REVIEW COMMENTS (ZNCV 03-023)
DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING AND ZONING DIVISION
MEMORANDUM NO. PZ 04-229
STAFF REPORT
TO:
Chair and Members
Community Redevelopment Agency and City Commission
DATE:
Michael W. Rumpf
Director of Planning and Zoning
Eric Lee Johnson, AICP ~
Planner 1
October 6, 2004
THRU:
FROM:
PROJECT NAME/NO:
Gateway Shell Variances (fka Gateway Texaco)
Sign setback ZNCV 03-023
REQUEST:
Relief from the City of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations, Chapter
21, Signs, Article III. Section 5 requiring all signs must meet a minimum ten
(10) foot setback from the property line to the closest surface of the sign to
allow a five (5) foot variance from the property line, resulting in five (5) foot
setback for an existing gasoline dispensing establishment.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Property Owner: SUAU Enterprises, Incorporated
Applicant/Agent: Mr. Beril Kruger of Beril Kruger Planning & Consultants
Location: 2360 North Federal Highway Boynton Beach, FL
Existing Land Use/Zoning: Local Retail Commercial (LRC) / Community Commercial (C-3)/
Proposed Land Use/Zoning: No change proposed
Proposed Use: 681 square foot addition to gasoline dispensing establishment (limited to a
maximum of 600 square feet by Condition of Approval for appeal -ADAP 02-
001).
Acreage: 0.48 Acre (20,830 square feet)
Adjacent Uses:
(see Exhibit "A" - Location Map)
North:
A multi-family residential property, zoned Community Commercial (C-3);
South:
Right-of-way for Las Palmas Avenue, and farther south are single-family attached
townhouses under construction (The Harbors), zoned Infill Planned Unit Development
Staff Report
Memorandum No PZ-04-229
Page 2
(IPUD);
East: Vacant commercial lot zoned Community Commercial (C-3) currently under review for
a proposed car wash, and farther east is a single-family residential dwelling (part of
Las Palmas development), zoned Single-family residential, (R-l-AA); and
West: Rights-of-way of U.S. 1 and the Florida East Coast Railroad, and farther west
developed commercial property classified Local Retail Commercial (LRC) and zoned
Neighborhood Commercial (C-2).
PROPERTY OWNER NOTIFICATION
Owners of properties within 400 feet of the subject conditional use were mailed a notice of this request
and its respective hearing dates. The applicant certifies that they posted signage and mailed notices in
accordance with Ordinance No. 04-007.
BACKGROUND
Mr. Beril Kruger of Beril Kruger Planning & Zoning Consultants, agent for SUAU Enterprises, Incorporated is
requesting conditional use / major site plan modification approval involving a series of variance requests in
order to construct a 681 square foot building addition to an existing gasoline dispensing establishment. The
applicant is also proposing new parking spaces, additional landscaping, and a general "make-over" of the
exterior facades of the existing building and canopy. However, the number of gasoline pump islands and
fueling positions would remain unaltered.
The proposed building expansion is being considered for conditional use approval because gasoline
dispensing establishments are only allowed as conditional uses in the C-3 zoning district. Also, it should be
noted that this particular gas-station is a legal non-conforming use because it is currently a fully functional,
operating, and licensed gas station but does meet the locational criteria for gas stations as outlined by
Chapter 2, Section 11.L.3.a.(2) of the Land Development Regulations. The aforementioned code requires gas
stations to be located only on parcels of land located at intersections "consisting of roads of four (4) lanes or
wider"; Las Palmas is only two (2) lanes wide.
In 2002, Mr. Beril Kruger, acting on behalf of Mr. Zuhair Marouf, expressed a desire to construct a building
addition to the existing gas station, in part, to satisfy outstanding code enforcement violations. He also
proposed direct access between the subject lot and the lot directly to the east (which was previously
earmarked for a mechanical car wash). The direct access was proposed in order to minimize vehicular traffic
spilling onto Las Palmas Avenue. Mr. Kruger's inquiries were based on the presumption that the proposed
681 square foot expansion would be permitted (by right) and that direct access to the abutting lot (to the
east) would only require site plan review. However, after careful consideration, staff determined that the
building addition would not be permitted (by-right) because it would represent an unlawful expansion of a
legal non-conforming use (a gasoline-dispensing establishment). Furthermore, in response to Mr. Kruger's
inquiries, on July 16, 2002, the Director of Planning & Zoning issued an administrative determination letter
that basically prohibited the applicant from increasing the size of the gas-station building because by doing
so, would constitute a violation of Chapter 2, Sections D and G of the Land Development Regulations.
