The URL can be used to link to this page

Agenda 02-22-24 CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD MEETING AGENDA DATE: Tuesday, February 22, 2022 TIME: 6:30 PM PLACE: City Hall Commission Chambers, 100 E. Ocean Avenue 1. Pledge of Allegiance 2. Roll Call 3. Agenda Approval 4. Approval of Minutes 4.A. Approve board minutes from the 01/25/22 Planning & Development Board meeting. 5. Communications and Announcements: Report from Staff 6. Old Business 7. New Business 7.A. Approve request for a Community Design Appeal (CDPA 22-001) of Chapter 4, Article III, Section 6.F.2.d "Integrated Garages", requiring habitable floor area to wrap all upper levels of the parking structure where the structure has street frontage, in order to disguise the garage's facade and maximize design compatibility for the Broadstone Boynton Beach project proposed for 212 S. Federal Highway. Applicant: Steven Scaggs, DSS Properties L.C. 7.B. Approve request for Major Site Plan Modification (MSPM 22-001) to amend the previously approved site plan with the proposed changes contained herein for the Broadstone Boynton Beach project to allow construction of a mixed-use development consisting of an eight (8)-story building with 274 dwelling units, 13,110 square feet of commercial space, associated recreational amenities, and parking on a 2.76 acre site within the Downtown District. Applicant: Steven Scaggs, DSS Properties L.C. Approve request for Major Master Plan Modification (MPMD 22-002) for Broadstone Boynton Beach to amend the previously approved master plan with the proposed revisions to the concurrent Major Site Plan Modification Application, located at the northeast corner of SE 2nd Avenue and Federal Highway, extending north to one block south of Ocean Avenue and Federal Highway, extending south to SE 2nd Avenue and east to approximately SE 6th Street, in the Mixed-Use Core (MU-C) zoning district. Applicant: Steven Scaggs, DSS Properties L.C. 7.C. Approve requests for Major Site Plan Modification (MSPM 21-001) and Conditional Use (COUS 21-001) approval for Raising Cane's Restaurant including a new 2,771-square foot building with dual drive-through facilities and 68 seats (50 indoor, 18 outdoor) on a BJ's Wholesale Club outparcel located at 1550 West Boynton Beach Boulevard within the Planned Commercial Development (PCD) zoning district. Applicant: Kristina Belt, Kimley Horn &Associates. 8. Other 9. Comments by members 10. Adjournment Page 1 of 91 The Board may only conduct public business after a quorum has been established. If no quorum is established within fifteen minutes of the noticed start time of the meeting, the City Clerk or her designee will so note the failure to establish a quorum and the meeting shall be concluded. Board members may not participate further even when purportedly acting in an informal capacity. Notice Any person who decides to appeal any decision of the planning and development board with respect to any matter considered at this meeting will need a record of the proceedings and for such purpose may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceeding is made, which record includes the testimony, and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. (f. S. 286.0105) The city shall furnish appropriate auxiliary aids and services where necessary to afford an individual with a disability an equal opportunity to participate in and enjoy the benefits of a service, program, or activity conducted by the city. Please contact the City Clerk's office, (561) 742-6060, at least forty-eight (48) hours prior to the program or activity in order for the city to reasonably accommodate your request. Page 2of91 4.4.A. Approval of Minutes 2/22/2022 CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH AGENDA ITEM REQUEST FORM PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT MEETING DATE: 2/22/2022 REQUESTED ACTION BY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD: Approve board minutes from the 01/25/22 Planning & Development Board meeting. EXPLANATION OF REQUEST: HOW WILL THIS AFFECT CITY PROGRAMS OR SERVICES? FISCAL IMPACT: ALTERNATIVES: STRATEGIC PLAN: STRATEGIC PLAN APPLICATION: CLIMATE ACTION APPLICATION: Is this a grant? Grant Amount: ATTACHMENTS: Type Description D Minutes 01/25/22 Minutes Page 3of91 MINUTES PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD ' 100 E. OCEAN AVENUE, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA TUESDAY, JANUARY 25, 2022, 6:30 P.M. PRESENT: STAFF: Trevor Rosecrans, Chair Mike Rumpf, Planning & Zoning Administrator Butch Buoni, Vice Chair Amanda Radigan, Principal Planner Tim Litsch Andrew Meyer, Senior Planner Darren Allen James Cherof, City Attorney Thomas Ramiccio Leslie Harmon, Prototype-Inc. Jay Sobel, Alternate Chris Simon (arrived at 6:38 p.m.) ABSENT: Kevin Fischer GUEST—None. The meeting was called to order at 6:31 p.m. 1. Pledge of Allegiance 2. Roll Call Roll was called and it was determined a quorum was present. 3. Agenda Approval Motion made by Vice Chair Buoni, seconded by Mr. Litsch,to move Item 7C before Item 7A. In a voice vote, the agenda was unanimously approved (7-0). 4. Approval of Minutes 4.A. Approve board minutes from the 11/23/2021 Planning & Development Board meeting. Motion made by Mr. Allen, seconded by Vice Chair Buoni, to approve the November 23, 2021 meeting minutes. In a voice vote, the minutes were unanimously approved. (7-0). 5. Communications and Announcements: Report from Staff Mr. Rumpf, Planning and Development Administrator advised that he heard from Mr. Fischer via telephone, who stated he would be absent. He reported two previous items were passed by the Commission: Development of Land and the Ruskin Avenue Annexation. Page 4of91 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 2 January 25, 2022 6. Old Business -None. 7. New Business Note: Items 7A and 7B were combined and heard after Item 7C. Item 7B was discussed first. 7A. Approve request for 1320 S. Federal Highway Height Exception (HTEX 22-001) to allow tower elements and architectural features to be constructed at 54'-10"in height,9'-10"above the maximum allowable height of 45 feet in the MU-1 (Mixed Use-1) Zoning District. Applicant: TY Eriks MJ Jackson Holdings, LLC. Bradley Miller, with Urban Design Studio, was present on behalf of the applicant. He requested support for the elevator shaft and stairwell to access the rooftop. Motion was made by Mr. Sobel, and seconded by Mr. Litsch, to approve Item 7A, request for a height extension. In a roll call vote, the motion failed. (2-5) Ayes: Litsch, Allen Nays: Buoni, Simon, Ramiccio, Sobel, Rosecrans 7B. Approve request for New Major Site Plan (NWSP 22-002) and Master Plan Modification (MPMD 22-004) for 1320 S. Federal Highway to allow the construction of a 10,898-square- foot structure and associated site improvements, on a 0.51-acre parcel, located at the southeast corner of S. Federal Highway and Riviera Drive, in the MU-1 (Mixed Use-1) Zoning District. Applicant: Ty Eriks, MJ Jackson Holdings, LLC. Bradley Miller, with Urban Design Studio, was present on behalf of the applicant. He provided a brief history of the site and noted that the previous owner of the property did not renew the Site Plan. The new owner purchased the property in February unknowing that the Site Plan had expired. They are requesting Site Plan approval for the approval granted in 2018 for the same 10,898-square-foot,three-story building, and the height exception. In December, they submitted the same application package that was done in 2018 for approval, then staff reviewed it for Codes that might have changed since that time and might alter the plan. There are 32 parking spaces on the site and 13 parallel spaces,which were approved along Riviera Drive. The applicant is a dentist and who is taking the third floor and maybe some of the second floor, depending on how his growth plan goes,but he can lease out the second floor and ground floor. In reviewing the plan, the building needed to be shifted to the east by 2.5 feet due to a Code change. In doing that, they had to shift some parking, so one Handicap parking space was moved to the south side. It was noted the prior plan had some compact spaces and a motorcycle space,which are standard spaces, plus two Handicap spaces. In doing the shift, one parking space was lost,but they are still one space over the required 43;they have a total of 44 parking spaces. They also needed to enlarge some of the landscape islands; the ones in the middle of the parking lot were eight feet and now they are ten feet, so that played into the configuration as well. A four-foot sidewalk was approved, which would be constructed along Riviera Drive and staff requested it be changed to five feet. Those changes were made and that is the Site Plan before the Board. Additional updates were described, and a brief overview of the Site Plan was Page 5of91 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 3 January 25, 2022 given. There was a meeting with neighbors and another meeting will be arranged with residents along Riviera Drive and Snug Harbor. He highlighted key points from the meeting as follows: • Location of the driveway. • Requirement to put a sidewalk on both sides of Riviera Drive. The pavement is offset, and South Harbor residents are concerned the sidewalk may come close to the entry wall or hedge. This will be done through review by staff, but it is not something they are opposed to. • Parking along Riviera Drive and on-street parking. There is a list of criteria that must be met for on-street parking, one of which is design approval by the City Engineer. • On-street parking is often used as a traffic calming factor. • A use list was submitted prior to the packets going out, and uses they felt were not suitable were removed. They will continue working with neighbors before going to the Commission. The applicant is requesting the Board re-support approval of the major Site Plan for the 10,878-square- foot, three-story building, uses that are not part of the Site Plan application, but are on the plan, and the height exception to allow the elevator shaft and stairwells to allow roof access. Chair Rosecrans opened discussion to the public. Susan Hoyer, 140 SW 27th Way, is in favor of the plan; however, she had an issue with the height exception. She mentioned environmental concerns,as well as landscape,electric car chargers,not enough canopy trees, and the pavement. She requested the Board vote yes on Item B and no on Item A. Harriet Snyder, 630 Riviera Drive, indicated that residents are concerned about the proposed ingress/egress from Riviera Drive since it is primarily a residential street; they would like other options to be considered. There is already a problem with the volume of traffic and speeding. She expressed concern regarding parallel parking spaces, especially on the southbound side,traffic stacking on Riviera Drive, the length of the turn lane on Federal Highway, and the amount of traffic once the condominium is built. There are also concerns about the liquor store potential, the restaurant with evening hours, and a drug and alcohol treatment counseling facility. They would like to see daytime hours only as well as "No Parking"signage so there is no overnight parking. In addition to lights and cameras on the building,they need to be in the parking lot. She mentioned potential flooding issues, transient people, trash, and construction concerns regarding trucks, debris, hours, and where parking will be during that time. She submitted a list to be incorporated into the public record,which was provided to the Planning and Zoning Administrator. Linda Warton,lives on Riviera Drive, and is the President of Colonial Center Condominium Association. She spoke on behalf of the Condominium residents and noted there is a concern the new building will block their sign on the street. They need assistance moving the sign or making it visible. They are also concerned about overflow parking, the roof deck, parties and noise, the use of retail space, if there will be a bus station, and encouraged outdoor activities. Kathleen Henderson, 654 Riviera Drive, expressed concern regarding traffic obstruction and bike riding. She does not think there is a need for street parking. Page 6of91 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 4 January 25, 2022 Tom Ward, 650 Riviera Drive, asked City Attorney Cherof if this item could be postponed until they can secure legal counsel and expert testimony to review the plans in more detail. He noticed a few things that do not look to scale and expressed concern regarding traffic. He understands this is a residential roadway and asked how to find the difference between a residential roadway and a local roadway. City Attorney Cherof stated that he will provide an answer at the appropriate time, if the Board wants to take up that kind of issue. Mr. Simon acknowledged what happens at this meeting does not dictate what happens with the Commission. Chair Rosecrans advised this Board is advisory and members are volunteers with different levels of expertise. Whether they vote yes or no, the journey of this agenda item continues. Mr. Ward questioned if any of the Board members would be available to tour the site and several Board members replied they are familiar with the area. Candy Killian, 642 Riviera Drive,thanked the Board members for their service. She stated the objection with this project is three-fold; there will be parallel parking on Riviera Drive, access to the project will add a fourth point of ingress and egress to Riviera Drive, the access point is too close to the part of Riviera Drive that goes to the single-family homes; Riviera Drive is a dead-end street that services three communities, which is approximately 500 residents, and vehicles are already using Riviera Drive to get to their homes or offices. They request parallel parking be eliminated from Riviera Drive,reduce the size of the building by the square footage necessary to eliminate the 13 parallel parking spaces, and that the site be self-contained with access to the commercial building be off Federal Highway and not a residential street. She provided a picture of a building located at 709 South Federal Highway that has an entrance through the building with parking in the back; that site would be a compromise that might work. Bill Fritts, 652 Castillo Lane, seconded everything that has been said. This is a residential neighborhood, and he is not trying to stand in the way of progress, but there are considerations. They are not opposed to Commercial, they need it and like it, but it needs to be consistent with the preponderance of the community, which is residential. Jason Lazelle, 647 Riviera Drive, mentioned the fourth floor and noted that people will be looking down and watching people in their pools. He thinks the height ratio needs to be lowered without adding an upstairs area. If the elevator is an issue, maybe the stairs could be used. Captain Jeffrey Hofberger, 643 Riviera Drive, commented that the roundabout, drainage, and speeding need to be fixed and there needs to be an additional speed bump. He is not in favor of the height variance. Keith Thompson,644 Riviera Drive,agreed with everything said.He expressed concern regarding traffic, street parking, ingress and egress, and height. Page 7of91 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 5 January 25, 2022 Ted Koson, 624 Snug Harbor Drive, agreed with everyone. He noted people are using Snug Harbor parking and he believes a four-story building will be an eyesore. Ernest Mignoli, 710 NE 7t' Street, commented that every time these developments are constructed it destroys the neighborhoods east of Federal Highway. Mr. Miller addressed parking concerns and stated this is not a residential road designation. The rooftop bar is not part of the proposal; access to the roof was at most offered to employees. There was a suggestion to eliminate elevator use and encourage use of the stairwell;the height exception is necessary for both, and the access location is appropriate. They are working on a Conditional Use of businesses. They will look at the residential community, but the community is behind a Commercial Zoning area, and the Mixed-Use is following the CRA Code. Harriet Snyder, resident, urged the Planning and Development Board postpone this decision so staff can work to address the issues brought forth and incorporate resolution of the issues into a revised Site Plan with a smaller building and parking spaces staying within their site. Mr. Miller indicated one of the common discussion points was about parallel parking. The application process is to comply with the Code, which staff has reviewed, and they consider the plan to be in compliance. This is not a Conditional Use situation; parallel parking spaces are allowed and count towards parking for a development. Regarding residential roads, he did not know if there is a residential road classification; he used local road in the letter provided because it matches with the diagram in the City's Code to match the cross section for the roadway and it complies. The rooftop bar is not part of the proposal, access is to get to the rooftop, and originally the application was considering yoga classes. At the most, employees would be allowed to go on the rooftop during restricted hours. There is a comment about eliminating the elevator and using the stairwell; however, a height exception is needed for either one. The stacking and access location is the same location as it was from IHOP and it is there for a reason. From a Planning standpoint, it is a practice to try to separate the driveway from the main intersection; it is a traffic and Planning design they look at when planning. There were a few things about the use of a liquor store, restaurant, and counseling, but as mentioned, a list was provided and they have not had an opportunity to get with them. They would be happy to work on that list and come up with a condition that is agreeable to both sides. Regarding blocking the Colonial Center sign, they will look at that and if something needs to be done, they will work with them. There is a residential community behind the Commercial properties on Federal Highway. It had C-3 Zoning before, which allowed the not wanted uses, and Mixed-Use is following the Code as to what the CRA Redevelopment Plan proposed in 2017, which the Commission has followed. They believed everything submitted is a good plan, it meets the Code, and complies with all the rules and regulations of the Code. City Attorney Cherof asked if the Board wants his opinion regarding the authority to table. The Board does not have the authority to table and the Code is clear that only the City Commission can table a proposed Development Order. The process described that this Board is advisory and reports to the Commission, which would be another Quasi-Judicial Hearing, where they have the opportunity to table at that point. Page 8of91 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 6 January 25, 2022 Mr. Ramiccio mentioned parking and questioned if it is customary for the City to allow the calculation for parking on on-street parking. He asked if staff would encourage on-street parking. Mr. Rumpf indicated it is a new section of Code to promote use of on-street parking. He noted there is on-street parking where preexisting parking exists up against a new development. He would encourage on-street parking; it is a local street. This project is planned for this type of use, and this is not the only location on Federal Highway where there is a Commercial Use in between the highway and a single- family neighborhood. The height is respectful of that, and they are sensitive to setbacks and separations. Mr. Ramiccio asked if it is possible to remove the parapet wall to make it come into compliance with the height restriction; he wants the City to comply with height and parking. He realized they were looking at the CRA Plan from 2017, but it might be time to revisit that Plan. Mr. Rumpf stated they might be able to get a cross section of the elevation. Mr. Miller advised it is both the elevator shaft and the stairwell. The roof deck is below 45 feet, which is how