Loading...
REVIEW COMMENTS DEV't:LOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTM~T MEMORANDUM #PZ 02-025 Staff Report Community Redevelopment Agency Board and City Commission Meeting Date: February 12, 2002 File No: ZNCV 01-022 (parking space reduction) Location: 1105 & 1109 North Federal Highway, Boynton Beach Owner: Kent McMillan Project: McMillan Personal Watercraft. Variance Request: Request relief from the City of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2, Zoning, Section 11,H.16.d. (12), to allow twelve (12) parking spaces in lieu of the twenty (20) required by code, a variance of eight (8) spaces for a retail business zoned C-4, General Commercial. BACKGROUND The site is located on the west side of North Federal Highway, immediately north of Martin Luther King Boulevard (a.k.a. NE 10th Avenue). The applicant is concurrently requesting approval of a major site plan modification for the renovations of two buildings totaling 4,066 square feet, one of which would be used for the retail sales of personal watercraft (boats), and related site improvements. (see Exhibit "B" - Site Plan). The subject property consists of two assembled lots with a total of two buildings (one on each lot). The southern lot (lot #2 - building "A") was developed around 1958, and the northern lot (lot #3 - building "B") was developed in 1 962. No current occupational licenses are active for either building. The Land Development Regulations require that parking requirements be brought up to code when a use change is proposed that would generate the need for additional parking spaces. As the minimum number of spaces cannot be provided on-site, relief must be obtained to allow the project to proceed. The regulations also require full site plan review when there is not compliance with any applicable site regulations. The proposed plan indicates that building "A" is 2,746 square feet, building "B" is 1 ,320 square feet, and that total square footage equals 4,066 square feet. Based on the parking space ratio for retail uses of one (1) parking space per 200 square feet of gross floor area, the proposed project generates the need for a minimum of 20 parking spaces. However, the applicant has space to provide only 12 spaces. Therefore, a variance is necessary to obtain relief from the zoning regulations to reduce the parking requirements from one (1) space per 200 square feet of gross floor area to one (1) space per 339 square feet of gross floor area. The proposed reduction and variance request represents a difference of eight (8) parking spaces. The following is a description of the zoning districts and land uses of properties that surround the subject property (see Exhibit "A" -location map): North: Adult entertainment establishment zoned C-4; South: Outreach Ministry Church, and a retail store selling vertical blinds zoned C-4; Page 2 McMillan Personal Watercraft File No. ZNCV 01-022 East: Federal Highway right-of-way and farther east a vacant commercial site zoned C-4; and West: F.E.C. Railway right-of-way and farther west a commercial use zoned C-2. ANAL YSIS The code states that the zoning code variance cannot be approved unless the board finds the following: a. That special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the land, structure, or building involved and which are not applicable to other lands, structures or buildings in the same zoning district. b. That the special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. c. That granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this ordinance to other lands, buildings, or structures in the same zoning district. d. That literal interpretation of the provisions of this ordinance would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same zoning district under the terms of the ordinance and would work unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant. e. That the variance granted is the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, building, or structure. f. That the granting of the variance will be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of this chapter [ordinance] and that such variance will not be injurious