Regarding the direct access between lots, the Director determined that the proposed driveway connection
between the subject lot and the lot directly to the east would be permitted subsequent to site plan review.
However, the direct access would only be allowed contingent upon the recordation of a legally binding cross-
Staff Report
Memorandum No PZ-04-229
Page 3
access agreement between the subject lot and the lot directly to the east.
On July 31, 2002, Mr. Kruger submitted a formal appeal of the staff's aforementioned administrative
determination. According to the applicant, "in summary, the appeal justifies the proposed expansion by the
position that retail sales at this business is a separate component from the non-conforming aspect-gasoline
sales, which component can therefore be altered / expanded independent of the gasoline sales element of the
business". Again, staff disagreed with the applicant's position. However, the City Commission approved the
applicant's appeal but with the condition that the expansion would be limited to 600 square feet.
On June 17, 2003, Mr. Kruger submitted a request for conditional use / major site plan modification approval
and its accompanying variances for the construction of the building addition. Both staff and the CRA
reviewed the site plan and the variances and recommended approval contingent upon 43 conditions of
approval, one of which, limited the building addition to 600 square feet. On October 21, 2003, the City
Commission approved their request for conditional use / major site plan modification and the accompanying
variances. However, on November 18, 2003, the City Commission rescinded their previous approvals. Most
recently, on August 11, 2004, Mr. Kruger re-submitted a revised request for major site plan modification and
the accompanying variances. If approved, the construction of the addition, parking lot, and fa<.;ade
improvements would occur in one (1) phase. It should be noted that the difference between this submittal
and the original submittal as described above, is that the proposed car wash on the abutting lot (to the east)
has been abandoned. As such, the drive aisle that was to connect to the lot to the east has also been
eliminated from the design.
As part of the major site plan modification process, the site has to meet all the requirements of the Land
Development Regulations or obtain relief if necessary. Mr. Beril Kruger is requesting relief from the above-
referenced Land Development Regulations, which requires all outdoor freestanding signs be setback at least
10 feet from the property line. The existing pole sign is located five (5) feet from the property line (adjacent
to the right-of-way) so therefore, a five (5) foot variance would be required.
ANALYSIS
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.
Staff Report
Memorandum No PZ-04-229
Page 4
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 has conducted this analysis with the assumption that based on the city's prior approval of the
administrative appeal regarding the increase in intensity of this non-conforming use, that the city has
acknowledged the potential for revealing certain hardships and non-conformities to the site.
Also, the analysis focused on the applicant's response to the above criteria contained in Exhibit "C" - Marouf
Shell Variances, which requires that the request is to be initiated because of special conditions and
circumstances that are peculiar to the subject land, structure, or building, which are not the result of the
actions of the applicant, and that the request is the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable
use of the structure.
The subject request has been initiated in preparation for the construction of an addition to the existing gas
station business, which represents a major site plan modification. Through this process, every aspect of the
project is reviewed for compliance, and if a requirement cannot be met, relief from the code may be required.
As such, the applicant desires to maintain the freestanding sign at its existing location. The subject property
has been improved with a gas station business and occupied since 1965. Staff reviewed the site and
determined that the request for a sign setback variance of five (5) feet may not represent the minimum
variance necessary to maintain the site sign on the property. Staff acknowledged that the applicant could
meet the sign setback as required by code. The sign can be moved an additional five (5) feet to the east and
two (2) feet to the north while maintaining the same orientation without interfering with the vehicular use
area for the station. This scenario would meet both the code and maintain the same visibility for the
applicant's business. Understanding that the subject request does not represent the minimum variance that
will make reasonable use of the structure, criteria item "e" is not met. It should be noted that if the sign
were moved from its current location, then the entire structure would have to comply with current code. The
code now requires that all outdoor freestanding signs be of the "monument" style as defined by the Land
Development Regulations. This would translate to an eight (8) foot tall monument sign. The overall objective
of the Land Development Regulations is to ensure the welfare and safety of the public by providing
regulations and standards in which to achieve consistent equitable developments. The intent of the sign
setback is to provide reasonable visibility for a sign without interfering with visibility along a right-of-way.