the height is measured. It is a flat roof except for the elevator shaft and stairwells. The portions they are asking for a height exception are for the elevator shaft to be able to go up there and have access as well as the stairwells. Chair Rosecrans questioned the purpose of the stairwell going to the roof and if a roof hatch would suffice. Mr. Miller stated the elevator going to the roof is for access and he thought some was for the architectural feature and symmetry. Mr. Sobel questioned if they considered not having an elevator to the fourth floor and if the elevator was needed if the roof was not being used for any type of interaction. He asked if the elevator and doors would be ADA compliant and if this plan or a different plan with changes would be presented. He also questioned the impact and what would happen to the project if parking could not be counted. Mr. Miller stated they have not gotten to that level of design on the doors. They might revisit elevator access to the fourth floor if it is not approved; there are options for continuation and access. Regarding the elevator, the shaft needs to go a little above to be able to get to the third level stop, so the shaft is designed to be able to provide roof access. The architect would have to develop a design for the elevator and shaft to keep it from going to the fourth floor and they would have to look at how access to the fourth floor would be achieved. He did not have an answer as to which plan would be developed. As far as parking, square footage would be reduced to 2,600 square feet. He spoke to the applicant to see if they would be aggregable to a condition to restrict hours to employees. Mr. Sobel questioned if this plan would be presented to the City Commission or if they would also provide a long list. Page 9of91 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 7 January 25, 2022 Mr. Miller stated they have not talked about that. This plan is part of the application so it will move forward. He did not know if they had an alternative plan for the height exception component. Mr. Litsch questioned if there would be electric charging stations and if they could be charged simultaneously or if it would be sequential. He noted there is an abandoned FP&L utility and asked what that was earmarked for and if it is being allocated. Mr. Miller advised both spaces are charged, and they are anticipating doing two more in addition to the two on the plan. The FP&L utility is an above-ground powerline, which basically goes nowhere. Mr. Simon discussed the City Code regarding on-street parking, height restriction,parapet, architectural features, and rooftop equipment. This project can be great without the fourth floor. He thinks the configuration of the building can be redesigned; it can be a staggered building offset. He is against the position of the building. The building is blocking signage to the neighbor on the north and he does not think it is fair. He noted that traffic calming causes more damage to vehicles. He asked about landscape open space requirements and mentioned rental space under an overhang. He requested the applicant reconsider the design. Amanda Radigan, Principal Planner, advised this is where there is existing Zoning on the ground as well as a Redevelopment Plan that is shifting the design. It still requires the site to be re-approved in a new location, but they are putting some flexibility into the Codes recognizing there will be some shifting as this area is implemented. Mr. Simon questioned if they would have to apply for a new sign since the situation is blocking an existing sign,which adds unforeseen costs to the property owner. He mentioned FDOT will not allow the curb cut on the west side based on the proximity to Riviera Drive itself. He questioned the distance and asked if they can push that towards the north end of the property and if it would give enough distance. Ms. Radigan acknowledged shifting as the CRA Plan is implemented. The existing building would need to apply for a new sign location. Brian Kelly, Traffic Engineer for Simmons & White, explained the FDOT requirement is 245 feet. By spacing 245 feet from Riviera Drive, he thinks the whole frontage is 100 feet maximum. Mr. Simon questioned if setting the curb cut at the southwest portion of the property line is an option. Mr. Kelly stated it would be a poor engineering and planning practice,typically driveways are as far away from major arterial roadways as possible. The location shown to the far east is the best design,particularly for any kind of stacking and maneuverability; from a design and safety perspective, this is the best approach. In his experience, speed bumps cause damage to the vehicles that use it the most; roundabouts might be a better traffic calming solution because it is flush. He mentioned the length of the required landscape open space percentage on the site, and noted it is not shown on the plan. Page 10 of 91 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 8 January 25, 2022 Ms. Radigan commented that the City Engineering Department has similar regulations as FDOT as to how close the driveway could be. The Landscape Architect did not have the exact calculations; his recollection was that there was no minimum pervious and impervious; it comes down to a design standpoint. Mr. Rumpf stated it is a factor of drainage requirements. The islands and green space are a factor of numbered spaces and sizes of the trees required. The City has some green standards, but the Code only requires landscape islands, buffers, and tree count based on the number of spaces. Ms. Radigan indicated only the District requires small buffers and there is not an across-the-board standard for all Districts. Mr. Sobel stated for the record that he would vote against the height variance. He hopes when this is presented to the City Commission that they at least consider an option without the fourth-floor elevator and stairwell. Vice Chair Buoni commended residents for their input and asked them to raise their hand if they attended the 2018 Board meeting. He noted that the Board does listen to what is said. Chair Rosecrans mentioned the Art Museum and thought as part of past approval, art is going to be provided by the owner. He questioned if there is currently a source for the art. Mr. Miller stated he has a several colored Site Plans. He did not think the applicant has an art collection, but it is something they will work on to find a connection. Chair Rosecrans commented that the stairwell and elevator seem to be the need. If they got rid of the stairwell and put in a roof hatch, the parapet would be within Code and the equipment for the elevator could be reduced. Mr. Miller indicated the height exception would be a consistent line across the top parapet line without the components going above it. He noted that 45 feet goes to the roof deck and then there is an extra five feet for the parapet. Chair Rosecrans mentioned the need for the stairwell and the elevator maintenance room and asked if they would stop the height exception and move forward with the Site Plan. He asked if improvements were done to Riviera Drive in the previous Site Plan and if there were any conditions. Mr. Miller stated the section that runs along the frontage of the property would be modified to help with drainage; it is exfiltration, and it all falls to the catch basis on Riviera Drive. The drainage issue is going to the right place; there is currently no system on the property, so everything runs to that spot. Page 11 of 91 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 9 January 25, 2022 Motion was made by Mr. Sobel, and seconded by Mr. Litsch, to approve Item 713, the Site Plan for construction at 1320 South Federal Highway. In a roll call vote,the motion passed with Mr. Simon, Mr. Allen, and Mr. Ramiccio in opposition. (4-3). Ayes: Rosecrans, Buoni, Litsch, Sobel Nays: Simon, Allen, Ramiccio Chair Rosecrans asked that the Board entertain a condition of approval that the stairwell and elevator equipment be removed, and the height be reduced. City Attorney Cherof indicated a condition of approval was not necessary. Note: There was a recess between Items 7A and 7B at 8:46 p.m. The meeting resumed at 8:53 p.m. Note: Item 7C was heard prior to Items 7A and 7B. 7C. Approve WXEL request for Future Land Use Map Amendment (LUAR-22-001) from Recreation (R) to Office Commercial (OC), and Rezoning from Recreation (REC) to Office Professional (C-1), property located at 3401 South Congress Avenue. Applicant: Gene H. Talley, South Florida PBS, Inc. Bradley Miller, with Urban Design Studio, representing WXEL, spoke on behalf of the applicant. The current Land Use and Zoning is Recreation instead of the Office Building and the application is to change the Land Use and Zoning to an Office designation. At some part of this application,the proposed Site Plan Amendment is staff approval, but they need the Land Use and Zoning change to clean up the Land Use Map and Zoning Map to reflect the current present uses; the Map currently shows Recreational. The change to the Land Use will be from Recreational to Office Commercial, which would bring the use that has been there for 30 years to be consistent with the Land Use as mentioned. The same follows with the Zoning Map, which they are requesting be changed from Recreation to Office Professional for the same reason. He cannot show a Site Plan because they still have to go through that process, but they are adding about a 7,000-square-foot addition to the front of the building,which will add additional space that could be used by the community for different events. A 3-1) dome is shown, which they are putting inside to be used for school field trips. Chair Rosecrans opened the item for public comments. Mr. Sobel mentioned the property currently has a restriction on the deed, which says it is used to be used for Recreation and TV stations. He questioned if the future issue of the Cultural Arts Center is consistent with the restriction on the deed. Mr. Rumpf stated it is all still part of the bypassing station. Mr. Sobel commented that while on the Zoning Board up north,they avoided spot zoning; they would not spot zone a particular site to make it different than the north,south,or west side. The north is a recreational Page 12 of 91 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 10 January 25, 2022 area, the south is a plain unit community, and the west is a plain unit community. He stated if the Zoning is changed, the future property own.er would be allowed to build a Commercial four-story building imposing on a plain community of one-story homes. He objects and does not understand why staff is supporting this. If they grant the variance to build what they want,nothing will restrict them from anything they want to do in compliance with the deed restriction, but they will never have to see a three-story building. He asked the Board to vote no based on a variety of reasons; he thinks this would be a bad move on the future of that area and there is nothing to gain by the residents or the current property owner. Chair Rosecrans asked for a staff response. Mr. Rumpf indicated the variance process in their regulations does not apply to uses, so someone cannot get a variance to deviate from Zoning Districts. Under the current Zoning Use, even if there is an underlying deed restriction, a clean switch will allow the expansion. The maximum height in C-I is 30 feet. Regarding spot zoning, in his professional opinion, it is a different Zoning District to those around it and he referenced Case Law. Mr. Sobel stated he drove around the property and noted there is a building in the back that looks to be a few stories, which he assumed was 20 feet with no windows overlooking the residential homes. He did not see the gain to the community and thinks neighboring sites would be offended by someone building a 30-foot building with windows overlooking their backyards, as their right to privacy is violated. He suggested staff consider giving the TV Station what they want, let them build the Center as a valuable addition,without exposing the community and residents to a possible undesirable scenario. He questioned if the TV Station wants the change and if they requested the change. Mr. Miller advised that the TV Station wants to follow the City's regulations, Land Use Plan, Comprehensive Plan, and the Zoning Code. The variance is not the appropriate procedure according to City regulations. To change the use would require another Public Hearing with a proposed plan and an opportunity for the public to speak. This request is to take what is currently there and bring it into compliance with the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Plan. Mr. Sobel reiterated he does not find anything about this applicable and he will vote no on this. He does not think it is asking too much of the City to have them come back and let the public speak. Residents in Plantation Isles are in favor of the building, but their biggest concern is what the future has in store for them, which is unknown. By adopting the measure tonight, they are exposing the public to the vague reason of the future. He does not think it is necessary and he believes they can accomplish everything they want by giving them the variance and letting them do whatever they want with the building, and then there will be no objection. Mr. Miller asked City Attorney Cherof if there is a way to condition the Zoning. He also asked if a variance application is a way to resolve nonconforming. City Attorney Cherof advised that is not the issue before the Board, they have a specific agenda item in front of them that does not contain that component. In his opinion, this is not the way to resolve nonconforming. Page 13 of 91 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 11 January 25, 2022 Chair Rosecrans questioned how this affects the Deed restriction. City Attorney Cherof replied it does not. Chair Rosecrans mentioned they would still be restricted to non-profit. City Attorney Cherof stated that is correct, the Deed restriction is only affected by the Board or Commission's action on this agenda item. Mr. Simon asked Mr. Miller if he was saying they could not change their desire by requesting a variance to build a one-story building. City Attorney Cherof replied he was not saying that at all;he said the item before the Board is appropriate to dispose. Mr. Simon questioned if they still had an option to come back or if their option was cut off from coming back to request a variance to build a one-story building or a Cultural Center in the future. City Attorney Cherof indicated in his opinion a variance would not be a suitable matter to become before the Board for what they want to accomplish. Mr. Simon commented that they do not know what the future Site Plan is, and he wanted to be clear that they are not able to make any changes without changing Zoning. Based on current Zoning, they cannot make changes without Site Plan approval. He questioned what the requirements would be for the Site Plan to provide for safety and noise. Mr. Miller advised they are not expanding parking anywhere to the north, parking is on the west side closer to the lake immediately to the west. The addition is proposed on the front side of the building on the east side, so there is no significant change to the northern side. Mr. Litsch mentioned that the property was transferred by the City of Boynton Beach to South Florida Public Television and the Deed Restriction was put in the Deed as a perpetual restriction that would go to all subsequent Deeds. Even if the property were sold to someone who would not observe the Deed Restriction, he asked if the City would have recourse against that party. He questioned why it has taken from 1986 to 2019 to catch this. Mr. Rumpf indicated staff can only put so much effort into cleaning up certain things. He noted there was action on development in 2019. Chair Rosecrans opened discussion to the public. Ernest Mignoli, 710 NE 7t' Street, Boynton Beach, also known as Harbor Hall, commented that most of what happens in Boynton Beach directly or indirectly affects where he lives. His experience is even if this Board votes no, it goes back to the Mayor,the Commission, and the City Attorney, and they approve it anyway. Motion was made by Mr. Litsch, and seconded by Mr. Ramiccio,to approve Item 7C. In a roll call vote, the motion passed with Mr. Sobel in opposition. (6-1) Page 14 of 91 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 12 January 25, 2022 Ayes: Rosecrans, Buoni, Simon, Litsch, Allen, Ramiccio Nays: Sobel 7D. Approve modifications to Chapter 2, Article II, Section 2, Standard Applications to revise review criteria for future Land Use Map and Zoning Amendments (CDRV 22-003). Andrew Meyer, Senior Planner,presented the Future Land Use Map and Re-zoning Amendment Review Criteria, which is an amendment to the Code to clean up Code language. • Combining the existing Future Land Use Map Amendments and Rezoning Criteria into one set of criteria as these applications are generally processed concurrently. • Clarifying the review criteria sections to be more relevant in the assessment of the applications and are requiring documents for Master Plan applications. • Updating the threshold for Future Land Use Amendments, so the Code is in line with Florida Statutes. There are multiple review criteria to reflect City Codes regarding Economic Development and Mobility, consideration of trends, access to mobility options, and the CRA Plan. • Working on updating criteria titles to better reflect intent and introduce location, efficiency, and heavy commercial. Chair Rosecrans opened discussion to the public: Ernest Mignoli, 710 NE 7t' Street, commented that the City Commission does not listen to this Board, and this Board has no impact. The Board deceived the public with a bait and switch on Item 7B. Chair Rosecrans reminded Mr. Mignoli to stay on topic and not obstruct the Board. Mr. Litsch questioned if the proposed Amendments would affect the WXEL issue by combining Rezoning and the Land Use Maps into one item. Mr. Meyer replied no,the combination of review criteria would still have had the same level of intensity as it would today. There would not be any impact on the review or determination of the previous item had this implemented before. Mr. Simon asked if there would be an increase in the documentation and if it provides more detailed information on things that were not necessarily part of an application, but they are now. Mr. Meyer stated the additional documentation for Master Planning applications refers to the request of a bubble diagram. Often, Master Planning applications do not have a bubble diagram, they just have a Site Plan. This document is clarifying when a bubble diagram would be needed versus a Site Plan. Motion was made by Mr. Sobel, and seconded by Mr. Simon, to approve Item 7D. In a voice vote, the motion passed unanimously. (7-0) 7E. Approve amendments to Chapter 1, Article II, Use Definitions, Chapter 3 Zoning, and Chapter 4, Article V. Minimum off-street parking requirements addressing Medical Care or Testing (In-patient), Beverage Manufacturing, Micro-Brewery, Brew Pub, Tap Room Brewery, and Take Out Restaurant Uses (CDRV 22-002). Page 15 of 91 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 13 January 25, 2022 Andrew Meyer, Senior Planner, presented a brief overview of the Amendments to Chapter 1, Article II, Use Definitions, Chapter 3 Zoning, and Chapter 4, Article V, which includes several subjects. • Medical Care or Testing (In-patient) • Micro-Brewery, Brew Pub, and Tap Room Brewery • Take-out restaurants Currently, Medical Offices are permitted in the C-1 Office Professional Zoning District, which is compatible with Residential daytime operations. Other uses provide 24-hour client/care testing, and currently this Conditional Use approval required in the C-1 Office Professional Zoning District, within 50 feet to the property line of any use of abutting Residential. When a use is proposed within 50 feet of a Residential property line, it requires a Conditional Use. Locations of lesser intensity were looked at to determine