to the area involved or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. Staff conducted this analysis with emphasis on the applicant's response to the above criteria contained in the Exhibit "C", and current site layout and capacity. It is the position of the applicant that the proposed improvements have been tailored to best balance site constraints and project needs. The applicant believes that the current deficiency in parking is attributed, in part, to lot configuration and limited available space. Staff acknowledges that the current situation is simply by virtue of the fact that the property was improved prior to modern site and parking regulations, and therefore subsequently kept occupied or allowed to be re-occupied without application of modern regulations. The current situation is also intensified by the proposed change to a retail use, which increases the minimum parking requirement to one space for every 200 square feet. In contrast, the previous use licensed for the property included an electrical contractor, which would require no more than one space per 500 square feet and possibly less if a storage use ratio (one space per 800 square feet) is applied to the appropriate portion of the building. The applicant prefers the variance that represents, in general, the most intensive use and parking scenario. A variance based on the retail parking ratio would grant the property owner the greatest flexibility in terms of leasing options. Nearly all retails uses would conform to this parking ratio except for restaurants, without parking requirements being less on the remainder of the project to provide a balance or offset the minimum restaurant ratio of one space per 100 square feet. Page 3 McMillan Personal Watercraft File No. ZNCV 01-022 The city acknowledges the challenge to successful beautification and redevelopment efforts presented by non-conforming properties, and has tended to equate site constraints from the built environment with "hardship". Using this viewpoint, one could construe that special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the structures, which is caused by the application of regulations not in effect when the property was originally improved. Current parking regulations applicable to retail uses could not be satisfied on this site without building demolition to reduce building square footage, or by acquiring and demolishing improvements on adjacent properties on which the parking lot could be expanded. With respect to whether granting of the subject variance would confer on the applicant any special privilege, it should be noted that the city approved a similar variance request in 2001 (M & M Appliance). This previous application was similar in that it involved the intensification of an existing building located within the redevelopment area, the lack of site capacity, and the shortage of minimum parking spaces. This approval reduced on-site parking requirements for a retail use to less than one space per 300 square feet, or a total of 7 parking spaces. As for whether the subject request represents the minimum variance necessary to make possible the reasonable use of the land, it should be noted that the proposed use has a lower minimum parking ratio (1 per 500 square feet) than that required for retail uses. Applying this lower parking ratio to building "B", and the retail ratio to building "A", a minimum of 17 spaces would be required for both buildings, or a variance of 3 parking spaces. This scenario would reduce the variance request by 5 parking spaces. However, this would also limit the uses allowed in building "B", or in a portion of building "A" that may not be consistent with the recommendations of the Federal Highway Corridor Redevelopment Plan. In general, the Plan recommends that the corridor be limited to non-automobile or neighborhood oriented uses. CONCLUSIONS/RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends that this variance request for eight (8) parking spaces be denied, and alternatively, recommends that a variance for 3 spaces be approved. This recommendation is based on the following: 1) By limiting building "B" to the proposed