06-11-96 Special/Workshop DELRAy BEACI~
SPECIAL/WORKSHOP MEETING - JUNE 11, 1996 - 6:00 P.M. 1
FIRST FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM
The City will 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 Doug
Randolph at 243-7127 (voice) or 243-7199 (TDD), 24 hours prior to
the program or activity in order for the City to reasonably
accommodate your request. Adaptive listening devices are avail-
able for meetings in the Commission Chambers.
~PECIAL MEETING AGENDA
(1) RESOLUTION NO. 38-96: Approve a resolution authorizing the
Mayor and City Clerk to certify a survey of a portion of
~S.W. 5th Avenue right-of-way between 4th and 6th Streets,
and directing that the survey be recorded in the Public
Records of Palm Beach County.
(2) MICHAEL LUCAS v CITY; IVERY WILLIAMS v. CITY; AND R.J.
RITFELD v. CITY/SETTLEMENTS AND APPROVAL OF FUNDING SOURCE:
Consider approval of settlements in the referenced matter as
recommended by the ~ity Attorney, and approval of identified
funding source.
Alison MacGregor Harty
City Clerk
WORKSHOP AGENDA
(1) Comprehensive Plan Evaluation and Appraisal Report ~AR).
(2) v/North Federal Highway Redevelopment Plan.
(3) Commission Comments.
a. City Manager
b. City Attorney
c. City Commission
******************************************************************
Please be advised that if a person decides to appeal any decision
made by the City Commission with respect to any matter considered
at this meeting, such person will need to ensure that a verbatim
record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal
is based. The City neither provides nor prepares such record.
Writer's Dire, ct LLqc: (40/) 243-?~
DELRAY BEACH
AlPaca C~ ~MO~~
~ DATE: May 28, 1996
~: Ci~ Co~ssion
~OM: David N. Tolces, Assistant Ci~ Attom~
SUBJECT: Southwest 5th Avenue Right-of-Way
A review of the City's records revealed that there was not a recorded deed or dedication
for the right-of-way for S.W. 5th Avenue from S.Wo 4th Street to S.W. 6th Street.
Pursuant to Section 95.361, Florida Statutes, the right-of-way is deemed dedicated to the
City upon the recording of a survey locating the right-of-way and containing a
certification that the City constructed, and has maintained, and monitored the right-of-
way for at least four years. The City has constructed, maintained, and monitored this
section of road for at least four years. Therefore, approval of the attached resolution is
appropriate. Upon approval, the City Clerk will record a certified survey.
Please call if you have any questions.
DNT:smk
Attachment
cc: David T. Harden, City Manager
C. Danvers Beatty, City Engineer
Scott Solomon, Superintendent of Streets
Sharon Morgan, City Clerk's Office
<..
RESOLUTION NO. 38-96
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND THE
CITY CLERK TO CERTIFY A SURVEY OF A PORTION OF
SOUTHWEST 5TH AVENUE, RECITING THE FACT THAT RIGHT
TITLE EASEMENT AND APPURTENANCES IN AND TO SUCH ROAD
HAVE VESTED IN THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA;
DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO FILE SUCH A SURVEY IN THE
OFFICE OF THE CLERK OF THE CIR£UIT COURT OF PALM BEACH
COUNTY.
WHEREAS, the City of Delray Beach, Florida, has constructed
Southwest 5th Avenue extend/ng from Southwest 4th Street to Southwest 6th
Street; and
WHEREAS, such road is known as S.W. 5th Avenue and has been
maintained by the City in accordance with the City's standards and
practices for monitoring and maintaining its roads; and
WHEREAS, the road has been in existence, monitored, maintained
and used continuously and uninterruptedly as a City road for a period well
in excess of four years; and
WHEREAS, Florida Statute 95.361 provides that such roads shall be
deemed to be dedicated to the public.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF UELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized
to file a survey of Southwest 5th Avenue from Southwest 4th Street to
Southwest 6th Street, reciting that such road has been maintained in
accordance with City standard procedures for maintaining City roads,
continuously and uninterruptedly for a period of at least four years.
Section 2. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to record the
survey of S.W. 5th Avenue with a recitation stated above and certified by
the Mayor and City Clerk.
PASSED AND ADOPTED in special session on this the l lth day of
June, 1996.
,- ., .. ,- :'~,~ _---- .:
CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
FACSIMILE 407/278-4755
Wrist's Direct Line: (407) 243-7090
DELRAY BEACH
~'~ ¢~ M~MO~UM
1993
-- TO: David T. Harden, City Manager
FROM: David N. Tokes, ~sismt Ci~ ARom~
SUBJECT: $,W. 5th Avenue Right-of-Way Resolution
Dan Beatty was able to discuss the road survey with Manny Gutierrez. It appears that
what is shown on the survey is the right-of-way as it currently exists ia the field based
on the property comers found by the surveyor. However, neither the surveyor nor staff
could fred documents ia the public records which supports the location of the right-of-
way. The road survey, once recorded, will make the existing right-of-way public record
and protect the City's interest.
Please place the item on the June 4, 1996 agenda. If you have any questions, please
call.
DNT:smk
cc: Dan Beatty, City Engineer '
Pnnted on Flecycte~/Paoer
£1T¥ DF I]ELRiI'F BEI:ii
Writer's Direct Line: (407) 243-7091
DELRAY BEACH
Ali. America City MEMORANDUM
1993
TO: City Commission
FROM: Susan A. Ruby, City Attorney
SUBJECT: Michael Lucas v. City; Ivery Williams v. City; R.J. Ritfeld v. City -
Settlements and Approval of Funding Source
The remaining three plaintiffs, as set forth above, have agreed to settle their lawsuits
against the City on the terms set forth in the attached letter from Lucille Turner, Esq.,
the City's outside counsel. Our office concurs with outside counsel's recommendation to
settle on the terms outlined in the attached letter.