if they are compatible or more similar with Standard Medical Office Use; locations include Medical Offices along collector streets. The proposed Amendment is lower intensive for in-patient medical uses, providing services or testing commonly require less than 24 hours of in-patient stays, and those that appear and function in conventional Office Uses that would not be any different than a Standard Office Use. Brewery usage includes Micro Distillery Micro-Brew, Brew Pub, and Tap Room Uses. Breweries producing between 1,000 and 7,500 barrels per year represent the largest growth in the industry,provided these are complimentary Commercial components. These types of breweries are not linked to large distribution type breweries,they are a little smaller. Staff has received increasing inquiries regarding the establishment of Micro-Brewery, Brew Pub, and Tap Room Uses on properties zoned Commercial or Mixed-Use. Currently, any establishment that produces alcoholic drinks falls under Beverage Manufacturing, which is restricted to C-4, General Commercial, Wine Industrial, and PID, which is the Planning Industrial Development. This is the introduction of four uses. A Brewery is an Industrial Use, similar to Beverage Manufacturing, which is how breweries are currently classified, and they produce alcoholic beverages. There are no limits on production and a Commercial component is optional. No food services are allowed; they create an additional parking demand and cannot be accommodated by these types of Zoning Districts. This includes Winery and Distillery. Micro-Brewery produces a maximum of 3,000 barrels per year and it combines manufacturing and distribution of alcoholic beverages with on-site food service. It is more of a Commercial component and is publicly accessible. A Commercial component is required as part of this. The Tap Room and Brew Room Uses are similar, but they are both restricted to a maximum of 1,500 barrels per year. Anything produced on site is exclusively for on-site consumption, so there is no distribution allowed; no trucks coming in and out; everything must be served on site. The Tap Room is regulated like a bar use and a Brew Pub would be regulated like a Restaurant Use. Brew Pubs,which are similar to restaurants, are permitted by right in all Non-Residential Zoning Districts, and they are also allowed accessory, public use, and recreation. The rest are going to be permitted through a Conditional Use. A brewery would be permitted in C-4 and a Micro-Brewery is a Commercial Use in all Commercial Use and Mixed-Use Districts, except C-1 and C-2 where they are not permitted. A Tap Room would be C-3 and C-4. Page 16 of 91 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 14 January 25, 2022 The last proposed Amendment is take-out restaurants. Staff has noticed growth in the take-out, delivery industry in the popularity of third-parry delivery companies. There is a new type of take-out restaurant emerging and these fulfill orders exclusively from third-parry delivery apps. These uses that only deliver through third-parry apps differ from standard take-out restaurants because customer visits are brief,their order is placed on the app ahead of time and there is no waiting on site, customers are only there to pick up their order that is ready. It does not require high traffic exposure. Currently, take-out restaurants are permitted in M-1 if they are along collective and arterial roadways and do not exceed 25,000 square feet. They are proposing the take-out restaurants would be permitted within M-1 without roadway restrictions and the same limits on multi-tenant developments and size; transactions must be tendered off site prior to the customer arriving on site. Chair Rosecrans opened discussion to the public. Ernest Mignoli, 710 NE 7t' Street, mentioned medical and in-patient, and questioned if they are looking to allow less than 24-hour service in more locations. He asked if the public would know if they were trying to expand something and how it would affect them. Regarding breweries, he asked if there is an effort in Boynton Beach to compete with places like Delray, where wine, alcohol, rooftops, etc. Mr. Meyer indicated the question is if they are expanding uses within the City, and that is not the case. This Amendment is proposing in-patient uses that fall under specific criteria; it is a waste of staff's time and is a process to bring it through a Conditional Use if it meets specific criteria they are proposing as part of these Amendments. It is already an approved Conditional Use in these locations; however, if uses vary in terms of function and how they affect the neighborhood, the Planning and Development Administrator has the option to waive the Conditional Use requirement for these uses. Mr. Simon asked if they were trying to allow a doctor to perform surgeries or procedures in their home. Mr. Meyer stated that would apply to the C-1 Office Professional Zoning District, which does not currently permit Residential. No doctor is going to be allowed to perform a procedure in his house. Regarding the proposed brewery uses, they are allowed under Beverage Manufacturer and as part of the Amendments, they are changing the definition of Beverage Manufacturers and non-alcoholic beverages and introducing the use of brewery to capture the uses. The introduction of Tap Rooms and Brew Pubs are like bar and restaurant uses. The reason for the separate use is the manufacturing component on site and there are restrictions as to distribution and things like that. It is accommodating the new types of uses in the City, as there has been an increase in inquiries for them from the public. The Micro-Brewery is kind of a mix between the fully Commercial and fully Industrial. Mr. Litsch mentioned ghost kitchens, which is for places that work solely on applications. Mr. Meyer advised those are standalone operations where ordering and payment is online, and someone brings the food to you. This Amendment is intended for facilities that operate solely on apps. This allows them to move into smaller Industrial spaces that does not require the height, street frontage, etc., but parking standards are proposed; the required parking ratio will be one parking space per 350 square feet. Page 17 of 91 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 15 January 25, 2022 Mr. Simon requested clarification of restaurant criteria and mentioned the parking allotment. He asked for clarification of food services at breweries and noted there were limitations that this Amendment would be held to the industry. Ms. Radigan clarified parking is a minimum of one per 350 square feet and the use is restricted to 2,500 square feet, so they are looking at about seven or eight spaces. The Code has a minimum of four spaces required for any Commercial use. Mr. Meyer stated the Micro-Brewery will include food service on-site. The intent of the Micro-Brewery is to serve food on the premises. Breweries will still be allowed to have food trucks outside, but not within the walls of the establishment. Mr. Buoni mentioned medical and testing and noted that in a past situation it was said there cannot be testing in the same place someone stays overnight. He asked if that is included or if anything will change. Mr. Meyer indicated it is not because of leniency in regulations; it will be covered by the changes. Mr. Buoni questioned if any input was received from breweries or any destinations regarding alcohol issues listed. Mr. Meyer stated they consulted with people involved in the industry to get an idea of the use, trends, and sizes, and that is how they came to those conclusions. Mr. Rumpf advised this is an attempt to meet a request from a restaurant and brewery in town to work collaboratively. They looked at Industry standards and best plans and practices and they did not come up with a conclusion of allowing the business model they wanted. He noted the changes would not affect statutory requirements for medical places. Regarding breweries,this was a collaborative effort with local businesses and the City. Chair Rosecrans asked about the take-out, grease traps, and sewer, and questioned if that would have to be provided and improved if they move into a Commercial warehouse. Mr. Meyer replied that improvements would be needed. Motion was made by Mr. Simon, seconded by Vice Chair Buoni, to approve Item 7E. In a voice vote, the motion passed unanimously. (7-0) 8. Other —None. 9. Comments by Members —None. 10. Adjournment Upon Motion duly made and seconded, the meeting at was adjourned at 9:33 p.m. [Minutes prepared by C. Guifarro,Prototype,Inc.] Page 18 of 91 7.7.A. New Business 2/22/2022 CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH AGENDA ITEM REQUEST FORM PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT MEETING DATE: 2/22/2022 REQUESTED ACTION BY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD: Approve request for a Community Design Appeal (CDPA 22-001) of Chapter 4, Article 111, Section 6.F.2.d "Integrated Garages", requiring habitable floor area to wrap all upper levels of the parking structure where the structure has street frontage, in order to disguise the garage's facade and maximize design compatibility for the Broadstone Boynton Beach project proposed for 212 S. Federal Highway. Applicant: Steven Scaggs, DSS Properties L.C. EXPLANATION OF REQUEST: The applicant is requesting approval for a Community Design Appeal (CDPA 22-001) of Chapter 4, Article 111, Section 6.F.2.d "Integrated Garages", which requires habitable floor area to wrap all upper-levels of the parking structure where the structure has frontage along a public right-of-way. The request for relief is concurrent with the Major Master Plan Modification (MPMD 22-002) and Major Site Plan Modification (MSPM 22-001) Applications for the proposed alterations to the previously approved site plan now titled Broadstone Boynton Beach. In lieu of wrapping the parking structure with habitable floor area, the applicant proposes alternative architectural facade treatments such as open metal frames designed to appear as window fenestrations, metal frame panels which resemble metal railings that will be used on the balconies, metal canopies along the ground floor and at strategic locations on the upper levels, artistic metal screening, stucco banding, raised stucco surrounds, and architectural articulation through recesses, projections, and variations in the roofline where the parking structure fronts SE 1St Avenue. Staff has determined that the applicant has sufficiently addressed the intent of the "integrated garages" code section with the aforementioned proposed architectural enhancements and therefore recommends APPROVAL of the request, subject to the accompanying conditions. HOW WILL THIS AFFECT CITY PROGRAMS OR SERVICES? N/A FISCAL IMPACT: N/A ALTERNATIVES: None recommended STRATEGIC PLAN: STRATEGIC PLAN APPLICATION: N/A CLIMATE ACTION APPLICATION: N/A Page 19 of 91 Is this a grant? Grant Amount: ATTACHMENTS: Type Description D Staff Report Staff Report D Location Map Exhibit A® Location Map D Drawings Exhibit B ® Project Plans D Exhibit Exhibit C ® Justification Statement D Conditions of Approval Exhibit D ® Conditions of Approval Page 20 of 91 DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PLANNING AND ZONING DIVISION MEMORANDUM NO. PZ 22-009 STAFF REPORT TO: Chair and Members Planning and Development Board THRU: Michael Rumpf Planning and Zoning Administrator FROM: Amanda B. Radigan, Principal Planner Craig Pinder, Planner II DATE: February 11, 2022 PROJECT: Broadstone Boynton Beach CDPA 22-001 REQUEST: Approve request for a Community Design Appeal of Chapter 4, Article III, Section 6.F.2.d "Integrated Garages", requiring habitable floor area to wrap all upper levels of the parking structure where the structure has street frontage, in order to disguise the garage's facade and maximize design compatibility. Property Owner: Multiple Owners (see Exhibit Al) Applicant: Steven Scaggs, DSS Properties L.C. Agent: Bonnie Miskel and Beth Schrantz, Dunay, Miskel, Backman, LLP Location: 212 S. Federal Highway (Additional Parcels Included) Site Details: The applicant has submitted development applications for a Major Site Plan Modification, Major Master Plan Modification, and Community Design Appeal for a mixed-use project known as Broadstone Boynton Beach, which proposes an eight-story mixed-use building with 274 multi-family units, approximately 13,110 square feet of commercial space, recreational amenities, parking, and other related site improvements. The proposed site plan shows the placement of the building along S. Federal Highway, SE 2nd Avenue, and SE 1St Avenue. NATURE OF REQUEST Bonnie Miskel and Beth Schrantz are requesting approval of a Community Design Appeal of Chapter 4, Article III, Section 6.F.2.d "integrated garages", which requires habitable floor area to wrap all upper-levels of the parking structure where the structure has frontage along a public right-of-way. Page 21 of 91 Broadstone Boynton Beach (CDPA 22-001) Memorandum No PZ 22-009 Page 2 BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS The application submitted for Community Design Appeal is pursuant to the Land Development Regulations (LDR) Chapter 4, Article III, Section 6.F.2.d "integrated garages", which requires habitable floor area to wrap all upper-levels of the parking structure where the structure has frontage along a public right-of-way. Any deviation from the exterior building and site design standards is subject to review and approval by the City Commission. As described, the integrated parking garage is proposed to front SE 1St Avenue without being wrapped with habitable floor area, and accordingly, is the subject of this appeal request. The applicant has submitted a Justification Statement (Exhibit "C") dated January 21, 2022 addressing each of the following review criteria for such applications: a) Whether the proposed request will demonstrate consistency with the Comprehensive Plan; b) Whether the proposed request will not significantly detract from the livability or appearance of the city and will be consistent with the established or desired character of the area, or with the redevelopment plan, where applicable; c) On balance, whether the proposed request will be consistent with the purpose of the standard for which a deviation is requested. Granting the request will equally or better meet the purpose of the standard to be appealed; d) Whether the proposed request is intended to save or preserve existing trees or desired flora; e) Whether the proposed request will have adverse environmental impacts that cannot be prevented by the imposition of conditions; fl Whether the proposed request will have an adverse impact on property values of abutting or adjacent land; g) Whether the proposed request will seriously reduce the quality or quantity of light and air available to adjacent properties; h) Whether the proposed request is necessary to further the objectives of the City to assist with economic development and business promotion; and i) Whether the proposed request meets the purpose and intent of these regulations but conflicts with another site development standard or requirement, including sustainable development and green initiatives. The proposed building site totals 120,347 square feet or 2.76 acres,with developed commercial properties to the north, S. Federal Highway to the west, developed commercial properties on the northeast, a multifamily development on the southeast, SE 2nd Avenue to the south, then developed commercial properties farther to the south. The proposed mixed-use development is comprised of one structure including commercial space and private recreational amenities on the ground floor, multi-family units on levels two through eight, and an eight-floor integrated parking structure. As shown in the attached Justification Statement (pages 2-3), a portion of the integrated parking garage fronts SE 1 st Avenue for approximately 78'6", with the remainder of the north elevation fronting the ground floor recreation amenities within the site. This represents a modification from the original footprint of the parking structure in order to increase the percentage of usable open space from 2.1% to 40.77%. The revised footprint ensures that the viewshed from SE 1St Avenue does not terminate at a parking garage ingress/egress, instead it provides a view to landscaped active outdoor amenities and habitable space in the residential building. Page 22 of 91 Broadstone Boynton Beach (CDPA 22-001) Memorandum No PZ 22-009 Page 3 The strict application of the site design standards for integrated garages, in this instance, would require habitable floor area to wrap a portion of the garage where street level activity is anticipated to be minimal due in part to the partial abandonment of SE 1St Avenue. In addition, providing habitable space or additional dwelling units along this portion of the parking structure will significantly reduce the number of parking spaces and impact vehicular circulation within the parking structure, thereby rendering the project unfeasible. Moreover, this portion of SE 1St Avenue services parking areas and "back-of-house" uses for the commercial properties fronting E. Ocean Avenue. In lieu of wrapping the parking structure with habitable floor area, the applicant proposes alternative architectural fagade treatments such as open metal frames designed to appear as window fenestrations, metal frame panels which resemble metal railings that will be used on the residential balconies, metal canopies along the ground floor and at strategic locations on the upper levels, artistic metal screening, stucco banding, raised stucco surrounds, and architectural articulation through recesses, projections, and variations in the roofline where the parking structure fronts SE 1St Avenue. This proposal allows for the elevation of the parking structure to be designed to appear as habitable space and remain consistent with the architectural design language of the building. RECOMMENDATION Staff has reviewed this request for Community Design Appeal approval. Based on the analysis contained herein, staff recommends approval contingent upon City Commission approval of concurrent requests for the Major Site Plan Modification and Major Master Plan Modification, and satisfying all comments indicated in Exhibit "C" — Conditions of Approval. Any additional conditions recommended by the Board or City Commission shall be documented accordingly in the Conditions of Approval. \\Fps\main\SHRDATA\Planning\SHARED\WP\PROJECTS\Broadstone(FKA GCI-Legacy)\_Staff Report\CDPA 22-001 Staff Report.docx Page 23 of 91 LOCATION MAP Exhibit A2 LU z � z _ � s W. ,4 ,f1 E Ocean Ave f° �t {' 4f c s 5 r � � � SE-2nd Ave i t� 4 r� Page 24 of 91 Exhibit B - Project Plans Page 25 of 91 mm g nhN��m g 2 � a .a 'gym nsa i�o�i A� R NE CJ c wLT iTrr, aRoaEaTv UNE Y _ lll�eleer 9 El Q f — — cl o -- -- --- m! I _ ➢ m JI,A 0 -- - -- __ o � ! J -- oa Ian L 6 o b 4 ® _ FI t R = L__J RFH� H m�,4 Irl I' r._ lirl D 1. v I w m, o a 11 ti = - - 1 o 0 0 o a��oa_ � r 9 = F F yi h. N r: s s , �.e. ,' m a -- 3po,NREo i e 1711 0 - a PROPERTY LINE xA4 d$ s 5 §a D a as &8 sx ( 5 a 1 e r z = AA o oa95ITE Ts.wN .a,BROADSTON cn A r 04OMSA AC`LR L ECT BOYNTON BEACH zARCHITECTS ° aos's�ssALLIANCE RESIDENTIAL LCCATEID AT n m,. F1� BOYN TON BEACH, FL a D PLANNING m ECTFF�E&UIL m moo m , �.E�. < Page 26 of 91 4 msmnmmms. t t E - - _- L — 5 I s, Is 19I IN DAco 1 11 1 i �{ m O U O SIY hM {PTA IF.;lY Im, Irk' Awl Fm mItffil tl r �r � -tit .B stt st tt rrns�mns t rttsYr z n. ` a ' LIA ;. ms r 1C € s Iii i Z I, S zm } 0 I OF, FQ list" HTvst Iq h ,a� zo { x `k'l i iiiitttttttttttttttttttr^ { { ; .. l.. �tt4fffffffffffff��LLO11\\\\\\\�LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL�ti 2 v o m ii"1Y7E =�a❑D t �� ' kl` .:SY c, IZ it l ) t 1L At24 IQSC' 1Nfi lutn`C s5 �� JIM r tNm Ix� t� u� L oir (SI ISiIw,: { .. {fF S �,,. j � � ISI• w��lL Ho I cTi a d;T�- cF it's }L£f ttt4 T,{ s M z I �stt - � 4 I � � �= s" BROADSTONED z 041OMSABOYNTON BEACH o N- /ARCHITECTS -AT E1 56 ALLIANCE RESIDENTIAL N ARCHITLCTURL&PLANNING �� a BOYNTON BEACH,EL m Page 27 of 91 c, r 4�ili ��i b I t