CONCLUSIONS I RECOMMENDATION
Based on the analysis contained herein, staff recommends that the requested variance be denied, due to the
lack of hardship, and due to the avoidable circumstance being created by the actions of the applicant.
However, if approved any conditions of approval added by the Community Redevelopment Agency Board or
the City Commission will be placed in the Exhibit "D" - Conditions of Approval.
MDjELJ
S:\Planning\SHARED\WP\PROJECTS\Gateway Shell fka Texaco\New ShellWariances (revised 2004)\03-023 Sign Setback\Staff Report ZNCV 03-
023 Sign setback.doc
EXHIBIT "A" .1:
..
. l.LOcatio~p
, Gateway Shell
~ '~1 , H I lr'
0
m
" ~ . o'
f
1; J
I
: SITE :-r---
to..
0, 17
PU
J J
1 l I
. J
\,;~ ~, ~ J. ~
ox/'/' " 1 ~// I
J ~/
I 1
'\ -
J
IPUD o I
...-.
.7
---
t I '
_:: - I R3 I
- --
--- \ I
ft ~~ \ J
, .I
. I
.
,
u_
I
r / 1
/ J J J REC J
I I
J
j j r
~ qr;] ~~lJ .
~V"
~~
:t: 33.36'
......
~
~:I;. 20,76'
-
~
:l: 13.76'
+0;00'
~~o@~~
~@@@l ~~.Urlt.
lUJlnllki!l~ 'll a~~
{P>(Q)_li"
lP>DlUI~ 4l c (ff; 71
fP>~li'
1PJ~llU\1DlUlmro 4l a 71 ~
lO>b~@O 4l o(ff;~
8
61.81
EXHI BIT "B"
Shell' LOGO AND LETrERING -
EXISTING SIGNAGE
"Food Mart" IDENTIFICATION -
EXISTING SIGNAGE
"G..ollno" PRICE INDEX-
EXISTING SIGNAGE
"Diesel" PRICE INDEX -
EXISTING SIGNAGE
EXISTING GRADE
GATEWAY Shell
2360 NORTH FEDERAL HIGHWAY
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA 3a435
)
'"
~~
,"'
...
'j
I.
.
0..
'I::-
~~1:t
~ ~: ~
->:t\}t>
~~~
H
~.
~ ~
~
EXHIBIT "B"
v ~ h'ldih/W4Y /\/e.. /
~.~,.
6.....-;.0-_
~:./.w.... 4.....~~_
~
~r~~
t. ~t.
~~~ ~
~i'i'
~'-~~
~ ~ ~
t~
s"
G...........$
~
~t
~~
-T~
,.,
...
I
I
~~~ I
.. .::a ~ f
.f'~t
\." 4'~ }>f
tV i ~~
'..:- rJ
,:,:-.,:..; ',',', . :.~:,. ~ :,i;;.;'_'.e:~~A.-: ~~;;-?:"'~':/:">' '.,:. '~'. :,.,'.,..
't "t
~
"!
'"
~~
.....
,;
, .
t\~
. ~,
...'t:.........
:!-~
~i
: ,
"'~
R .
. ..
.....
h. ~
""'! ~
"- l\ I
-! ~
-~-,
- 01
~
;,.
.
, ,
~
il~~
I t
I ~~
.. .,.,
I .... "0 .
I ci" i
~\0~
~~'.~
~~J
N~.
~ ~~ :
1-~~ I
--t~I'
s..~
, ;,..
~~
~~
, t~
{~
,&,
~'1
t
...
-,
...
':18~J
~ tt ~ ~
~ t'~-.t
; ~~~
; ~~~
. l:'.. -.
t t' 0
, ,
! ~
'e.
~
...~" G..r"",," ~/.... a." ~'*_
~ ~~'" 'ss."",~.occep
i~ i..s: 7...?t:.' " "w. ~/-:9
}l
<..
~.
",.
.
"
-z-
~,' ~~
--- , ~~
~ ,~, .'i-:'
it ~c', ,>:".
H <6
w, ~
-O.::t:..