Joe Safford, Finance Director, has requested that the Commission approve the funding
source (001-000-301-10.00) for these settlements, and the three settlements previously
approved by the Commission at the June 4, 1996 meeting.
By copy to David Harden, City Manager, our office requests that this item be placed on
the City Commission's June 11, 1996 agenda as a Special Meeting item.
Attachment
cc: David Harden, City Manager ~~~,
Lucille Turner, Esq. .
cookl l.sar
June 7, ~ 996
Vhr FAX; Original via U.S. Mail
Susan Ruby, Esquire
City Attorney
City of De~'ay Beach
200 NW. First Avenue
Delray Beach, FL 33444
Re: Micha..el. Lucas v. Deltav Beach, Case No. 93-8593-Civ-Ryslmmp
][very WilliaLns v. De!ray Be. ach, Case No. 93-96fll-Civ-Ryskamp
R.J. Ritfeld v. Deh'av Beach, Case No. 94-8107-Civ-Ryskarap
Dear Susan:
This will confirm that we recommend the City Commission approve the proposed
settlements o£the above-referenced cases pursuant to the terms set out in the executed Stipulation
£or Entry of Consent Decree that is being provided to you today.
Amounts Payable to Michael Lucas & Ivery Williams -- The City would pay a total of
$390~000 to settle these claims. This amount includes the verdict amounts o£$125,000 for
Michael Lucas and $150,000 for Jvery Williams, an additional $115,000 for attorneys fees and
costs. This is a reduction ors 15,168 from the amount of fees and damages cla/med by Mr. Lucas
and Sergeant Williams following the trial. It is also $15,000 less than the amount these plaintiffs
were seeking to settle their claims before trial.
Amount Payable to R.J. Ritfeld -- The City would pay R.I. Rifteld a total of $240,000
to settle his claims. This amount hacludes the verdict amount of $140,000 and an additional
$I00,000 for attorneys fees mad costs. This is a reduction of $14,687 from the amount of fees
damages claimed by Sergeant Ritfeld following the trial. It is also $10,000 less than the total
amount he was seeking to settle this matter before trial.
Susan Ruby, Esquire
June 7, 1996
Page 2
Advantages of Settlement -- The total immediate savings realized as a result of these
settlements is $29,855. In addition, the City will not be liable for post judgment int~est on the
verdict amounts, which was accruing at the rate of almost .5% per month (approximately $2000 a
month). The Stipulation eliminates the risk of additional claims for fees fi'om these plaintiffs,
wtfich would be ~xpected to arise if the City were to continue to litigate the matter.
The Stipulation is advm~tageous to the City because these plaintiffs have settled for
minimal injunctive4ype relief compared to what they miglat be entitled to if they were to
ultimately prevail in this litigation.
The City does not admit liability in settling the cases. All parties recognize that this action
is taken in order to avoid the costs and uncertainties of further litigation.
Compm'ison of Pre-Trial Settlement Demands with Actual Settlements -- In the final
mediation session before the trial in the matter, the six plaintiffs in this consolidated matter
demanded a total of $2,880,000 dollars to settle tim matter without trial. If the Stipulation is
approved, the City will have settled all the claims by pa.ying plaintiffs and their attorneys a total of
$1,228,000, or approximately forty two percent (~2%) of the pre-trial se~iement demands.
Con.__...~clusion
We believe that it would be in the best interest of the City to accept this
Stipulation, and we recommend approval of it. We understand that you will bring the Stipulation
to the attention ofthe City Commission in order to obtain its approval. Please contact us if we
can be of further assistance in tiffs matter.
Sincerely,
CARSON & ADKINS
.
Lucille E. Turner
C2kRSON' & 2KDKINS
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM
TO: David Harden, City Manager
FROM: e Domingu or of Planning and Zoning
SUBJECT: City Commission Workshop Meeting of June 11. 1996
EVALUATION AND APPRAISAL REPORT
Attached is the Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR). The EAR is a complete
review and assessment of the data and analysis, needs and recommendations,
and objectives and policies contained in the Comprehensive Plan. It includes
both accomplishments since the adoption of the Plan in 1989 and identification
of issues for the City looking forward to the year 2005. The EAR contains
recommendations for Plan Amendments to update the information in the
Comprehensive Plan and direction to implement actions to address identified
needs.
The EAR is presented in two volumes, with an executive summary and a
description of the public participation process. Each element of the
Comprehensive Plan is treated separately, with its own recommendations.
The proposed EAR was transmitted by the Board to the Florida Department of
Community Affairs (DCA) for initial review. The DCA has had no adverse
comments to date as a result of their review.
There has already been extensive public participation in the EAR process,
including Citizen Task Teams, workshops, and a public hearing by the Planning
and Zoning Board. There may still be issues which the public may wish to
address, therefore, it is suggested that the City Commission accept both
verbal and written public comment at this workshop.
The EAR will be presented to the City Commission for adoption at a public
hearing on July 9, 1996. Please bring your copy of the EAR to the public
hearing. The adopted EAR will then be transmitted to the DCA for a formal
sufficiency review. Once deemed sufficient, we will begin the process to amend
the Comprehensive Plan in accordance with the recommendations in the EAR.
This amendment process will follow the normal Comprehensive Plan
Amendment procedures, and must be completed within one year.
S:\EAR\general\CCadoptl
TO: Delray Beach City Commissioners
FROM: Lyn/~and Kathy~Stokes (1220 Southways)
COPY TO: David Harden, City Manager
Diane Dominguez, Director, Planning and Zoning
Board of Directors, Beach Property Owners' Association
RE: Proposed study regarding hotel/motel development in RM zoning included in the
Coastal Management Element of the EAR final draft
DATE: June 6, 1996
Many beach residents are adamantly opposed to the RM hotel proposal outlined in the Coastal
Management Element of the EAR. However, we have been told by the P&Z staff that the study
for this proposal will go forward regardless of whether or not it is included in the EAR.