use-boat sales-and the corresponding parking ratios of one space per 500 square feet (applicable to 1 ,320 square feet) and one space per 200 square feet (applicable to building "A"- 2,746 square feet), the variance request is reduced down to the minimum necessary to support a reasonable use of the land (see conditions of approval Exhibit "D"; 2) Parking relief has been granted by the city in similar cases where site constraints preclude full code compliance; and 3) The lack of parking relief to the site will either result in the continued vacancy of the property and its blighted condition, or the ultimate use of the entire property by businesses that do not conform to the vision for the corridor. MDAI S:\Planning\SHARED\WP\PROJECTS\McMillan Personal Watercraft\ZNCV 01--022\STAFF REP-parking var.doc Location Map McMillan Personal Watercraft EXHIBIT "A" m \ III \lTTTTl-lJ o I 800 I 1600 Feet I N W~E 800 s " ~ I~- ~ ~ 9 ~ " II'lli!~m / ~ l i; "~'l' > ~ I o~ "a!" > · "2 ,!..i! ' ~ 6' ,1<,01, i . !il~'~'i~ ~ \ 1~2"! ~ iil ~ ~i',';i' i ," j' "p'il' iiJ!jlh! ! r'~i,. ~ !' Zi.lji11ii ! i !ll~ ~li ' , i~,,~~ 'I . !;~llh~i ; 'It 1.!,11 ' l~ III i~, i' I." -0 iO C) -0 0 C) (f> ~~o m I~ :!z. ~~./>. ol> j;:r / r -0 I r I p. Z ~ I " I I:ll oJ-I I 0'-< I . 1]1 () I P. r E p. r r (f> m () I::! C) Z \>J , -I>; (f> p fi II- , (f>!-I mH ()il) -1'0 alp. Zr \>JliT '1m ~Z =() (f,lm pi ,~ '~~ f~ iii \$i r', 'II zi ~ ~! M' I'! I Ii! . I"" ~ ,H I ~H ; 1'1 i JI I iP 0 i c:: (f> J: G\ J: ~ -{ EXHIBIT "B" ~ --,-~~,-,--~ - ~._._._.-rFl--._,- -~'_.~.- -.- ~._._.~- o ~~o NE 10Tf-l AVE :! Z , m~./>. JIll> Or l> r II ~ I I ! i ~ I , < ~ i 102.65' !iP'<'I" 'd O' I ",oH I: 0 ,,"'!ii!' .1!H~i5 "HiI! ~ i' ill C) iU 5 p. R' (Jl -f () R (f> -f 0 ~ ~ ~ ~o ~ :!r' r [TJ JIl '" F III m ... 0.... -{ j;:l> , r F I j ~ j II 'I' !l: !~T!I!l!'IIII!ili 11!!I!lll II i II' I oj!!! 'I"! ,I I ! I!'" ~ I i ;; i 3 , e: ~ ~ ! I I ilp :' n' I ! !!! I II i! I ; I !! i J ~3 r I I I I ~ ~ II. ~ ~ l ~ l ~ l ~ , l I II : ! I L--__. (f>E mp' ()r -Ir Om ZX -I \>Jm 'Z ~(f> ;10 p Z ; j1 ~., ~: n i ~;; n ! ~J i L ( ;1, /11.( i;; ail ,,: ; ,.; : .,; ,; ,,: ; .: ,; ",; .;! Ii ; "11 ..*1 , 4' ~ * II ~,. . *~~~ ~~ I;:!~ !ij ~ ij~ !! ;~~ ~ !i ~4 ~~;~ i~ ~ J~: )- ~ ,.~, i -,iE i .:~ ji~ I~~: .i . :;1 Il ~~ - "'~ ~ ill.!~ h .i:~iO i" :~: ~~! !i i !!~ i ii ~; i~~;!j , I I; ~ji i:~;; .,i;; :iJ,':ij' I' - ~!i ;:.i i~ ~ j~ i ~i i ~ ~i ~-:H ..~ - ,<. 'I' ., . ,<. ! < "<I! . J 3 i ii i ~~ : ~! i ~ ~ !;;~ ~ j !d -'!' il ~ I' ! :, j , ; ii" ! I ;,! oj! H I Ij' I ,I'": I ill - . g~ 'Igjlllill I z, ,r m i f'l,~~ aim ~iF (n _ 1::J i.~ "v; -8 ai i i~! ~ ~ _._~~<....t~~~~U,~-L~ d ! Ii . ~,. ~ {:;~~~rt 1'" ", 'J" r!i ;I J !!~ T.':- i I i-: ! ;1, i ;.; : .Ii i !i ~~~ .g p!!Ji ~! ~ ~ .;... ,. " 2~ i! h FCC"'"'"*----, : : ------.--r- J.",---"'_",__,~",,~"_ -'.._.~___ FROF. BUILDING REMODEL FOR, ~IQ~DNG ANp~ I FEDERAL ~Wy I 120 MA"'F:~T~~~~?~~t~1< FL-CRIOA . ::=~::::~_~~~i~._u_.__ j ! EXHIBIT "e" Zoning Code Variance Application response to question 5. A. This property is a redevelopment of existing buildings/structures. B. My actions are not a result of my proposed development, but are a result of the existing development of the parcel. i.e. building location within the parcel and building size. C. I acknowledge that the granting of the variances requested is a result of undo hardships imposed by the redevelopment of the subject property. D. The literal interpretation of the provisions ofthis chapter would subject undo hardship on the applicant to utilize the existing structures in like zoning of commercial retail uses by way of parking requirements and associated green area requirements. E. The redevelopment of this property/site plan was derived in conjunction with minimizing variance requests through working with the City of Boynton Beach Planning and Zoning Department. F. Granting of these variances will provide for redevelopment of a currently unoccupied property with services to benefit the general public while aiding in the initiative of a corridor redevelopment/enhancement. ,--..... r.-: '-' . "'I'~ ( i i; J ~~.._..:.':..-~~._ j j..I I I : ,.,~ ! UU iDEe 5 2001 L____- ______'__'.