 3 of 4 January 2005 F:\Quantum LimitedWOPC15 CODE REVIEW Bldg HtlCODE REVIEW-Rv3.doc PROPOSED ZONING TEXT CHANGES Revise Section 7 .H.14 - Maximum Building Height, as follows: Section 7.H.14 - Maximum Building Height. No building or appurtenances thereofwithin the PID zoning district shall exceed forty-five (45) feet in height, with the exception of buildings in a Mixed Use POD pursuant to Section 7.P.1.e.1). Renumber and revise Section 7.P.l.e - Maximum Structure Height, as follows: Section 7.P.1.e.1) Maximum Building Height. The maximum building height within a Mixed Use Pod shall not be greater than jive (5) stories and shall be below the Florida Building Code. thresholds for a high-rise classification. Two (2) new subsections are proposed, as follows: Section 7.P. 1. e.2). Building Height Measurement. Building height shall be measured from the lowest jinish floor slab elevation of the proposed building to the peak of the structure, including any architectural details, stairwells, elevator shafts ete. Section 7.P. 1. e.3). Height Setback Envelop. Minimum building setbacks shall be based on building heights for buildings greater than 45 feet in height. The height setback envelope is applicable where the Mixed Use development is adjacent to an existing developed single-family residential zoning district outside the PID. This minimum setback shall be three (3) times the building height for any multifamily or nonresidential structure. The set back shall be measured from the common boundary of the PID and the existing single-family residential zoning district or the midpoint of any intervening right-ol-way. QUANTUM PARK PID - CODE REVIEW REQUEST January 2005 F:\Quantum LimitedWOPCI5 CODE REVIEW B/dg Ht\CODE REVIEW-Rv3.doc Page 4 of 4