Consequently, this memorandum outlines some of the issues that we believe need to be included
in the study. Other issues will undoubtedly arise as more information becomes available and
the proposal is debated through the public hearings and any subsequent DCA challenge.
Purpose and Intent of the RM hotel proposal?
The goal of the proposal as outlined in the EAR is unclear. In order to evaluate the results of
the study, the study must first define the goal(s) of the proposal. The possibilities that have been
discussed include the following:
1. Allow existing hotels in RM to repair/improve their properties beyond the current 10%
limitation for non-conforming uses in the LDRs.
2. Allow existing hotels in RM to increase their density.
3. Allow existing hotels in RM to have additional uses.
4. Create new hotel sites in RM with the 1.5 density ratio and ancillary uses mentioned in
the EAR.
5. Some combination of the above.
Comprehensive Plan
In order to support the proposal outlined in the EAR, the study must explain how the proposal
is consistent with the policies of the Comprehensive Plan ("Comp Plan") or must provide a
rationale for changes in the Comp Plan which allow the proposal to go forward. While the
following list may not be exhaustive, these are some of the issues the study must address:
1. Provide the rationale for deleting Policy D-3.3 of the Coastal Management Element
which reads:
In addition to the existing type of commercial development along Atlantic
Avenue, the only other commercial development may be located at the junctions
of Ocean Blvd and Atlantic Avenue, and shall be limited to tourist, resort or
restaurant as opposed to any retail, office or convenient commercial uses.
2. Resolve the conflict between the RM hotel proposal and Objective C-3 of the Coastal
Management Element that there be no change in land use intensity on the barrier island
for vacant and undeveloped land? Similarly, a logical extension of Objective C-3 would
prohibit changes in land use intensity when existing sites are redeveloped.
3. Describe how hotel development in the Coastal Zone can meet the concurrency
requirements which apply to all parts of the City without a conflict with Objective C-3
of the Coastal Management Element which states that new development should not
change the residential character, intensity or demand on infrastructure in the Coastal
Zone.
4. Explain why the RM hotel proposal is not in conflict with policies in the Housing
Element of the Comp Plan which prohibit the City from taking actions that contribute to
the destabilizafion of neighborhoods?
5. If the City's objective is to increase the number of hotel units, would it be more effective
to amend the Comp Plan to encourage additional hotel uses in commercial zoning? If
such a policy already exists, what measurable targets have been established for the
number of rooms, zoning districts and specific locations in the City?
Hotel Expansion as a City Goal
The EAR mentions inventory data collected for the study, which is reproduced as Exhibit 1.
Based on this data and certain supplemental information regarding the Sea-Aire and Waterford
Place, the following chart summarizes the number of hotel units in the City by zoning category
and location:
2
Hotel Units By Zoning Category and Location
ZONING WEST OF TOTAL
CATEGORY BEACH ICW CITY
Residential 599 84 683
40.82% 5.72% 46.56%
Commercial 544 240 784
37.07% 16.35% 53.44%
Residential & 1,143 324 1,467
Commercial 77.92% 22.08% 100%
Source: Data from Exhibit 1, adjusted to reflect demolition of Sea-Aire (-8}
and construction of Waterford Place ( + 78}.
Exhibit 1 and this chart raise the following issues that need to be addressed in the study:
1. Haven't the RM districts at the beach already done their fair share in meeting the City's
hotel goals since they currently support 599 hotel units or 41% of Delray's total hotel
units?
2. If expansion is the intent of this proposal, what is the City's planning goal for hotel
units? Of these, how many will be in commercial zoning? How many will be in
residential zoning?
3. In justifying any expansion goal, the study should explain how the expansion fits into the
City's overall future land use plan and identify those areas of the City which need more
hotel units.
4. The beach currently has 1,143 hotel units (in both residential and commercial districts),
or over three-fourths of the City's hotel units. How much more can the beach support
and still maintain its residential character? How many should be in residential zoning?
5. Are there any guidelines (state or national) for determining how many hotel units a
residential beach area can support without jeopardizing its residential character?
6. What studies have been completed regarding how many hotel rooms the City needs?
What are the results? Are hotels needed that are visible from 1-957 Do they need to be
close to the Tennis Center and downtown?
3
7. What are the plans for hotel expansion that have been formulated by groups such as the
DDA, CRA, Chamber of Commerce, Pineapple Grove, West Atlantic, and other
organizations? What are their planning goals in terms of number of units and their
locations?
Identification of Hotel Sites
In order to evaluate the impact of the proposal, the study needs to identify likely sites for hotel
expansion and the impact each site or type of site would have on the surrounding neighborhood,
including the following concerns:
1. Identify the amount and location of RM acreage citywide in Delray.
2. Which specific RM areas in the City are targeted for hotel/motel expansion?
3. What hotel sites are being targeted west of the Intracoastal for hotel development? What
are the zoning districts? How much of the RM zoning west of 1-95 is represented by
PLID developments which could not be redeveloped as hotels?
4. What sites at the beach are being specifically targeted for new hotel development?
Which are vacant land? Which buildings (either current hotels or buildings currently
used for other uses) are targeted for redevelopment? Which buildings are targeted for
demolition and subsequent development of the raw land?
5. Are there any small hotels at the beach with historical/architectural value that need
protecting? Are there any buildings which could be targeted for possible demolition to
build a hotel that need historical/architectural protection?
6. In terms of the real estate market, what is the potential for lots to be assembled at the
beach for new hotel sites?
Conditional Uses in Residential Zoning in "Neighboring Cities" ..'
The EAR suggests that the proposal may have merit because "most of the City's neighbors allow
hotel/motel uses as a conditional use in RM districts." In order to properly evaluate this
statement, the study needs to expand the scope of the work done to date (see Exhibit 2) to
address the following issues:
1. The four cities cited in Exhibit 2 allow hotels as conditional uses in multi-family zoning
districts have base densities ranging from 12 to 45 units per acre. Do these cities also
allow hotels as conditional uses in multi-family zoning districts with densities as Iow as
Delray's RM base density of 6 units per acre?
