REVIEW COMMENTS
6.A.l
KRISPY KREME
LAND USE PLAN
AMENDMENT/REZONING
DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING & ZONING DIVISION
MEMORANDUM NO. PZ 01-222
TO:
Chairman and Members
Planning and Development B~ I _____
Dick Hudson. Senior Planner~
Michael W. Rumpf ;'1 q.::.-
Director of Planning and Zoning
FROM:
THROUGH:
DATE:
December 10,2001
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Project/Applicant: Krispy Kreme of South Florida, LLC
Agent: Scott Barber / Gee & Jenson, Inc.
Owner(s): Salvador and Norma Sentmanat, Anthony Mannino, August Vultaggio.
Giuseppe Vultaggio and Pietra LoPiccolo
Location: Four parcels all being south of Boynton Beach Boulevard [SR804]
approximately 1,500 feet east ofNW 7'h Street). Having mailing addresses
of633 NW I" Avenue, 3015 S. Ocean Boulevard - Apartment H, 1501
NW 2nd Avenue and 3015 S. Ocean Boulevard - No. 404. West Industrial
Avenue intersects with Boynton Beach Boulevard immediately north of
the subject property. (See Exhibit A)
File No: Land Use Amendment/Rezoning (LUAR 01-008)
Property Description: Vacant property consisting of 0.36 acres classified Medium Density
Residential (MeDR) and zoned Duplex Residential (R-2), and 0.26 acres
of developed property, containing one duplex residential building and
classified Medium Density Residential and zoned Duplex Residential (R-
2). Total property to be reclassified and rezoned equals 0.62 acres.
Proposed change/use: To reclassify the subject property from Medium Density Residential to
Local Retail Commercial (LRC), and rezone from Duplex Residential CR-
2) to Neighborhood Commercial (C-2). The subject property will be
combined with a 0.42 acre vacant parcel to the west, which is currently
classified Local Retail Commercial (LRC) and zoned Neighborhood
Commercial (C-2), to assemble a :t1.04 acre site to be developed as a fast
food restaurant with a drive through feature.
Page 2
File Number: LUAR 01-008
Krispy Kreme Doughnuts
Adjacent Land Uses and Zoning:
North: Right-of-way of West Boynton Beach Boulevard (SR 804), then property classified Local Retail
Commercial (LRC), zoned Neighborhood Commercial (C -2), and developed with a service station
(Texaco) to the northwest; to the northeast the intersection of Boynton Beach Boulevard and West
Industrial Avenue and farther east, right-of-way of Industrial Avenue then developed property
classified Industrial (I) and zoned Light Industrial (M-l) (the locations of Lloyds Auto Electric and
Foster Oil).
South: Right-of-way ofNW I" Avenue, then property classified Low Density Residential, zoned Single
family Residential (R-I-A) and developed with single family homes.
East: Property classified Medium Density Residential (MeDR). zoned Duplex Residential (R-2) and
developed with duplex (two family) homes.
West: Vacant property classified Local Retail Commercial (LRC), zoned Neighborhood Commercial (C-2)
and under ownership of the applicant. Farther west is developed property classified Local Retail
Commercial (LRC), zoned Neighborhood Commercial (C-2) and occupied by a dental/medical office
building.
PROJECT ANALYSIS
The parcels, which are the subject of this land use amendment, total 0.62 acre. Because of the size
of the property under consideration, the Florida Department of Community Affairs classifies this
amendment as a "small scale" amendment. A "small-scale" amendment is adopted prior to
forwarding to the Florida Department of Community Affairs and is not reviewed for compliance
with the state, regional and local comprehensive plans prior to adoption.
This amendment request presents a unique situation. The property is being assembled from
property owned by six individuals. The western property consists of vacant land totaling :1:0.78
acre and is bisected from north to south into two land use classifications and two zoning districts.
The western portion of approximately :1:0.42 acre is classified Local Retail Commercial (LRC) and
zoned Neighborhood Commercial (C-2). The eastern portion equals approximately 0.36 acre, is
classified Medium Density Residential (MeDR), zoned Duplex Residential (R-2) and is a subject of
this request. The :1:0.26 acre parcel to the east is currently under separate ownership (Salvador and
Norma Sentmanat) and is also a subject of this request. It is classified Medium Density Residential
(MeDR), zoned Duplex Residential (R-2) and is occupied by a duplex (two family) structure (See
Exhibit "B").