rr <o Ts $} ®® n m i ® ma m m v OOmmmmc Z FQ r ® IN OR IN 0 IN a; on IN IN 0 , -. o , 4 d, f rre� f , IN NMI �O �° m4�1 ",1", 10 I'M 0t W 011 %4 ,` Ir m olr waral of r aw "m mY❑ Rt 3 4 E — a t k 4 � f 3 �lrvI,4"y .45,41 F O l z m �/ m _ m z D >O L J MS! \ ow BROADSTONE D o BOYNTON BEACH N 02 / \RCHITECTS »11..,.m�_.1 ALLIANCE PRESIDENTIAL y _ ARCHIT',-CTURE&P�A.NNINv aorNTo eenc , FL u Page 28 of 91 DUNAY Gary 0unay Hope Gathoun Christina Bitenkl MISKEL Bonnie Mickel 0wayne Dickerson LaUrf'n G.Odom Scent Backman Ete Zachariades Nicole Jaeger L.LP Eric Coffman Matthew H.Scott Rachael.0ond P:atmer Alliance Residential Statement of Use and Justification for Community Design Appeal Submitted: December 13,2021 Resubmitted:January 21,2022 DSS Properties, LLC ("Petitioner") is the assignee and representative for the owners of a +/- 2.76 acre assemblage of nine(9) parcels as shown below("Property"),which is generally located on the east side of Federal Highway one block south of Ocean Avenue in the City of Boynton Beach ("City"). The Property is designated MU-H, Mixed Use—High,on the City's Future Land Use Map and located within the City's MU- C, Mixed Use — Core, zoning district. The Property is also located within the boundaries of the City's Community Redevelopment Agency ("CRA"), as well as the DTODD, Downtown Transit-Oriented Development District.The Property addresses and parcel control numbers are detailed below. ---------------------------------------------- �a 112 S Federal Highway 08-43-45-27-04-000-00 r -n-n- -n-n-- ----- ----- �t�i � t 206 S Federal Highway 08-43-45-27-04-000-00 � ------------------------� SE 1" Avenue b �f ;� 08-43-45-27-04-000-0650 s SE 1"Avenue � > > 08-43-45-27-04-000-0670 sy�n--------�n---------------�r 1, nxz Or � SE 1"Avenue 08-43-45-27-04-000-0710 ,E t -- Ocean Avenue s. ;i it�tit t t 08-43-45-27-04-000-0610 ------------------------ �,a� �'� � � _ i -• � 625 SE 2°d Avenue 08-43-45-27-49-000-0010 t — 08-43-45-27-49-000-0020 naa 08-43-45-27-49-000-0030 � ep++� 08-43-45-27-49-000-0040 ,1 caa l SE 2°d Avenue "fin Ave 08-43-45-27-04-000-0630 Federal Highway�� 08-43-45-27-04-000-0131 212 S Federal Highway PRIOR APPROVALS08-43-45-27-04-000-0150 r-------------------------- On January 19, 2021,the City Commission approved Ordinance 20-034, Ordinance 20-035, and Major Site Plan Application NWSP 20-003 to allow the following requests: 14 5.E.4th Street,Suite 36,Boca Raton, FL 33432 Tel: 15611405-3300 ! Fax: [561)409-2341 wwwArribbl.aw,corn Page 29 of 91 • Rezone the Property from the CBD, Central Business District, zoning district to the current MU-C zoning district in order to make the zoning consistent with the MXH Future Land Use designation. • Abandon a portion of the improved 45 foot wide right-of-way of SE I"Avenue running east from Federal Highway for a distance of approximately 175 feet in order to provide a continuous and uninterrupted frontage along Federal Highway; and • Major Site Plan Approval for a mixed-use development consisting of an eight (8) story building with 274 dwelling units, 12,422 square feet of commercial space, and associated recreational amenities, subject to 40 conditions of approval, which are detailed under STATUS OF CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL below. The foregoing approvals are collectively referred to herein as "Original Approval". APPLICATION REQUEST At this time,Alliance Residential is under contract to purchase the Property from the collective ownership group identified above in order to develop the Property as a mixed use development consistent with the Original Approval. Petitioner has submitted an application for Major Master Plan Modification and Major Site Plan Modification (MMSP 22-002) in order to make certain improvements to the site design that will significantly improve the quality of the development by modifying the unit mix for the residential component of the development, modifying the commercial component of the development to 13,110 square feet, expanding the recreational amenities to increase usable open space by 38.77% (from the 2% minimum required to 40.77%), and reconfiguring the site plan to insulate the parking garage and add more lush plantings to ensure no viewsheds to the garage from adjacent roadways ("Major Master Plan Modification and Major Site Plan Modification"). These changes will create a meaningfully higher quality of life for the future residents of the project and the City by providing world class recreational amenities and creating an urban environment in the City's downtown while respecting the surrounding area by ensuring that the parking areas do not impact the adjacent roadways. As noted above, the integrated parking garage has been redesigned in order to ensure that the viewshed from SE 1st Avenue from the east does not terminate at a parking garage entry, and instead provides a view to lush and attractive landscaping. The reorientation of the parking garage places the garage entry on the north side of the building facing the south side of SE I"Avenue and back of house/parking areas for the small retail uses existing to the north.This results in a +/-78'-6" portion of the integrated parking garage having frontage on SE I"Avenue, as shown on the excerpt from the Site Plan provided below. SE 1ST AVENUE S Page 2 of 9 Page 30 of 91 The City's Land Development Regulations ("LDRs") require that habitable floor area must wrap all upper- levels of the parking structure where an integrated parking structure has frontage along a public right-of- way with the intent to disguise the garage and create continuity in street-level activity by maintaining interest for pedestrians and passing automobile traffic. Habitable space along such a minimal portion of the garage fagade adjacent to back-of-house and parking areas and at a dead-end location where street level activity and passerby traffic does not exist is not feasible and would not create a successful development project. As such, Petitioner proposes alternative architectural fagade treatments as shown in the excerpt from the architectural elevations provided below, including awnings along the ground floor and at strategic locations on the upper levels, open metal frames and metal screen wall panels that provide the appearance of window fenestration, artistic metal panels, and architectural articulation through recesses, projections, and variations in roofline. Further,two(2) large live oak trees are proposed adjacent to this frontage that will provide additional screening and ensure a pleasant street-level environment for any pedestrians. 'Irk- ME, V1 qIN"11" 111 L —MFAALCAN0rN WORELINE ALONG GROUND LEVEL RAISED jTUDGO SURROUND 1111 1"r,", ��4yk,br 7, In consideration of the foregoing information, Petitioner respectfully requests approval for the following community design appeal in order to provide the alternative design elements and high-quality architectural fagade treatment to screen and disguise the garage while also providing for a pleasant pedestrian experience at the street level: Page 3 of 9 Page 31 of 91 Relief from Part 111, Chapter 4, Article 111, Section 6.F.2.d to provide alternative design elements and faVode treatment to shield the+/-78'-6"portion of the integrated parking garage faVode that fronts SE 15Y Avenue, as shown in the excerpt from the Site Plan below, in lieu of wrapping this portion of the faVode with habitable floor area. ("Community Design Appeal") Approval of the requested Community Design Appeal will allow the Major Master Plan Modification and Major Site Plan Modification and ultimately development of the project. COMPLIANCE WITH COMMUNITY DESIGN APPEAL CRITERIA In accordance with the review criteria of Chapter 2, Article 11, Section 4.13.3 of the City's LDRs, Petitioner will demonstrate below that the Community Design Appeal:(a)is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, (b) will not significantly detract from the livability or appearance of the City and will be consistent with the established or desired character of the area, or with the redevelopment plan,where applicable; (c) is consistent with the purpose of the standard for which a deviation is requested and will equally or better meet the purpose of the standard; (d) is intended to save or preserve existing trees or desired flora (e) will not have an adverse environmental impact that cannot be prevented by the imposition of conditions; (f) will not have an adverse impact on property values of abutting or adjacent land; (g) will not seriously reduce the quality or quantity of light and air available to adjacent properties; (h) is necessary to further the objectives of the City to assist with economic development and business promotion; (i) meets the purpose and intent of these regulations and does not conflict with another site development standard or requirement, including sustainable development and green initiatives. (a) Whether the proposed request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. As noted above, the Property has a future land use designation of Mixed-Use High. Per the City's Comprehensive Plan,the MX-H category is intended to provide for the vertical or horizontal mixing of land uses within a single site in order to allow for redevelopment in specific areas of the City that take maximum advantage of existing utility systems and services and promote compact development,safe and pedestrian friendly streets, and provide for transportation choices. The MX-H category east of I- 95 specifically provides for high density residential development. As such, the Project is consistent with the higher-density residential development clearly contemplated in the City's Comprehensive Plan. The requested relief is required to provide more appropriate architectural fagade treatment for the +/-78'-6" portion of the integrated parking garage fagade that fronts SE 1st Avenue. This portion of SE V Avenue is where the public roadway terminates at the project entrance and serves as the entry for back-of-house parking areas for the small scale retail uses located to the north. As such, there is not a high level of pedestrian activity in this area and ground floor uses located in this area are not likely to be viable. The Project is further consistent with the goals, policies and objectives outlined in the City's Comprehensive Plan as follows: Page 4 of 9 Page 32 of 91 • Objective 1.3 — Future development and redevelopment within the City shall continue to be regulated through administration of the Land Development Regulations specified within the City's Zoning Code, Community Redevelopment Plans, Florida Building Code and subdivision regulations. — The requested Community Design Appeal is consistent with the LDRs, CRA's Downtown Master Plan, Florida Building Code, and subdivision regulations. • Policy 1.3.1.d—The requested Community Design Appeal provides for the vertical mixing of land uses within a single site in order to allow for redevelopment that takes advantage of existing utility systems; and promotes compact development, safe and pedestrian-friendly streets and transportation choices — Approval of the requested Community Design Appeal will allow development of the project,which provide for compact development, pedestrian friendly streets, improved recreational amenities, and a higher quality view down SE I" Avenue than were contemplated under the Original Approval. • Objective 1.7 —The City shall strive to improve blighted residential neighborhoods and business districts through the implementation of the Community Redevelopment Plan within the Community Redevelopment Area. — The project proposes to redevelop an aggregation of underdeveloped parcels along the Federal Highway corridor with a vibrant mixed-use project that will serve the community. • Policy 1.7.3—The City shall require that designs for redevelopment and infill projects encourage use of public transit, pedestrian and bicycle travel as alternatives to the car and shall maximize personal safety. — Approval of the requested Community Design Appeal provides for an infill mixed-use development that encourages pedestrian activity and use of alternate transportation options in the vicinity of the Property. • Policy 2.4.12 — The City shall provide a variety of transportation choices within the CRA by supporting the following design features for street — new continuous and permanent on-street parking; bus stops and transit enhancements;widening sidewalks... -The Project proposes a wide sidewalk along SE I"Avenue to create a safe area for pedestrian activities. • Objective 2.12 — Promote a pedestrian environment by providing adequate facilities, such as wider sidewalks, buffer from travel lanes, etc. for pedestrians and bicyclists —A well landscaped pedestrian area is provided along this frontage to promote a safe pedestrian environment. Two (2) large live oak trees are proposed adjacent to the portion of the fagade for which relief is sought, which will provide a pleasant, shaded pedestrian experience. Considering the foregoing,approval of the requested Community Design Appeal is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. Page 5 of 9 Page 33 of 91 (b) Whether the proposed request will not significantly detract from the livability or appearance of the city and will be consistent with the established or desired character of the area, or with the redevelopment plan, where applicable. Approval of the requested Community Design Appeal will not significantly detract from the livability or appearance of the City the intent to disguise the garage and create continuity in street-level activity by maintaining interest for pedestrians and passing automobile traffic.The intent of the requirement to provide habitable space wrapping an integrated parking garage is to disguise the garage and create continuity in street-level activity by maintaining interest for pedestrians and passing automobile traffic. Habitable space along such a minimal portion of the garage fagade adjacent to back-of-house and parking areas and at a dead-end location where street level activity and passerby traffic does not exist is not feasible and would not create a successful development for the City. As such, Petitioner proposes alternative architectural fagade treatments to meet the intent of the LDRs, including awnings along the ground floor and at strategic locations on the upper levels, open metal frames and metal screen wall panels that provide the appearance of window fenestration, artistic metal panels, and architectural articulation through recesses, projections, and variations in roofline. Further, approval of the requested Community Design Appeal is consistent with the desired character of the area and applicable redevelopment plan. As noted above,the Property is further located within the TOD District around the future transit station under the CRA's Downtown Master Plan. This particular district is intended to create a downtown core that builds momentum for other redevelopment, allowing for provisions today which will accomplish the long-term vision of the commuter rail transit station. This district creates transit-supportive densities within walking distance of the marina and the future transit station. Redevelopment of the Property with high density residential development and a ground-floor retail component coincides with the goal contemplated by the TOD district. Finally, the City's mixed-use urban zoning districts are intended to implement the community redevelopment plans by providing for a mixture of land uses, accommodating varying densities and intensities for each planning area and by establishing a compact urban setting. These districts area also intended to support transit ridership, and in particular the development of transit-oriented development near planned passenger train stations. The Property is within a special focus area, the DTODD Overlay district, as it is in close proximity to a planned station area. Specifically, the DTODD Overlay zone is intended to improve land development patterns around the future station of the planned commuter service and further enhance the vision embodied by the mixed-use zoning districts with increased density and intensity as well as a strong emphasis on interconnectivity throughout the area. Again,there is an emphasis of high density development for this overlay district which includes the Property. Approval of the requested Community Design Appeal will allow for the higher density development encouraged by such provisions in the City's Land Development Regulations. As such, approval of the Community Design Appeal will not detract from the livability or appearance of the City, and is consistent with the purpose and intent of the applicable Comprehensive Plan policies, redevelopment plans and land use regulations. Page 6 of 9 Page 34 of 91 (c) On balance, the proposed request is consistent with the purpose of the standard for which a deviation is requested. Granting the request will equally or better meet the purpose of the standard to be appealed. Approval of the requested Community Design Appeal is consistent with the purpose of this provision. The intent of the requirement to provide habitable space wrapping an integrated parking garage is to disguise the garage and create continuity in street-level activity by maintaining interest for pedestrians and passing automobile traffic.The alternative architectural fagade treatments proposed (awnings along the ground floor and at strategic locations on the upper levels, open metal frames and metal screen wall panels that provide the appearance of window fenestration, artistic metal panels, and architectural articulation through recesses, projections,and variations in roofline) meet the intent of the LDRs. The proposed architectural treatment, in combination with the proposed live oak trees and wide pedestrian sidewalk meets the purpose of the standard. (d) Whether the proposed request is intended to save or preserve existing trees or desired flora (1) whether the applicant is unable to design or locate proposed buildings, structures, or improvements and preserve the tree(s) and comply with all provisions of these community design standards without causing the applicant undue hardship, and (2) whether it is not feasible to transplant the trees to another location on the subject site considering the following: 1) shape and dimensions of the real property,2) location of existing structures and infrastructure improvements; and 3)size, age, health and species of trees sought to be protected. Approval of the requested Community Design Appeal will not have an impact on existing trees or desired flora. Street trees will be provided along all street frontages as required by the City's Code. This specific request relates to habitable space along the upper levels of the garage and is required to provide a safe and functioning garage facility. As noted above, the garage has been designed to continue the appearance of the livable space in the associated residential building. As such, this criterion is not applicable to the Project. (e) Whether the proposed request will have an adverse environmental impact that cannot be prevented by the imposition of conditions. Approval of the requested Community Design Appeal will not have an adverse environmental impact. Rather, approval of the requested Community Design Appeal will allow for approval of the requested Major Master Plan Modification and Major Site Plan Modification,which is designed to provide 42.3% usable open space (where the Original Approval provided only 2.1% usable open space). As such, the environmental quality of the current proposal is significantly higher than the Original Approval. Considering that approval of the Community Design Appeal is necessary for the approval of the Major Master Plan Modification and Major Site Plan Modification, approval of this request will have a positive environmental impact. (f) Whether the proposed request will have an adverse impact on property values of abutting or adjacent land. Page 7 of 9 Page 35 of 91 Approval of the requested Community Design Appeal will not have an adverse impact on property values of abutting or adjacent land. The Property is currently