2. The survey must be expanded to include other nearby cities such as Ocean Ridge, Palm
Beach, Stuart, etc. and determine whether they allow hotels as a conditional use in
zoning districts similar to that of Delray's RM zoning?
4. Which cities surveyed have residential zoning comparable to Delray's RM zoning east
of the Intracoastal? In other words, is their hotel expansion targeted towards parts of
their cities other than the beach?
5. What studies have been completed regarding hotels and hotel units in neighboring cities?
What are the results? How does the count of hotel units in other beach communities
compare with Delray's - citywide? beach only?
6. Are these other cities allowing timeshares as a conditional use?
Density Issues
RM has a base density of 6 units per acre. Up to 12 may be approved if "the resulting
development is harmonious with adjacent properties and does not adversely affect areas of
environmental significance or sensitivity," pursuant to a special regulation (LDR Sec
4.4.6(H)(1)). The study needs to address the following questions:
1. How would the RM hotel proposal handle a developer's request for a density of 18 hotel
units/acre when the finding made pursuant to the special regulation is for a density of less
than 12 residential units/acre? In other words, would the maximum of 12 residential
units/acre always be assumed for hotel uses?
2. During the last 5 years, how many applications for development in RM were submitted
for densities which were at or close to 12 residential units/acre? How many were
approved? How many of these were located east of the Intracoastal?
3. Since the ratio of 1.5 means that the density for a hotel-type development could be 18
units/acre, what will prevent a developer from building 18 efficiency apartments that are
rented seasonally? What will be the permitted length of stay? It appears that in the LDRs
only bed and breakfast inns limit the length of stay (see LDR Sec. 4.3.3.(Y)(4)(a)). What
will be the mechanism to assure hotel units are not occupied as rental apartments?
Reconcile this with ads by current non-conforming hotels that advertise apartments (see
Exhibit 3).
4. What safeguards will be included in the RM hotel proposal to protect the stability of the
surrounding beach neighborhoods?
5. WiI1 the proposal establish a threshold for determining when a traffic study is required
since development in the Coastal Zone must still meet the concurrency requirements even
though the infrastructure in the Coastal High Hazard Zone cannot be expanded?
6. What buffers will be provided for R-l-AAA properties when the change to RM zoning
occurs mid-block (such as Southways) or on the other side of a residential side street
(such as Bucida)?
7. Would the hotels/motels with existing densities in excess of 1.5 ratio (i.e., a maximum
of 18 hotel units/acre) remain nonconforming uses? Would they get to rebuild after a
hurricane at their current densities or would they be limited to a maximum of 18 hotel
units/acre?
Non-Conforming Uses
1. If the intent is to "do away" with non-conforming hotel uses in RM, explain why under
the RM hotel proposal a vast majority of the existing hotels in RM would exceed the
proposed maximum density of 18 units per acre?
2. What effect, if any, would the RM proposal have on the existing non-conforming hotel
uses in residential zoning districts other than RM (i.e., the Hampton Apartments in R-l-
AA and La France Hotel in R-l-A).
3. Some of the non-conforming uses in RM are not hotel uses. For example, the Seagate
Club operates a private club in addition to the hotel; the Delray Beach Club is a private
club; and the Colony Cabana Club is a hotel facility for a hotel in the CBD but also
operates as a private cabana club. How will this proposal address these other non-
conforming uses?
4. If the goal of this RM hotel proposal is to permit the existing hotels to repair their
properties more extensively, the study should evaluate whether it would be more efficient
to address the problem by amending the LDRs for non-conforming uses.
Potential for Another Zoning Category
Based on the density of the existing hotels in RM zoning at the beach (see Exhibit 1), two-thirds
of the hotels exceed the proposed maximum hotel unit density of 18 units/acre. The densities of
the existing hotels are as high as 41.2 units per acre.
Since I6 of the 23 hotels (the total excludes the Sea-Aire) would remain non-conforming uses
under this proposal, one suggestion for handling these properties has been to create a separate
zoning category for them. However, the creation ora separate zoning category raises the
6
following issues for the study:
1. Since the beach neighborhoods are identified as "stable" on the Residential Neighborhood
Categorization Map, explain why the creation of a separate zoning category for existing
hotels which are non-conforming uses in RM would not be in conflict with Policy A-1.4
of the Housing Element which reads:
That these neighborhoods be identified as "stable residential" on the Housing
Map, that the most restrictive residential zoning district which is applicable is
affixed on the zoning map, and that requests for rezoning to a different zone
designation, other than Community Facilities and Open Space be denied,"
and LDR Sec. 3.3.2(A), "That a rezoning to other than CF within stable residential area
shall be denied."
2. The 16 existing hotels whose density would exceed the 18 hotel units/acre are sprinkled
throughout the beach (see Exhibit 4), and any effort to provide a separate zoning
category for them would be tantamount to spot zoning.
3. Ifa new zoning category is created, can the 7 hotels which would be conforming under
the RM hotel proposal apply for rezoning to the new category and thereby obtain a
higher density?
4. If a new zoning category is designed to accommodate the maximum density of the
existing properties which is 41.2 units/acre, can the existing hotels with less than 41.2
units/acre be expanded to that density?
5. Ifa new zoning category is created to accommodate the existing properties, how will the
City handle applications for rezoning of properties not currently used as hotels into this
category?
6. Would the new zoning category contain the same ancillary uses envisioned by the RM
hotel proposal?
Expansion of Uses
The recommendations for ancillary uses as described in the EAR raise the following issues:
1. What would be the enforcement mechanism "to limit food and bar service to a scale that
would serve only hotel guests"? Could guests of guests be served?