"'-..;:"
~~
'--...",
"
~
;:~-'-'s o;~.:,.~~~~__ '
, ---------R r'S... 0l '
--- , /,,1. €....."''-",I, L..o~f_s ! 'Z> 12~ ~
",. "^, ~, ,us ~ Ol.>l;l~ fl .~ ~
~ -- - , m i~i~~~lndlgil~iil hI II ~
!Il!, Ill'llI:,'" '., ill I
lillihhln~IUi!:ln IU ~~ '
~~~I lil>i~.~=>~lil:1 ~il lillil
iil; il~;~si!iill ~!m i~
>0l~I~E>5~ ~~ii~lil ~i
UI~I~lii!hUI!1 hjl--li
lillillilE~;>i~ii~;i I.!~ I)
li=;~I!i~ilil~';.!1 j~t .15
Bil"i~lliE~~i.!iD:ti fij~ ~
llili~.!niilnni~i; h ~~
u5 ..u E~ga>~a~ .
mlillil> i~ ." ,
~
~~;!)
f\;::<\t
~i ~ '-
l~~
'- .
~~
~}
_..~ ~
~t "
..o~
-1'.J(I.
~~~
~
=..
-tt
ill"
4 '"
~
~~
~ ;.
~~ ~i I
~~ ~i
1.1 II
n !I
~
~':.
.
~
I iiu e :I G I
i 1;~I'~ail
Ilit.H ~n~;,
i ~11&i,ill
t:f f:t~!1
!!t I' I ell. ...::!~
~ " .~
- ~I-
. Ir =m
!l ~g
C> I_ e 1\<>
.:.. 'i _ ~~ '
h
i; I ,
~I!! r--::
-",. , "-'7',. ""'+. .
~ili /~::'" -"~
~ 1'.1<:,:--:::>: ~ '. I
I I
i
I
r' Ii ~ I
1;1. I~ ~ ii'
18 I" Z &
Iii ' :;: Ii'
'i5 i ~ '0 q
II! Sj' ; ~ I
1;1 ill ~ 8 -,-
Iii il i ~ ~ , :
1'1 !"! ::I I Vl
1&1 h . - ~ '0
. ~ I ~
S~ I;
I ~
I
I
I
J~~~
iijl
I~!
-1<1
u ,
Ii),
III ~
EXHIBIT
3-11111
~ , ii-
, ; i id
- ~~q
. ~ 1m;
"B"
N O. 1
Jf
~~~~
I II
!~~
: II
i II
,
,
,
~~Uliln
~h!~ i
~ol i
~M~ c
n~ 1<1
m~~
fi 140.00" "'7'2e'n
i!
~
o I
III 1111~lil;;ill Ii 11!~;I;!tli!ii~11 I~i I~II
~; I;; I I~ii; I ~1!~r.~~!I~;ilil ~lii!I~III~ I~!~ !;
III ! ~ ! ~!ij~s~ 12S~!iil~~i~~I.~~1 i~ ~...
I" ii ~ g illlI8iiij!lill;!;i!ilili ~~I i!
. ~ 'i li~!i!il!I;~j~!i;il 115 ~!
I J hi~ii;dl~;sIU il h ;
~1i~d~lrU' Ii 51 II"'~ ~
ih~~~ ~~dl I~dnl~' H~I;bl i II ~
1115ill~l~i~i~- ,l I~ ~
~ii. iiU~1i nd 1~ldl~li~~uUI !I ; E ...
~i= ii~~~~ ~~~; ~~~~llil~II,!J~ I~ l~ ~
m i = R.~.a fill" i~ ~ ~..
11111111111 ii,iljjil 1111 :
III~~I;II Jii i~ I~I!
i~lilli~~ I~ I~ ii I
~lIl1i; 5G~ ~ ~ I II
illjl Iii ! I i Ii
1111; i~i I I I II
1!lli Iii I I Ii I l
~
" I I I J '"~ ~ al~ e PROPOSED ADDITION AND AI. TERA110N TO: ii II ~ s:: ~ ~ i
~; ~ GATEWAY SHELL ..-- III I . ~ ~
..- II --- :ll
a i ~ ~ (PORMERL Y toIONtf M QA~Y 'TEXACO) IIZA ~AN. PL ---- 11
--- 11 11 II B
I k ~ B ~ 2360 NORTH FEDERAL HIGHWAY r:=
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA 33435 :.,=,~.:--..r-=~-...:.=. :=:...-r- . &IS = ~
-:XHIBIT 111 II
..
EXHIBIT "C"
MAROUF SHELL VARIANCES
5/26/04
Chapter 2, Sec. II Supplemental ReQulations
L.3.d.(1), (3), (4), Driveways
..