underdeveloped with small retail uses that do not serve the needs of the community or meet the intent of the City's adopted regulations and plans. Approval of this request will allow for revitalization of the Property with a Project that is consistent with the City's master plans. As noted above, the Property is further located within the TOD District around the future transit station under the City's CRA Downtown Master Plan. This particular district is intended to create a downtown core that builds momentum for other redevelopment, allowing for provisions today which will accomplish the long-term vision of the commuter rail transit station. This district creates transit-supportive densities within walking distance of the marina and the future transit station. Redevelopment of the Property with high density residential development and a ground-floor retail component coincides with the goal contemplated by the TOD district and will provide the needed residential density to serve as an economic stimulus to the surrounding commercial uses. As such,this request will not have an adverse impact on property values. (g) Whether the proposed request will seriously reduce the quality or quantity of light and air available to adjacent properties. Approval of the requested Community Design Appeal will not reduce the quality or quantity of light and air available to adjacent properties. Petitioner is requesting relief from the requirement to provide habitable space wrapping the minimal portion of the integrated parking garage that fronts SE I" Avenue. Approval of the requested Community Design Appeal will allow for approval of the requested Major Master Plan Modification and Major Site Plan Modification, which is designed to provide 42.3% usable open space (where the Original Approval provided only 2.1% usable open space). As such, the quality and quantity of light and air available to adjacent properties will be significantly increased by the current proposal than was provided under the Original Approval. Considering that approval of the Community Design Appeal is necessary for the approval of the Major Master Plan Modification and Major Site Plan Modification, approval of this request will have a positive impact on the quality and quantity of light or air available to adjacent properties. (h) Whether the proposed request is necessary to further the objectives of the city to assist with economic development and business promotion. Approval of the requested Community Design Appeal is necessary to further the City's objectives to assist with economic development and business promotion. As noted above, the Property is located within the TOD District around the future transit station under the City's CRA Downtown Master Plan. This particular district is intended to create a downtown core that builds momentum for other redevelopment, allowing for provisions today which will accomplish the long-term vision of the commuter rail transit station. This district creates transit-supportive densities within walking distance of the marina and the future transit station. Redevelopment of the Property with high density residential development and a ground-floor retail component coincides with the goal contemplated by the TOD district. Petitioner is requesting relief from the requirement to wrap a small portion of the integrated parking garage with habitable space in order to be able to develop the project further these objectives. Page 8 of 9 Page 36 of 91 Approval of this request is necessary to redevelop this underdevelopment aggregation of parcels with the vertically integrated mixed-use project,which provides public art and recreational amenities that will promote the City as a first class destination and place to live. The proposed Project is compatible with development in the adjacent areas with high-density residential development to the west, as well as the commercial redevelopment to the north and south. The Project will help satisfy a community need and is compatible with surrounding residential and commercial development. As such,the request is consistent with this criterion. (i) Whether the proposed request meets the purpose and intent of these regulations but conflicts with another site development standard or requirement, including sustainable development and green initiatives. The intent of the requirement to provide habitable space wrapping an integrated parking garage is to disguise the integrated parking garage and create continuity in street-level activity by maintaining interest for pedestrians and passing automobile traffic. Habitable space along such a minimal portion of the garage fagade adjacent to back-of-house and parking areas and at a dead-end location where street level activity and passerby traffic does not exist is not feasible and would not create a successful development for the City.As such, Petitioner proposes alternative architectural fagade treatments to meet the intent of the LDRs, including awnings along the ground floor and at strategic locations on the upper levels, open metal frames and metal screen wall panels that provide the appearance of window fenestration, artistic metal panels, and architectural articulation through recesses, projections, and variations in roofline. The project is designed to comply with all other site development standards and requirements. As such, the requested Community Design Appeal complies with this criterion. Page 9 of 9 Page 37 of 91 EXHIBIT "D" Conditions of Approval Project Name: Broadstone Boynton Beach (fka Legacy at Boynton Beach) File number: CDPA 22-001 Reference: Approve request for a Community Design Appeal (CDPA 22-001) of Chapter 4, Article III, Section 6.F.2.d "Integrated Garages", requiring habitable floor area to wrap all upper levels of the parking structure where the structure has street frontage, in order to disguise the garage's facade and maximize design compatibility. DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT ENGINEERING / PUBLIC WORKS / FORESTRY/ UTILITIES Comments: None FIRE Comments: None POLICE Comments: None BUILDING Comments: None PARKS AND RECREATION Comments: None PUBLIC ART Comments: None PLANNING AND ZONING Comments: 1. Please revise the "knee wall" section of the parking garage X elevation to either: a. Provide additional screening within the metal open frames to effectively screen vehicles from view; and/or b. Raise the "knee walls" to effectively screen the vehicles from view. The intent is to ensure that parked vehicles are not able to be seen, and the appearance of habitable floor area must be maintained. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Comments: None Page 38 of 91 Broadstone Boynton Beach (fka Legacy at Boynton Beach) CDPA 22-001 Conditions of Approval Page 2 of 2 PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD CONDITIONS Comments: To be determined. CITY COMMISSION CONDITIONS Comments: To be determined. ADDITIONAL REPRESENTATION /COMMITMENTS 2. The applicant or applicant's representatives made the following representations and commitments during the quasi-judicial and/or public hearings that now constitute binding obligations of the applicant. The obligations have the same weight as other conditions of approval. \\Fps\main\SHRDATA\Planning\SHARE D\WP\PROJECTS\Broadstone (FKA GCI-Legacy)\_Staff Report\Exhibit D - COA Broadstone CDPA 22-001.doc Page 39 of 91 7.7.B. New Business 2/22/2022 CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH AGENDA ITEM REQUEST FORM PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT MEETING DATE: 2/22/2022 REQUESTED ACTION BY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD: Approve request for Major Site Plan Modification (MSPM 22-001) to amend the previously approved site plan with the proposed changes contained herein for the Broadstone Boynton Beach project to allow construction of a mixed-use development consisting of an eight (8)-story building with 274 dwelling units, 13,110 square feet of commercial space, associated recreational amenities, and parking on a 2.76 acre site within the Downtown District. Applicant: Steven Scaggs, DSS Properties L.C. Approve request for Major Master Plan Modification (MPMD 22-002) for Broadstone Boynton Beach to amend the previously approved master plan with the proposed revisions to the concurrent Major Site Plan Modification Application, located at the northeast corner of SE 2nd Avenue and Federal Highway, extending north to one block south of Ocean Avenue and Federal Highway, extending south to SE 2nd Avenue and east to approximately SE 6th Street, in the Mixed-Use Core (MU-C) zoning district. Applicant: Steven Scaggs, DSS Properties L.C. EXPLANATION OF REQUEST: Broadstone Boynton Beach is a proposed mixed-use development that will be situated on 2.76 acres located within the Downtown District as defined by the CRA Community Redevelopment Plan. The project site is an assembly of properties consisting of nine (9) developed and undeveloped parcels, including one story retail, office, and residential multi-family units. The applicant is requesting approval of several concurrent applications for the development of Broadstone Boynton Beach (see the respective staff reports). The first two applications, MSPM 22-001 and MPMD 22- 002, are for Major Site Plan Modification and Major Master Plan Modification approval. The requests include an increase in the commercial square footage from 12,422 square feet to 13,110 square feet, a reduction in the overall building footprint to provide additional outdoor amenities for the residents thereby increasing the percentage of usable open space, a revision to the unit mix for the residential component of the project, and reconfiguration of the integrated parking garage to provide 540 parking spaces. The project maintains its original proposal of an 8-story mixed-use development consisting of ground floor commercial space adjacent to Federal Highway, 274 multi-family residential units, and the aforementioned supporting parking garage. Lastly, application CDPA 22-001 represents the request to provide relief for the north elevation of the parking garage from Part 111, Chapter 4, Article 111, Section 6.F.2.d. which requires the parking garage to be wrapped with habitable floor area. The proposed project's main vehicular access point is located at SE 2nd Avenue, east of Federal Highway, with a secondary access point on SE 1st Avenue. The project's access design is contingent on the approval of an Engineering Wavier. The architectural style for the project is a mid-rise interpretation of"Contemporary Coastal" architecture, which is a variation of Florida Vernacular Architecture. The project features a strong base utilizing framed entrance features that provide shade and protection and interact with the pedestrian zone along Federal Highway and SE 2nd Avenue. The upper portions of the building include separate vertical elements that create a scale consistent with the 500 Ocean development. The project's materials include simulated wood cladding, clear glass at the retail level, vertically-oriented windows, and subtle tan tones that create a warmth to Page 40 of 91 the building while maintaining clean lines. The materials and finishes are consistent with the contemporary coastal architectural style. HOW WILL THIS AFFECT CITY PROGRAMS OR SERVICES? N/A FISCAL IMPACT: N/A ALTERNATIVES: N/A STRATEGIC PLAN: STRATEGIC PLAN APPLICATION: N/A CLIMATE ACTION APPLICATION: N/A Is this a grant? Grant Amount: ATTACHMENTS: Type Description D Staff Report Staff Report D Exhibit Exhibit Al ® PCN and Owner List D Location Map Exhibit A2 ® Location Map D Drawings Exhibit B ® Project Plans D Conditions of Approval Exhibit C ® Conditions of Approval Page 41 of 91 DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PLANNING AND ZONING DIVISION MEMORANDUM NO. PZ 22-008 STAFF REPORT TO: Chair and Members Planning and Development Board THRU: Michael Rumpf Planning and Zoning Administrator FROM: Amanda B. Radigan, Principal Planner Craig Pinder, Planner II DATE: February 11, 2022 PROJECT NAME: Broadstone Boynton Beach (MSPM 22-001, MPMD 22-002, CDPA22-001) REQUEST: Approval of a Major Master Plan Modification and Major Site Plan Modification Application for a mixed-use development consisting of an eight (8)-story building with 274 dwelling units, 13,110 square feet of commercial space, associated recreational amenities, and parking on a 2.76 acre site. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Property Owner: Multiple Owners (see Exhibit Al) Applicant: Steven Scaggs, DSS Properties L.C. Agent: Bonnie Miskel and Beth Schrantz, Dunay, Miskel, Backman, LLP Location: Northeast corner of SE 2nd Avenue and Federal Highway, extending north to one block south of Ocean Avenue and Federal Highway, extending south to SE 2nd Avenue and east to approximately SE 6th Street (see Exhibit "A2" — Site Location Map) Existing Land Use: MXH (Mixed Use-High) Proposed Land Use: MXH (Mixed Use High) Existing Zoning: MU-C (Mixed Use Core) Proposed Zoning: MU-C (Mixed Use Core) Proposed Use: Mixed use development with 274 multi-family units, approximately 13,110 square feet of commercial space, recreational amenities, parking, and other related site improvements. Page 42 of 91 Broadstone Boynton Beach (MSPM 22-001,MPMD 22-002) Memorandum No PZ 22-008 Page 2 Acreage: 2.76 acres Adjacent Uses: North: Developed commercial properties, classified Mixed Use-High (MXH) and zoned CBD, Central Business District; farther north, the right-of-way for Ocean Avenue; South: Right-of-way for SE 2nd Avenue, then developed commercial property classified Mixed Use-Medium (MXM) and zoned CBD, Central Business District, and developed rental residential properties classified Mixed Use-Medium (MXM) and zoned R-3 Multi-Family; further south, the residential community of Sterling Village Condominiums, classified Medium Density Residential (MEDR) and zoned R3; East: On the northeast, developed commercial properties classified MXH, Mixed Use-High and zoned CBD, Central Business District; on the southeast, a multifamily development (Sea Terrace Condominiums), also under the MXH and CBD designations; farther east, the right-of-way of SE 6th Street; and West: Right-of-way of Federal Highway, then a mixed-use project (500 Ocean), classified Mixed Use-High (MXH) and zoned MU-C, Mixed-Use Core. PROPERTY OWNER NOTIFICATION Owners of properties within 400 feet of the subject request 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 Proposal: Broadstone Boynton Beach is a proposed mixed-use development that will be situated on 2.76 acres located within the Downtown District as defined by the CRA Community Redevelopment Plan. The project site is an assemblage of properties consisting of nine (9) developed and undeveloped parcels, including one story retail, offices, and residential multi-family units. The applicant is requesting approval of several concurrent applications for the development of Broadstone Boynton Beach (see 2 Page 43 of 91 Broadstone Boynton Beach (MSPM 22-001,MPMD 22-002) Memorandum No PZ 22-008 Page 3 the respective staff reports). The first two applications, MSPM 22- 001 and MPMD 22-002, are for Major Site Plan Modification and Major Master Plan Modification approval. The requests include an increase in the commercial square footage from 12,422 square feet to 13,110 square feet, a reduction in the overall building footprint to provide additional outdoor amenities for the residents thereby increasing the percentage of usable open space, a revision to the unit mix for the residential component of the project, and the reconfiguration of the integrated parking garage to provide 540 parking spaces. The project maintains its original proposal of an 8- story mixed-use development consisting of ground floor commercial space adjacent to Federal Highway, 274 multi-family residential units, and the aforementioned supporting parking garage. Lastly, application CDPA 22-001 represents the request to provide relief for the north elevation of the parking garage from Part III, Chapter 4, Article III, Section 6.F.2.d. which requires the parking garage to be wrapped with habitable floor area. ANALYSIS Traffic: A traffic study was sent to the Palm Beach County Traffic Division for review. The project is located within the boundaries of the City of Boynton Beach TCEA (Traffic Concurrency Exception Area) and therefore meets the Palm Beach County Traffic Performance Standards. The project would generate 1,543 new daily trips with 59 AM peak trips and 113 PM peak trips. School: The applicant has submitted a School Capacity Availability Determination (SCAD) application to the School District of Palm Beach County to confirm that area schools have adequate capacity to accommodate the potential public school students who will reside in the proposed dwelling units with their families. Approval of the modification request is contingent upon approval of the SCAD application. Utilities: The City's water capacity would meet the projected potable water demand for this project. Sufficient sanitary sewer and wastewater treatment capacity is also currently available to serve the project. The applicant will be making several upgrades to utility lines in the vicinity of the project as part of the site development. The Utilities Department has requested for the existing 8-inch and 24-inch gravity sewer mains to be lined with cured-in-place pipe methods (see Exhibit C — Conditions of Approval). 