2. Which meals could be served? Would breakfast be the only meal served since the EAR
states the hotel facilities would be operating with impacts similar to a bed and breakfast?
7
Would a facility such as the Seagate be non-conforming based on its food and bar
service?
3. Would the bar service be limited to complimentary drinks since the sale of alcoholic
beverages as an accessory use is limited to chartered private clubs and golf courses (LDR
Sec. ,L3.3(V)(2))?
4. Would an existing hotel which would remain non-conforming because its density
exceeded 18 units/acre be allowed to add the proposed RM hotel ancillary uses?
5. The recommendations regarding ancillary facilities are to prohibit meeting rooms and
conference facilities. Would existing hotels with these facilities remain non-conforming?
Timeshares
A number of the properties which would be effected by the RM hotel proposal are timeshares.
The study should address the following issues:
1. Where are timeshares currently allowed in the LDRs?
2. Will this proposal result in timeshares being made a conditional use? If so, will timeshare
conversions of existing hotels or other RM properties be allowed?
3. According to the DCA, the trend in Florida is not to permit timeshares because of
ownership issues and the difficulty of placing liens. What is the rationale for legitimizing
them in the RM zoning district?
4. If timeshares are allowed in residential zoning, would there be potential for timeshares
to then be allowed in commercial zoning?
Reconciling with Current Provisions in the LDRs
Any LDRs which result from the adoption of the RM hotel proposal must be consistent with
other aspects of the City's LDRs. This raises the following issues:
1. What other zoning districts allow hotels, motels, residence inns, timeshares, and bed and
breakfasts? Are they permitted or conditional uses in those districts? Are there any
applicable special regulations for those districts?
8
2. Reconcile applicable special requirements in LDR Sec. 4.3.3. with the RM hotel
proposal. For example:
a. Hotels and Motels (LDR Sec. 4.3.3.(M)):
- Uses include lounges, limo service and car rental
b. Residence Inns (LDR Sec. 4.3.3.(X)):
- Must be located with frontage or access from at least one arterial or
collector street
- Must be located in proximity to office, industrial and business uses
Shall be used as a transitional or buffer area between residential uses and
office uses
Minimum floor area of 500 sq.ft
Maximum density of 20 units/acre
Can have meeting rooms
Meeting catering and complimentary room service may be provided
c. Bed & Breakfast Inns (LDR Sec. 4.3.3.(Y)):
Geared to historic properties
No cooking or food storage facilities in any rental room
Breakfast only for paying guests and their guests
Length of stay regulations
2. Reconcile these definitions in the LDRs with the RM hotel proposal:
a. Hotel - no provision may be made for cooking in any individual room.
b. Efficiency - located in a multiple family dwelling and which consists of combined
sleeping and living facilities for occupancy by permanent residents (emphasis
added).
c. Motel - no provision may be made for cooking in any individual room, but motels
may have one (1) or more dining rooms, restaurants or cafes as accessory uses.
e. Resort - a building or group of buildings in which any combination of rooms or
complete dwelling units are available for habitation on a rental or ownership basis
(emphasis added).
3. How will the RM proposal handle the square footage minimums for the following:
Hotel or motel (i.e., sleeping room) - 325 sq.ft
Residence inn (i.e., suite) - 500 sq.ft.
Efficiency or studio apartment - 400 sq.ft.
9
Real F_ztate Tax Issues
At the P&Z workshop where the board sat as the Land Planning Agency and discussed the
Coastal Management portion of the EAR, one rationale for the adoption of the RM hotel
proposal was that it would support the tax base in the CBD by increasing the number of visitors
available to patronize downtown businesses. This argument cannot be evaluated unless the
following information is gathered:
1. What percentage of the CBD's existing customer base is made up of hotel guests?
2. What is the relative contribution of each of the following property types to the City's tax
base:
a. CBD
b. Beach single family residential
c. Beach multi-family residential
d. Beach non-conforming uses
3. What has been the trend for total valuation in each category in Item 2 above over the last
5 years?
4. Have those cities which permit hotels as a conditional use in residential zoning districts
with densities comparable to Delray's RM zoning seen an increase in CBD tax valuations
as a result of the change?
5. Have those cities which permit hotels as a conditional use in residential zoning districts
with densities comparable to Delray's RM zoning seen a decrease in the tax valuations
of residential properties in those districts as a result of the change?
Attachments (4)
10
EXHIBIT I
EXHIBIT 2
HOtels and. MOtels.in Resideh'(iai' 6hirig'' DiStriCts
Boca Raton i R4 t Conditional 15/acre No limit
!R-5 .Conditional 20/acre I 30/acre
i R-5A Conditional 20/acre t 30/acre
Deerfield Beach t RM-25 Conditional 25 d.u./acre I 38 d.U./acre
Pompano Beach ' MF.12 ' Special Ex. , 12d.u./acre [ 24d.u./acre
....... MF-20 "Special Ex. 20 d.u./acre i 40 d.u./acre
MF~30 Special Ex. :30 d.u./acre i 60 d.u./acre
i MF-45 Special Ex. 45 d.u./acre 90 d.u./acre
Lake Worth t MF-20 , Conditional 20/acre 40/acre
MF-30 ,Conditional ;30/acre 40/acre
' MF-40 ; Conditional [40/acre !40/acre
-~oynton Beach I None i n/a n/a I n/a
Palm Bch. Gdns. None I n/a n/a t n/a
West Palm Beach ! None I n/a n/a , n/a
Palm Beach Cry." None n/a t N/A I n/a
· Note: PBC, Boca, and, Jupite~rr~z~l?Bed and Breakfasts in some residential districts
EXHIBIT
SEA AiR[ v~L~.~$
6R0V£ CONDOMINIUM RENTAL APARTM[NT$~
OPEN YEAR ROUND ~
FURNISHED
STUDIOS · 1 & 2 BEDROOM Oa,,~ . wee~ .
