Loading...
Ord 41-12ORDINANCE NO. 41 -12 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, REZONING AND PLACING LAND PRESENTLY ZONED PLANNED OFFICE CENTER (POC) DISTRICT TO SPECIAL ACTIVITIES DISTRICT (SAD); SAID LAND BEING LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LINTON BOULEVARD AND SOUTH FEDERAL HIGHWAY, AS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN; ESTABLISHING THE USES AND REGULATIONS FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTIES UNDER T14E SAD ZONING; AMENDING THE "ZONING MAP OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, JANUARY 2012 "; AMENDING THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING SECTION 4.4.25(G), "S.A.D.S ", TO ADD SUBSECTION (11), " DELRAY PLACE" TO THE LIST OF APPROVED S.A.D.S; PROVIDING A GENERAL REPEALER CLAUSE, A SAVING CLAUSE, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, Delray Place, LLC is the fee simple owner ( "Owner ") of the subject property as more particularly described herein; and WHEREAS, the subject property hereinafter described is within the corporate limits of the City of Delray Beach, Florida; and WHEREAS, the subject property hereinafter described presently has a Future Land Use Map (FLUM) designation of TRN (Transitional); and WHEREAS, pursuant to LDR Section 2.2.2(E)(6), the Planning and Zoning Board for the City of Delray Beach, as local planning agency held a public hearing and considered the subject matter at its meeting of October 15, 2012 and voted 4 to 3, to recommend that the requests be approved, based upon positive findings; and WHEREAS, pursuant to LDR Section 2.2.3, the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board for the City of Delray Beach, held a public hearing and considered the subject matter at its meeting of June 12, 2013 and voted 5 to 0, to approve the Site Plan, the Architectural Elevations, and the Landscape Plan, as well as various waivers, and recommended approval to the City Commission of other waivers, based upon positive fuidings; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Florida Statute 163.3174(4)(c), the Planning and Zoning Board, sitting as the Local Planning Agency, has determined that the changes are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the City Cormnission of the City of Delray Beach adopts the fmdings in the Planning and Zoning Staff Report; and WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach finds the ordinance is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Recitals. That the recitations set forth above are incorporated herein. Section 2. Subject Property. That the Subject Property affected by this Ordinance is described in Exhibit "A ". Section 3. Rezoning. That the Subject Property described in Section 2, above, shall be rezoned from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) and the City's Zoning Map shall be amended accordingly. Section 4. Site Plan Approval. That the site plan attached hereto as Exhibit "E" is the approved site plan ( "Site Plan") for the Subject Property as of the date of this Ordinance, subject to the conditions of approval imposed by the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board on June 12, 2013. Section. 5. Permitted Uses. That the development of the Subject Property described in Section 2, above, is approved for: (a) General retail uses including grocers and pharmacies; (b) Restaurants, at the locations as identified on the Site Plan; (c) Business, professional and medical offices and labs; (d) Personal services limited to: barber and beauty shops and salons; nail salons; caterers; dry cleaning limited to on -site processing for customer pickup only; dry cleaning and laundry pickup stations; financing, e.g. banks and similar institutions including drive- through facilities; Laundromats limited to self- service facilities; pet grooming; tailoring; tobacconist, vocational schools; gyms, health and athletic clubs; dancing schools; martial arts studios; small item repair, and rental of sporting goods and equipment; and (e) Indoor movie theaters. Total restaurant uses permitted on the Subject Property shall initially be allowed up to 23,218 leasable square feet, which is based on twenty percent (20 %) of the total leasable 116,089 square footage as set forth on the Site Plan attached hereto as Exhibit "B ", subject to revision as determined by the Parking Utilization Study required within Section 7 of this ordinance. 2 ORD, NO. 41 -12 Additional uses within the Subject Property may be allowed but only after review and recommendation by the Planning and Zoning Board and approval by the City Commission through the adoption of an ordinance. Section 6. Shared Parking AnWysis Matrix. That the Shared Parking Analysis Matrix attached hereto as Exhibit "C" is hereby adopted. Any desired reallocation of the mix of permitted uses within the Subject Property shall be allowed upon demonstration of consistency with the established parking ratios set forth within the Shared Parking Analysis Matrix and with the established amounts of concurrency approval from Patin Beach County Traffic Concurrency, but in all instances shall not otherwise exceed the total number of provided parking spaces on the approved Site Plan. Section 7. Parking Utilization Study. (a) Requirement. No sooner than six (6) months after receipt of the first Certificate of Occupancy by the first tenant of the Subject Property and when at least 89% of the leasable space is occupied, Owner shall cause a parking utilization study (the "Parking Utilization Study ") to be performed by a licensed traffic engineer selected by the developer to determine whether the overall parking provided is sufficient and whether a regular parking shortage problem is occurring, as well as to determine whether the conclusions and presuraptions set forth in the Shared Parking Analysis Matrix attached hereto as Exhibit "C" are accurate. The results of the Parking Utilization Study shall be submitted to the City by Owner. (b) Parking_ Mitigation. If the Parking Utilization Study concludes that all parking spaces are being consistently used and a regular parking shortage problem is occurring, then Owner shall provide to City a parking mitigation plan implementing one or more of the following parking mitigation measures: (i) on -site valet parking; (ii) off -site valet parking; (iii) off -site employee parking; (iv) off -site customer parking with shuttle or van service to the Subject Property; (vi) South Florida Commuter Services Transportation Demand Management ( "TDM ") Programs, such as car, van, and bus pooling and ride sharing; increased bicycle parking; preferential car and van pooling parking prograans; a fair -share contribution to a programmed shuttle service; or (vii) any other reasonable program approved by the City. The parking litigation plan shall be submitted to the City for approval, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. The City reserves the right to not renew any or all annual sidewalk cafe permits issued for the Subject Property until such time as a subsequently prepared parking utilization study demonstrates that the identified parking deficiency has been mitigated. Should any proposed mitigation require a revision to the approved Site Plan (such as the establishment of a valet queue), such revision(s) may be reviewed and approved either administratively or by the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board, in the sole discretion of the City's Planning & Zoning Director, and shall not be considered an amendment to this ordinance such as would 3 ORD. NO. 4112 otherwise require compliance with public notice and hearing procedures for rezoning ordinances. (c) Requested Increase in Restaurant Use. If supported by the Parking Utilization Study and approved by the City as set forth herein, restaurant use area may be increased up to 36,147 square feet, which is approximately thirty -one percent (31 %) of the total leasable 116,089 square footage, as set forth on the Site Plan attached hereto as Exhibit "B ", which is also the maximum restaurant area calculated within the Shared Parking Analysis Matrix attached hereto as Exhibit "C ". Such request for increased restaurant use shall be processed as a site plan modification and reviewed either administratively or by the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board, in the sole discretion of the City's Planning & Zoning Director, and shall not be considered an amendment to this ordinance such as would otherwise require compliance with public notice and hearing procedures for rezoning ordinances. (d) Bicycle Parking. The Parking Utilization Study shall also assess whether the number of bicycle racks provided on the Site Plan are adequate to meet demonstrated bicycle parking demand. Should any further bicycle parking facilities be suggested by the Parking Utilization Study which require revisions to the approved Site Plan, the siting of such additional facilities may be reviewed and approved either administratively or by the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board, in the sole discretion of the City's Planning & Zoning Director, and shall not be considered an amendment to this ordinance such as would otherwise require compliance with public notice and hearing procedures for rezoning ordinances. Section 8. Future Modification of Approved Site Plan. That any future requested modification to the Site Plan or development plans which does not seek to increase overall project size, total building area, or building height, and which modification otherwise remains within the confines of an approved building footprint as set forth on the Site Plan attached hereto as Exhibit "B ", shall be processed as a site plan modification and reviewed either administratively or by the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board, in the sole discretion of the City's Planning & Zoning Director, and shall not be considered an amendment to this ordinance such as would otherwise require compliance with public notice and hearing procedures for rezoning ordinances. In all other instances, any requested modification shall be considered an amendment to this ordinance. Section 9. Trade Dress. That the City Commission hereby recognizes that specific tenants of the project have distinctive, branding identities, established through unique aesthetic design features associated with their business and commonly referred to as "Trade Dress" and that any modification to the approved Architectural Elevations for the project which seeks to incorporate a tenant's established "Trade Dress" shall be processed as Class I or Class IT site plan modification and reviewed either administratively or by the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board, in the sole discretion of the City's Planning & Zoning Director, and shall not be considered an amendment to this ordinance such as would otherwise require compliance with ORD. NO. 41-12 public notice and hearing procedures for rezoning ordinances. Section 10. Property Restrictions. That the uses of the Subject Property shall be further limited as follows: (a) Restaurant Uses Adjacent to Linton Boulevard. Restaurants which may be Iocated within the structures identified as Buildings 600, 700, 800 and 900 shall not be permitted to have live outdoor entertainment but shall be permitted to provide pre - recorded music not to exceed City noise limits for properties adjacent to single- family residential zoned districts and shall terminate all such music by no later than 9:00 pm daily. (b) Loading Hours. All loadingtmloading /delivery of goods to the Subject Property may begin no earlier than 7:00 am and shall terminate by 7:00 pm daily, with the exception of supermarket /grocery store uses, for which all loading/unloading /delivery of goods may begin no earlier than 6:00 am and shall terminate by 9:00 pm daily. The loading doors of all enclosed loading bays associated with Buildings 500 -510 shall remain closed at all times when delivery vehicles are loading and mechanical engines and /or refrigeration equipment is turned on. Delivery vehicles utilizing backup beepers shall not be permitted to unload into Buildings 500- 510 between the hours of 7:00 pm and 7:00 am. Any delivery vehicles parked at the rear of Buildings 500 -510 between the hours of 7:00 pm and 7:00 am waiting to unload shall ensure all engines and mechanical /refrigeration equipment are turned off. (c) Trash Collection Hours. All trash collection from the Subject Property shall not occur before 7:00 am or after 6:00 pm daily. Violation of any of these restrictions shall be deemed a violation of this Ordinance, subject to enforcement by City. Section 11. That Section 4.4.25(G), "S.A.D.s ", of the Land Development Regulations of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, is hereby amended to add Subsection (11), Delray Place. Ordinance 41 -12. Section 12. That all ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith be, and the same are hereby repealed. Section 13. That should any section or provision of this ordinance or any portion thereof, any paragraph, sentence, or word be declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remainder hereof as a whole or part thereof other than the part declared to be invalid. Section 14. That this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage on the second and final reading. ORD. NO, 41-12 PASSED D ADOPTED in regular session on second and final reading on this the day of 2013. ATTEST: M A Y O City Clerk First Reading I Le Second Reading { 1 ORD. NO. 41-12 EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION Parcel A: All of OLD HARBOR OFFICE AND BANK FACILITY, according to the Plat thereof, as recorded in Plat Book 42, Page 61, Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida. LESS and EXCEPT therefrom that parcel of land described as Parcel 103 in that Order of Taking on Palm Beach County Petition filed in Palm Beach County Circuit Court under Case No. CL99- 229AN and recorded March 30, 1999 in Official Records Book 11016, Page 226, being more particularly described as follows: A parcel of land lying in Section 28, Township 46 South, Range 43 East, Palm Beach County, Florida, being more particularly described as follows: That portion of the Plat of OLD HARBOR OFFICE AND BANK FACILITY, according to the Plat thereof, as recorded in Plat Book 42, Page 61, of the Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida, being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the Northwest corner of said Plat; thence North 89 °47'57" East, along the Northerly boundary line of said Plat, a distance of 25.00 feet; thence South 57 1,26'45" West, a distance of 42.24 feet to a point on the Westerly boundary line of said Plat and on the are of a circular curve to the right, where the radial line bears South 65 017'42" East; thence Northeasterly along said Westerly boundary line and the are of said curve, having a radius of 1850.08 feet and a central angle of 00 °46'27 ", a distance of 25.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING, PARCEL B : All of OLD HARBOR OFFICE AND BANK FACILITY U, according to the Plat thereof, as recorded in Plat Book 42, Page 62, Public Records of Pahn Beach County, Florida. ORD. NO. 41-12 EXHIBIT B SITE PLAN I 1� �Mll 119H In 11 K"A All I'l 11 q td_ EXHIBIT B SITE PLAN I F0 jg�riri e law= all g. M. m T td_ 1. ig ppq -A ---------- IL sw tj F0 jg�riri e law= all g. M. LLULLLU LW -LLLU=� -______ --- 9 Pin 4, RIF 7 DELRAY PLACE ORD. NO. 41-12 m T td_ 1. ig ppq -A ---------- owl, sw LLULLLU LW -LLLU=� -______ --- 9 Pin 4, RIF 7 DELRAY PLACE ORD. NO. 41-12 EXHIBIT C SHARED PARKING ANALYSIS MATRIX K a a 11 E � - O � + Z U � � s E � � a a F ? i t m P� a r N � � a u cp' C v — O a � O � a � 4 v � Q m a v N O m tiu eo = 2 = 9 yp 7 7 7 ❑ l7 Z Q a r-1 �m cY °� N m --_ 3 4 ti v C °m a_ ry ra m n. cn E a v ❑y v � W L � p 4 0 P U �� d C 10 7 � m � E O m k m � � FM v � w ? m � C 0 •w m a � y n c E ep 7 'O a N o0 a w � m p w L C e2 vE 2° 0 t y m m T u Q Q a❑ Lo m L m m y p 0 0. a m a � m � _ X "' Y � m a n y a a aaoo . 4 n N O [b a y cp o lC m N c�0 E� y 3 s m X E r Pg o o v P m -° ti d ✓� a A° v ' V v Q `° E `° o E Q _7 K a a 11 E � - O � + Z U � � s E � � a a F ? i t m P� a r N � � a u cp' C v — O a � O � a � 4 v � Q m a v N O m tiu eo = 2 = 9 yp 7 7 7 ❑ l7 Z Q a r-1 cY °� N m --_ - ti v C °m 1 N E 0 U C 10 � � E m � � FM v � w ? m � A y n c E ep 7 a N o0 a w � m p u Y Lo Y 0 p a m a s �- "' Y � a a m c�0 Q X E r m -° A° v � `° E `° a E Q _7 �/1 H V n L Y P sm 3 m o c N N v6i n 4 ro e- ry Q w � z SFr w [G iVIONSIEROV) IN THE CITY COMMISSION CHAMBERS OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA ORDER OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA WAIVER REQUESTS IN ASSOCIATION WITH THE CLASS V SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR DELRAY PLACE 1. These waiver requests in association with the Class V site plan approval for Delray Place came before the City Commission on July 9, 2013. 2. The Applicant and City staff presented documentary evidence and testimony to the City Commission pertaining to the waiver requests in association with the Class V site plan approval for Delray Place. All of the evidence is a part of the record in this case. Required findings are made in accordance with Subsection I. I. WAIVER: Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5), prior to granting a waiver, the approving body shall make a finding that the granting of the waiver: (a) Shall not adversely affect the neighboring area; (b) Shall not significantly diminish the provision of public facilities; (c) Shall not create an unsafe situation; and, (d) Does not result in the grant of a special privilege in that the same waiver would be granted under similar circumstances on other property for another applicant or owner. A. Waiver #1 — Pavement Encroachment into the Required 15' Perimeter Landscape Setback: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.4.25 (D)(1) "A minimum setback of fifteen feet shall be established around the perimeter of any property developed under the SAD designation. Within the front and any street side setback, the fifteen foot (15') setback area shall be a landscape area and no pavement shall be allowed therein except for pedestrian ways and driveways (or streets) which provide access to the property and which are generally perpendicular to the abutting street." The applicant has requested a waiver to allow various paved areas for use as pedestrian access to the site, to maintain existing parking use along Linton Boulevard, and for potential future use as sidewalk cafe areas, all of which are generally parallel to the abutting street. Does the waiver request meet all the requirements of 2.4.7(6)(5)? July 9, 2013 Regular City Commission Meeting; Item 1 0.A.1 Yes ✓ No B. Waiver #2 — Vehicular Stacking Distance: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.9(D)(3)(c)(1), the minimum stacking distance between a right -of -way and the first parking space for a parking area that has fifty one (51) or more parking spaces is fifty feet (50') for all driveway connections along Linton Blvd. and Eve St. The applicant has requested a waiver to reduce the required stacking distance for the driveway connections off of Linton Blvd. and for the driveway connection off of Eve St., by providing for a stacking distance of twenty seven feet (27') for the driveway connections along Linton Blvd. and a stacking distance of thirty three feet (33') for the driveway connection off of Eve St. Does the waiver request meet all the requirements of 2.4.7(B)(5)? Yes ✓ No 3. The City Commission has applied the Comprehensive Plan and LDR requirements in existence at the time the original development application was submitted and finds that its determinations set forth in this Order are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 4. The City Commission finds there is ample and competent substantial evidence to support its findings in the record submitted and adopts the facts contained in the record including but not limited to the staff reports, testimony of experts and other competent witnesses supporting these findings. 5. Based on the entire record before it, the City Commission approves ✓ denies the waiver requests to LDRs. 6. Based on the entire record before it, the City Commission hereby adopts this Order this 9th day of July, 2013, by a vote of 4 in favor and 1 opposed. ry D lickstein, Mayor Chevelle Nubin, City Clerk 2 July 9, 2013 Regular City Commission Meeting; Item 1 0.A.1 B2 THE PALM BEACH POST REAL NEWS STARTS HERE t WEDNESDAY. JULY 3, 2013 CITY OF DELRAY BEACH NOTICE OF PROPOSED REZONING AND AMENDMENT TO-THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS SECTION 4;4 251G) TO ADD "DELRAY fL10E TO THE LIST -OF PPROVED S.A.D.s (SPECIAL ACTIVITIES DISTRICTS) The City Commission of the. City of Delray Beach, Florida proposes to adopt the following ordinance: ORDINANCE NO. 41 -12 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, REZONING AND PLACING LAND PRESENTLY ZONED PLANNED OFFICE CENTER (POC) DISTRICT TO SPECIAL ACTIVITIES DISTRICT (SAD); SAID LAND BEING LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LINTON BOULEVARD AND, SOUTH FEDERAL HIGHWAY, AS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN; ESTABLISHING THE USES AND REGULATIONS FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTIES UNDER THE SAD. ZONING; AMENDING THE "ZONING MAP OF DELRAY ,BEACH, FLORIDA, JANUARY 2012.. "; AMENDING THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING. .SECTION 4.4.25(G), "S.A.D.S ", TO ADD SUBSECTION (11 J, "DELRAY PLACE" TO THE LIST OF APPROVED S,A.D,S; PROVIDING A -GENERAL REPEALER CLAUSE, A SAVING CLAUSE; AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. The City Commission Will conduct two (2) Public Hearings for the purpose of accepting public testimony regarding the proposed ordinance. The first Public Hearing was held on TUESDAY. NOVEMBER 6, 2012 AT 7:00 P.K. The proposed ordinance passed on first reading. A second Public Hearing will be held on TUESDAY, JULY 9, 2013 AT 7:00 P.M. (or at any continuation of such meeting which is set by the Commission) in the Commission\Chambers at City Hall, 100 N.W. 1 "Avenue, Delray Beach, Florida. AII interested citizens are invited to attend the public hearings and comment.upon the proposed ordinance or submit their comments in writing on or before, the date of these hearings to .the Planning and Zoning Department. Further. information concerning the proposed .ordinance can be obtained from the Planning and Zoning Department, City Hall 100 NW 1" Avenue, FL 33444 (e -mail at pzmail@mydelraybeach. com) or by calling Ronald Haggard-, Principal Planner at 561/243-7325, between the hours of 8:00 A.M. and S:00.1P.M., Monday through Friday, excluding holidays. Please be advised that if a person decides to appeal any decision made by the City Commission with respect to any matter considered at these hearings, such person will need a. record of the proceedings, and for this .purpose such person may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings . is made, which record inclydes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is based. The City does not provide or ;prepare such record pursuant to F. 5: 286.0105. CITY OF DELRAY BEACH Chevelle D. Nubin, MMC PUB: 7-3/2013.#98.955 City Clerk E6 PALM BEACHPOS i;COM ` I REAL NEWS ST R THE PALI1il' BEACH POST (561) 820 =4343 : 1` FRIDAY, DECEMBER 21, 2012 Cily cterk PUB: The Palm Beach Post DECEMBER 21- ,,2012. 933912 THE PALM BEACH POST REAL NEWS STARTS HERE 1' MDAY; DECEMBEF? �t3' 2712 Al2. THE PALM BEACH POST REAL NEWS ST R HERE ! .NAONDAY,OCTOBER 29:2012. F FRf17AY, JUNE 28, 2Q13 1 (561} g20 -4343 THE PALM BEACH POST REAL NEWS STARTS HERE I PALMBEACHPOST.COM CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING A PUBLIC HEARING will be held on the following propposed . ordinance at 7:00 P.M. on TUESDAY JULY. 9, 2013 (or at arty continuation. of such meeting which is set,by the Commission), in the Commission Chambers, 390 N.W. 1st Avenue, Delray Beach, Florida, at which time the City Comrhission•will consider; its adotion. The proposed ordtnairce may be ins led at the 'Office.of the City Clerk at City Hall, 100 NMI. 1st Avenue, Delray Beach, Florida, .:between 8;00 a.m. and 5:00 p -m., Monday through Friday, except holidays. Interested parties a re' i nvited to attend and be heard with respect to the proposed ordinance. ORDINANCE NO. 41-12 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CfTYOF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, - REZONING -AND PLACING LAND PRESENTLY ZONED PLANNED OFFICE CENTER (POq DISTRICT TO SPECIAL ACTIVITIES DISTRICT (SAD); SAID LAND BEING LOCATED AT THE: SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LINTON BOULEVARD AND SOUTH FEDERAL HIGHWAY, 'AS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN; ESTABLISHING THE USES AND REGULATIONS FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTIES UNDER THE SAD ZONING; AMENDING THE . "ZOMNN-G MAP OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORMA¢, JAfyUARY 2012"; AMENDING LL�4 1 DEVELOPWNT REGULATIOvNS Oi rrHE . CITY- OF DELRAY BEACFf, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING .SECTION 4A.25(G), '5.A.D -S ", , TO ADD SIA95ECTION (11), " DELRAY PLACE" TO THE LIST OP APPROVED' S.A.D.S;. PROVIDING A GENERAL R REPEALECCLAUSE, .A SAVING CLAUSE; AND AIiII;EFFCcriVE DATE. Please be advised ,that ,if a - person decides to appeal -j4 decision! made by the City ComrrI*ioq with respect to any matter considered at this blearing, such person May need to ensure that a verbatim recordyinchrrdes the#esLSnYony . and evidence upon whlch the appeal is to be based. Th& City does hot provide nor prepare such record pr}r3uant to F.S. 286.0105, CITY OF DELRAY BEACH. Chevelle D. Hubin, MMC - City Clerk PUB: The F'�Im Beach Posy 6/29(2("3 #98955 \ E7 105 1 OT 1 ► : ► 11"d TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Ronald Haggard, AICP, Principal Planner Paul Darling, AICP, Director Planning and Zoning THROUGH: Louie Chapman, Jr., City Manager DATE: July 2, 2013 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 10.A. -REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF JULY 9, 2413 ORDINANCE NO. 41-12 (SECOND READINGI SECOND PUBLIC HEARING) ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION The item before the City Commission is adoption of Ordinance No. 41 -12 to approve a privately - initiated rezoning from POC (Planned Office Center) to SAD (Special Activities District) for Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Linton Boulevard and South Federal Highway (1801 and 1845 South Federal Highway). BACKGROUND The 9.95 acre property was acquired by the current owner in September, 2011, and an application to initiate a Future Land Use Map amendment and a zoning change to PC (Planned Commercial) was submitted on January 6, 2012. The application was continued for a period of up to six months at the public hearing on the ordinance by the City Commission on April 3, 2012. This continuance was to give the applicant time to address the concerns of the residents of the adjacent neighborhood to the east. Since the residents' concerns were mostly site development issues related to building size, setbacks, location of service areas, and buffering, an alternative rezoning to SAD (Special Activities District) was also discussed. This zoning district requires that a site plan be included as part of the rezoning action which would provide a higher level of comfort to the adjacent residents. On August 21, 2012, the City Commission approved the applicant's request for up to an additional 6 months to subunit a privately sponsored rezoning from POC (Planned Office Center) to SAD (Special Activities District) for the subject property. The applicant amended the rezoning application on September 7, 2012 to request SAD zoning. On October 15, 2012, the Planning and Zoning Board held a public hearing associated with the rezoning from POC (Planned Office Center) to SAD (Special Activities District). Although the Board recommended approval of the rezoning on a 4 -3 vote, it is noted that the Board did not endorse the related site development plan. It was anticipated that modifications of the site plan would be made to ensure compatibility with adjacent properties. Actions on the site plan as it relates to this compatibility were deferred to SPRAB. On November 6, 2012, the City Commission passed the SAD Rezoning Ordinance on 1st Reading, but did not endorse the related site development plan, which was to be reviewed by the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board prior to second reading of the Ordinance. On December 12, 2012, the site plan was reviewed by SPRAB and received denials on the Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and six of the associated waivers. On December 14, 2012, the applicant submitted an appeal of the SPRAB decisions to the City Commission. This appeal was to be scheduled for January 3, 2013, in conjunction with the second reading of the SAD rezoning ordinance. On December 17, 2012, the applicant submitted a letter requesting that SPRAB reconsider its denial of the Delray Place Site Plan, subject to the conditions that the appeal to the City Commission be withdrawn; and that the revised Site flan, Landscape flan and Architectural Elevations be brought back before SPRAB no later than March 13, 2013. At its meeting of December 19, 2012, SPRAB moved to reconsider denial of the project subject to the two conditions. On March 13, 2013, the site plan for Delray Place was reviewed again by SPRAB. The Board tabled the Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevations with direction that the applicant address an issue the board had with the building at the corner of Linton Boulevard and South Federal Highway. The Board approved the following five associated waivers: • A waiver to LDR Section 4.3.4(H)(6)(b)(1), to reduce the required 25 foot special landscape buffer along South Federal Highway to 15 feet. • A waiver to LDR Section 4.3.4(H)(6)(b)(4), to reduce the required special landscape buffer along Linton Boulevard from the required 15.5 and 30 feet to 9 feet. • A waiver to LDR Section 4.6.16(H)(3)(i), requiring landscape islands to be placed at intervals of no less than one landscaped island for every thirteen (13) standard parking spaces or fifteen (15) compact parking spaces. Five (5) required landscape islands are not being provided. • A waiver to LDR Section 4.6.16(H)(3)(i), requiring landscape islands which contain a minimum of one hundred thirty -five (135) square feet of planting area, with a minimum dimension of nine (9) feet, exclusive of the required curb. Eight (8) islands are being reduced from 9 feet to 8 feet, and four (4) islands are being reduced in size from a minimum of 135 square feet to a minimum 100 square feet. • A waiver to LDR Section 4.6.16(H)(3)(k), requiring a 5' landscape strip with a two foot hedge to be placed between abutting parking tiers, to allow sidewalks to be placed in two required landscape strips. The Board also recommended approval to the City Commission of the following two waivers: A waiver to LDR Section 4.4.25(D)(1), for pavement encroachment into the required 15' perimeter setback for the SAD zoning district, for the driveway /parking aisle along Linton Boulevard and the outdoor dining area along the south side of the 400 building. A waiver to LDR Section 4.6.9(D )(3)(c), Stacking Distance, to reduce the required 50 foot stacking distance between a right -of -way and the first parking space or aisle way in a parking lot to twenty-seven (27) feet for the two entrances on Linton Boulevard and thirty -three (33) feet for the entrance on Eve Street. The site plans were subsequently modified to reduce the size of the building at the corner of Linton Boulevard and South Federal Highway, by approximately 500 square feet and to add a decorative landscape entry feature with a fountain. The revised plans were reviewed again by SPRAB on June 12, 2013. The Board approved the Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevations with conditions as shown in the attached Exhibit "A ": Development Proposal & Site Plan Issues A complete analysis of the required findings for the rezoning and the site plan can be found in the attached Planning and Zoning Board and SPRAB Staff Reports. A synopsis of the major issues is included below: Staff continues to support the property owner's proposal to redevelop the site as a high end shopping center, subject to the site plan adequately addressing the development's compatibility with adjacent residential development, and feels that a major retail center at this comer will anchor the South Federal Highway Redevelopment Area and encourage additional redevelopment. The POC zoning designation currently assigned to the property may have been adequate in the past, but office use at this location now represents an economically infeasible use of the property and current market trends indicate that a zoning designation which permits commercial development is more appropriate. Much of the office space in this project is currently vacant and the demand for office space has been marginal in this area. The City is currently promoting office development in the downtown area and in the "Innovation Corridor" along Congress Avenue in the MROC (Mixed Residential, Office and Commercial) zoning district. It would be better if this site did not compete with those initiatives. Properly designed shopping centers can and do exist adjacent to residential development throughout the City. Residential and general commercial uses can be compatible and complimentary in that the commercial uses provide necessary goods and services for residential neighborhoods and the residents provide the market base to support the commercial uses. Since the site plan for the project will be included in the rezoning ordinance, compatibility with the adjacent Tropic Isles single - family residential development to the east can be assured at the time of rezoning. Key issues that need to be addressed to ensure compatibility include the mix of uses, the level of intensity and appropriate buffering. After multiple revisions of the site plan and three reviews by the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board, the current site plan for Delray Place does address these issues. Some of the major changes that have occurred since first reading of the ordinance by the City Commission include: • The total building area was reduced by 14.8 % (20,241 square feet); • The FAR (floor area ratio) was reduced from 0.32 to 0.27; • The maximum percentage of restaurants was reduced form 50% to 3 l % (sec parking section below); • Open space was increased from 16.2% to 25.3°/x; • The parking deficit (based on standard shopping center requirements) was reduced from 109 spaces to 54 spaces (See parking section below) • The landscape setback along Linton Boulevard was increased from 8' to 9% • Sound absorption material was added to 14 feet in height on the south and east walls of Buildings 500 -504, and the north wall of Buildings 506 -510; • Truck traffic is now forced to exit onto Federal Highway instead of Linton Boulevard; • Screen walls and roofs were added between buildings 600 -900 to minimize sounds from the outdoor seating to the adjacent residents; • The height of buildings 600 -900 was decreased by lowering parapet adjacent to neighbors from 22' to 18' and mechanical equipment was moved 16' north further away from the neighbors and provided with addition screening; • Rear doors and rear sidewalks were eliminated from buildings 600 -900; • The depth of buildings 600 -900 was reduced from 60' to 50' to allow raised planters along the sidewalk facing Linton Boulevard and was designed to encourage outdoor seating between the north face of these buildings and the raised planters. • The loading docks were enclosed; • All trash enclosures were enclosed and air conditioned; • The daycare center with outdoor play area was eliminated; • Pedestrian amenities were added in six locations along the public streets which include trellises, benches, trash receptacles and bicycle racks; • Areca Palms were added to increase screening along all property lines abutting Tropic Isles; • Green wails were added on three sides of all free standing dumpster enclosures and on numerous building walls visible to the public streets; • A pedestrian connection was added on Eve Street to facilitate neighborhood access; and • The Gateway Feature was added at the Linton/Federal corner to include a water feature with fountain jets and a colonnade. Also, a clock tower was incorporated in the building behind. Parking: Parking requirements for SAD zoned properties are established on the site and development plan. While there are no standard parking requirements for SAD zoned properties, the parking requirement for shopping centers of this size in other zoning districts is typically 4 spaces per 1,000 square feet in the City. This would result in a requirement of 455 spaces for the 113,947 square foot shopping center. The proposed site plan shows 443 spaces, a reduction (11.4°/x) from this requirement with a deficit of 52 spaces. An alternative plan for the 100 building would require 464 spaces for the 116,089 square foot shopping center, while 414 have been provided, a deficit of 54 spaces or (11.6 %). The overall parking ratio for the project as designed is 3.53 per 1,000 square feet of commercial space. A parking study has been provided by TrafTech to support this figure. The Parking Needs Analysis in the Study, which is based on a Shared Parking Analysis Matrix and information published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) in their Parking Generation (4th Edition) manual, sets the maximum parking required for the center at 397 spaces. Staff reviewed the ITE report and notes that the figure presented represents the "average peak period parking demand" of 2.94 vehicles per 1,000 sq. ft. The applicant also provided additional supporting data, including information on 2 shopping centers with comparable parking to support the reduced number. The actual parking requirements of the shopping center will ultimately be determined by the mix of uses in the center. A balance must be struck between uses with higher and lower parking demand. This is where a successful shopping center developer and management company is needed. Retail Property Group, Inc. "RPG" is a locally based shopping center developer with significant long term successful shopping center industry experience. RPG currently owns and operates 7 quality shopping centers averaging about 175,000 sf each for a total of approximately 1,200,000 sf throughout southeast Florida. RPG will be the developer and operator of Delray Place. Based on their experience and their current leasing efforts, they insist that the parking provided in this project is adequate. It is also noted that the applicant has committed to meeting with South Florida Commuter Services (SFCS) and SAFE to explore TDM initiatives that could alleviate parking demand, especially for employees at the shopping center. To ensure that this does occur, this was added as a condition of approval to occur prior to site plan certification. The proposed shopping center at this location is a highway- oriented development. Due to the major perimeter roadways, walls around the rear of the property and the vehicular gate on Eve Street, overflow parking is highly unlikely to impact the surrounding residential neighborhood or the adjacent commercial properties. Eve Street itself is the only logical overflow parking area if the parking lot at the shopping center is full. To negate this possibility, no- parking signs must be placed on Eve Street and the applicant must pay for these signs. This was added as a condition of approval. The attached SAD Rezoning Ordinance includes a "Shared Parking Analysis Matrix" which provides a method to calculate the total parking demand for the shopping center based on uses. To minimize the potential impact of higher parking generators, such as restaurants, the ordinance initially allows only 20% (23,218 square feet) of the total leasable building area to be utilized for restaurants. For comparison purposes, Palm Beach County uses 25% restaurants as the standard figure for shopping centers to determine traffic concurrency. A parking utilization study must be prepared during the first peak season when the shopping center is at least 89% occupied. If supported by the study and approved by the City, the developer may then lease the remaining 1 I% of building area for restaurants (bringing the total to approximately 31% (36,147 square feet), which is the maximum restaurant area shown in the Matrix. If the study indicates that all parking spaces are being consistently used and a regular parking shortage problem is occurring, then the developer shall alleviate the parking shortage through any of the following: (a) on -site valet parking, (b) off -site valet parking, (c) off -site private property employee parking, (d) off -site public property employee parking, (e) off -site nearby customer shuttle parking (f) South Florida Commuter Services Transportation Demand Management "TDM" Programs such as, car & van & bus pooling, bicycling and bicycling parking, preferential car & van pooling parking programs, South Florida vanpools, transportation partnerships, shuttle shared system, ride sharing & matching, other TDM programs (c) any other reasonable programs. There is approximately 4,900 square feet of potential outdoor dining area (sidewalk cafes) around the buildings in the shopping center. Sidewalk cafes create a vibrant atmosphere that enhances the area and adds to the overall shopping experience of the customers. While additional parking is not required for areas designated as sidewalk cafes, an annual permit fee is required. If the parking study mentioned above shows that parking at the shopping center is not adequate, the permits for some or all of the outdoor cafe areas may not be renewed until some mechanism is employed to reduce the parking deficit. REVIEW BY OTHERS At its meeting of October 15, 2012, the Planning and Zoning Board held a public hearing associated with the rezoning from POC (Planned Office Center) to SAD (Special Activities District). Staff presented its analysis of the applicant's submittal, including the proposed site plan for the project, and recommended that the Board move a recommendation of denial based on a failure to make positive findings with respect to LDR Section 3.1.1 (Required Findings), LDR Section 3.2.2 (Standards for Rezoning Actions) and LDR Section 2.4.5(D)(5 )(Rezoning Findings), and the Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan, due to the inability to make positive findings with respect to compatibility with surrounding development. Note: the complete analysis is included in the attached Planning and Zoning Board Staff Report. The applicant made a presentation of the proposal and members of the public spoke on this agenda item —both in favor of and in opposition to the proposed rezoning. After a discussion, the Board recommended approval of the proposal on a 4 -3 vote. The development proposal is not within a geographical area requiring review by the DDA (Downtown Development Authority) or CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency). Courtesy Notices: A special courtesy notice was provided to the following homeowners and/or civic organizations: • Neighborhood Advisory Council Linton Woods Delray Citizen's Coalition • Pelican Pointe • Tropic Isle Civic Association • Pelican Harbor Banyan Tree Village Spanish Trail Condo • Domain Delray • Tropic Bay Harbour's Edge - Tropic Harbor • Harbourside Public Notices: Formal public notice has been provided to property owners within a 500' radius of the subject property. The letters and emails received to date are attached to this staff report. Other letters of objection and/or support, if any, will be presented at the City Commission meeting. RECOMMENDATION Staff rccommcnds that the City Commission approve Ordinance No. 41 -12 for rezoning from POC (Planned Office Center) to SAD (Special Activities District) for Delray Place, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and fmding that the request and approval thereof is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, and meets the criteria set forth in Sections 2.4.5(D )(5), 3.1.1 and 3.2.2 of the Land Development Regulations. ORDINANCE NO. 41 -12 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, REZONING AND PLACING LAND PRESENTLY ZONED PLANNED OFFICE CENTER (POC) DISTRICT TO SPECIAL ACTIVITIES DISTRICT (SAD); SAID LAND BEING LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LINTON BOULEVARD AND SOUTH FEDERAL HIGHWAY, AS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN; ESTABLISHING THE USES AND REGULATIONS FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTIES UNDER THE SAD ZONING; AMENDING THE "ZONING MAP OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, JANUARY 2012 "; AMENDING THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, BY AMENDING SECTION 4.4.25(G), "S.A.D.S ", TO ADD SUBSECTION (11), " DELRAY PLACE" TO THE LIST OF APPROVED S.A.D.S; PROVIDING A GENERAL REPEALER CLAUSE, A SAVING CLAUSE, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, Delray Place, LLC is the fee simple owner ( "Owner ") of the subject property as more particularly described herein; and WHEREAS, the subject property hereinafter described is within the corporate limits of the City of Delray Beach, Florida; and WHEREAS, the subject property hereinafter described presently has a Future Land Use Map (FLUM) designation of TRN (TransitionaI); and WHEREAS, pursuant to LDR Section 2.2.2(E)(6), the Planning and Zoning Board for the City of Delray Beach, as local planning agency held a public hearing and considered the subject matter at its meeting of October 15, 2012 and voted 4 to 3, to recommend that the requests be approved, based upon positive findings; and WHEREAS, pursuant to LDR Section 2.2.3, the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board for the City of Delray Beach, held a public hearing and considered the subject matter at its meeting of June 12, 2013 and voted 5 to 0, to approve the Site Plan, the Architectural Elevations, and the Landscape Plan, as well as various waivers, and recommended approval to the City Commission of other waivers, based upon positive findings; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Florida Statute 163.3174(4)(c), the Planning and Zoning Board, sitting as the Local Planning Agency, has determined that the changes are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; and ORD. No. 41-12 WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach adopts the findings in the Planning and Zoning Staff Report; and WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach finds the ordinance is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Recitals. That the recitations set forth above are incorporated herein. Section 2. Subject Property. That the Subject Property affected by this Ordinance is described in Exhibit "A ". Section 3. Rezoning. That the Subject Property described in Section 2, above, shall be rezoned from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) and the City's Zoning Map shall be amended accordingly. Section 4. Site Plan Approval. That the site plan attached hereto as Exhibit "B ", is the approved site plan ( "Site Plan ") for the Subject Property as of the date of this Ordinance, subject to the conditions of approval imposed by the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board on .Tune 12, 2013. Section 5. Permitted Uses. That the development of the Subject Property described in Section 2, above, is approved for: (a) General retail uses including grocers and pharmacies; (b) Restaurants, at the locations as identified on the Site Plan; (c) Business, professional and medical offices and labs; (d) Personal services limited to: barber and beauty shops and salons; nail salons; caterers; dry cleaning limited to on -site processing for customer pickup only; dry cleaning and laundry pickup stations; financing, e.g. banks and similar institutions including drive - through facilities; Laundromats limited to self- service facilities; pet grooming; tailoring; tobacconist, vocational schools; gyms, health and athletic clubs; dancing schools; martial arts studios; small item repair, and rental of sporting goods and equipment; and (e) Indoor movie theaters. Total restaurant uses permitted on the Subject Property shall initially be allowed up to 23,218 leasable square feet, which is based on twenty percent (20 %) of the total leasable 116,089 square 2 ORD. NO. 41-12 footage as set forth on the Site Plan attached hereto as Exhibit "B ", subject to revision as determined by the Parking Utilization Study required within Section 7 of this ordinance. Additional uses within the Subject Property may be allowed but only after review and recommendation by the Planning and Zoning Board and approval by the City Commission through the adoption of an ordinance. Section 6. Shared Parking Analysis Matrix. That the Shared Parking Analysis Matrix attached hereto as Exhibit "C" is hereby adopted. Any desired reallocation of the mix of permitted uses within the Subject Property shall be allowed upon demonstration of consistency with the established parking ratios set forth within the Shared Parking Analysis Matrix and with the established amounts of concurrency approval from Palm Beach County Traffic Concurrency, but in all instances shall not otherwise exceed the total number of provided parking spaces on the approved Site Plan. Section 7. Parking Utilization Study. (a) Requirement. No sooner than six (6) months after receipt of the first Certificate of Occupancy by the first tenant of the Subject Property and when at least 89% of the leasable space is occupied, Owner shall cause a parking utilization study (the "Parking Utilization Study ") to be performed by a licensed traffic engineer selected by the developer to determine whether the overall parking provided is sufficient and whether a regular parking shortage problem is occurring, as well as to determine whether the conclusions and presumptions set forth in the Shared Parking Analysis Matrix attached hereto as Exhibit "C" are accurate. The results of the Parking Utilization Study shall be submitted to the City by Owner. (b) Parking Mitigation. If the Parking Utilization Study concludes that all parking spaces are being consistently used and a regular parking shortage problem is occurring, then Owner shall provide to City a parking mitigation plan implementing one or more of the following parking mitigation measures: (i) on -site valet parking; (ii) off -site valet parking; (iii) off -site employee parking; (iv) off -site customer parking with shuttle or van service to the Subject Property; (vi) South Florida Commuter Services Transportation Demand Management ( "TDM ") Programs, such as car, van, and bus pooling and ride sharing; increased bicycle parking; preferential car and van pooling parking programs; a fair -share contribution to a programmed shuttle service; or (vii) any other reasonable program approved by the City. The parking mitigation plan shall be submitted to the City for approval, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. The City reserves the right to not renew any or all annual sidewalk cafe permits issued for the Subject Property until such time as a subsequently prepared parking utilization study demonstrates that the identified parking deficiency has been mitigated. Should any proposed mitigation require a revision to the approved Site Plan (such as the establishment of a valet queue), such revision(s) may be reviewed and approved either administratively or by 3 ORD. NO. 41-12 the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board, in the sole discretion of the City's Planning & Zoning Director, and shall not be considered an amendment to this ordinance such as would otherwise require compliance with public notice and hearing procedures for rezoning ordinances. (c) Requested Increase in Restaurant Use. If supported by the Parking Utilization Study and approved by the City as set forth herein, restaurant use area may be increased up to 36,147 square feet, which is approximately thirty-one percent (31 %) of the total leasable 116,089 square footage, as set forth on the Site Plan attached hereto as Exhibit "B", which is also the maximum restaurant area calculated within the Shared Parking Analysis Matrix attached hereto as Exhibit "C ". Such request for increased restaurant use shall be processed as a site plan modification and reviewed either administratively or by the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board, in the sole discretion of the City's Planning & Zoning Director, and shall not be considered an amendment to this ordinance such as would otherwise require compliance with public notice and hearing procedures for rezoning ordinances. (d) Bicycle Parking. The Parking Utilization Study shall also assess whether the number of bicycle racks provided on the Site Plan are adequate to meet demonstrated bicycle parking demand. Should any further bicycle parking facilities be suggested by the Parking Utilization Study which require revisions to the approved Site Plan, the siting of such additional facilities may be reviewed and approved either administratively or by the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board, in the sole discretion of the City's Planning & Zoning Director, and shall not be considered an amendment to this ordinance such as would otherwise require compliance with public notice and hearing procedures for rezoning ordinances. Section 8. Future Modification of Approved Site Plan. That any future requested modification to the Site Plan or development plans which does not seek to increase overall project size, total building area, or building height, and which modification otherwise remains within the confines of an approved building footprint as set forth on the Site Plan attached hereto as Exhibit "B ", shall be processed as a site plan modification and reviewed either administratively or by the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board, in the sole discretion of the City's Planning & Zoning Director, and shall not be considered an amendment to this ordinance such as would otherwise require compliance with public notice and hearing procedures for rezoning ordinances. In all other instances, any requested modification shall be considered an amendment to this ordinance. Section 9. Trade Dress. That the City Commission hereby recognizes that specific tenants of the project have distinctive, branding identities, established through unique aesthetic design features associated with their business and commonly referred to as "Trade Dress" and that any modification to the approved Architectural Elevations for the project which seeks to incorporate a tenant's established "Trade Dress" shall be processed as Class I or Class II site plan modification and reviewed either administratively or by the Site Plan Review and 4 ORD. NO. 41-12 Appearance Board, in the sole discretion of the City's Planning & Zoning Director, and shall not be considered an amendment to this ordinance such as would otherwise require compliance with public notice and hearing procedures for rezoning ordinances. Section 10. Property Restrictions. That the uses of the Subject Property shall be further limited as follows: (a) Restaurant Uses Adjacent to Linton Boulevard. Restaurants which may be located within the structures identified as Buildings 600, 700, 800 and 900 shall not be permitted to have live outdoor entertainment but shall be permitted to provide pre - recorded music not to exceed City noise limits for properties adjacent to single - family residential zoned districts and shall terminate all such music by no later than 9:00 pm daily. (b) Loading Hours. All loading /unloading /delivery of goods to the Subject Property may begin no earlier than 7:04 am and shall terminate by 7:00 pm daily, with the exception of supermarket/grocery store uses, for which all loading/unloading/delivery of goods may begin no earlier than 6:00 am and shall terminate by 9:00 pm daily. The loading doors of all enclosed loading bays associated with Buildings 500 -514 shall remain closed at all times when delivery vehicles are loading and mechanical engines and/or refrigeration equipment is turned on. Delivery vehicles utilizing backup beepers shall not be permitted to unload into Buildings 500- 510 between the hours of 7:00 pm and 7:00 am. Any delivery vehicles parked at the rear of Buildings 500 -510 between the hours of 7:00 pm and 7:40 am waiting to unload shall ensure all engines and mechanical /refrigeration equipment are turned off. (c) Trash Collection Hours. All trash collection from the Subject Property shall not occur before 7:40 am or after 6:00 pm daily. Violation of any of these restrictions shall be deemed a violation of this Ordinance, subject to enforcement by City. Section 1 I . That Section 4.4.25(0), "S.A.D.s ", of the Land Development Regulations of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, is hereby amended to add Subsection (11), Delray Place, Ordinance 41 -12. Section 12. That all ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith be, and the same are hereby repealed. Section 13. That should any section or provision of this ordinance or any portion thereof, any paragraph, sentence, or word be declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remainder hereof as a whole or part thereof other than the part declared to be invalid. 5 ORD. NO. 41-12 Section 14. That this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage on the second and final reading. PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session on second and final reading on this the day of , 2013. ATTEST: City Clerk First Readin Second Readin WIFTIST16 6 ORD. NO. 41-12 EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION Parcel A: All of OLD HARBOR OFFICE AND BANK FACILITY, according to the Plat thereof, as recorded in Plat Book 42, Page 61, Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida. LESS and EXCEPT therefrom that parcel of land described as Parcel 103 in that Order of Taking on Palen Beach County Petition filed in Palm Beach County Circuit Court under Case No. CL99 -229AN and recorded March 30, 1999 in Official Records Book 11016, Page 226, being more particularly described as follows: A parcel of land lying in Section 28, Township 46 South, Range 43 East, Palm Beach County, Florida, being more particularly described as follows: That portion of the Plat of OLD HARBOR OFFICE AND BANK FACILITY, according to the Plat thereof, as recorded in Plat Book 42, Page 61, of the Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida, being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the Northwest corner of said Plat; thence North 89 °47'57" East, along the Northerly boundary line of said Plat, a distance of 25.00 feet; thence South 57 °26'45" West, a distance of 42.24 feet to a point on the Westerly boundary line of said Plat and on the arc of a circular curve to the right, where the radial line bears South 65 °17'42" East; thence Northeasterly along said Westerly boundary line and the arc of said curve, having a radius of 1850.08 feet and a central angle of 00 °46'27 ", a distance of 25.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL B: All of OLD HARBOR OFFICE AND BANK FACILITY II, according to the Plat thereof, as recorded in Plat Book 42, Page 62, Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida. ORD. NO. 41-12 -Kill. On 11 it, ©1�l d !41 R men jJjjjjIlllw an � � Wncar.J IMUNSET � 11: - - - - - - -9— `r--- -- --- •----- -- - - - - -- - --- 1---+� UNTON BOULEVARD - �,•..••� -_ ` _-�„ r,....• _� U -- `� O RTWI 77 liiliiiiJiff r M1111 t, - V!, c. III �11101111 1....... arm r F ^ ,5 =3 .a i<.- P I. C Q s� 1 ' I { I I I vtirNwen AlCtllll Cll SITE PLAN 42 FL Ill. -m 1 0 % x Rpttn ! � �.dd.. F SITE ?L4-- �r rr 11 r �5 4 —.., M .„ •...� aw.c acvF r.x �. I I SfTE L�GCTION IIRP ve.�nap.sei roar mvw --:, �s+.vrnn yy i '61 FAM u 5 EaL roMxv �s6nar r,a BwY= rrr- ..aec - noiarr: -iosir a:: - . iri rr "v �rar'imrr �ii+Win�N �B 3 y SITE PLAN ORD. NO. 41-12 EXHIBIT C SHARED PARKING ANALYSIS MATRIX TABLE 1 Shared Parking Analysis Matrix {Based on Delray Beach Code of 0rdinances Section 4.6.9 (C) (B) a) Delray Place, Delray Beach, Florida Square Feet: 113,907 116,089 WEEKDAY WEEKEND 410 Parking Spaces Required under Average Weekday and Weekend Shared Parking Space Requirements 290 Excess Average Parking Spaces Provided ahove Average Weekday and Weekend Shared Par king5pace Require ments Night (Midnight to 6AM) Day (9AM-6PMI Evening (6PM to Midnight) Day (9AM-6PMI Evening (6PM to Midnight) Excess Average Parking 5 pace s Provided above maximum Weekday or Weekend with Day or Evening Use Parking Requirements (14) Shared Parking Shared Parking Shared Parking Shared Parking Shared Parking per 2,000sfw/o Square Percent Parking Percent Parking Percent Parking Percent Parking Percent Parking Weekly use Shared Parking Footage Reduction Spaces Reduction Spaces Reduction Spaces Reduction Spaces Reduction Spaces Average Medl cal Office (1) 5.00 0 5.0% 0 SOOA% 0 10.0% 0 10.0% U 5A% 0 orrice (1) R.W 0 5.0% 0 SODA% 0 10.0% 0 10.0% 0 5.0% 0 Commercial/Retait(2) 2.94 105589 5.0% 16 70.0% 219 90.0% 282 100.0% 313 70.0% 219 Restaurants (1) ?2.00 9,500 1010% 11 50A% 57 100496 114 50j0% 57 lop -f)% 117 To be Determined To be Determined otel Spaces Required 116,089 27 276 396 370 333 NOTES: (1) Parking requirements based on Delray Beach Code of Ordinances (2) parking requirements based on ITE Purkma Gerigration (4th Edition) - Consistent wit h Parking Study conducted by Traf Tech Engineering, Inc. dated November 2012. Additionally, the 106,529 square feet of general commercial retail use Includes up to 25% restaurants 126,647 square feet), consistent with Palm Beach County practice relatiyeto non - merchandising uses such as restaurants that are pan of the commercial/retail buildings. Hence, the total allowed restaurants under this analysts IS 36,147 Square feet (26,647 t 9,500). This is consistent with lrE standards, as documneted in DE's nJC 820 - Shopping center definition. PARKING 0VERMEW SUMMARY With Outparcel Concept 1DO (with Drive -Thru Bank) or with Dutparcel Concept 100A (without Drive -Thru Bank and Commercial/Retail) 100 100A Square Feet: 113,907 116,089 Approved Parking 5paces: 403 410 Parking Spaces Required under Average Weekday and Weekend Shared Parking Space Requirements 290 Excess Average Parking Spaces Provided ahove Average Weekday and Weekend Shared Par king5pace Require ments (130) Parking Spaces Required under maximum Weekday or Weekend with Day or Evening Use 396 Excess Average Parking 5 pace s Provided above maximum Weekday or Weekend with Day or Evening Use (14) Traf Teeh ENGINEERING, INC- ORD. NO. 41 -12 r 11 I M'l I 3 f N A Ai M'l I 3 f N A I I � 5 LEWS COVE CENTRAL AVE. S.E. 12TH RD. r BROOKS W. C,7 x WHITE DR. a` i I k RHODES -VILLA AVE- } � BANYAN .� TREE LANE �q DEL -HAVEN D . Ld 1z' Q L I N T 0 N H 0 U L E V A R ¢ � D z z d L; WC CLEARY S 7�= DEL- HARBOUR DR, EVE STREET DIE J � � Q � F D TROPIC BOULEVARD Ln J Q O W CJ W Q W SOLENDER STREET w F BER uD } RO 0 Uptivi ALLAMAR A a BANYAN DRIVE CYPRESS DRIVE I SUBJECT PROPERTY DEL RAY PLACE PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT LOCATION MAP -- DfGITAL BASE AMP SYSTEM -- MAP REF: 5:\Planning do Zomriq\DBMS\FI- Ca6\Z -LM 1001- 150D\LM1310 Delray Place :1 i ■ ■ S � � ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■■ ■rte LE ■■E■■■■■■■ ■ . s■■■■■■ r ' - r ■ ■on ■M■■■■■�� ... ■ MEN■■■■■■r� �■■■■■■■■■r ■■ r ■■■■■■■■■■■� i.■■■■ii■■■� ■ ME �_ ■ ■� ■■■■■■■■■■■� =� rf■■■■■.■,■■■.■ 1'S fl SUBJECT PROPERTY DELRAY PLACE ❑t.a � PLANNING AND ZONING , • Y g? DEPARTMENT X11111= �� I�C11� I �■■■�■N � oil! �'■N��NI INS ice �■■■■■■i iiP ■�y cm v_►_� ' :r ■NNE 7■l i � • Pd•43C�1j� r 1 i■■■■■■■■■� i ■ ■N_O■■ ■ ■ ■�■ . O WN 1 &iii:i■■■P- . ` = ������ � � ■ ■ ■ ■� ■ ■■ ■rte � . � 1• 1r � �dd.i1711. �� ■■ ■ ■ ■■■■■■11� ■■■■■■■■■rte ■ ■ ■■■■■■■■■ � ME _ M ■■■■■■ ■ ■MEN 1 cif` PROPERTY �p G AND ZONING ■•■ / .. DE ARTMENT SITE PLAN REVIEW AND APPEARANCE BOARD CITY OF DELRAY BEACH -- -STAFF REPORT - -- MEETING June 12, 2013 DATE: ITEM: V. C. Delray Place: Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevations associated with construction of a 125,927 sq. ft. shopping center consisting of multiple commercial buildings, parking and landscaping on a 9.95 acre site located on the southeast corner side of Linton Boulevard and South Federal Highway. (1801 and 1845 South Federal Highway). GENERAL DATA: Agent...... _ _ _ __ ................ Weiner, Lynne & Thompson, P.A. Location ... ............................... Southeast corner of Linton Boulevard and Federal Highway (1801 and 1845 South Federal Highway) Property Size .......................... 9.95 acres Existing FLUM ......................... TRN (Transitional) Current Zoning ........................ PCC (Planned Office Center) Proposed Zoning ..................... SAD (Special Activities District) Adjacent Zoning ............ North: PC (Planned Commercial) and RM (Multiple Family Residential - Medium Density) East: R- 1 -AA -B (Single Family Residential) And CD (Conservation District) South: PC (Planned Commercial); RM (Multiple Family Residential- Medium Density); R- 1 -AA -B (Single Family Residential. West: PC (Planned Commercial) Existing Land Use ................... Old Harbor Office and Bank Facility Proposed Land Use............ Water Service. . . . . . . . . ........... Multiple building commercial shopping center development Available via connection to a 12" water main located on the east side of S. Federal Hwy., a 14" water main on Eve Street, and a 6" water main on the south side of Linton Boulevard. Sewer Service ..................... Available via connection to a 8" sewer main located on Eve Street. ITEM BEFORE THE BOARD The item before the Board is the approval of the following aspects of a Class V site plan request for Defray Place, pursuant to Land Development Regulations (LDR) Section 2.4.58: ❑ Site Plan; ❑ Landscape Plan; ❑ Architectural Elevations; and The subject parcels are located at the southeast corner of Linton Boulevard and South Federal Highway (1801 and 1845 South Federal Highway). BACKGROUND ANALYSIS The 9.95 acre property was originally annexed into the City of Delray Beach in the early 1980's. The existing development on the property, which was constructed in 1983, is known as the Old Harbor Office and Bank Facility, and consists of 96,702 square feet of office use in three buildings. In 1991, the City of Delray Beach adopted new Land Development Regulations and the property was assigned the new zoning designation of POC (Planned Office Center), which was consistent with the existing office development. A policy requiring that a redevelopment plan be prepared for South Federal Highway was added to the Comprehensive Plan in Amendment 2008 -1, adopted on December 9, 2008. In March of 2011, staff attended two public workshops with property owners, residents and business owners in the area to discuss existing conditions, identify problems and listen to what the attendees had to say about how the area should be redeveloped. After the initial workshops, staff prepared a series of recommendations for the redevelopment area and held a second set of two workshops in June of 2011 to discuss the recommendations and get feedback from the attendees. Staff presented two alternatives for the redevelopment of the subject property at these workshops. One alternative was to rezone the property to PC (Planned Commercial) to allow development of a commercial shopping center. The second alternative was to rezone the property to AC (Automotive Commercial) to allow development of an automobile dealership. Staff's recommendation was for the Planned Commercial alternative and the response from residents was generally favorable, although some residents felt that the area was better suited for automobile sales, which they also felt would be less impacting to the adjacent neighborhood. The property was acquired by the current owner in September, 2011, and an application to initiate a Future Land Use Map amendment and a zoning change to PC (Planned Commercial) was submitted on January 6, 2012. Since the proposal was in keeping with staff's recommendation, the application was supported by staff. However, residents were concerned that the redevelopment of the property would not have to comply with buffering and setback provisions which had been previously presented for inclusion in the redevelopment plan, and felt that action on the proposal should be delayed until the Redevelopment Plan was completed. Ultimately, the application was continued for a period of up to six months at the public hearing on the ordinance by the City Commission on April 3, 2012. This continuance was to give the applicant time to address the concerns of the residents of the adjacent neighborhood to the east. Since the residents' concerns were mostly site development issues related to building size, setbacks, location of service areas, and buffering, an alternative rezoning to SAD (Special Activities District) was also discussed. This zoning district requires that a site plan be included as part of the rezoning action and would provide a higher level of comfort to the adjacent residents. SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of June 12, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations Page 2 The South Federal Highway Redevelopment Plan was adopted by the City Commission on September 20, 2012. The Plan recommended that the subject property retain its original POC zoning with the option for a privately- initiated rezoning by the property owners to SAD. Since the original rezoning application was submitted prior to adoption of the Redevelopment Plan, the current proposal for redevelopment of the subject property is not required to comply with the Redevelopment Plan per se. However, it is noted that the underlying issue of compatibility with the adjacent residential neighborhood, discussed in the Redevelopment Plan, must still be addressed during consideration of the project proposal. If the current rezoning action does not go forward, any future redevelopment of the subject property will be required to comply with the Redevelopment Plan. On August 21, 2412, the City Commission approved the applicant's request for up to an additional 6 months (in addition to the 6 months previously granted) to submit a privately sponsored rezoning from POC (Planned Office Center) to SAD (Special Activities District) for the subject property. The applicant amended the rezoning application on September 7, 2012 to request SAD zoning. The SAD rezoning process is shown below: 1. Planning and Zoning Board review of the SAD and a recommendation made to the City Commission; 2. First reading of the SAD Rezoning Ordinance by the City Commission; 3. Review of the site plan by the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board; and 4. Second and final reading of the SAD Rezoning Ordinance, which will include the approved site plan, by the City Commission. The site plan for Delray Place was reviewed by SPRAB on December 12, 2012 and received denials on the Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and six of the associated waivers. On December 14, 2012, the applicant submitted an appeal of the SPRAB decisions to the City Commission. This appeal was to be scheduled for January 3, 2013, in conjunction with the second reading of the SAD rezoning ordinance. On December 17, 2012, the applicant submitted a letter requesting that SPRAB reconsider its denial of the Delray Place Site Plan, which included denials of a Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and associated Waivers, subject to the conditions that the appeal to the City Commission be withdrawn; and that the revised Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevations be brought back before SPRAB no later than March 13, 2013. At its meeting of December 19, 2012, SPRAB moved to reconsider denial of the project subject to the two conditions. On December 20, 2012, the applicant submitted a letter requesting that the appeal be withdrawn and that the second reading of the ordinance be deferred. At its meeting of January 3, 2013, the City Commission agreed to defer second reading of the ordinance to no later than May 5, 2013. The site plan for Delray Place was reviewed again by SPRAB on March 13, 2013. The Board tabled the Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevations with direction that the applicant address the issue with the building at the corner of Linton Boulevard and South Federal Highway. The Board approved the following five associated waivers: A waiver to LDR Section 4.3.4(H)(6 )(b )(1 ), to reduce the required 25 foot special landscape buffer along South Federal Highway to 15 feet. SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of June 12, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations Page 3 • A waiver to LDR Section 4.3.4(H)(6)(b)(4), to reduce the required special landscape buffer along Linton Boulevard from the required 15.5 and 30 feet to 9 feet. • A waiver to LDR Section 4.6.16(H)(3)(i), requiring landscape islands to be placed at intervals of no less than one landscaped island for every thirteen (13) standard parking spaces or fifteen (15) compact parking spaces. Five (5) required landscape islands are not being provided. • A waiver to LDR Section 4.6.16(H)(3)(i), requiring landscape islands which contain a minimum of one hundred thirty -five (135) square feet of planting area, with a minimum dimension of nine (9) feet, exclusive of the required curb_ Eight (8) islands are being reduced from 9 feet to 8 feet, and Four (4) islands are being reduced in size from a minimum of 135 square feet to a minimum 100 square feet. • A waiver to LDR Section 4.6.16(H )(3 )(k), requiring a 5' landscape strip with a two foot hedge to be placed between abutting parking tiers, to allow sidewalks to be placed in two required landscape strips. The Board also recommended approval to the City Commission of the following two waivers: A waiver to LDR Section 4.4.25(D)(1), for pavement encroachment into the required 15' perimeter setback for the SAD zoning district, for the driveway /parking aisle along Linton Boulevard and the outdoor dining area along the south side of the 400 building. A waiver to LDR Section 4.6.9(D)(3)(c), Stacking Distance, to reduce the required 50 foot stacking distance between a right -of -way and the first parking space or aisle way in a parking lot to twenty -seven (27) feet for the two entrances on Linton Boulevard and thirty -three (33) feet for the entrance on Eve Street. On, March 26, 2013, the City Commission approved a waiver to LDR Section 4.4.25©(2), Alternative Processing" for the establishment of an SAD zoning district, to allow second reading of Ordinance No. 41 -12 to occur greater than 180 days after first reading, but before July 18, 2013. The site plans have been modified to reduce the size of the 100 building at the corner by approximately 500 square feet and to add a decorative landscape entry feature with a fountain. Now before the Board for consideration is the Class V Site Plan proposal for the project which includes construction of a 123,745 sq. ft. (125,927 sq. ft. with alternative layout) shopping center consisting of ten buildings, parking and landscaping on the subject property. This is Step 3 in the SAD rezoning process. The Planning and Zoning Board recommended approval of the SAD rezoning on October 15, 2012 and the City Commission passed the SAD Rezoning Ordinance on 1St Reading on November 6, 2012. Second and Final reading of the Ordinance is scheduled for July 9, 2013. It is noted that both the P &Z Board recommendation and the City Commission approval on first reading did not endorse the related site development plan. It was anticipated that modifications of the site plan would be made to ensure compatibility with adjacent properties. Actions on the site plan as it relates to this compatibility were deferred to SPRAB. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The development proposal consists of the following elements: ❑ Building "100 ": 3,474 sq. ft. bank with drive -thru lanes; or alternative plan with 5,656 sq. ft. of retail /restaurant use. SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of June 12, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations Page 4 0 Building "200 ": 5,600 sq. ft. of retail/restaurant use with outdoor dining area. 71 Building "300 ": 5,694 sq. ft. of retail/restaurant use with outdoor dining area. • Building "400 ". 7,882 sq. ft. of retail/restaurant use with outdoor dining area. • Building "500 - 504 ": 32,015 sq. ft. of retail use with enclosed truck wells, loading area and trash compactor. • Building "506 - 514 ": 46,882 sq. ft. of retail use and enclosed truck wells, loading area and trash compactor. 0 Building "600 5,000 sq. ft. of retail/restaurant use with outdoor dining area. • Building "700 ": 5,000 sq. ft. of retail/restaurant use with outdoor dining area. • Building "800 ": 5,000 sq. ft. of retail/restaurant use with outdoor dining area. • Building "900 ": 5,476 sq. ft. of retail/restaurant use with outdoor dining area. 0 Construction of a 403 space parking lot (410 with alternative Building 100 layout) 0 Installation of associated landscaping and design elements, including trellises, benches and trash compactor enclosures. SITE PLAN ANALYSIS COMPLIANCE WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS: Items identified in the Land Development Regulations shall specifically be addressed by the body taking final action on the site and development application /request. SAD Rezoning Ordinance: The applicant submitted a revised SAD Rezoning Ordinance (attached). Staff has one concern with the underlined section of Section 5 of the Ordinance which has an impact on the site plan approval: Section 5. Permitted Uses. That the development of the Subject Property described in Section 2, above, is approved for all uses set forth in LDR Section 4.4.9, General Commercial (GC), with the exception of residential -type uses, and shall include but not be limited to commercial, general retail, banks, office, business, professional, medical, dental, personal services and facilities, restaurants, food stores, supermarkets, health clubslgyms, pharmacies, movie theatres, and all other commercial related uses. Additional uses within the Subject Property may be allowed but only after review and recommendation by the Planning and Zoning Board and approval by ordinance of the City Commission. Total restaurant uses permitted on the Subject Property shall initially be allowed up to 23,218 leaseable square feet which is based on twenty percent (20 51o) of the total leasable 116,089 square footage as set forth on the site plan, subject to an increase in such restaurant and other uses to be determined after submittal to and approval by the City of a parking utilization study performed by a licensed traffic engineer selected by the developer, which parking utilization study demonstrates that the actual overall parking used is less than the provided parking or the conclusions and presumptions set forth in the Shared Parking Analysis Matrix attached hereto as Exhibit "C" are satisfied. Said parking utilization study must be prepared and submitted after the first peak season and at least (6) months after receipt of the first Certificate of Occupancy for the Subject Property. I If supported by the parking utilization study and approved by the City, the restaurant area may be increased up to 35,988 square feet which is approximately thirty -one percent (31 %) of the total leasable 116,089 square footage as set forth on the site plan, which is SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of June 12, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations Page 5 the maximum restaurant area shown in the Shared Parking Analysis Matrix attached hereto as Exhibit "C". Staff recommends that the parking study be prepared during (not after) the first peak season when the shopping center is at least 89% occupied. That will allow the developer to lease the remaining 11 % for restaurants (bringing the total to 31 %) if the study supports it. Section 4.4.25 Special Activities District [SAD] Regulations Perimeter Setback Landscape Requirements: Pursuant to Section 4.4.25(D)(1), R minimum setback of fifteen feet shall be established around the perimeter of any property developed under the SAD designation. Within the front and any street side setback, the fifteen foot (15'j setback area shall be a landscape area and no pavement shall be allowed therein except for pedestrian ways and driveways (or streets) which provide access to the property and which are generally perpendicular to the abutting street." SPRAB recommended approval of a waiver to this requirement to the City Commission on March 13, 2013. Parking: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.4.25(E)(1), "Parking and loading requirements (number of spaces) shall be as set forth on the site and development plan." The parking requirement for shopping centers of this size is typically 4 spaces per 1,000 square feet in the City [LDR Section 4.6.9(C)(3)(e).] This would result in a requirement of 455 spaces for the 113,907 square foot shopping center. The proposed site plan shows 403 spaces, a reduction (11.4 %) from this requirement with a deficit of 52 spaces. The alternative plan for the 100 building would require 464 spaces for the 116,089 square foot shopping center, while 410 have been provided, a deficit of 54 spaces or (11.6 %). The site plan has been revised since the last submittal to reduce the total building area by 493 square feet to accommodate the landscape feature at the corner. The SAD Rezoning Ordinance includes A "Shared Parking Analysis Matrix ", which provides a method to calculate the total parking demand for the shopping center based on uses. The current ordinance will allow only 20% (23,218 square feet) of the total leasable building area to be restaurants until a parking utilization study is prepared after the first peak season at least 6 months after receipt of the first Certificate of Occupancy to evaluate the adequacy of the parking. This was reduced from 25 %in the previous ordinance. The 25% figure is based on the standard figure used by Palm Beach County for shopping centers to determine traffic concurrency. If supported by the parking utilization study and approved by the City, the restaurant area may be increased to approximately 31% (35,988 square feet) of the total leasable building area, which is the maximum restaurant area shown in the Matrix. As noted above, staff recommends that the parking study be performed during the peak season and that the shopping center be at least 89% occupied when the study is performed. There is approximately 4,900 square feet of potential outdoor dining area (sidewalk cafes) around the buildings in the shopping center. Sidewalk cafes create a vibrant atmosphere that enhances the area and adds to the overall shopping experience of the customers. While additional parking is not required for areas designated as sidewalk cafes, an annual permit fee is required. The permit fee is currently $4.75 per square foot of approved sidewalk cafe space. If the parking study mentioned above shows that parking at the shopping center is not adequate, the permits for some or all of the outdoor cafe areas may not be renewed until some mechanism is employed to reduce the parking deficit. This could include a change of use in one or more of SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of June 12, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations Page 6 the buildings with a lower parking demand or employing Transportation Demand Management (TDM) initiatives to reduce automotive dependence. While a waiver is not required for the SAD zoning District, the number of spaces must be adequate to support the proposed development. A parking study has been provided by TrafTech to support this reduction. The overall parking ratio for the project as designed is 3.53 per 1,000 square feet of commercial space. The Parking Needs Analysis in the Study, which is based on a Shared Parking Analysis Matrix and information published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) in their Parking Generation (4"' Edition) manual, sets the maximum parking required for the center at 397 spaces. Staff reviewed the ITE report and notes that the figure presented represents the "average peak period parking demand" of 2.94 vehicles per 1,000 sq. ft. The applicant also provided additional supporting data, including information on 2 shopping centers with comparable parking to support the reduced number. The actual parking requirements of the shopping center will ultimately be determined by the mix of uses in the center. A balance must be struck between uses with higher and lower parking demand. This is where a successful shopping center developer and management company is needed. Retail Property Group, Inc. "RPG" is a locally based shopping center developer with significant long term successful shopping center industry experience. RPG currently owns and operates thru wholly owned separate affiliated companies without any partners, 7 quality shopping centers averaging about 175,000 sf each for a total of approx.1,200,000 sf throughout southeast Florida which have been successfully developed by RPG from ground up and/or thru major redevelopment. RPG will be the developer and operator of Delray Place and an affiliated wholly owned company of RPG designated as Delray Place, LLC, is the owner of Delray Place. RPG is putting its reputation and money on the line that this project will be successful. Based on their experience and their current leasing efforts, they insist that the parking provided in this project is adequate. It is also noted that the applicant has committed to meeting with South Florida Commuter Services (SFCS) and SAFE to explore TDM initiatives that could alleviate parking demand, especially for employees at the shopping center. To ensure that this does occur, this has been added as a condition of approval to occur prior to site plan certification. The proposed shopping center at this location is a highway - oriented development. Due to the major perimeter roadways, walls around the rear of the property and the vehicular gate on Eve Street, overflow parking is highly unlikely to impact the surrounding residential neighborhood or the adjacent commercial properties. Eve Street itself is the only logical overflow parking area if the parking lot at the shopping center is full. To negate this possibility, no- parking signs must be placed on Eve Street and the applicant must pay for these signs. This has been added as a condition of approval. L D R Section 4.3.4(x) Development Standards Matrix - Nonresidential Zoning Districts: The following address the Development Standards of LDR Section 4.3.4 {K} as it pertains to the Special Activities (SAD) zoning district: Building Height: The maximum height in the SAD zoning district is 48 feet. Although all the proposed buildings are 1 -story with the top of roof at 18 feet, they appear much higher from the front and sides adjacent to the parking areas with decorative parapets, towers, and entry features projecting up to 40 feet in some instances. It is noted, however, that these elements do not occur in the rear of the buildings, adjacent to the residential area to the east. SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of June 12, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations Page 7 The parapets are 23 feet in height in the rear of the 500 buildings with the 500 -504 building located approximately 30 feet from the rear property line. While the 505 -510 building is located only 15 feet from the rear property line, it is further buffered from the residential area by Spanish Trail and a 10' park reservation. At the request of the residents on McCleary Street, the parapet has been eliminated in the rear of the 500 -1000 buildings and an aluminum screen placed further towards the front of the building to screen mechanical equipment. This reduced the height of the buildings in this area from 23 feet to 18 feet and improved compatibility with the adjacent residential development. Building Setbacks: The required perimeter building setback in the SAD zoning district is 15 feet, and all of the proposed buildings meet this requirement. The front and side street setbacks vary throughout the site with the four outbuildings creating an urban edge along South Federal Highway. These buildings are set back 15 feet. To maximize the available parking area, the larger 500 buildings are positioned to the rear of the parcel with the 500 -504 building approximately 30 feet from the rear property line and the 505 -510 building at the rear 15 foot setback line. The 600 to 900 buildings facing Linton Boulevard are also positioned at the rear 15 foot setback line in order to provide adequate area in the front for parking and pedestrian connectivity along this narrower section of the property. Open Space: The required open space in the SAD zoning district is 25% and 25.3% (25.2% with the alternate layout) has been provided. In order to provide the required open space for the project, the existing parking area in the eastern portion of the property along Linton Boulevard is being removed and the area landscaped. While it would be better if the required open space could be distributed throughout the site, it is acknowledged that this dogleg area does present challenges to redevelopment, and the proposed solution does meet the requirements of the LDRs. LDR Article 4.6 - Supplemental District Regulations: Bicycle Parking: LDR Section 4.6.9(C)(1)(c) and Transportation Element Policy D -2.2 of the Comprehensive Plan recommend that a bicycle parking facility be provided. The minimum requirement for shopping centers is 5 spaces per 100,000 square feet of gross floor area, which means that a total of 6 spaces are required for the project. Five (5) bike racks, each with 4 spaces, are proposed for the project, thereby meeting the minimum number of spaces required. These racks are all located along pedestrian connections to the perimeter sidewalk system which provide convenient access points to all buildings on the site. Since, this project does not meet the City's standard minimum automotive parking requirements for shopping centers, the use of bikes as an alternative transportation method, especially for employees at the shopping center should be encouraged as much as possible. Therefore, an assessment must be made during the first peak season at least 6 months after receipt of the first Certificate of Occupancy to determine if the number of bike racks is adequate for the project. This has been added as a condition of approval. Handicap Accessible Parking: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.5.9(C)(1)(b), special parking spaces designed for use by the handicapped shall be provided pursuant to the provisions of Florida Accessibility Code for Building Construction. Pursuant to the Florida Accessibility Code for Building Construction, the nine (9) of the parking spaces serving the development must be handicap accessible. A total of SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of June 12, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations Page 8 thirteen (13) handicap accessible parking spaces are proposed. Thus, this LDR requirement has been met. Stacking Distance: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.9(D)(3)(c)(1 ), provisions must be made for stacking and transitioning of incoming traffic from a public street, such that traffic may not backup into the public street system. The minimum stacking distance between a right -of -way and the first parking space or aisle way in a parking lot that contains 51 or more spaces is fifty feet (50'). This distance has not been provided at the driveway connections to Eve Street and Linton Boulevard. SPRAB recommended approval of a waiver to reduce the stacking distance from the fifty feet (50') for parking lots with fifty -one (51) or more spaces required pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.9(❑)(3)(c)(1) to twenty -seven (27) feet for the two entrances on Linton Boulevard and to thirty -three (33) feet for the entrance on Eve Street.to the City Commission on March 13, 2013. Bank Drive -thru Stacking Distance: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.9(❑)(3)(c)(2), provisions must be made to provide for one hundred feet (100') of clear stacking from the first point of transaction for each lane of a drive -thru facility. The development proposal consists of a two (2) lane drive -thru facility in which each lane provides the minimum 100' of stacking. Thus, this standard has been met. Site Visibility Triangles: Although site visibility triangles have been indicated on the site and landscape plans, the triangle for the intersection of Eve Street and South Federal Highway is shown in the wrong location. Additionally, pursuant to Section 4.6.14(B)(5), "Sight visibility measurements at the intersection of a right -of -way, access way, or driveway and a right -of -way under County, State or Federal jurisdiction are subject to sight visibility requirements from those authorities." Provide modify the site visibility triangles shown on the plans for the driveway connections and roadway intersections involving South Federal Highway to meet the requirements of Florida DOT. Add sight visibility triangles where missing and modify the Site, Landscape and Engineering plans as required to depict the correct site visibility triangles. This has been added as a condition of approval. Refuse Enclosures: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.6(C)(1), dumpster, recycling containers and similar service areas must be enclosed on three sides and have vision obscuring gates on the fourth side, unless such areas are not visible from any adjacent public right -of -way. 11 foot high free - standing trash compactor enclosures with roll up doors have been proposed for the 100 to 400 buildings. The enclosures have green walls and design elements to match the architectural features and colors of the adjacent buildings. Enclosed trash compactors have been integrated into the 500 -504, 506 -510, 800 and 900 buildings. Therefore, this LDR requirement has been met. Lighting: A submitted photometric plan and details of the light pole and wall mounted light fixtures have been submitted. Wall mounted, under overhangs, and under canopy light fixtures will be LED units (light- emitting -diode fixtures). Metal halide fixtures mounted on light poles at a height of 25' are provided throughout the parking lot. The illumination levels for the parking area as well as for the buildings at the entrances and under canopies, drive -thru and overhangs comply with the standards of Section 4.6.8. SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of June 12, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations Page 9 Based on the CPTED review, it is recommended that the parking lot fixtures be changed to LEDs, as they provide the best light with the least amount of glare. Wire cages or industrial strength shatter resistant lenses be placed over the light to deter vandalism. A note to this effect must be included on the site plan. This has been added as a condition of approval. Also note that Florida Statutes include certain requirements with regard to the lighting of automated teller machines (ATM). These requirements are as follows: O F.S. 655.962(1)(a): There shall be a minimum fen (10) footcandle power whereat the face of the automated teller machine and extending in an unobstructed direction outward five feet (5). ❑ F.S. 655.962(1)(b): There shall be a minimum of two (2) footcandle power within 50' in all unobstructed directions from the face of the ATM. O F.S. 655.962(1)(c): There shall be a minimum of two (2) footcandle power in that portion of the defined parking area within 60' of the ATM. If the bank is to have an exterior ATM, the photometric plan must be consistent with the above Florida Statutes, as well as meet the requirements of LDR Section 4.6.8. Signs: The signs depicted on the site plan are not included with this site plan approval. OTHERISSUES Special Landscape Setbacks: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.3.4(H)(6)(b), "Within the following special landscape setbacks, no structures shall be erected, altered, or reconstructed, nor shall any paving be allowed except for driveways and sidewalks leading to structures on the premises. Such driveways and walkways shall be generally perpendicular to the frontage. However, waivers may be granted to these restrictions at the time of site plan review in order to accommodate landscape features, decorative walls, meandering sidewalks, and other decorative pedestrian ways." Linton Boulevard: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.3.4(H)(6 )(b)(4), a special landscape area shall be provided along Linton Boulevard, from A -1 -A to the western City limits. This landscape area shall be the smaller distance of either 30' or 10% of the average depth of the property; however, in no case shall the landscape area be less than ten feet (10'). Therefore, a 15.5 foot buffer is required along the narrow portion of the property along Linton Boulevard; and a 30 foot buffer is required along the deeper portion of the property to the west. A waiver to reduce the special landscape setback required from 15.5 feet for the narrow portion of the property and 30 feet for the deeper portion of the property to nine (9) feet was approved by SPRAB on March 13, 2013. South Federal Highway: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.3.4(H )(6 )(b )(1), a 25' special landscape area must be provided along Federal Highway (U.S. Highway 1), including the one way pairs (5th and 6th Avenues), extending from the south City limits to S.E. 10th Street. A waiver to reduce the special landscape setback from 25 feet to 15 feet was approved by SPRAB on March 13, 2013. South Federal Highway /Linton Boulevard Intersection: At its meeting of December 12, 2012, SPRAB expressed concerns about the bank building located in the corner of the property at this intersection. The Board felt that the building crowded SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of June 12, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations Page 10 the corner too much and should be removed to provide a more open vista into the property. The applicant did not make this modification prior to resubmittal for the March 13, 2613 meeting. Based on SPRAB's strong objections to the location of this building at the earlier meeting, staff added a condition of approval that the building be eliminated or reduced in size to provide a vista into the property and allow for additional parking. At its March 13, 2013 meeting, SPRAB again expressed concerns about this corner and tabled the item to give the applicant time to address the issue. The building at the corner has been reduced by approximately 500 square feet and a landscape feature, including fountains, has been provided on the revised plans. The applicant has stated that the large roadway intersection at this corner provides views into the interior of the property. Undergrounding of Utilities: Pursuant to LDR Section 6.1.8, utility facilities serving the development shall be located underground throughout the development. Therefore, it is attached as a condition of approval that all existing and proposed utilities associated with the development must be located underground and that a note be provided on the site plan to this effect. Right -of -way Dedication: Pursuant to Table T -1 of the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan, the required right -of -way for Linton Boulevard is 120 feet where only 106 feet exists on the north side of the subject property. Pursuant to LDR Section 5.3.1(❑ )(5), a reduction in the required right -of -way width of existing streets may be granted by the City Engineer upon favorable recommendation from the Development Services Management Group (DSMG). On October 4, 2012, the City Engineer and DSMG considered and approved the reduction of right -of -way for Linton Boulevard to the existing width. No additional dedications are required. Bus Shelters: As noted in the Findings section of this report, pursuant to Transportation Element A -1.5 of the Comprehensive Plan, a City approved bus shelter and Mass Transit easement may be required. Work with the Engineering Department to determine if a mass transmit easement should be provided along South Federal Highway. If so, this must be depicted on the site plan, landscape plan, and civil engineering plans. If the project is not adjacent to a bus stop a contribution of approximately one -half the cost of a bus shelter must be paid in -lieu of providing the bus shelter on site. This has been added as a condition of approval and must be addressed prior to site plan certification. Plat: As the development proposal necessitates the dedication of utility easements, the property must be replatted. The recordation of a plat prior to the issuance of a building permit is attached as a condition of approval. Sidewalk Cafes: Many paved outdoor areas surrounding the various buildings in the project have been designated as potential sidewalk cafes on the plans. Pursuant to LDR Section 6.3.3, Sidewalk Cafe, `A sidewalk cafe is a group of tables with chairs and associated articles approved by the City situated and maintained outside whether on public or private property (excluding interior courtyard seating which is subject to parking requirements) and used for the consumption of food and beverages sold to the public from an adjoining business. All tables and chairs and associated articles must be located within the sidewalk cafe permit area. Sidewalk cafes allowed only when in compliance with this Section." While additional parking is not required for SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of June 12, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations Page 11 areas designated as sidewalk cafes, an annual permit fee is required. The permit fee is currently $4.75 per square foot of approved sidewalk cafe space. (Also see the Parking Section related to sidewalk cafes.) Preliminary Engineering Technical Items: While revised plans have accommodated most of staff's concerns, the items attached in Appendix "C" remain outstanding and will need to be addressed prior to site plan certification. CPTED REVIEW The following review was provided by Officer G. Wesner of the Delray Beach Police Department. Note: since this CPTED review was based on the earlier site plan submittal, notations have been added to denote chanoes in the current site clan. Overview The site is situated at the busy S. Federal Hwy and E. Linton Blvd intersection, and extends all the way to the Intracoastal Waterway [ICWI. On the adjacent North side of E. Linton is a successful strip mall containing a popular Carrabas Restaurant, and several retail businesses. Diagonally across S. Federal Hwy the "Plaza at Delray" contains several restaurants and retail ,businesses including an (18) screen Regal theatre. Upscale homes along McCleary and Eve Streets in the "Tropic isles" neighborhood will sit less than 100 feet from the rear of the "540 " and "506 "buildings once completed. Currently, the site contains two four story office buildings facing S. Federal Hwy with a third building to the East along E. Linton Blvd. Most recently, one of the four story buildings had been home to a regional banking center; both four story buildings have been largely empty for several years. Delray Place will be completed in several phases; eventually with existing buildings being demolished to make room for new construction. The project will also get a reconfigured parking lot it will accumulatively encompass (1 2) separate one -story buildings; over 106,000 square feet of restaurant and retail space. For the most part, the site will be a "medium high risk" location for patrons and employees because (11) of the buildings will be suited for a restaurant; they will likely serve alcohol. The 100 building will be high risk location once it is occupied as a bank. This CPTED review was provided using following resources: Several visits to the location during daytime lighting conditions; Delray Beach Police Department Records (available upon request); site plans containing a comprehensive Photometric Study [PSI and certified by Mark Saltz on 11119112; and accepted Crime Prevention Thru Environmental Design [CPTED] standards. Natural Surveillance Natural Surveillance [NS] for each building will be greatly enhanced by the large floor to ceiling windows for each building. overall NS will also be enhanced by the broad stroke of sidewalk cafes areas, and trellis covered benches located throughout the project. Securitv and CCTV: Historically, crime trends for the site have been at acceptable levels. However, a project such as this will see patronage at levels far higher than those previously seen at the site. Additionally, SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of June 12, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations Page 12 restaurants will bring higher numbers in the evening hours than those seen during the sites previous uses. Therefore, there should be management onsite during normal business hours. Each vender should make use of the latest digital CCTV technology. Building entrances and all "points of purchase" should have facial recognition cameras as well as "anti- shoplifting" alarm devices. Retail users should make use of a cash - control system; have signs indicating that cashiers have limited cash on hand. Additional CCTV systems at the management office(s) will provide coverage at parking lot entrances, as well as store front areas. These should be able to record images of approaching vehicles and their license plates. Lighting and Landscaping: The PS indicates that most of the outdoor spaces will receive between 1 and 8 Foot candles [Fc]. Overall Fc levels are acceptable; however, Fc levels should be increased to a minimum of 2 Fc along the East end of the property. This secluded area of the parking lot sits next to the iCW, has an ongoing history for homeless activity. [Note: This parking area next to the ICW was eliminated in the revised site plan. Since, it is now a landscaped area, the comment is not applicable] "Shoe-box" type fixtures mounted on 15 and 25 foot poles will have L.E.D. fixtures. These L.E.D. fixtures will deter glare, and provide the ,best visual quality of color available. Furthermore, their high initial cost will be offset in a matter of months by the formidable energy savings that are common with their use. (Note: This was reported in error, LED fixtures are only being used on wall mounted fixtures only, not in the parking lot fixtures] Much of the existing landscaping will be relocated or completely replaced; an important point made readily obvious by the poor condition of the current landscaping. The landscape plan indicates that appropriate trees, shrubs, and ground cover will be used. Proper maintenance will ensure that new landscaping will not inhibit natural surveillance; create ambush points in the parking lot. Natural Access Control FNAC7. Egress from the parking lot has always been a concern at this site. The main entrance -exit will continue to be at S. Federal Hwy; it only provides right turn egress from the lot. Furthermore, the entrance along E. Linton Blvd has always been a difficult place to turn left for those wishing to exit West bound; towards 1 -95. Those who chose to exit on Eve St. will only be able to turn right once they are at S. Federal Hwy. Once inside the parking lot, renovations will enhance NAC for all users, and improve safety for pedestrians moving to and from parking areas. Fencing and walls along the southern perimeters will make quick access on foot difficult for abnormal users. The `enclosed truck wells" to the rear of the 500 and 508 buildings will be accessed from the main entrance. Once delivery trucks negotiate customer vehicles, they will be able to easily access loading areas. However, they will also be less than 100 feet from the exclusive "Tropic Isles" Therefore, truck engine noise will be a chronic issue for nearby residents if large trucks are left running in the truck wells. Even covered truck wells project noise several blocks away. [Note : this has been addressed in the SAD Ordinances CPTED Technical Items: Based on the above CPTED review, the following items need to be addressed prior to site plan certification. SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of June 12, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations Page 13 1. CCTV technology should be incorporated into the project. The applicant shall work with the police department to ensure compliance. 2. It is recommended that the light fixtures used in the parking lot be LED as they provide the best light with the least amount of glare. Wire cages or industrial strength shatter resistant lenses be placed over the light to deter vandalism. The photometric plan and other plans that may be affected must be revised to comply with this requirement. LANDSCAPE PLAN ANALYSIS Pursuant to LDR section 4.6.16 {C } {1 } (a), prior to the issuance of a building permit for a structure or a paving permit, compliance with the requirements of Section 4.6.16 shall be assured through the review and approval of a landscape plan submitted pursuant to Section 2.4.3 (C). A landscape plan has been submitted and evaluated by the City's Senior Landscape Planner. The plan provides for some building foundation, site perimeter, and parking area landscaping to address the landscaping needs for the proposed commercial development. The total landscape area required for the proposed project is 19,304 sq. ft. and 20,441 sq. ft. are being provided. The proposed development requires a total of 154 interior shade trees and 179 interior shade trees are being provided. The total number of perimeter trees required for the project is 160 trees and the applicant is providing 160 perimeter trees. It is noted that the project will provide a total of 333 trees. All proposed trees along the r -o -w meet "The Right Tree - Right Place as defined by the Florida Power Light company. It is important to mention that the applicant has made an effort to save a total of 11 existing trees that will be relocated on site. The landscape material proposed for the project appears to be abundant and diverse. It is noted that a total of 333 trees which include Verawood, Gumbo Limbo trees, Italian Cypress, Japanese Fern Trees, Jatropha trees, Japanese Privet, Lignum Vitae, High -rise Live Oak, Southern Live Oak, Golden Cassia, and Pink Tabebuia will be planted. Regarding Palm trees the landscape material for the project includes Areca Palms, Alexander Palms, Wild Date Palms, Christmas Palms, Pygmy Date Palms, and Montgomery Palms. A variety of large accents, shrubs, groundcover materials and vines are employed to enhance the proposed development. Accents and Shrubs include Variegated Shell Ginger, Red Ti Plant, Queen Emma Crinum Lily, Bird of Paradise, Red Tip Cocoplum, Muhly Grass, Podocarpus, Wild Coffee, Viburnum and others. The proposed under plantings include Blue Flax Lily, Green Island Ficus, Spider Lilly, Pentas, and Dwarf Podocarpus. Vines include Confederate Jasmin and Bleeding Heart Vine. The City's Senior Landscape Planner has evaluated the landscape plan and found that the plan partially complies with the LDR Section 4.6.16. There are two landscape technical items that the applicant needs to address. These items have been listed below and will be attached as conditions of approval. Thus, once these technical items are addressed, the Landscape Plan will be in compliance with LDR Section 4.6.16. Landscape Technical Items: The following Landscape Plan item remains outstanding, and will need to be addressed prior to certification of the site plan. There is still a deficiency of approximately 640 inches in caliper between the trees that are required to be mitigated for and the new mitigation trees that have been provided. The difference in caliper inches will either have to be made up in the form of money ($1001caliper inch) or donated trees (equal to the number of caliper inches deficient). The other alternatives are to plant larger trees or relocate additional existing trees that are currently proposed for removal and mitigation. SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of June 12, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations Page 14 2. There are several instances where light poles are proposed on top of or immediately adjacent to required trees. Coordinate with the Engineer to move these light poles away from the trees, so that there will be minimal conflict between light pole and tree canopy. Based upon the aforementioned landscaping comments, a positive finding of compliance with the requirements of LDR section 4.6.16 can be made when all outstanding Landscape Technical items are addressed. Parking Lot Islands: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.16(H )(3)(i), "Landscape islands which contain a minimum of one hundred thirty -five (135) square feet of planting area, with a minimum dimension of nine (9) feet, exclusive of the required curb, shall be placed at intervals of no less than one landscaped island for every thirteen (73) standard parking spaces. One shade tree shall be planted in every island with a minimum of seventy -five (75) square feet of shrubs and groundcovers. Tree specifications shall adhere to those listed in Section 4.6.16(E)(5) and 4.6.16(E)(6). Where approval for the use of compact parking has been approved, islands may be placed at intervals of no less than one (1) island for every fifteen (15) compact parking spaces." SPRAB approved waivers to these requirements on March 13, 2013. Landscape Strips Between Parking Tiers: Pursuant to LID Section 4.6.16(H )(3 )(k), "Whenever parking tiers abut, they shall be separated by a minimum five (5) foot wide landscape strip. This strip shall be in addition to the parking stall and be free of any vehicular encroachment, including car overhang. In addition, a two foot (2) hedge shall be installed within this landscape strip and run the entire length of the strip. Pedestrian walkways are permitted to allow passage through the hedge. lllonmountable curbs are not required for these landscaping strips, providing carstops are provided. " SPRAB approved a waiver to this requirement on March 13, 2013. ARCHITECTURAL ELEVATIONS ANALYSIS LDR Section 4.6.98(E) — Criteria for Board Action: The following criteria shall be considered, by the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board (SPRAB), in the review of plans for building permits. If the following criteria are not met, the application shall be disapproved: The plan or the proposed structure is in conformity with good taste, good design, and in general contributes to the image of the City as a place of beauty, spaciousness, harmony, taste, fitness, broad vistas, and high quality. 2. The proposed structure, or project, is in its exterior design and appearance of quality such as not to cause the nature of the local environment or evolving environment to materially depreciate in appearance and value. 3. The proposed structure, or project, is in harmony with the proposed developments in the general area, with the Comprehensive Plan, and with the supplemental criteria which may be set forth for the Board from time to time. The architectural design style utilized in the design of the proposed commercial development is an eclectic representation of a modern contemporary style with architectural design elements typically featured in the southeast Florida area. Four outbuildings have been located close to the SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of June 12, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations Page 15 South Federal Highway frontage with parking areas shielded behind the buildings. Two major anchor tenants for the development are located to the rear, opposite the main parking area. Six buildings are located towards the rear property line with the parking lot area facing Linton Boulevard. The concept of an eclectic style of architecture can be defined as the borrowing of various architectural styles to create a functional and cohesive look through color, texture, physical volumes and shapes. The style of Architecture of the proposed commercial development building is an eclectic cotemporary combination of the Caribbean style and colors with a renovated Old Florida Vernacular style of architecture. The architectural elevations include many features and design elements, such as: white translucent laminated glass with aluminum finish mullions, standing seam metal roof, manufactured stone, stucco texture, cantilever wire suspended overhangs, decorative medallions, suspended awnings, metal roofs, decorative wall mounted light fixtures, score lines, stucco texture finishes, smooth stucco banding around the windows, cornice finished fiat roofs, various shapes of roofs including flat, arched, and asymmetric roof shapes, decorative brackets to support the roof of some portions of the buildings. Eight different colors are incorporated into the buildings of the commercial development including white, light yellow moonraker, light green, artichoke green, threshold taupe, light brown, robust orange, light blue scandal and van dyke dark brown. The proposed colors will help distinguish among different retail bays and portions of the proposed buildings. The proposed colors combined with different roof shapes and roof lines will create a visually attractive streetscape both along South Federal Highway and Linton Boulevard. The proposed commercial development is a high quality design product and will improve the aesthetics of this important double frontage site and will be in harmony with developments in the area; thus, positive findings can be made with respect to LDR Section 4.6.18 (E). REQUIRED FINDINGS N *1tI I S =I 1l .11►1111► [91.1[11 1 T M&3T Pursuant to LDR Section 3.1.1 (Required Findings), prior to the approval of development applications, certain findings must be made in a form which is part of the official record. This may be achieved through information on the application, the staff report, or minutes. Findings shall be made by the body, which has the authority to approve or deny the development application. These findings relate to the following four areas. Future Land Use Map: Pursuant to Section 3.1.1(A), the resulting use of land or structures must be allowed in the zoning district within which the land is situated and said zoning must be consistent with the applicable land use designation as shown on the Future Land Use Map. The subject property has a Future Land Use Map (FLUM) designation of TRN (Transitional) and the proposed zoning designation is SAD (Special Activities District). Pursuant to the Land Use Designation /Zoning Matrix (Table L -7, Future Land Use Element), SAD Zoning is consistent with any land use designation on the Future Land Use Map. Pursuant to LDR Section 4.4.25(A) "Purpose and Intent' for the SAD zoning district, "While SAD zoning is deemed consistent with any land use designation on the Future Land Use Map, the uses allowed within a specific SAD shall be consistent with the land use category shown on the Future Land Use Map. The uses, activities, and characteristics of a SAD are to be consistent SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of June 12, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations Page 16 with the Comprehensive Plan, suitable and compatible with surrounding existing developments, and with the proposed character of the area." Pursuant to LDR Section 4.4.25(B)(1), -Allowed Uses and Structures ", all uses which are to be allowed in a particular SAD shall be established at the time of establishment of the SAD zoning designation through inclusion in the rezoning ordinance. Additional uses may be allowed after review and recommendation by the Planning and Zoning Board and approval by ordinance of the City Commission. The proposed SAD rezoning ordinance, prepared by the applicant, was amended to incorporate a list of the uses allowed within the SAD and the maximum intensity (square footage) of each use is controlled by the Shared Parking Analysis Matrix attached to the ordinance. Based upon the above, it is appropriate to make a positive finding with respect to consistency with the Future Land Use Map designation. CONCURRENCY: Pursuant to Section 3.1.1(B), facilities which are provided by, or through, the City shall be provided to new development concurrent with issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. These facilities shall be provided pursuant to levels of service established within the Comprehensive Plan. As described in Appendix "A ", a positive finding of concurrency can be made as it relates to water and sewer, streets and traffic, drainage, parks and recreation, open space, and solid waste. CONSISTENCY: Compliance with performance standards set forth in Article 3.2 and required findings in appropriate sections of LDR Section 2.4.5 shall be the basis upon which a finding of overall consistency is to be made. Other objectives and policies found in the adopted Comprehensive Plan may be used in making a finding of overall consistency. As described in Appendix "B ", a positive finding of Consistency can be made as it relates to Standards for Site Plan Actions. A review of the objectives and policies of the adopted Comprehensive Plan was conducted and the following applicable objective and policy were found: Future Land Use Element Objective A -7: Property shall be developed or redeveloped in a manner so that the future use and intensity is appropriate in terms of soil, topographic and other applicable physical considerations, is complimentary to adjacent land uses and fulhJls remaining land use needs. Since the subject property is already developed, soil, topographic and other applicable physical considerations do not have an impact on the appropriate development intensity. Ensuring that the proposed development will be complimentary to adjacent land uses and fulfill remaining land use needs is discussed below. Due to its close proximity to Interstate 95 and the Linton Boulevard Interchange, the Federal Highway 1 Linton Boulevard intersection is a prime location for destination shopping for goods and services. Commercial activity in Delray Beach has greatly expanded and this intersection has become a robust commercial hub. There are major developments on all four corners of the intersection: the Plaza at Delray Shopping Center at the northwest corner; the Old Harbour Plaza at the northeast corner; the Linton Tower and SunTrust Bank development at the southwest corner; and the Old Harbor Office and Bank Facility on the subject property at the SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of June 12, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations Page 17 southeast corner. While the subject property is zoned POC (Planned Office Center), all three of the other corners are zoned PC (Planned Commercial). Staff continues to support the property owner's proposal to redevelop the site as a high end shopping center, subject to the site plan adequately addressing the development's compatibility with adjacent residential development, and feels that a major retail center at this corner will anchor the South Federal Highway Redevelopment Area and encourage additional redevelopment. The POC zoning designation currently assigned to the property may have been adequate in the past, but office use at this location now represents an economically infeasible use of the property and current market trends indicate that a zoning designation which permits commercial development is more appropriate. Much of the office space in this project is currently vacant and the demand for office space has been marginal in this area. The City is currently promoting office development in the downtown area and in the "Innovation Corridor" along Congress Avenue in the MROC (Mixed Residential, Office and Commercial) zoning district. It would be better if this site did not compete with those initiatives. The proposed SAD zoning designation will allow development of a major commercial shopping center at this location. Since the site plan for the project will be included in the rezoning ordinance, compatibility with the adjacent Tropic Isles single- family residential development to the east can be assured at the time of the rezoning. It is not unusual for commercially zoned property to directly about single - family residential development since properly designed shopping centers can and do exist adjacent to residential development throughout the City. Residential and general commercial uses can be compatible and complimentary in that the commercial uses provide necessary goods and services for residential neighborhoods and the residents provide the market base to support the commercial uses. Key issues that needed to be addressed to ensure compatibility included the mix of uses, the level of intensity and appropriate buffering. As discussed below, the revised site plan has addressed these issues with a substantial reduction in building area, a decrease in the maximum potential restaurant area and an increase in open space on the site. Additional issues of compatibility are being addressed in the SAD ordinance. Commercial Development Intensity Comparison Project Name Total Building Area Floor Area Ratio (Square Feet) (Total Building Area /Total Land Area) Delray Place 118,580' 0.27 1801 -1845 South Federal Highway Plaza at Delray 293,327 019 1400 South Federal Highway Harbor Plaza 52,679 021 1725 South Federal Highway South Delray Shopping Center 91,402 0.24 3001 South Federal Highway Linton Center (Target) 206,008 0.24 1200 Linton Boulevard New Century Commons 89,164 0.23 500 Linton Boulevard Lavers International 88,376 0.24 660 Linton Boulevard To present a fair comparison, the building area does not include enclosed loading areas, which are not normally provided. The applicant has continued to work with staff and the neighboring residents to mitigate the impacts of the proposed development. While not everyone is completely happy, significant strides have been made to and the revised site plan represents a significant reduction in building area from the prior submittal. The parapets on the back of the buildings adjacent to the SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of June 12, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations Page 18 single family lots on McCleary Street have been eliminated to reduce the overall height of the buildings to 18 feet in order to be more compatible. The trees in this area have been selected to fit in the narrow setback area and the applicant has agreed to a request by the adjacent residents to provide areca palms between the trees along the rear property lines to provide a more effective screen of the buildings. The developer has also agreed to provide sound baffles along the south and east sides of the 500 -504 building and along the north side of the 508 -510 building to mitigate the noise from trucks in this area. The previous elimination of the doors in the rear of the 600 -900 buildings for loading functions and enclosing the outdoor dining areas between the buildings addressed staff's previous concern that noise would impact the adjacent homes; and the revised SAD ordinance does not permit live outdoor entertainment in this area. Although pre - recorded music is allowed, it shall not exceed City noise limits for properties adjacent to single - family residential zoned districts and shall terminate no later than 9:00 pm daily. Future Land Use Element Policy C -1.12: The following pertains to the South Federal Highway area, south of Linton Boulevard In Fiscal Year 2010111, the City's Planning & Zoning Department shall review existing land uses in this area and shall create a redevelopment plan, overlay district or other development tool to promote and guide future redevelopment of the area. The South Federal Highway Redevelopment Plan was adopted by the City Commission on September 20, 2012. Since the original rezoning application was submitted prior to adoption of the Redevelopment Plan, the current proposal for redevelopment of the subject property will not be required to comply with the Redevelopment Plan per se. However, if the current rezoning action does not go forward, any future redevelopment of the subject property will be required to comply with the Redevelopment Plan. It is noted that the Redevelopment Plan supports redevelopment of the subject property with a commercial shopping center development, subject to the site plan adequately addressing the development's compatibility with adjacent residential development, and recommends the option for a privately- initiated rezoning by the property owners to SAD. While the PC zoning district would have allowed the proposed uses, the SAD zoning district, with its required site plan, provides the mechanism to ensure compatibility at the time of rezoning. Transportation Element Policy A -1.5: New residential projects over 25 units and nonresidential projects over 90,000 square feet adjacent to existing or future Palm Tran bus stops shall provide an easement and install a city - approved bus shelter on site. If the project is not adjacent to a bus stop, or a bus shelter already exist, a contribution shall be made to the City in -lieu of providing the bus shelter on site. The applicant must work with the Engineering Department to determine if a mass transmit easement should be provided along South Federal Highway. If so, this must be depicted on the site plan, landscape plan, and civil engineering plans. If the project is not adjacent to a bus stop a contribution of approximately one -half the cost of a bus shelter must be paid in -lieu of providing the bus shelter on site. This has been added as a condition of approval and must be addressed prior to site plan certification. Subject to it being addressed at that time, the development will comply with Transportation Element Policy A -1.5. COMPLIANCE WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS: Items identified in the Land Development Regulations shall specifically be addressed by the body taking final action on the site and development applicationfrequest. SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of June 12, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations Page 19 As described under the Site Plan Analysis of this report, a positive finding of compliance with the LDRs can only be made when all outstanding items attached as conditions of approval are addressed and the two waivers which require approval by the City Commission are either approved or the plans are modified to eliminate the need for said waivers. Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.5(F )(5), In additions to provisions of Chapter Three, the approving body must make a finding that development of the property pursuant to the site plan will be compatible and harmonious with adjacent and nearby properties and the City as a whole, so as not to cause substantial depreciation of property values. The following table identifies the zoning designations and uses that are adjacent to the subject property: Since a rezoning to SAD is linked to a site plan at the time of rezoning, the specific uses are known and compatibility with adjacent and nearby land uses can be assured at that tune. This is a unique situation which only occurs with this zoning district. Staff supports SAD zoning at this location, because of this uniqueness. The SAD can be tailored to the situation, allowing both appropriate and compatible commercial development. With this in mind, the compatibility of SAD zoning is entirely dependent on the SAD rezoning ordinance and the associated site plan. As stated earlier in this report, the revised site plan and SAD ordinance have undergone significant modifications to increase compatibility with the adjacent residential development to the east. With these modifications and compliance with the additional conditions of approval contained in this staff report, a positive finding with respect to Section 2.4.5(F)(5) can be made. REVIEW BY OTHERS The development proposal is not within a geographical area requiring review by the DDA (Downtown Development Authority) or CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency). Courtesy Notices: A special courtesy notice was provided to the following homeowners and/or civic organizations: • Neighborhood Advisory Council • Delray Citizen's Coalition • Tropic Isle Civic Association • Banyan Tree Village • Domain Delray • Harbour's Edge • Harbourside • Linton Woods • Pelican Pointe • Pelican Harbor • Spanish Trail Condo • Tropic Bay • Tropic Harbor Adjacent Zoning: Adjacent Land Uses: North PC (Planned Commercial) and RM Old Harbor Shopping Plaza and Harbors Edge (Multiple Family Residential) Multiple family Residential Development West PC (Planned Commercial) SunTrust Bank and Burger King East R- 1 -AA -B (Single Family Residential) and Tropic Isles Single Family Residential CD (Conservation District) Development South PC (P Ian ned Commercial) & R- 1 -AA -B Tropic Square Shopping Center and Tropic Isles (Single Family Residential) Residential Development Since a rezoning to SAD is linked to a site plan at the time of rezoning, the specific uses are known and compatibility with adjacent and nearby land uses can be assured at that tune. This is a unique situation which only occurs with this zoning district. Staff supports SAD zoning at this location, because of this uniqueness. The SAD can be tailored to the situation, allowing both appropriate and compatible commercial development. With this in mind, the compatibility of SAD zoning is entirely dependent on the SAD rezoning ordinance and the associated site plan. As stated earlier in this report, the revised site plan and SAD ordinance have undergone significant modifications to increase compatibility with the adjacent residential development to the east. With these modifications and compliance with the additional conditions of approval contained in this staff report, a positive finding with respect to Section 2.4.5(F)(5) can be made. REVIEW BY OTHERS The development proposal is not within a geographical area requiring review by the DDA (Downtown Development Authority) or CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency). Courtesy Notices: A special courtesy notice was provided to the following homeowners and/or civic organizations: • Neighborhood Advisory Council • Delray Citizen's Coalition • Tropic Isle Civic Association • Banyan Tree Village • Domain Delray • Harbour's Edge • Harbourside • Linton Woods • Pelican Pointe • Pelican Harbor • Spanish Trail Condo • Tropic Bay • Tropic Harbor SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of June 12, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations Page 20 Public Notices: Formal public notice has been provided to property owners within a 540' radius of the subject property. A substantial number of emails and letters have been received and are attached to this staff report. Other letters of objection and/or support, if any, will be presented at the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board (SPRAB) meeting. ASSESSMENT AND CONCLUSION Staff continues to support the property owner's proposal to redevelop the site as a high end shopping center, subject to the site plan adequately addressing the development's compatibility with adjacent residential development, and feels that a major retail center at this corner will anchor the South Federal Highway Redevelopment Area and encourage additional redevelopment. The proposed SAD zoning designation will allow development of a major commercial shopping center at this location. Since the site plan for the project will be included in the rezoning ordinance, compatibility with the adjacent Tropic Isles single - family residential development to the east can be assured at the time of rezoning. Key issues that needed to be addressed with the revised site plan to ensure compatibility included the mix of uses, the level of intensity and appropriate buffering. The currently proposed site plan for Delray Place has adequately addressed these issues subject to conditions of approval. As stated earlier, a commercial shopping center is the best use of this property and it will be a catalyst for redevelopment of the South Federal Highway corridor. There are still a number of outstanding issues that will be addressed as conditions of approval, including a number of Landscape and Engineering items. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS A. Move postponement of the Class V site plan, landscape plan and architectural elevations for Delray Place, by electing to continue with direction. B. Move approval of the Class V site plan, landscape plan and architectural elevations for Delray Place, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and meets the criteria set forth in Sections 2.4.5(F )(5), and Chapter Three of the Land Development Regulations, subject to the attached conditions of approval. C. Move denial of the Class V site plan, landscape plan and architectural elevations for Delray Place, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan and does not meet the criteria set forth in Sections 2.4.5(F )(5), and Chapter Three of the Land Development Regulations. SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of June 12, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations Page 21 STAFF RECOMMENDATION By Separate Motions: Site Plan: Move approval of the Class V site plan for Delray Place, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and meets the criteria set forth in Section 2.4.5(F )(5) and Chapter Three of the Land Development Regulations, subject to the following conditions: 1. Add sight visibility triangles where missing and modify the Site, Landscape and Engineering plans as required to depict the correct site visibility triangles. 2. A note shall be placed on the site plan that all existing and proposed utilities associated with the development must be located underground. 3. The signs depicted on the site plan are not included with this site plan approval. 4. The developer shall work with the Engineering Department to determine if a mass transmit easement should be provided along South Federal Highway. If so, this must be depicted on the site plan, landscape plan, and civil engineering plans. If the project is not adjacent to a bus stop, a contribution of approximately one -half the cost of a bus shelter must be paid in -lieu of providing the bus shelter on site. 5. The property must be replatted and the plat must be recorded prior to the issuance of a building permit. 6. Satisfy the Preliminary Engineering Technical Items identified in "Appendix C" of the staff report prior to site plan certification. 7. CCTV technology should be incorporated into the project. The applicant shall work with the police department to ensure compliance. 8. Light fixtures used in the parking lot shall be changed to LED as they provide the best light with the least amount of glare. Wire cages or industrial strength shatter resistant lenses be placed over the light to deter vandalism. The photometric plan and other plans that may be affected must be revised to comply with this requirement. 9. The developer will pay for the manufacture and installation of "no parking" signs along Eve Street. 10. If any of the uses in the Delray Place project requires an auxiliary power generator pursuant to the Specific Requirements for Specific Uses in LDR Section 4.3.3, the generator {s} shall not be located outside the building on the ground in the rear of the development adjacent to the residential neighborhood, unless located on the roof, appropriately screened and no closer than 16 ft to the rear of the buildings. 11. The exhaust ports for any restaurant ventilation hood system in the 600 to 900 and 500- 504 and 506 -510 buildings must be located on the roof and not in the rear wall facing the residential neighborhood and no closer than 16 ft from the rear of the buildings. 12. Delray Place shall, by the date the first major tenant opens, install an island that restricts Delray Place internal southbound exiting traffic to right -turn only onto Eve Street. In the event that, at some point in the future, and after all applicable City of Delray Beach process, and after all applicable public hearings, including but not limited to those before the Planning & Zoning Commission and the City Commission, a final development approval is issued by the City for the adjacent (on the south) Tropic Square shopping Center, which approval allows a cross - access across Eve Street with Delray Place, then SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of June 12, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations Page 22 the aforesaid island, upon the completion of said Tropic Square cross- access, may be removed. Removal of the island shall not be considered an amendment to the Delray Place Ordinance and/or amendment to the Site Plan Approvals such as would otherwise require compliance with public notice and hearing procedures for site plan approval and/or rezoning ordinances and shall control in all instances to the extent of any inconsistency with any other approval granted by the City. 13. A Parking Utilization must be prepared during the first peak season when the shopping center is at least 89% occupied outlining that all parking spaces are not being consistently used and a regular parking shortage problem is not occurring, to justify the adequacy of the provided parking. 14. If the Parking Utilization Study condition 13 above provides that all parking spaces are being consistently used and a regular parking shortage problem is occurring, then developer shall provide to alleviate the parking shortage any of the following: (a) on -site valet parking, (b) off -site valet parking, (c) off -site private property employee parking, (d) off -site public property employee parking, (e) off -site nearby customer shuttle parking (f) South Florida Commuter Services Transportation Demand Management "TDM" Programs such as, car & van & bus pooling, bicycling and bicycling parking, preferential car & van pooling parking programs, South Florida vanpools, transportation partnerships, shuttle shared system, ride sharing & matching, other TDM programs (e) any other reasonable programs. 15. An assessment must be made during the first peak season budgeted to be approx. 12/1- 5/1/2014 after receipt of the first certificate of occupancy to determine if the number of bike racks is adequate for the project. 16. The developer shall meet with SFCS and SAFE to explore TDM initiatives that could alleviate over capacity parking shortage demand at the shopping center. 17. Provide a traffic concurrency equivalency letter from project traffic engineer that demonstrates the mix of proposed uses falls within the approved 2/13/2013 Palm Beach County project number 1200911 Traffic Performance Standards Review Letter proposed uses and other allowed allocations. 18. The developer shall provide sound mitigation for the nearby rear neighbors by providing Sound Wall Absorption Material up to 14 feet high on the south wall elevation of building 500 -504 and the north wall elevation of building 506 -510 and on the east wall elevation of building 500 -504 as shown in detail within the Development Plans on architectural sheet A -10 building 500 -504 Elevation Plans prepared by Saltz Michelson Architects. . 19. The Linton Boulevard buildings 600 -900 adjacent to the south residential area are to have (a) an overall height of no more than 18' as measured from grade level of Delray Place, (b) air conditioning and other mechanical equipment placed on the roof no closer than 16ft to the rear of the buildings, (c) a parapet or screening wall installed no closer than 16' to the rear of the buildings and such parapet or screening wall shall have a height no lower than the height of the tallest element of mechanical equipment and shall run parallel to the east & west width of the buildings to screen said equipment visually and from noise from the residential community to the south thereof. 20. The exhaust fans integral to the loading bays shown on the site plan for the buildings parallel to Federal Highway and adjacent to Spanish Trail to the east thereof along the rear of buildings 500 -510 are to be located only on the roof. 21. The existing landscaping, including the root systems thereof, lying within City owned easements located along Spanish Trail and east of the Eve Street gate, will not be disturbed by any construction nor the operation of Delray Place. Should any of the SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of June 12, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations Page 23 existing landscaping located along Spanish Trail and east of the Eve Street gate, die due to developer's disturbance, the developer will replace the dead plant material with that of like density and size based on the current availability of plant materials and code requirements. 22. The two large Banyan trees located proximate to the north corner intersection of Spanish Trail and McCleary Street which are partially located on Delray Place property and the adjacent neighbor's property, are not to be disturbed other than the right of the owner of the Delray Place property to care for and to trim and modify branches that overhang onto the Delray Place property. In the event the activities of the developer during constructing Delray Place injure either one or both of the two Banyan trees to an extent causing the death of either or both of the two Banyan trees, the developer will fully remove the dead tree(s), including the root systems thereof as reasonably possible and replace in the same general area either on the Delray Place property and/or the adjacent residential property with tree(s) based on current availability which can reasonable fit in the same general place and as are allowed by code. 23. The Developer shall incorporate mature Areca Palms that are approx. 14' in height based on reasonable availability into the landscape plans which are to be planted within the boundary of the Delray Place rear landscape buffers behind building 500 -504 & building 506 -510, on the south side of building 506 -510, and behind Linton Blvd. buildings 600 -900 and all the way to the east property line near and next to the Tropic Isle residential community as shown on the landscaping plans. 24. The existing wood fence running along the rear of the Delray Place property parallel to Spanish Trail and Eve Street, and just outside the City easement, is to be removed as shown on the plans. 25. There is to be no construction access for the construction of Delray Place from Eve Street east of the Eve Street gate, or from within any other portion of the Tropic Isle residential community. 26. All trash areas are to be air - conditioned and enclosed as shown on plans. 27. A southbound Federal Highway No U -turn sign shall be placed at the intersection of Federal Highway and Tropic Isle Boulevard, if approved by FDOT and other required approval parties. 28. There are to be no rear doors, except for emergency, fire access, and/or code required rear doors, for the Linton Boulevard buildings 600 -900 adjacent to the residential area. 29. All mops, grease carts, buckets, and like equipment are to be internally stored within the Linton Boulevard buildings 600 -900 adjacent to the residential area. Landscape Plan: Move approval of the landscape plan for Delray Place, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request is consistent with Section 4.6.16 of the Land Development Regulations, subject to the following conditions: 1. That all Landscape Plan Technical Items be addressed prior to certification of the site plan. SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of June 12, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations Page 24 Architectural Elevations: Move approval of the architectural elevations for Delray Place, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request meets the criteria set forth in Section 4.5.18 {E} of the Land Development Regulations. Attachments., ■ Appendix A" ■ Appendix "6" ■ Appendix "C" ■ Location Map • Aerial ■ Reduced Plans ■ Parking Study and Support Documents ■ Public CommentslCorrespondence ■ SAD Rezoning Ordinance No. 41-12 ■ Color Board SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of June 12, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations Page 25 APPENDIX "A" CONCURRENCY FINDINGS Pursuant to Section 3.1.1(8), Facilities which are provided by, or through, the City shall be provided to new development concurrent with issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. These facilities shall be provided pursuant to levels of service established within the Comprehensive Plan. Water and Sewer: The site is already served by water and sewer service. Municipal water service is available via connection to a 12" water main located the east side of S. Federal Hwy., a 14" water main on Eve Street, and a 6" water main on the south side of Linton Boulevard. Fire protection is provided by two fire hydrants located on the south side of Linton Boulevard and one along the north side of Eve Street. Additional fire hydrants may be required and this was noted in the Fire Department's technical comments. Sewer service is available to the site via connection to an existing 8" sewer main which is located along on Eve Street. On site sewer main improvements will be considered as part of the site development approval process. Pursuant to the Comprehensive Plan, treatment capacity is available at the South Central County Waste Water Treatment Plant for the City at build -out. The Comprehensive Plan also states that adequate water and sewer treatment capacity exists to meet the adopted LOS at the City's build -out population based on the current Future Land Use Map. Thus, a positive finding with respect to this level of service standard can be made. Streets and Traffic: A traffic analysis report for the proposed development was prepared by TrafTech Engineering. The traffic report determined that the proposed redevelopment will generate a net increase of 4,817 Average Daily Trips (ADT), with a net reduction of 225 A.M. peak hour trips, and a net increase of 398 new P.M. peak hour trips. The report concluded that the adjacent street network has adequate available capacity to accommodate the project traffic associated with the Delray Place Project and that the project is not anticipated to negatively affect the roadway network located within the project study area. The applicant transmitted the traffic study to the Palm Beach County Traffic Division for review. Although a letter from Palm Beach County indicating that the project meets the Traffic Performance Standards of Palm Beach County has been provided, the mix and intensity of uses is not consistent with the current site plan. Since the intensities given in the letter exceed the current proposal, traffic concurrency can be met. Thus, a positive finding with respect to this level of service standard can be made. However, a revised letter will be required prior to certification of the site plan. Drainage: Engineering has requested that the applicant provide a signed and sealed drainage report indicating the proposed system's ability to meet storm water quality and quantity requirements in accordance with the South Florida Water Management District regulations per LDR Section 2.4.3 (❑)[7). In addition, the surface water management system needs to be designed in accordance with LDR Section 6.1.9 for a minimum of a 10 yr. 1 24 hr. storm event. The system needs to provide for positive drainage of lots, streets, roads, and other public areas as well as handling any run -off from adjacent areas that historically flowed into the subject area. Include drainage calculations confirming that there will be no negative post development impacts on adjacent homes, structures or properties. The applicant has indicated that the drainage calculations will be provided at final engineering and show that the parking lot is designed to be protected from the 10 yr. 1 24 hr. storm event while maintaining the existing discharge from the site. Thus, a positive finding with respect to this level of service standard can be made. Parks and Open Space: Park dedication requirements do not apply for non - residential uses. Thus, the proposed development will not have an impact with respect to this level of service standard. The 25% minimum open space requirement for the project has been met. SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of June 12, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations Page 26 Schools: School concurrency findings do not apply for non - residential uses. Thus, the proposed development will not have an impact with respect to this level of service standard. Solid Waste. As shown on the following table, the proposed redevelopment of the property will result in a net increase of 618.4 tons per year in solid waste generation. In its annual capacity letter, dated January 6, 2012, the Solid Waste Authority indicates that it has sufficient capacity for concurrency management and comprehensive planning purposes. As stated in the letter, "Capacity is available for both the coming year, and the five and ten year planning periods specified in 9J- 5- 005(4)." Based on population projections, waste generation rate projections, waste reduction, and recycling, the Solid Waste Authority forecasts that capacity will be available at the existing landfill through approximately the year 2047. Thus, a positive finding with respect to this level of service standard can be made. Solid Waste Generation Delray Place Existing Development Proposed Development 56,515 SF General Office @ 5.4 Ibslsf = 152.6 tons/year 80,101 SF Retail @10.2 Ibslsf = 409.6 tonslyear 29,366 5F Medical Office @ 4.6 Ibslsf = 67.5 35,988 SF Potential Restaurants @ 24.9 Ibslsf = tons/year 451.6 tons/year 4,459 SF Retail @ 10.2 Ibslsf = 22.7 tons/year Total: 242.8 tons/year Total: 861.2 tons/year SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of June 12, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations Page 27 APPENDIX "B" STANDARDS FOR SITE PLAN ACTIONS A. Building design, landscaping and lighting (glare) shall be such that they do not create unwarranted distractions or blockage of visibility as it pertains to traffic circulation. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X Does not meet intent B. Separation of different forms of transportation shall be encouraged. This includes pedestrians, bicyclists and vehicles in a manner consistent with policies found under Objectives D -1 and D -2 of the Transportation Element. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X Does not meet intent C. Open space enhancements as described in Policies found under Objective B -1 of the Open Space and Recreation Element are appropriately addressed. Not applicable X Meets intent of standard Does not meet intent D. The City shall evaluate the effect that any street widening or traffic circulation modification may have upon an existing neighborhood. if it is determined that the widening or modification will be detrimental and result in a degradation of the neighborhood, the project shall not be permitted. Not applicable X Meets intent of standard Does not meet intent E. Development of vacant land which is zoned for residential purposes shall be planned in a manner which is consistent with adjacent development regardless of zoning designations. Not applicable X Meets intent of standard Does not meet intent SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of June 12, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations Page 28 F. Property shall be developed or redeveloped in a manner so that the future use and intensity are appropriate in terms of soil, topographic, and other applicable physical considerations; complementary to adjacent land uses; and fulfills remaining land use needs. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X- Subject to conditions of approval. Does not meet intent G. Redevelopment and the development of new land shall result in the provision of a variety of housing types which shall continue to accommodate the diverse makeup of the City's demographic profile, and meet the housing needs identified in the Housing Element. This shall be accomplished through the implementation of policies under Objective B -2 of the Housing Element. Not applicable X Meets intent of standard Does not meet intent H. The City shall consider the effect that the proposal will have on the stability of nearby neighborhoods. Factors such as noise, odors, dust, traffic volumes and circulation patterns shall be reviewed in terms of their potential to negatively impact the safety, habitability and stability of residential areas. if it is determined that a proposed development will result in a degradation of any neighborhood, the project shall be modified accordingly or denied. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X- Subject to conditions of approval. Does not meet intent 1. Development shall not be approved if traffic associated with such development would create a new high accident location, or exacerbate an existing situation causing it to become a high accident location, without such development taking actions to remedy the accident situation. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X Does not meet intent J. Tot lots and recreational areas, serving children from toddler to teens, shall be a feature of all new housing developments as part of the design to accommodate households having a range of ages. This requirement may be waived or modified for residential developments located in the downtown area, and for infill projects having fewer than 25 units. Not applicable X Meets intent of standard Does not meet intent SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of June 12, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations Page 29 APPENDIX "C" PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING TECHNICAL ITEMS 1. Provide a response letter with a detailed description of how each of these comments has been addressed and reference plans sheet number for accurate review. 2. The Survey, Site, Landscaping and Civil Plans need to be at the same scale. All plans needs to be drawn on 24" x 36" sheets and at a scale of 1" = 10', 1" = 20' or 1" = 30' per LDR Section 2.4.3 (B) (1 ) and (D) (1). 3. Please coordinate location of all existing and proposed easements on Site, Civil, Landscape and Composite Utility Plans. Existing and proposed easement locations and labeling needs to be consistent on all plans. Site, Civil and Landscaping Plans need to include Drainage, Water and Sewer Easements. 4. It was not clear whether the off -site drainage connection on Linton Boulevard was still being used. If it is, clearly indicate location and permission from Palm Beach County is required. 5. Indicate location of required FPL easements on all plans, including Site, Civil and Landscaping Plans. 6. Indicate location for relocated pole at driveway on Eve Street on all plans. 7. Palm Beach County permit(s) or permit modification through the Traffic Division required for this project per LDR Section 2.4.2 (C) (2) (d). Provide documentation indicating applicant has met with Palm Beach County regarding proposed project. Actual copies of the drainage and utility permits must be submitted prior to any building permit issuance. 8. Provide Demolition Plans at the 1" = 30'. 9. On Demolition Plans, indicate existing easements to be abandoned. 10. Please revise drainage summary to include how the surface water management system is designed for a minimum of a 10 yr./24 hr. storm event, as this is a requirement in accordance with LDR Section 6.1.9. 11. Provide a Composite Utility Plan signed by a representative of each utility provider attesting to the fact that services (water, sewer, drainage, gas, power, telephone and cable) can be accommodated as shown on the Composite Utility Plan. The Composite Utility Plan needs to address the responsibility for relocation of existing services and installation of new services in accordance with LDR Section 2.4.3 (F) (4). Composite Utility Plan is also used to ensure physical features do not conflict with each other and existing or proposed utility services. 12. Submit revised plans and any required documentation for Preliminary Engineering review with next submittal. Please ensure a complete set is provided for the City of Delray Beach Engineering Division and indicate which documents are for the Engineering Division. 13. Additional comments may follow after review of revised plans. I I � 5 LEWS COVE CENTRAL AVE. S.E. 12TH RD. r BROOKS W. C,7 x WHITE DR. a` i I k RHODES -VILLA AVE- } � BANYAN .� TREE LANE �q DEL -HAVEN D . Ld 1z' Q L I N T 0 N H 0 U L E V A R ¢ � D z z d L; WC CLEARY S 7�= DEL- HARBOUR DR, EVE STREET DIE J � � Q � F D TROPIC BOULEVARD Ln J Q O W CJ W Q W SOLENDER STREET w F BER uD } RO 0 Uptivi ALLAMAR A a BANYAN DRIVE CYPRESS DRIVE I SUBJECT PROPERTY DEL RAY PLACE PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT LOCATION MAP -- DfGITAL BASE AMP SYSTEM -- MAP REF: 5:\Planning do Zomriq\DBMS\FI- Ca6\Z -LM 1001- 150D\LM1310 Delray Place r 11 I M'l I 3 f N A Ai M'l I 3 f N A DELRAY PLACE SALTZ MICHELSON DELRAY REAM PL ARCHITECTS mll lm awns -11 EXTERIOR COLOR BOARD SW 6168 MODERN WHITE � SHERWIN-WILLIAMS W 6701 NRAK 5W 6741 MOONRAKER Q SHERWIN-WILLIAMS 17 CY SAGE �J SW 6179 ARTICHOKE `J SW 7R1 THRESHOLD TAUPE 501 SW 66 SHERWIN-WILLIAMS 8 ROBUST ORANGE SHERWIN-WILLIAMS lJ SW 65 SANDA 1,V SW 7441 VAN DYKE BROWN 'F. I ff { WHITE TRANSLUCENT LAMINATED GLASS STANDING SEAM ROOF SYSTEM: MILL FINISH:'DREXLUME' W/ BRONZE COLORED MULLIONS BY'DREXEL METALS Inc.' WHERE INDICATED GREEN GLASS i. WIALUMINUM FINISH MULLIONS WHERE INDICATED - - - �j E E0 V C SEP a 7 2012 "y 4 +•Y iLii' ! .1 �,.•• .�'� -. y, PLANNING & ZONING f _ . MANUFACTURED STONE BY 'CORONADO' — - �-y `r L WK STACK' COLOR., ASPEN' DELRAY PLACE SALTZ MICHELSON DELRAY REAM PL ARCHITECTS mll lm awns -11 EXHIBIT "A" DELRAY PLACE SPRAB MOTIONS WITH CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL The Board approved the Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevations with the following motions: Site Plan: Move approval of the Class V site plan for Delray Place, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and meets the criteria set forth in Section 2.4.5(F)(5) and Chapter Three of the Land Development Regulations, subject to the following conditions: 1. Add sight visibility triangles where missing and modify the Site, Landscape and Engineering plans as required to depict the correct site visibility triangles. 2. A note shall be placed on the site plan that all existing and proposed utilities associated with the development must be located underground except around perimeter where if affects mature trees. 3. The signs depicted on the site plan are not included with this site plan approval. 4. The developer shall work with the Engineering Department to determine if a mass transmit easement should be provided along South Federal Highway. If so, this must be depicted on the site plan, landscape plan, and civil engineering plans. If the project is not adjacent to a bus stop, a contribution of approximately one -half the cost of a bus shelter must be paid in- lieu of providing the bus shelter on site. 5. The property must be replatted and the plat must be recorded prior to the issuance of a building permit. 6. Satisfy the Preliminary Engineering Technical Items identified in "Appendix C' of the staff report prior to site plan certification. 7. CCTV technology should be incorporated into the project. 8. Consider the use of LED light fixtures in the parking lot. If so, the photometric plan and other plans that may be affected must be revised accordingly. 9. The developer will pay for the manufacture and installation of "no parking" signs along Eve Street. 10. If any of the uses in the Delray Place project requires an auxiliary power generator pursuant to the Specific Requirements for Specific Uses in LDR Section 4.3.3, the generator {s} shall not be located outside the building on the ground in the rear of the development adjacent to the residential neighborhood, unless located on the roof, appropriately screened and no closer than 16 ft to the rear of the buildings. 11. The exhaust ports for any restaurant ventilation hood system in the 600 to 900 and 500 -504 and 506 -510 buildings must be located on the roof and not in the rear wall facing the residential neighborhood and no closer than 16 ft from the rear of the buildings. 12. Delray Place shall, by the date the first major tenant opens, install an island that restricts Delray Place internal southbound exiting traffic to right -turn only onto Eve Street. In the event that, at some point in the future, and after all applicable City of Delray Beach process, and after all applicable public hearings, including but not limited to those before the Planning & Zoning Commission and the City Commission, a final development approval is issued by the City for the adjacent (on the south) Tropic Square shopping Center, which approval allows a cross- access across Eve Street with Delray Place, then the aforesaid island, upon the completion of said Tropic Square cross- access, may be removed. Removal of the island shall not be considered an amendment to the Delray Place Ordinance and/or amendment to the Site Plan Approvals such as would otherwise require compliance with public notice and hearing procedures for site plan approval and/or rezoning ordinances and shall control in all instances to the extent of any inconsistency with any other approval granted by the City. 13. A Parking Utilization must be prepared during the first peak season when the shopping center is at least 89% occupied outlining that all parking spaces are not being consistently used and a regular parking shortage problem is not occurring, to justify the adequacy of the provided parking. 14. If the Parking Utilization Study condition 13 above provides that all parking spaces are being consistently used and a regular parking shortage problem is occurring, then developer shall provide to alleviate the parking shortage any of the following: (a) on -site valet parking, {b} off -site valet parking, {c} off -site private property employee parking, (d) off -site public property employee parking, (e) off -site nearby customer shuttle parking {f} South Florida Commuter Services Transportation Demand Management "TDM" Programs such as, car & van & bus pooling, bicycling and bicycling parking, preferential car & van pooling parking programs, South Florida vanpools, transportation partnerships, shuttle shared system, ride sharing & matching, other TDM programs (e) any other reasonable programs. 15. An assessment must be made during the first peak season budgeted to be approx. 12/1- 5/1 /2014 after receipt of the first certificate of occupancy to determine if the number of bike racks is adequate for the project. 16. The developer shall meet with SFCS and SAFE to explore TDM initiatives that could alleviate over capacity parking shortage demand at the shopping center. 17. Provide a traffic concurrency equivalency letter from project traffic engineer that demonstrates the mix of proposed uses falls within the approved 2/13/2013 Palm Beach County project number 1200911 Traffic Performance Standards Review Letter proposed uses and other allowed allocations. 18. The developer shall provide sound mitigation for the nearby rear neighbors by providing Sound Wall Absorption Material up to 14 feet high on the south wall elevation of building 500 -504 and the north wall elevation of building 506 -510 and on the east wall elevation of building 500 -504 as shown in detail within the Development Plans on architectural sheet A- 10 building 500 -504 Elevation Plans prepared by Saltz Michelson Architects. 19. The Linton Boulevard buildings 600 -900 adjacent to the south residential area are to have (a) a rear height of no more than 18' as measured from grade level of Delray Place, (b) air conditioning and other mechanical equipment placed on the roof no closer than 16ft to the rear of the buildings, {c} a parapet or screening wall installed no closer than 16' to the rear of the buildings and such parapet or screening wall shall have a height no lower than the height of the tallest element of mechanical equipment and shall run parallel to the east & west width of the buildings to screen said equipment visually and from noise from the residential community to the south thereof. 20. The exhaust fans integral to the loading bays shown on the site plan for the buildings parallel to Federal Highway and adjacent to Spanish Trail to the east thereof along the rear of buildings 500 -510 are to be located only on the roof. 21. The existing landscaping, including the root systems thereof, lying within City owned easements located along Spanish Trail and east of the Eve Street gate, will not be disturbed by any construction nor the operation of Delray Place. Should any of the existing landscaping located along Spanish Trail and east of the Eve Street gate, die due to developer's disturbance, the developer will replace the dead plant material with that of like density and size based on the current availability of plant materials and code requirements. 22. The two large Banyan trees located proximate to the north corner intersection of Spanish Trail and McCleary Street which are partially located on Delray Place property and the adjacent neighbor's property, are not to be disturbed other than the right of the owner of the Delray Place property to care for and to trim and modify branches that overhang onto the Delray Place property. In the event the activities of the developer during constructing Delray Place injure either one or both of the two Banyan trees to an extent causing the death of either or both of the two Banyan trees, the developer will fully remove the dead tree(s), including the root systems thereof as reasonably possible and replace in the same general area either on the Delray Place property and/or the adjacent residential property with tree(s) based on current availability which can reasonable fit in the same general place and as are allowed by code. 23. The Developer shall incorporate mature Areca Palms that are approx. 14' in height based on reasonable availability into the landscape plans which are to be planted within the boundary of the Delray Place rear landscape buffers behind building 500 -504 & building 506 -510, on the south side of building 506 -510, and behind Linton Blvd. buildings 600 -900 and all the way to the east property line near and next to the Tropic Isle residential community as shown on the landscaping plans. 24. The existing wood fence running along the rear of the Delray Place property parallel to Spanish Trail and Eve Street, and just outside the City easement, is to be removed as shown on the plans. 25. There is to be no construction access for the construction of Delray Place from Eve Street east of the Eve Street gate, or from within any other portion of the Tropic Isle residential community. 26. All trash areas are to be air - conditioned and enclosed as shown on plans. 27. A southbound Federal Highway No U -turn sign shall be placed at the intersection of Federal Highway and Tropic Isle Boulevard, if approved by FDOT and other required approval parties. 28. There are to be no rear doors, except for emergency, fire access, and /or code required rear doors, for the Linton Boulevard buildings 600 -900 adjacent to the residential area. 29. All mops, grease carts, buckets, and like equipment are to be internally stored within the Linton Boulevard buildings 600 -900 adjacent to the residential area. 30. The Developer shall provide a provision in all restaurant leases that all outdoor seating areas are subject to the City of Delray governmental regulations. Landscape Plan: Move approval of the landscape plan for Delray Place, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request is consistent with Section 4.6.16 of the Land Development Regulations, subject to the following conditions: 1. That all Landscape Plan Technical Items be addressed prior to certification of the site plan. The landscape plan technical items are as follows: ■ There is still a deficiency of approximately 640 inches in caliper between the trees that are required to be mitigated for and the new mitigation trees that have been provided. The difference in caliper inches will either have to be made up in the form of money ($100 /caliper inch) or donated trees (equal to the number of caliper inches deficient). The other alternatives are to plant larger trees or relocate additional existing trees that are currently proposed for removal and mitigation. There are several instances where light poles are proposed on top of or immediately adjacent to required trees. Coordinate with the Engineer to move these light poles away from the trees, so that there will be minimal conflict between light pole and tree canopy. Architectural Elevations: Move approval of the architectural elevations for Delray Place, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request meets the criteria set forth in Section 4.6.18(E) of the Land Development Regulations, subject to the following condition: 1. That the canopy over the clock tower be proportionate with said clock tower in relation to the other canopies in the project. Wild AVH'IEI CI /9 uj � � � � I OR � � IN W � � 2 U � w 03 � � w CD �A � � &� k | � § | | |§ | § § |� |||I| ,! ■ Hill l-- ; ■ II - |! ■! § |t || | ;!IzQQzI§§§§ UOVICI RI li A.WIF1 Wn.Ra _y L1 c q w HE 0.N 4 Ek �C� 3 J 106 P p6 y zw a @` ayil; gar s$ 9 b + y lo- LU ® Q § w z g! d 2 a o y gggg W 9 €E < _ W Q 7 j 5 J C7rr k - -° — J¢ Qom':, ma z w4 4 a w E c; 0.y Y N �a ...... Pi w wg g g g d 9ie g LL 4 4 N LU 2 a P P F N O � g 3 w w w w w r W s � a U av LU { b —:: tit ¢ is o e d U 2 pp ya gs 8 Spg U Hgi 9 i 92)Vld SKVIIJ DNISVHd I i1 con LU �N LLI CL (L LU ry . . .......... . a. LU 2g. IIIIIIII I T. '41 hi* I-sl (L Jif 7" a li II II ii LL 10 LU LU ayy LIl LU L co CL W LU DE Z CL aDvid AVY190 U) 0 LL I II ....... JJLL ......... I --- - -------- ........... ............. ........... W III -------- --------- ........... ...................... ----------- LL-i ---------- - --- F .........I.........._ ITL ......... Fy.- �_________ . ---- II ....... JJLL ......... I mi Q LLj ---------- m i a7 ........... ft O 0. paLL O O QS Ce O LL --- - -------- ........... ............. ........... ................... ........... L -- - -- - ----------- LL-i ---------- - --- mi Q LLj ---------- m i a7 ........... ft O 0. paLL O O QS Ce O LL 1d 71:rt'39 AV873O � _ gf � y 6 PUMP"" E"alHag A39 yygg y@ e X44 Y zoo 4 a S 'I — - s , 1�. 4 LJ H 2 W N o- n S - a a w � ■ a .z uJ 3 p g T12 cc ,p 'I frry lil .liL3O VV�7g V� 8 - r d s - -- -- --- - -- -- -- a O O 0 J�� i:- Q Y•f. .N t m- k IN KNwl OT IlI A I IN NI_ 0Z ..RI ml PO R umim IN Mill El 3 IS E113. IS 016 I Y1. E., i !Imigu MFA NJ NO MM 11110111111 11411, ON ]IRAN ME MINIM "Ing MEAN 2, F. All Fill I. �.Z+7111,1■!�� !!■ ■■Ir�l I� �� Mul Ei: I. Il 11110111 Ew lie 10, W domm I ME .0 Elm i ii Mil No Nomm 1—: NO - 01- +�•I 5v it .lid Im j 6e � Q Q V� = 7 M±F= r LL Ly J O � a ... u7 44 = Q u7 F ty .. ....... T - -- - -- .. .. ° _:t.....LBO........� j ................ ❑....: '........ 1 ...........G ....... ........... � � 1.................L../ s si yy yy V _ I yy I Se o I 1 1 I 1 1 I 1 1 ui 1(7 J p O O W C) _ O . all LiSi 19- 8 r-- i �k` 1 { - {jliSS 1d 71:rt'39 AV873O ^� � � q x HIM �Iw. _ ill, g 4sl 77 q �F�Bt€8�8kA i aS�B 9g L _ 6 - 3ii GPO L S - I — f J I W al c8a om o„ 71 4 i o I � a - z 4 - o +I ? w k C 4 GyS TA 07 ^-i e , a e a ...s a I §b�� |M§��� | .| |, �| | %§ f || | ■9 �i f f , |■ ; |I�� , | |� | .| |- � w\ .§ � - # 1p , k k } k | § ) .. @ | � _ $ / J105 � | | � � |� I 5v u kid Im ............ ... .. . . ....................................... LJ ss ie IMF ........... -., WN Mau" Cf im Ali ie IMF ........... -., WN Mau" Cf im ]Jd akVdZ O � � : ■�,�| ;.! | | |k � | � ) |\ � §. � %��� | |m � � § k ) §, §/ ƒ I ! � |' � � 1�4 !| � .. � � � - - -ƒ I ) | | | || © IN % - ( k y k � I ( � a § � k !� §� li � |- /' I Lo � d 2 a §� a U 3 con a 4 � 0. F nrr LL 0 O c3 z Yk Olt t �a I u 0 ®J ❑ �l u �9l I1 11 l I a� 1 1 0 o 'L7 ►I Q m Q 0 F U W N W U� 0 0 a Hi u { c 1 [ F c u I l 1 1 I l l l ti l I l 1 1 l ti l I l 1 all V71:ri39 AVU73O � � m a x w 0 a L- w; S: W W H N W 7 W Z Q } Q F (7 X Q uK W LL H Q Nle` O J zfL OF 2 w 2 O a Nk [7 z A GJ k 150" F �'`••- �o�` #��,� it ' ii Z V J N J Z_ ❑ 7 m Z O z 0 Z r x C 5 J J 6 J 7 n 6 . . t f .. lk oom .�c d`W s • t4. � �,��r`r• - lir �• ay , aDvid AV-dlgu |) }) LL.l ........... § /� \� | |( k ■ b!! � \/ �- ,.._____ _/_ � \•/ \ 0 .q L P2 149 a ii'11?Yi Q.tVM7ip � iJ =� 7 ? O s g 4 con a ir J rig yJ All 9 i =F U ;ill g!jj a. [ 1 1 • e1 ; 4 ; haw - ibw vy A -.•e m� A- ,.e7�r CHOi it a Jill .1.!. t i[ h Jill If s n s Ai P 141, e :a MAIM Ig E;�33i1 In i € 1 i 1 [ ;���1 ii eFl�Fi6i1 e i € 1 a ii'11?Yi Q.tVM7ip � iJ =� 7 3 p con Luhi i ub�+Wi Is��rc �F� l MS r^h. acuhr•p �' uCIIOlJOd541Wj Se71NB$JOlueWUD1M.u3 sjlu7ajww ell unhpu Oi I i3uluvgd 'H7N39 pp pt '� x H l n o s tltllLDl� Ati'Hl3tl �NI'dnoda) A1213d021d IIVAd 2104 (13'dVd3dd 3 16g iL E I sI ❑ 3:)V9d KV dl3❑ €; . MN GNVI L I Imo; {r i" 3. - C) 3 6 0. s z 0 az � I LL u 3 's z s 0 s z 0n�i�_ I S a d W a 1 � z iF I N @ i �! fill 1 11114,111; ----- --------- -------- I I F; I � r F ]f� 'U aX S• It a � § § a §���� �apappappapaa m v o m LL v' x_ L Z O a 0 x s z 0 az � I LL u 3 's z s 0 s z 0n�i�_ I S a d W a 1 � z iF I N @ i �! fill 1 11114,111; ----- --------- -------- I I F; I � r F ]f� 'U aX S• ur„ if +�ul WW�NM•�i.P:vW]�kw'I�.v y yy§ S(rY i uWWJOdsuwl � se�niBS Igluewualnu? ajNmm4ymly odoospu in 1 f3uiuugL H f (� (� 1j I ,] NN S I SI ❑ V N Y VC]NOIA'H7'd39 AVMW DNI 'dno,d] A- L'OdO21d -11VI d 2103 d3' Vd3lW 3DYId A"130 Eg � a J S W 3g ° s °r $ y W J 3 & ;iloaaaaaaaaa l a14: §� 3 g33�� �IH� 3 � .�:... �I I Lu ces d f ra ffia # # fs f Ap 1911H z �W IH � O � t j} d as g z� 0 �� �� �I �� �� N %R.CY.:Y4= pgoLk& NGa—Y4 %1 om a.:s% n? F F y 4Z � g ]p Wyly n ? LyJh 'Sld $ ;CrCi` 31naC��i�q� �u �i i1Ci M3 �R ��� r 0 ju E LU f 9� I 1�'a1 9 a is a H z z 4h All Z, R Hill H a5: Ski gA H Hill 1 3 g as I! H, a 3' g i y yy§ S(rY E- a r� �� • I ag c W `a It z I� z $ @e! # e IIIF ��.3 a °IIII�n� •- Q o d C =sR IIII, II e �I zu 7 a I —I r 0 ju E LU f 9� I 1�'a1 9 a is a H z z 4h All Z, R Hill H a5: Ski gA H Hill 1 3 g as I! H, a 3' g i PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD CITY OF DELRAY BEACH -- -STAFF REPORT - -- MEETING DATE: October 15, 2012 ITEM: VI, B. Privately initiated rezoning from PCC (Planned Office Center) to SAD (Special Activities District) for the property located at the southeast corner of Linton Boulevard and South Federal Highway (1801 and 1845 South Federal Highway). Quasi - Judicial Hearing. GENERAL DATA: Agent ..... ............................... Weiner, Lynne & Thompson, P.A. Location ....... ............................... Southeast corner of Linton Boulevard and Federal Highway (1801 and 1845 South Federal Highway) Property Size .............................. 9.95 acres Existing FLUM ........................... TRN (Transitional) Current Zoning ............................ POC (Planned Office Center) Proposed Zoning ........................ SAD (Special Activities District) Adjacent Zoning ................North: PC (Planned Commercial) and RM (Multiple Family Residential - Medium Density) East: R- 1 -AA -B (Single Family Residential) And CD (Conservation District) South: PC (Planned Commercial); RM (Multiple Family Residential - Medium Density); R- 1 -AA -B (Single Family Residential. West: PC (Planned Commercial) Existing Land Use ...................... Proposed Land Use ................... Water Service ....................... Old Harbor Office and Bank Facility Multiple building commercial shopping center development Available via connection to a 12" water main located on the east side of S. Federal Hwy., a 10" water main on Eve Street, and a 8" water main on the south side of Linton Boulevard. Sewer Service ........................ Available via connection to a 8" sewer main located on Eve Street. ITEM BEFORE THE BOARD The item before the Board is that of making a recommendation to the City Commission on a privately initiated rezoning from POC (Planned Office Center) to SAD (Special Activities District) for the property located at the southeast comer of Linton Boulevard and South Federal Highway (1801 and 1845 South Federal Highway). Pursuant to Section 2.2.2(E)(6) of the Land Development Regulations, the Planning and Zoning Board shall review and make a recommendation to the City Commission with respect to the rezoning of any property within the City. BACKGROUND The subject property is located at the southeast corner of Linton Boulevard and South Federal Highway and is approximately 9.95 acres in size. The existing development, known as the Old Harbor Office and Bank Facility, consists of 96,702 square feet of office use in three buildings: two multiple -story office buildings (one located to the north of the property and the other to the south), and a one -story office building located on the east side of the property along Linton Boulevard. The property was originally annexed into the City of Delray Beach from unincorporated Palm Beach County in the early 1980's. The property was originally assigned the Future Land Use Map designation of Transitional (TRN) and a zoning of SAD (Special Activities District). The three office buildings and associated parking were constructed in 1983. In 1991, the City of Delray Beach adopted new Land Development Regulations and the property was assigned the new zoning designation of POC (Planned Office Center), which was consistent with the existing office development. The Future Land Use Map Designation of TRN (Transitional) was retained. In 2008, as the country was heading into an economic recession, city leaders saw how volatile the automotive industry had become and became concerned that the large amount of automotive dealerships on South Federal Highway would not be sustainable in the long term. If the industry imploded and dealers began to withdraw from the area, there would be a major economic impact on the corridor and the City as a whole. The City Commission wanted the area to be evaluated and a Plan prepared that would help the area to become more sustainable. A Policy dealing with South Federal Highway was added to the Comprehensive Plan in Amendment 2008 -1, adopted on December 9, 2008. Following a series of visits to the area to collect land use and environmental data, staff attended two public workshops with property owners, residents and business owners in the area to discuss existing conditions, identify problems and listen to what the attendees had to say about how the area should be redeveloped. These workshops occurred in March of 2011, and those people who attended the workshops were enthusiastic and generally supportive of the planning effort. After the initial workshops, staff prepared a series of recommendations for the redevelopment area and held a second set of two workshops in June of 2011 to discuss the recommendations and get feedback from the attendees. Staff presented two alternatives for the redevelopment of the subject property at these workshops. One alternative was to rezone the property to PC (Planned Commercial) to allow development of a commercial shopping center. The second alternative was to rezone the property to AC (Automotive Commercial) to allow development of an automobile dealership. The Future Land Use Map amendment would be required in either Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 2 case. Staff's recommendation was for the Planned Commercial alternative and the response from residents was generally favorable, although some residents felt that the area was better suited for automobile sales, which they also felt would be less impacting to the adjacent neighborhood. The property was acquired by the current owner in September, 2011, and an application to initiate a Future Land Use Map amendment and a zoning change to PC (Planned Commercial) was submitted on January 6, 2012. Since the proposal was in keeping with staff's recommendation, the application was supported by staff. However, residents were concerned that the redevelopment of the property would not have to comply with buffering and setback provisions which had been previously presented for inclusion in the redevelopment plan, and felt that action on the proposal should be delayed until the Plan was completed. Ultimately, the application was continued for a period of up to six months at the public hearing on the ordinance by the City Commission on April 3, 2012. This continuance was to give the applicant time to address the concerns of the residents of the adjacent neighborhood to the east. Since the residents' concerns were mostly site development issues related to building size, setbacks, location of service areas, and buffering, an alternative rezoning to SAD (Special Activities District) was also discussed. This zoning district requires that a site plan be included as part of the rezoning action and would provide a higher level of comfort to the adjacent residents. At its meeting of July 16, 2012, the Planning and Zoning Board held a public hearing on the proposed South Federal Highway Redevelopment Plan. Staff presented the Plan and several members of the public spoke about the various components of the Plan, including the proposed rezonings, the maximum tenant size, buffer requirements and restrictions on the west side of South Federal Highway. The Planning and Zoning Board recommended approval of the Redevelopment Plan with a number of recommended changes, including that rezoning of the subject property be limited to SAD. The Plan was amended to retain the original POC zoning with the option for a privately- initiated rezoning by the property owners to SAD. The Plan was adopted by the City Commission on September 20, 2012. Since the original rezoning application was submitted prior to adoption of the Redevelopment Plan, the current proposal for redevelopment of the subject property is not required to comply with the Redevelopment Plan per se. However, it is noted that the underlying issue of compatibility with the adjacent residential neighborhood, discussed in the Redevelopment Plan, must still be addressed during consideration of the project proposal. If the current rezoning action does not go forward, any future redevelopment of the subject property will be required to comply with the Redevelopment Plan. On August 21, 2012, the City Commission approved the applicant's request for up to an additional 6 months (in addition to the 6 months previously granted) to submit a privately sponsored rezoning from POC (Planned Office Center) to SAD (Special Activities District) for the subject property. The applicant amended the rezoning application on September 7, 2012 to request SAD zoning. The SAD rezoning process is shown below: 1. Planning and Zoning Board review of the SAD and a recommendation made to the City Commission; 2. First reading of the SAD Rezoning Ordinance by the City Commission; 3. Review of the site plan by the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board; and 4. Second and final reading of the SAD Rezoning Ordinance, which will include the approved site plan, by the City Commission. Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 3 REZONING ANALYSIS REQUIRED FINDINGS (Char)ter 31: Pursuant to LDR Section 3.1.1 (Required Findings), prior to the approval of development applications, certain findings must be made in a form which is part of the official record. This may be achieved through information on the application, the staff report, or minutes. Findings shall be made by the body, which has the authority to approve or deny the development application. These findings relate to the following four areas. Future Land Use Map: The resulting use of land or structures must be allowed in the zoning district within which the land is situated and said zoning must be consistent with the applicable land use designation as shown on the Future Land Use Map. The subject property has a Future Land Use Map (FLUM) designation of TRN (Transitional) and the proposed zoning designation is SAD (Special Activities District). Pursuant to the Land Use Designation /Zoning Matrix (Table L -7, Future Land Use Element), SAD Zoning is consistent with any land use designation on the Future Land Use Map. Pursuant to LDR Section 4.4.25(A) "Purpose and Intent" for the SAD zoning district, "While SAD zoning is deemed consistent with any land use designation on the Future Land Use Map, the uses allowed within a specific SAD shall be consistent with the land use category shown on the Future Land Use Map. The uses, activities, and characteristics of a SAD are to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, suitable and compatible with surrounding existing developments, and with the proposed character of the area." Pursuant to LDR Section 4.4.25(B)(1), "Allowed Uses and Structures ", all uses which are to be allowed in a particular SAD shall be established at the time of establishment of the SAD zoning designation through inclusion in the rezoning ordinance. Additional uses may be allowed after review and recommendation by the Planning and Zoning Board and approval by ordinance of the City Commission. The proposed SAD rezoning ordinance, prepared by the applicant, must be amended to incorporate a list of the uses allowed within the SAD and the maximum intensity (square footage) of each use. These uses can be general use categories such as retail, restaurant, services, office, etc. Based upon the above, it is appropriate to make a positive finding with respect to consistency with the Future Land Use Map designation. CONCURRENCY: Pursuant to Section 3.1.1(B), Facilities which are provided by, or through, the City shall be provided to new development concurrent with issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. These facilities shall be provided pursuant to levels of service established within the Comprehensive Plan. As described in Appendix "A ", a positive finding of concurrency can be made as it relates to water and sewer, streets and traffic, drainage, parks and recreation, open space, and solid waste. CONSISTENCY: Compliance with performance standards set forth in Chapter 3 and required findings in LDR Section 2.4.5(D)(5) for the Rezoning request shall be the basis upon which a finding of overall consistency is to be made. Other objectives and policies found in the adopted Comprehensive Plan may be used in making a finding of overall consistency. A review of the objectives and policies of the adopted Comprehensive Plan was conducted and the following applicable objective and policy were found: Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 4 Future Land Use Element Objective A -7: Property shall be developed or redeveloped in a manner so that the future use and intensity is appropriate in terms of soil, topographic and other applicable physical considerations, is complimentary to adjacent land uses and fulfills remaining land use needs. Since the subject property is already developed, soil, topographic and other applicable physical considerations do not have an impact on the appropriate development intensity. Ensuring that the proposed development will be complimentary to adjacent land uses and fulfill remaining land use needs is discussed below. Due to its close proximity to Interstate 95 and the Linton Boulevard Interchange, the Federal Highway 1 Linton Boulevard intersection is a prime location for destination shopping for goods and services. Commercial activity in Delray Beach has greatly expanded and this intersection has become a robust commercial hub. There are major developments on all four corners of the intersection: the Plaza at Delray Shopping Center at the northwest corner; the Old Harbour Plaza at the northeast corner; the Linton Tower and SunTrust Bank development at the southwest corner; and the Old Harbor Office and Bank Facility on the subject property at the southeast corner. While the subject property is zoned POC (Planned Office Center), all three of the other corners are zoned PC (Planned Commercial). Staff continues to support the property owner's proposal to redevelop the site as a high end shopping center, subject to the site plan adequately addressing the development's compatibility with adjacent residential development, and feels that a major retail center at this corner will anchor the South Federal Highway Redevelopment Area and encourage additional redevelopment. The POC zoning designation currently assigned to the property may have been adequate in the past, but office use at this location now represents an economically infeasible use of the property and current market trends indicate that a zoning designation which permits commercial development is more appropriate. Much of the office space in this project is currently vacant and the demand for office space has been marginal in this area. The City is currently promoting office development in the downtown area and in the "Innovation Corridor' along Congress Avenue in the MROC (Mixed Residential, Office and Commercial) zoning district. It would be better if this site did not compete with those initiatives. The proposed SAD zoning designation will allow development of a major commercial shopping center at this location. Since the site plan for the project will be included in the rezoning ordinance, compatibility with the adjacent Tropic Isles single - family residential development to the east must be assured at the time of rezoning. It is not unusual for commercially zoned property to directly about single- family residential development. Properly designed shopping centers can and do exist adjacent to residential development throughout the City. Residential and general commercial uses can be compatible and complimentary in that the commercial uses provide necessary goods and services for residential neighborhoods and the residents provide the market base to support the commercial uses. Key issues that need to be addressed to ensure compatibility include the mix of uses, the level of intensity and appropriate buffering. Unfortunately, as discussed below, the currently proposed site plan for Delray Place does not adequately address these issues. Due to the excessive amount of building area, the proposed site plan does not meet the minimum open space requirements or provide adequate parking for the proposed uses. Nor is there room to provide adequate buffering in some areas. These issues, which are identified in the attached technical comments in Appendix "B ", have been discussed with the applicant over a more than 6 month period. The applicant's response to these concerns is that the overall building area cannot be reduced without rendering the entirety of the project economically infeasible, and that relief will be sought. As stated earlier, a commercial shopping center is the best use of this property, but not at the level of intensity proposed. For comparison purposes, Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 5 the intensity of other Delray Beach commercial shopping centers on South Federal Highway and Linton Boulevard were reviewed. As shown in the table below, the level of intensity proposed for Delray Place significantly exceeds that of these other centers. At a more consistent FAR of 0.24, the total building area of Delray Place would be reduced to approximately 104,000 square feet. The least open space provided in the alternative scenarios included on the site plan is 16.2 %, while 25% is required. If a reduction of 34,000 of building floor area was moved to open space, the total open space would be increased to 24.1 % and the total parking requirement reduced to 416 spaces, as opposed to the 552 spaces required with the current plan (444 spaces provided). A subsequent reduction in parking from 444 to 416 spaces would increase open space to the required 25 %. A reduction in building intensity and subsequent increase in open space would also allow buffering to be better addressed. As noted in the technical comments, the proposed site plan has a much greater impact on the adjacent residential neighborhood to the east than the current office development, especially as it relates to the adjacent single family lots on McCleary Street. The extreme length of the proposed buildings with limited buffering in this area is a concern. Except for the lower connections between buildings, the (5) interconnected 600 to 1000 Buildings present a continuous 700+ feet long, 22 feet high wall located 15 feet from the rear property line of the single family houses. Architecturally, the essentially blank wall of the south elevation of these buildings is reminiscent of a self- storage facility. The 15' setback with 10' of landscaped area is not large enough to adequately buffer the back of these buildings. The closeness of the loading areas for the 500 Buildings is also a concern. Even though the loading docks are enclosed, trucks backing into these spaces will generate noise. An increase in the buffers at these locations is appropriate. This analysis is provided to show what the intensity of the project would have to be to comply with open space and parking requirements with little or no relief. This is not to say that the ultimate intensity cannot be approved above an FAR of 0.24. Maintaining economic feasibility is a concern and some relief may still be needed. Staff is concerned that the current proposal pushes the envelope too far to make a finding of compatibility with the neighborhood. Commercial Development Intensity Comparison Project Name Total Building Area Floor Area Ratio (Square Feet) (Total Building Area /Total Land Area) Delray Place 138,130 0.32 1801 -1845 South Federal Highway Plaza at Delray 293,327 019 1400 South Federal Highway Harbor Plaza 52,679 021 1725 South Federal Highway South Delray Shopping Center 91,402 0.24 3001 South Federal Highway Linton Center (Target) 206,008 0.24 1200 Linton Boulevard New Century Commons 89,164 0.23 500 Linton Boulevard Lavers International 88,376 0.24 660 Linton Boulevard Future Land Use Element Policy C -1.12: The following pertains to the South Federal Highway area, south of Linton Boulevard. In Fiscal Year 2010177, the City's Planning & Zoning Department shall review existing land uses in this area and shall create a redevelopment plan, overlay district or other development tool to promote and guide future redevelopment of the area. Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 6 The South Federal Highway Redevelopment Plan was adopted by the City Commission on September 20, 2012. Since the original rezoning application was submitted prior to adoption of the Redevelopment Plan, the current proposal for redevelopment of the subject property will not be required to comply with the Redevelopment Plan per se. However, if the current rezoning action does not go forward, any future redevelopment of the subject property will be required to comply with the Redevelopment Plan. It is noted that the Plan supports redevelopment of the subject property with a commercial shopping center development, subject to the site plan adequately addressing the development's compatibility with adjacent residential development, and recommends the option for a privately - initiated rezoning by the property owners to SAD. While the PC zoning district would have allowed the proposed uses, the SAD zoning district, with its required site plan, provides the mechanism to ensure compatibility at the time of rezoning. LDR SECTION 2.4.5[D](5) - REZONING FINDINGS: Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.5(D)(5), in addition to provisions of Chapter 3, the City Commission must make findings that the rezoning fulfills at least one of the reasons listed under Subsection (2): (a) That the zoning had previously been changed, or was originally established, in error; (b) That there has been a change in circumstances which make the current zoning inappropriate; or [c] That the requested zoning is of similar intensity as allowed under the Future Land Use Map and that it is more appropriate for the property based upon circumstances particular to the site andlor neighborhood. The Applicant submitted a statement and supporting documentation addressing this requirement, attached as Appendix "C ". The applicant's statement seeks to justify the rezoning based on all three of the reasons. Staff does not agree with the statement that the original zoning was established in error (item a), since the POC zoning was appropriate given the existing use of the property. The fact that the office development proved not to be economically sustainable and viable over time does not demonstrate an error, it reflects a change in circumstances (item b). Staff concurs that a rezoning to SAD is appropriate based on items "b" and "c" identified above, indicating that there has been a change in circumstances which make the current Planned Office Center (POC) zoning inappropriate. The property is bordered on three sides by commercial zoning districts. The long term operation of an office center (Old Harbor Office and Bank Facility) is less compatible than commercial uses given development that has occurred along both of these corridors, and is not sustainable based on market conditions. This change in circumstances supports the change to allow commercial development similar to the other three corners of the intersection. All zoning districts permitted within the TRN (Transitional) Future Land Use Map designation are subject to a maximum FAR of 1.00, and the proposed shopping center is significantly below that maximum level. Within the TRN designation, the SAD zoning district is the clear choice to allow development of a commercial center while ensuring compatibility with the adjacent residential neighborhood. COMPLIANCE WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS: Items identified in the Land Development Regulations shall specifically be addressed by the body taking final action on the site and development applicationfrequest. Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 7 Final approval of the rezoning to SAD will require the inclusion of an approved site plan in the SAD rezoning ordinance. The Site Plan must be approved by the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board {SPRAB} prior to the second and final reading of the SAD rezoning ordinance. However, if the site plan is not approved by SPRAB, an appeal must be approved by the City Commission, overturning the SPRAB decision, prior to second and final reading of the SAD rezoning ordinance. Staff reviewed the applicant's site plan submittal for compliance with the Land Development Regulations. Although revised site plans have not been submitted due to time constraints, the applicant has submitted responses indicating how each comment will be addressed. Staff's comments and the applicant's responses are attached as Appendix "B ". These items must be addressed prior to scheduling review by the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board. From staff's review of the proposed site plan and applicant's responses, it was determined that one variance and five waivers will be required. These include the following: 1. A variance to the 25% open space required (16.2% provided) required by LDR Section 4.3.4(K); 2. A waiver for pavement encroachment into the required 15' perimeter setback for the SAD district. Pursuant to LDR Section 4.4.2 5(D), "Within the front and any street side setback, the fifteen foot (15 ) setback area shall be a landscape area and no pavement shall be allowed therein except for pedestrian ways and driveways (or streets) which provide access to the property and which are generally perpendicular to the abutting street." 3. A waiver to LDR Section 4.3.4(H )(6 )(b), Special Landscape Setbacks, requiring a 25 foot landscape buffer along South Federal Highway. 4. A waiver to LDR Section 4.3.4(H )(6 )(b), Special Landscape Setbacks, requiring a special landscape area at the smaller distance of either 30' or 10% of the average depth of the property along Linton Boulevard. 5. A waiver to LDR Section 4.6.9(❑ )(3 )(c), Stacking Distance, requiring a stacking distance of 50 feet is required between a right -of -way and the first parking space or aisleway in a parking lot. 6. A waiver to LDR Section 4.6.16(H )(3)(i), requiring, landscape islands which contain a minimum of one hundred thirty -five (135) square feet of planting area, with a minimum dimension of nine (9) feet, exclusive of the required curb, to be placed at intervals of no less than one landscaped island for every thirteen (13) standard parking spaces or fifteen (15) compact parking spaces. Although relief can be sought for these identified deficiencies, the applicant maintains that relief is not required for many of the deficiencies due to language in Section 4.4.25(F), "Special Regulations" of the SAD zoning district, which states that any special regulations may be applied through the SAD review and approval process. The "Special Regulations" section is included in all zoning districts and is used to denote special requirements for each zoning district. All zoning districts must comply with the requirements in other sections of the LDRs unless specific provisions, which exempt the district from these requirements, are included in the zoning district. The applicant argues that the "Section F" language gives the unique ability to approve a deficient site plan without appropriate relief to other sections of the LDRs. This is not the case, and staff maintains that relief will be required for the items identified in the technical comments. An additional point of contention between staff and the applicant is related to relief for a deficiency in open space. Pursuant to Section 2.2.4(D), "Duties, Powers, and Responsibilities" of the Board of Adjustment, the Board has the authority to grant variances and hear appeals Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 8 from the provisions of the General Development Standards set forth in Section 4.3. Since required open space is included in Section 4.3.4 "Base District Development Standards" of the LDRs, relief to this section of the LDRs will require a variance. The applicant contends that relief from this section can be accomplished by a waiver. This issue will be needed to be resolved. Parking: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.4.25(E )(1), "Parking and loading requirements (number of spaces) shall be as set forth on the site and development plan." However, the parking requirement for shopping centers of this size is typically 4 spaces per 1,000 square feet in the City [LDR Section 4.5.9 {C}(3)(e).] The proposed site plan shows a substantial reduction (19.7 %) from this requirement with a deficit of 109 spaces. While a waiver is not required, the number of spaces must be adequate to support the proposed development. Therefore, a parking study must be provided to support this reduction. Additionally, with respect to parking balance, the spaces provided for the buildings along Linton Boulevard have a 28% deficit of 43 spaces from the typical shopping center requirements. Given that four of the five buildings in this area are labeled as potential restaurants, this is a concern. In fact, the number of potential restaurants in the entire shopping center is a concern. Given the limited parking, a reduction in the number of restaurants should be considered. As noted elsewhere in this report, the major issue with the site plan is the level of intensity. There is a direct relationship and balance between building area, open space, and parking. When one component is out of balance, the other components are compromised. This is what is happening with the proposed site plan. The property is just not large enough to accommodate the proposed building area without sacrificing these other components. The result is a project that staff feels is not compatible with the surrounding area. This one issue also has a direct impact on many of the other technical comments identified by staff, such as an 8.8% deficiency in open space, a 19.7% deficiency in parking, failure to meet special landscape setbacks, and inadequate buffering of adjacent residential development. If the SAD rezoning moves forward from this point, the site plan must be modified or relief sought to address the technical comments attached in Appendix "B" prior to consideration by the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board. SAD Rezoning Ordinance: The applicant submitted a revised SAD Rezoning Ordinance (attached) in response to technical comments. Section 4 of the proposed Ordinance states the following: "That any future requested modification to the site plan or development plans which the City would customarily classify as a Class I or Class H site plan modification, or any requested amendment which does not change the approved uses, densities, intensities or height for the project, may be approved administratively consistent with the City's land development regulations existing as of the date of this ordinance and such modification shall not be deemed an "amendment" of this ordinance such as would otherwise require compliance with the public notice and hearing procedure. " While this revised ordinance language does address some of staff's concerns with the previous version, it still needs to be revised. Up to this point, the rezoning process has been very inclusive and the developer has had extensive meetings with neighborhood residents to obtain support for this project. The City Commission's suggestion to consider SAD zoning instead of the previously requested PC zoning was specifically aimed at providing the adjacent neighborhood with a level of certainty of what to expect with redevelopment of the site. The SAD language, as proposed, could allow some site plan modifications, which directly impact the neighborhood to be approved administratively. This is in direct opposition to what the SAD Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 9 district was meant to achieve. At a minimum, the revised Ordinance should include the following items: 1. Some Class I and II Site Plan modifications require review by the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board and cannot be approved administratively. 2. All Site Plan modifications which directly impact the surrounding properties should go to the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board. These would involve buffering or changes to the rear of buildings adjacent to the neighborhood. 3. A list of the uses allowed within the SAD and the maximum intensity (square footage) of each use. These uses can be general use categories such as retail, restaurant, services, office, etc. 4. Changes of use or intensity will require modification of the SAD through the rezoning process. 5. Specific items which will ensure compatibility with the adjacent residential development should be listed, such as limiting hours of delivery and service at the rear of the buildings. Section 3.2.2 (Standards for Rezoning Actions): Standards "A ", "B ", "C ", and "E" are not applicable with respect to this rezoning request. An evaluation of the applicable standards is discussed below: Standard "D" requires that the rezoning shall result in allowing land uses which are deemed compatible with adjacent and nearby land use both existing and proposed; or that if an incompatibility may occur, that sufficient regulations exist to properly mitigate adverse impacts from the new use. The following table identifies the zoning designations and uses that are adjacent to the subject property: Since a rezoning to SAD is linked to a site plan at the time of rezoning, the specific uses are known and compatibility with adjacent and nearby land uses can be assured at that time. This is a unique situation which only occurs with this zoning district. Staff supports SAD zoning at this location, because of this uniqueness. The SAD can be tailored to the situation, allowing both appropriate and compatible commercial development. With this in mind, the compatibility of SAD zoning is entirely dependent on the SAD rezoning ordinance and the associated site plan. As stated earlier in this report, staff does not feel that the proposed site plan for this project is compatible with the surrounding area. The intensity is just too high to allow adequate open space and buffering. The applicant's response is that a reduction in intensity will make the project economically infeasible; relief will be sought to address LDR compliance; and in some cases, the applicant maintains that no relief is required for the SAD district. Since this response does not address the underlying concern with respect to the development intensity depicted on the proposed site plan, a positive finding with respect to Section 3.2.2 cannot be made. Adjacent Zoning: Adjacent Land Uses: North PC (Planned Commercial) and RM Old Harbor Shopping Plaza and Harbors Edge (Multiple Family Residential) Multiple family Residential Development West PC (Planned Commercial) SunTrust Bank and Burger King East R- 1 -AA -B (Single Family Residential) and Tropic Isles Single Family Residential CD (Conservation District) Development South PC (Planned Commercial) & R- 1 -AA -B Tropic Square Shopping Center and Tropic Isles (Single Family Residential) Residential Development Since a rezoning to SAD is linked to a site plan at the time of rezoning, the specific uses are known and compatibility with adjacent and nearby land uses can be assured at that time. This is a unique situation which only occurs with this zoning district. Staff supports SAD zoning at this location, because of this uniqueness. The SAD can be tailored to the situation, allowing both appropriate and compatible commercial development. With this in mind, the compatibility of SAD zoning is entirely dependent on the SAD rezoning ordinance and the associated site plan. As stated earlier in this report, staff does not feel that the proposed site plan for this project is compatible with the surrounding area. The intensity is just too high to allow adequate open space and buffering. The applicant's response is that a reduction in intensity will make the project economically infeasible; relief will be sought to address LDR compliance; and in some cases, the applicant maintains that no relief is required for the SAD district. Since this response does not address the underlying concern with respect to the development intensity depicted on the proposed site plan, a positive finding with respect to Section 3.2.2 cannot be made. Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 10 REVIEW BY OTHERS The development proposal is not within a geographical area requiring review by the DDA (Downtown Development Authority) or CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency). Courtesy Notices: A special courtesy notice was provided to the following homeowners and/or civic organizations: • Neighborhood Advisory Council • Delray Citizen's Coalition • Tropic Isle Civic Association • Banyan Tree Village • Domain Delray • Harbour's Edge • Harbourside Public Notices: • Linton Woods • Pelican Pointe • Pelican Harbor • Spanish Trail Condo • Tropic Bay • Tropic Harbor Formal public notice has been provided to property owners within a 500' radius of the subject property. To date, three emails have been received and are attached to this staff report. Other letters of objection and /or support, if any, will be presented at the Planning and Zoning Board meeting. ASSESSMENT AND CONCLUSION The requested rezoning from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD), for the subject property is to allow development of the property as a commercial shopping center. Positive findings cannot be made with respect to LDR Section 3.1.1 (Required Findings), LDR Section 3.2.2 (Standards for Rezoning Actions) and LDR Section 2.4.5(D )(5){Rezoning Findings), and the Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan due to the inability to make positive findings with respect to compatibility with surrounding development. RECOMMENDED ACTIONS A. Continue with direction. B. Move a recommendation of approval to the City Commission for the privately- initiated rezoning from POC (Planned Office Center) to SAD (Special Activities District) for Delray Place, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request and approval thereof is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and meets the criteria set forth in LDR Sections 3.1.1 (Required Findings), 3.2.2 (Standards for Rezoning Actions), and 2.4.5(D)(5 )(Rezoning Findings), with the condition that the site plan be modified and/or relief be sought to address the technical comments attached in Appendix "B" prior to review by the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board_ C. Move a recommendation of denial to the City Commission for the privately- initiated rezoning from POC (Planned Office Center) to SAD (Special Activities District) for Delray Place, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request and approval thereof is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan and does not meet the criteria set forth in LDR Sections 3.1.1 (Required Findings), 3.2.2 (Standards for Rezoning Actions), and 2.4.5(D)(5)(Rezoning Findings). Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 11 STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS Move a recommendation of denial to the City Commission for the privately- initiated rezoning from POC (Planned Office Center) to SAD (Special Activities District) for Delray Place, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request and approval thereof is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan and does not meet the criteria set forth in LDR Sections 3.1.1 (Required Findings), 3.2.2 (Standards for Rezoning Actions), and 2.4.5(❑ )(5 )(Rezoning Findings). (Motion to be made in the affirmative) Attachments: • Location Map • Existing Zoning Map • Proposed Zoning Map • Reduced Plans • SAD Rezoning Ordinance • UL! Report - Ten Principals for Rebuilding Neighborhood Retail • Public comments on the project via email Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 12 APPENDIX "A" CONCURRENCY FINDINGS Pursuant to Section 3.1.1(B), Facilities which are provided by, or through, the City shall be provided to new development concurrent with issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. These facilities shall be provided pursuant to levels of service established within the Comprehensive Plan. Water and Sewer: The site is already served by water and sewer service. Municipal water service is available via connection to a 12" water main located the east side of S. Federal Hwy., a 10" water main on Eve Street, and a 6" water main on the south side of Linton Boulevard. Fire protection is provided by two fire hydrants located on the south side of Linton Boulevard and one along the north side of Eve Street. Additional fire hydrants may be required and this was noted in the Fire Department's technical comments. Sewer service is available to the site via connection to an existing 8" sewer main which is located along on Eve Street. On site sewer main improvements will be considered as part of the site development approval process. Pursuant to the Comprehensive Plan, treatment capacity is available at the South Central County Waste Water Treatment Plant for the City at build -out. The Comprehensive Plan also states that adequate water and sewer treatment capacity exists to meet the adopted LOS at the City's build -out population based on the current Future Land Use Map. Thus, a positive finding with respect to this level of service standard can be made. Streets and Traffic: A traffic analysis report for the proposed development was prepared by Traf Tech Engineering. The traffic report determined that the proposed redevelopment will generate a net increase of 3,262 Average Daily Trips (ADT), with a net reduction of 82 A.M. peak hour trips, and a net increase of 316 new P.M. peak hour trips. The report concluded that the adjacent street network has adequate available capacity to accommodate the project traffic associated with the Delray Place Project and that the project is not anticipated to negatively affect the roadway network located within the project study area. The applicant transmitted the traffic study to the Palm Beach County Traffic Division for review. A letter from Palm Beach County indicating that the project meets the Traffic Performance Standards of Palm Beach County is required prior to final reading of the SAD rezoning ordinance. Drainage: Engineering has requested that the applicant provide a signed and sealed drainage report indicating the proposed system's ability to meet storm water quality and quantity requirements in accordance with the South Florida Water Management District regulations per LDR Section 2.4.3 {D} (7). In addition, the surface water management system needs to be designed in accordance with LID Section 6.1.9 for a minimum of a 10 yr. 1 24 hr. storm event. The system needs to provide for positive drainage of lots, streets, roads, and other public areas as well as handling any run -off from adjacent areas that historically flowed into the subject area. Include drainage calculations confirming that there will be no negative post development impacts on adjacent homes, structures or properties. The applicant has indicated that the drainage calculations will be provided at final engineering and show that the parking lot is designed to be protected from the 10 yr. 1 24 hr. storm event while maintaining the existing discharge from the site. Thus, a positive finding with respect to this level of service standard can be made. Parks and Open Space. Park dedication requirements do not apply for non - residential uses. Thus, the proposed development will not have an impact with respect to this level of service standard. Schools: School concurrency findings do not apply for non - residential uses. Thus, the proposed development will not have an impact with respect to this level of service standard. Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 13 Solid Waste: As shown on the following table, the proposed redevelopment of the property will result in a net increase of 829.7 tons per year in solid waste generation. In its annual capacity letter, dated January 6, 2012, the Solid Waste Authority indicates that it has sufficient capacity for concurrency management and comprehensive planning purposes. As stated in the letter, "Capacity is available for both the coming year, and the five and ten year planning periods specified in 9J- 5- 005 (4)." Based on population projections, waste generation rate projections, waste reduction, and recycling, the Solid Waste Authority forecasts that capacity will be available at the existing landfill through approximately the year 2047. Thus, a positive finding with respect to this level of service standard can be made. Solid Waste Generation Delray Place Existing Development Proposed Development 56,515 SF General Office @ 5.4 Ibslsf = 152.6 tons/year 88,056 SF Retail @10.2 Ibslsf = 449.1 tons/year 29,366 SF Medical Office @ 4.6 Ibslsf = 67.5 tons/year 50 ,074 SF Potential Restaurants @ 24.9 Ibslsf = 623.4 tons/year 4,459 SF Retail @ 10.2 Ibslsf = 22.7 tons/year Total: 242.8 tons/year Total: 1,072.5 tonslyear Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 14 APPENDIX "B" SITE PLAN TECHNICAL COMMENTS AND APPLICANT'S RESPONSES Planning and Zoning Technical Comments: SAD Ordinance: The proposed SAD Ordinance, as it relates to future modifications, does not conform to the normal procedures the City has taken in the past to modify SADs and must be revised. Since the SAD is linked to a specific site plan, modifications of the approved site plan will require the processing of a rezoning. The comment is noted. We would like to further explore the opportunity to limit extensive and otherwise unnecessary duplicitous public hearings for otherwise minor site plan modifications which the City's Land Development Regulations may allow staff to handle administratively. We do not believe that the plain language of the SAD zoning code requires, nor is it the intent of the City Commission, to require such minor revisions to go through the entire rezoning process anew. 2. Compatibility: Pursuant LDR Section 4.4.25(A), Purpose and Intent, "The uses, activities, and characteristics of a SAD are to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, suitable and compatible with surrounding existing development, and with the proposed character of the area. Additional findings of compatibility are also required under LDR Sections 3.2.2, Standards for Rezoning Actions, and 3.2.3, Standards for Site Plan and/or Plat Actions. The proposed site plan has a much greater impact on the adjacent residential neighborhood to the east than the current office development, especially as it relates to the adjacent single family lots on McCleary Street. The extreme length of the proposed buildings with limited buffering in this area is a concern. Except for the lower connections between buildings, the (5) interconnected 600 to 1000 Buildings present a continuous 700+ feet long, 22 feet high wall located 15 feet from the rear property line of the single family houses. Architecturally, the essentially blank wall of the south elevation of these buildings is reminiscent of a self - storage facility. The 15' setback with 10' of landscaped area is not large enough to adequately buffer the back of these buildings. The closeness of the loading areas for the 500 Buildings is also a concern. Even though the loading docks are enclosed, trucks backing into these spaces will generate noise. Consider reducing the overall building area on the site and increase the buffering in the rear. This will also serve to reduce the parking and open space deficits. RPG held another meeting with the Tropic isle homeowners, specifically those living along McCleary and Eve Streets, at the Delray Beach Public Library on Wednesday, October 74, 2012, from 6:34pm to 8:00p m. The intent of the meeting was to ensure their concerns were heard and, to the extent feasible, incorporated into the Delray Place site plan upon resubmittal in response to the City's TAC comments. The various issues presented in the TAC comments were discussed and are addressed individually below: A. Rear Elevations it appears from the meeting that the residents are requesting the removal of the lower connections between buildings facing Linton Boulevard so that there is a continuous wall adjacent to the Tropic isle neighborhood. The intended goal of this design is to mitigate noise from the patrons of those specific businesses, which noise may otherwise be channeled towards Tropic Isle based upon the present site plan layout. Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 15 The residents also appear to have preferred this design to deter patrons from otherwise wandering behind the buildings. Overall, the reduction in height of the existing structure (from 3 stories to 1) coupled with the extensive landscape buffering utilizing very mature existing trees and additional landscaping (as depicted on the Landscape Plan) will sufficiently - if not entirely - screen the project from the view of the neighbors. The assumption therefore that the 15' setback with 10' of landscaped area is not large enough to provide an adequate buffer is sufficiently addressed and mitigated by the extensive landscaping being added as well as the reduced scale and location of the existing buildings in relation to the Tropic isle homes. B. Loa ding Areas To accommodate the requests of Tropic isle residents, RPG designed the loading areas to consolidate as many potential loading zone areas as possible into fewer locations in an attempt to noise from the property. This noise reduction plan had been previously presented to the Tropic isle Civic Association and over 100 of its residents, all of whom approved of this concept and were appreciative of the additional expense being incurred by RPG to accommodate the neighbors. The McCleary Street and Eve Street residents continued to express concern regarding the location of the loading docks and anticipated noise generated from trucks backing into such locations. RPG has assumed considerable voluntary expense in providing 14 -foot high walls (18 feet from -ground to top inside the loading area) with noise - dampening wall treatments to minimize any noise which may be -generated. The McCleary Street and Eve Street residents desire a fully - enclosed loading area, which RPG previously represented to the residents it would explore. However, after review by RPG as to the effectiveness of such a fully- enclosed structure, it has been determined that the extreme cost far outweighs any perceived benefit. Moreover, the need to fully ventilate such a structure with mechanical fans would actually create more noise on a continuous basis than the intermittent noise perceived from deliveries. However, the trash areas for the businesses adjacent to Linton Boulevard will be, as previously represented to the community, fully enclosed Reason dictates an acknowledgment that ambient commercial noise is a natural part of the South Federal Highway makeup and can ever be eliminated in its entirety from any commercial project. However, this has been appropriately addressed by the City's Land Development Regulations regulating limited hours of permissible and prohibited loading times and strikes the proper balance. C. Reducing Overall Building Area During the most recent neighborhood meeting held on Wednesday, October 10, 2012, the residents suggested a preferred reconfiguration of the buildings facing Linton Boulevard that did not require a reduction of overall building area. RPG's design team is currently intensely evaluating the feasibility of this design suggestion as it relates to the Florida Building Code and Florida Life Safety Code. it must be noted that the existing width of the property adjacent to Linton Boulevard is constrained. It does not allow for relocation of proposed buildings or a reduction in overall building area without rendering the entirety of the project economically Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 16 infeasible and would actually hinder appropriate and necessary pedestrian traffic flow throughout the site as anticipated by retail tenants. 3. Pursuant to LDR Section 4.3.4(K), Development Standards Matrix, the minimum open space required for a project in the SAD zoning District is 25 %. The proposed site plan provides for alternative concepts which provide between 16.2% and 17.12% open space. Relief from this section of the LDRs requires a variance. A waiver will be provided with the resubmittal of plans. A suggestion is made for consideration of significant landscape improvements (including an ongoing and perpetual maintenance obligation) relating to Eve Street to augment open space. With regard to all waivers to be submitted, the following is a general statement that we respectfully ask the City to consider as we move forward with this endeavor to replace the aging and mostly vacant office complex on the southeast corner of South Federal Highway and Linton Boulevard with a modern retail and dining destination. RPG's principals and development team has a collective 100 years of significant retail site planning experience and have successfully built, own, and continue to manage and operate a portfolio of seven Florida significant retail properties totaling approximately 1.25 million square feet of retail space. Using this successful business experience, coupled with being local residents themselves, the principals of RPG are dedicated to bringing this prominent gateway of the City of Delay Beach back to prominence with a project of quality in every aspect, from exceptional architecture to an exceptional tenant mix. In such regard, and utilizing the intent of the Special Activities District zoning paradigm as suggested by the City Commission, RPG believes site planning elements for this particular project should be judged based upon form and the utilitarian aspect, rather than a zoning paradigm which the SAD construct seeks to avoid. All modern economic development surveys point to the rather long and uncertain land development process as the primary inhibitor to sustainable economic development, particularly in the retail sector. in shopping and dining projects, this long approval process often causes quality tenants to hesitate about coming into new markets when adjacent municipalities may be more inviting or when the immediate surrounding business environment (i.e., South Federal Highway) does not have a proven track record of success. However, working directly in concert with the greater Tropic Isle neighborhood to create a consensus site plan, quality tenants are beginning to feel more confident that they can commit to the South Federal Highway corridor and the Delray Place project. For the residents of the Tropic Isle Civic Association, RPG has taken a close look to court the right mix of tenants by beginning to "put the pieces of the puzzle together" in identifying quality retailers, quality dining options, and neighborhood services and amenities that best meet the present and future needs of the greater South Federal Highway community. This framework was then utilized to design a neighborhood retail center that could accommodate all of these needs and remain economically feasible for years to come. As a result of these discussions, RPG worked very hard to design an optimized site plan that intended to meet both the needs and desires of the City, the adjacent community, as well as the reasonable requirements of the types of qualify retail and dining tenant RPG seeks to place, who themselves seek to protect and promote their own business models, trade dress, and goodwill. Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 17 RPG remains committed to the continued collaboration with the leadership of the Tropic isle, Tropic Bay, and the other neighborhood associations to develop a project that is financially feasible and economically sustainable for such an important corner of our City. 4. Pursuant to LDR Section 4.3.4(K), Development Standards Matrix, the minimum perimeter setback required for a project in the SAD zoning District is 15 feet. The 100 Building encroaches into this setback at the corner of Linton Boulevard and South Federal Highway; and it appears that a portion of the loading dock (Loading Area #1) also encroaches. Remove these encroachments or seek relief from this requirement. Relief from this section of the LDRs requires a variance. The north end of Building 100 on Linton Blvd. will be reduced 5 ft. to provide for the required 15 ft. setback. Loading Area # 7 does not encroach within the 15 ft. setback requirement. 5. Pursuant to LDR Section 4.4.25(D), Development Standards, "Within the front and any street side setback, the fifteen foot (15) setback area shall be a landscape area and no pavement shall be allowed therein except for pedestrian ways and driveways (or streets) which provide access to the property and which are generally perpendicular to the abutting street. "An outdoor dining area is located within the required landscape area adjacent to the 400 building. Remove this encroachment or seek relief from this requirement. Relief from this section of the LDRs requires a waiver. For Building 400, it may be desired to locate a dining tenant at that location, if ultimately feasible. To the extent an outdoor dining area is included within a pedestrian way permitted within a required landscape area, no waivers should be required as this meets code. 6_ Pursuant to LDR Section 4.3.4(H )(6)(b), Special Landscape Setbacks, a 25 foot landscape buffer is required along South Federal Highway. Provide the required buffer or seek relief from this requirement. Relief from this section of the LDRs requires a waiver. Dimension the landscape buffer adjacent to the parking areas along South Federal Highway and the distance from the property line to the dumpster adjacent to the 400 Building. Consistent with the elimination of the "Special Landscape Setback" endorsed by the South Federal Highway Redevelopment Plan, RPG has worked with planning staff to meet the intent of this code provision wherever an "urban edge" of buildings has not been provided. Notwithstanding, LDR Section 4.4.25(F) provides that such Special Regulations "may be applied" in SAD projects but are not required. Therefore, seeking relief is not necessary as this is not a "requirement" applicable to the project and may be otherwise addressed through the SAD review and approval process by the City Commission. 7. Pursuant to LDR Section 4.3.4(H )(6 )(b), Special Landscape Setbacks, 'Along Linton Boulevard, from A - 1 -A to the western City limits, a special landscape area shall be provided. This landscape area shall be the smaller distance of either 30' or 10% of the average depth of the property; however, in no case shall the landscape area be less than ten feet (10). " A 15.5 foot buffer is required along the narrow portion of the property along Linton Boulevard; and a 30 foot buffer is required along the deep portion of the property. Provide the required buffers or seek relief from this requirement. Relief from this section of the LDRs requires a waiver. While a 10' buffer is indicated, it appears that the parking overhang encroaches into Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 18 this area. Provide additional dimensioning that clearly shows the dimension of the provided buffer. Additional dimensioning that clearly shows the dimension of the provided buffer will be provided. As stated above, LDR Section 4.4.25(F) provides that such Special Regulations "may be applied" in SAD projects but is not required. Therefore, seeking relief is not necessary as this is not a "requirement" applicable to the project and may be otherwise addressed through the SAD review and approval process by the City Commission. 8. As indicated in the Landscape Comments, an Existing Tree Survey must be provided. The proposed plans seek to remove all of the existing vegetation on the site. There are quite a few mature trees on this site. Where possible, these trees should be incorporated into landscape islands in the parking areas. A tree survey will be provided with the resubmittal of plans. 9. Pursuant to LDR Section 4.4.25(E)(1), "Parking and loading requirements (number of spaces) shall be as set forth on the site and development plan." However, the parking requirement for shopping centers of this size is typically 4 spaces per 1,000 square feet in the City [LDR Section 4.6.9(C)(3 )(e).] The proposed site plan shows a substantial reduction (19.7 %) from this requirement with a deficit of 109 spaces. While a waiver is not required, the number of spaces must be adequate to support the proposed development. Therefore, a parking study must be provided to support this reduction. Additionally, with respect to parking balance, the spaces provided for the buildings along Linton Boulevard have a 28% deficit of 43 spaces from the typical shopping center requirements. Given that four of the five buildings in this area are labeled as potential restaurants, this is a concern. In fact, the number of potential restaurants in the entire shopping center is a concern. Given the limited parking, a reduction in the number of restaurants should be considered. A parking study will be provided with the resubmittal of plans. 10. Parking along the main access drive from South Federal Highway should be minimized to avoid conflicts and improve traffic flow. The handicapped accessible space in this aisle should be relocated. The HC space will be relocated. After reviewing various permutations, the design professionals have determined that the balance of the parking has been designed to be optimized for the usefulness of the site without further reducing parking count. 11. Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.9(D)(3)(c), Stacking Distance, a required stacking distance of 50 feet is required. This distance has not been provided at the driveway connections to Eve Street and Linton Boulevard. Relief from this section of the LDRs requires a waiver. Eve Street is not a "thru street" and therefore we do not believe that the concerns with stacking distance exist. The effective stacking distance is to Federal Highway. The entrances on Linton, as proposed, match existing stacking distances which are twenty -six feet (28'). 12. The dumpster enclosures for the 200, 300 and 400 buildings are located adjacent to designated outdoor dining areas for these buildings. This may not be practical due to odor issues. Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 19 The areas designated as "outdoor dining areas" on the site plans are for reference only. Actual tenant location is not yet feasible to be determined until final approvals are obtained and requires an examination of desired patron foot traffic circulation. 13. Indicate how trash is handled for the 600,700 and 1000 buildings. There are enclosed trash rooms in buildings 800 and 900 which will be used for all the tenants in buildings 600 -1000. 14. Indicate where grease traps might be located for the potential restaurants. All grease traps will be located under paving in the parking lot. No grease traps will be located behind buildings 500 -510 and 600 -1000. 15. Indicate how loading is handled for the frontage buildings along South Federal Highway and Linton Boulevard. The South Federal Highway buildings will primarily use smaller box trucks for loading and temporary loading areas have been provided in between each of the South Federal Highway outparcels next to the trash enclosures. The Linton Boulevard buildings will similarly utilize smaller box trucks due to the limited size of the stores and temporary loading for these smaller premises will be primarily through adjacent loading zones utilized for the larger stores. Delivery of goods will then occur either through the front entrances or, as feasible or necessary under conditions then existing, through the rear tenant entrances. 16. There are only two connections to the external sidewalk system for the entire development. Provide sidewalk connections to all buildings. All other buildings are connected to one another other which satisfy ADA requirements for shopping centers. 17. Provide a sidewalk along Eve Street and connect it to the sidewalk in front of the 505 -510 Building. The Tropic Isle community has expressed a strong concern against the removal the gate on Eve Street. RPG has no plans to remove or relocate, or to request to remove or relocate, the Eve Street gate without the express consent of the Tropic isle Civic Association. While a sidewalk can be provided on Eve Street, connection of the sidewalk to the front of the 506 -510 building will require modifications to the Tropic isle security wall andlor Eve Street gate, neither of which RPG has control over. 18. The proposed monument signs will require separate action and site plan approval. ilioted. A master sign package will be submitted for the project. 19. It is anticipated that egress from the driveway on Eve Street will cause traffic problems for the adjacent neighborhood if the proposed redesign of the Tropic Square shopping center is not constructed. Redesign this connection to restrict exiting traffic to right -turn only. An alternative design with full turning movements can be provided as an alternative on the site plan approved with the SAD zoning and conditioned on the construction of the Tropic Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 20 Square connection. This alternative design should be coordinated with the Tropic Square proposal. The current design appears to be slightly offset. While RPG agrees in concept, RPG is requesting that the currently proposed site plan depicting the connection with Tropic Square with full turning movements be approved as the primary egress from the driveway on Eve Street, with the alternative design that restricts exiting traffic to right -turn only movements be required only if the Tropic Square cross access connection point is not constructed. 20. Show sight visibility triangles for all driveway connections. Sight triangles will be provided with the resubmittal of plans. 21. Indicate the location of bicycle racks on the site plan. Bicycle racks will be provided with the resubmittal of plans. 22. Indicate the number of children for the proposed daycare center and provide documentation that the requirements of LDR Section 4.3.3(E), Child Care Facilities, are being met. The location of the daycare center with the outdoor play area adjacent to the single family lots on McCleary Street is problematic. A less impacting location for this use should be sought. The presently identified location of the proposed pre - school facility is problematic for some of the residents of McCleary Street, as expressed to RPG on October 74, 2472, because they did not want to hear children during the day. Assuming the desired use of the premises as identified on the site plan for the proposed pre - school is ultimately sought, RPG will continue to work with the residents to endeavor to find a feasible solution. That being said, provisions for quality pre - schools in Delray Beach are a desired amenity which benefits not only Tropic Isle, but the greater South Federal Highway corridor in general. RPG agrees to comply with the provisions of LDR Section 4.3.3(E), as applicable. 23. Generators are required for all new grocery stores and pharmacies in the City. If these uses are anticipated, consideration should be given where they might be located now to avoid future compatibility issues with adjacent residential development. in the current site configuration, the generator would have to be located on the roof. As a general premise, the intent behind the requirement of a generator for both grocery stores and pharmacies was in response to past power outages resulting from hurricanes and the need to protect the public by preserving perishable goods. The intended food store for Delray Place overwhelmingly does not carry many perishable items but rather mainly dry goods. Likewise, there are no current plans to have a pharmacy use included within the project. 24. Provide a point by point response on how these items are being addressed. Respectfully provided and contained herein. Landscape Technical Comments: 1) A Special Landscape Setback is established for this property along Federal Highway and Linton Boulevard. The Special Landscape Setback along Federal Highway is twenty -five (25') feet. The Special Landscape Setback along Linton Boulevard is fifteen and four /tenths (15.4') feet for the narrow portion {eastern -half} of the site and thirty {30'} feet for the wider Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 21 portion (western- half). The City would support building frontage along Federal Highway, however, the Overhead Lines that power the street fights along Federal Highway and Linton Boulevard would have to be buried underground. This will allow for more growing space to plant larger canopy trees within the landscape buffer. The project is designed with the "urban edge" building form suggested (but not required for this project) by the South Federal Highway Redevelopment Plan). Therefore, the Special Landscape Setback should not be applicable for both Federal Highway and Linton Boulevard. Burying the power lines is cost - prohibitive. The Landscape Architect will coordinate with the project's Engineer to alleviate possible conflicts between landscaping and utility lines. However, as applicable, any required waivers will be sought. 2) An Existing Tree Survey was not submitted. Submit this plan on a separate sheet. All existing trees that have a caliper of 4" or greater must be documented on the plan. Each tree shall be properly identified with a number that can be referenced to a table that lists each species name (botanical and common names), caliper, size (height and spread), condition and proposed action (remain in place, relocate or remove). City staff may or may not agree with all proposed removals and may institute mitigation requirements. More comments will be generated upon review of this submitted document. An existing tree survey will be submitted with the required tabular data as requested. 3) Document on plans where the temporary holding area for all relocated trees will be. Show temporary watering source. Provide a note detailing proper root pruning procedures. The temporary holding area and note will be provided on the resubmitted plans. 4) There are a few instances where the Engineer has placed fire hydrants in landscape islands. Coordinate with Engineer on alternate locations that will not pose a conflict for required canopy trees. All islands are required to contain one (1 ) canopy tree with specifications of sixteen (16') feet in height with a seven (7} foot spread. The LA will coordinate with the project engineer to alleviate possible conflicts between landscape and utility lines. Fire hydrant locations in landscape islands will be coordinated with the Fire Department to relocate fire hydrants out of the landscape islands if possible. Additionally, an alternative landscape island arrangement has been provided and suggested for the City's consideration based upon RPG's prior successful experiences on other similar retail projects. However, as applicable, any required waivers will be sought. 5) All landscape islands are required to contain a canopy tree with the above specifications. Canopy trees are defined as a tree that will attain a minimum spread of twenty {24'} feet. Green Buttonwoods, East Palatka Hollies and Sabal Palms are NOT considered canopy trees. Switch to larger growing trees such as Live Oak (many varieties are available), Gumbo Limbo, etc. `Highrise' and `Cathedral' Oaks are popular choices because they grow more vertically before branching out allowing better storefront visibility. The landscape plans will be revised to include alternate species as suggested. 6) All required parking lot trees must be in the form of canopy or shade trees. Palm trees will not be credited towards the interior tree count. Revise planting plans and chart tabulations. The landscape plans will be revised to meet this requirement. Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 22 7) Several required landscape islands are missing. Pay particular attention to the parking rows in front of Buildings 600 thru 1000, between Buildings 100 and 200 and along the north side of Eve Street. Parking rows are allowed thirteen (13) standard parking spaces between islands. Parking rows are also required to begin and terminate with a landscape island. All islands are to be curbed and have minimum dimensions of nine (9') in width, exclusive of curbing. Each island shall have a minimum planting area of one hundred and thirty -five square feet (135 SF) and contain seventy -five square feet {75 SF} of shrubs and groundcovers and one (1) canopy tree that is sixteen (16') feet in height with a seven {7'} foot spread. Make sure all islands are of proper dimensions and contain the required plant material. An alternative landscape island arrangement has been provided and suggested for the City's consideration based upon RPG's prior successful experiences on other similar retail projects. However, as applicable, any required waivers will be sought. 8) Several of the required landscape islands do not meet the required minimum width of nine feet (9'), exclusive of curbing. Thus, they do not meet the minimum planting area of one hundred and thirty -five square feet (135 SF). Revise all plans and adjust planting plan as needed. An alternative landscape island arrangement has been provided and suggested for the City's consideration based upon RPG's prior successful experiences on other similar retail projects. However, as applicable, any required waivers will be sought. 9) All landscape islands are required to contain a minimum of seventy -five (75 SF) square feet of shrubs and groundcovers. Shrubs shall be placed at the back of the island with low groundcovers in the nose to eliminate sight visibility issues. The landscape plans will be revised to meet this requirement. 10) All landscape areas adjacent to vehicular use areas are required to be curbed with Type `D' curb or better. Show on all plans. The landscape plans will be revised to meet this requirement. The landscape islands will be curbed with Type D curb. 11) Per LDR 4.6.16 {H}(4), all buildings shall have foundation trees spaced so that their canopies will be touching at maturity. Size specifications are to adhere to the chart listed within this regulation. This requirement has not been met for Buildings 600, 700, 800, 900, 1000, 500- 504 and 506 -510. No Foundation trees have been proposed. Revise planting plans and chart tabulations. Landscape plans will be revised accordingly to meet this requirement. 12) All existing soil within landscape areas adjacent to vehicular use areas is required to be removed (to 30" below grade), inspected and then replaced with a sixty to forty (60140) mix of sand to topsoil, native soil that has been screened of rock or another mixture suggested by the Landscape Architect. Provide note on plans. Include in plans the illustration found in LDR 4.6.16[H](3)[n). Landscape plans will be revised accordingly to meet this requirement. Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 23 13) Show sight triangles on landscape plans and modify design to accommodate visibility between 3' -6' above grade within triangles. Landscape plans will be revised accordingly to meet this requirement. 14) Show light poles on landscape plans. Coordinate with Engineer to move light poles so that potential conflict between tree canopy and light pole is minimized. Landscape plans will be revised accordingly to meet this requirement. 15) A Landscape Maintenance Agreement will be required for those plantings outside the property line. This applies particularly to the plantings along Eve Street. This agreement shall be submitted prior to submittal of building permits to be executed by City Commission. Noted. RPG is further suggesting significant landscape improvements (including an ongoing and perpetual maintenance obligation) relating to Eve Street to further satisfy open space requirements. 16} The plant palette along Federal Highway and Linton Boulevard lacks vivid colors. Incorporate more flowering and colorful plants into these areas. For example, use Muhly or Red Fountain Grass instead of Dwarf Fakahatchee Grass. Croton varieties such `Mammy' will add a splash of red. Trinettes and Variegated Ginger will help make the landscape pop with their greens and yellows. In other words, use plants that add a variety of colors (reds, yellows, purples) in addition to green. Landscape plans will be revised accordingly to meet this requirement. 17) Specify Crinum augustum `Queen Emma' as the Crinum of choice. It performs much better and is more attractive. Landscape plans will be revised accordingly to meet this requirement. 18) Extend the landscape beds along Federal Highway and Linton Boulevard outward to incorporate the proposed trees so that the landscape is completely unified rather than throwing trees out in an oasis of sod. Typically, trees incorporated within landscape beds of shrubs and groundcovers looks much better than those planted in an area surrounded by sod. Landscape plans will be revised accordingly to meet this suggestion. Preliminary Engineering Technical Comments: 1. Provide a response letter with a detailed description of how each of these comments has been addressed and reference plans sheet number for accurate review. Contained herein. 2. Provide copy of certified boundary and topographic survey meeting requirements of LDR Section 2.4.3 (A), (B) and (D). Existing grades should be taken at least 10 -feet outside all subject property lines for all adjacent properties per LDR Section 2.4.3 (B) (20). Survey shall provide sufficient information to determine historical drainage pattern. Survey shall include all existing easements. This will be provided with the resubmittal of plans. Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 24 3. Provide Survey completed within the last 6 months per LDR Section 2.4.3 (B) (5). This will be provided with the resubmiftal of plans. 4. The Survey, Site, Landscaping and Civil Plans need to be at the same scale. All plans needs to be drawn on 24" x 36" sheets and at a scale of 1" = 10', 1" = 20' or 1" = 30' per LDR Section 2.4.3 (B) (1) and (D) (1). Civil plans will be resubmitted at the same scale as the survey, site plan, and landscaping plans. Due to the size of the center and in and in effort to avoid match lines, the planner has agreed to a 1 " =54' scale. 5. Provide Civil Plans with existing and proposed spot elevations showing changes of elevations of not more than 2 -feet, throughout the site and at a minimum distance of 10 -feet into all adjacent properties per LDR Section 2.4.3 (B) (20) and (D) (2). Provide sufficient elevations to ensure proposed improvements will not have a negative impact on surrounding drainage and to establish historical storm water flow. Complete site grading will be provided on final engineering plans. 6. Provide existing elevations on existing roadway including edge of pavement and center line. This will be provided with the resubmiftal of plans. 7. Clearly indicate limits of right -of -way and center line of the right -of -way of any adjacent streets with the basis of the center line clearly stated; the center line of the existing pavement; the width of the street pavement; the location and width of any adjacent sidewalk; and the identification of any improvements located between the property and any adjacent street per LDR Section 2.4.3 (B) (5). This will be provided with the resubmiftal of plans. 8. Please coordinate location of all existing and proposed easements on Site, Civil, Landscape and Composite Utility Plans. Existing and proposed easement locations and labeling needs to be consistent on all plans. The existing easements are shown on the survey. Proposed easements will be added to the engineering plans. 9. Indicate sight distances at all ingress /egress points and all intersections. Sight triangles must be indicated on Landscape and Engineering plans per LDR Section 4.6.14. All visual obstructions within the site visibility shall provide unobstructed cross - visibility at a level between 3 -feet and 6 -feet, this includes tree trunks. Sight triangles are to be measured from the edge of pavement for driveways and from the ultimate right -of -way line for alleys and streets. The sight distances at ingress 1 egress points will be added to the engineering plans. 10. Indicate sight visibility triangles in accordance with the FDOT Design Standard Index 546, Sight Distance at applicable FDOT intersections. Sight visibility triangles per FDOT Index 546 will be added to the engineering plans. Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 25 11. Provide a minimum 10 -foot General Utility Easement {GUE} through the property for all other utilities. This GUE is not allowed in public right -of -way. Water, sewer or drainage system(s) cannot occupy or share this GUE. The required 74' GUE will be provided at final engineering. 12. Indicate location of required FPL easements. The required FPL easements will be provided at final engineering. 13. If project phasing is proposed, such phases need to be clearly shown on the plans and a narrative describing the phasing program provided per LDR Section 2.4.3 (B) (22). Please indicate phasing plan on Civil Plans and clearly indicate how this would affect proposed improvements; specifically water and sewer improvements. This project is not expected to be phased at this time. 14. Please take into consideration constructabiiity, health department releases, road closures, re- paving, inconvenience to local residence, etc. when developing a civil phasing plan. Acknowledged 15. Palm Beach County Health Department permits required for this project. Permits will have to be phased in accordance with construction phasing so Health Department releases do not hold -up Certificate of Occupancy issuance by the Building Permit Department. Palm Beach County Health Department permits for water and sewer will be obtained prior to final engineering approval. 