The criteria used to review Comprehensive Plan amendments and rezonings are listed in Article 2,
Section 9. Administration and Enforcement, Item C. Comprehensive Plan Amendments: Rezonings.
These criteria are required to be part of a staff analysis when the proposed change includes an
amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map.
a. Whether the proposed rezoning would be consistent with applicable comprehensive
plan policies ineluding but not limited to, a prohibition against any increase in
dwelling unit density exceeding 50 in the hurricane evacuation zone without written
approval of the Palm Beach County Emergency Planning Division and the City's risk
manager. T7ze planning department shall also recommend limitations or requirements,
Page 3
File Number: LUAR 01-008
Krispy Kreme Doughnuts
which would have to be imposed on subsequent development of the property, in order
to compZv with policies contained in the comprehensive plan.
According to the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Support Document, under the "Discussion
of Supply and Demand for Commercial Land" the following is recommended:
"The Future Land Use Plan which is proposed for the City and area to be annexed by the
City will accommodate all of the anticipated demand for commercial land through build-
out. Therefore, the City should not change the land use to commercial categories, beyond
that which is shown on the proposed Future Land Use Plan, except for minor boundary
adjustments, small infill parcels, or commercial uses of a highly specialized nature, which
have special location or site requirements, and therefore cannot, be easily accommodated
on already designated commercial areas."
This direction is repeated in Policy 1.19.6 of the Land Use Element.
"The City shall not allow commercial acreage which is greater than the demand which has
been projected, unless it can be demonstrated that the additional commercial acreage would
not require the proportion of commercial acreage on the City's Future Land Use Map to
exceed the proportion of commercial acreage on the Palm Beach County Future Land Use
Map. The City shall not allow commercial unless a particular property is unsuitable for
other uses, or a geographic need exists which cannot be fulfilled by existing commercially-
zoned property, and the commercial use would comply with all other applicable
comprehensive plan policies."
The subject property is not located within the hurricane evacuation zone. Rather than increase
residential densities, the requested amendment will reduce the total number of existing housing
stock by two units.
The request will add a total of :t27,000 square feet to the existing commercial node that exists on
both sides of Boynton Beach Boulevard in this area and may be viewed as a minor boundary
adjustment. It is not likely that any beneficial commercial development could occur on the
:t 18,000 square foot portion of the property currently designated for commercial development
while simultaneously providing adequate screening and buffering for the adjacent neighborhood.
According to the applicant, the resulting commercially-designated parcel will add the necessary
property to allow for greater circulation efficiency.
b. Whether the proposed rezoning would be contrary to the established land use pattern,
or would create an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts, or
would constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual property owner as
contrasted with the protection of the public welfare.
The proposed rezoning would not create an isolated district, but would represent a minor
enlargement of an existing commercial node. It would relate to the adjacent lands to the west,
which are under the same ownership and to property both farther west and across Boynton Beach
Boulevard that are already developed for Local Retail Commercial uses. The requirements for
buffer walls between residential and commercial districts, coupled with the city's landscaping (e.g.
barrier) requirements. ensure that impacts of commercial developments on residential
developments are ameliorated.
Page 4
File Number: LUAR 01-008
Krispy Kreme Doughnuts
c. Whether changed or changing conditions make the proposed rezoning desirable.
There are no changed or changing conditions that make the proposed rezoning desirable.
d. Whether the proposed use would be compatible with utility systems, roadways, and
other public facilities.
The parcels, which are the subject of this land use amendment, total 0.62 acre. Only applications
involving parcels larger than one (I) acre are required to include comparisons of water demand and
sewage flow estimates.
The Palm Beach County Traffic Division has reviewed the traffic study for the entire project and has
determined that it meets the Traffic Performance Standards of Palm Beach County. The Traffic
Division Engineer recommended that the City "review traffic operations at the project access
driveway. with emphasis on left-turns in and out of the site. The forecasted peak hour volumes
indicate the need for provision of a westbound left-turn land on Boynton Beach Boulevard onto the
site. Also, adequate safety measures should be considered to accommodate left-turns out of the
project site."
With respect to solid waste; the Solid Waste Authority (SW A) has stated, in a letter dated January 6,
1999, that adequate capacity exists to accommodate the county's municipalities throughout the 10-
year planning period.