APARTMENTS Open Year RounO
EFFICIENCIE~ . STUDIO ~ P T5
Dady. Weekly I & 2 8EOROOM APT5
Monthly · Seasonal H{a~o Pool , Color
· Cabal/Corer TV's 5~ASONAL EATS5
Sea Breeze Kesorr
By The Ocean
8eau~du/ rromca/ Groun~
[~XURIOUS STUDIOS
t & 2 8[DROOM APTS ,
ON-THE-OCEAN ............ ~ ......
AIR CONDITIONED FURNISHED APTS.
Private 8each, Heated Pool. Cabana~ ' Cable ~
· Pu~lng 6teen, Shuffleboard
272-11 O0
~775 S. Ocean Blvd. · Delray Beech
kmton BIvO &
· . . -.- ~ ~
TO: D~VID T. HARDEN, CITY MANAGER
FROM: DI~.NE DOM~NGUEZ, D~I;~ECTO'I~
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/AND ZONING
SUBJECT: WORKSHOP MEETING OF JUNE 11, 1996
DISCUSSION RE: NORTH FEDERAL HIGHWAY
REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
As you know, the Planning and Zoning staff and the CRA have been working
together on the redevelopment plan for the North Federal Highway area. The
plan will include several different components, which are discussed in the
attached Planning and Zoning Department Memorandum staff report. We will
also have a representative of the ZOM Companies available at the meeting, if
the Commission wishes to discuss their proposal for development of the Yake
property.
MEETING OF: JUNE 10, 1996
AGENDA ITEM: II.A.4 NORTH FEDERAL HIGHWAY
REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
:~:; ::: ~. ::.::: ~:.'.~-:: ~:.-..~.~:~., '..:~.?~;..;: ~'.:.'? ~..~ ~, ~:.-'-'.'-;':;~: ~',-~;,~.,~ ~. ~ ,~..~ ~:~ :E:.-'-:: ~ ~.: ....:.,~f ~:~::~ ~ ~;~-~: ~;~ :...-. ~::.~ .:-.-'.-:: ... ~-.-:. :...::~-~:: ::::: ~ :. :. :-:-~:..:.---~ ~-'.-::::::-'.-~~, ~:~'~.-'.':.~:~
The item before the Board is discussion regarding the North Federal Highway
Redevelopment Plan. The plan is only in a draft stage, therefore, no action is
required at this time. The purpose of the discussion is to inform the Board of the
main recommendations in the plan, and to provide the background for the
proposed comprehensive plan amendments that am on this meeting's agenda.
......................................... L ...... J .................................................................... J ..............
:::..:-'.':-~:-.-:-,:::~.:~:-:.::-:-..:.-~::.-~:~:.:.,:.:[,', :.-' .~- :-:'.~ :. -s ~.~~~f~::~ · >: '. .~:~::::~::::~``::~;~::::~::::::::~::::~::~::::::~:`~:::~`~::~:~-~::~::sss~E:~E~ -:~.~::,~ -' ~:~' '~-;-'~E~:~::.
In 1991, the City Commission directed the Community Redevelopment Agency
(CPA) to consider measures to improve the North Federal Highway commercial
corridor. In 1992 the CRA added to its Community Redevelopment Plan the
"North Federal Highway Land Use Transition Program." In response to the
proposal presented in 1993 for an upscale single family community along the
Intracoastal, the CRA modified its program to also include the residential
component of the area. The current program, entitled the "North Federal
Highway Improvement Program," has as its objectives the following:
· Improve the visual appearance of the corridor
· Reduce and eliminate marginal and inappropriate land uses.
· Direct smaller business operations to mom concentrated areas.
· Provide economic stimulation and investment in the area.
· Creation of jobs.
· Stabilize and preserve the residential neighborhoods through new
development, redevelopment and the elimination of blight.
In 199,5, the City recognized the need to get involved in the development of this
redevelopment plan. Residents and business owners in the area made requests
at the Annual Town Hall meeting for measures to improve the physical condition
P&7 Board Memorandum Staff Report
North Federal Highway Redevelopment Plan
Page 2
of the area and provide additional lighting and better police protection. The City
had also heard requests by business owners in the area for increased flexibility
in the types of uses that could be established on the properties adjacent to the
F.E.C. railroad corridor. In response to these suggestions, the City began
working with Florida Power and Light on the installation of new lighting, and "'
stepped up the police presence in the area. in addition, language was added to
the Future Land Use Element of the City's Comprehensive Plan, which identified
the North Federal Highway corridor as a "blighted area," and called for the City to
work in conjunction with the CRA on its North Federal Highway Corridor
Improvement Program. The Comprehensive Plan states that at a minimum, the
program will address the following issues:
.*. · Improvement of the appearance of the.area; ." *
· Identification of appropriate uses for parcels adjacent to Dixie Highway
and the F.E.C. railroad tracks;
· Identification of and strategies for the elimination of inappropriate and
marginal uses;
· Provision for increases in permitted residential densities adjacent to
the Intracoastal Waterway;
· Directing smaller business operations to more concentrated areas;
· Providing economic stimulation and investment in the area;
· Creation of jobs;
· Stabilization and preservation of residential neighborhoods through
new development, redevelopment, and the elimination of blight.
In February of 1996, the Plan~ing and Zoning Board initiated Comprehensive
Plan amendment 96-1, which is to include Comprehensive Plan and Future Land
Use Map (FLUM) changes associated with the North Federal Highway
redevelopment plan. The CRA and the Planning and Zoning Department began
working on the plan that same month. The following series of meetings were
held with business owners and residents of the study area, as well as residents
of the surrounding area. ._.;
: Meeting Date Location Participants.