16. Palm Beach County permit(s) or permit modification through the Traffic Division required for this project per LDR Section 2.4.2 (C) (2) (d)_ Provide documentation indicating applicant has met with Palm Beach County regarding proposed project. A Palm Beach County Right- Of-Way Permit will be obtained prior to final engineering approval for the existing drainage connection to the Linton Boulevard drainage system. 17. Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) permit(s) required for this project per LDR Section 2.4.2 (C) (2) (c). Submit copy of FDOT pre - application letter. An FDOT Drainage permit will be obtained prior to final engineering approval because the project is adjacent to the FDOT right-of-way of Federal Highway. No driveway connection permit is required because we are not proposing any improvements within the FDOT right -of -way of Federal Highway. 18. South Florida Water Management District ( SFWMD) permit, permit modification or Letter of "No Notice" required for this project in accordance with LDR Section 2.4.6(J). Provide Letter of "No Notice" from SFWMD or pre - application correspondence with SFWMD regarding proposed project. If project qualifies for a "No Notice General Permit for Activities in Uplands," submit specific criteria in accordance with Section 40E- 400.315 and Section 40E- 400.316 of the Florida Administrative Code to City of Delray Beach Engineering Division for consideration; otherwise, submit to SFWMD for determination. Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 26 This project has already been submitted to SFWMD as application 120906 -4. The SFWMD permit will be obtained prior to final engineering approval. 19. Provide Demolition Plans at a scale to match Civil Plans. Include any underground utilities to be removed or abandoned in place. Provide notes that state the disposition of all existing facilities including service lines and cieanouts. Demolition plans for the site will be provided at final engineering. 20. Clearly dimension driveway width on Civil Plans. The driveway dimensions will be provided on a horizontal control plan at final engineering. 21. Indicate handicap spaces are to be provided in accordance with LDR Section 4.6.9 (D )(8 )(d); City of Delray Beach Construction Standard Detail RT 4.2; and the Florida Building Code, Chapter 11, Accessibility Code for Building Construction. Handicapped parking spaces need to be paved, properly marked, and ramp and curb cuts provided if required. Handicap spaces that are paved, marked, and with curb ramps will be provided in accordance with LDR Section 4.6.9 (D) (8)(d), City of Delray Beach Construction Detail RT 4.2, and the Florida Building Code Chapter 11 at final engineering. 22. Provide ADA compliant access from the parking space to the building. ADA compliant access will be provided from the parking space to the building at final engineering. 23. Provide note that parking layout and striping needs to follow City of Delray Beach current standards. Provide latest Parking Lot Detail RT 4.1 and Typical Parking Space Details RT 4.2 A thru C, as applicable on Civil Plans_ 'On plan view, indicate double striping at parking spaces. Parking and striping layout will follow City of Defray Beach current standards at final engineering. 24. Provide finished floor elevation. In accordance with LDR Section 7.1.3 (B) (2), if finished floor elevation is less than 18- inches above centerline of adjacent road, but above the 100 - year storm or National Flood Insurance minimum elevations, then a letter is required from a professional registered engineer certifying that the drainage conditions have been investigated and the proposed floor elevation is above the flooding level. It must be shown that the property will have adequate drainage to ensure that flooding will not occur in a 100 - year, 3 -day storm event. A letter from a professional engineer will be provided at final engineering that certifies the drainage conditions have been investigated and the proposed finished floor elevation is above the 100yr -3day flood stage. 25. Provide finish floor elevations for nearest adjacent structures 1 buildings abutting all property boundaries. This will be provided on the revised survey. Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 27 26. Provide signed and sealed drainage report indicating the proposed system's ability to meet storm water qualit and quantit requirements in accordance with the South Florida Water Management District regulations per LDR Section 2.4.3 (D) (7). In addition, the surface water management system needs to be designed in accordance with LDR Section 6.1.9 for a minimum of a 10 yr. /24 hr. storm event. The system needs to provide for positive drainage of lots, streets, roads, and other public areas as well as handling any run -off from adjacent areas that historically flowed into the subject area. Include drainage calculations confirming that there will be no negative post development impacts on adjacent homes, structures or properties. The drainage calculations will be provided at final engineering and show that the parking lot is designed to be protected from the 74yr - -24hr storm event while maintaining the existing discharge from the site. 27. Show nearest existing drainage structures per LDR Section 2.4.3 (D) (3). This will be provided on the revised survey. 28. Provide note indicating that no landscaping shall be planted over any exfiltration trenches on Civil Plans. A note will be provided on the final engineering plans that states "No landscaping shall be planted over any exfiltration trench" 29. Provide drainage easements for all proposed private drainage systems in accordance with LDR Section 5.3.4. Drainage easements will be shown over the private drainage system on the final engineering plans in accordance with LDR Section 5.3.4. 30. Provide a separate tap for irrigation, domestic water and fire lines. Separate taps are shown for the irrigation, water, and fire fines on the Conceptual Water and Sewer Plan (C2) submitted. 31. Provide separate tap from water main for single or double water service connections per City standard detail PW 9.2, revise accordingly. The water service connections will be provided per City standard detail PW 9.2 on the final engineering plans. 32. Provide a second valve at fire hydrant for runs that exceed 29 -feet, per City Standard detail PW 5.1 (see note #7). A second valve will be added to the fire hydrant runs that exceed 24'. 33. Provide double valves at connection points for new mains to existing mains, not at service lines. Double valves will be provided at the connections to existing mains. 34. Indicate typical configuration and location of proposed sewer services with cleanouts. A cleanout will be required on the existing sewer service at a maximum distance of 18- inches from the right -of -way line and/or easement line per City of Delray Beach Standard Detail Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 28 WW 4.1. At locations where this cannot be obtained, an exclusive sewer easement will be required up to the first clean -out. The location of proposed sewer services with cleanouts will be provided. 35. Provide on the detail sheet City of Delray Beach Standard Detail WW 4, 1, WW 5.1 or 5.2 (as applicable). The applicable City details will be provided with final engineering plans. 36. Indicate grease trap {s} will be installed in accordance with City of Delray Beach Minimum Construction Standards and Specifications. Grease traps will be provided in accordance with the City of Defray Beach Minimum Construction Standards and Specification on final engineering plans. 37. Provide 12 -foot exclusive water and 12 -foot exclusive sewer easement over water and sewer mains, respectively. Water and sanitary sewer lines cannot share a 12 -foot easement. Separate 12' water and sewer easements will be shown. 38. Provide the following note on both the Engineering Plans and the Landscape Plans that, "any trees or shrubs placed within water, sewer or drainage easements shall conform to the City of Delray Beach Standard Details; LD 1.1 & LD 1.2." These Details are to be shown on the Landscape Plans. The note "Any frees or shrubs placed within the water, sewer, or drainage easements shall conform to the City of Delray Beach Standard Details LD 1.1 and LD 1.2" will be added to the engineering plans. 39. Provide a minimum horizontal distance of 10 -feet between water mains and storm or sanitary sewers; refer to City Standard Detail PW 2.1 for other City design criteria. A minimum horizontal distance of 10' will be provided between wafer mains and storm I sanitary sewers. 40. Provide note indicating, "No proposed improvements, buildings or any kind of construction can be placed on or within any water, sewer or drainage easements, unless approved by the City of Delray Beach City Engineer." A note indicating "No proposed improvements, buildings, or any other kind of construction can be placed on or within any wafer, sewer, or drainage easements, unless otherwise approved by the City of Delray Beach City Engineer" will be added to the engineering plan. 41. Provide note indicating, "No proposed structures shall be installed within a horizontal distance of 10 -feet from any existing or proposed water, sewer or drainage facilities, unless approved by the City of Delray Beach City Engineer." A note indicating "No proposed structures shall be installed within a horizontal distance of 10' from any existing or proposed water, sewer, or drainage facilities, unless otherwise approved by the City of Delray Beach City Engineer" will be added to the engineering plan. Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 29 42. Provide a minimum horizontal distance of 6 -feet between water main 1 connection and right - of -way and/or easement line. A minimum horizontal distance of 10' between wafer mains and the easement I right - of -way line will be provided. 43. Provide a minimum horizontal distance of 6 -feet between sanitary sewer main 1 connection and right -of -way and /or easement line. A minimum horizontal distance of 10' between sanitary sewer mains and the easementl right -of -way line will be provided. 44. Provide details for all water, sewer and drainage conflicts. Provide both bottom and top elevations at all conflict locations on profile sheets. This will be checked during the Building Permit review process. Details for water, sewer, and drainage conflicts will be provided on final engineering plans. 45. Provide signed and sealed calculations indicating current and proposed estimated flows into existing or proposed lift station and force main. Written approval from the Deputy Director of Public Utilities stating that the City's system has sufficient capacity to treat proposed flows is required. Signed and sealed calculations indicating the current and proposed flows into the existing City system will be provided. 46. Provide a Composite Utility Plan signed by a representative of each utility provider attesting to the fact that services (water, sewer, drainage, gas, power, telephone and cable) can be accommodated as shown on the Composite Utility Plan. The Composite Utility Plan needs to address the responsibility for relocation of existing services and installation of new services in accordance with LDR Section 2.4.3 (F) (4). Composite Utility Plan is also used to ensure physical features do not conflict with each other and existing or proposed utility services. A composite utility plan will be provided. 47. The Composite Utility Plan (or Composite Overlay Plan) needs to include all existing and proposed overhead and underground utilities; all existing and proposed light poles; all existing and proposed easements; all existing and proposed improvements to hardscape and landscape. The Composite Utility Plan is also used to ensure physical features and existing or proposed utilities do not conflict with each other. A composite utility plan will be provided. 48. Indicate City approved bus shelter and mass transit easement will be provided per City of Delray Beach Comprehensive Plan, Policy A -1.5. New residential projects with over 25 units and nonresidential projects over 10,000 square feet which are adjacent to existing or future Palm Tran bus stops are required to provide an easement and install a City approved bus shelter on site. If project is not adjacent to a bus stop, or bus shelter already exist, a contribution made to the City in -lieu of providing the bus shelter on site is required. Acknowledged. Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 30 49. If bus shelter required, please indicate on plans a City approved bus shelter will be installed in accordance with Palm Tran and ADA requirements (eg. 5' x 8' landing area, 30' from intersection, direct access to site, etc). Acknowledged 50. Submit revised plans and any required documentation for Preliminary Engineering review with next submittal. Please ensure a complete set is provided for the City of Delray Beach Engineering Division and indicate which documents are for the Engineering Division. Acknowledged 51. Additional comments may follow after review of revised plans. Acknowledged. 52. Final Engineering comments will also be generated after submittal of Final Engineering Plans for the Building Permit. Acknowledged Fire Department Technical Comments: 1. Indicate fire code reference — Florida Fire Prevention Code 2010 Edition, NFPA 1, Fire Code, 2009 Florida Edition, NFPA 101, Life Safety Code, 2009 Florida Edition. 2. Maintain inside turning radius of 25 feet in fire lanes for fire apparatus. 3. Post of symbols on buildings for light frame truss type construction. 4. Identify fire hydrant locations. Commercial and business districts not more than 300 feet between hydrants. As measured by way of road travel. Provide clearances of seven and one half feet (7' 6 ") in front of and to the sides of the fire hydrant, with a four feet {4'} clearance to the rear of the hydrant. 5. Maximum 100' distance from Fire Department Connections to a fire hydrant. Fire Department Connections shall be identified by a sign stating "No Parking. Fire Department Connection" and shall be designed in accordance with FDCT standards for information signage. Provide clearances of seven and one half feet (7'6") in front of and to the side of these appliances. 6. Knox Box access at main entrance for all buildings. 7. Fire Sprinkler and fire alarm systems — central station monitored for buildings B — 500 — 504 and B — 506 — 510. Separate permits required. 8. Show fire lanes in front of retail buildings 500 - 504 and 506 - 510. See Section 18.2.3.5.3 NFPA 1 Fire Code, 2009 Florida Edition. 9. Building 1000 - New Day - Care Occupancy - Remote supervising station fire alarm system required. Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 31 10. Dead end fire department roads in excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with approved provisions for fire apparatus to turn around. See Section 18.2.3.4.4 NFPA 1 Fire Code, 2009 Florida Edition. Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 32 APPENDIX "C" APPLICANT'S STATEMENT - SECTION 2.4.5(D)(5) REZONING FINDINGS 1. OVERVIEW of SAD (SPECIAL AcTtyiTiES DISTRICT) ZONING. The new Delray Place neighborhood commercial retail center is the next evolution of modern urban redevelopment that seeks to amenitize surrounding residential uses in an appropriate scale, taking into consideration that the quality of retail tenant is the strongest driver in sustaining the quality of any given project. Retail Property Group ("RPG "), the project's developer, is very excited to be able to implement the City Commission's desire to utilize the SAD (Special Activities District) zoning for this site as a way to design the center, tied to a site plan, which the adjacent Tropic Isle/Tropic Bay community has had extensive collaborative input. Rather than simply performing the Euclidean zoning function of "separating incompatible land uses," the City's SAD zoning is a modern zoning and land use regulatory processes utilized in both urban centers and outlying suburban areas that is intended to promote the public welfare by attempting to shape the creation of integrated, functional, and aesthetically pleasing communities. Further, SAD zoning allows the City to incorporate, rather than be at odds with, proven market -based realities. Through innovative regulatory techniques such as SAD zoning, RPG intends to implement a host of diverse uses complimentary to the desired economic vibrancy of the South Federal Highway corridor and remain respectful to the social, cultural, environmental and aesthetic concerns of the adjacent Tropic Isle/Tropic Bay communities. See generally, Meshenberg, "The Administration of Flexible Zoning Techniques" 3-4 {1975} (American Planning Association, PAS Rept. No. 318). The adoption by communities of flexible zoning design incorporating site plan specific review has proven to be an important land use regulatory device in facilitating high quality, innovative and integrated development projects which traditional Euclidian zoning often cannot accommodate. Also, the design flexibility afforded by SAD zoning (which is analogous to planned development review) allows of responsiveness to changing consumer preferences and economic and fiscal conditions as well as in controlling public service and infrastructure costs by generally providing better planning for and increased control over new development has led to widespread utilization of this regulatory technique. See generally, Moore & Siskin, "PUDS In Practice," 3-12 (1985) (Urban Land Institute). See also Baers, "Zoning Code Revisions to Permit Mixed Use Development', 7 Zoning & Plan. L. Rep. 81, 82 (1984), wherein the author notes the following as potential benefits of flexible development: (1) provide a transition zone between single purpose land use districts; (2) achieve close proximity among employment centers, cultural and recreational uses, and residential areas; (3) enhance the vitality which comes from the interplay among various activities; (4) use space efficiently and economically, relieving development pressure on rural and agricultural land; (5) preserve older, but sound housing, which is often located within or adjacent business districts. In short, the City's SAD zoning ordinance acknowledges the need to embrace the evolutionary change and the natural process of land development that juxtaposes older, imbedded land uses and newer, more profitable ones as well as local shopping activities, which create the need for commercial uses in even relatively stable neighborhoods. It is within this paradigm that RPG proposes the new Delray Place retail development to compliment the neighborhood and to serve as the catalyst for the revitalization of the entire South Federal Highway corridor. Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 33 2. COMPLIANCE wITH REZONING STANDARDS OF LDR SECTION 2.4.5(D)(2). City of Delray Beach Land Development Regulation Section 2.4.5(D) sets forth the requirement that "a statement of the reasons for which the change is being sought" to accompany any application for rezoning of property. (a) That the zoning had previously been changed, or was originally established, in error. The City's records regarding the property reveal the following to be correct: The property was originally annexed into the City of Delray Beach from unincorporated Palm Beach County in the 1970's. The property was assigned the Future Land Use Map designation of Transitional (TRN) and a zoning of SAD (Special Activities District) and it was developed with three office buildings and associated parking simultaneously with the annexation. In 1991, the City of Delray Beach adopted new Land Development Regulations and the property was assigned the new zoning designation of PCC (Planned Office Center) and retained the Future Land Use Map Designation of TRN (Transitional).' It therefore appears that the prior rezoning by the City from SAD to POC was predicated upon the fact than an office building existed on the property at the time of its annexation and that such a use was economically sustainable and viable. This has proven to be untrue. See, e.g., Mayor and Council of Rockville v. Stone, 271 Md. 655, 319 A.2d 536, 541 (1974) ("On the question of original mistake, this Court has held that when the assumption upon which a particular use is predicated proves, with the passage of time, to be erroneous, this is sufficient to authorize a rezoning. "). (b) That there has been a change in circumstances which makes the current zoning inappropriate. The City's Planning & Zoning staff has identified that changing the zoning at this location "will formally acknowledge what the market trend has already indicated.i2 It has been repeatedly acknowledged, as recently as the City Commission hearing on this application on April 3, 2012, that this corner at Linton Blvd. and South Federal Highway has been unable to sustain office - type uses and the repeated demand for new, complimentary retail to amenitize and serve the adjacent Tropic Isle community, the beach property owners, and their respective environs, remains great. Staff has agreed, stating: Residential and general commercial uses are both compatible and complimentary in that the commercial uses provide necessary goods and services for residential neighborhoods and the residents provide the market base to support the commercial uses. Existing trends repeatedly point to the need to have this property's zoning designation returned to its former SAD to allow an economically sustainable neighborhood retail center to be developed. The City's Planning & Zoning staff has again acknowledged the need for this zoning map change in its prior staff report of February 27, 2012, when it was concluded: "The commercial activity in Delray Beach has greatly expanded and the Federal Highway /Linton ' See, City of Delray Beach, Staff Report to Planning & Zoning Board, February 27, 2012. 2 See, City of Delray Beach, Staff Report to Planning & Zoning Board, February 27, 2012, pg. 3. Planning & Zoning Board Staff Report - Meeting of October 15, 2012 Delray Place - Rezoning to SAD Page 34 Boulevard intersection has become a robust commercial hub. An office use at this location represents an economically unfeasible use of the property that the market trend has clearly identified as suited for commercial use." C. That the requested zoning is of similar intensity as allowed under the Future Land Use Map and that it is more appropriate for the property based upon circumstances particular to the site and/or neighborhood. Objective A -1 of the Future Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan states that property shall be redeveloped in a manner so that the use and intensity is appropriate and complimentary to adjacent land uses and fulfills remaining land use needs. The proposed SAD zoning designation would be complimentary to the surrounding commercial and residential properties. Moreover, the change in zoning to SAD will provide an appropriate and necessary land pattern for the South Federal Highway corridor with the implementation of a neighborhood retail center. The Urban Land has repeatedly recognized the need for neighborhood serving retail centers near residential communities:3 The decline of neighborhood retailing has had a profound effect on the desirability of many urban neighborhoods and communities. The convenient availability of goods and services is a key factor that people consider when choosing a place to live, and neighborhoods without suitable retailing are dramatically weakened. Residents who can afford it, leave, and potential new residents choose to live somewhere else. In this type of environment, communities cannot be sustained over the long term. By the tailoring of more specific and distinct restrictions to particular land areas, particularly when coupled with a development review process that provides for specific site -plan and design review, the utilization of the SAD zoning district significantly enhances the project and the neighbor by affording a measure of flexibility and discretion in regulating land use and development not found in traditional Euclidean zoning regimes. 3 See, "Ten Principles for Rebuilding Neighborhood Retail' (2003). The Urban Land Institute, is a 501(c) (3) nonprofit research and education organization supported by its members. Founded in 1936, ULi has members worldwide, representing the entire spectrum of land use and real estate development disciplines working in private enterprise and public service. As a multidisciplinary real estate forum, ULl facilitates an open exchange of ideas, information, and experience among industry leaders and policy makers dedicated to creating better places. Delray Place Correspondence Hoggard, Ron From: Peggy Paterra <ppaterra @gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 2:22 PM To: Breto, Estelio; Hoggard, Ron; Dorling, Paul; Alan Margolis Cc: Joe Carosella; Kelli Freeman Subject: Proposed shopping center - Delray Place I recently attended a presentation proposing the construction of Delray Place by Retail Property Group, Inc. As a 12 -year resident of Tropic Isle, I personally welcome the proposed shopping center which will be an asset to the community in my opinion. After the meeting I spoke to both their lawyer and directly to Joe Carosella, the developer, regarding my concerns about traffic in the area. I made the suggestion that there should be an alternate entrance to the new shopping center that would accommodate both Tropic Isle and Tropic Bay communities (as well as the other residences in that neighborhood) by giving access to shopping without having to join the traffic on Federal Highway or Linton Blvd. This could be from either Tropic Blvd. or Spanish Trail and would accommodate 3 types of traf fic - auto, bicycle and pedestrian - from this area. One excellent solution would be to utilize the existing entrance into Delray Square f rom Tropic Blvd. and create a pass - through road to Delray Place. I would think it would make access much more convenient and far safer for our residents, as well as alleviating the traf fic load on the highways for others coming to the new area merchants, making those highways safer as well. At the same time, there would be no traffic increase to Tropic Isle streets since residents would have to go onto Tropic Blvd. anyway to get to Federal Highway. A Spanish Trail alternative would make for more congestion on that street - and I'm not sure of the status of the road with a gate that exists there now. I'm not sure of the numbers, but I believe there are 450 residences in Tropic Isle, and hundreds of condos in Tropic Bay and other communities in this section of town (East of Federal.) The proposed traffic pattern of having one entrance on Federal Hwy. and one exit on Linton Blvd. would be prone to excessive congestion at the peak times of day or season (think Christmas ?) 1 The volume of traffic at that busy intersection Federal and Linton} varies from season to season and from hour to hour, but with all the new development going on at that intersection - new stores coming in to all four corners, I've heard, it would seem to me that the traffic volume is going to increase substantially, including many tractor trailers which we rarely have now. The patterns of having traffic making u- turns on Federal Hwy. and 1 or Linton Blvd. are also a concern to me. We currently have some vehicles making u -turns at Tropic Blvd. and it becomes a problem when drivers don't always follow the rules of safety and courtesy (or the law!) So, please consider the above in planning for upgrading of this area. We have a lovely, quiet waterfront community in here and take great pride in our neighborhood. In order to make the proposed project a true enhancement to the community, I hope you will take a long hard look at what will make the project one which we can all be proud to support. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Peggy Paterra 915 Dogwood Drive Delray Beach, FL 33483 Cell Phone: 561 - 702 -0428 2 Hoggard, Ron From: Truxeli, Rebecca Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2012 4:29 PM To: Hoggard, Ron Subject: FW: Delray Place Please see email below sent to PZ Mail. Rebecca Truxeli Administrative Ass istantl5ecretary to 5PRAB Interim Secretary to the Planning k Zoning Board and Historic Preservation Board Planning A Zoning Department City of Delray Beach 100 NW 1st Avenue Delray Beach, FL 33444 Phone: 561.243.7040 Fax: 561.243.7221 truxell@mydeirgybeach.com From: csmith727 Finailto :csmith727(dbellsouth.netl Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2012 $:1$ AM To: PZmail@MyDelray6each.com Subject: Delray Place I attended the meeting in Tropic Isles recently to learn about the proposal for a new development at the corner of Linton & Federal Hwy. I was extremely impressed by the presentation given by the architect and engineers involved! There has been a great deal of thought put in with regard to providing up -scale tenants for 'Delray Place' (an asset to our community), and details as to the limitation of noise /odors (which could potentially affect Tropic Isles). I am in favor of this development 100 %. The rendering provided is not only cosmetically beautiful but it affords a retail outlet that has long been awaited. This will be a great asset to our community. I look forward to the building of Delray Place. Sincerely, Christine Smith Cypress Drive Truxell, Rebecca From: R. Van Gernert <superone @ix.netcom.com> Sent: Friday, October 12, 2012 10:12 AM To: aaaa - TEST TO MYSELF Subject: FAILURE TO GIVE PROPER NOTIFICATION UNDER THE LAW I am forwarding the following letter to you so you are aware what is happening. I delivered this letter yesterday Oct. 11, 2012, to Mayor McDuffie; City Attorney, Brian Shutt; Planning and Zoning Board Director, Paul Dorling; and City Manager, Harden. I also copied the letter and filed a complaint with the State Attorney General, Pam Bundi, since State law is involved. Thank you for your continued dedication to a better Delray Beach. Your efforts on behalf of the residents are deeply appreciated. Richard Van Gernert URGENT- READ IMMEDIATELY Oct. 11, 2012 Mr. Paul Dorling Director of Planning & Zoning Board City of Delray Beach 100 NW 1st Ave. Delray Beach, Ft Re: Notification of Rezoning Hearing for Delray Place (Corner Linton Blvd. & Fed. Hwy.) Dear Mr. Dorling; Under Section 2.4.2 (A) (1) of the City of Delray Beach Ordinances, it states as follows: (B) Public Hearing Requirements (1) Notice (b) Privately Initiated Rezoning: Notice Requirements contained within the applicable sections of Florida Statutes Chapter 166 shall apply. Additional notice shall be given before the Planning and Zoning Board hearing in accordance with Section 2.4.2(B)(1)Jj) (i), (ii), (iii) and (iv). [Amd.Ord. 78.04 1/18/051; [Amd. Ord. 60 -95 10/24/95] (B) Public Hearing Requirements (1) Notice (j) Additional Public Notice: When a section of these Land Development Regulations requires additional notice pursuant to this section, the additional notice shall be sent in accordance with one or more of the following: [Amd.Ord. 78 -04 1/18/051; [Amd. Ord. 8 -97 2/18(97) (B) Public Hearing Requirements (1) Notice (j) Additional Public Notice (iii): Notice posted by the City on the affected property by placing one placard visible from each adjoining right -of- way or on each street block face, at least seven (7) days before the scheduled hearing. The placard shall be prepared by the City and shall identify the action to be considered and state the time and place of the h ear rig. The placard shall be removed by the City within five (5) business days after the date the public hearing is held. Photographic documentation of the posted placard shall be placed in the file to document the posting of the placard. [Amd.Ord. 78- 041/18/051 Page 2, Letter to Paul Dorling, Delray Planning & Zoning Hoard, Oct. 11, 2012, This letter is my formal notification to you that the above requirements have not been met as set forth in the laws of Lhe City of Delray Beach and the State of Florida. Although placards were pasted on federal highway and Linton Blvd., no placards were posted on the property facing Eve Street, Spanish Trail, or at the head of McCleary Street, as required by law. The placards must be up seven days before the meeting. Therefore the public hearing for Delray Place, scheduled to be held before the Planning and Zoning Board on Oct. 15, 2012, must be withdrawn since it is not in compliance with the legal requirements set forth by the laws of the City and State. I ask that you comply with the regulations, by notifying all parties concerned, that this item has been withdrawn from the agenda for that date, and a new date will be set, to be announced. I empathize with your staff and the applicant for this postponement but it is important that you comply with every aspect of the law to avoid furt her complications. 1 have taken the liberty to copy this letter to the Attorney General, State of Florida, along Edith the City of Delray Mayor, City Manager, and City Attorney, to make them aware of this situation. Sincerely, Richard Van Gernert 912 Eve Street Delray Beach, Fl- 33,183 Cc.: Attorney General, State of Florida, Pamela Jo "Pam" Bondi Mayor, Nelson S. "Woodie" McDuffie City Manager, Mr_ David T. Hardin City Attorney, R. Brian Shutt, Esq. Truxell, Rebecca From: FRANOIOSA4DELRAY @aol.com Sent: Friday, October 12, 2012 7:35 PM To: Truxell, Rebecca; Harden, David; McDuffie, Woodie; Shutt, Brian Subject: Re: Paul Darling's Response Letter to Richard Van Gemert Rebecca, Please pass this email on to the other P & Z board members and to Paul Dorling: Paul: I received an email from Richard Van Gernert stating in essence that the public notification of the upcoming meeting for the-Delray Place rezoning was not properly posted. My question is can you provide documentation that all the requirements of the LDR's were meet concerning public notice of the public hearing for the Delray Place. In the letter Mr Van Germert stated "no placards were posted on the property .facing Eve Street, Spanish Trail, or at the head of McCleary Street, as required by law" and further the LDR requirement as asserted by'Mr. Van Gernert... "Notice posted by the City on the affected property by placing one placard visible from each adjoining right-of-way or on each street block face, at least seven (7) days before the scheduled hearing. As I mentioned has this been done and do you have documentation as required by the LDR...Photographic documentation of the posted placard shall he placed in the fde to document the posting of the placard. [Amd.Drd. 7$ -04 1/18/051. Thank you, Gerald Franeiosa In a message dated 10/1212012 4.23:56 P.M. Eastem Daylight Time, truxell mydelra bV each.com writes: Good afternoon, Attached please find a copy of Mr. Darling's response letter to Mr. Richard flan Gernert regarding Notification of Rezoning Hearing for Delray Place. Please let us know if you have any questions. Regards, Administrative Assistant /Secretory to SPRAB Interim Secretary to the Planning & zoning Board and Historic Preservation Board Planning & Zoning Oepartrnent City of Delray Reach Truxell, Rebecca Subject: FW: Delray Place South Federal Highway From: Robert Wiebelt fmailto:bob @delrayplaza.coml Sent: Friday, October 12, 2412 12:20 PM To: Truxell, Rebecca Cc: Bob Wiebelt Subject: Delray Place South Federal Highway To-the Delray Beach Planning & Zoning Dept: My name is Robert Wiebelt. I live at 955 fasmine Drive in Tropic Isles. Also, I am the owner of the Delray Plaza located at 2275 South Federal Highway. The Delray Plaza is located in the heart of the South Federal Highway corridor, which is being considered in the current Redevelopment Plan_ I have inany important concerns regarding what has been proposed for the area in which I live and have worked for over 64 years. OF PRIME IMPORTANCE is the shopping center proposed by the Retail Property Group for the corner of Linton Boulevard and Federal Highway. Considering that over 50% of the commercial property in the corridor is zoned automotive, their proposed shopping center is an ideal asset to South Federal Highway. further, I think this center would be just the catalyst for change that we Dave long needed in our area! My wife and 1 attended the neighborhood workshop that the Retail Property Croup sponsored. They provided a detailed rendering of the proposed shopping center and revealed the names of tenants that arg considering opening in the center. Also, they assembled their whole group of professionals to consider and though Ifuily answer everyone's concerns. Clearly, the Retail Property Group have seriously considered the issues of commercial deliveries and trash pick -up. They have come up with logical solutions. The proposed elevations of the buildings are not offensive, nor do they detract fro m neigh boring properties. The RetaiI Property Group is a "hands on" group of professionals. Their proposed shopping center will be the catalyst for a vibrant revitalization of South Federal Highway. PLEASE VOTE TO APPROVE THE DELRAY PLACE SHOPPING CENTER! Sincerely, Bob Wiebelt Tropic Isles Resident Owner of the Delray Plaza Truxell, Rebecca From: Nancy Diehards <ndrich @bellsouth. net? Sent: Monday, October 15, 2012 11:13 AM To: PZmail@MyDelray6each.com Subject: Delray Place re- zoning I am writing to voice my support for the re- Zoning of the SE corner of Federal Hwy and Linton Blvd from General Office to SAD so that the Delray Place project can move forward. The city of Delray Beach needs quality re- development on this lot, and I believe RPG's plans will give the city just this. They have a good reputation, from what I've gathered, and will be managing the development themselves. That self - management tells me that they want to keep their good name clean, and keep the quality high. Also, there is a small group of Tropic Isle residents who are very vocal in their opposition to this plan. If you talk to them, they are opposed to anything and everything that has been proposed. They do not want retail, as you are certainly aware. They do not want the complex razed and developed into Class A office space, since taller and bigger buildings would be called for. They do not want State government offices and telemarketers to move into the current office complex. In my opinion, they like a run -down, nearly empty, quiet, office building and pretend that it does not attract the homeless element during the night. I want to stress that -these people in opposition, from discussions I've had with neighbors, are a very small minority of Tropic Isle residents. The rest of the people I speak with want quality development on the corner that complements our neighborhood and enhances our quality of life. To sum., please do not be swayed by the vocal minority. Best regards, Nancy Richards 934 Cypress Drive .Delray Beach, FL 33483 (561) 702 -0550 Truxell, Rebecca From: Jelly Cammisa <Jilly @premierestateproperties.com> Sent: Monday, October 15, 2012 3:29 PM To: PZmail @MyDelrayBeach.com; MCDUfe, Woodie; Carney, Tom Subject: For Delray Place Dear Commissioners, I'm writing to give my support for the Delray Place proposed plans on the SE Corner of Linton Blvd. As a residential Estate Agent, who lives and works in Tropic Isle, I believe this is a sound project for our neighborhood. i like the architectural plans, I like the fact they aim to appeal to high end retail companies and would be very happy to see Trader foes as one of their Tenants. This would be the best market place for all of us. I'm also encouraging a high end personal training gym to choose this location for their premises as I believe it will be an asset for everyone living on the Island side and for residents south of Atlantic Avenue. We have been waiting for a high end Mall -- remember in Tropic Isle, Boca Raton promised us another "Mizner" where the now failed Theatre is. Given the surge of rental developments in the area, traffic is definitely on the increase. As long as we can get sufficient off road parking, I believe the location is perfect far Retail space. On the other hand, the "shed" development of the Ralph Buick property is of great concern and I will oppose plans for that. I'm sorry I'm not able to attend this evening's meeting. Yours sincerely, Jilly cammisa Estate Agent 561.665.8181 Direct 561.278.8188 Office 561.271.7010 Mobile 561.278.7188 Facsimile nren licrest ate nrnrserties.com :i11y�q)Urcmiciesta[eproperlits eom 900 East Atlantic Avenue, boutique 4, Delray Tieach, Florida 33483 Presenting Properties L:xclusiVely to Excess Of One Million Dollars Not ice of Can fidentiality. This o-mail communication and the anaamcnt(s) hereto, if any, arc intended solely For the information end use of the addressees) ident ificd ahnyc am[ may mnlnin 1rn9mmation which is kgal ly privileged From di sclosms andlnr otherwise cnnRdmtiAI rf a recipient of rhis a -mail mmrnnnicallmn is nnc an addressee (or an authorized mpresentodve of an add rassea), such recipient is herehy advised that any review, d isrbaurc, reproductian� re�trrrsntissimn or other disserninatiun or use oi't his e-mail ou mmunicalimn fur any in rormat inn ommlained hcrcinJ is strictly prohihired ]f you are not an aJdl raze and lt"c i"mcd this e-rnaiI cnmmtt nira Finn rn ermr, plcasc advise tltc sender either by reply o-mail cn by klephone 81561. 394.77411, im medi welt' dalete this a m A I communication from any compulcr and destroy all physical cvpics of same. "thank ivu. 1Y.d,f,0 00 7- HEIDI H. UURAN NIEMI, P.A. ESQUIRE 7631 Nei 6" AV F. BOCA RATON FL 33487 PHONE 551- 994 -C-280, VAX 561- 994 -0,270 Date: October 15, 2012 To: Kelli A. Freeman, President 1730 S. Federal Highway, Unit 145 Delray Beach, FL 33483 Ronald Hoggard Planning and Zoning Department City Hall 100 NW 1St Avenue Delray Beach, FL 33444 Re: Proposed Rezoning for Delray Place initiated by the property owner Dear Ms. Freeman and Mr. Hoggard, Please be advised that I have bccn asked to represent Stroms, LLC in certain legal matters. Stroms, LLC recently purchased a property located at 1801 Spanish Trail, Delray Beach, FL 33483 on June 20, 2012. The owners were out of the country at that time and arrived here at this home on September 28, 2012. Upon moving in, it was brought to their attention by neighbors about the proposed rezoning For Delray Place initiated by the property owner- Stroms, LLC strongly opposes this rezoning, as this action would cause unpleasant noise, dust, trash, and traffic and the unsightly presence of large work vehicles. This greatly diminishes the value of their property and interferes with their quiet enjoyment and use of the property. Please feel free to contact me with any questions and concerns and let me know of any new developments. V W�qmG eo o r r EL -� w -:n i,J -'- •l - .mod -• -,i _ - �•L.�L�.�'f t... - �i -- ._ .`.�,.... _• -_ - _ � '� .., .. ... PETITION`` TO THE CITY OF_ DELIvAY BEACH =i s'� ��,•, � 'rG�r y'u c �= Tv: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd,, from Planned Office Center (PQC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it Would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, trucks loadin and unloadinal, smelly (aarbaae dumasters), disturbina. hectic. [traffic] and intrudina commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. Sign name here 101r�j� Date I Address Property identification number PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dcrling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Corrimissicn against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage dumgsters), disturbing, hectic. (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. Sign name here Date Address � 2 _24s 4(� 28 . -b l . -(x) 0 --01 ztD Property identification number TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Darden; Derline Pierre- Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic; Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the reeiuest f ®r rezonireq of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal highway and Linton Blvd., From Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically chancle the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a nois trucks loaning and unloading),_ smelly (garbage dumpsters), disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our duality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action . is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood, Sign name mere Address Date / 14 3 /f 6 acrd 10 0,0 Cris r Property identification number PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt, Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast comer of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: 1, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, trucks loading and unloading), smell arba a dum stern disturbin hectic traffic and intrudin commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the rnarketvaIue of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. Sig 4nae her e Address Date / ,'� k3 �-L 9E- 01 ooc) e) ��6 Property Identification number PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre- Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: 1, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I -rind that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, trucks loadincl and unloading), smell y (garbacie dum stern disturbing, hectic traffic and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our cluallity of life and will reduce the market value of our pro perties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. Sign na here { f Date r cyI - IAA 3 /-000 -0 70 Address Property identification number I »11111150 .1l TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy,_ (trucks loading and unloading), smelly [aarbacle dumpstersl, disturbing, hectic, trafficl and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. G Sian name he Address ' Date I ��, 3 adf�a� 600 % X 30 Property identification number 73d III iCi129 1 TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre- Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, trucks loading and unloading], smelly(garbaae dumpsters], disturbing, hectic traffic and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our p rope rties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. Sign name here Date 3i � p*tvccev 7� Address Property identification number PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: 1, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage dum asters), disturbing, hectic�Atraffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our guallity of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. n name here Date Address /�- �-3 � 6 .' P-o- J-. 0 o 0 /3 e) Property identification number TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (PCC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. i find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it world dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloadin smelly Warbaae dum stern disturbing, hectic traffic and intrudincl commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. Sign nam ere Address 16 -13 -r Z__ Date %-- 1�3 �_�'7'"96. ,'� 4i0 C3 ( 3;2 0 Property identification number 7:111d111Ce721 TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre- Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage dumpsters), disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. I 14 Sign name here Date - -2E V-1 i6h Address Property identification number PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: i, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd_, from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD), as requested by the applicant Delray Place, through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloadingil, smelly Warbase dum ters ), disturbin hectic traffic and intrudinci commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. -this would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. C.,4 13- 201 Sign nam re Date _� rv�r Address 15 Property identification number PETITION TQ THE CITY. OF, DELRAY -BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of l the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louts; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Tonic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: 1, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to r000mmend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (PDC) to Special Activities District (SAD), as requested by the applicant Delray Place, through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn_ it is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change_ l find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unioadin smell arbane durn tern disturbin hectic traffic and intrudin commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of M and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. ;rte. 4 � o /(-� / 2ci-z' -.- Signname e e Date , I "--y it 6'�' rep i nroo d 7-�d Address Property identificabon numt er PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (ROC) to Special Activities District (SAD), as requested by the applicant Delray Place, through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage dumpsters), disturbing hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our qualitV of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of comp tib ity with therrounding single family residential neighborhood. Sign n e here Date 2� 1 -re- n L Address 1'9L q 3 '�4G ?- 9 d r 0 00 00 - �0 Property identification number PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., From Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD), as requested by the applicant Delray Place, through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage dumpssters), disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties'. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of comp 'bility with -the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. Sign name here Date Addres i. / �Lr3/- a.2-k6, / "0 U OY-Y� Property identification number MIN 1f1r0Cs1.11 T4 THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; -rhuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: 1, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (PQC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change, I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloading), smell (garbage dum sters disturbing, hectic traffic and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood, Sign name here 1// '�_ ell� �- Address Date /9�Jf3�46 aFC// 01�'e c'BYO Property identification number PFTITI[7N TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodalc; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloadin smell arba a dum sters disturbin hectic traffic and intruding- commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use_ This would be detrimental to our guality of life and will reduce the Market value of our woperties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. Sign me her Address Date ~ - Property identification number P :TITIMI TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Darden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway, Petition: 1, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, trucks loading and unloading), smell (garbage durri stern disturbing, hectic traffic and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quallitV of life and will reduce the market value of our pro De rnes. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. Sign Arne here Date � Address Property identification number PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Darling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically hange the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, [trucks loading and unloading], smell {garbage dumpsterS ), disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. Sign name here Date Address 3 �L-6 ')_ o 1000 e� i& e Property identification number PFTII'lr]hl TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd, and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy: (trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage dumpsters), disturbing, hectic, traffic and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. Sign name here Date Add ress V 1 I C-�-V-:�7L-,>, E- 0IOQC3 0 /too Property identification number PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: i, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., 'from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD), as requested by the applicant Delray Place, through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garba a dumpsters), disturbing, hectic 4traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our cluality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. nam a e�pt Address Property identification number PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of -the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre- Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board, Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place; located at -the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD), as requested by the applicant Delray Place, through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change, i find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, trucks loading and unloadin ), smell [garbage dumusters ), disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties'. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility,withlhe surrounding single family residential neighborhood. Sign nam ! �LZ, Address I ;/� 10 /,z Dat Property identification number 173dh0rolZI TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Defray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: 1, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the recut for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., 'From Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD), as requested by the applicant Delray Place, through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, trucks loading and unloading), smell arba a dum stern disturbing, hectic traffic and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties'. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. ID Sign nam ere Date 3 ! Ifa �0 000 Address Property identification number PFTITICSN TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoninq of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at -the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD), as requested by the applicant Delray Place, through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage dumpsters ), disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our guuality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. Sign name mere Date Address I��� VL -0r ee0C) _Q Z7 & Property identification number »i_111111kd15674, 1 TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre- Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Darling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: i, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD), as requested by the applicant Delray Place, through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, trucks loading and unloading], smelly (garbage dumesters ), disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is y this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with tjl _e, rq n ing single family residential neighborhood. Sign name here - Date FT o il� Address Property identification number PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; 1"huy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD), as requested by the applicant Delray Place, through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I 'find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, Itrucks, loading and unloading), smell arba a dum stern disturbin hectic traffic and intrudincl commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our qU2111y of life and will reduce the market value of our properties'. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. Sign name here Date Ck I rav d)jj Address Property identification number 3,-N63 PETI'T'ION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: f, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the re guest for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD), as requested by the applicant Delray Place, through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn_ It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a nois trucks loading and unloading), smell (garbs a dum sters ), disturbing, hectic (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. -Fhis would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. Sign name here ! ?' '9'�/ Address Date 1 - Y_ 3�6aI0 r 0V 00 -12 Q-0 Property identification number »i`�rel;!I TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franclosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoninq of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD), as requested by the applicant Delray Place, through their attomey, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically chap a the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, itrucks loading and unloadin ' }, smelly (garbage dumpsters) disturbing, hectic, (traffic and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our qualitV of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. NF Sign name here .. q Lr_'3� Address Date e" 1 11 Ci�H r Property identification number :111111-11WOMT TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre- Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD), as requested by the applicant Delray Place, through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically thane the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, trucks loading and unloading], smelly, [garbage dumpsters , disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life_ and will re u e the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. Sign name here Address /4�) - 9 - / Date / _,�- �- -3 V--6 A -$.'o I o c�, o & 3 °>i)' Property identification number PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; 'rhuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast comer of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoninc of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD), as requested by the applicant Delray Place, through their attomey, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, trucks loading and unloadin smell (garbage durn stern disturbing, hectic traffic and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. sign name he Date - Address Property identification number PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD), as requested by the applicant Delray Place, through their attomey, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically chap a the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, trucks loadin and unloadinal, smelly fgarbaue dumpsters , disturbinq, hectic (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. Sign name here Date q V� s� t)_z �V' Add ress Property identification number »11Il11 ri7'kil TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre- Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD), as requested by the applicant Delray Place, through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage dumpsters), disturbing hectic, (traffic) and intr�q commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our clualli of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. Sign name here Date Address I�_1-3 I- �a r o0 do ';*1-0 Property identification nurnber rr�ii[r■MT,, TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: 1, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD), as requested by the applicant Delray Place, through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, trucks loading and unloading), smelly )garbage dumpsters) disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. I wig n name here Address Date Pr �jd tifi �atian number '�_ �-'3 00 3sz') PFTI'I 'If7N TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage d_umpsters), _disturbing, hectic,. (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood, �.1 V' . Sign name here Date Address Property identification number PFTITInN TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre- Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD), as requested by the applicant Delray Place, through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a nois trucks loadlina and unloading), smelly _(garbage dumpsters), disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. + lam'{`+ ❑ � � � �l �i �j Sign name here %� 0 �' Address Date ' a V-3 /0000 f --- 3 S_ Property identification number PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast comer of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD), as requested by the applicant Delray Place, through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change_ I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, trucks loading and unloading), smelly {garba_ ec a dumisters], disturbing, hectic, traffic and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties'. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. 7 Sign name here rte° — yo Address S7 Date Property identification number PETITION TO 'rHE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the reci uest for rezonin q of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, [trucks loadiiaq and unloading), smelly (garbage dumpsters ), disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our duality of life and will reduce tha market value of our propertias. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood, At Sign name here Date Address 4� Property identification number PFTITInN TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; -rhuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of f=ederal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (PCC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change, I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloading), smelly_ (garbage durnpsters), disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properdes. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of auction is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single fancily residential neighborhood. Sign ame ' Date '701 MI J�ELA G Address T-3 q- �3 / ' 1v3 11-6 '9-s _? e e�C7 oe'-'67 '-�_ d Property identification number PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoninc of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (PCC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find 'that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage dum stern ), disturbing, hectic traffic and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our uality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. Sign name here Address 7 Date 13 Property identification number 3M11-11 i iTOTY TO THE CITY OF CELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Darden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodalt; 'fhuy Shutt; ,Ian Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: i, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatis charge the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy,_ (trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage dumosters). disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our duality of life and will reduce the market value of ourjprolperties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. Sign name he A Tess � Date f �f 3 r C e7eeC'o /20 TM') c W L13 Property identification number PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH Tie: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: i, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., -from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, trucks_ loading and unloading), smelly (garbage du_mpsters), disturbing, hectic, {trafagl and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our guality of life and will reduce the market value of our proDertles. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to dewy this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. 214i�. Sign name here Address 1 1 3 Date Property identification number -U *twel-Lv TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Darden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the re -quest for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloadinal, smelly arbage durnpsters disturbing, hectic traffic and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our_qualily of life and will reduce tho market value of ouperties. In order to protect the integrity of our single gamily neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood, 5i n name here Date 0000 p 3 Address / T Property identification number W/11�/ TO 'rHE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa, Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Doling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board_ Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast comer of Linton Blvd_ and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast comer of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd_, from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. +t is requested that the Pla ^ring and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the I - in_,A +k� the change IS i� a nroposa h o ?off Y i v;,Ith the surrounding single family ccmmunity since it xcu`d drarnatirally "-n7-.