Lastly, drainage will also be reviewed in detail as part of the review of the conditional use
application, at which time compliance with all requirements of the city and local drainage permitting
authorities must be demonstrated.
e. Whether the proposed rezoning would be compatible with the current and future use
of adjacent and nearby properties, or would affect the property values of adjacent or
nearby properties.
As stated above, the proposed zoning would be compatible with current uses of adjacent properties
to both the north and the west. The buffering and landscape requirements expressed in both the
comprehensive plan and the zoning code will serve to lessen any negative effects the commercial
development would have on the existing residential development.
f Whether the property is physically and economical(v developable under the existing
zoning.
As stated above, it is doubtful that any beneficial commercial development could occur on the
:t18,000 square foot portion of the property currently designated for commercial development
without leaving minimal land available for buffering purposes. A duplex dwelling might be
constructed on the residentially designated portion; however, the location adjacent to Boynton
Beach Boulevard and the southbound entrance ramp to 1-95 make this location less than desirable
for residential development. The eastern-most parcel is currently developed with a duplex
dwelling.
g. Whether the proposed rezoning is of a scale which is reasonably related to the needs
of the neighborhood and the city as a whole.
Page 5
File Number: LUAR 01-008
Krispy Kreme Doughnuts
The subject rezoning and subsequent use of the property would represent a positive contribution to
the commercial corridor of Boynton Beach Boulevard.
h. Whether there are adequate sites elsewhere in the city for the proposed use, in
districts where such use is already allowed.
There are a number of sites elsewhere in the city where the development of the proposed use would
not necessitate a land use amendment and rezoning. These locations may not afford the proximity
to a state road (Boynton Beach Boulevard-SR804) or an interstate highway (1-95) that this location
provides.
CONCLUSIONS/RECOMMENDATIONS
As indicated herein, this request is consistent with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan; will not
create additional impacts on infrastructure that have not been anticipated in the Comprehensive
Plan; will be compatible with adjacent land uses and will contribute to the overall economic
development of the City. Therefore, staff recommends that the subject request be approved, with
the acknowledgement that buffering and other design requirements intended to maximize
compatibility with adjacent uses and traffic related comments will be applied at time of site
plan/conditional use review. If the Planning and Development Board or the City Commission
recommends conditions, they will be included within Exhibit "e".
ATTACHMENTS
J \SHRDA TA\Planning\.SHAREDI WPIPROJECTSlkrispy kremelLUARIKrispy Kreme staff report2 doc
ANSWERS TO JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT
__ 1) Is the proposed land use amendment/rezoning consistent with applicable
comprehensive plan policies? (The division shall also recommend limitations or
requirements that would have to be imposed on subsequent development of the
property in order to comply with policies contained in the comprehensive plan).
Yes, the proposed land use amendment/rezoning is consistent Witl'l the applicaNe
comprehensive plan policies. For instance, Objective 6.2 of the Housing Element
states that all substandard housing shall be eliminated. The residential housing
presently on this main thoroughfare falls into this category. Additionally, Poli::y
1.16.2 of the Future Land Use Element indicates that lot coverage- should be less
than fifty percent (50%). The Krispy Kreme project, being newconstwction, will meet
these and other contemporaneous standards. Pursuant to Policy 1.17.1 of tne
Future Land Use Element, the City discourages additional commercial uses beyond
those which are currently shown on the Future Land Use map except where access
is greatest and impacts and residential land uses are least. That is precisely tile
case here. In support of this proposition, Policy 1.19.5 of the Future Land Use
Element states that the City shall continue to adopt and enforce re9.~Jlations to allcow
for commercial acreage which can accommodate the approximate demand lor
commercial acreage which has been projected in the future land use element.
Page 1 of 8
ANSWERS TO JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT (Continued)
__ 2) Is the proposed land use amendmenUrezoning contrary to the established land 'Jse
pattern, or would it create an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby
districts or constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual property owner as
contrasted with the protection of the public welfare?
No, the proposed land use amendment/rezoning is not contrary to the establish"~d
land use pattem and it would not create an isolated district unrelatecl to adjacent and
nearby districts or constitute a grant of special privilege to an inc1ividual property
owner. To the contrary, this merely rationalizes a commercial dIstrict on a main
thoroughfare and eliminates a small portion of residential zoning property which,
because of the proximity of the 1-95 exit, would only encourage substandard housing
utilization.
Page 2 of 8
ANSWERS TO JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT (Continue,c:l)
__ 3) Do changed or changing conditions make the proposed land u:;e
amendment/rezoning desirable?