" March 25, 1996 City Commission Chambers All
Apdl 10, 1996 Community Center- Mahogany Room All
May 8, 1996 Delray Beach Public Library Business owners
May 15, 1996 Community Center- Mahogany Room Residents of area
May 16, 1996 Community Center- Mahogany Room Residents outside
of area..-
Staff has also had meetings with a luxury apartment developer, ZOM
Companies, which has a contract to purchase the 17-acre Yake property located
along the Intracoastal Waterway north of Palm Trail.
P&Z Board Memorandum Staff Report
North Federal Highway Redevelopment Plan
Page 3
The redevelopment plan is being written by former Redevelopment Planner Jeff
Perkins, who is completing the document on a contractual basis. The plan is
only in a rough draft stage. The Board is not being asked to approve the plan at
this time. However, it is necessary at this time to take action to transmit the
associated Comprehensive Plan and FLUM amendments. The reason that the
action is necessary prior to completion of the plan is as follows:
As the Board knows, the City is in the process of adopting its Evaluation and
Appraisal Report (EAR), which is an assessment of the status of the City's
Comprehensive Plan. A major component of the EAR is the recommendation for
new amendments to the Comp Plan, to bdng it up to date. Known as the "EAR-
based Amendments," those changes will take months to prepare, and will not be
ready to transmit to the State Department of Community Affairs"(DCA) until eady
next year. The statutory provisions regarding the EAR state that once the City
adopts its EAR, no new amendments to the Comprehensive Plan or FLUM
may be adopted prior to the adoption of the EAR-based amendments. The
City's EAR is scheduled to be adopted in July. Therefore, unless
Comprehensive Plan Amendment 96-1 is transmitted to the state before that July
meeting, it cannot be transmitted until next year. In order to avoid such a lengthy
delay, staff is asking the Board to transmit 96-1, including the North Federal
Highway amendments, prior to final completion of the redevelopment plan. DCA
will take approximately 90 days to review the amendments. During this time, the
redevelopment plan will be completed and presented to the Planning and Zoning
Board and City Commission for approval. Once DCA has finished its review and
issued its comments on the amendment, and the redevelopment plan has been
formally adopted, the City ca~n adopt the Comprehensive Plan and FLUM
amendments, probably sometime in October.
The following is a summary of the major components of the proposed
redevelopment plan.
Light Industrial Overlay
The commercial area along the west side of North Federal Highway presents
some interesting opportunities for a mixed commercial/light industrial type
zoning. The properties are situated between North Federal Highway and Dixie
Highway, with the F.E.C. railroad tracks to the rear. While some of the parcels at
the northernmost end are relatively large, most of the others in th~ corridor are
only 250-300 feet in depth. Under the present GC (General Commercial) zoning,
they are most conducive to a strip commercial type development, which the City
has tried to discourage.
P&Z Board Memorandum Staff Report
North Federal Highway Redevelopment Plan
Page 4
Dixie Highway in this area has a narrow right-of-way (average of 30') and is
lightly traveled. It is separated from the residential neighborhoods to the west by
the railroad right-of-way. It has excellent potential for use as a service road for
the light industrial type uses.
The plan proposes that an overlay zone be created for this area which would
allow, in addition to the uses currently permitted in the GC district, certain light
industrial type uses such as fabrication and assembly, and wholesale and
distribution. The uses would be permitted as conditional uses, and would have
to be conducted entirely indoors. In order to preserve the pdmadly commercial
nature of the area, the use would have to be associated with a retail and/or
service business. The goal is to have the Federal frontage keep its commercial
appearance, with access to industrial uses off of Dixie Highway.".-
These changes would allow some alternatives to strip commercial development,
and would promote the following goals of the redevelopment plan:
· Identification of appropriate uses for parcels adjacent to Dixie Highway
and the F.E.C. railroad tracks;
· Providing economic stimulation and investment in the area;
· Creation of jobs;
In order to i:mplement the overlay district, it is necessary to amend the
description of the General Commercial Land Use designation which is contained
within the Future Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan..It will also be
necessary to amend the General Commercial zoning district regulations
contained in the Land Development Regulations. The Future Land Use Element
changes will be considered with amendment 96-1; the LDR changes will be
processed at later date.
Future Land Use Map Change for the Yake Property to High Density
Residential .~ .-:.
Initially, staff proposed to create a mixed use land use and zoning district that
would encompass most of the area east of Federal Highway, from approximately
Bond Way north to the southern border of Borton Volvo. Within this area, a mix
of commercial and high density residential uses could be permitted, provided that
certain criteria were met. The criteria would be designed so as to promote large
scale, high quality developments. It would have allowed for the owners of
property on the Lake Avenues, Eastview, Allen, etc., to aggregate their
properties for sale to a developer of commercial, high density residential, or
mixed use projects.
P&Z Board Memorandum Staff Report
North Federal Highway Redevelopment Plan
Page 5
This idea was presented at the first meeting on the North Federal Highway plan,
but was not supported by the area residents. They expressed concerns about
the overcommercialization of the area, and instead preferred the adoption of
measures to help identify and stabilize their neighborhoods. The direction of he
plan was changed to accommodate those interests, and the idea of the mixed
use district was abandoned. Those areas will maintain their existing Medium
Density Residential land use designations. However, the plan contains a change
in the land use designation of the 17-acre Yake property (Map Area #2) from
Medium Density Residential to a proposed new category, High Density
Residential.
As previously noted, the Yake property is currently under contract by ZOM
Companies, who is seeking to build an approximately 350-unit iuxury apartment
complex on the property. As proposed, the complex would have access from
Federal Highway only, most likely through Royal Palm Boulevard.
In order to have a development of this density (approximately 20 units per acre)
at this location, it is necessary to change the FLUM designation and zoning.