= try ref our Pr.�!'*Jul r[ae�i'�o fia? nP1:^rt f?rhretr� i �j 9j !31'S' -n►s a * ° °- °- .wc�-- {� i1Sx'd rrw p-- - ui-i �5adzng), smelts (giarbage durnpetersh disturbing, hecticAtraffic) and intruding °.R_'°'°- i H �- snl^ amti msi �iiuiiai iiui?'I_ti- -- r_.a -G rr.sil s�e'f with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and wail In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only Fiourse of aC&ion is iu- derwy 11his rez&oYivvg application based upon its Is'ck— of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood_ Sign name here _ Date 1h 9, Acatcoq Address /'� -V 3 1/-' - � awl Property identification number PIFTITI ®IV TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Deriine Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Derling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., From Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically _chanclethe character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloading), smelly arba a dum stern disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our cluality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. V Sign name here e_�3 f a, �-nav Address 1_ Date . FL I �_3 ca?3s O0066ar Property identification number NZINA III dFe7'ki1 TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franbosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attomey, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change -the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloadin smell (garbage dum stern disturbing, hectic traffic and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties'. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. Sign name here Address Date Property identification number PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: "fhe following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Doriing, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the re guest for rezonin_q of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, trucks loading and unloadin ), smelly [garbage dumpsters , disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intrudin commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application teased upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. LAI, il� &6-n rya e here � I Address i L Date 0/ 0600 /X0 Property n number [A 3-0-t TTT TO TIME CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and f=ederal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the rogues t for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District [SAD] as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. i find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically chance the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage durn tersl, disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. Sigrf name here Date T Address C l�- �L3 610000fI49 Property identification number PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRA'Y BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Darden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board, Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the re guest for rezopino of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would drarnaticaliy_cFsan-Cle the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, trucks loading and unloading1h_srnell y (clajrtaacie duns stern dlsturbirrg,_hectic, _(traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quali of-life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. f 17ft Sign name he Date Ad d ress �G vLe C P 0400 /1,9 Property identification number PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: 1, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically Change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a ngLAy,__ftrucke loading and unloading), smell (garbage dum stem disturbin hectic (traffic)_ and intruding- commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our guiality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. Y F t Sign name here k Address C4T .�- Date Property identification number PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre- Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial _of_ the _reguest for rezonin�t of such property referred to corr�monly as Delray Place located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single fancily community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbap_e dumpstars ), disturbipl- hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail chapping center use. This would be detrimental to oar duality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties'. �. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. Sign name here _. Address ^ Date Property identification number PETITION TO 'SHE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloading), smellV (garbage dumpsters), disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. sio name here Address }ice 'r4_7 rFl7. Date Property identification number i!]:�idk- draWl1 TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (PQC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. i find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically chance the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage dumosters), disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our prot3erties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. Sign name here lie dkal r� Address Date 1 _ ?S— 00 0�d 0 Property identification number PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELIAY BEACH To. The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; ,tan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above nosed authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically chanrae the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy.- trucks loadin and unloading), smelly (garbage du ers), disturbing, hectic traflec and intrudin commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our guality of life and will reduce the market value of our ro erties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. x (o S n name here Date Address I Property identification number PFTITl0N TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre- Louis, Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: i, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning. of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center SPCC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray "ace ts`liuiil fi t�'�Er ?{ter " ^::y;, ti�iii jl Lysvrl. It iis� requested �y that the Planning and � Zoning Board and City S}�tafpf er�+ecop�mmennd tonthe City Co! fission agai 3c i al Ll Li 1 Ll3[i! fi��. f FIF 1� thatt the proposed change is not deoe53p'nOlt`s with the SUrror�u.'nding�y�sn -Fgle family community since it into dramatically c�.ans� i,& dl�a c9iaFac e L-f our i)eaceful r��:! UL•E' #:SCSI 1 SirF�l3611%l1 fVViE }I1Li1 a ��olsS j jLrZ.Elal:ls unloading). sma!! a�g�e dlumnstersll. disturbing. hectic:_ (traffic! and W -rudin 3 i !."- Ad f F dl ilE '•E ir7if..13�kY =��i ;.��t 3 ti- �sesiiri iii iii i T sui i Y ➢ Fu1 CiI iu.:i Clf _,Y ilCi i FCie.��i of ps �. with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our guality. ►_+mil of life and l rvuuuy the mafrkeit vaiue of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only ii: a L:i9 gi !;3 L!4'n�M Eif ' °.. e:`iy `°}5 j9'.e fi9i}11 Va sed Upon ka lack of a -L -�• �� the ! Pith re ■ comipa bI ity with -tae sa�ci"eae�rrii�ing single family resideruua ll iieigaaaa�rrnaoa. /40— L ICJ Sign n me here Date ? 4- Address Property identification number PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach, Mayor, Nelson S. McDuffie; Vice -Mayor Thomas Carney; Deputy Vice- Mayor, Adam Frankel; Commissioner, Angeleta Grey; and Commissioner, Al Jacquet. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to deny the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., From Planned Office Center (PO C) to Special Activities District (SAD), as requested by the applicant Delray Place, through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, ltrucks loading and unloading), smelly (garbage durripsters), disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to dgny this rezcgDjpg application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. Sign name here Date Address , Property identification number PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; "rhuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loadincland unloading), smelly (garbage dumpsters), disturbing, hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our wone rties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. l� y ' d` —1d '-4f " Sig ame here -- Date f{ Address Property identification number 00000V A »iiifr7lkq TO 'rHE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD) as requested by the applicant, Delray Place through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Co,mmissknn against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would drarr�aticall�T - = eR: r Ui character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into noisy=_ atrucki 'q:m ; =,. ' .._._..ad rs,4_ disturtin hectic �ali��+ataiii rir1� .._L `� -`�-- - saa�;p� e. -- — w r^ d :e°Z 'l!�' �P; FiYil➢Y ¢ i:ia° r�F sn `yi!`i d[1:: � �1{ iS� �, it 'Ct : vs3:iiiLV iifGl1 L� Ls .`i i v�1i t 7 , with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will in order pp to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only u ��4 �y Yuri Ail SfIS NYC. sL� -�••i. A •••Y " iof �AAis �-F _'iiltfY i%'- 6A i1 0.fiF a S LaT.�J ••.�i -a 221 i'h ii�a��3.Ei iii id4�v r9.i 6I.i V'1! 1��7 SCeLCi �.id co-mpa' biliity --Wi- th the surrounding single family residential rieigifiborhood. Sign na a here 1,71-1 Address Cate � I-� y--3 Z1-6 �-k 0 I-� 6 00 a Y-D Property Identification number PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Deriine Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd, and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Btvd., from Planned Office Center (PCC) to Special Activities District (SAD), as requested by the applicant Delray Place, through their attomey, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not com❑atibig with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loadinc and unloading), smelly (garbage dunipsters), diisturbina, hectic, ftraffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our nuality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. Sign name here Bate Address Property identification number 0 61 PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Deriine Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak,- Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition- (, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the reQuestfor rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd„ from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD), as requested by the applicant Delray Place, through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloading), smelly [aarbage dumpsters), disturbing,_ hectic, (traffic) and intruding commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use- This would be detrimental to our Qualft of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. Sign name h Date J f d L!i' Gw' �J C/" I I L'� iU Li j ca Address - Property identification number PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: The following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch; Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre- Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway. Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD), as requested by the applicant Delray Place, through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloadin smell arba a dum stern disturbing, hectic traffic and intrudin commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties'. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. Sign name here Date Address If Property identification number PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH To: "fhe following petition is directed to the members of the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Chairperson, Connor Lynch, Clifford Durden; Derline Pierre - Louis; Gerald Franciosa; Craig Spodak; Thuy Shutt; Jan Hansen; and to Paul Dorling, Director of the Planning and Zoning Board. Topic: Request by Delray Place for rezoning of property located at the Southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and Federal Highway, Petition: I, the undersigned, herewith petition the above noted authorities to recommend denial of the request for rezoning of such property referred to commonly as Delray Place, located at the southeast corner of Federal Highway and Linton Blvd., from Planned Office Center (POC) to Special Activities District (SAD), as requested by the applicant Delray Place, through their attorney, Jeffrey Lynn. It is requested that the Planning and Zoning Board and City Staff recommend to the City Commission against such change. I find that the proposed change is not compatible with the surrounding single family community since it would dramatically change the character of our peaceful residential neighborhood into a noisy, (trucks loading and unloading), smell y (clarbacle dum stern disturbing, hectic traffic and intrudinci commercial area which would subject residents to many nuisances and disturbances related with a retail shopping center use. This would be detrimental to our quality of life and will reduce the market value of our properties. In order to protect the integrity of our single family neighborhood the only course of action is to deny this rezoning application based upon its lack of compatibility with the surrounding single family residential neighborhood. 2 , U; I6--r -1� Sign name here _ Date Address Property identification number From: Jeffrey Lynne fmailto:iiynne@zonelaw.coml Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2012 11:30 AM To: nd rich abellsouth.net; kellifreeman @beilsouth.net; hanuschakm@aol.com; balbert315@yahoo.com: bddegner @yahoo.comet; grandpabobbylewCaaol.com; scuba regsilvia(aatt.net; tarheei bill @bellsouth.net Cc: seasidebldrs(&beilsouth. net; sur)erone(&ix.netcom.com; Hoggard, Ron; Ashlee Coosaia; Joe Carosella; Louis Carosella; MsaltzCcbsaltzmichelson.com Subject: Delray Place - Tropic Isle Input Dear Board of the Tropic Isle Civic Association, Mr. Schnabel, and Mr. Van Gemert: Our clients continue to desire to find a solution that works for you. When we met with you last week, we listened to what you wanted and heard that you would be satisfied if our clients incorporated your desired redesign of the buildings along Linton Blvd. as requested, to eliminate the perpendicular pathways and move the potential outdoor dining closer to Linton. RPG then paid their architects to start drawing those redesigned buildings at their expense. But then, at the P &2 meeting, you all came out unequivocally opposed to the project. So now, we are confused. If you could provide some clear direction as to reasonable requests, we will be more than happy to consider them. Thanking you in advance for your time, JEFFREY C. LYNNE, ESQ., LEED AP WEINER, LYNNE ft THOMPSON, P.A. 10 SE 1 st Avenue, Suite C I Delray Beach, Florida 33444 Direct (561) 900.0725 I Cell (561) 239.0839 Main (561) 265 -2666 1 Fax (561) 272.6831 National (877) 901 -2666 REAL ESTATE I ZONING I GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS I LITIGATION iLynne @zoneLaw.com I www.zonelaw.com APlease consider the environment before printingthis email. Haggard, Ron From: Bill Schnabel <tarheel_bill@bellsouth.net> Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2012 7:03 PM To: 'Jeffrey Lynne'; ndrich @bellsouth.net; kellifreeman @bellsouth.net; hanuschakm@aol.com; balbert315 @yahoo.com; bddegner @yahoo.comet; grand pabobbylew @aol.com; scubarepsilvia@att.net Cc: seasidebldrs @belIsouth.net; superone @ix.netcom.com; Haggard, Ron; 'Ashlee Coosaia'; 'Joe Carosella';'Louis Carosella; Msaltz @saltzmichelson.com Subject: RE: Delray Place - Tropic Isle Input Attachments: Kohl's Sheridan St..jpg Yes, we have had several meetings but we don't see any evidence that you have taken our concerns seriously. Our discussions with Joe and Louis were met with "can`t be done," "won't work" and "not economically feasible." We never agreed that eliminating the perpendicular pathways and moving the outside dining closer to Linton was our only concern. The 22' height of the buildings along Linton Blvd. that would create a concrete monolith just 15 feet from our property line is unacceptable. The height of these buildings is almost 4 times as high as the existing 6' wall and would tower over our property eliminating all view of the sky to the north for the eight homes on the north side of McCleary 5t. and it would be visible to the homes on the south side of McCleary St. over the tops of the north -side homes. You listened to us but I don`t think you heard us. At the P &Z meeting, staff enlightened the group that you would need at least seven variances to build this project according to the site plan submitted to P &Z. I don`t think that the City of Delray Beach has any obligation to change zoning regulations and negatively impact existing residential properties just to make your project economically feasible. Here are some other concerns: ■ Restaurants and a day -care center should not be located behind the houses on the north side of McCleary St. These are not compatible with the surrounding residential property. ■ Your suggested traffic pattern, which now includes a u -turn on Federal Hwy instead of Linton Blvd, for trucks poses a danger for the 25,000 cars you claim go past your site each day. Southbound 18- wheelers making a U- turn on Federal Highway at Tropic Blvd. will create a traffic hazard to all vehicles traveling north and south on Federal Hwy in that area and make it even more difficult to exit Tropic Isle at the traffic signal. ■ Landscape buffers are not adequate on two sides of the project. How can you plant mature 25' canopy trees in a 10' wide planting area on the Linton Blvd. side of the project? ■ 1 have personally visited the Kohl's store on Sheridan St. in Hollywood that you stated used the same sound muffling wall materials that you are proposing for the loading docks in Delray Place. I did not see that any extra sound proofing was installed in these walls and, as you can see in the attached photo, the trailers are higher than the existing wall. Is this what you are planning for Delray Place? = The other project that you showed with a Michael's store should not be compared with Delray Place because that center is completely surrounded by streets with no part of the property directly abutting residential property. We are not against re- developing this site — but it needs to be done with less impact on the surrounding residential properties. Please show us how you have taken our concerns seriously and made changes that will minimize the impact on McCleary St., Eve St. and Tropic Blvd. The residents of McCleary 5t., Eve 5t. and Tropic Blvd. are always available to meet to discuss these issue again. Bill and Nancy 5chnabel �I�r October 22, 2012 LISA MALLOY JOHN MALLOY 925 McCleary Street Delray Beach, FL 33483 (561) 573 -5596 Paul Dorling, Director City of Delray Beach Planning & zoning Dept. Site Plan Review and Appearance Board RE: Proposed Delray Place shopping center SAD Land Use submittal Dear Mr. Darling and /or To Whom It May Concern: Tropic Isle residents were initially receptive to the 8113/12 SAD Land Use presentation provided by Jae Caroseila, President of Retail Property Group and his staff. The following is a comparison of promises made (versus) actual 917/12 site plan submittal reflecting a classic Bait and Switch approach in dealing with adjacent Tropic Isle Association, representing hundreds of affected adjacent residents. All of the below misrepresentations reflects developer /RPG's credibility which, if approved as submitted would rob every Tropic Isle resident the quiet, peaceful enjoyment of their waterfront home, and negatively impact home values. Tropic Isle residents do not approve of the 9/7/12 SAD Land Use site plan. Mr. CaroselIa on 8130/12 arrogantly advised everyone that the Delray Beach Mayor and City Commissioners loves us, and will give us anything we want ? ?? He further stated Tropic Isle approved his site plan at the 8/13/12 HOA meeting. Unfortunately most of RPG`s promises have been withdrawn, and many other unacceptable demands made. 1. Promise — totally enclosed loading docks for _500 building roof vented for diesel fumes and noise. Site Alan — withdraws enclosed loading dock in favor of less expensive open docks, 30 feet from Tropic Isles homes. 2. Promise —front only eliveries — 600 through 1,000 building on Linton. Site plan — withdraws front door only deliveries, in favor adding rear building deliveries 15 feet from Tropic Isle homes. 3. Promise — limited rear door use on 500 through 1,000 building fire exit only. Site plan — withdraws limited fire door only use, in favor of general use 15 feet Tropic Isle homes. 4. Promise — follow all building and zoning codes, minimizes noise and security issues for adjacent Tropic Isle residents. Site plan — withdraws quiet use of directly adjacent Tropic Isles homes by eliminating 17 needed parking spaces in favor of 6,000 sq. ft. outdoor school playground for 1,000 building nursery school directly adjacent Tropic Isle homes. 5_ Promise —follow all building and zoning codes, minimizes noise and security issues, for adjacent Tropic Isle residents. Site plan — withdraws quiet use of adjacent Tropic Isles homes by eliminating required 9% open area, and 109 parking spaces in favor of four large restaurants along Linton Blvd. containing an additional 2,700 sq. ft. outdoor dining entertainment area, 15 feet from Tropic Isle homes. F. Promise — height reduction of the 3 story (BOA) office building being replaced with one story retail providing much lower profile. Site Plan — no reduction, hotly 500 building and Bank of America buildings are same height, only reduce number of stories. Tropic Isle wants to be a good neighbor, support an acceptable Bank of America property redevelopment. In return we do not wish our peaceful enjoyment of our home taken away, so developer increase profit as a result of Tropic Isle loss. Sincerely, 4'1�,Ifull. Lisa Malloy cc: Hand Delivered a Ron Haggard, AICP Principal Planner Planning & Zoning Dept. ■ Mayor Nelson "Woodie" McDufFie ■ Vice -Mayor Thomas Carney • Deputy Vice -Mayor Adam Frankel s Commissioner Angeleta Gray s Commissioner Al Jacyuet • City Manager David Harden * Tropic Isles HOA ■ President, Retail Property Group, Joe Carosella 9 Fred Fetzer, "Tropic Isles resident/Retired Delray Beach City Commissioner + Tropic Bay HOA Tropic Harbor HOA cc: E -mail Delivery Truxell, Rebecca From: Kelli Freeman < kellifree man@bellsouth. net> Sent: Monday, October 22, 2412 4:25 PM To: PZmail@MyDelrayBeach.com S u bject: Attention Paul Dorling Hi Paul I would like your professional opinion on the Delray Place issue as it relates to the current zoning request and possible outcome if NOT approved. If the Delray Place request for SAD zoning does not pass the Commission, what then happens to that property? Would it automatically revert to PC zoning based on the new S. Federal Highway Redevelopment plan (SFHRP) that has been adopted? And, if it does revert to PC would the property have to follow all of the setback/buffers within the SFHRP? I'm trying to determine if our residents could be more negatively impacted if the SAD is not approved_ Please feel free to email me or call me with your thoughts. Thanks so much, Kelli Kell! Freeman (561) 705 -8766 Cell Tropic Isle Civic Association "Caring For Our Community" Please "like" Tropic Isle Civic Association on Facebook for updates! Truxell, Rebecca From: Hoggard, Ron Sent: Friday, October 26, 2012 11:25 AM To: Truxell, Rebecca Subject: FK Proposed Tropic Square Cross Access with adjacent North planned Delray Place Ronald Hoggard, Jr., AICP Principal Planner Planning & Zoning Department 100 N.W. 1st Avenue Delray Beach, FL 33444 Phone: 561 - 243 -7325 Fax: 561 - 243 -7221 From: Joe Carosella [mailto:JCarosellaarpg123.corn] Sent; Wednesday, September 12, 2012 5:20 PM To; Peggy Paterra Cc: Breto, Estelio; Haggard, Ron; Dorling, Paul; Alan Margolis; Louis Carosella; Kelli Freeman; Mark Saltz (Msaltz n&saltzmichelson.com); Joaquin Vargas (Loa uin a]traftech.biz); Dennis Shultz ( dshultzCoflynnengineering.corn); Alan Margolis (alanm(Neases.net); Lorraine; Michele Burns; Linda Lewis (Ilewis (pbsmith- knibbs.com); Andrea Knibbs (akn ibbs @smith- knlbbs.com) Subject: Proposed Tropic square Cross Access with adjacent North planned Delray Place We appreciate your below proposed email suggesting cross access between our planning delray place and the adjacent south tropic square and we will start to review same with all the parties involved We appreciate all our planning progress with the nearby tropic isle and tropic bay neighborhoods and the neighborhood support for same and look forward to providing this quality delray place project to the neighbors Best regards Joe Carosella President Retail Property Croup, Inc. Royal Palm Place 101 Plaza Real South Suite 200 Boca Raton, Florida 33437 Direct: 561- 961 -1732 Cell: 954- 647 -6790 Fax: 561 - 961 -1744 Emall: jcar-osella@rpQ123.com From: Peggy Paterra [mailto:ppaterra @ gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 2:22 PM To: Estelio Breto; Ron Hoggard; Paul Darling; Alan Margolis Cc: Joe Carosella; Kelli Freeman Subject: Proposed shopping center - Delray Place I recently attended a presentation proposing the construction of Delray Place by Retail Property Group, Inc. As a 12 -year resident of Tropic Isle, I personally welcome the proposed shopping center which will be an asset to the community in my opinion. After the meeting I spoke to both their lawyer and directly to Joe Carosella, the developer, regarding my concerns about traffic in the area. I made the suggestion that there should be an alternate entrance to the new shopping center that would accommodate both Tropic Isle and Tropic Bay communities (as well as the other residences in that neighborhood) by giving access to shopping without having to join the traff is on Federal Highway or Linton Blvd. This could be f rom either Tropic Blvd. or Spanish Trail and would accommodate 3 types of traffic - auto, bicycle and pedestrian - from this area. One excellent solution would be to utilize the existing entrance into Delray Square from Tropic Blvd. and create a pass - through road to Delray Place. I would think it would make access much more convenient and far safer f or our residents, as well as alleviating the traf f is load on the highways f or others coming to the new area merchants, making those highways safer as well. At the same time, there would be no trof fic increase to Tropic Isle streets since residents would have to go onto Tropic Blvd. anyway to get to Federal Highway. A Spanish Trail alternative would make for more congestion on that street - and I'm not sure of the status of the road with a gate that exists there now. I'm not sure of the numbers, but I believe there are 450 residences in Tropic Isle, and hundreds of condos in Tropic Bay and other communities in this section of town (East of Federal.) The proposed traffic pattern of having one entrance on Federal Hwy. and one exit on Linton Blvd. would be prone to excessive congestion at the peak times of day or season (think Christmas ?) 2 The volume of traffic at that busy intersection (Federal and Linton) varies from season to Season and from hour to hour, but with all the new development going on at that intersection - new stores coming in to all four corners, I've heard, it would seem to me that the traffic volume is going to increase substantially, including many tractor trailers which we rarely have now. The patterns of having traffic making u- turns on Federal Hwy. and 1 or Linton Blvd. are also a concern to me. We currently have some vehicles making u-turns at Tropic Blvd. and it becomes a problem when drivers don't always follow the rules of saf ety and courtesy (or the law!) So, please consider the above in planning for upgrading of this area. We have a lovely, quiet waterfront community in here and take great pride in our neighborhood. In order to make the proposed project a true enhancement to the community, I hope you will take a long hard look at what will make the project one which we can all be proud to support. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Peggy Paterra 915 Dogwood Drive Delray Beach, FL 33483 Cell Phone. 561- 702 -0428 3 Truxell, Rebecca From: Thuy Shutt <TShutta@pbcgov.org> Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2012 12:49 PM To: David Dipino Cc: Truxell, Rebecca Subject: RE: Delray Forum Staff Writer David DiPino with a quick question Importance: High Hi, David, It has been a long time and hope this finds you well. I have not had a chance to see my personal emails since this weekend and some may have been spammed out if they are not on my Frequent contact list. In addition, I understand that many of these residents are acting on emotions and may not have had the history of the downtown redevelopment or knowledge in the development review processes. With that in mind, I feel there is no need to legitimitize references to our integrity. As a board member, I need to weigh the code requirements, the testimonies given at the meeting, and the mitigation strategies /conditions that will be in place once the project has been through the development review processes. These are not taken lightly as we all are volunteers who are also stakeholders in the community. The hours I spend on reviewing these items and at the meeting are hours away from my family and that is priceless. I would be more than willing to speak to you on my decision but not during work hours. I would appreciate it if you contact me by phone in the future on these matters versus my work email. Thank you. Thuy ( "Twee ") T. Shutt, AIA, CRA Assistant Director Westgate /Belvedere Homes CRA 1280 N. Congress Avenue, Suite 215 West Palm Beach, FL 33409 (561 ) 640 -8181 (561) 640 -8180 fax www.westgatecra.org From: David Dipino [ddipino @gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2012 9:23 AM To: Thuy Shutt Subject: Delray Forum Staff Writer David DiPino with a quick question (.food Morning Mrs. Shutt. Delray Forum reporter David DiPino here... It's been awhile, how are you? T received a few emails after the last P &7, board meeting concerning Atlantic Plaza 11 changes in density and how it would affect Tropic Isles. Did you receive the ennails below? Does the P &Z dept, staff or the P &Z Board have a comment concerning the email below? Have any residents gone ahead and asked for resignations of any P &7 Board Members? Thanks for your time, David DiPino Delray Forum Staff Writer From: Judy Craig <iudyWiudycrai�.com> To: delrayneighbors < delrayneighbors @googlegroups.com> Sent: Tue, Oct 16, 2012 11 :15 am Subject: RE: P &Z Meeting last night: Atlantic Plaza II It appears two neighborhoods got thrown under the bus last night at the P & Z meeting. First was Tropic Isle. It was amazing to sit there & listen to why they need to destroy a large office building for which it is currently zoned, and sits some distance from the east property line, therefore not right up against residential backyards, and build more retail /restaurants & position them right up against residential properties. (We kept telling Walmart to go away until they finally did, we're not going to stop speaking out now.) There must be a dozen or more restaurants at Old Harbor Plaza & Delray Plaza combined, not to mention clothing, grocery, pharmacy, movies. One Tropic Isle resident in favor of the project got up & said he was excited to be able to rude his bike to shopping & restaurants, as if there were none available! He can't cross the intersection of Lintori/Federal ? ?? You think it's dangerous now? Wait till those tractor trailers start with the U -turns which they admitted they would need to do to get in & out! The second was Atlantic Plaza development, stunning is all I can say_ After just approving getting rid of the office building at Linton & Fed -- they determined we are desperate for more office space so we need to approve this developer's plan to build more office space! Do the board members all have a short term memory problem? Or dial they think the residents wouldn't notice that contradiction? Next, l fail to understand why raising the density from 34 to 51 per acre is not a huge "NO, not going to happen"! We have limits in place for a reason. I have not heard a good reason to throw them out the window. It seems all the developer condescended to do was lower the height slightly in a portion of the project, but spread the footprint to make up the difference, therefore taking away green space. When he started his presentation, the developer's representative stated they had added more green space. Apparently it's a wash — all smoke & mirrors. How this P & Z board can sit there & pat these guys on the back for throwing us a bone (but they took it back by slight of hand!) is beyond me. Donating a bus just doesn't cut it. Apparently they have been "gotten to ", I don't know what else to think. No mention at all was made of the "step backs" of the buildings that have been required by other projects, so the site line is more palatable. They apparently are unconcerned about the block of empty new buildings that sit in the 204 blk of NE 5th Ave, I imagine there is lots of "Class A" office space waiting there. Mizner (which is widely reported to be a failure) was brought up a number of times by the proponents. Two of the parking garages are entered from Federal Hwy, the other two from the rear service road, Mizner Blvd. Why is this parking garage not on Federal, in the first phase of this development? I still don't know where these occupants will park while phase 2 is being built — has anyone addressed that? Can we ask for some resignations? I don't know how that works, but it seems the current P & Z board are not upholding their fiduciary responsibility to the citizens of Delray Beach. We are who they are supposed to represent, not developers who appear in town with their vision for this town, which has no relation to ours. 1 have no problem with anyone making a profit, it's what everyone who works strives for. But do it with integrity. When the property was purchased, the owners were well aware of the zoning regulations. Live with it, or don't buy it, but don't misrepresent your intentions & then expect us to give you carte blanche to do whatever suits your purposes. Let's flood some email inboxes at city hall for starters_ Please feel free to share these thoughts with others who might want to be included. Judy Craig, (Palm Trail Neighborhood resident of 26 years) David DiPino Delray Forum. Staff Writer Sun- Sentinel.com Reporter Delray Beach Forum Food Critic Hometown Downtown Column Co- Writer ddinino iggniail.corn or dddipino@tribune.com 954 - 621 -5000 Under Florida law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by phone or in writing. Truxell, Rebecca From: Fred Fetzer <fbfetzer @bellsouth.net> Sent: Monday, October 29, 2012 9;52 AM To: PZmail @MyDelrayBeach.com; CityManager @MyDeirayBeach.com; Kelli Freeman: CityAttorney @MyDelrayBeach.com; wmduffie@mydeiraybeach.com; Carney, Tom; frankel @mydelayeach.com; Gray, Angeleta; jacquet @myelraybeach.com; Cary Fllopolus; mweiner@zonelaw.com Subject: Delray Place proposed SAD rezoning Attachments: wakeup.tropicisle.pdf Mr. Dorling: As a resident of Tropic Isle, I want to give you my concerns regarding the rezoning and proposed site plan for the Delray Place redevelopment project at the southeast corner of Linton Blvd. and South Federal Highway. I believe most Tropic Isle residents, including myself, are in favor of this property being redeveloped and feel this redevelopment will help revitalize the South Federal Highway corridor. However, I also believe that many Tropic Isle residents, including myself, have some major concerns with the proposed site plan as it is presently configured. Most Tropi Isle residents would welcome redevelopment of this property as long as this plan is respectful of the Tropic Isle homes which are very close to this proposed development. I understand your staff has documented numerous issues with the proposed site plan, as it is presently configured. I believe there are additional issues that need to be addressed before this site plan is approved. Please read the attached letter from a Tropic Isle resident whose home backs up to the proposed development. This letter reflects my concerns that the present site plan does not adequately buffer the the proposed development from the adjacent Tropic Isle homes. I am copying this letter regarding to the Mayor and City Commission in order to make them aware of the concerns of many Tropic Isle residents, since I understand this will be on the next City Commission agenda. I would appreciate any assistance that you and yon. staff can provide in this matter. Thanks, Fred Fetzer LISA MALLOY JOHN MALLOY 925 McCleary Street Delray Beach, FL 33483 (561) 573 -5596 October 22, 2012 Paul Dorling, Director City of Delray Beach Planning & Zoning Dept. Site Plan Review and Appearance Board RE: Proposed Delray Place shopping center SAD .Land Use.smbmittal Dear Mr. Dorling and /or To Whom It May Concern: Tropic Isle residents were initially receptive to the 8/13/12 SAD Land Use presentation provided by Joe Ca rose IIa, President of Retail Property Group and his staff. The following. J.5 a comparison of promises made (versus) actual 9/7/2 site plan submittal reflecting a classic Bait,�and Switch approach in dealing with. adjacent Tropic Isle Association, representing hundreds of affected adjacent residents. All of the below misrepresentations reflects developer/RPG's credibility which, if approved as submitted, would rob every Tropic Isle resident the quiet, peaceful enjoyment of their waterfront home, and negatively impact home values. Tropic Isle residents do not approve of the 9/7/12 SAD Land Use site plan. Mr. Caro selIa on. 8/30/12 arrogantly advised everyone that the Delray Beach M0yor and City Gonn.mission6rs loves us, and will give us anything we want ? ?? He further stated Tropic Isle approved his site plan at the 8/13/12 HOA meeting. Unfortunately most of RPG's promises have been withdrawn, and many other unacceptable demands made. 1. Promise — totally enclosed loading docks for 500 building roof vented for diesel fumes and noise, Site pian — withdraws enclosed loading dock in favor of less expensive open docks, 30 feet from Tropic Isles homes. 2. Promise — front only deliveries — 600 through 1,000 building on Linton. Site plan — withdraws front, door only -deliveries, in favor adding rear building deliveries 15 feet from Tropic Isle homes. 3. Promise — limited rear dear use on 600 through 1,000 building fire exit onl . Site plan = withdraws limited fire door onl use, in favor of general use 15 feet Tropic Isle homes. 4. Promise — follow all building and zoning codes, minimizes noise and security issues for adjacent. Tropic Isle residents. Site Rlan — withdraws quiet use of directly adjacent Tropic Isles homes by eliminating 17 needed parking spaces in favor of 6,000 A outdoor school p.,layground for 1,000 building nursery school directly adjacent Tropic Isle homes. 5. Promise — follow all building and zoning codes, minimizes noise and security issues, for adjacent Tropic Isle residents. Site plan — withdraws quiet use of adjacent Tropic Isles homes by eliminating required 9% open area, and 109 parking spaces in favor of four barge restauirants along Linton Blvd. containing an additional 2,700 sq. A. outdoor dining entertainment area, 15 feet from Tropic Isle homes. 6. Promise — height reduction of the 3 story (BOA) office building being replaced with one story retail providing much lower profile. Site plan — no reduction, both 5B0 building and Bank of America buildings are &Arne height, only reduce number of stories. Tropic Isle wants to be a good neighbor, support an acceptable Bank of America property redevelopment. In return we do not wish our peaceful en)oymek of our home taken ;aikay, so deye110 er:increase profit as a result ofTropic_lsle loss. Sincerely, isLJ aMallo Y LISA MALLOY JOHN MALLOY 925 McCleary Street Delray Beach, FL 33483 (561) 573 -5595 October 29, 2012 Delray Beach Site Plan Review and Appearance Board Jose Aguila Jason Bregman Alice Fi nst Rustem Kupi Scott Porten Mark Gregory James Knight RE: SAD Land Use Delray Place Dear Ladies and Gentlemen: r�l VL OCT 3 112 PLANNING ZONING �1 As long time residents of Tropic Isle we realize the Bank of America property is going to be revitalized. We just don't want our quiet, secure Tropic Isle lifestyle drastically altered so developers can make more money at Tropic Isle residents' expense. Please honestly ask yourselves if you would accept any of the following proposed, intense commercial land uses to take place in your families' backyard. If you answer no, then please do not force these objectionableJunwanted uses on us Tropic Isle residents. 1) Four additional lame Linton Blvd. restaurants with 3,000 so. ft. of additional outdoor seating/entertainment, with paying patrons, doing what paying patrons do, eat -drink -have a good time, loud competing conversations over each other on top of restaurant m -usic entertainment. All of the above is perfectly acceptable for downtown Atlantic Avenue or Boston On The Beach, but not comaatible 15 feet from Tropic Isle families. 2) 6,000 sg. ft. school playground full of exuberant children doing what children love to do, scream in their high pitched voices. Once again screaming is perfectible, acceptable in the middle of nowhere, but not coml3atible right next to Tropic Isle families trying to enjoy their quiet Tropic Isle homes. 3) Rear building deliveries, general access to anyone behind 600 feet of Linton Blvd. building, 10 feet from Tropic Isle families. • Employees /patrons ducking behind buildings for cigarette or loud cell phone conversations. * Potential homeless — transients hanging out. o Potential petty theft/hom e burglary staging area. This above use doesn't exist in current Linton Blvd. buildin s only in proposed RPG current Site Plan Land Use request. _Again we beg the City Commission to treat us like you would want your family treated, i.e. 1) cut back on so many Linton Blvd. restaurants, and eliminate all outdoor seating /entertainment; 2) keep people out from behind Linton Blvd. building, fire alarm doors use only, and deliver through front as promised; 3) Have outdoor playground moved somewhere allowing kids to make all the noise they want without driving neighbors crazy. Tropic Isle quiet, secure neighborhood has been here for over fifty_years; please do not sell us out so a commercial intense shopping center developer can make more money at Tropic Isle families' expense. Sincerely, Lisa Malloy cc: a Ron Hoggard, A1CP Principal Planner Planning & Zoning Dept. Paul Dorling, Director Planning & Zoning Dept. Site Plan Review and Acceptance Board • City Manager David Harden • Tropic Isles T40A • President, Retail Property Group, Joe Carosella r Fred Fetzer, Tropic Isle residentlRetired Delray Beach City Commissioner * Tropic Hay I TD A • Tropic Harbor ITQA Truxell, Rebecca From: Joe Smith <delrayjoe1999 a7gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2012 2:02 PM To: PZmail @MyDelrayBeach.com; CityManager @MyDelrayBeach.com; CityAttomey@MyDelrayBeach.com; wmduffie@mydelraybeach.com; Carney, Tom; frankel @mydelayeach.com; Gray, Angeleta; jacquet @myelraybeach.com-, Harden, David; kellifreeman @bellsouth. net, ndrich @bellsouth.net; gersan2 @aol.com; tarheel_ bill @bellsouth.net; balbert315 @yahoo.com; bddegner @yahoo.com; grandpabobhylew @aol.com; hanuschakm@aol.com; scubarepsilvia @att.net; seasidebldrs @bellsouth.net; djr @crosstecsoftware.com; info@friendsofdelray,cotn Subject: Gerald Franciosa - Potential Illegal Voting Conflict of Interest - Delray Place Attachments: RQO-1 2-063. pdf; ROO- 12 -063.pdf Dear Commissioner Harden and Members of the City Commission: I am writing out of concern that Mr. Gerald Franciosa may have had an undisclosed conflict of interest when voting on the Delray Place project as a member of the City's Planning & Zoning Board on October 15, 2012. He lures in the adjacent residential Tropic Isle community and clearly stated he was opposing the project. As a matter of law and the County's Ethics regulations, I do not know whether he should have recused himself. I believe the City has a fiduciary duty to inquire with the Commission on Ethics and let that body make a fair, impartial, and independent decision. Attached are opinions from the Commission w1 ich would seem to indicate he had to step down or, at a minimum, file the required paperwork with the clerk. ON ON Commissioners Manuelfatach. chair Palm Beach Count Robin N. f lore, Vice Chair + Rorraid E. Harbison Commission on Ethics cs Patricia LI.Archer Executive Director 4& FIR( G Alan S. Johnson September 13, 2012 John C. Randolph, Esquire Town of Palm Beach Town Attorney Jones, Foster, Johnston & Stubbs, P. A. 505 South Flagler Drive, Suite 1100 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Re: ROO12 -063 Voting Conflicts Dear Mr. Randolph, The Palm Beach County Commission on Ethics (COE) considered your request for an advisory opinion, and rendered its opinion at a public meeting held on September 12, 2021 YOU ASKED In your subrnlssion dated August 28, 2012 whether an employee of a corporation that owns property wfthin a study area may serve on an advisory board created to review potential development proposals for the study area and if so, whether he may participate and vote on any ultimate recommendation submitted to the Town. IM SUM, advisory board members are prohibited from using their official position, participating or voting on an issue that would give a Financial benefit to their outside employer, not shared with similarly situated members of the general public. There is no bright line as to whether a congngent Financial benefit creates a conflict. In evaluating conflict of interest under the Palm Beach County Code of Ethics, the Commission considers 1] the number of person$ who stand to gain From a decision and 2) whether the gain or loss is remote and speculative. Where the class of persons who stand to On from a decision is small, it is more likely that a member will have a conflict. Similarly, where a gain or loss to an official or his or her employer is not subject to significant contlIng6ricies, it may result In a conflict of'Interest under the Palm Beach County Code of Ethics. THE FACTS as we understand them are as follows: You are the Town Attorney for the Town of Palm Beach (Town 1. The Town Council (Council) recently appointed an ad hoc committee to consider the future development of a five acre commercial area on Royal Poinciana Way (the study area). The Royal Poinciana Way Study Committee (FtPWSQ has 7 members. The Chair was appointed by the full council, each coyndiperson appointed an RPWSC member and the final member, also appointed by the full Council, is the Chair of the Town Planning and zoning Commission. Members were selected from town residents and businesses who have expressed a special interest in the area or who, based upon special knowledge or Interest, may lend a particular contribution to the RPWSC, The committee does not have authorlty to make changes to the zoning code, but can make recommendations to the Town Council, The Town did not provide the RPWSC with much direction regarding future development of the study area. Accordingly, the RPWSC along with Town stafil have discussed traditional planning mechanisms such as potential increases In density, height, setbacks, etc. to the area. The RPWSC has heard various presentations and each member of RPWSC expressed individual opinions in regard to potential development in the area. At some point In time in the future, the RPWSC will vote on a recommendation to the Town Council_ 2633 Vista Parkway, West Palm Beach, FL 33411 561.2 33,0724 FAX: 561.233.0735 Hotline: 877.766.5920 E -mail: et: hics C3palrnbeachcountyethics,com Website: www.palmbeachcouFttyethics.com One of the 7 appointees is an employee of the Breakers PB, Inc. (Breakers). The Breakers owns an office building located within the study area. In total, based upon the study area legend prepared by Town staff and submitted to COE staff, there are 15 property owners who may be affected by changes in the study area. In addition, the Breakers owns property on the south side of Royal Poinciana Way as well as resort and golf club properties not included in the study area in the Town. As mentioned above, the RPWSC has heard presentations detailing potential development options and has discussed these presentations at their meetings. Recommendations ultimately could include land use changes affecting density, height restriction and permitted uses within the study area- Changes could have a significant impact on property values, however, it is unknown at this time whether the recommendations will have a financial impact on the area. The RPWSC's next meeting is on September 14, 2012_ The question has arisen as to 1) whether it is a conflict of interest for an employee of the Breakers to sit on the RPWSC and /or 2) to vote on any ultimate recommendation which may be made to the Town Council in an advisory capacity. THE LEGAL BASIS for this opinion is found in the following relevant sections of the revised Palm Beach County Commission on Ethics Ordinance and Code of Ethics, which took effect on June 1, 2011, Sec. 2 -443. Prohibited conduct. (a) Misuse of public office or employment. An official or employee shall not use his or her official position or office, or take or fail to take any action, or influence others to take or fail to take any action, in a manner which he or she knows or should know with the exercise of reasonable care will result in a special financial benefit, not shared with similarly situated members of the general public, for any of the following persons or entities: (1) Himself or herself; (a) An outside employer or business of his or hers, or of his or her spouse or domestic partner, or someone who is known to such official or employee to work for such outside employer or business; Section 2- 443(a) prohibits advisory board members from using their official position to take or fail to take any action if they know or should know with the exercise of reasonable care that the action would result in a special financial benefit not shared with similarly situated members of the general public, for certain entities or persons including themselves or their employer. Section 2- 443(c) Disclosure of voting conflicts, similarly requires an advisory board member to abstain and not participate in any matter coming before his or her board which would result in a special financial benefit, nat shared with similarly situated members of the general public, to themselves or their employer. Under state statute, to constitute a prohibited voting conflict, the possibility of a Financial gain must be direct and immediate, rather than remote and speculative.' Where an official's gain or loss would require many steps and be subject to many contingencies, any gain or loss is remote and speculative and cannot be said to inure to one's special financial benefit? Similarly, for a financial benefit to be "special ", the benefit must Inure uniquely to the voting member, rather than benefiting the Town as a whole. There is no bright line in determining the number of Individuals who would need to be affected to transform a personal gain or lass Into a gain or loss shared with similarly situated members of the general public. Where a class Is large, a prohibited financial gain would result only if there are circumstances unique to the voting official which would enable him to gain more than the other members of the class. However, where the class of persons benefiting is small, the likelihood of prohibited financial benefit is much greater.3 Each advisory opinion Is based upon a unique set of facts and circumstances. Whether a matter rises to the level of a voting conflict will be based upon the facts and circumstances presented to the COE. For example, the COE has previously opined that a municipal advisory board member was prohibited from presenting his client's project to his advisory board, participating in discussions regarding the project or voting on a matter financially benefiting his ' George v. Ciry of Cocoa, Florida, 78 1, 3d 494 (1995). ' CEO 05 -15, CE❑ 91 -51, CEO 12 -19 ' CEO 77 -129 2633 Vista Parkway, West Palm Beach, FL 33411 561.233.4724 FAX: 561.233.0735 Hotline: 877.766.5920 E -mail: ethic s6palmbeacheountyethics .come Website: palmbeachcountyethics.com customer or client.4 Under the facts presented the gain to the board member's rustomer or client was direct and immediate. First, the board member's employer is one of 15 property owners that would be subject to any changes recommended by the RPWSC. The number of persons or -entities directly affected by potential changes Is too small a class to be considered similarly situated to members of the general public. Second, the RPWSC was established to provide input and recommendations to the Town concerning a proposed ordinance that would, if adopted, make changes to the land use code in the study area. For example, should the Committee recommend a land use change resulting in an increase in density and that recommendation is adopted by the Town Council, the value of the Breakers property may be Increased, regardless of whether or not the current owner takes advantage of the changes. The sole purpose of the RPWSC is to consider changes to the study area containing these 15 properties. Therefore, ahy discussion, recommendation or vote of the Committee. would present a conflict of interest for the board member. Because the Code prohibits participation as well as voting on the matter, the COE is of the opinion that the board member should resign From the Committee. That being said, the Code does not prohibit business owners, their employees or citizens with a vested financial interest in development of their property from providing meaningful and valuable comment to the Committee or Town Council provided they do not do so while serving as an official in an appointed advisory capaclty. IN SUMMARY, an advisory board member may not use his official position, including participation and voting on issues before the RPWSC, affecting the financial interests of his employer, where his employer is one of 15 land owning entities within an affected study area. Based upon the facts and circumstances provided, including the limited class of persons or entities that stand to gain from the RPWSC process and the absence of significant contingencies to obtain that gain if changes are approved, the potential Financial benefit to a board member's employer is not so remote and speculative as to eliminate a conflict of Interest under the Palm Beach County Code of Ethics. This opinion construes the Palm Beach County -Code of Ethics Ordinance and is based upon the facts and circumstances that you have submitted, It is not applicable to any conflict under state law. Inquiries regarding possible conflicts under state law should be directed to the State of Florida Commission on Ethics. Please feel free xojcontact me at 561 - 233 -0724 if I can be of any further assistance in this matter. 5lncerel Alan 5. J n on Executi Irector ASJ /mcr /gal cc: William 0. Cooley `Rao 11 -067 2633 Vista. Parkway, West. Palm Beach, FL 3341.1 561 .233.0724 FAX: 561.233.0735 HatHne: 877.766.5920 E -mail- ethics (Opahnbeacheountyethics.com Website: palmbeachcountyethies.coui Haggard, Ron From: Truxell, Rebecca Sent: Friday, November 09, 2012 4:01 PM To: Hoggard, Ron Subject: FW: Delray Place proposed SAD rezoning and associated site plan Attachments: Malloy letter regarding Delray Place Nov 9 2012.docx Please see below sent to PZ mail. Rebecca Truxell Administrative Assistant /Secretary to SPRAB Interim Secretary to the Planning & Zoning Board and Historic Preservation Board Planning & Zoning Department City of betray Beach 100 NW 1st Avenue delroy Beach, FL 33444 Phone: 561.243.7040 Fax: 561.243.7221 truxellemydelraybeach.com From: Fred Fetzer rmailto:fbfetzer @ bellsouth.net] Sent: Friday, November 09, 2012 1:58 PM To: Michael Weiner Cc: migman911@yahoo.com: cleanslaterk@gmail.com; PZmail@MyDelrayBeach.com; Gary Eliopolus; Kelli Freeman; PAB (]ack Malloy) Subject: Delray Place proposed SAD rezoning and associated site plan Mr. Weiner: As a Tropic Isle resident, I have been working with some other Tropic Isle residents to evaluate the latest proposed site plan for Delray Place and try to determine what changes could be made to the site plan that would allow the Developer to move forward with a qualit business development, but one that does not adversely impact the Tropic Isle homes that are immediately adjacent to the proposed Delray Place development. I would appreciate you reviewing the attached letter from a Tropic Isle resident whose ham( backs up to the Delray Place property. They are particularly concerned with the presently configured restaurant outdoor seating. They have made some suggestions on how this issue could be addressed. I would appreciate an opportunity to meet with the Developer (prior to submission of any additional site plans to the City) to further discuss how this concern be addressed to the 1 mutual satisfaction of the Developer and the adjacent Tropic Isle homeowners. Please feel free to contact me (via email or at 561- 715 -9030) or Jack Malloy (561- 573 - 5596), if you require further information or would like to have further discussion on these issues. Thank you, Fred Fetzer 932 Evergreen Dr. Delray Beach, FL 33483 November 9, 2012 To Whom It NIay Concern: Re: Delray Place proposed SAD Rezoning and associated site plan I have reviewed the latest (111212012) site plan submitted to the City and was pleased to see some progress being shown with regard to some of the concerns previously mentioned by Tropic Isle residents. For example: Rear Area of 600 to 1100 Buildings - Sidewalk removed -Rear doors removed -Any remaining side doors kept locked (Fire Code Use only) -Rear landscaped area gated and locked (only lawn maintenance people to access) - Additional landscaping added While the above changes to the proposed site plan are a step in the right direction, a remaining major concern (particularly of Tropic Isle whose properties are immediately adjacent to the development) is the proposed use of outdoor restaurant seating between the 600 to 1100 buildings. The outdoor seating, as presently configured, will still channel all the noise directly south into the rear of adjacent Tropic Isle homes. We had requested (at the meeting recently held at the library) that the outdoor seating be moved to the front of the 600 to 1100 buildings and the vacated seating area be made part of the 600 to 1100 building interior. By making those changes, the building would act as a 600 ft., 22 ft. high buffer to help offset restaurant noise that would now be captured in front of the restaurants facing Linton Blvd. and directed toward Linton. In addition to the above concerns regarding the proposed outdoor restaurant seating, we still feel that the City's Planning Department documented concerns (i.e., for open space, parking, landscape buffers, traffic, etc.) must be addressed and resolved before the site plan is approved by the city. We appreciate the opportunity to state our concerns with the existing site plan proposal. Hopefully, the Developer will help us resolve those concerns and move forward with a plan that will provide a quality business development that does not adversely impact the adjacent Tropic Isle homes. Sincerely, Jack Malloy and Lisa Malloy 925 McCleary Street Delray Beach, FL 33483 LISA MALLOY JOHN MALLOY 925 McCleary Street Delray Beach, FL 33483 (561) 573 -5596 November 14, 2012 Mr. (Paul Darling Mr. Ron Haggard Delray Beach Planning & Zoning RE: Delray Place Gentlemen: gWLa NOV 19 1012 n�An)hllll�� � �tyrJllVt; I-lave met tod y jointly with. tRetW Property Group owner_ Louis t U Msella. architect Mark Sala Planner Dobi U'lass and theix attorneys Michael Weiner and Jeffery Lynne and former City Coaunissioner Fred f'ett'er and discussed genemJ P &Z Review Md c 1 the Outdoor Seating Areas for the 600 to i 100 buildings. Snecilic ally how the noi-w from rt�dings" current Outdoor Setting configumtion channels noise directly into the adjacent Tropic Isle homes. It was my understanding, the following changes would be considered as everyone felt it was reasible Outdoor Seating cc.uld he relocaled to the front of the 600 to 1100 buildings. and the vacated Outdoor Seating Area made part of the buildings' interior, allowing some of the noise generated from the 600 to 1100 buildings to be captured on the north side of the building and directed towed Linton Blvd. ne 600 to i 100 buildings would act as an effective noise barrier in conjunction with landscaped rear set knack area. See attached renderings. It was also discussed that the 22 foot high front and rear elevations would have improved architectural features to break up any U- Storage =It Iookof earlier Site PIan submittals. Hope staff will find this concept for dealing with noise from Outdoor Seating Area of 600 to 1100 buildings acceptable, and allow -future revised Site Plan with above revision given favorable consideration. F , J lay cc. ael Weiner Jeffrey Lynne Attorneys At Law Fax 561 -272 -6831 Louis Carosella R.etai I Property Group Fax 561- 961 -1744 Mark Saltz, AIA Salta Michelson Architects Fax 954 - 266 -2741 Dobi Glass 00140 & Associates Fax 561- 575 -5260 Fred Fetzer WOU MGe. LFC • y� p V1 cr+r ra � r � w 1 Q � J � cy 4 3 'J Z WOU MGe. LFC • y� p V.1 cr+r ra � r � w f � � I I � w � � h I T _� I~ t � I CL _ , a W i I ~ � w ,may u � � � 1 �o Cd L2, 4 VI U d ul �'{ n CL- t- 1�'i .s,n.� I w } t W pw xxF J Q W H U) - m-. Ep l rw �••�► .r r •Y -+�•�� ••V r"i�Y Mfg �'Fwl� wlas aww /MV4 Mi�4M � 4 H ul g ci r O 0 x C] [13 N O a r• z, do C�� mrw45 1 aJ I - —.*. #.--- November 15, 2012 RONALD K. KOLINS 701 South Clive Avenue Unit 313 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 Brian Shutt, Esq. Office of City Attorney Delray Beach, Florida ?QD N.W. 1 st Avenue Delray Beach, r or,da 33444 Re., Delray Place Dear Mr. Shutt: xf--9 It I! _L{ _ f, NOV 1 6 Z3ll As you are aware, I represent eleven homeowners within the Tropic Isles residential ornmunity, which community is adjacent to the site of the proposed commercial development commonly referred to as Delray Place My clients own homes along, and reside on, the two streets which immediately abut the proposed commercial site. and thus are the people to be most impacted should the City approve and the developer build the commercial center. I will appear on behalf of my clients at all hearings and c- oceedings related to this matter, including, among others, Clearings before: the City Commission. I am writing this letter to you as per our telephone conversation, wherem you suggested do so to clearly establish my standing to part'c`pate and represent the interests of my clients. If you require anything further, please adv se, cc: Paul Dorling Michael Young Very truly yours, Ronald K. Kolins HSA MALLOY ]Ql IN M-AII,DS' 925 McCleary Street Delray Bcach. FL 33483 (5ol) 573 -5596 M.)vcmbcr 20.2012 Retail Property Group, Louis Carosella. Icam'seltagUig, "3.crs Architect, . ark Salty- IUM.lk�- -si ui Deli so cc_s�_I •krn►rney Michael Weiner. rnwti�ri r+r;x± Cs ni yti,cr+rt7 Atturncv leftcry Lynnc. j 1, iuiv -, 2 v_rp oc cu Planner Dobi Glass. d� Ii o !! }.cm RF. Delray Place Dear Ladies and 6ctri k-m c r: Revicwtd your latest Site Plan suhmitia.l and could not find any natic Able movement of the hetween huI-Iding Ouldoot Seating being relocated to the front of 6W to 1 100 l:+uildin ,, arid the vacated arcs I�rtng made parr c +f the 000 to 1 100 buildings interior, creating not.Se bier and chaattcling noise l ownrd I Inton .kiId away from Tropic: Isle homes At Our Iasi mee Ling at your oI- ice on 1 1!14111, the ptrtihlcm of the Megaphone Effect as a result of having Outdoor .Skating noise bmwecn 6(K) to 1 1(x) buildings wcre again discus and the Megaphone FI'(cct :Ict*s IO lttfot $i the Outdoor 5 noise. mt>_�ic. convetmn and channei:s it lntn the rear of ad.iacctu 'Fropic I�¢le rrsident; h.��'e are al aware of how noise Lrave ►s on water. We are all :.