Yes, changing conditions make it desirable for this area to be zoned commercial. For
example, the area does not currently meet objective 1.22 of the Future Land Use
Element because this community is not defined by a series of walkable' neighborhoods
with a clearly defined center and edge. Changing the frontage along Boynton Bea,~h
Boulevard to commercial will better insulate the remaining neighborhood and with
appropriate site plan attention, will provide a definite sense of neighborhood to the are a.
Page 3 of 8
ANSWERS TO JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT (Continued)
__ 4) Is the proposed land use amendment/rezoning compatible with utility systems,
roadways and other public facilities?
Yes, the proposed land use amendment/rezoning is compatible with the utility
systems, roadways and other public facilities. This area is a/mady utilizing city
services and no greater material burden is expected by conversion from residemial
to commercial.
Page 4 of 8
ANSWERS TO JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT (Continued)
__ 5) Is the proposed land use amendment/rezoning compatible with the current and
future use of adjacent and nearby properties or would it affect the property values
of adjacent and nearby properties?
Yes, the proposed land use amendment/rezoning is compatible with the current and
future use of adjacent and nearby properties as the property is genel'ally surround9d
by commercial zoning designed local retail on the Future Land Use map. Trle
property values of the adjacent and nearby properties would be stabilized as a result
of this rezoning because: (i) there would be a definite border to thE! "esidential arE'a;
(ii) substandard housing would be eliminated; and (Ui) there would be improv'9d
landscaping and a more aesthetically pleasing building than currently on the
property,
Page 5 of 8
ANSWERS TO JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT (Continued)
__ 6) Is the property physically and economically developable under the existing land use
designation/zoning?
No, the property is not physically and economically developable under the existing
land use designation/zoning. It is too small to be put to use for a major residenUal
community. It would only support a small isolated rental project within an area of
high traffic and major highway arterials which would be neglecteel over a period of
time.
Page 6 of 8
ANSWERS TO JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT (Continued)
__ 7) Is the proposed land use amendment/rezoning of a scale that is masonably relatec
to the needs of the neighborhood and the City as a whole?
Yes, the proposed land use amendment/rezoning is reasonably related to the nel1ds
of the neighborhood and the City as a whole. The rezoning is on~v for. 62 acre~; of
land. It is only for the purpose of rationalizing an already existing commercial ZO'7e.
It has no major impacts.
Page 7 of 8
ANSWERS TO JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT (Continued)
__ 8) Are there adequate sites elsewhere in the City for the proposed use, in districts
where such use is already allowed? .
Yes, there are other sites zoned for this use, but none are available to the applicunt.
As to the adequacy of these sites, we can make no comment since parking,
drainage, ingress and egress and other site specific issues must be addressed on
a case-by-case basis.
G:\K'ikOO2\Answers to Justification Stalemenl.wpd
Page 8 of 8
ANSWERS TO COMPARISON OF IMPACTS
__ 1) What is the comparison of the potential square footage of nUITI ber and type of
dwelling units under the existing zoning with that which should be a lowed under the
proposed zoning or development?
It is difficult to specifically compare the potential square foot of the number in types
of dwelling units under the existing zoning with that which would b'9 allowed under
the proposed zoning and development since the requested change is from a
residential zoning to a commercial zoning. However, under the H.2 classification,
9.68 dwelling units are permitted per acre. Under the C-2 zoning designation, the
gross floor area must be less than 5,000 square feet. If you assume that an
average dwelling unit is 1,500 square feet, the buildable area as a result of this
zoning change is significantly reduced.
Page 1 of 3
ANSWERS TO COMPARISON OF IMPACTS (Continuecl)
__ 2) What uses would be allowed in the proposed zoning or development and what
particular uses would be excluded?
C-2 commercial is not the City's most intense commercial zone. For instance, it
allows restaurants, flower shops, bookstores and jewelry stores. Such things that
would be excluded would be firearms, fireworks and the sale of alcohol other than
beer or wine. The applicant has no intentions whatsoever to USEl the property i'or
any use which would be excluded.
Page 2 of 3
ANSWERS TO COMPARISON OF IMPACTS (Continuedl)
__ 3) What is the proposed timing and phasing of the development?
The development is only one phase. The restaurant would be cons.'ructed within six
(6) months of the issuance of a building permit.
G:\Kr k002\Answers to Comparison of Impacls.wpd
Page 3 of 3