3 Page 44 of 91 Broadstone Boynton Beach (MSPM 22-001,MPMD 22-002) Memorandum No PZ 22-008 Page 4 Police/Fire: The Police and Fire Departments have reviewed the site plan and the applicant has addressed all review comments during the DART review process. The Fire Department notes that they will be able to provide an adequate level of service for this project with current or expected infrastructure and/or staffing levels. Further plan review by Police and Fire will occur during the building permit process. Drainage: Conceptual drainage information was provided for the City's review. The Engineering Division has found the conceptual information to be adequate and is recommending that the review of specific drainage solutions be deferred until time of permit review. Additionally, the project has the opportunity to utilize the Downtown Stormwater improvement Watershed for a fee-in-lieu-of capital contribution (see Exhibit C — Conditions of Approval). Access: The proposed project's main vehicular access point is located on SE 2nd Avenue with a secondary access point on SE 1St Avenue. The project's access design is contingent on the approval of an Engineering Waiver. The Engineering Waiver is a request to reduce the driveway's throat depth from the required 100 feet to 75 feet (see Exhibit C — Conditions of Approval). A portion of SE 1St Avenue was approved to be abandoned (Ordinance No. 20-035) by the City Commission on January 19, 2021 and will no longer connect to Federal Highway, but instead will provide direct access to the secondary ingress/egress of the parking garage. In addition, the project also provides nine (9) on-street parking spaces along Federal Highway and SE 2nd Avenue to serve the retail uses on the first floor of the project. Sidewalks are provided along all street rights-of-way. The proposed sidewalks are a minimum of ten (10) feet wide and are lined with street trees for shade. The sidewalk along Federal Hwy also abuts a covered eight (8) foot active area that may be used for commercial uses. The project also proposes a private dog park along the northern property line and two public art sculptures — one to the north end and one to the south end of the project — to encourage pedestrian activity along the ground floor. There is limited pedestrian access from SE 2nd Avenue into the private amenities for the residents. Parking: Off-street parking for the MU-C zoning district requires 1.33 parking spaces for studios and one-bedroom units, and 1.66 parking spaces for two (2) or more bedroom units. The project proposes 274 units (149 studios and one-bedrooms, and 125 two and three-bedrooms), which would require 407 parking spaces. Additionally, the code requires guest parking at a rate of 0.15 spaces per unit, which adds an additional 42 required spaces. . The commercial space, which 4 Page 45 of 91 Broadstone Boynton Beach (MSPM 22-001,MPMD 22-002) Memorandum No PZ 22-008 Page 5 would allow a mix of retail and office uses, requires one (1) parking space per 200 square feet of gross floor area. Proposed is 13,110 square feet of retail, thereby requiring an additional 66 parking spaces. Additionally, the developer will maintain a parking agreement that involves an additional 20 parking spaces being provided for use in the operation of the Two George's restaurant. Under this standard methodology for calculating required off-street parking spaces, a grand total of 535 parking spaces would be required. The site plan proposes 549 parking spaces, an excess of fourteen (14) spaces. Regular parking space dimensions would conform to code requirements for the CRA of 9 feet by 18 feet for 90-degree parking and 8 feet by 22 feet for parallel spaces. The applicant is proposing an eight (8)-story parking garage that would accommodate up to 540 vehicles. The developer will be required to comply with the City's residential parking requirements to ensure that designated resident parking spaces are reserved for, and made available to the residents to minimize the use of the retail parking spaces by residents. This requirement shall be monitored and enforced by the developer (see Exhibit C — Conditions of Approval). There are an additional 9 on-street parking spaces; six (6) on Federal Highway and three (3) on SE 2nd Avenue. Landscaping: The Plant List (Sheet LP-1) indicates that the project would add a total of 202 trees, 70 of them being canopy trees, and 132 palm trees (including 16 relocated), 2,388 accent and shrub specimens, and 1,756 small shrubs/groundcover plants. Canopy trees are being maximized where spatially feasible, while palm trees are proposed in areas near the building foundation, along the property lines within the landscape buffer and landscape barrier to further screen the building. The exception to this objective intended to maximize canopy trees is within the ground floor amenity areas in an effort to maximize the amount of programmable open space on the site. All plant materials to be used in the landscape design are required to be Florida number one grade and must be identified as having "low" or "medium" watering needs as indicated in the South Florida Water Management's "Waterwise" publication. The proposed tree species would include the following: Cathedral Live Oak, Gumbo Limbo, Satin Leaf, Royal Poinciana, Orange Geiger, Timor Black Bamboo, Crape Myrtle, Privet, Simpson Stopper, Mast Tree, Yellow Trumpet Tree, Paurotis Palm, Fishtail Palm, Areca Palm, Ruffled Fan Palm, Medjool Date Palm, Solitaire Palm, Cabbage Palm, Thatch Palm, Montgomery Palm Double, and Montgomery Palm Triple. The applicant has selected several butterfly attracting plants and has exceeded the sustainability code's requirement of utilizing a 5 Page 46 of 91 Broadstone Boynton Beach (MSPM 22-001,MPMD 22-002) Memorandum No PZ 22-008 Page 6 minimum of 5% of butterfly attracting shrubs and trees in the planting scheme. Projects proposed in the Mixed-Use Core (MU-C) zoning district are subject to the "Streetscape Design" portion of the landscape code regulations. These code provisions recognize the desire for reduced building setbacks, thus creating an urban setting. The purpose of the "Streetscape Design" concept is to create a landscape design that encompasses both the private and public domain, to blend the two areas into one unified landscape scheme and optimize the pedestrian experience. This is accomplished through hardscape and landscape choices, covered walkways (arcades, awnings, tree canopy), and streetscape amenities (benches/seatwalls, lighting, accent plantings). The landscape design proposed by the applicant depicts the use of street trees and covered arcades to create the streetscape theme. This includes the uses of lower landscape material placed around private terraces and along the building foundation, and street trees placed between the street and sidewalk in an effort to provide maximum clear pedestrian pathways. Lastly, a 15-foot wide urban landscape barrier with a 6-foot wall is proposed along the east property line intended to mitigate off site impacts (see Exhibit C—Conditions of Approval). Building and Site: The proposed site area totals 2.76 acres. The proposed mixed-use buillding contains 274 dwelling units which are located above the retail spaces fronting Federal Highway and wrapping a central parking garage. Along SE 2nd Avenue the building creates a large courtyard which allows for the ground floor amenity deck to be visable from the unit balconies. The retail portion of the project totals 13,110 square feet and provides an elevated covered arcade adjacent to Federal Highway. As noted previously, the parking garage has eight (8) levels of parking. The north elevation of the parking garage is visable from SE 1St Avenue and is to be enhanced with architecturual elements to ensure that the elevation has the appearance of habitable floor area and that vehicles are completely screened from view (see Exhibit C — Conditions of Approval). Of the 274 residential units 29 are studio, 120 are one (1) bedroom, 103 are two (2) bedroom, and 22 are three (3) bedroom units. The units range in size from 576 square feet to 1,425 square feet. Each unit also has a balcony or terrace that either faces out towards the street or in towards the ground floor amenity deck. Relative to the floor area ratio (FAR) regulations within the code, the 6 Page 47 of 91 Broadstone Boynton Beach (MSPM 22-001,MPMD 22-002) Memorandum No PZ 22-008 Page 7 Mixed Use Core (MU-C) zoning district has a maximum FAR of 4.0. The project is also located within the "Transit Core" (1/4 mile radius of the planned station), which requires that new development have a minimum density of 40 dwelling units per acre; the project proposes a density of 99.3 du/ac based on the one-half (1/2) unit provision. Under this provision, the development must not exceed: a) the maximum density of the MU-C zoning district (80 du/ac) when using 1/2 density units and the maximum density of the MXH future land use classification (100 du/ac) when counting each individual unit as a whole. Efficiency and one-bedroom units which are 750 square feet or less and located within the MU-C zoning district may count as one- half density units. The project proposes a total of 113 efficiency and one-bedroom units that are 750 square feet or less, therefore, providing a density count of 57 units. The remaining 36 one-bedroom units count as whole units, in addition to the number of two-bedroom, and three-bedroom units. Under the 1/2 unit provision, the total is 79 du/ac which complies with the maximum density allowed within the MU-C zoning district. When counting each individual unit as a whole, the proposed density is 99.3 du/ac which complies with the maximum density permitted within the MXH future land use. Building Height: The maximum building height allowed in the MU-C (Mixed Use Core) zoning district is 150 feet. The proposed building elevations depict the typical roof deck height of the mixed-use building at seventy- seven (77) feet, with an overall height of approximately eighty-six (86) feet six (6) inches, sixty-three (63) feet five (5) inches below the maximum allowable height. Along Federal Highway, the proposed building elevations show that the building steps back thirteen (13) feet at an approximate height of twenty-six (26)feet and then extends to its overall height. Setbacks: The MU-C zoning district requires no building setbacks, but rather a zero (0) build-to line with accommodation of the required pedestrian zone. The Land Development Regulations requires the building to be setback to allow for an enhanced public realm that includes 2.5 feet—5 feet for street trees, 10 feet for sidewalks, and 8 feet for active areas such as outdoor seating and retail uses. The building setback is measured from the property line to the exterior surface of the building or supporting columns. Along Federal Highway, the proposed building setback along the length of the building is between 27 feet and 37 feet. Along SE 2nd Avenue, the building setback is between 7.7 feet and 15.5 feet except for the areas of the ground floor amenity deck, which is setback approximately 107 feet. The building setback along SE 1St Avenue varies between 8.5 feet and 21.5 feet. The eastern property line abuts the adjacent property where the setback is 67 feet and includes a putting green, pickleball 7 Page 48 of 91 Broadstone Boynton Beach (MSPM 22-001,MPMD 22-002) Memorandum No PZ 22-008 Page 8 court, bocce ball court and additional outdoor amenities. Lastly, the building is setback approximately 26 feet from the northern property line to allow for a private dog park. Amenities: As noted above, a covered active area is proposed along Federal Highway to encourage a mixture of active uses along the exterior of the ground floor retail spaces, and pedestrian zone designs are proposed along SE 1St Avenue and SE 2nd Avenue. The pedestrian zones include a street tree area, sidewalks, active areas and covered walkways. The project has been designed with a large interior courtyard for resident use, containing the community pool, outdoor lounging areas, and lush tropical landscaping. The private amenities located within the building will include a host of programmed spaces on the ground floor and a rooftop amenity for the residents' enjoyment. The developer also worked with Palm Tran of Palm Beach County to locate and create a new transit shelter on site (Sheet SP-1), designed utilizing some of the architectural characteristics of this project. Design: The intended architectural style for the project is a mid-rise modern interpretation of "contemporary coastal" architecture, which is a variation of Florida Vernacular Architecture. This architectural style fosters a sense of place and identity for the district. The project features a strong base utilizing framed entrance features that interact with the pedestrian zone along Federal Highway and SE 2nd Avenue, and provides shade and protection. The upper portions of the building include separate vertical elements that create a scale consistent with the 500 Ocean development. The project's materials include simulated wood cladding, clear glass at the retail level, concrete eyebrows, metal awnings, vertically-oriented windows, and subtle tan tones that create a warmth to the building while maintaining clean lines. The materials and finishes are consistent with the contemporary coastal architectural style. Mixed-use projects are designed to create a pedestrian-friendly environment by placing the buildings along the pedestrian zones and articulating the building mass to avoid a repetitive, continuous, monotonous building block. The building mass fronting SE 2nd Avenue steps back and wraps the ground floor amenity deck, creating a break in the building mass. This approach mitigates the impact of the building's height on the multifamily properties to the south. Along Federal Highway, the building maintains its mass along the length of the road and varies in height to create tower elements at the north end, middle, and south end of the building. As mentioned 8 Page 49 of 91 Broadstone Boynton Beach (MSPM 22-001,MPMD 22-002) Memorandum No PZ 22-008 Page 9 previously, the building facing Federal Highway is stepped back thirteen (13) feet at a height of 26 feet in order to move the mass of the building farther from the pedestrian environment. Sustainability: Mixed-use developments must achieve a minimum of 25 sustainability points (see Exhibit "C" — Conditions of Approval). The development would satisfy the requirement by providing the following: SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS POINTS ENERGY Heat Island Reduction - 75% of the non-roof impervious site 6 Efficient Cooling - All air conditioners are Energy Star qualified. Minimum SEER 16. 2 Building Color - Use of white or cool light colors for the body of buildings to reflect rather than absorb heat and reduce cooling costs - as shown on architectural plans. 2 Lighting - Provide energy efficient lighting such as LED lighting for building interiors for 100% of proposed lighting. 1 Energy star appliances -All appliance with in a building are 100% energy star. 2 Recycle & Waste Reduction Recycle Content in infrastructure For all new roadways, parking lots, sidewalks, and curbs. 2 Recycle station \ dumpster area Recycle chute(s) in Mixed Use Districts and dumpster, which include a recycle station. 1 URBAN NATURE Tree Canopy - Provide canopy trees in an amount that exceeds the minimum number of required trees by 20%. 4 TRANSPORTATION Parking Structure At least 75% of the development's total number of required off-street parking spaces is contained in a parking deck or garage. 2 9 Page 50 of 91 Broadstone Boynton Beach (MSPM 22-001,MPMD 22-002) Memorandum No PZ 22-008 Page 10 Electric Charging Stations - Provide four (4) over the required number of electric car charging stations. 4 Total Points 26 Lighting: The photometric plans (Sheets PH-1 & PH-2) include 33 freestanding pole light fixtures, with a pole height of 20 feet. The condition of approval requires the ground level poles and fixtures to match the design of the existing poles and light fixtures located along the 500 Ocean and Casa Costa developments. In addition, the condition of approval requires the spot reading to be a maximum of 5.9 foot- candles (see Exhibit "C" — Conditions of Approval). Signage: Site and building signage have not been finalized and a Sign Program must be approved in conjunction with requesting any sign permits for the site (see Exhibit "C" — Conditions of Approval). Public Art: The project is subject to the Art in Public Places requirement, and the applicant has identified two locations for artwork along Federal Highway, one to the north end of the project and one to south end at the SE 2nd Avenue intersection. This concept is supported by City staff as well as the Art Advisory Board. The project also proposes to utilize portions of the exterior wall on the parking garage for Public Art. The applicant is required to secure approval from the Art Advisory Board and install the artwork prior to receiving the certificate of occupancy (see Exhibit "C" — Conditions of Approval). RECOMMENDATION Staff has reviewed this request for a Major Site Plan Modification and Major Master Plan Modification, and recommends APPROVAL, subject to approval of the accompanying applications and satisfying all comments indicated in Exhibit "C" —Conditions of Approval. Any additional conditions recommended by the Board or required by the City Commission shall be documented accordingly in the Conditions of Approval. \\Fps\ma in\S H RDATA\Pla nni ng\S HARE D\WP\PROJ ECTS\Broadstone(FKA GCI-Legacy)\_Staff Report\Staff Report.docx 10 Page 51 of 91 EXHIBIT Al — List of Owners & PCNs 206 S Federal Highway 625 SE 2nd Ave 0010 Federal Highway 08-43-45-27-04-000-0090 08-43-45-27-04-000-0010 08-43-45-27-04-000-0131 Bowden INC Sara N Garcia Francisco and Olga Solis 1622 NE 4th Street 625 SE 2nd Ave #A 80 SW 15th Court Boynton Beach, FL 33434 Boynton Beach, FL 33435 Boca Raton, FL 33486 SE 1 st Avenue 625 SE 2nd Ave 0020 212 S Federal Highway 08-43-45-27-04-000-0650 08-43-45-27-04-000-0020 08-43-45-27-04-000-0150 One Twelve South Fed Hwy Maria CS Ruggeri Downtown Properties of South INC Florida LLC 3549 Harbor Cir W Bingham c/o PO Box 1182 4283 Fox Trace Delray Beach, FL 33483 Boynton Beach, FL 33425 Boynton Beach, FI 33436 SE 1 st Avenue 625 SE 2 nd Ave 0030 112 S Federal Highway 08-43-45-27-04-000-0670 08-43-45-27-04-000-0050 08-43-45-27-04-000-0030 Joseph W Scaggs One Twelve South Fed Hwy Linda and Christopher Chiodo 728 Casa Loma Blvd INC 2515 SW 13th Ct Boynton Beach, FL 33435 Boynton Beach, FL 33426 W Bingham c/o PO Box 1182 Boynton Beach, FL 33425 SE 1St Avenue 625 SE 2nd Ave 0040 08-43-45-27-04-000-0710 08-43-45-27-04-000-0040 DSS Properties Howard and Marianne Spencer 728 Casa Loma Blvd 731 NE 12th Terrace Apt 1 Boynton Beach, FL 33435 Boynton Beach, FL 33435 Ocean Avenue SE 2nd Ave 08-43-45-27-04-000-0610 08-43-45-27-04-000-0630 Francisco and Olga Solis Francisco and Olga Solis 80 SW 15th Court 80 SW 15th Court Boca Raton, FL 33486 Boca Raton, FL 33486 Page 52 of 91 LOCATION MAP Exhibit A2 LU z � z _ � s W. ,4 ,f1 E Ocean Ave f° �t {' 4f c s 5 r � � � SE-2nd Ave i t� 4 r� Page 53 of 91 Exhibit B - Project Plans Page 54 of 91 mm g nhN��m g 2 � a .a 'gym nsa i�o�i A� R NE CJ c wLT iTrr, aRoaEaTv UNE Y _ lll�eleer 9 El Q f — — cl o -- -- --- m! I _ ➢ m JI,A 0 -- - -- __ o � ! J -- oa Ian L 6 o b 4 ® _ FI t R = L__J RFH� H m�,4 Irl I' r._ lirl D 1. v I w m, o a 11 ti = - - 1 o 0 0 o a��oa_ � r 9 = F F yi h. N r: s s , �.e. ,' m a -- 3po,NREo i e 1711 0 - a PROPERTY LINE xA4 d$ s 5 §a D a as &8 sx ( 5 a 1 e r z = AA o oa95ITE Ts.wN .a,BROADSTON cn A r 04OMSA AC`LR L ECT BOYNTON BEACH zARCHITECTS ° aos's�ssALLIANCE RESIDENTIAL LCCATEID AT n m,. F1� BOYN TON BEACH, FL a D PLANNING m ECTFF�E&UIL m moo m , �.E�. < Page 55 of 91 4 msmnmmms. t t E - - _- L — 5 I s, Is 19I IN DAco 1 11 1 i �{ m O U O SIY hM {PTA IF.;lY Im, Irk' Awl Fm mItffil tl r �r � -tit .B stt st tt rrns�mns t rttsYr z n. ` a ' LIA ;. ms r 1C € s Iii i Z I, S zm } 0 I OF, FQ list" HTvst Iq h ,a� zo { x `k'l i iiiitttttttttttttttttttr^ { { ; .. l.. �tt4fffffffffffff��LLO11\\\\\\\�LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL�ti 2 v o m ii"1Y7E =�a❑D t �� ' kl` .:SY c, IZ it l ) t 1L At24 IQSC' 1Nfi lutn`C s5 �� JIM r tNm Ix� t� u� L oir (SI ISiIw,: { .. {fF S �,,. j � � ISI• w��lL Ho I cTi a d;T�- cF it's }L£f ttt4 T,{ s M z I �stt - � 4 I � � �= s" BROADSTONED z 041OMSABOYNTON BEACH o N- /ARCHITECTS -AT E1 56 ALLIANCE RESIDENTIAL N ARCHITLCTURL&PLANNING �� a BOYNTON BEACH,EL m Page 56 of 91 c, r 4�ili ��i b I t rr <o Ts $} ®® n m i ® ma m m v OOmmmmc Z FQ r ® IN OR IN 0 IN a; on IN IN 0 , -. o , 4 d, f rre� f , IN NMI �O �° m4�1 ",1", 10 I'M 0t W 011 %4 ,` Ir m olr waral of r aw "m mY❑ Rt 3 4 E — a t k 4 � f 3 �lrvI,4"y .45,41 F O l z m �/ m _ m z D >O L J MS! \ ow BROADSTONE D o BOYNTON BEACH N 02 / \RCHITECTS »11..,.m�_.1 ALLIANCE PRESIDENTIAL y _ ARCHIT',-CTURE&P�A.NNINv aorNTo eenc , FL u Page 57 of 91 S.FEDERAL HIGHWAY - a Em mj al r- - v � � W g o IIo r mm- ❑ m El Z C m + 5 �m e� ❑ �' m m a G I _ + p. ON a R m 2z Kn s� =s - my nm ,. ,a �s...lig�, g a � ff s �. � 3§o a�,� .€ � �'�� Saa;.�.E �...�4 s �{{ �a�a�a� 3a3a3a3�sza• e 3� �. � - ��s.�3,.c n5 A s y. P n l�roadsaone Boyinton Beach 212 S.Federal Highway,Boynton Beach,FL LANDSCAPE PLAN Page 58 of 91 .' -- .. _ 1 _ • I , 3QA ` S. FEDERAL HIGHWAY a m �bL 1 EAq a nfi \ i MA ° m b m I gg A IyII I a T m m m " 9 - T1�{ o 1 a z " �" O < a} 04 „ ., i"2 ( o �,a°ryA �l A ,>.�.w_. P n S t 4 m I S I' k , i s w., f � a _w ° i d g z a—r w f*I o "".. ° � H w 2 z e —r F 9R N a + jI S D Pa 4 pal — 1Z 9 ' m vim e MATCHLINE-SEE SHEET C-5.01 �g Mgiplil --1W19 s9' 1 $Lm��ffl a ma g him-11 _ m a s m II._ ---- s m g5 9 Y him 9 a m a m z v ia9 ! ggra§ €pAI4 �F� g$ z - v a v s a 98 c£a R4l v p @9 o s --¢_ z a v n m P A HIM A � a`' AIA'A r.Al "aA01e Ala n 'z m_m P o 9 �� =a m �_ Rf a a4••4P F "� i z m o m �M2 mgo • €Aa a-0 HH� �Y ? om m> �g V-.1 .1 z '"'^11 o�F za�m 'a NFA �H ��a 8m4€PP9 Ez g.m I 1H = p 4 5 o �,np �a'ESSm'm pa+a`2 9m Y N m 'm5A FFz9Px 4z 3,a' f 4� A n Pe p2! 9 �a A yy§ S PR€R77,� 95a 9€ om o A o f y N u 2 z n a ~ A �� PAI m< BAImPS Rca pom s n �z 7_i -mz 0 9 m - : g$ 4i$ IV.�i: Pm _o f F"y c m am m z MI Im a pi Pal �e�10 �Q s.� Fa p� � an Z S" m 1z z MZ en pHawT BROADSTONE aasss�OOa O m BOYNTON BEACH PAVING GRADING °2E ��x oPRorlmox.� �� m dANs2O22 �as+un o.eaawNc,BE. Horn Om ALLIANCEREALTY AND DRAINAGE PLAN ` ��_��° s,s Baa A PARTNERS,LLC Iz67505zBEP '-HEI-2--x— p 00000sg BOYNTON BEACH FL 111111D DIIEor/O4/2022 77 REVISIONS —E B, Page 59 of 91 .......... MATCHUNE-SEE SHEET C-5.00 pr Lj a 1,9 0 z -0 > -4�r '0 GO z com GO >' �01r ail G, E E� 0, ".0 > M, 8 F m, z FSI> 1 0 ml fzl > ti a, I I C j § SE 6TH STREET 4- IM -NR m-M--M-I I I-I o ai ma ui u , M -M. > M., 0. F 8 A102 MAI iMp, F A,M, > A:9 mai mg $ M- € f6 em 0, AIR, Vp =egg q pr' 1XI p€€= ,Trv up AY r NOR ma-H A F 62 bMA A 1 1p, age 9 ix J '10� gmSUPl i-A J§'T .9 N Alm 2m om' 5-j 0-m 5-i F o0>mz 0 ..A g, 12 .m 0-. -Z mz A T 0. 