-Aare of Comrnissinncr _Am F el's comments. at the 1116112 commission meeting oI' ng one ►+ants a yxre in their bEc Y�arrd ever nigh !..e YoK betwcgn tifildiUS Quickwr Di g hn c Effect _asstrres a yern laud party is Tropic 1 Your failure to bc considctatc of Tropic Isle repealed requests, %-011th C(Mid sn cash cnrrrcted makes the Delray Place a bad nel hhor, who appeam to he putting profit abc d of doing the right Ili ing to be rompatihlIt r it Tropic Isirs you Site PIN n. What % o u continue to do will rob every Tropic Isit family the liencefni cmjtkvmrnt of their home i'topic Isle again ask you in please be a xW neaghbor that %%v cis tiupport. elim i me or move Outdoor Dining cram hen. -nett 600 to I I�] buildings_ close off the Megaplm)ne I_ ffect monsicr you have created P",;e adviu so we know how to deal w h someone w io a2pe hr���t fr�lr) -Diet h art T it Igo __ _ -IM - Please govern yourself accordingly. S' l lalloy cc. Von Wt+odie McDuI'fie. titirucduli6 ice Mayor To Carney. �.rnt— �r rrt�r rrt Coffin- ssioner Angcleta Gmy' liMv:" I Commissioner Adam Franke, t '�• Commissioner All tact. JUCq Lrit 11 1113 City Manager David Harden is i. Ron Hoggard, Planning 111: Zonin , 1u) Kc1li freeman, kel ilrLrman� lk �,ut1 Fred Fetrer. F BPS tzer u• _ Ilaou_ ]_ n, IC1r111"De cl ,0m ff i mL &IM.- FZ- -w— W. Haggard, Ron From: Dodi Glas <Dodi @2gho.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2012 4:03 PM To: pabinc; Ica rosel la @rpg 1 23.com; Mark Saltz; Michael Weiner; Jeffrey Lynne Cc: McDuffie, Woodie; Carney, Tom; Gray, Angeleta; Frankel, Adam; Jacquet, Al; CityManager @MyDelrayBeach.com; Hoggard, Ron; Kelli Freeman; Fred Fetzer Subject: RE: Delray Place Dear Mr. Malloy; Your letter of November 2&, 2012 clearly tells me we have failed in showing you what we changed in response to your comments on November 10. You did in fact discuss how far we have come, and, that you had one more concern. Specifically, you wanted the area between the buildings to have a higher wall to eliminate the "megaphone effect." You may recall you and I discussed the continuous wall effect that Mr. Hoggard had a concern over and how that may conflict with your suggestions. You had even said that you had already discussed that with Mr. Haggard. What you apparently did not read in the revised plans is that we have redesigned that space to address both Mr. Howard's and your concerns. We have a included a roof over the area extending from the buildings, at a level below the overall building height, to address your concern to capture sound (while maintaining the solid rear wall that you like but using some glass blocks to allow interest and light but no vision through it to continue to provide the articulation that Mr. Hoggard wanted.) This was also done in an way to maintain the varied rear architecture to avoid the continuous "wall " effect that Mr. Hoggard noted he wanted to avoid. This redesign was in direct response to your last request. In our presentation materials, we will work harder to better demonstrate the design. I know that there is has been a lot of conversation and time invested in the project. On behalf of the team, I want to thank you for your time and tell you that our meeting truly did impact the design and your comments were heard. Very Truly, Dodi Glas Dodi Buckmaster Glas, AICP, LEEDVAP Partner, Director of Planning Cell: 561 - 310 -7325 dodiCa 2gho.cotn landscapeArrhilem Planners + EnvironmenN Consultants GENTILE GLAS HOLLOWAY O'MAHONEY & Associates, Inc 1907 Conmierce Lane, Suite 101 Jupiter, Florida 33458 561- 575 -9557 x121 The information contained in this transmission may contain privileged and confidential information. It is intended only for the use of the person(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or duplication of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. All attached drawings, specifications and other documents, including those in electronic form, prepared by the consultant and the Consultants Sub- consultants are Instruments of Service for use exclusively to this Project. The Consultant and the Consultants Sub- consultants shall be dr�emed the authors and owners of their respective Instruments of Service and shall retain all common law, statutory and other reserved rights, including copyrights. From: pabinc fmaiito:pabincPbellsouth.net] Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2012 10:33 AM To: IcarosellaOrpg121com; Mark 5altz; Michael Weiner; Jeffrey Lynne; Dodi Glas Cc: woody mcduffe; thomas Carney; angeleta gray; adam Frankel; a[ jacquet; CityManager(aMyDeIrayBeach.com; hoggard@mydelraybeach.com; Kelli Freeman; Fred Fetzer Subject: Delray Place To All Parties Listed: This is in regards to the Delray Place project and I have attached a letter for everyone to review and provide their responses accordingly. Sincerely, John Malloy Lisa Malloy Haggard, Ron From: Jeffrey Lynne <jlynne@zonelaw.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2012 11:40 AM To: pabinc; Ica rosel la @rpg 1 23.com; Mark Saltz; Michael Weiner; dodi @2GH0.com; Joe Carosella Cc: McDuffie, Woodie; Carney, Tom; Gray, Angeleta; Frankel, Adam; Jacquet, Al; CityManager @MyDelrayBeach.com; Haggard, Ron; Kelli Freeman; Fred Fetzer Subject: RE: Delray Place ]ohn - Thank you for your letter. I think there continues to be ongoing misunderstanding of which I do not know the source. Your "opening statement" to the group during our meeting on 11/14 was how pleased you were that the overwhelming number of site plan changes you had requested were implemented into the project and you commented as to your appreciation of same. Your 11129 letter to the City, before contacting us, or having Commissioner Fetzer contact us, therefore comes as a complete surprise. Unfortunately, I believe the net result of your letter, albeit unintentionally, will be to further entrench distrust. Stated otherwise, you were personally invited, at your request, to review the site plan and meet with the design team. You left that meeting very happy. Nothing has changed. But your letter to the City attempts to discredit the project in the eyes of the City's leaders without factual justification (we are unsure what the "megaphone effect" is). That is the reason why I feel compelled to write this lengthy e-mail for my clients. We stand by the honest and sincere representations made to you at the meeting with our clients on 11/14 and your ability to rely upon it. Though you live many blocks away from the project to the south, we understand your desire to protect what you perceive to be a threat to your daughter's property. That is admirable and respected. We also appreciate that you have drafted former City Commissioner Fred Fetzer, your neighbor, to be your advocate. He is very well- versed in economic development and the land development process. Commissioner Fetzer will be able to also confirm that we discussed with you the difference between "heavy" restaurant uses, where alcohol is served, outdoor table seating dining is provided, and the area is designed for purposes of allowing people to "congregate ". This is different than "light" dining uses such as a yogurt shop or a deli take out which is not designed for those purposes and, for the most part, are not open as late as formal dining establishments. Because the City's land development regulations sometimes treats these "light" food service establishments as "retail uses" in other instances as "restaurants ", this is why the site plan shows both as being viable opportunities for each specific parcel. But with that comes the implicit understanding, and the explicit representation made to you, that compatibility of uses were designed into the site, to which you agreed. More specifically, we explained to you, and you expressed your understanding, that outdoor seating areas would exist along Linton Blvd. uses for purposes of continuing the "pedestrian experience" and "sense of place" for residents to enjoy being outdoors during the more pleasant months such as now. I continue to strongly believe that those distinctions we very clearly expressed to you, you understood them, and had no issue. So now, we are at a loss to understand your letter to the City. 1 No personal attacks. Just the facts. � Z JEFFREY C. LYNNE, EsQ., LEED AP WEINER, LYNNE Et THOMPSON, P.A. 10 SE 1 st Avenue, Suite C I Delray Beach, Florida 33444 Direct (561) 900 -0725 1 Cell (561) 239 -0839 Main (561) 265 -2666 1 Fax (561) 272 -6831 National (877) 901 -2666 REAL ESTATE I ZONING I GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS I LITIGATION ilynne @zonelaw.com I www.zonelaw.com APlease consider the environment before printingthis email. NOTICE: This e-mail message and any attachment to this e-mail message contains confidential information that may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not review, retransmit, convert to hard copy, copy, use or disseminate this a -ma il or any attachments to it. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail or by telephone at 561- 265 -2666 and delete this message. Please note that if this e-mail message contains a forwarded message or is a reply to a prior message, some or all of the contents of this message or any attachments may not have been produced by the sender. From: pabinc fmailto:pabinc0bellsouth.net1 Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2012 10:33 AM To: Icarose1la @rnci123.com; Mark Saltz; Michael Weiner; Jeffrey Lynne; dodi @2GHQ.com Cc: woody mcduffie; thomas carney; angeleta gray; adam Frankel; al jacquet; CityManager(aMyDelrayBeach.com; hoggard@mydelraybeach.com: Kelli Freeman; Fred Fetzer Subject: Delray Place To All Parties Listed: This is in rcgards to the DO ray PIacc projcct and I havc attachcd a Icttcr for evcryone to rcview and provide their responses accordingly. Sincerely, John Malloy Lisa Malloy Hoggard, Ron From: Truxeli, Rebecca Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2012 3:22 PM To: Hoggard, Ron Subject: FW: Delray Place The proposed use of "Delray Place" is extremely inappropriate for the adjacent homeowners. I live on I :ve Street and am very concerned about a probable decline in enjoyment of my home that will occur with the noise, smells, traffic etc. that will occur at the proposed site. I know something will be going up other than the non- intrusive office buildings. But the project should be scaled back to allow the residents of McCleary, Spanish Trail and western section of Eve Street to continue to live in their quiet, restful environment. The properties are accessed on the value of their waterfront lots and we pay property taxes reflecting the privilege of living there. The value of properties will be diminished if this project is allowed to use the site in an inappropriate matter. Traffic flow is another huge concern. There are only 2 entrees and exits. This in itself should limit the use of this site. Linton and Fed Hwy is already a high volume area. Delray Place, if developed as the owners request, will cause major traffic problems. The owners of Delray Place presented their plan site to the Tropic Isles residents in hopes of gaining support for the site. Their initial proposal was nice, but they have repeatedly changed all that was presented and now they want to increase the square footage, setbacks, activities sound barriers etc. Please consider the residents adjacent to this site and do what is right for them. Thank you, Judith Colvard 918 Eve St tooju&Q,bellsguth. net 1 December 3, 2012 RONALD K. KOLINS 701 South alive Avenue Unit 313 West Palm Beach, Florida 33441 City Clerk City of Delray Beach 204 NW 1 st Avenue Delray Beach, FL 33444 RE: Delray Place Dear Madam Clerk: DEC 4 5 MIZ PLANNING I represent eleven families, each of which owns and resides in a home in Tropic Isles which lies immediately adjacent to the property line of the property, commonly referred to as Delray PI ace, which is the subject of development applications to be heard by SPRAD on December 12, 2012 and then by the Delray Beach City Commission of January 3, 2013. By this ietter, I hereby formally apply for "party status" for my clients, who I will collectively refer to as the" Tropic Isles Resident Group ". I submit this request pursuant to, and consistenl with, section 3 (.B) of the City's Procedures for Quasi - Judicial Hearings. The Tropic Isles residents that comprise the `Tropic Isles Resident Group ", which represent, together with their addresses, are as follows: 1. Michael E. Young, 1807 Spanish Trail 2. Kaj Strom. 1801 Spanish Traill 3. Bill & Nancy Schnabei. 901 McCleary Street 4. Andy & Gayle Ross, 943 McCleary Street 5. Marc & Lani Rosenberg. 9C2 Eve Street C. Barbara Jayne DeGloyer, 1949 Spanish Trail 7_ Cheryl Sandhoff, 1919 Spanish Trail 8. Bruno & Emma Pellegrini, 937 McCleary Street 9 Gary & Toni Rockis, 936 McCleary Street 10. Bob & Cyndy Lewandowski, 928 McCleary Street it- Charlie & Ethel Young, 935 McCleary Street The property owned, respectively, be each of the above earned residents, lies within 500 feet of the Delray Beach property, The applications pending before the City to redevelop Delray Place propose unique impacts upon each of those named above, comprising the 'Tropic Isles Resident Group" . Because each of their properties lies not only close to the Delray Place property, but indeed immediately adjacent to it, the impacts of the proposed retail) commercial development will have a profound impact upon, and a disproportional impact upon their respective properties and their respective qualities of life. Among other things, the proposed development will bring with it, and to some extent unavoidably, noise, fumes and odors, lighting, and visual impacts which will, unless fully and properly mitigated, grossly undermine my clients quality of life. Because of the unique and sever impacts which will be imposed upon my clients, people and families who have lived a number of years in their Tropic Isles homes and who have been long- standing citizens and residents of Delray Beach, they should be granted "patty status" as called for by your codified rules, all of which have been satisfied and addressed by this letter - application. If you required anything further, please advise, Very truly you Ronald K- Kolins PH- 561 - 202 -1841 Email -� - -! - '�RKL ijmaj,r, L cc Paul Dorling Brian Shutt, Esq. Michael Young �r �. It�� L�,� �.�' � C! • l � -�iF, Rid ��- � �'��_�_, �� f, CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE DELRAY BEACH Ail- R�December 5, 2012 Ronald K. Kolins 701 South Olive Avenue Unit 313 7993 2001 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 WRITER'S DIRECT SINE MU243 -7097 Re: Party Status for Quasi - Judicial Hearing on Delray Place Dear Mr_ Kolins, Our office has received your request for party status and in accordance with the adopted quasi - judicial rules our opinion, based on the facts you submitted, is that you should be granted party status on behalf of your clients. The ultimate decision as to the granting of party status shall be made by the City Commission or Site Plan Review and Appearance Board when you appear in front of them. Please call if you have any questions. Sincerely, OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA By: f� R. Brian Shutt, Esq. Ctty Attorney cc: Paul Dorling, Director of Planning and Zoning Hoggard, Ron From: Ron Kolins <cleanslaterk @gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 9:55 AM To: Jeffrey Lynne Cc: Dorling, Paul; Haggard, Ron; M. Young Subject: Delray Place Jeffrey: I am in receipt of your letter to Paul Darling advising of your intention, on behalf of your client, the proposed developer of Delray PIace, to appear before SPRAB tomorrow evening for the purpose of requesting that it reconsider its denial of your client's proposed site plan and to continue the matter to allow your client the time to modify the proposed site plan. Given your representation to me yesterday that your client intends to address the concerns with the site plan of my clients as set forth at the SPRAB hearing last week, my initial inclination, subject to discussions with my clients, is to support your effort to gain the time to address those issues in the site plan. However, your letter goes on to say that, assuming SPRAB takes the action you request tomorrow, your client will withdraw it appeal of last week's SPRAB decision and then appear before the City Commission on January 3, 2013, to request a continuance to a date certain. upon reflection, I am of the belief that, should your client withdraw its appeal, the scheduled hearing before the City Commission on January 3, 2013 automatically becomes moot and there would be nothing for the Commission to consider. Thus, there is no vehicle available for which the Commission could continue anything to a subsequent date certain. Assuming the correctness of my position on this issue, the process would be as follows: Assuming that, tomorrow evening, SPRAB takes the deferral action you request, after your client redesigns and modifies the site plan it will submit that plan to the City's professional staff for review, after which a hearing on that new plan will be scheduled before SPRAB. After action thereon by SPRAB, a hearing date before the City Commission will be set, be it to consider the SPRAB recommendation in light of both the rezoning question and the site plan, or, should SPRAB deny the new site plan, then no doubt to consider an appeal of that denial you will file on behalf of your client. I therefore urge that you modify your request to the City consistent with the above. Should you disagree with my analysis, please advise me of the basis for that disagreement. Let me be clear that nothing herein is to be interpreted as committing my client's to a position concerning your request, nor should anything herein be interpreted to suggest that my client's in any way waive the belief that some of your requested "waivers" must be considered as variances and thus must be the subject of variance applications and the consideration thereof by the City's Board of Adjustment. Hoggard, Ron From: Jeffrey Lynne <jlynne @( zonelaw.com> Sent: Friday, November 16, 2012 12:49 PM To: Ron Kolins Cc: M. Young; Joe Carosella: Louis Carosella; dodi@2GHG.com; Msaltz@saltzmichelson.com: Michael Weiner; Ashlee Coosaia; Hoggard. Ron; kellitreeman @bellsouth. net; pabinc Subject: RE: Tropic Isle Clients Thank you Ron. It is always good to see you. And I thought the dialogue was productive. I do feel the need to clarify your assessment of the meeting. You carne in with "non-negotiable-s"' and we said we would listen. You presented three "deal breakers" that you demanded else your clients would oppose the project: (a) a 10' wall (13' on your clients' side) surrounding the entire property, in addition to the existing wall; (b) all buildings pushed out 25' from said wall; and (c) no outdoor music. We said that we would always entertain reasonable requests and that we could not, respectfully, agree to your demands since they were unreasonable. On the other hand, T am proud to say that our client has incorporated other reasonable requests proposed by the neighbors, before you were hired. They include, but are not limited to: + Relocating ALL potential Outdoor dining areas to the front of buildings and other outdoor seating areas to be away from the residents; Removing ALL rear access doors (and ALL access) to and from the buildings along Linton; • Fully enclosing and air conditioning ALL trash compactors ■ Full enclosing and air conditioning ALL loading areas (which we have confirmed, no Class 8 delivery trucks which will be using the loading areas make any "beeping noise") ■ Articulating the rear facade along Linton (which no one is going to see anyway because of landscaping); ■ Limiting any full service, table seating, heavy use restaurants to the Federal Highway portion of the project, and reserving those Linton Blvd, parcels for less intensive dining uses such as a ]amba Juice, Starbucks, Subway, PeiWei, etc.; and ■ Not removing any mature trees which exist on either our property or your clients property which straddle the property line (such as the large tree behind Mr. Schnabel's residence). So I have to respectfully disagree that we are not willing to help your clients. To the contrary, RPG has spent an unprecedented amount of time and money (again, long before you were hired) to satisfy their requests over the past year. overwhelmingly, the residents of Tropic Isle (even to the north) have been appreciative and collaborative. We continue to maintain an open door policy should you wish to explore other matters with us. But we must respectfully decline to entertain the "non - negotiable" site plan elements you state your clients are demanding. Please do not hesitate to e-mail or call if there is anything I have said which misconstrues your position. 1 JEFFREY C. LYNNE, EsQ., LEER AP WEINER, LYNNE F± THompsoN, P.A. 10 SE 1st Avenue, Suite C I Delray Beach, Florida 33444 Direct (561 ) 900 -0725 1 Cell (561 ) 239 -0839 Main (561 ) 265 -2666 I Fax ( 561 ) 272 -6831 National (877) 901 -2666 REAL. ESTATE I ZONING I GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS I LITIGATION ilynneCzonelaw.com I www.zoneLaw.com a h Please considerthe environment before printing this emalL NOT IGEI This a -mail message and any attachment to this e-mail message contains confidential information that may be legally privileged. if you are not the intended recipient. you must not review, retransmit, convert to hard copy, copy, use or disseminate this a -mail or any attachments to it. If you have received this e-mail in error; please notify us immediately by return e-mail or by telephone at 561 - 265 -2666 and delete this message. Please note that if this email message contains a forvlarded message a is a reply to a prior message, some or all of the contents of this message or any attachments may not have been produced by the sender. From: Ron Kolins [mailto:cleanslaterk @gmail.com] Sent: Friday, November 16, 2012 11:42 AM To: Jeffrey Lynne Cc: M. Young Subject: Re: Tropic Isle Clients I represent the following: Young (Spanish Trail); Strom; Schnabel; Ross; Rosenberg; DeGloyer; Sandhoff; Pellegrini; Rockis; Lewandowski; and Young (McCleary St.). Of course, you will have no meetings or discussions with any of the foregoing without my participation. Thank you for meeting with me the other day and for lunch- I am sorry that your client was not willing to be helpful to my clients regarding the issues that are key to them. However, it never hurts to meet and have a dialogue. On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 2:09 PM, Jeffrey Lynne <ilynnepzonelaw.com�- wrote: Ron — Attached is a list of those residents whom live on Eve Street, McCleary Street, and a few on Spanish Trail. Please help us by identifying whom you represent so we can respond to inquiries appropriately without violating attorney/client privilege. Thanks. N 1 i ' I .JEFFREY C. LYNNE, ESQ., L E E D AP WEINER, LYNNE & TtioMPSoN, P.A. 10 SE 1 st Avenue, Suite C I Delray Beach, Florida 33444 Direct (561 900 -0725 1 Cell {5611 239 -0834 Main (561) 265 -2666 1 Fax (5611 272 -6831 National (877) 901 -2666 REAL ESTATE I ZONING I GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS I LITIGATION ilynne @zonelaw.com 1 www.zonelaw.com APlease consider the ensiroameal before prindag this email. NOTICE: This e-mail message and any attachment to this e-mail message contains confidential information that may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not review, retransmit, convert to hard copy, copy, use or disseminate this e-mail or any attachments to it. If you have received this e-mail in enor, please notify us immediately by return e-mail or by telephone at 661- 266-2666 and delete this message. Please note that if this e-mail message contains a forwarded message or is a reply to a prior message, some or all of the contents of this message of any attachments may not have been produced by the sender. Hoggard, Ron From: Dodi Glas <Dodi @2gho.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2012 4:03 PM To: pabinc; Icarosella @rpg123,com; Mark Saltz; Michael Weiner; Jeffrey Lynne Cc: McDuffie, Woodse; Carney; Tom; Gray, Angeleta; Frankel; Adam; Jacquet, Al; C4Manager @MyDelrayBeach.com; Hoggard, Ron; Kelli Freeman; Fred Fetzer Subject: RE: Delray Place Dear Mr. Malloy, Your letter of November 201h 2012 clearly tells me we have failed in showing you what we changed in response to your comments on November 14"'. You did in fact discuss how far we have come, and, that you had one more concern. Specifically, you wanted the area between the buildings to have a higher wall to eliminate the - megaphone effect." You may recall you and I discussed the continuous wall effect that Mr. Haggard had a concern over and how that may conflict with your suggestions. You had even said that you had already discussed that with Mr. Hoggard. What you apparently did not read in the revised plans is that we have redesicned that space to address both Mr. Hg9gard`s and your concerns. We have a included a roof over the area extending from the buildings, at a level below the overall building height, to address your concern to capture sound (while maintaining the solid rear wall that you like but using some glass blocks to allow interest and light but no vision through it to continue to provide the articulation that Mr. Hoggard wanted.) This was also done in an way to maintain the varied rear architecture to avoid the continuous -wall " effect that Mr_ Haggard noted he wanted to avoid_ This redesign was in direct response to your last request. In our presentation materials, we will work harder to better demonstrate the design. I know that there is has been a lot of conversation and time invested in the project. On behalf of the team, I want to thank you for your time and tell you that our meeting truly did impact the design and your comments were heard. Very Truly, Dodi Glas Dodi Buckmaster Glas, AICP, LEED[]AP Partner, Direc €or of PImw_iikg Cell: 561-3 [0-732i dodiWgho.com l anduapr 'n:':ifk Alam��r, F�riirpni��ent.J i:�.ai:�.�anG GENTILE GLAS 110L1,0WAY ONA1iMEN & ASS0691es , jne I` ?ill Commerce Lane, Sair�: 101 Jupiter, t1orich 561- 575 -9557 xl?t The information contained in this transmission may contain prilileh;ed and confidrartial information. It is intended only for the use of the person(s) named above. If you are nor the intended recipient. you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or duplication of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you are net the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply entail and destroy all copies of the original message. All attaclLed diawings, specificaUciu and other doLu .Lnts, including those in elLctfoutc loan, prepared by tha consultant and the Consultants Sub-consuitwits are hLstrummts of Swke for use exclusively to thus Project. The Consultant and the Consultants Sub - consultants shall be deemed the authors and owuers of their respective In.4truments of Service and shall retain all common law, statutory and other resexved rights, including copyrights. From: pabinc fmailto:pabinc(—&bellsouth.netj Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2012 10:33 AM To: Icarosellag^rpg123,com; Mark Saltz; Michael Weiner; Jeffrey Lynne; Dcdi Glas Cc. woody mcduffie; thomas carnet'; angeleta gray; adam Frankel; al jacquet; City a a., ecMyDelrayBeach.com; hWgard @mydelraybeach.com; Kelli Freeman; Fred Fetzer Subject: Delray Place To All Parties Listed: This is in regards to the Delray Place project and X have attached a letter for everyone to review and provide their responses accordingly. Sincerely, John Malloy Lisa Malloy MEMORANDUM TG: Delray Beach Site Plan & Appearance Board FROM: Ron Kolins: Attorney for Tropic Isles Resident Group RE: Proposed Delray Place Commercial Development I represent eleven families, each of which owns and lives in a home which directly abuts and is adjacent to the proposed Delray Place development. These homes lie along Spanish Trail, McCleary Street, and Eve Street. For ease of reference, I have named my clients, collectively, the Tropic Isles Resident Group ( "the Group ,,). `rhe Group does not oppose the application in its entirety, and indeed believes that some form of commercial use is appropriate for the site, My client's interest is to be protected from the unavoidable impacts of such a development, particularly since my clients are the ones with Tropic Isles who, because of the location of their homes, will suffer the greatest impact from said development. The issues of concern are: i . Location of wall to be constructed at rear of development parallel to Spanish Trail. It must be build 5' west of development property line to preserve existing landscaping. 2. Height of wall to be constructed at rear of development parallel to Spanish Trail. It must be no less that 12 feet high to protect from visual, noise, fumes, lights, and other impacts. 3. Buffer along that property line to be no less than 20'. 4. Side of wall facing Spanish Trail should be "green ", with vines and vegetation flush with exterior of wall for visual protection of residents along Spanish Trail. 5. Existing 5' high wall along property line shared by the development site and McCleary Street must be made 4' higher by the addition of wood lattice or aluminum baffles to protect immediately abutting residents from impacts from the proposed adjacent line of restaurants. 5. Said wall to be "green" with vegetation on its exterior. 7. No music allowed outside of the restaurants. 8. Outdoor restaurtant table service to cease no later than 9 P.M. 9. Single story buildings proposed adjacent to McCleary Street to be no high than 18'. 10. HVAC units to be to quietest type made today. 11. Trash compactors screened and hours of use limited to 9 A. M. to 7 P.M. 12. No U -turns allowed by trucks or cars at intersection of Federal Highway and Tropic. 13, If proposed landscaping shown on site plan is, to any extent, precluded because of existing or subsequent easements, including the existing utility easement at the property line along McCleary Street, the easements must be moved or other satisfactory landscaping provided. 14, If development is to be done in more than one phase, all walls, landscaping, and related screening requirements must be complete for the ENTIRE proposed development as part of Phase 1 and prior to the issuance of any ground clearance or vertical construction permits. 15. Please note that, as discussed in the comments of the City's professional staff, there are legal issues with some of the waivers requested in that they should be variance requests not waiver requests. The Group agrees with those comments. 16. The Group supports the very thorough comments of the Staff report. 6/ ,A 5ul�rYtitted by - -� .- n_ D ate Hoggard, Ron From: Ron Kolins <cleanslaterk @gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 9:55 AM To: Jeffrey Lynne Cc: Dorling, Paul; Haggard, Ron; M. Young Subject: Delray Place Jeffrey: I am in receipt of your letter to Paul Darling advising of your intention, on behalf of your client, the proposed developer of Delray PIace, to appear before SPRAB tomorrow evening for the purpose of requesting that it reconsider its denial of your client's proposed site plan and to continue the matter to allow your client the time to modify the proposed site plan. Given your representation to me yesterday that your client intends to address the concerns with the site plan of my clients as set forth at the SPRAB hearing last week, my initial inclination, subject to discussions with my clients, is to support your effort to gain the time to address those issues in the site plan. However, your letter goes on to say that, assuming SPRAB takes the action you request tomorrow, your client will withdraw it appeal of last week's SPRAB decision and then appear before the City Commission on January 3, 2013, to request a continuance to a date certain. upon reflection, I am of the belief that, should your client withdraw its appeal, the scheduled hearing before the City Commission on January 3, 2013 automatically becomes moot and there would be nothing for the Commission to consider. Thus, there is no vehicle available for which the Commission could continue anything to a subsequent date certain. Assuming the correctness of my position on this issue, the process would be as follows: Assuming that, tomorrow evening, SPRAB takes the deferral action you request, after your client redesigns and modifies the site plan it will submit that plan to the City's professional staff for review, after which a hearing on that new plan will be scheduled before SPRAB. After action thereon by SPRAB, a hearing date before the City Commission will be set, be it to consider the SPRAB recommendation in light of both the rezoning question and the site plan, or, should SPRAB deny the new site plan, then no doubt to consider an appeal of that denial you will file on behalf of your client. I therefore urge that you modify your request to the City consistent with the above. Should you disagree with my analysis, please advise me of the basis for that disagreement. Let me be clear that nothing herein is to be interpreted as committing my client's to a position concerning your request, nor should anything herein be interpreted to suggest that my client's in any way waive the belief that some of your requested "waivers" must be considered as variances and thus must be the subject of variance applications and the consideration thereof by the City's Board of Adjustment. M1ofLkELS.'LVE,1NkM Jffmv C. LYNNE. LAMMA. THOmpsON Ji SUN M. CIAUD L. DIANA Hn.FmAN 1'ebruary 20.2013 VIA E- TVIAIL & V.S. MAIL TAW czrTIU'S WEINER, LYNNE & A TORNF,Y$ AT L.Aw 14 SE F AVENUE, SUTC C DFIRAY Br,ACH, FLORmA 33444 Chairman and Members of the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board City of Delray :B each 100 NW 1 st Avenue Delray Beacli, Florida 33444 Re: Delray Place Dear Mr. Chairman and hoard Members of SPRAB: TELUMNE (561) 265 - 2666 L csDAax (561y 272 - 6811 JUNNE&LONELAW.COM W WW.ZONEL,kW.COM On behalf of our client, Retail Property Group and its principals, Joe and Louis Carosella, we thank you again for allowing us to continue to March 13. 2013, our site plan review public hearing for the Delray Place retail shopping center project (on the southeast corner of S. Federal Highway and Linton Boulevard). This additional time has allowed the project's design tcan) the opportunity to further work with the City's planning staff, the Tropic Isle Civic Association, Safety as Floridians Expect (SAFE), and most importantly, the residents directly abutting the prof ect. Admittedly, designing this site has proven to be a daunting task, even for seasoned and experienced retail developers as Retail Property Group. Unlike prior projects, there has been great pressure placed upon ;foe and Louis b�- the national tenants they have been negotiating with to design the site to meet those tenant's specific retail needs. There has been equal if not greater pressure placed upon Joe and Louis by the owners of residential property adjacent to the project to not diminish the quality of life those residents have enjoyed for a pct -iod of years. Then, there is the inherent pressure to create an economically sustainable urban infill redevelopment project that is anticipated to serve as the catalyst for the resurgence and renaissance of the entire South Federal Highway corridor-. Meeting each of these compethig demands and achieving consensus has proven to be an art and not a science, But we believe we are them. At the first SPRAR hearing on the Delray Place project; there was not sufficient time during the public hearing process for the pro'ject's consultants to frilly explain the intentions behind the project's design.. In an effort to ensure your time is best served during the March 13, 2013 1- rearing, our clients are makfgg themselves and their design consultants, as well as the site itself available to YOLK at all hours and at vow, convenience to answer any questions ou may have, The goal of this otTer is to endeavor to answer as many of your questions and concerns in 0 - 1C,1R0003lCorrespondencclLetter ro SPT 3 Doex SltePIan Review and Appearance Board February 20, 2013 Re; Delray Place Page advance so that the Board will be able to use its time efficiently and effectively during the hearing on March 1P. Their direct contact information is contained below, We certainly appreciate that you may be concerned about the appearance of irrlpropriety by having such discussions. Everyone is very sensitive in today's age of ultra- transparency and ethics reform. Such discussions with the project's design professionals are lawful pursuant to state law and local ordinances, subject only to disclosure during the public Dearing itself: Please feel free to confer with the City Attorney's Office if you have any concerns. You are also free to decline this offer, we also understand that serving on SPRAB is voluntary and not your regular employment_ This offer is therefore meant to provide you with a sufficient opportunity to fully explore the site plan at your convenience. Our clients are the developers, owners and managers of similar projects across southeast Florida. They live locally. They are committed to this property, to this project, and to the City of Delray Beach. They are therefore willing to provido you with whatever resources you need to make the best decision possible. We thank you for your time and consideration. .JEFFREY C. LYNNE JCL:mrni Mr, Joe Carosella Proi cot Developer caroseilaa.=123.corn (954) 647 -6790 (cell) Mark Sa1tL, AIA Project Architect nasal rresa ltzrni the lsa n.com_ (954) 266 -2700 ( office) Jeff Brophy, RLA, ASLA Project Landscape Architect JBroaLy rrLandDeSig`nSoutli.coin (561) 349 -1525 (cell) JDaclusi7 Vargas, P E., PTOL•' Project Traffic Engineer =o, ayuin awaftech,biz (954) 552-4998 (Office) Mr. Louis Csrrosel[a Project Developer 1caroseI]a(@ (954) 873 -4597 (cell) Dodi Glas, AICP Project Planner d_odi(rr7,2GHO.corn (561) 3 i U -7325 (ceH) Dennis Schultz, PE Project lr[gineer dshult r@ft nnengLrteeri[ia.c�m (954) 522 -1004 (office) Jeffrey C. Lynne, Esq. Project Agent '1 tine o ronclaw.corn (561) 239 -0839 (cell) NRC%IAFI, S. WUM JE A&Y C LYNNE LA,uRIEA. MHo,NTsoN J'UYnN M. CtATM L. DIANA HTLEMAN March ti, 2013 VIA F -11 AIL & U.S. MAIL Ron Kolins, Esq. 701 S. Olive Avenue Apt. 313 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Re: Delray Place Dear Ron: 1ANY 01-71ct:5 WEINER, LYNNE & THOMPSON, P.A. ATrORNEYs AT Law 14 SE 1° AVENUE, SUITE C DELRAY BEAc]-I, R.ORIDA 33444 ,n LFPpFio TF_ (561) 265 -`3666 FAcsftdmE (561) 272 - 6831 ]LyKst@'lzoNELAw.r_o M :SAM 20NTAw.L`OM 1 am writing on behalf of my clients, who have asked that i gather all of the responses from their various consultants to your clients' requests and provide their response accordingly. A sincere and significant effort has been undertaken to review the impacts of the proposed Delray Place development upon your specific clients' properties and every reasonable effort has been made to implement each requested accommodation. For those requests which could not be accommodated, please know that all efforts were nxade to otherwise find another sohttion or, should no solution exist, to provide an honest and complete response. Your requests, and our clients' responses, are as follows: Request 4 1: Building I leights: Maximum height at rear of buildings along Linton Blvd. to be no greater than 18'. The parapets are to be moved north to point approximately mid - building, with air - conditioning and other building equipment to be located north of said parapets. Response: Agreed. More specifically, the rear height of Buildings 600 - 900 have been reduced to eighteen feet (18') as requested. The air conditioning and other building equipment will need to be located no closer than sixteen feet (161) to the rear wall and enclosed with a waWsereening no higher than the tallest piece of equipment in compliance to the City code. Request 4 2. T.oading Docks= The loading docks proposed for the rear of the large buildings which are parallel to Federal Ilighway and just to the west of Spanish trail are to be enclosed, including roof with exhaust fans to be on the roof and directed 0;�CAR00031Correipondence 'Response -fu Ron Kafir; 3,633.0ou Edon Kolins, Esq. March G, 2013 Pa,gn 2 upward. No exhaust fans are to be located so as to face or be directed east towards Tropic Isle. Response: Agreed. This design was previously implemented into the site plan per request of the Tropic Isle Civic Association for Buildings 500 -510. The site plan remains unchanged in that regard and therefore complies with this request. Request # 3. Existing Vegetation: The existing vegetation located along Spanish Trail and Eve Street within. City owned easements is not to be disturbed, including the roots thereof. Walls and the footers therefore, must not be placed so as to disturb said vegetation,, some of which are very mature trees. Response: Agreed. Request ## 4: Sound Baffles: The rear walls of the large buildings running parallel to Federal Highway are to have sound baffles, as are the parallel walls between both of said buildings. This is to mitigate: the noise from tricks that will travel between the two buildings and to the rear of those buildings. Response: Agreed, in part. Sound absorbing panels will be provided on the south wall of Building 504 and the north wall of Building 506 so as to mitigate the noise from trnelo5 that will travel between these two buildings and to the rear of those buildings. Request # 5: Administrative Changes There are to be no administratively approved changes to the site plan or any element thereof, with the exception of changing the use of a particular building, and then only so long a` the change in use will not cause an increase in traffic or the need for additional parking spaces. Response: Agreed. Any reallocation of approved uses within established buildings which change in tenant category is consistent with the Shared Parking Equivalency Matrix and PB1C traffic coneurrency will be handled administratively; any change of site design or architectural elevations that does not seep an increase in height or intensity may be either approved administratively or via public hearing by SPRAB at the discretion of the Tuning Director. Request # 6: Banyan Tree: The large Banyan tree at the corner of the Schnabel house (corner of Spanish trail and McCleary Street) is not to be disturbed in any way, including the roots thereof, with the singular exception that, to the extent its branches may overhang the Delray Place property, those branches may be trimmed, but only to 0:IC.RODWCorresgondenceTo5pnrnse To Ron Kolins 3413.Docx Ron Kohns, Fsq. March 6, 2013 Page 3 the minimum extent necessary, and in no event beyond the property Sine of Delray Place. Response: Agreed. Request 9 7: Truck Deliveries: Delivery times to be limited to between 7 A.M. and 7 P.M., Monday through Saturday. Response: Delivery times shall be pursuant to commercially reasonable standards for shopping centers, taking into consideration the enormous expense undertaken by the property owner to create fully enclosed, air conditioned, and properly ventilated shared loading bays, which is not otherwise a requirement of the Land Development Regulations. As currently anticipated, all loadinglunloadingldelivery of goads shall begin no earlier than 6:00am and shall terminate by no later than 9pm daily. However, should the national specialty chain food store known as "Trader Joe's" become a tenant of the property, and pursuant to anticipated mandatory operating procedures for said specific tenant, loadinglunloadingldelivery of goods for this tenant alone shall begin no earlier than 5:00am and shall terminate by 10:00pm daily, with all said loading/unloading/delivery to occur entirely within the fully enclosed loading bays. In all instances, all overhead doors for all enclosed loading bays shall remain closed at all times that delivery vchicics occupy these spaces. Though unlikely, any vehicle required to wait in queue to enter the enclosed loading bays shall be required to turn off its engine. The sound absorbing panels will further mitigate the noise from said trucks. Request # 8: Areca Palms: Areca Palm trees of significant maturity .are to be planted by developer on the Tropic Isle side of all landscape buffers (in addition to other previously proposed landscaping) running the entire Perimeter of the Delray Place properly (from the easternmost boundary along the Minton Blvd. side to Spanish Trail, then running south along Spanish Trail to its intersection with Eve Street, then along Eve Street to the gate on Eve Street). The only exception to this is that Areca Palms are not to be planted in such a way as to disturb the Banyan tree or its roots at the intersection of Spanish Trail and McCleary Street. The Areca Palms are to be placed as close to brat tree as possible without so disturbing the tree. Response: Agreed, if approved by the City and not otherwise opposed by the Tropic Isle Civic Association for those portions of the property boundary not adjacent to a residence but otherwise adjacent to public right-of-way. The Areca Palms will need to be planted in between the 25' spacing of the required canopy trees as shown on the currently submitted landscape plan, and will be a O;1CAR0000-ormpon don =\Response To Ron Kohns 34.13.Doex Ron Kolins, S q. March G, 2013 Page 4 substitute spe6cs for the currently proposed smaller canopy trees in order to accommodate the landscape material adequately. Request # 9: Wood Fence: The existing wood fence Iying along the developer's property and Just outside of the City easement, and parallel to Spanish Trail and Eve Street, is to be removed. Its condition is very poor and it is an eyesore. Response: Agreed. All perimeter wood fencing is intended to be replaced with a pre- cast concrete wall. Request # 10: External Music and Outdoor Table Service: Sho►ild any of the buildings rurining parallel to Linton Blvd. be occupied by, and operated as, restaurants and/or bars, outdoor music and outdoor table service, if any, mlxst cease at J P.M. Response: Restaurants and/or bars which may he located within the structures identified as Buildings 61DU, 700, 800 and 900 shall not be permitted to have live outdoor entertainment but shall he permitted to provide pre- recorded music not to exceed City noise limits and shall terminate all such music by no later than 10:00 pm daily, consistent with enmmercially reasonable standards for shopping centers and taking into ennAderation the complete redesign of said buildings to create enclosed alcoves, at the request of the Tropic Isle Civic Association and specific residents not represented by counsel. Request # 11: Construction Access: There is to be no construction access for the construction of Delray Place from Eve Street east of the gate, or from any other portion of Tropic Isle. Response: Agreed. Request # 12: Building Relocation: The westernmost proposed building running parallel to Linton Blvd. is to be modified in such a way so as to remove and reloc:ale the two westernmost bays of said building. This will result in the row of buildings running parallel to Linton Blvd. to start further to the east by the width of two bays- Those two bays may be relocated by the developer elsewhere along that TOW of buildings to a place to be determined by the developer. It should be noted that the 'westernmost of said buildings, as presently reflected on the proposed site plan, extends westward of the house at 901 McCleary Street, thereby subjecting that corner property to development impacts on two_ sides, and dramatically impacting the quality of life at that property. Response: After detailed analysis, it has been determined that this request is unfortunately not feasible. Design of the entire site has been strictly scrutinized to reasonably mitigate all adverse impacts from the existing OAC: AR0003 %Cor"pon don c6Res pan seToRcn Kolins3.6.13.Docx Ron Kolins, Esq. March 6, 2013 Page 5 commercial parcel being redeveloped adjacent to the existing residential neighborhood. Relocation of the two western most bays of Building 6UU would have significant adverse impact upon the entire project. Buildings 600 thru 900 were specially designed to create a direct pedestrian connection to the, major anchor tenant in Building 5O0. Relocating Building 600 would undermine the cohesiveness of the center and its overwhelmingly pedestrian friendly and integrated design. Relocating Building 600 further east for the benefit of the single lot owner Identified would have to therefore come at the detriment of other homeowners who did not purchase their property immediately adjacent to an existing commercial use. While suggestions from this lot owner that support of the project could be obtained in exchange for purchase of their residence, the economics of such a transaction are not practical and would set an unhealthy precedent for the greater Tropic Isle community. Notwithstanding, and in contemplation of the redevelopment of this existing commercial site, the developers of the project have met with this specific lot owner on various occasions at both public and private meetings. The developers have critically examined every requested mitigation measure proposed by this specific resident (including the request for a twenty -foot (201) high wail between the properties) and have incorporated every feasible option at each opportunity, including highly expensive fully enclosed loading bays for Buildings 500 -510, as well as fully enclosed and air conditioned trash compaction rooms. Sound baffling has now been additionally requested and agreed to. Any further accommodation to this lot owner by way of relocation of Building 600, unfortunately, causes an unbalanced and unfair burden upon the developer and the project as a whole. Regrettably, the developers cannot agree to this request. Request # 13: Trash Areas. Trash Areas are to be air-conditioned and enclosed, Response: Agreed, with regard to all buildings adjacent to Tropic Isle (Buildings 500- 510, and 600 -900). The buildings immediately frontiing S. Federal Highway are not designed to have enclosed, air - conditioned trash areas. Request # 14: No "U" Turn Signs: Developer is to work with Tropic Isie and the City to have a No "U" Tarn sign installed at the intersection of Federal Highway and Tropic Isle Boulevard. O1C NRU0031Correspondenc6Respnnse To Ron Kelins 3.6,13.Doex Ron Kolins, Esq. March 6, 2013 Page 6 Response: Agreed. Request 9 15: Vertical Construction: Al l walls, landscaping; and related screening requirements located between Delray Place and Tropic We mnst be installed and completed for all said portions of the Delray Place development befbrc the start, of ■ ordeal construction. Response: While the developer respects and appreciates the concern expressed, it is not commercially realistic or practical to phase any construction in this manner. There is a phasing plan on file with the City which depicts anticipated demolition and construction phases. Due to irrigation requirements and the potential for injury to landscaping from construction activity, trees, shrubs, bushes and the like are one of the very last items to be installed in any project, residential or commercial. However, these items shall be installed prior to Certificate of Occupancy, per City code. Request 4 t6'. Rear Doers: There are to be no rear doors for the buildings facing and running parallel to Union Blvd. The large buildings facing Spanish Trail may have emergency read' doors Only. Response: Agreed. This design was previously implemented into the site plan per request of the Tropic Isle Civic Association. The site plan remains unchanged in that regard and therefore complies with this request. Request � .7: Lou' rnent: All mops, grease traps, buckets, and the like are to be internally stored within the buildings. Response: Agreed. Request # 18: Access Points: 'There are to be no additional access points to Delray Place beyond those shown on the latest site plan filed on behalf of'the developer as of the date hereof, namely 2126113. Response: Agreed. Rc,quest # 19: Site Plan Modifications: Developer will promptly amend its site plan to the eXteni nc=ssary to reflect the matters which, hopefully, will be agreed to herein. Response: The site plan, landscape plan, and architectural elevations already reflect most of the responses contained herein. If further additions are required to be consistent with these responses, same will be made as "conditions of approval' by staff and confirmed via the Site Plan Certification process. 0 :1CAR000ACorrespondencORespvnse To Coon Kaiinj 3- 6.13 -Docx Ran Kolins, Esq. March 6,20B Page 7 Request 9 20: This "request" was in the form of a generalized comment and therefore no response is warranted. However, as stated above, the responses set forth herein have either already been pre-60USly made a part of the site plan submittal or, as appropriate, and -sxith the City's consent, may be memorialized within Ordinance 41.12 or made a condition of site plan approval by SPRAB and confirmed through the City's standard Site Plau Certification process, Respectfully submitted, Cu. Ron Hoggard, AICP. Principal Planner, City- of Delray Beach Brian Shutt, Esq., City Attorney Ashlee L, Coosaia, EI, Project Manager Mr. roe Carosella Mr. Louis Carosella Mark S altz, AIA D odi Glas, A IC P Jeff Brophy, LSA Joaquin Vargas, PE 0: 1CAR0443 IC:arrespondeiioe\Response'['n Ron Kolins 3.6.13.Docx Hoggard, Ron From: Jeffrey Lynne <jlynne@zonelaw.com> Sent: Monday, February 04, 2013 6:47 PM To: kellifreeman @bellsouth.net; Ray Kempf Cc: Joe Carosella; Louis Carosella; Ashlee Coosaia; Michael S. Weiner; Dodi Glas; AIA Mark L. Saltz; Michele Burns; Dennis Shultz; Jeff Brophy; Hoggard, Ron; Jim Smith; Ronald Kenneth Kolins Subject: Re: Delray Place Update ?? Hi Kelli. Your timing is good. The architect met with staff today to go over the last few tweaks to the current evolution of the site plan. As requested by the City, I understand the 25% open space requirement has been achieved per code. More landscape islands are included in the parking area. Truck routes will only utilize Federal Highway and, to the extent it is able to be regulated, there will be no U -turn movements. Benches and trellises and other amenities have also been included along Federal Highway and Linton Boulevard in the setback. As requested by the residents, two buildings have been removed from the Linton Boulevard side of the project, eliminating significant gross leasable area for the site. The trash compactors and loading areas remain fully enclosed and air - conditioned. All other prior requested accommodations remain intact. Also, there is not, and never has been, any intention to touch the Eve Street gate. I understand that rumor continues to persist. As requested by Jim Smith/SAFE, bike racks have been strategically placed throughout the project to accommodate all intended users. We have also explored an additional traffic light at the exit on Linton Boulevard. However, that location does not meet county and state requirements due to proximity to the bridge and the existing Federal Highway intersection. We also met with South Florida Commuter Services and have agreed to work with them on integrating multimodal transportation alternatives for the employees. In summary, these are my understandings of the points that were sought to be included in the new site plan. I believe the final revised site plan is being prepared for submittal_ By copy of this email to Joe and Louis, I assume they will comment if anything I have said is a misstatement. Jeffrey Lynne, Esq. Weiner, Lynne & Thompson, P.A. Cell: (561) 239 -0839 www.zonclaw.com Sent from my iPhone On Feb 4, 2013, at 6:01 PM, "Kclli Freeman" <kcllifreeman[ bcllsouth.nct3 wrote: Hey Jeffrey Hope all is well with you, I haven't seen you in a while!! Can you provide me with any update on Delray Place? We have our Tropic Isle Annual Meeting Wednesday night and I would like to provide an update if you have one. Thanks Kelli Kelli Freeman (561) 706 -8766 Cell Tropic Isle Civic Association "Caring For Our Community" Please "like" Tropic Isle Civic Association on Facebook for updates! Haggard, Ron From: Jeffrey Lynne <jlynne @zonelaw.com> Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2013 5:41 PM To: JamesEJIMCHAR @aol.com; kellifreeman@bellsouth.net; ray_kempf @hotmail.com Cc: JCaroseIla@rpg123.com; LCarosella @rpg123.com; Ashlee Coosaia; Michael Weiner; Dodi@ 2gho.com; msaltz @saltzmichelson.com; Admin@rpg123.com; dshultzc@flynnengineering.com; JBrophy @Land Design5outh.com; Hoggard, Ron; Ashlee Coosaia Subject: RE: Delray Place Update ?? Jim — As always, thank you for your a -mail and for being a great advocate. I have responded, in kind, below. JEFFREY C. LYNNE, ESQ., LEES AP WEINER, LYNNE Et THOMPSON, P.A. 10 5E 1 st Avenue, Suite C [ Delray Beach, Florida 33444 Direct (561) 900 -0725 1 Cell (561) 239 -0839 Main (561) 265 -2666 1 Fax (561) 272 -6831 National (877) 901 -2666 REAL ESTATE I ZONING I GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS I LITIGATION itynne@zonetaw.com I www.zonelaw.corn APlease consider the environment before printingthis email. NOTICE: This e -mail message and any attachment to this e-mail message contains confidential information that may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not review, retransmit, convert to hard copy. copy, use or disseminate this e-mail or any attachments to it. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail or by telephone at 561- 265 -2666 and delete this message. Please note that if this e-mail message contains a forwarded message or is a reply to a prior message. some or all of the contents of this message or any attachments may not have been produced by the sender. From: JamesEJIMCHAR @ao €.com [mai €to:JamesE]IMCHAR@ao €.