(1) No driveway shall be located less than One Hundred Ten (110')
feet from the intersecting right-of-way lines of public streets.
(3) Driveways shall be located less than thirty (30) feet from any interior
property line.
(4) Driveways will be limited to one per street frontage.
(1) Request a variance from this section of the code as the site has only 140 LF
of frontage along N. Federal Highway and 123 LF of frontage on Las Palmas.
Therefore it would be impossible for any driveways to be 110' to meet this
current code.
(3) Due to the fact that this is an existing Gas Station and is only being upgraded
for looks, the driveways must stay in their current locations because the
traffic patterns jhave already been set and cannot be changed. Gasoline
Tankers must be able to enter and leave the premises from the existing
driveways.
(4) Due to the Gasoline Tankers entering and leaving and the location of the fillers
for the tanks, these driveways must remain in their current locations.
L.3.e. (3), Rear Setbacks
Rear Setbacks are required to be 20' and we are proposing only a 10' rear
setback.
L. 3. e. (a). No Canopy shall be located less than 20' from the
property line
The Canopy is 9.5 feet from the front (west) property line. We are requesting a
10.5 foot variance to allow a 9,5 foot front setback for the existing canopy.
L.3.e. (b). No gasoline pump island shall be located less than 30' from any
property line.
The existing gasoline pump island is 19.8 feet from the front (west) property line.
The required front gasoline pump island setback is 30 feet so we are requesting a
variance of 10.2 feet from the front property line to allow the 19.8 foot gasoline
pump island setback.
MAROUF SHELL V ARIANC
Page 2
EXHI BIT "c"
L.3. f. (1) BUFFERS
A 10' wide landscape buffer shall be located along the street frontage. This
buffer shall contain one tree 10' to 15' in height with a minimum 3" caliper
every 30', a continuous hedge 24" high, 24" ole at time of planting with
flowering ground cover.
We do not have a landscape buffer along the westerly street frontage (N. Federal
Hwy.) so we are requesting a variance of 10 feet from the required 10 foot
landscape buffer.
The Landscape buffer we are proposing along the south street frontage (Las
Palmas) is only 5 feet with a requirement of 10 feet. We are therefore requesting a
variance of 5 feet for the 10 foot landscape buffer. We are requesting from the
Engineering Department to be allowed to landscape the area between property line
and the street.
L.4,b Buffers (Interior Property Lines)
(a) A 5' wide landscaped buffer shall be located on all interior property
lines, When the buffer separates the property from other commercial
property, the buffer shall not be required to contain a concrete wall.
Landscaping shall be continuously maintained.
~ i~~ q-.C'#uJlL/,~ ;Jtvd~
Boy/lgf/ Bfa&9attif Q;dTf,ances ~ / ,. 0 ~
Part III Land Development Regulations V /-- CI'/ /Y I ~/
SIGNS '
Chapter 21, Article III,
Sec. 5. Setbacks.
All signs must meet a minimum ten (10) foot setback measured from the
property line to the closest surface of the sign.
The existing sign is currently 8.5 feet from the south property line and 5 feet from
the west property line. Therefore we are requesting a 1.5 foot variance for the
south setback and a 5 foot variance for the west property lines
'~
. g
EXHIBIT "D"
Conditions of Approval
Project name: Gateway Shell (fka Gateway Texaco)
File number: Sign setback ZNCV 03-023
Reference:
DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT
PUBLIC WORKS- General
Comments: None
PUBLIC WORKS- Traffic
Comments: None
UTILITIES
Comments: None
FIRE
Comments: None
POLICE
Comments: None
ENGINEERING DIVISION
Comments: None
BUILDING DIVISION
Comments: None
PARKS AND RECREATION
Comments: None
FORESTERJENVIRONMENT ALIST
Comments: None
PLANNING AND ZONING
Comments: None
ADDITIONAL COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD
COMMENTS
Conditions of Approval
2
I DEPARTMENTS I INCLUDE I REJECT I
Comments:
1. To be determined.
ADDITIONAL CITY COMMISSION COMMENTS
Comments:
2. To be determined.
S:\Planning\SHARED\WP\PROJECTS\Gateway Shell fKa Texaco\New Shell\Variances (revised 2004)\03-023 Sign Setback\COA Sign setback ZNCV 03-
023,doc