1> I z m A m z m > 514 01 z m>A>'m 'mz a 6L A 16. jj§ e2 Aj r5 f Im 'z 09 mz > Az m. Z BROADSTONE '0'43 53...R'8T o" B '0 Kimley*Horn - CYNTON BEACH PAVING GRADING G HORNING,P E —LIA�;'ZALTY .1111 11-1—IN 141 — HS sRO c?-. AND DRAINAGE PLAN JNH HL L11617150�5-1 1111 1 11E,111HE 1'�N' 11 PARTNERS,LLC P—E 1-110--1 — --.3-11 .1— NINN 11-1—IN— 1�M-- BOYNTON BEACH FL —111D JDH—E 01/04/2022 7. REMSIONS — BY Page 60 of 91 1� � I y I ,I ED J%R { t � r D - S . { f "' "l'v d J r E I a Ce ;P -i SCI � I r rte',.t; .� { > � - � c')= �I r r v I r_ rE, ' L I x I ;LJ . I m Y I I� co m m D Z aBA m BROADSTONE p m '$ BOYNTON BEACH a�°�a ' au— a �' =€E. FFPS � amBorracn BEACH a a m Page 61 of 91 OO h�) r s" r } �I r- � P O ` J�S, 00 r 6) 1, p O hot OCt T xfi m z= t 1 moo; + f s + + t - �' s C D r D n C < a� �f MV/ \ BROADSTONE'^E -_ Do " k" BOYNTON BEACH ARCHITECTS = FDR N A _oA ALLIANCEc RESIDENTIAL Al f BOYNTON BEACH, FL Page 62 of 91 EXHIBIT "C" Conditions of Approval Project Name: Broadstone Boynton Beach (fka Legacy at Boynton Beach) File number: MSPM 22-001, MPMD 22-002, CDPA 22-001 Reference: 51h review of plans identified as a Maior Site Plan Modification and Maior Master Plan Modification with a January 24, 2022 Planning and Zoning Department date stamp marking. DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT ENGINEERING / PUBLIC WORKS / FORESTRY/ UTILITIES Comments: 1. The City has received an Engineering Waiver request for the X driveway throat depth at the SE 2nd Ave access. The plan proposes to have 75 ft in lieu of the required 100 ft. The project is conditioned on the waiver's approval. 2. The ingress/egress on SE 2nd Ave will have night time traffic X shining their headlights at the building at 610 SE 2nd Ave. Please contact the building management and offer to supplement the existing planting in an attempt to reduce the impact of the lights. 3. Developer will be responsible for replacement of existing FPL X street lighting adjacent to the site with underground decorative street lighting to match the City's standards. 4. The site appears to be in an A/E flood zone (EI 6 ft). The code X requires the FF to be 12" above the average crown height of the adjacent roadway. Please provide a narrative that indicates how the finished floor elevation was determined (i.e. what road(s) and crown were used). Please be aware that this area discharges into Marina Village at Boynton (i.e. the intracoastal waterway). The intersection of E Ocean Ave and SE 6th St regularly floods during the seasonal King Tides and during tropical disturbances. The wet season water table will limit the quantity of storage available in the proposed exfiltration. Have you approached FDOT for legal positive outfall? Signed and sealed drainage calculations will be required. 5. Confirm that the Engineer of Record is aware of any historical X drainage patterns on site. Any current (historic) surface water flows, directed to the site, shall be accommodated into the post development design. 6. Be aware that the existing 48" RCP in the FDOT R/W is the main X trunk line serving 500 Ocean and NE 4th St basin. Its legal positive outfall connection will need to be maintained. Page 63 of 91 Broadstone Boynton Beach (fka Legacy at Boynton Beach) MSPM 22-001, MPMD 22-002, CDPA 22-001 Conditions of Approval Page 2 of 6 7. The trash service shall be a dock height, roll off type compactor X unit. Please provide a narrative that describes how trash removal will be handled for the project. Be sure to discuss residential, retail and City Sanitation Division perspectives. How will bulk trash be handled? Where will bulk trash be located? 8. Has the developer determined if water quality and quantity is X available via the Downtown Stormwater improvement Watershed? If it is, a "fee-in-lieu-of" capital contribution for properties utilizing the installed storm water treatment and/or conveyance facilities within that watershed are as follows: a. Capital cost per impervious square food for water quality is $2.05 b. Capital cost per impervious square foot for water quantity is $0.18 c. Total capital cost per impervious square foot for Water Quality and Quantity is $2.23. The Fee shall be paid prior to the issuance of a building permit for new construction and/or redevelopment in the Downtown Watershed. 9. The existing 8-inch and 24-inch gravity sewer mains are vitrified X clay pipe (VCP) and shall be lined utilizing cured-in-place pipe (CIPP) methods. FIRE Comments: All previous comments addressed at DART meeting. POLICE Comments: All previous comments addressed at DART meeting. BUILDING Comments: All previous comments addressed at DART meeting. PARKS AND RECREATION Comments: 10. Per City Ordinance, the Park Impact Fee is based upon a factor of X $595 per unit for multi-family dwellings. Based upon the proposed 274 units, the fee will be $163,030 (274 X $595) due at time of building permit issuance. Page 64 of 91 Broadstone Boynton Beach (fka Legacy at Boynton Beach) MSPM 22-001, MPMD 22-002, CDPA 22-001 Conditions of Approval Pae 3 of 6 PUBLIC ART 11. As per Article II, Section 27-25 of the Administrative Code, the X project must satisfy the Art in Public Places requirements by the payment of 30% of art fees at the time of permitting and the installation of artworks with an art project cost of 70% or greater of the art fees. 12. Artwork shall be placed at both the south and north corners of the X property along S Federal Highway as shown on the Landscape Plan (sheet LP-1) submitted on 1-24-2022. Both artworks must satisfy the Art in Public Places Guidelines, be publicly accessible 24 hours a day, and be fully visible from public property with targeted night lighting. 13. The artworks shall be approved by the Art Advisory Board and be X installed prior to the issuance of the certificate of occupancy. PLANNING AND ZONING Comments: 14. Approval of the Major Master Plan Modification and Major Site Plan X Modification is contingent upon approval of the School Capacity Availability Determination (SCAD) application. 15. The Major Master Plan Modification and Major Site Plan X Modification approval is contingent on the approval of the Community Design Appeal Application (CDPA 22-001) for relief of Chapter 4, Article III, Section 6.F.2.d. "integrated garages", which requires habitable floor area to wrap the parking structure where the structure has frontage along a public right-of-way. 16. Please revise the "knee wall" section of the parking garage X elevation to either: a. Provide additional screening within the metal open frames to effectively screen vehicles from view; and/or b. Raise the "knee walls" to effectively screen the vehicles from view. The intent is to ensure that parked vehicles are not able to be seen, and the appearance of habitable floor area must be maintained. 17. The proposed design treatments on the parking structure's north X elevation shall also be applied to the elevation of the parking structure fronting the pool courtyard. The intent is to ensure that parked vehicles are not able to be seen and the appearance in habitable floor area is also translated onto this elevation. At the time of permitting, please include an elevation that shows the enhanced elevation design meeting this requirement. Page 65 of 91 Broadstone Boynton Beach (fka Legacy at Boynton Beach) MSPM 22-001, MPMD 22-002, CDPA 22-001 Conditions of Approval Page 4 of 6 18. On the north elevation, please revise the position of the framed X window openings located above the ingress/egress of the parking structure to be centered with the ingress/egress opening below. 19. Provide a detail of the proposed wall separating the pool courtyard X from the public sidewalk on SE 2nd Avenue. The proposal should include architectural enhancements and possibly an integrated green/vine wall feature or public art to avoid a monolithic appearance. 20. Please increase the width and height of the columns of the X proposed landscape barrier wall to provide adequate horizontal and vertical offsets to avoid an expansive monolithic appearance. The proposal should resemble the scale and proportions shown in the image example below: Nrrm "} (arnond� Mulch— 21. The project plans shall be revised to identify which parking spaces X are reserved for the residents. The resident parking spaces shall be separated by a gate and/or gate arm to restrict public access to resident parking. The developer shall comply with the City's residential parking requirements to ensure that designated resident parking spaces are reserved for, and made available to the residents to minimize the use of the retail parking spaces by residents. This requirement shall be monitored and enforced by the developer. 22. Revise the proposed Satin Leaf tree specification to be a minimum X 4-inch caliper at the time of installation. The caliper of all trees, except for palms and those trees classified as a development's "signature tree" shall be a minimum of four (4) inches at the time of installation. 23. The applicant shall provide on-street parking on S Federal Highway X and SE 2nd Avenue as depicted on the site plan submitted on 1-24- 2022. 24. Provide benches near the proposed art work at both locations on S X Federal Highway. The project is required to provide a total of six (6) benches, therefore, three (3) additional benches are required to be located on the site plan. In addition, the project shall also provide a total of six (6) trash receptacles on site, therefore, three (3) Page 66 of 91 Broadstone Boynton Beach (fka Legacy at Boynton Beach) MSPM 22-001, MPMD 22-002, CDPA 22-001 Conditions of Approval Pae 5 of 6 additional trash receptacles shall be located on the site plan. 25. At time of permitting, provide a detail drawing of the proposed bike X shelters, designed utilizing architectural elements, materials and colors matching the proposed building. 26. The applicant shall dedicate a 10' x 30' easement and place, at X their cost, a bus shelter designed utilizing architectural elements, materials, and colors matching the proposed building. 27. Revise the photometrics plan to provide the proposed lighting X levels along the east side of the project, between the east property line and the building. The lighting levels shall not exceed the maximum foot-candles allowed by code (5.9) and shall not spill (levels greater than 0.3 foot-candles) onto the adjacent property. 28. All ground level poles and light fixtures shall match the design of X the existing poles and light fixtures located along the 500 Ocean and Casa Costa developments. 29. The applicant will be placing, at their cost, all overhead utilities X below ground around the perimeter of the site. 30. A Sign Program will need to be submitted and approved in X conjunction with requesting any sign permits for the project. 31. Prior to issuance of any permits, a narrative and phasing drawing X shall be provided outlining how the required parking for the Two Georges Restaurant will be provided throughout the construction of the project. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Comments: All previous comments addressed at DART meeting. PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD CONDITIONS Comments: To be determined. CITY COMMISSION CONDITIONS Comments: To be determined. ADDITIONAL REPRESENTATION /COMMITMENTS 32. The applicant or applicant's representatives made the following representations and commitments during the quasi-judicial and/or public hearings that now constitute binding obligations of the applicant. The obligations have the same weight as other conditions of approval. Page 67 of 91 Broadstone Boynton Beach (fka Legacy at Boynton Beach) MSPM 22-001, MPMD 22-002, CDPA 22-001 Conditions of Approval Pae 6 of 6 F:\Exhibit C-COA Broadstone MSPM 22-001 MPMD 22-002.doc Page 68 of 91 7.7.C. New Business 2/22/2022 CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH AGENDA ITEM REQUEST FORM PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT MEETING DATE: 2/22/2022 REQUESTED ACTION BY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD: Approve requests for Major Site Plan Modification (MSPM 21-001) and Conditional Use (COUS 21-001) approval for Raising Cane's Restaurant including a new 2,771-square foot building with dual drive-through facilities and 68 seats (50 indoor, 18 outdoor) on a BJ's Wholesale Club outparcel located at 1550 West Boynton Beach Boulevard within the Planned Commercial Development (PCD) zoning district. Applicant: Kristina Belt, Kimley Horn & Associates. EXPLANATION OF REQUEST: The Applicant is seeking Conditional Use/ Major Site Plan Modification approval for the construction of a 2,771 square foot Raising Cane's fast food restaurant and associated site improvements, located at 1550 W. Boynton Beach Boulevard in the PCD (Planned Commercial Development) zoning district. The subject outparcel was previously a Wells Fargo Bank and the existing bank building is proposed to be demolished, allowing for construction of a new fast food restaurant. The proposed drive-through facilities require Conditional Use approval. Additionally, per Ch. 2 Art. 11. Sec. FA.b. of the Land Development Regulations (LDR), the proposed restaurant and related site improvements require Major Site Plan Modification approval prior to permitting. The proposed restaurant use is permitted in the PCD zoning district; however, per Ch. 3Art. IV. Sec. 3.13.5. of the LDR, the proposed drive-through facility requires Conditional Use approval. HOW WILL THIS AFFECT CITY PROGRAMS OR SERVICES? N/A FISCAL IMPACT: N/A ALTERNATIVES: To not approve a new commercial use for a vacant building at a shopping center. STRATEGIC PLAN: STRATEGIC PLAN APPLICATION: CLIMATE ACTION APPLICATION: N/A Is this a grant? Grant Amount: Page 69 of 91 ATTACHMENTS: Type Description D Staff Report Raising Cane's Staff Report D Location Map Exhibit A Location Map D Drawings Exhibit B Survey D Drawings Exhibit B Site Plan D Drawings Exhibit B Civil Plan D Drawings Exhibit B Floor Plan D Drawings Exhibit B Exterior Elevations D Drawings Exhibit B Exterior Elevations D Drawings Exhibit B Landscape Plan D Drawings Exhibit B Photometric Plan D Exhibit Exhibit C Applicant Justification D Conditions of Approval Exhibit D Conditions of Approval Page 70 of 91 DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PLANNING AND ZONING DIVISION MEMORANDUM NO. PZ 22-007 STAFF REPORT TO: Chair and Members Planning and Development Board FROM: Kathleen Hatcher Senior Planner DATE: February 10, 2022 PROJECT NAME/NO: Raising Cane's Restaurant COUS 21-001 / MSPM 21-001 REQUEST: Conditional Use and Major Site Plan Modification approval for the construction of a 2,771 square foot Raising Cane's fast food restaurant and associated site improvements, located at 1550 W. Boynton Beach Blvd. in the PCD (Planned Commercial Development) zoning district. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Property Owner: Boynton St LLC Applicant/Agent Kristina Belt with Kimley Horn &Associates, Inc. Location: 1550 W Boynton Beach Blvd (see Exhibit "A") Existing Land Use/Zoning: LRC (Local Retail Commercial) / PCD (Planned Commercial Development) Proposed Land Use/Zoning: No change proposed Proposed Uses: Fast Food Restaurant Acreage: 0.8597-acres/ 37,448 square feet Adjacent Uses: North: Right-of-way for W Boynton Beach Blvd, and farther north a bank (TD Bank) zoned C-3 (Community Commercial); South: A Big-Box Discount Store (BJ's Wholesale Club) on 12 acres zoned PCD (Planned Commercial Development); East: Main ingress/egress drive for BJ's shopping center, and farther east a government facility (USPS Post Office) zoned PU (Public Usage); and Page 71 of 91 Raising Cane's— 1550 W Boynton Beach Blvd Staff Report COUS 21-001 /MSPM 21-001 Page 2 West: A restaurant with drive through (Chick Fil-A), another outparcel of the BJ's PCD, zoned PCD (Planned Commercial Development). PROPERTY OWNER NOTIFICATION Owners of properties within 400 feet of the subject project were mailed a notice of this request and its respective hearing dates. The applicant has certified that signage is posted and notices mailed in accordance with Ordinance No. 04-007 and 05-004. BACKGROUND/ PROPOSAL Mr. Bryan Brown, representing Raising Cane's Restaurants, LLC, is seeking Conditional Use / Major Site Plan Modification approval for the construction of a 2,771 square foot Raising Cane's fast food restaurant and associated site improvements, located at 1550 W. Boynton Beach Boulevard in the PCD (Planned Commercial Development) zoning district. The subject property is one (1) of three (3) outparcels of the BJ's Wholesale Club PCD. The subject outparcel was previously a Wells Fargo Bank and was closed long ago. The existing bank building is proposed to be demolished, allowing for construction of the proposed fast food restaurant. The proposed drive-through facilities require a Conditional Use approval. Additionally, per Ch. 2 Art. II. Sec. FA.b. of the Land Development Regulations (LDR), the proposed restaurant and related site improvements require a Major Site Plan Modification approval prior to permitting. The proposed restaurant use is a permitted use in the PCD zoning district; however, per Ch. 3 Art. IV. Sec. 3.13.5. of the LDR, the proposed drive-through facilities require Conditional Use approval. STANDARDS FOR EVALUATING CONDITIONAL USES AND ANALYSIS Ch. 3 Art. IV. Sec. 4.C. of the LDR contains the following standards to which conditional uses are required to conform. Following each of these standards is the Planning and Zoning Division's evaluation of the application as it pertains to each of the standards. In addition, the applicant has submitted a separate detailed justification statement that addresses each of these standards (see Exhibit"C" —Justification Statement). The Planning & Development Board and City Commission shall consider only such conditional uses as are authorized under the terms of these zoning regulations and, in connection therewith, may grant conditional uses absolutely or conditioned upon adherence to conditions of approval including, but not limited to, the dedication of property for streets, alleys, recreation space and sidewalks, as shall be determined necessary for the protection of the surrounding area and the citizens' general welfare, or deny conditional uses when not in harmony with the intent and purpose of this section. In evaluating an application for conditional use approval, the Board and Commission shall consider the effect of the proposed use on the general health, safety and welfare of the community and make written findings certifying that satisfactory provisions have been made concerning the following standards, where applicable: 1. Ingress and egress to the subject property and proposed structures thereon, with particular reference to automobile and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, and access in case of fire or catastrophe. Page 72 of 91 Raising Cane's— 1550 W Boynton Beach Blvd Staff Report COUS 21-001 /MSPM 21-001 Page 3 The subject property currently has two (2) points of ingress and egress via cross-access easements; one (1) full driveway located on the east side of the parcel, at the main entrance into the BJ's Wholesale Club site where Winchester Park Blvd. intersects with W. Boynton Beach Blvd. (see Exhibit "A"). The second driveway is right-in, right-out access located to the west between the adjacent outparcels of Chick-Fil A and Autozone (formerly Applebee's). There are no new vehicular access points proposed. A dual-drive through with two (2) lanes is proposed for the restaurant that will provide sufficient vehicle stacking. In addition, pedestrian access to the site is proposed to be enhanced with stamped concrete and pedestrian lighting along the north and south pedestrian pathways. 