Currently, high density development is only permitted in the CBD (30 units per
acre). Development of up to 25 units per acre was allowed for the Silver Terrace
area, however, that plan was abandoned when no workable proposals were
received. The North Federal plan proposes the creation of a new'High Density
Residential land use category, which could only be used in areas designated as
:redevelopment or blighted areas in the Comprehensive Plan. The land use
would be applied in conjunction with a redevelopment plan. The base density of
twelve units per acre could only be exceeded when a newly created High
Residential zoning district is applied, which requires that certain performance
standards be met or exceeded in order to be granted greater densities. The
High Density Residential zoning will require that a site plan be adopted
concurrent with the zoning designation. The maximum allowable density is 24
units per acre.
The purpose of the designation is to provide incentives to attract developers to
redevelopment areas, but to also ensure that those incentives are tied to
standards that will result in a high quality development. Some of the proposed
standards are: provision of additional amenities, such as covered parking and/or
garages; open space and/or buffers in excess of the minimum requirement;
larger unit sizes, etc. The creation and application of the High Density
Residential Land Use category is being processed as part of amendment 96-1.
The creation and application of the High Residential zoning district will occur
subsequent to the adoption of the land use amendment.
P&Z Board Memorandum Staff Report
North Federal Highway Redevelopment Plan
Page 6
The change in the land use to one that will ensure a high quality, relatively dense
development is cdtical to the success of the North Federal Highway plan. If
adopted, it has the potential to place approximately 400 middle to high income
households in the redevelopment area, who will have to drive up and down
Federal Highway to get to their homes. Together with the Kokomo Key
townhomes, it will provide a good consumer base for businesses seeking to
locate in the area. The investment in the area will help to boost the value of
adjacent properties. While higher in density than the surrounding residential
neighborhoods, the project can be designed in a manner that will enhance those
neighborhoods. The change is consistent with the following goals of the
redevelopment plan, as stated in the Comp Plan.
· Provision for increases in permitted residential densities adjacent to
the Intracoastal Waterway;
· Providing economic stimulation and investment in the area; and
· Stabilization and preservation of residential neighborhoods through
new development, redevelopment, and the elimination of blight.
Extension of CBD Zoning Between N.E. 4th Street and N.E. 7th Street
The zoning for the North Federal Highway business corridor is GC (General
Commercial), with the exception of a few automotive dealerships that are zoned
AC (Automotive Commercial), and the old Miller Dodge parcel which was
.recently zoned SAD (Special Activities District). South of N.E. 4th Street, the
zoning changes to CBD (Central Business District). The North Federal plan
proposes to extend the CBD zgning north to N.E. 7th Street (excluding the AC
parcels, which would keep their current zoning). The reason for this change is to
include those parcels as part of the downtown area, and to allow them to have
the benefit of flexible use and parking regulations. Most of these parcels re too
small to accommodate large scale businesses and their required parking. On-
street parking is available in this area.
This provision requires a change in the land use to Commercial Core, and a
change in zoning to CBD. The changes are consistent with the following goals
of the plan:
· Directing smaller business operations to more concentrated areas;
· Providing economic stimulation and investment in the area;
· Creation of jobs.
?
Establishment of a Neighborhood Park
The North Federal plan will call for the creation of a neighborhood park to serve
those residential areas along the east side of Federal Highway. These older
P&Z Board Memorandum Staff Report
North Federal Highway Redevelopment Plan
Page 7
subdivisions were built without any kind of recreational amenities or common
open space. A small mini-park of 2-3 acres in size would provide space for a tot
lot and some picnic tables, and space for small social gatherings.
The attached map shows the locations of potential park sites. One site (#3, the
Donelly Tract) is already owned by the City, but is to be developed as a passive
nature preserve with little usable open space. The other two parcels provide
attractive settings for a neighborhood park. The plan will also identify the need
to obtain a pedestrian easement around portions of the north, west, and south
borders of the Yake property, in order to connect these small neighborhoods to
each other, the park, and the Donelly tract.
The plan will propose that the park and its improvements be funded in part by
the recreation impact fees obtained from the development of the Yake property.
If the High Density designation is approved, the potential exists to obtain
approximately $200,000 in impact fees for park development. Normally these
fees are placed in a fund and are applied Citywide. The plan will recommend
that in this case they be specifically allocated for a park in the North Federal
area.
Infrastructure improvements
Residents of Allen, Eastview, and the Lake Avenues have requested that the
plan include the provision of improvements to their streets. These would include
sidewalks, landscaping, street lighting, and street entry features. The plan will
address the manner in which these improvements could be financed.
Street modifications
Residents of Bond Way have complained about the volume of traffic on their
street, especially from cars that are cutting through the neighborhood to avoid
the intersection of George Bush Boulevard and Federal Highway. Residents of
Allen Avenue have requested that speed humps be installed to slow traffic on
their street. The plan will address these issues, and make recommendations.
The above described provisions of the plan (Neighborhood Park, Infrastructure
Improvements, Street Modifications), help to further the following plan goal:
· Stabilization and preservation of residential neighborhoods through
new development, redevelopment, and the elimination of blight.
P&Z. Board Memorandum Staff Report
North Federal Highway Redevelopment Plan
Page 8
No action is required at this time. The Board should discuss the provisions of
the plan thus far, and provide direction to staff.
Attachments:
· Map - Changes in Allowable Uses
· Map - Alternative Park Sites
This report prepared by Diane Dominguez
NORTH FEDERAL HICHWAY
I~ ~HANCES IN ALLOWABLE USESc '°°' ° C"^"H'iiilLI~ ...... ii°]
~,,-,. 0~. 0~_,_.^¥ .~,,o,. ,-,_ ® ,... ....... (Z) ................... ® ................... ,~,,., ,
~' o ~APHIC SCALE
N NORTH FEDERAL HIGHWAY ~ ,
~ ALTERNATIVE PARK SITES ~' ~'
CI~ OF OELRAY O[AClt. FL Sill] I I~ ACRI% SII[ 2: 2-3 ACRES SII[ J: 1.6~ ACRES REDEVELOPMENT AREA i
-- /)IOI[~L BASE MAI~ SYSI[M -- M~ REF; LMO75