2. Off-street parking and loading areas where required, with particular attention to the items in standard#1 above, and the economic, glare, noise, and odor effects the conditional use will have on adjacent and nearby properties, and the city as a whole. The minimum parking required for restaurant uses is calculated at one (1) parking space per 100 square feet of gross floor area, or one (1) parking space for every 2.5 seats, whichever is greater. The site plan indicates 68 seats (50 inside, 18 outside) are proposed, therefore a minimum of 28 parking spaces would be required based on the seat count. The building is proposed to be 2,771 square feet, also requiring a minimum of 28 parking spaces. Therefore, minimum required parking is calculated to be 28 spaces. The applicant is proposing the five percent (5%) reduction in the number of parking spaces allowed per Ch. 4. Art. V. Sec. 3.A. of the LDR. A 5% reduction would be one (1) parking space less, or 27 parking spaces required. However, the reduction requires landscaping within the parking lot to be maximized, impervious surfaces to be minimized, and pedestrian connections to be enhanced. The applicant has submitted a written justification for the request and revised the plans to comply with the above criteria. The site plan depicts the provision of 27 parking spaces within the proposed lease parcel boundaries, including two (2) handicap spaces, in compliance with code requirements. Relative to impacts on adjacent properties, the nearest residential structure to the west is approximately 425 feet away from the subject property. Any proposed lighting will have to comply with the City's lighting regulations, which are designed to reduce the impact of glare in adjacent properties. The noise associated with the proposed business should not be much different from the current surrounding commercial businesses. 3. Refuse and service areas, with particular reference to the items in standards 1 and 2 above. The applicant intends to have a dumpster enclosure for trash and another for recycling that are proposed to the south of the building and drive-through lanes, for waste removal purposes. Trash removal needs would be absorbed into current solid waste services by the City without any anticipated capacity limitations. 4. Utilities, with reference to locations, availability, and compatibility. The City of Boynton Beach Utility Department currently serves the site, and utilities would continue to be available and provided, consistent with Comprehensive Plan policies and City regulations. No additional impacts are anticipated with this application. 5. Screening, buffering and landscaping with reference to type, dimensions, and character. The property has existing landscaping around the perimeter of the entire site. The Landscape Plan (Sheet L-1) depicts the addition of landscape plantings along all property Page 73 of 91 Raising Cane's— 1550 W Boynton Beach Blvd Staff Report COUS 21-001 /MSPM 21-001 Page 4 lines, to fill in any gaps and further enhance the existing material. Additionally, the plan depicts landscaping along the north and south sides of the subject property, including screening of the drive-through operation as required by code, and landscaping of the parking lot islands and service area at the rear of the building. Typical landscape material utilized in the design include Live Oak, Gumbo Limbo, and Orange Geiger trees, Sabal and Montgomery palms, Cocoplum, Schefflera Arboricola, Fakahatchee Grass, Podocarpus and Croton shrubs, as well as Green Island Ficus and Jasmine groundcovers. There are also existing mature Live Oak trees and Palms that will remain in place in the final site design. 6. Signs, and proposed exterior lighting, with reference to glare, traffic safety, economic effect, and compatibility and harmony with adjacent and nearby properties. The project proposes the installation of eight (8) new light poles on the site. The new poles will be comparable in height (25 feet tall) to the existing light poles in the area. In an effort to minimize glare and impact on surrounding properties, the light fixures will be full cutoff design, as required by code. The light levels depicted on Sheet E1.1 do not exceed the maximum allowable of 5.9 foot-candles. Relative to signage for the project, the applicant proposes to add a tenant panel on the existing monument sign for the shopping center located at the northeast corner of the subject property next to the ingress/egress drive. This tenant identification sign is designed to match the existing sign colors of red and white. The maximum wall signage allowed for the new restaurant building has been determined to be approximately 58 square feet (length of north building wall x 1.5). The applicant has proposed more wall signage than allowed on the building elevations submitted. In addition to wall signage and two (2) menu boards, the applicant has proposed additional signage that is considered artwork and is subject to City review and approval by the Art Advisory Board. The agent for the project has been informed of this, as well as that project signage will be reviewed for compliance with the maximum area standard at the permitting stage. 7. Required setbacks and other open spaces. The proposed restaurant building is designed to meet or exceed the minimum setback requirements of the PCD zoning district. Minimum building setbacks from property lines are: front (north) required 40'; rear (south) required 40'; side (east and west) required 30'. The proposed restaurant building complies with all required setbacks. The closest residential structure is nearly 425 feet to the west. The perimeter of the site has existing mature landscaping that will be further enhanced to provide a nice streetscape along West Boynton Beach Boulevard. 8. General compatibility with adjacent properties, and other property in the zoning district. The proposed restaurant use is generally compatible with the remainder of the commercial uses in the area, and with the residential properties in the vicinity. The building's design is typical of most commercial structures with a smooth stucco finish, control joints and cornices in soft earth tone colors; a neutral gray primary body color (Sherwin Williams "Summit Gray'), and a light beige secondary body/accent color ("Oyster Shell'). A brick veneer will accent portions of the fagade in paints named "Alamo"and `Beldan Norman" The proposed canopies and awnings are black aluminum as well as the store front and window trim. Page 74 of 91 Raising Cane's— 1550 W Boynton Beach Blvd Staff Report COUS 21-001 /MSPM 21-001 Page 5 9. Height of building and structures, with reference to compatibility and harmony with adjacent and nearby properties, and the city as a whole. The drive-through restaurant is designed as a one-story structure, with the typical parapet wall designed at a height of 18' - 2" with the top of the accent parapets built at 19' — 10", which is compatible with the structures on the same and adjacent properties, and under the maximum allowable height of 45' in the PCD zoning district. 10. Economic effects on adjacent and nearby properties, and the city as a whole. The overall economic effects of the proposed use on adjacent and nearby properties, and the City as a whole, will be enhanced with the increased activity on this property and the development of the partially vacant site. The City will also benefit from the collection of permit fees, certificate of use fees, and increased assessable value of the property. 11. Conformance to the standards and requirements, which apply to site plans, as set forth in Part lll, Chapter 4. Site Plan Review, of the City's Land Development Regulations. Relative to concurrency requirements, a traffic statement for the proposed project was sent to the Palm Beach County Engineering Traffic Division for concurrency review in order to ensure an adequate level of service. A traffic concurrency approval letter from Palm Beach County has been received stating the proposed project meets traffic concurrency requirements, will generate 246 new daily trips, and has a build out deadline date of December 31, 2026 for traffic concurrency. School concurrency is not required for this type of project. As for the City's water and sewer concurrency review, the City's water capacity would meet the projected potable water demand for this project. Sufficient sanitary sewer and wastewater treatment capacity is also currently available to serve the project, subject to the applicant making a firm reservation of capacity, following site plan approval. Solid Waste disposal capacity has been confirmed through the issuance of a certificate of availability by Palm Beach County Solid Waste Authority. Staff reviewed the site plan and determined that current staffing levels would be sufficient to meet the expected demand for services. Conceptual drainage information was provided for the City's review. The Engineering Division has found the conceptual information to be adequate and is recommending that the review of specific drainage solutions be deferred until time of permit review. 12. Compliance with, and abatement of nuisances and hazards in accordance with, the performance standards of Chapter 2, Section 4.N. of the City's Land Development Regulations and conformance to the City of Boynton Beach Noise Control Ordinance. The project would not create smoke, odors, fumes, or toxic matter that would negatively impact the neighboring properties. As noted above, with the distance to residential units, and the buffer wall and intervening landscaping, noise associated with operation should not be an issue. With incorporation of all conditions and staff recommendations contained herein, the proposed use would exist in a manner that is in compliance with the above- referenced codes and ordinances of the City of Boynton Beach. RECOMMENDATION Based on the information contained herein, compliance with development regulations and conditional use standards, staff recommends APPROVAL of this request for conditional use and major site plan modification, subject to satisfying all conditions of approval recommended by Page 75 of 91 Raising Cane's— 1550 W Boynton Beach Blvd Staff Report COUS 21-001 /MSPM 21-001 Page 6 staff as contained in Exhibit "D" — Conditions of Approval. Any additional conditions of approval recommended by the Board and required by the City Commission will be placed in Exhibit "D" accordingly. Furthermore, pursuant to Chapter 2, Article II, Section 2.0 Conditional Uses, a time limit is to be set within which the proposed project is to be developed. Staff recommends that a period of 18 months be allowed to receive the necessary building permits. S:\Planning\SHARED\WP\PROJECTS\Raising Cane's Restaurant\COUS 21-001 MSPM 21-001\Staff Report.doc Page 76 of 91 EXHIBIT "A" - LOCATION MAP 1 F 1 x > A w - fi r ! 4 � '�it'Ss� I art f � ` ✓, a F � 40 *T'i , n r" 4 .e t ` t i 1 r. a r r r. Kin, a rt � ss IEj ( � February 10, 2022 1:2,257 0 0.0175 0.035 0.07 mi Page- i7T of 91 0 0.03 0.06 0.12 km _ W S Y <m > _ U wm Ld w — zm A � ¢ N n°x ¢=`mLL o VN >�oG pm = ¢�CLa voo O o QF yOLL m�o'a - >> CF = UWi ILIM CZ W O ZNai a a --o N Im o ZJ °ma V �ee msess r�mmm �ry �� mm _ ITT----- oo _ n 118Vd 2131S3H31AIAA d` nvaie aavn3�n o o a a o z��mo iv J W Eop w `^ 000w�oo>dom _ w azo < :S El ale z w `aoa < oa=ow„ (/ m r� zlooao o =9 �000 w _LL 0 a��aaaoo�aQoy Qo - - o oN - w -_ w ------ -- lu _ _ T II �-- �� t _ III , � - ------ o oh 1 �I JU m emo ins3iaaNm sre I I b 0£ZcL, bL 3 LZoZOS I �n a _ ,a a_ +� ✓a„1 I �a„ W ,r 41 4� 8� ZR I — � r_ 111 r � 1 e wp- �No�z g £69bMZb6 LZoZON. 1 "Vd 16 o� I 9 I G A9AJ 8 1ig1yx haat �a��o lM-69L-L6'-J ONE-69L-L6'aPi r F e VZ09L Xi—id'Peon dopa 0089 ao�,u0 aoddne w-elsaa Q N m z r 4 am > ^ o ® hil Y� 9 U U o w" o �w W £� ig 0 a 1 t ftst� € wo •• 8N21112GiS3HHNIM kms. Yk O Q Qam'pw C, I I S ' " 2 o o Y I0" 0 0 0 0 0 0' 00 00 0®0 0 ee(D(I ~ ANl m LY - £40£Z 344 LZ ZOS 5 _ _ r I �I inti un' ` m I 1 a w � m 0 m w LU a a o ca O ° z� 1! r - —• —. O 1 ,£6 94Z M bl LZoZON L2 2 I..L Sas 1 ...... —1 so 41-- maga 3.11 osa.m— 11——N—1c:r--iaaus --1°=�oiexe Pan°ia LOl£-69L-L6'-J OOl£-69L-L6'aPi r F e VZ09L Xi laid'Peon dopa 0089 ao�,u0 aoddne w-eIsaa 6. m m "m > o ID ID s� a::� e3.��3 �a�3d.edoso3�o o 11 z o o lu w _ e 00 3v i � e I_ p cmvo EtsEr�ErR � N � 3 f0 1 I: J w �daw o — o� s w w a 0 w o w w � �r o LL a wp = w a w w w w LL m 0 LLo a a op 0 0 a a = 0 00000000000 000(D(" (9(D,' .� '° --- a ------ ----- - ---- ------ - 00 f -j—EL11 .. ILI, rW �ro pin - o . . . . . . . . . . . . W .....-«.�se�� o�resrus:Ili ome-esracs�aiai VZ09LX OLo ld'Vnay doysp ooBO m m V 1 oa o ooUo l,oddnS lueinejsd v ¢ =r o 75 � m s o� m of 41 w _ ------------ 1-44 w 0 y F ss w z o V ]" 8 II N I --- - fs Vim;• w:a� p /... ......E ¢�� CV --------------------- ----------r O � rn ____ ______________ s 22 w� w � w i ------- ------ 0 � � m a�spa _ v s d O I m r I w a I c e �I O d O O H O Yv ❑ ❑ ❑ Ueld JOOIJ - 9 I!q!gx3 < Q-,�Y iM-69c-z1s.1 ame-s9rzle..aia1 r tDgl X1'l'lid0ol0 d�ro 0099 a�1110 LocanS luemesad M Q 0 0 o K K w o a L o o 0 oJm- a0 .� w a pp � f i _ � o = b w o0op0 Q 0 0Viol 0 L - 2 a w r _ e y w 0MUM m B a� o� ti m a ow j � < ooa o� w - w o z�o w N o suoi}en913 aoiaa}x3 - 9 jggx:� iM-6ec-z1s.1 ame-s9rzle..aia1 r tDgl X1'l'old0ol8 d�ro 0099 a�1110 LocanS luemesa9 M a o o K K 0 sra9x�Nasa�H9 �x/'� 6 _ Y s N a w o E `cT w =moo= 0 0=� a q s 0 5 _ m 0 •� q �!m Y 4 Y _ = u r o = O a y e x y OOOrO oa I IRA O a r r 2 w � m O✓ n � � w a z o.v O SUOi}en913 JOia91x3 - 9 jggx:� lM-69L-L6'-J ONE-69L-L6'aPi r F e VZ09L Xi—id'Peoy dopa 0089 = J g L g Z m eo 110 noddns Iu-Blso8 E. NNNNNId NNN71N� - x - - o - - g 0 0 N mm ? r w4 oo a oV 1 N o o J gip- owaa doe =� spa�� r 96kig � �w'"as�o egg " g5N8m�O Wd 8,2 w O O �a m ., o o •• ''.. �a �` o� v pOOO°OOO��OOO�OOO�OO OOO��O�OOO�� 3V I I r � � 0888888888888888888888888888888888 y d� 4� _�� zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz»»»»»> i --3��8 �000044444444444444444400000000000 �� w�ccc��wcw�ccc�w�ccwwcw��ccc �� $ ott�rcrcrc wrc��rc�w�w�rc�rcrc wrcrc��w�w�rc�� Q � um ________ ___ m o m o o ° rc rc tt mmmm mm mm o �' 'o w rc o a za � zz aaaaa WWWW WW WW F o m o m o 444jj-uuzzzu»»>T— �wwww www o — o �aaaa�Nm- HUM N � � E `� ° F Fa iaan�000°aa�n�oNNN au�uu ��a�u a a a m a w c oaNmm1— d°uuw wwww°**> mrrrr °imrr NoI'll ooaaa°°&°a m mo moi a 'o w� � �w rc °z��5 Fff000�`add�odd�ado Ix �� d�oN m = aaaayyaa�yyyyy�a�aaLL��ww�ww ��- N�aiaa°O 000000000aaaoo X- 1�11 /�-\ll r� ~ ppmmmm>;VVV»j>?u°a�rctt»>Ou°i000�oo�oo� + an'18 NI Nd b3163HONIM f 71 Q _ '= , I reg /*LY m I�� IS � J t i w "A d co J" co wV — — — wm � o 0 a ® wl. 6MP�,d No�.�ods�o 33a.o�,f=,aau=�o�d,od„u�oae�o,�oe«<o sa�o�bu�s�oa—eoo�s«e�,�a�a�f N wooz osso zzoz so..o��o� �,d No��sods�a 33a.o�,,�o�o, ea��o�6��=�oa+as,aaus uau,N o aro�e Pa+,o�d ems-serails.-d ooze-serads.aPi r F e 1 baosdxi—id'Peoadousl,soo8o = a 8 M aol,uo nwe,� odd�s elsaa a 1 °' 0 O o N p - o SY80NId HHH31H3 - x — o Np O p /'� - _ __ _ t, T - 1 o v ^ bo z CNJ v _ x o22 o - � o — - - - - ww �FK wW O�UOFQ F - - K ~ £QowZ zx u°Qo W NLL No aoN w =: �xQ O�QOU £ QUOU pQOFF3o aQ 30�Kp dd Www � F - £wF U '--gP - z - wN 40 O O O O O 43p O O ° O 40 Q� O O x - OFzww 04 - wwV mFw aFww,�a - m 3m Z x m Z L 3m L L L Z 3m 3F m L aZaxo v}3wo w �o3w � ywpoz - r~z 3 wzW w yF{I �y{I o ��pZg w> x xa Ol cv = _ � v �n d'_^ _ tv _ cv 6� °Iv cNv v v 4 H QNwx r- �°g4w iNwmmQm www , QQFo w _ d ~ ro� N a�x WwNw 4 OOQZo � 34Q50O ® a o Z � _ wQU OQQat C£3mK U£�13K�04 03 O�4V3F 4£U __ _ �� 3N N O � O N 0 0 0 O 11U_ p 0 0 m w z3 6i 7E w p �m m m � K LL UV U U U U UU �U U V U LA �e m F FK = L5 £ - E azN - F E t - - v fLL u u w rr d3 N 3a 3W.� ry E owww `°aa w3gz LLI aN IN U £� rvLL � NOJZ O N3 w4 z Q u m U 6 N N > NV U U N NF •Q LL -r wN J Q{3� ��3ID 4 pr wm o ° an-18 NI Vd U31S3HONIM oQ ° u 0 r`4 � LJ R .O w s 1 lYI ry{� 1 M � � �.� t �,,... �. ._— OQm p LL J ` I Fm " � i + w iYG m „ e g T- < U ' ug L� co z8m �m uald ad ss;puaw9 j q! xE] b�o�,d 3��saNd,oz„s,aau=�old,ad„u�oae�°,Noe 4«o se��bus,oa_eoo�sttet,�a�a�,� wotz axso zzoz 90 tio��ot �,d 3dd�a�,o z,,�o�o, ea��o�6�4=toa,as,aaus ua,=��o awe Pa„old IDIS-69#-Z#6-J ONE-69L-L6..alai _ r F e bZOSL XI'oueld'Peon tlo4si,8 0089 Y G J g 0 uo I,oddns we,�elsaa °' 0 o rV V O SY80NId N8A71N9 - x - - o O O J tw a€g acd74 � s�4a= =g M ma „, 9wa LLaa�c E 5a w w o a e �a zN � 00 °m o PH XM encs sw8tws, £s' a oo ps n3s ma ��d ead HH, Q Q 4 -p� +D+Ot+' Mo k 1p3 ffi O w Y gj N HIIfi; 619a minaw =tea m�a> ORP s ° ami se, _ LL'"55gmW kw=4a$�`ONS egP � M�oRt d y g S i En .3"Z -R< �LL� .�' s a w z o a� w o � `u c s t � yew a vsvv3a 3m�avr,ezz#s,aays�oia#aao#v=oae��, e,too z iia—aooss«n nzan eaM#r tz os so zzoz so � r sv.3o 3aaosaNaz s zz, z ea � iia,s, v ,i a is e v n is MM-69L-L6-J ONE-69L-L6 Pi _ r F e _ VZ09L Xi—ld'Peoy dopa 0089 Y ¢ g O fV o eopio lmddns we,neleea " N o _ El 0 o Q O o C-0SY80NId N8A71N9 v - r� - - - ¢ o N �i w J U ¢ v r, 00N= o G o o uli � 5�g� ��w oaf= ;W alloo FgQo FQaw 35�k sm�w �ooa�� ofgx�=�� N�wmN w -oazaQ� � � tgo� � awa" a��OQ r -za a o�3oF= � � �dNo� wow - �� _ -pFN> �g8° �! � 408�� a w�° 5a m LL�a �az8w3� £ �8m LL W. -3., ��g LLa z3>��3�g oR N Am UP,®3 U P, � wawwosooga4 e ogmo o - _ Baa °a � hw,� ��g � � as m<ga== o Ww�o �d ww��o�azaNwl e -H - �oaF �,°N j a� -- �a ��a _- g�w - ��gog�w N K., § p�6 � wU __�� —W 2i 'g o§ a agom � 48! 3 §o< osm w as �'RE ° Y 2, Nig a TJN H", �a °1. nom m _ LL�d � �� , a o� K �mg5 � yo&� "° ° ^W4aQ 6o £ Qom �-_ Wz5 2 mgao °�Qo "�F oma< N Fw w of o aE gm wa� a § a 3 0� as who g3� aW ga� ° gogN 3 _t� W _ _ 5o��a Q _`d �°Qo3N4 DR o?oNmo g4a 40g NLL �q � z `�� = o8m <�-=5� AoSaQo a B0"v0,4" " osog=d - oaf w3wwwww° ag m = =dao ww w ��3g"aoNz°�<�aa ��a moi°ww= N dq��° wT ti 2� wo a� _ aQOFog� ra 3000 3�owaroNOFww - �N«g --"�&rc - Ez - �W9 2 g�J� �5 £�� Y <g - £m�_- L C 69L —J OM 69L-d L6 alai 2091X1 oueld'PQoH do ysi,8 0099 — 1 0 0 `\001„ Co A. w momm �� ops y swE a F sS .„a — a �s ao nom pop o £ - S ag mp ad _ a a x S b --x:13-'H `Eli M e LO e` w< w a ue!(4OIJ19 OIOgd 9 I!q!gx3 L C 69L —J OM 69L-d L6 alai 2091X1 oueld'PQoH do ysi,8 0099 — 1 0 0 `\001„ Co A. w momm �� ops y swE a F sS .„a — a �s ao nom pop o £ - S ag mp ad _ a a x S b --x:13-'H `Eli M e LO e` w< w a ue!(4OIJ19 OIOgd 9 I!q!gx3 EXHIBIT "D" Conditions of Approval Project Name: Raising Cane's Restaurant File number: COUS 21-001 /MSPM 21-001 Reference: 3rd review-plans identified as a Major Site Plan Modification with a Januar+ 06. 2022 Planning and Zoning Department date stall marking. DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT ENGINEERING/ PUBLIC WORKS/FORESTRY/ UTILITIES Comments: None, all previous comments addressed at DART meeting. FIRE Comments: 1. Please understand this review is for the Site Plan only. The Floor Plan will be reviewed in detail at time of permit submittal. POLICE Comments: None, all previous comments addressed at DART meeting. BUILDING DIVISION Comments: None, all previous comments addressed at DART meeting. PARKS AND RECREATION Comments: None PLANNING AND ZONING Comments: 2. It is the applicant's responsibility to ensure that the application requests are publicly advertised in accordance with Ordinance 04- 007 and Ordinance 05-004, and an affidavit with attachments (ownership list, radius map, and copy of mailing labels) is required to be provided to the City Clerk and Planning & Zoning one (1) week prior to the first public hearing. 3. At time of permit submittal, please ensure downspouts are internal or Page 90 of 91 Raising Cane's Restaurant(COUS 21-001 /MSPM 21-001) Conditions of Approval Page 2 of 2 DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE ]:�REJECT encased in architectural elements. 4. At time of permit submittal, please provide documentation that all customer areas will have vision glass, and said glass will only have a light tint for visibility into the restaurant. Also, any faux, non- transparent glass shall be designed to mimic the color of the vision glass. 5. At time of permit submittal, correct building elevation directions and label front/north, side/east, side/west, and rear/south. 6. At time of permit submittal, revise sign package to comply with the sign regulations of the LDR. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Comments: N/A PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD CONDITIONS Comments: To be determined. CITY COMMISSION CONDITIONS Comments: To be determined. S:1Planning\SHAREDIWPIPROJECTS\Raising Cane's Restaurant\COUS 21-001 MSPM 21-0011COA.doc Page 91 of 91