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2013 3:55 PM To: Jeffrey Lynne; kellifreeman @bellsouth.net,' ray— kempf @hotmail.com Cc: ]Carole €la @rpg123.com; LCarosella @rpg123.com; Ashlee Coosaia; Michael Weiner; Dodi @2gho.com; msaltz @saitzmicheison.com; Admin@rpg123.com; dshu €tz @flynnengineering.com; JBrophy @LandDesignSouth.com; Hoggard @mydelraybeach.com; cleanslaterk @gmail.com Subject: Re: Delray Place Update ?? Jeff It was very welcomed news to discover that the applicant has eliminated the two buildings on the Linton Blvd side of the project which will increase the number and reduce the demand for parking spaces. How many total parking spaces will now be provided in the project? APPROXIMATELY 407- 410, WHICH EQUATES TO 3.5 SPACES11000 S.F. As a point of reference, based on info SAFE has received from Bridgid O'Connor of the Publix Real Estate Department, " Publix typically requires 5 spaces per 1,44DSF of retail to adequately accommodate our customers and associates...." It seems likely that a Trader Joes would require at least that number of parking spaces. There have been too many horror stories about Trader Joes parking /traffic problems all over the USA to ignore (see attached). A TYPICAL PUBLIX OR WHOLE FOODS IS WELL OVER 50,000 S.F. IN FACT WHOLE FOODS BEGAN SCALING BACK STORES FROM ITS PROTOTYPE 80,400 S.F. TO 35K -50K S.F. TRADER JOES IS MUCH SMALLER, AND THE ONE CONTEMPLATED FOR DELRAY PLACE (ASSUMING THEY DON'T BACK OUT AND GO TO BOCA AT THIS POINT) 1S LESS THAN 13,040 S.F., WHICH IS OVER SEVENTY -FIVE PERCENT (75 %) SMALLER IN SCALE AND USE. THE PICTURES YOU SENT SHOW A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD WITH ON- STREET PARKING. ALL OF OUR PARKING IS OFF- STREET AND ON -SITE. THE AREAS REFERENCED ARE ALSO IN HEAVILY URBANIZED AREAS (CHICAGO; LOS ANGELES). I DO NOT BELIEVE A PROPER COMPARISON CAN BE MADE. As SAFE mentioned during our joint meeting with South Florida Commuter Services and our follow - up "Thank you" email, we hope that the applicant will provide secure inside employee bicycle storage, lockers, and separate shower facilities for males and females. JUST FOR THE RECORD, WE MET WITH YOU AND WITH CHARLIE BONFIELD; THERE WAS NO ONE ELSE FROM "SAFE" PRESENT. WE ALSO COULD NOT FIND "SAFE" OR ANY EQUIVALENT ORGANIZATION REGISTERED WITH THE SECRETARY OF STATE OR REGISTERED AS A LOBBYIST WITH THE COUNTY OR THE CITY. UNDER THE NEW COUNTY ETHICS RULES, WE ARE NOT SURE IF THIS APPLIES TO "SAFE ". WE ALSO COULD NOT FIND A WEBSITE THAT HAD ANY OTHER INFORMATION AS TO WHO "SAFE" IS. I ALSO BELIEVE YOU SAID YOU LIVE NEAR THE PROJECT AND THEREFORE I BELIEVE YOU RIGHTFULLY HAVE A PERSONAL INTEREST IN THIS PROJECT, ABOVE WHAT THE TYPICAL "SAFE" MEMBER MAY HAVE. NOTWITHSTANDING, I PERSONALLY RECOGNIZE YOUR PASSION FOR SAFETY AND MULTI -MODAL TRANSPORTATION AND APPLAUD YOU FOR SAME. I WISH OTHERS WOULD DO AS MUCH AS YOU. WITH THAT SAID, THE SITE IS HAS MULTIPLE CONVENIENTLY LOCATED BIKE RACKS, STRATEGICALLY PLACED THROUGHOUT THE SITE BOTH FOR BUSINESS INVITEES AND EMPLOYEES. BUILDING INTERNAL BIKE STORAGE, LOCKERS, AND SHOWER FACILITIES, AS YOU PRESENTED BY COMPARISON TO US FOR THE ATLANTIC PLAZA PROJECT, WERE PART OF A LARGER RESIDENTIAL PROJECT, WHICH AMENITIES WILL ALSO BE SHARED, AS WE UNDERSTAND, BY RENTERS. OUR CLIENT'S PROJECT IS COMPRISED OF SINGLE - STORY STRUCTURES, UNLIKE ATLANTIC PLAZA, AND THEREFORE THIS ADDITIONAL "AMENITY" IS NOT FEASIBLE. WE HAVE ALREADY REMOVED 30,000 S.F. OF GROSS LEASABLE AREA. Since an employee occupies a parking space 8 hours or more, having one employee ride a bicycle to work, means that approximately 34 customers can parking in that employee "saved" parking space over an employee shift. In addition to this obvious reduction in parking demand, employers will discover that employees will be more attracted to work for an employer who provides for such facilities as one who does not. WE AGREE, WHICH IS WHY WE COMMITTED IN WRITING TO WORKING WITH SOUTH FLORIDA COMMUTER SERVICES TO EDUCATE ALL EMPLOYEES ABOUT THE IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT BUS STOP, CONVENIENT BUS ROUTE, AS WELL AS THE TRI -RAIL ROUTE. WE ALSO FULLY SUPPORT THE FEC RAILWAY STUDY WHICH WILL BRING COMMUTER PASSENGER SERVICE TO THE AREA IN THE FUTURE. ►a SAFE continues to have concerns about exiting, left turn traffic onto Linton Blvd. Currently, there is considerable left- turning traffic from Linton Blvd. into Harbours Edge and the Harbor Plaza shopping center on the north side of Linton Blvd; and, left- turning traffic exiting from the north side of Linton Blvd., headed east over the bridge. SAFE believes that without a new traffic signal the introduction of semi - tractor trailers turning left onto Linton Blvd. from Delray Place will exasperate the situation to an unsafe level. Linton Blvd. is a five lane highway with a median where traffic speeds sometimes exceed 50 mph. As far as SAFE knows there has been no traffic study prepared by either the City or the applicant that would project peak left turning traffic onto Linton Blvd. Also, SAFE calculates that the distance from the Federal Highway traffic signal is 510'- more than enough distance to qualify for a traffic signal, if traffic warrants. SAFE points out that this distance is greater than the distance between the two existing traffic signals on Federal Highway /Linton Blvd. and Banyan Tree Lane /Federal Highway. If the applicant would be willing to provide the name and contact info of the person in the Palm Beach County Traffic Engineering Department who told the applicant that a new traffic signal "does not meet county and state requirements due to proximity to the bridge and the existing Federal Highway intersection," SAFE will have an easy way to satisfy itself that a new traffic signal will not be allowed. THE SPACING OF SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS SHOULD ALLOW EFFICIENT SIGNAL PROGRESSION AT THE PREVAILING SPEEDS AND CYCLE LENGTHS. THIS NORMALLY REQUIRES RELATIVELY UNIFORM SPACINGS BETWEEN SIGNALS, AND SUFFICIENT DISTANCES BETWEEN THEM. I BELIEVE, ACCORDING TO FDOT REGULATIONS, THE MINIMUM DISTANCE BETWEEN TRAFFIC SIGNALS IS 750 FEET, AND IDEALLY 1,320 FEET. THE EXISTING DISTANCE BETWEEN THE MEDIAN CUT YOU REFERENCE AND THE EXISTING LIGHT AT FEDERAL HIGHWAY IS ACTUALLY APPROXIMATELY 330 FEET. IF YOU BELIEVE WE ARE LOOKING AT THE WRONG REGULATIONS, PLEASE LET U5 KNOW. However, if the applicant believes the info obtained from the County to be correct, why doesn't the applicant simply agree to a promise to pay for a new traffic signal on Linton Blvd for up to 1 year after the project is occupied, subject to City and County assessment? ASSUMING YOU WERE ALSO INVOLVED WITH THE REDEVELOPMENT APPROVAL OF THE STILES DEVELOPMENT ON THE NE CORNER, WHICH IS BUILDING THE NEW FRESH MARKET, WAS THIS A CONDITION OF THEIR APPROVAL? I DO NOT KNOW. SUCH AN EXCESSIVE FINANCIAL BURDEN SHOULD BE SHARED BY EVERYONE. AS IS, THE TROPIC ISLE COMMUNITY HAS REQUESTED FULLY ENCLOSED AND AIR CONDITIONED SHARED LOADING BAYS AND TRASH COMPACTORS, COSTING HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS. OUR CLIENT IS NOT A DEVELOPER WITH DEEP POCKETS LIKE STILES. AGAIN, PLEASE ACCEPT THIS E -MAIL AS A RESPONSE TO YOU AND CHARLIE AND HOPE 15 ANSWERS YOUR QUESTIONS. Please ask the applicant to respond to all of SAFE's questions and suggestions. SAFE wants to support this project, but as of now it cannot. Best Regards, Jim Smith, SAFE Chairman 3 1225 S. Ocean Blvd, # 242 Delray Beach, FL 33483 (561) 330 -6798 Phone & Fax i a m esei i m ch ar(a)aol . com "Help Florida become the most motorist, pedestrian, and bicyclist friendly state in the USA" In a message dated 2/4/2013 6.47:04 P.M. Easton Standard Time, iIynnerdzonclaw.com writes: Hi Kel1i. Your timing is good. The architect met with staff today to go over the last few tweaks to the current evolution of the site plan. As requested by the City, I understand the 25% open space requirement has been achieved per code. More landscape islands are included in the parking area. Truck routes will only utilize Federal Highway and, to the extent it is able to be regulated, there will be no U -turn movements. Benches and trellises and other amenities have also been included along Federal Highway and Linton Boulevard in the setback. As requested by the residents, two buildings have been removed from the Linton Boulevard side of the project, eliminating significant gross leasable area for the site. The trash compactors and loading areas remain fully enclosed and air - conditioned. All other prior requested accommodations remain intact. Also, there is not, and never has been, any intention to touch the Eve Street gate. I understand that rumor continues to persist. As requested by Jim Smith /SAFE, bike racks have been strategically placed throughout the project to accommodate all intended users. We have also explored an additional traffic light at the exit on Linton Boulevard However, that location does not meet county and state requirements due to proximity to the bridge and the existing Federal Highway intersection. We also met with South Florida Commuter Services and have agreed to work with them on integrating multimodal transportation alternatives for the employees. In summary, these are my understandings of the paints that were sought to be included in the new site plan. I believe the final revised site plan is being prepared for submittal. By copy of this email to Joe and Louis, I assume they will comment if anything I have said is a misstatement. Jeffrey Lynne, Esq. Weiner, Lynne & Thompson, P.A. Cell: (561 ) 239 -0839 www.zonelaw.com Sent from my iPhone On Feb 4, 2013, at 6:01 PM, "Kelli Freeman" <kellifreemanCEDbellsouth.net> wrote: Hey Jeffrey Hope all is well with you, I haven't seen you in a while!! Can you provide me with any update on Delray Place? We have our Tropic Isle Annual Meeting Wednesday night and I would like to provide an update if you have one. Thanks Kclli Kelli Freeman (561) 706 -8766 Cell Tropic Isle Civic Association "Caring For Our Community" Please "like" Tropic Isle Civic Association on Facebook for updates! Haggard, Ron From: Jeffrey Lynne <jlynne @zonelaw.com> Sent: Monday, February 11, 2013 6:45 AM To: ctbonfield @aol.com Cc: JamesEJIMCHAR @aol.com; kellifreeman @bellsouth.net; ray_kempf @hotmail.com; JCaroseIla @rpg123.com; LCaroseIla @rpg123.com; Ashlee Coosaia; Michael Weiner; Dodi@ 2gho.com; msaltz @saltzmichelson.com; Admin@rpg123.com; dshultz @flynnengineering.com; JBrophy @LandDesignSouth.com; Haggard, Ron; Dorling, Paul Subject: Re: Delray Place Update ?? We have integrated each of your requests to the maximum extent possible. Jeffrey Lynne, Esq. Weiner, Lynne & Thompson, P.A. Cell: (561) 239 -0839 Sent from my iPad On Feb 11, 2013, at 6.08 AM, "ctbonfield waol.com" <ctbonfield a,aol.com> wrote: on- ii The "no truck ingress/egress on Linton" for the Delray Place project is appropriate and a relief. Those of us who drive on Linton Boulevard regularly could envision considerable traffic congestion at this junction particularly when the Linton Bridge has opened and then closed. We already have traffic congestion at the Atlantic Avenue Bridge when it has opened and closed. During season, traffic at this bridge can back up to A1A on the east and 5th Avenue on the west after an openinglclosing. It will become even worse when Atlantic Crossing is built out. This could happen at Linton should there be much egress traffic from Delray Place. Thanks for your consideration on this request. Charlie Bonfield 220 Macfarlane Drive # 1243 Delray Beach FL 33483 1 561 330 6329 ctbonfield(a)aol.com In a message dated 2/10/2013 3:08 :36 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, ilynne(d)zonelaw.com writes: You are correct re no truck ingress/egress on Linton. Jeffrey Lynne, Esq. Weiner, Lynne & Thompson, P.A. Cell: (561) 239 -0839 www.zonelaw.com Sent from my iPhone On Feb 10, 2013, at 2:46 PM, "JamesEJIMCHAROaol.com" <JamesEJIMCHARaaol.com�> wrote: Jeff et al: Thanks for your email response and for your kind words about me and the SAFE organization. As you know, SAFE President Charlie Bonfield and I arranged the meeting and prepared the meeting agenda that you, the brother of the developer, and two staffers from South Florida Commuter Services attended. So, I would say that SAFE was very much involved in that effort. For those of you who are unfamiliar with SAFE, please let me explain what SAFE is, and what our mission is: SAFE is an email based, non -dues, advocacy organization that connects with individuals, elected officials, government leaders, governmental departments /agencies, businesses, clubs, the media, etc_, to promote safety on Florida roadways. SAFE periodically sends out a free, email newsletter_ SAFE's long -term goal is to change Florida's reputation from being known as a "killing zone" for motorists, pedestrians and bicyclists, to being known as the safest state in the nation for travelers. SAFE will not have accomplished its mission until Florida is universally recognized as the # 1 motorist, pedestrian, and bicyclist friendly state in the USA. SAFE was founded in 2004. At that time, SAFE's sole mission was to influence the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) to build bicycle lanes and additional sidewalks on A 1 A in Delray Beach_ At that time, our membership was confined, for the most part, to Delray Beach residents. Since that time, SAFE has enlarged the scope of its mission to include safety on all Florida roads (not just confined to AIA), and to include motorist safety, as well as pedestrian and bicyclist safety. SAFE has few membership meetings, but instead, relies on email to communicate. SAFE advocacy activities include writing emails to elected officials/government leaders, emailing "letters to the editor ", working on special projects, proposing law changes, preparing research reports, and attending public meetings. We hope you agree with SAFE's mission, and offer your support by becoming a member. To become a new SAFE member, please send a "YES" email to jamesejimchara,aol.com. If at any time you want to stop receiving V1 SAFE'S free newsletter, just let us know, and SAFE will delete your email address. Thanks. SAFE has three continuing problems with Delray Place: adequate parking, appropriate TDM initiatives, and truck traffic exiting onto Linton Blvd that is headed west, south, and east. First, let's address the parking issue. In your email you stated that after eliminating two buildings on the Linton Blvd. side of the project, there will now be between 407- 410 parking spaces which equates to 3.5 spaces/1,000 S.F. vs. the City minimum of 4.0 spaces/1,000 S.F. Based on SAFE's analysis of parking spaces at The Boys on S. Military. SAFE does not believe that City's minimum parking requirement for a shopping center will be adequate to prevent congestion and spill -over traffic to the surrounding neighborhoods. SAFE counted 173 parking spaces at the Boys. Customer parking totals 141 parking spaces and employee parking adds another 32. Included in the 141 spaces are 8 spaces along the south perimeter where there are "No parking signs ". However. this mornina at 11:30, when we took the survev. these spaces were occupied as were the rest of the customer parking spaces. SAFE suggests that the applicant and the City audit our numbers. The owner of The Boys wasn't exactly sure of the square footage of the building since he has added on several times. His estimate was 12,000 S.F. From my own experience in the retail industry, I would have estimated 11,000 to 12,000 S.F The question that must be addressed by the City is whether the formula of 4.0 for Delray Place is sufficient. The City must weigh the actual experience of The Boys with a formula approach for Delray Place. The formula would require 4 X 13,000 S.F., or 52 parking spaces for Delray Place vs. the 173 actual parking spaces at The Boys. Some people even believe that the 173 parking spaces provided at The Boys is inadequate. As a result of our count of parking spaces at The Boys, and from blogging stories about the high volume of shoppers at existing Trader Joes and resulting parking problems, SAFE believes that applicant needs to either provide more parking or or reduce the demand for parking. It seems to us that the developer has three ways to make that happen - either to reduce density further or implement Transportation Demand Management (TDM) initiatives that will reduce employee parking, or some combinations of the two. Jeff, referring to another of your points, SAFE will require that bicycle showers, lockers, and inside bicycle storage be provided. Atlantic Crossing will be providing for these facilities for its employees. Residents at Atlantic Crossing will have separate inside bicycle storage and will not need showers or lockers. As far as a traffic light on Linton Blvd is concerned, Linton Blvd is a County road and not a State road. So, "yes" you are looking at the wrong regulation. Please exam the County code, 2009 Edition — Revision I, Section 1A.09. That regulation states that "...this Manual should not be considered a substitute for engineering judgement." However, SAFE has learned that the applicant may be considering a change in the directional flow of exiting truck traffic by moving it to Federal Highway so this point may be mute. If this is correct, we applaud that decision. Since the BPOA similarly disapproved of exiting trucks on Linton Blvd, they may be pleased as well. Best Regards, Jim Smith, SAFE Chairman 1225 S. Ocean Blvd, # 242 Delray Beach, FL 33483 (561 ) 334 -6798 Phone & Fax iamesei im chara- aol.com "Help Florida become the most motorist, pedestrian, and bicyclist friendly state in the USA" PS: Attached are a few horror stories about parking at The Boys and other Trader Joes. See you can tell which are which. Note: some of the Trader Joes are located in shopping centers. In a message dated 2/6/2013 5.40.59 P.M. Eastern Standard Timc, ilynncRzonclaw.com writes: Jim — As always, thank you for your e-mail and for being a great advocate. I have responded, in kind, below. .JEFFREY C. LYNNE, ESQ., LEER AP WEINER, LYNNE Et THOMPSON, P.A. 10 SE 1 st Avenue, Suite C I Delray Beach, Florida 33444 Direct (561) 900 -0725 1 Cell (561) 239 -0839 Main (561) 265 -2666 1 Fax (561) 272 -6831 4 National (877) 901 -2666 REAL ESTATE I ZONING I GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS I LITIGATION ilynneC@zonelaw.com I www.zonetaw.com APlease consider the environment before printingthis email. NOTICE: This e-mail message and any attachment to this e-mail message contains confidential information that may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not review, retransmit, convert to hard copy, copy, use or disseminate this e-mail or any attachments to it. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately by return a -mail or by telephone at 561 - 265 -2666 and delete this message. Please note that if this e-mail message contains a forwarded message or is a reply to a prior message, some or all of the contents of this message or any attachments may not have been produced by the sender. From: JamesEIIMCHAR@aol.com rmailto:JamesE]IMCHAR @ aol.corn Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2013 3:55 PM To: Jeffrey Lynne; kellifreeman @bellsouth.net; ray kempf @hotmail.com Cc: Karosella (argg123.corn; LCarose1la @rpy123.corn; Ashlee Coosaia; Michael Weiner; Dodi @2gho.corn: msaltzOsaitzmichelson.com: Admin0rpg123.corn: dshultz@flynnengineering.com; IBrophy(a Land Design5outh.corn Hoggard@mydelraybeach.com; cleanslaterk@gmail.com Subject: Re: Delray Place Update ?? Jeff: It was very welcomed news to discover that the applicant has eliminated the two buildings on the Linton Blvd side of the project which will increase the number and reduce the demand for parking spaces. How many total parking spaces will now be provided in the project? APPROXIMATELY 407 -410, WHICH EQUATES TO 3.5 SPACES11000 S.F. As a point of reference, based on info SAFE has received from Bridgid O'Connor of the Publix Real Estate Department, " Publix typically requires 5 spaces per 1,OOOSF of retail to adequately accommodate our customers and associates...." It seems likely that a Trader Joes would require at least that number of parking spaces. There have been too many horror stories about Trader Joes parking /traffic problems all over the USA to ignore (see attached). A TYPICAL PUBLIX OR WHOLE FOODS IS WELL OVER 50,000 S.F. IN FACT WHOLE FOODS BEGAN SCALING BACK STORES FROM ITS PROTOTYPE 80,000 S.F. TO 35K -50K S.F. TRADER JOES IS MUCH SMALLER, AND THE ONE CONTEMPLATED FOR DELRAY PLACE (ASSUMING THEY DON'T BACK OUT AND GO TO BOCA AT THIS POINT) IS LESS THAN 13,000 S.F., WHICH IS OVER SEVENTY - FIVE PERCENT (75 %) SMALLER IN SCALE AND USE. THE PICTURES YOU SENT SHOW A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD WITH ON- STREET PARKING. ALL OF OUR PARKING IS OFF - STREET AND ON -SITE. THE AREAS REFERENCED ARE ALSO IN HEAVILY URBANIZED AREAS (CHICAGO; LOS ANGELES). I DO NOT BELIEVE A PROPER COMPARISON CAN BE MADE. As SAFE mentioned during our joint meeting with South Florida Commuter Services and our follow -up "Thank you" email, we hope that the applicant will provide secure inside employee bicycle storage, lockers, and separate shower facilities for males and females. JUST FOR THE RECORD, WE MET WITH YOU AND WITH CHARLIE BONFIELD; THERE WAS NO ONE ELSE FROM "SAFE" PRESENT. WE ALSO COULD NOT FIND "SAFE" OR ANY EQUIVALENT ORGANIZATION REGISTERED WITH THE SECRETARY OF STATE OR REGISTERED AS A LOBBYIST WITH THE COUNTY OR THE CITY. UNDER THE NEW COUNTY ETHICS RULES, WE ARE NOT SURE IF THIS APPLIES TO "SAFE ". WE ALSO COULD NOT FIND A WEBSITE THAT HAD ANY OTHER INFORMATION AS TO WHO "SAFE" IS. I ALSO BELIEVE YOU SAID YOU LIVE NEAR THE PROJECT AND THEREFORE I BELIEVE YOU RIGHTFULLY HAVE A PERSONAL INTEREST IN THIS PROJECT, ABOVE WHAT THE TYPICAL "SAFE" MEMBER MAY HAVE. NOTWITHSTANDING, I PERSONALLY RECOGNIZE YOUR PASSION FOR SAFETY AND MULTI -MODAL TRANSPORTATION AND APPLAUD YOU FOR SAME. I WISH OTHERS WOULD DO AS MUCH AS YOU. WITH THAT SAID, THE SITE IS HAS MULTIPLE CONVENIENTLY LOCATED BIKE RACKS, STRATEGICALLY PLACED THROUGHOUT THE SITE BOTH FOR BUSINESS INVITEES AND EMPLOYEES. BUILDING INTERNAL BIKE STORAGE, LOCKERS, AND SHOWER FACILITIES, AS YOU PRESENTED BY COMPARISON TO US FOR THE ATLANTIC PLAZA PROJECT, WERE PART OF A LARGER RESIDENTIAL PROJECT, WHICH AMENITIES WILL ALSO BE SHARED, AS WE UNDERSTAND, BY RENTERS. OUR CLIENT'S PROJECT IS COMPRISED OF SINGLE -STORY STRUCTURES, UNLIKE ATLANTIC PLAZA, AND THEREFORE THIS ADDITIONAL "AMENITY" IS NOT FEASIBLE. WE HAVE ALREADY REMOVED 30,000 S.F. OF GROSS LEASABLE AREA. Since an employee occupies a parking space 8 hours or more, having one employee ride a bicycle to work, means that approximately 34 customers can parking in that employee "saved" parking space over an employee shift. In addition to this obvious reduction in parking demand, employers will discover that employees will be more attracted to work for an employer who provides for such facilities as one who does not. WE AGREE, WHICH IS WHY WE COMMITTED IN WRITING TO WORKING WITH SOUTH FLORIDA COMMUTER SERVICES TO EDUCATE ALL EMPLOYEES ABOUT THE IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT BUS STOP, CONVENIENT BUS ROUTE, AS WELL AS THE TRI -RAIL ROUTE. WE ALSO FULLY SUPPORT THE FEC RAILWAY STUDY WHICH WILL BRING COMMUTER PASSENGER SERVICE TO THE AREA IN THE FUTURE. SAFE continues to have concerns about exiting, left turn traffic onto Linton Blvd. Currently, there is considerable left- turning traffic from Linton Blvd. into Harbours Edge and the Harbor Plaza shopping center on the north side of Linton Blvd; and, left- turning traffic exiting from the north side of Linton Blvd., headed east over the bridge. SAFE believes that without a new traffic signal the introduction of semi - tractor trailers turning left onto Linton Blvd. from Delray Place will exasperate the situation to an unsafe level. Linton Blvd. is a five lane highway with a median where traffic speeds sometimes exceed 50 mph. As far as SAFE knows there has been no traffic study prepared by either the City or the applicant that would project peak left turning traffic onto Linton Blvd. Also, SAFE calculates that the distance from the Federal Highway traffic signal is 514'- more than enough distance to qualify for a traffic signal, if traffic warrants. SAFE points out that this distance is greater than the distance between the two existing traffic signals on Federal Highway /Linton Blvd. and Banyan Tree Lane /Federal Highway. If the applicant would be willing to provide the name and contact info of the person in the Palm Beach County Traffic Engineering Department who told the applicant that a new traffic signal "does not meet county and state requirements due to proximity to the bridge and the existing Federal Highway intersection," SAFE will have an easy way to satisfy itself that a new traffic signal will not be allowed. THE SPACING OF SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS SHOULD ALLOW EFFICIENT SIGNAL PROGRESSION AT THE PREVAILING SPEEDS AND CYCLE LENGTHS. THIS NORMALLY REQUIRES RELATIVELY UNIFORM SPACINGS BETWEEN SIGNALS, AND SUFFICIENT DISTANCES BETWEEN THEM. I BELIEVE, ACCORDING TO FDOT REGULATIONS, THE MINIMUM DISTANCE BETWEEN TRAFFIC SIGNALS IS 750 FEET, AND IDEALLY 1,320 FEET. THE EXISTING DISTANCE BETWEEN THE MEDIAN CUT YOU REFERENCE AND THE EXISTING LIGHT AT FEDERAL HIGHWAY IS ACTUALLY APPROXIMATELY 330 FEET. IF YOU BELIEVE WE ARE LOOKING AT THE WRONG REGULATIONS, PLEASE LET US KNOW. However, if the applicant believes the info obtained from the County to be correct, why doesn't the applicant simply agree to a promise to pay for a new traffic signal on Linton Blvd for up to 1 year after the project is occupied, subject to City and County assessment? ASSUMING YOU WERE ALSO INVOLVED WITH THE REDEVELOPMENT APPROVAL OF THE STILES DEVELOPMENT ON THE NE CORNER, WHICH IS BUILDING THE NEW FRESH MARKET, WAS THIS A CONDITION OF THEIR APPROVAL? I DO NOT KNOW. SUCH AN EXCESSIVE FINANCIAL BURDEN SHOULD BE SHARED BY EVERYONE. AS IS, THE TROPIC ISLE COMMUNITY HAS REQUESTED FULLY ENCLOSED AND AIR CONDITIONED SHARED LOADING BAYS AND TRASH COMPACTORS, COSTING HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS. OUR CLIENT IS NOT A DEVELOPER WITH DEEP POCKETS LIKE STILES. AGAIN, PLEASE ACCEPT THIS E -MAIL AS A RESPONSE TO YOU AND CHARLIE AND HOPE 15 ANSWERS YOUR QUESTIONS. Please ask the applicant to respond to all of SAFE's questions and suggestions. SAFE wants to support this project, but as of now it cannot. Best Regards, Jim Smith, SAFE Chairman 1225 S. Ocean Blvd, # 242 Delray Beach, FL 33483 (561 ) 330 -6798 Phone & Fax iamesei im char(a)aol.com "Help Florida become the most motorist, pedestrian, and bicyclist friendly state in the USA" In a message dated 2/4/2413 6:47:44 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, ilynne u,zonelaw.com writes: Hi Kelli. Your timing is good_ The architect met with staff today to go over the last few tweaks to the current evolution of the site plan. As requested by the City, I understand the 25% open space requirement has been achieved per code. More landscape islands are included in the parking area. Truck routes will only utilize Federal Highway and, to the extent it is able to be regulated, there will be no U -turn movements. Benches and trellises and other amenities have also been included along Federal Highway and Linton Boulevard in the setback. As requested by the residents, two buildings have been removed from the Linton Boulevard side of the project, eliminating significant gross leasable area for the site. The trash compactors and loading areas remain fully enclosed and air - conditioned. All other prior requested accommodations remain intact. Also, there is not, and never has been, any intention to touch the Eve Street gate. I understand that rumor continues to persist. As requested by Jim Smith /SAFE, bike racks have been strategically placed throughout the project to accommodate all intended users. We have also explored an additional traffic light at the exit on Linton Boulevard. However, that location does not meet county and state requirements due to proximity to the bridge and the existing Federal Highway intersection. We also met with South Florida Commuter Services and have agreed to work with them on integrating multimodaI transportation alternatives for the employees. In summary, these are my understandings of the points that were sought to be included in the new site plan. I believe the final revised site plan is being prepared for submittal. By copy of this email to Joe and Louis, I assume they will comment if anything I have said is a misstatement. Jeffrey Lynne, Esq. Weiner, Lynne & Thompson, P.A. Cell: (561 ) 239 -0839 www.zonelaw.com Sent from my iPhone On Feb 4, 2013, at 6:01 PM, "Kelli Freeman" <kellifreemanabellsouth.net> wrote: Hey Jeffrey Hope all is well with you, f haven't seen you in a while!! Can you provide me with any update on Delray Place? We have our Tropic Isle Annual Meeting Wednt night and I would like to provide an update if you have one. Thanks Kelli Kelli Freeman 10 (561) 706 -8766 Cell Tropic Isle Civic Association "Caring For Our Community" Please "like" Tropic Isle Civic Association on Facebook for updates! Jim Smith, SAFE Chairman 1225 S. Ocean Blvd, # 202 Delray Beach, FL 33483 (561 ) 334 -6798 Phone & Fax iamesei im charcc-Daol.com "Help Florida become the most motorist, pedestrian, and bicyclist friendly state in the USA" <Boys.TraderJ oes. Parking. docx> 11 Haggard, Ron From: Dorling, Paul Sent: Friday, February 15, 2013 9:56 AM To: Haggard, Ron Subject: FW: Insufficient Parking at Delray Place fyi Paul Dorling, AICP Director of Planning and Zoning City Of Delray Beach 100 N 1 st. Avenue Delray Beach, Florida 33444 561 - 243 -7040 dorl ing p(cDci.de Iray- beach.fl. us From: ]amesE]IMCHAR@aol.com rmai1to:7amesE]IMCHAR @ aol.com] Sent: Friday, February 15, 2013 7:52 AM To: Dorling, Paul Subject: Insufficient Parking at Delray Place Paul After analyzing the parking requirement of the proposed Delray Place project, SAFE believes that the applicant's request to provide only 407- 410 parking spaces, or 3.5!1.000 S.F. will be woefully inadequate to support the proposed development. According to a study SAFE conducted, The Boys Farmers Market has 173 parking spaces that are full at peak time. Based on an estimated 11,000 — 12,000 S.F., the parking ratio of The Boys is a whopping 15.0!1,000 S.F. Therefore, if the planned for Trader Joes is as popular as The Boys — and, there is no reason to think otherwise based on Trader Joes popularity in other locations - applying the same formula to 13,000 S. F. of gross floor area would require 195 parking spaces. Of course, since The Boys is a stand -alone facility, while Trader Joes is located in a proposed shopping center, Trader Joes seemingly would be able to take advantage of shared parking. However, the planned usage of the shopping center is not conducive to benefiting from shared parking since the restaurants and Trader Joes peak parking demand will coincide during both lunch and dinner times. If there are four restaurants in the shopping center with an average square footage of 6,000, the parking space requirement for those restaurants would total 288 (6,000 S. F. X 12 X 4). So, if there were only 407 — 410 parking spaces originally provided, and you subtract the prime parking needs of both Trader Joes (195) and the four restaurants (288), the shopping center would be short 73 - 76 parking spaces before even considering the parking needs of all the other tenants! If nothing is done to either increase the number of parking spaces or reduce parking demand, or a combination of both, there will be mayhem in the parking lot during peak times. SAFE offers a few action plans for reducing demand: 1. Require off -site parking for employees, 2. Adopt TDM initiatives, and 3. Install "LOT FULL" signs with active management by parking attendants, Note: The City may want to consider offering the applicant the rental use of the Atlantic Dunes parking lot for employees. In any event, the P & Z should consider implementing a "No Queue" condition. Click here: 1401 California: Trader Joe's And CVS Authorization This Week at SocketSiteTM Other SAFE concerns: 1. SAFE understands that there will be no on -site management, 2. Trader Joes operating hours — will they stay open until 10:00 PM? 3. Will there be security personnel and security cameras? Thank you for your consideration. Jim Smith, SAFE Chairman 1225 S. Ocean Blvd, # 202 Delray Beach, FL 33483 (561) 330 -6798 Phone & Fax iamesej im char(a-)aol.com "Help Florida become the most motorist, pedestrian, and bicyclist friendly state in the USA" ►a After analyzing the parking requirement of the proposed Delray Place project, SAFE believes that the applicant's request to provide only 407- 410 parking spaces, or 3.5!1.000 S. F. will be woefully inadequate to support the proposed development. According to a study SAFE conducted, The Boys Farmers Market has 173 parking spaces that are full at peak time. Based on an estimated 11,000 — 12,000 S. F., the parking ratio of The Boys is a whopping 15.011,000 S. F. Therefore, if the planned for Trader Joes is as popular as The Boys — and, there is no reason to think otherwise based on Trader Joes popularity in other locations - applying the same formula to 13,000 S. F. of gross, leasable floor area would require 195 parking spaces. Of course, since The Boys is a stand -alone facility, while Trader Joes is located in a proposed shopping center, Trader Joes seemingly would be able to take advantage of shared parking. However, the planned usage of the shopping center is not conducive to benefiting from shared parking since the restaurants and Trader Joes peak parking demand will coincide during both lunch and dinner times. If there are four restaurants in the shopping center with an average square footage of 5,000, the parking space requirement for those restaurants would total 288 (6,000 S. F. X 12 X 4). So, if there were only 407 — 410 parking spaces originally provided, and you subtract the prime parking needs of both Trader Joes (19 5) and the four restaurants (288), the shopping center would be short 73 - 76 parking spaces before even considering the parking needs of all the other tenants! If nothing is done to either increase the number of parking spaces or reduce parking demand, or a combination of both, there will be mayhem in the parking lot during peak times. SAFE offers a few action plans for reducing demand: 1. Require off -site parking for employees, 2. Adopt TDM initiatives, and 3. Install "LOT FULL" signs with active management by parking attendants, Note: The City may want to consider offering the applicant the rental use of the Atlantic Dunes parking lot for employees. In any event, the P & Z should consider implementing a "No Queue" condition. See attached for more info. Other SAFE concerns: 1. SAFE understands that there will be no on -site management, 2. Trader Joes operating hours — will they stay open until 10:00 PM? 3. Will there be security personnel and security cameras? Thank you for your consideration. Mr. Carosella Thank you and Jeff for your emails and for the Shared Parking Analysis, Matrix and Third -Party Justification for Delray Place prepared by Traf Tech and the supplement to that report prepared by Gentile, Glas, Holloway, O'Mahoney & Associates. These, indeed, are comprehensive studies and well reported. First, let me say that SAFE understands the limitations that you have for installing bicycle lockers and showers in the facilities you have planned. SAFE therefore withdraws its recommendations that you install such facilities at Delray Place. Particularly, since you will not have on -site personnel to care for and maintain such facilities. And, we can see that with mixed -use tenants you will likely have it is not a feasible option. SAFE's remaining concern is parking. We will, of course, concur with whatever the Delray Beach P &Z Department decides regarding parking. Some types of businesses have more parking demand than others. For instance, someone picking up clothes from a cleaners will be parking for perhaps 15 minutes, whereas persons visiting a restaurant for dinner may need parking for 3 -4 hours. So, the mix of businesses at Delray Place will determine parking demand. We would still like to have you meet with SFCS and SAFE after the site plan has been approved to explore TDM initiatives that could alleviate parking demand. We hope you will do whatever possible to limit employee parking at the site. Some possibilities would be to encourage employee use of public transportation, commutating by bicycle or walking, and perhaps off -site parking for employees. SFCS has effective information on these possibilities. Charlie Bonfield President, SAFE 220 Macfarlane Drive # 1203 Delray Beach FL 33483 1 561 330 6329 ctbonfield @aol.com Parking around Trader Joe's sparks "vigilante" action the risk of being ticketed. Photo: D.H. Parks By Linda Hemmila If you've received a parking ticket near Trader Joe's on University Avenue in Berkeley, you're in good company. So many people have been ticketed there over the past year and half it's become a neighborhood cause, has provoked defiant action from a "parking vigilante ", and is up for renewed discussion at the next scheduled City Council meeting on January 17th. The trouble stems from parking signs in the area, which, according to councilmember Jesse Arreguin, are "very confusing ". The city has acknowledged as much by dismissing most contested citations because, it says, the signage is not sufficiently clear to visitors. It all started in June 2010 when, as part of the redevelopment of the downtown area — and with the June 11 opening of Trader Joe's — the city altered parking signs in the neighborhood that designated one side of the street as resident -only parking and the other side two -hour parking. The signs on the residential side were adorned with red and white city -made stickers denoting "no parking" that were placed directly over the old sign which said "two- hour parking The streets in questions include Berkeley Way, Addison Street, Bonita Avenue and Grant Street. +� 0411 C04 C;1-Y �vn61 om) e ss e fi l ' re O/ n Ott W/- 7/ ?o For hClop qc� i rCf,hsh, a lea Fo1- aeon FasIn 51 a C log wm I r n� Coat A sign by a "parking vigilante" offers advice. Photo: Linda Hemmila That's when councilmembers started to receive phone calls complaining of unfair parking citations. "These aren't just scofflaws," said Anthony Sanchez, legislative aid to councilmember Arreguin. "There is a hodgepodge of signs in that area making it hard for people to know what to do. The stickers just made that worse. Is it two -hour parking or no parking? People aren't sure." Calls from citizens seeking help with traffic citations aren't new to Arreguin's office. "That's what we do," said Sanchez. But he said he is currently receiving up to three calls a day on this problem alone. "Such a disproportionate number of tickets are coming from this one area, so you know the signage isn't working," he said. In November 2011, a City Council information item raised the issue of the clarity and effectiveness of the Trader Joe's area parking signs. A memo from Andrew Clough, Director of Public Works, concluded the signs met all legal standards. However the memo went on to suggest revisiting the design of the signs and possibly making modifications which would state more clearly where parking was allowed. One "dramatic alternative" suggested in the memo was to completely eliminate the Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) modification and restore the entire area to allow 2- hour visitor parking. "The city, the mayor and council are very sympathetic to people and are working to resolve this problem," said Arreguin this week. "But this takes time and resources." Arreguin and his staff have drafted a consent item for the January 17 City Council meeting which recommends the city manager move to temporarily enforce the previous two -hour parking limit until the new signs are installed. But relief isn't coming quickly enough for some residents in the neighborhood. In recent months the tickets have continued to pile up and so have complaints. Frustrated by the city's lack of swift action, some neighbors have taken matters into their own hands by fashioning signs warning drivers not to park in particular areas, or risk being ticketed. When the busy holiday season brought more shoppers to the area, one person became known as the "parking vigilante". A psychotherapist with a practice in the neighborhood (who wishes to remain anonymous), she said she was so irate she began scrawling notes and leaving them on cars informing drivers where to get help with the violations. A Hudstead's truck on MLK between Berkeley Way and Hearst in November What appears to be a Hudstead's employee removes handmade signs next to his truck "It's evil. The city and the tow company are benefiting from these bad signs. They're making thousands of dollars off of poor people who cannot afford the tickets," she said. Berkeley's policy is that any car on a city street found to have five or more parking violations is subject to be towed. "I've had my sessions interrupted by the clanking of the tow truck and the screams of those who are being towed. This is outrageous," said the "vigilante". "Something had to be done, so a bunch of us got together and asked if we could put signs on our property telling people to not park there, but drivers from [towing company] Hustead's started coming around and yanking them down so they could continue to benefit from the problem," she said. Hustead's manager, Janice Lee, says that's not happening. "Our drivers would never do that. It sounds illegal and that would be grounds for termination. They would never go on private property and remove anything, there's just no reason to do it." However a photo taken in the first week of November appears to show a Hustead's employee removing handmade pink signs on Martin Luther King Jr. Way near Hearst. Meantime, Arreguin and his staff hope the temporary resolution they are suggesting to Council eases the parking situation while waiting for the real signs to arrive — and they say they can offer assistance to those with violations still within the 21 -day appeal period. "We are committed to helping people overturn their tickets," Sanchez said. Trader Joe's traffic troubles continue Submitted by Nikki Bussey, News Producer he parking problems for those who live near Trader Joe's continues. WILMINGTON, NC (WELT) – The parking problems for those who live near Trader Joe's continues. In fact, one man who lives behind the supermarket, says it's a nightmare. He says since the grand opening traffic has been non -stop on 47th Street. So, he put up some cones to keep people from parking in his yard. Kerry Gower says he hopes things will slow down in his neighborhood once the newness of Trader Joe's wears off Trader Joe's Lyn -Lake proposal squashed By Emily Weiss Published Mon., J ul. 16 2012 at 1: 16 PM City Council opposes plans for Trader Joe's in Uptown See Also: Trader !oe's Coming to Lyn -take? Residents and business owners in the Lyn -Lake area who worried about the added congestion, parking problems, and competition that a proposed Trader Joe's store might bring to their neighborhood can breathe a sigh of relief. The Minneapolis City Council rejected the property developer's request for rezoning, which was required to move forward on building the 74,000- square -foot grocery with attached liquor store. Jeff Minea, a representative from the family that owns the lots where the store would be built, says this rejection by the council likely means the project is dead, reports the Southwest lournal. Several small businesses at 27th Street and Tyndale Avenue South would have been disrupted, displaced, or otherwise affected negatively by this proposal, which was a large factor in the decision- making process. The project's developers were also unsuccessful in courting the Lowry Hill East's Neighborhood Association. Maybe it's time to look to the suburbs? News70 Live • No Text Zone • Trip Check • Links • Community Toy Drive Vl- t,ai Saturday, October 20 2012, 01:52 AM CDT Northgate Marketplace parking problems By Molly Trotter /Ktvl.com MEDFORD, Care. -- On Friday, October 19, Trader Joe's opened its doors. Eager shoppers filled the parking lots before the store was even open. Northgate created an additional gravel lot West of the shopping center, to provide extra parking. Shoppers weren't impressed with the extra parking. Liz Gibbons told News 10 that she tried to park in the gravel lot, but at one point her car got stuck and she had to go back to the main parking lot until a spot opened. She said that when the rain comes, that parking lot will be a big problem. Regency Centers owns the Northgate Marketplace. Leaders on the project say they have no intentions of expanding parking anything soon. They said they will keep an eye on parking to see if it becomes a real issue, but they said it was busy today because of the opening of Trader Joe's. Chicago, IL Parking here sucks, hence the missing star. I normally don't mind walking, but the only other option to parking is taking the L which I'm not a huge fan of. Love the choices and inexpensive prices. This is the place to go for quick, healthy meals! Loses a star because of their parking lot. It's really tiny and I'm always scared I'm going to ding a car when I'm trying to get out of a parking space or when I'm trying to leave the lot. Love Trader Joe's... I was happy to see that there is parking but a bit cumbersome... We like going during the week because it is less busy... No, this place will not have everything. But Jewel is right across the street and Whole Foods down the street if you need a ton of food. And yes the parking is a little scary, but seriously. Deal with it Chicago. 1 will agree with the other reviews that have pointed out the parking situation. Driving in can sometimes be reminiscent of descending into the seventh ring of hell but a little patience and perseverance goes a long way. No parking lot is going to stop me! This Trader Joe's is definitely worth the trip. This review would not be complete without a mention of the parking. It sucks. Though it turns over fast. I am no expert, but my gut tells me, it could be improved if it was one way. Then people come in on the Wabash side and exit into the alley. Cause really, the aisle is BARELY wide enough for two cars. he downside? Parking and general store access. At 8:30 in the morning on a Saturday had to deal with multiple pedestrians, numerous cars, and the terrible parking layout. It's hard to fit more than one car through the entrance. I foresee major traffic issues along Roosevelt and Wabash for years to come. Parking here is nothing less than a pain in the ass. This will definitely keep me away from any daytime shopping. 1 mean, this is really incredible. I've never seen a worse parking situation. It's not tenable for a Walgreens much less a massively popular grocery store. There will be accidents. There will be rage. San Diego, CA 1211 Garnet Ave {between Everts St & Fanuel St) San Diego, CA 92109 Neighborhood: Pacific Beach (858) 272 -7235 httl2://www.traderjoes.com Hours: Mon -Sun 8 am - 9 pm Truly the only thing "bad" about this Trader Joe's location is the parking. Every so often finding a spot is a chore, but it's usually fitting for the store. Super- super -super frindly, generous, attentive and kind Stuff. These people are always ready to help. The only advice I have is try to park 2 -3 blocks away, because it's really difficult to get a parking, unless you live nearby. love Trader Joe's. The staff is always very helpful and friendly. The only reason I am giving it 4 stars instead of 5 is because parking there is next to impossible. Also, Trader Joe's does not have a very good produce selection. Other than that 1 love Trader Joe's. The only problem here is that sometimes you cannot find parking if you go on the weekdays between 5 and 630pm. Otherwise, this place is great and II the cashiers are very friendly and tell you the good things they have tried that you bought. What's to say about TJ's that hasn't already been said? LOVE. What's to say about this location? +1 friendly +1 cleanliness +1 selection +1 good looking shoppers! -1 PARKING. Try your luck on the side streets and walk. What a nightmare!! - its a pretty small parking lot which makes it hard to maneuvere around, especially during busy hours Only downside is the parking lot always seems to be packed, but a spot or two is usually available. You would get the much sought after FIVE STAR award but I docked you due to the parking...horrible! Be very careful, patient and calm when attempting to parking in that tiny very dangerous parking lot. This can be bumper car madness! This store has parking issues and a rear exit that forces you to cross an alley so don't rush out the back door as you might be in the path of a moving car. Regardless, it's still a great bet if you can manage to park on the street. 1 swear, this lot has to have a million and a half accidents a day. It's crazy. WARNING: THEY TOW AFTER HOURS!!! So, if you're going out in PB DO NOT park in the lot!!! YES, the parking lot sucks monkey balls, but the store rocks. I ride my cruiser there just to avoid this cluster... Everyone just ride your bike or walk because the parking situation can get a little stressy. Hey its better for the environment anyway! Ft. Worths TX Monday, Jul 2, 2012 1 Updated 7 :32 PM CST More than two weeks after its opening, Trader Joe's and its parking lot still jam - packed on a daily basis. Neighboring lots and businesses have installed signs warning Trader Joe's customers not to park there. "Every time I come over here, 1 find it difficult to find a place to park," Mary Rayfield said. Rayfield and a group of friends were eating lunch at Brix Pizzeria and Wine Bar in the Stonegate Crossing shopping center on Monday and planned to go to Trader Joe's after their meal. The group says it understands why the California -based grocery store is so popular but also said customers should respect the neighboring businesses. "I don't think it's fair," Julie Berman said. "I think these businesses have a business to run and they want their clients to be able to park in front of their business and not have to fight with Trader Joe's customers." The Stonegate Nursing Center, which is located behind Trader Joe's, has spent hundreds of dollars on signs around its property warning the store's customers not to park there. Sue Hayes, executive director, said she plans on extending a fence and adding speed bumps in her lot to keep her residents safe. She said she simply wants people to not park in emergency access ways, saying Trader Joe's is trying to be a good neighbor and often brings food and flowers over for her clients. At Brix Pizzeria, employees said things have improved but said some of their customers still have trouble at times finding parking. "Our loyal fan base is pretty loyal, but if there's no place to park, I don't think they're going to walk from home, so parking for them has been pretty paramount," manager Mischa Astroff said. Trader Joe's expected to be busy in its first few weeks in the Metroplex, even hiring off- duty Fort Worth police officers to direct traffic at times. "Trader Joe's cares about our neighbors and being part of the Fort Worth community," said Alison Mochizuki, Trader Joe's spokeswoman. "Typically, when a new store opens, traffic is higher than normal and eventually lessens. Presently, we have crew members helping to direct the flow of traffic in our parking lot. We appreciate the community's patience with our new location, and we look forward to being a positive addition to the neighborhood for years to come." Most neighboring businesses told NBC 5 they expect to have increased traffic in their stores because of Trader Joe's and want to be good neighbors. But they said they also have some frustration with Trader Joe's customers who park in their spaces. "This is our parking lot," Astroff said. "Trader Joe's has its own. We just want to keep things fair." Astroff and other business employees and owners said they expect things to improve as the novelty of the store wears off and others open across the Metroplex. However, even Trader Joe's customers say the parking mess is something they don't want to deal with. "I'm not surprised that it's packed because it's such a great place," Joy Rosen said. "But if the parking continues like this, I'm not going to make the trip. It's not going to be worth it:' Three more Trader Joe's stores are expected to open on the eastern side of the Metroplex over the next two years. San Franciso, CA Three weeks after a contentious meeting it held with Castro residents, Trader Joe's is abandoning plans to open a store in San Francisco's gay neighborhood, the Bay Area Reporter has learned. The national grocery chain informed city officials today that it would no longer pursue opening at the Market and Noe Center on Market Street, currently the site of a Goodwill store. The project had been met with concerns from residents that customers would clog nearby streets since there is a limited parking garage at the site. Others had rallied behind seeing Trader Joe's come into the neighborhood, and Planning Department staffers had been working with the retailer to resolve the parking issues. "They were finding it challenging to make the model work here given the parking constraints. Unfortunately, in the end, they decided they couldn't make it work," District 8 Supervisor Scott Wiener told the Bay Area Reporter late Monday, March 7. As of last month Trader Joe's officials, including the store's general counsel Doug Yokomiro (seen at right), had told Castro residents they would likely seek approval for the store in April. They attended the February 14 meeting of the Duboce Triangle Neighborhood Association to once again present their plans and discuss the parking issues. In a letter Planning Director John Rahaim sent to Trader Joe's management February 22, he informed the grocery chain that it should agree to a wide range on requirements intended to ease its impact on vehicular traffic. Among the items Rahaim suggested that Trader Joe's agree to was paying for improvements to the intersection of Market and Noe Streets costing upwards of $600,000; working with a delivery /shuttle operator to reduce car trips to the Castro store; and hiring parking control officers to stop customers from queuing up to enter the parking lot. Apart from the traffic impacts, other problems had bedeviled Trader Joe's plans since they were first disclosed several years ago. The grocer wanted the entire bottom space of the shopping center, including the storefront now housing a Radio Shack. The electronics retailer had resisted entreaties it move to a vacant space across the street. The family that owns the site had reportedly agreed to pay for Radio Shack to relocate and had been working to move out several other tenants. The Jeffrey family has been seeking a long -term tenant since Tower Records closed in late 2006. Wiener said he was "very disappointed" with the news that Trader Joe's was walking away from the location. He said he plans to continue working with the building owners to find a retailer for the site. Goodwill had signed a short -term lease; it is unclear if it will want to extend its lease. But it only moved into the lower - level, leaving a second floor space empty. "I will be working closely with the owner of the property to make sure we get that space filled," said Wiener, who wouldn't rule out seeing another grocery store move into the space. "I know it is disappointing for a lot of people not to have Trader Joe's there. I am confident we will get that space filled with a good retailer." Albany, NY 1. Strick9 says: July 31, 2012 at 2:34 pm They've leased parking spaces ACROSS Wolf Road? Really? That'll be interesting to see — TJ's shoppers scurrying across Wolf Road with grocery carts in tow. And what about the other businesses in that plaza, like the mattress store? What a bummer for their customers. 2. silvfx says: July 31. 2012 at 2 :38 pm Get used to tough parking, my local TJ's parking lot here in NC is always full and its alot bigger than 80 cars. This is 5+ years after it opened. 3. bocuse says: July 31, 2012 at 4:11 pm (611Strick9 — most shop owners I know would give their left leg to have Trader Joe's as a neighbor. Retail is all about driving traffic to your store, with one store complimenting another in plazas. Does anyone drive traffic better than TJ? 4. hotrod107 says: July 31. 2012 at 4:2712m editing needed NBT 5. zack says: July 31, 2012 at 4:51 pm Terrible, terrible planning from the word go. I can't wait for Bruce Roter to start a "We Want Trader Joe's Parking" group. Now THAT'S something even this hater could get behind. 6. K says: July 31. 2012 at 4:51 pm You beat me to it. ACROSS THE STREET? ITS WOLF ROAD! 7. BiBi Upstate Ukie says: July 31. 2012 at 5:05 pm "At La- a -ast" — to paraphrase the great Etta James:) 1 plan on biding my time (although the pantry is in dire need of restocking), blc 1 believe that it'll be a nightmare getting in and out of that particular plaza the first several days of opening. Finally, the end of transporting groceries up /down the Mass Pike! 8. 5trick9 says: July 31. 2012 at 5:38 pm bocuse — I would generally agree with you, but where the heck are all these people that TIN attracts going to park? People in the suburbs just get P.CNd if there's no place to park. That's why I rarely if ever go to downtown Albany. I can't stand having to search for a parking spot. They would have been so much better putting this in at the Wolf Road Shopper's Park just up the road — there's a huge parking lot there that is almost never even half full. 9. Dominick Purnomo says: July 31, 2012 at 5:47 pm A video preview of what it will be like! httl2://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2UFcl 12r2yU U 10. mattydread says: July 31. 2012 at 7 :00 pm love TJ's but I won't be going near this place for a long while. 11. wif iepitt says: luly 31. 2012 at 7 :01 pm I've never yet had problems parking at any Trader Joe's (out of peak hours, admittedly), and I've parked at 6 of them in this general area. Basingstoke, people. Wait out the rush, and shop at reasonable hours. You won't be disappointed./ Of course, I have nothing to say to the T) haters. I just hope they stay away from the area forever. 12. /T says: July 31, 2012 at 7:30 pm Get real! This is a little podunk store that only appeals the snobs with the big $. It is not a Shop Rite or Wegmans. If you have the Dough -GO! but I'll be putting my bucks where I get the biggest bang, not here! 13. Burnt My Fingers says: July 31. 2012 at 9:00 pm From the comments it appears there will be ample parking this weekend: everybody expects mayhem and so plans to stay away. Or else this board is inhabited by provincial, nattering nabobs of negativism... no, couldn't be. 14. a says: July 31, 2012 at 9:14 pm I'm hoping everyone will stay away on opening day because of parking jitters. Me, I'm planning on being there! Wouldn't miss it! BTW, I believe they are only having the extra parking for the opening mad rush and have hired the local police to direct traffic and help people cross the street. 15. zack says: July 31. 2012 at 11:39 pm 0) a You believe? Or you read the article linked in this post? just wondering. 16. store says: August 1, 2012 at 6:37 am 1 thought 1 heard there was an access road /path behind it going to Colonie Center. Did just dream that or does that really exist? I don't plan on using Wolf road ever again after Friday... 17. Z says: August 1, 2012 at 7:58 am I'll bite on this store some time in the near future. Used it as sort of a neat "boutique grocery" back in the days when I lived /worked in the greater DC area. P11, "Basingstoke ?" Really? You're really reaching on that one! I gotta admit, got an audible laugh out of me. Do you speak that way in "real life ?' (not that there's anything necessarily wrong with that, of course...] 18. potrzebie says: August 1. 2012 at 8:00 am Prediction: More than one incident of parking- space -rage and/or car - pedestrian accident. 19. Harry 5 says: August 1, 2012 at 8:20 am 1 understand that they will be selling food in cans and boxes, why didn't anyone else think of that? 20. pw says: August 1. 2012 at 8:37 am Stay away ...................not worth the hype. Not a local or solely owned small store. Owned by huge evil corporation 21. Bruce Roter says: August 1. 2012 at 8:42 am Zack P45 Don't look for me to help find more parking. I want to see a more efficient public transportation system. 1 want CDTA to offer an app that tells riders in real time when the bus is going to be at their stop. Think of it. No more senseless waiting at a bus stop (especially in summer or winter). CDTA has this for the Central Ave. line. It's time they opened this to the entire system! I hope you can get behind this. We've waited long enough. Bruce Roter 22. williepitt says: August 1. 2012 at 8:55 am Z ( #17), do you know anything about Gilbert & Sullivan? Mad Margaret, a character in "Ruddigore ", tends to go off the deep end frequently. She and her main squeeze finally agree that when that happens, he will say "Basingstoke" to her and she will calm down. It works! 23. non_foodie says: August 1. 2012 at 9:50 am You people really can't do anything else but complain, can you? We begged for a Trader Joe's and the company finally came to Albany, thanks largely to Bruce Roter (thank you, thank you, thank you). Now, you're complaining about the traffic and parking? personally wish they would simply knock down the old Friendly's building for additional parking, but they haven't so stop whining. 24. Stephen says: August 1. 2012 at 10:58 am Oh what I wouldn't pay to see Old WilliePit trying to cross Wolf Road with a fist full of cans of crappy sauce in her hands........ Oh my .......... Hope you all enjoy fighting each other for all those boxes and cans of food ........... JUST LIKE ANYWHERE ELSE oh except these boxes and cans have the name Trader Joe's on them so they must come from some special place on earth that no other grocery store has access too........ Lame you all are. 25. williepitt says: August 1. 2012 at 11:08 am Stephen (924), some of us are intelligent enough to know how to cross Wolf Road without endangering ourselves. Seems like maybe you aren't in that camp. But then it doesn't really matter, does it, since you dislike Tps so much. Besides, not having you there will make shopping there much more pleasant. 26. zack says: August 1. 2012 at 11:28 am 0123 There's a big difference between whining and commenting on what is an obvious and serious problem. 27. 11m says: August 1. 2012 at 12 :44 pm While I remain skeptical about Trader Joe's, it appears that they have come up with a fair plan to alleviate the initial rush of shoppers and are considerate by paying Colonie for the extra police officers.The only suggestion I have is that they also arrange with Colonie Center to designate an overflow parking area in their lot, maybe on the northeastern end of Macy's, and to provide shuttle bus service for the first few days. A longer term solution should be considered for additional parking, though, as Wolf Road is highly congested as it is. 28. Parma Ham says: August 1, 2012 at 2:18 pm # 23's comment is well taken. Nothing is ever good enough for the blog posters. They will find negativity in everything. 29. Albany Mom says: August 1, 2012 at 2 :25 pm After helping my teenage daughter scout out the bus and walking in the Wolf Rd area earlier this summer so she and 1 would feel comfortable with her going it alone, 1 can say that: 1. Yes, store (916), there is an access road that goes to Colonic Center. There is no good pedestrian path at the moment or an easy way to take a grocery cart, but perhaps that will be improved in the near future. 2. Wolf Road seems daunting to cross, but it's not bad at all since they installed sidewalks and walk lights a few years ago. There is a light and cross walk not far from Trader Joe's. 30. GOOSECOUS @ says: August 1, 2012 at 2:39 pm Plenty of parking at the Brooklyn location, where I'll continue to shop. 31. non_foodie says: August 1, 2012 at 2:54 pm #27's solution makes sense, especially now that NBT is not allowing Trader Joe's customers to use their lot. Problem is, Colonic Center itself doesn't have enough parking. Clifton, NJ 1. I've come to the conclusion that Clifton doesn't look at traffic flow or parking space when it approves new development. just take a look at Clifton Commons. Try going there on a Friday Night and park. The new development just up the road from where Trader Joe also has parking issues. You can also look at the cluster fuck that is Costco. Another disaster when it comes to traffic flow. Basically anything along Route 3 that Clifton has approved doesn't have enough parking or a safe traffic flow. Trader Joes will also be a parking and Traffic disaster. Clifton is just looking at the dollars and doesn't care about anything else. But hey 1 guess we have to put up with poor parking and traffic to have things close by. I just think they should a least consider it. 2. 3. POSTED BY Jerseygurl I October 13, 2012 @ 7:49 am Maybe Montclair will have shuttles from the new assisted living facility on Church. 4. POSTED BY eventhorizon I October 13, 2012 @ 10:45 am You could also ride a bicycle the with some saddlebags to go with your re- usable shopping bags for a double -dose of Tj's goodness. 5. oh happy day! I put this on my calendar yesterday. But now I'm thinking about waiting a few days to go-the opening of the new Fairway was too intense for me, and I know I'm not the only TJ's fan in the area. The place is going to be mobbed. As to size —even a mini -T1's is better than no TJ's at all, and I'm tired of driving to the others! 6. 1�5 POSTED BY frobnitz I October 12 , 9:37 m 2012 @ P I agree that the parking will probably not be ample enough. But the trip from my house to the new T)s will be easier than it is to Fairway. We're certainly lucky to have so many great food markets in our area. Shops at Stonefield Customers Run into Parking Problems - NBC29 WVIR Charlottesville, VA News, Sp... Monday Nov 19 judged: Native Holly Ridge, NC There are plenty of shopping centers who followed the rules on parking spaces relative to the buildings. Why is this the only center with different rules? Buildings opening without all work complete? Landscape not complete? Rules other developers painfully follow or the doors don't open. WHY ? ?? Rep I Report Abuse ud c it! #2 Monday Nov 19 fudged: County 4 Resident Charlottesville, 4 VA 2 Albemarle screws up AGAIN! Not only is there not enough parking but the lanes are too narrow. We can expect to see some side mirrors missing if cars are allowed to park along the lanes as they were when I was there this weekend. Thank you Board of Supervisors and the ARB for making such an ugly corner on our "Main Street ". I guess this was another "midnight" decision when you were half asleep! Rep I y » Report Abuse ud c it! Rex #3 United States Monday Nov 19 ] udged: 3 1 think the whole place is confusing. 1 won't be going there on Saturdays. Although, 1 did get a good parking space at Trader Joes! Got there at the right time! Reply » Report Abuse ud e it! #4 Monday Nov 19 Yuuup ]udged: Charlottesville, VA 5 Just a newer version of Barracks Road springing up. Overpriced shopping and horrendous parking. Just wait until all the shops open and even now with the holidays approaching the body shops are sure going to be busy. Reply ,) Report Abuse ud e it! #5 Arthur Monday Nov 19 Charlottesville, Judged: VA What cracked me up was even the bicycle racks were way out on the Outside of the shopping center near the outer parking lots. Guess they didn`t want to see a Iot of bikes locked uP conveniently near the business the cyclist might want to patronize either... what a bunch of goof ball planners. Rep I Report Abuse ud e it! #6 heh Monday Nov 19 Charlottesville. judged: VA Traffic may or may not subside after the lookey lookers have seen the stores and written home, but it is a bit of a maze, the lanes & intersections are cramped with stop signs slowing everything down. Reply » Report Abuse ud e it! #7 Tuesday Nov 20 judged: Ernest Morris Richmond, VA 6 1 There should have been traffic circles installed for that volume of cars. its like we took Barracks Road Shopping center and compacted it into the Old Navy Parking lot. ]m probably going to avoid that place at all costs. Rep I y » Report Abuse Crackerjack Allentown, PA I ud c it! #8 Tuesday Nov 20 > AdChoi ms D Judged: 5 give it two years (tops) and there will he plenty of parking. All the stores will close and it will look just like Alhemarle Square. Reply » Report Abuse ud e it! Eaglescnut1984 Tuesday Nov 20 Charlottesville, ]edged: VA I'm going to just point out Trader Joe's is a grocery store and this past weekend was the last weekend before Thanksgiving. I'm sure all the other grocery stores in town saw large crowds as well. Reply ,) Report Abuse ud e it! #10 Tuesday Nov 20 judged: It 1s Too Soon 5 Staunton, VA 4 For shoppers to complain. Although EVERY complaint in this thread is spot -on! Traffic will get worse, especially after Friday, and as stores open. ❑riving our family auto (small crossover)- it was horrible trying to get into the shopping area and worse trying to get out. I only saw TWO entrances - I agree - the approvals must have been given after midnight, with ALL the mem hers nodding off. Stupidity & Greed.....as usual for C'ViIle. Rep I y » Report Abuse ud . it! #11 Tuesday Nov 20 Freedom of Judged: Choice Charlottesville, 2 VA 2 1 Went the other night. It was a nightmare! Got a parking at Trader Joe's, then no one would let us back out of the spot. Cars were lined up at each row and some people got impatient and actual I started started going the wrong way in the opposite lane so that no one could turn in toward Trader foe's. [ won't be going back there anytime soon, that's for sure! Reply )) Report Abuse ud e it! #12 Tuesday Nov 20 Um No Judged: Atlanta, GA 5 3 1 When they first talked about putting so many shops in there, [ wondered if there would be enough space for the shops and ample parking. [ went there one time and got my answer - not nearly enough parking. Reply » Report Abuse GC Citizen ud e it! Fredericksburg, VA 1 Tuesday Nov 20 Judged: rol 4 is anyone really surprised at this? But we had to have it. Had to put a shopping center with too many stores, not enough parking at the intersection that's the most congested all day. Sounds like a fun shopping trip. 1 won't be going out there any time soon, no matter how many stores open up. Rep I Report Abuse ud e it! #14 buyerbeware Tuesday Nov 20 Charlottesville, Judged: VA 4 We now have our own little slice of Northern Va. Welcome to Fairfax county south! Reply u Report Abuse ud e it! #15 Tuesday Nov 20 judged: Megan Charlottesville, 2 VA Good lord. The place just opened. if you're expecting that you're going to zip right up to a brand new Trader Joe's and park quickly and easily the week before Thanksgiving, you're deluded. You got along in Charlottesville just fine before Stonefield opened... if you don't like it, don't take your business there. I've only been there once, and I did find getting to Tj's from Hydraulic Road to be someone convoluted. But I'll wait until the crowds die down and the construction's over to say for sure. Rep I Report Abuse ud e it! #16 Tuesday Nov 20 Anonymouse ]udged: Charlottesville, 3 VA It's not a matter of excitement, it's a matter of there being a giant movie theatre with not enough spaces for their clientele. ]ust looking at spaces per store, with -10% of the stores open now, we are not going to see parking woes decrease by any stretch of the imagination. Reply » Report Abuse ud e it! #17 Tuesday Nov 20 judged: common sense Charlottesville, 3 VA 2 of course parking and traffic flow is a disaster; it's Charlottesville and Albemarle's MO. Why would you think putting a shopping center at one of the worst intersections in town wasn't going to be problematic? it's typical Charlottesvi Ile, we can't have something functional we have to have something that's visually appealing. it's all about the look and perception... no depth. Rep I y �) quit crying Crozet, VA Report Abuse ud e it! #18 Tuesday Nov 20 judged: 1 if you don't like the traffic or bad parking, don't go! No one is making you visit those stores. Rep I y �) Report Ab LI se ud e it! #19 Tuesday Nov 20 5arg judged. Charlottesville, 5 VA There is no excuse for inadequate parking and blocked lanes. what happens if an emergency vehicle has to get through? [ guess we have an "Architectural Review Board" that is more concerned about the visual aesthetics of the buildings, rather than customer and employee safety, to thank for this. Haggard, Ron From: Jeffrey Lynne <jlynne@zonelaw.com> Sent: Thursday. March 07, 2013 11:44 AM To: ctbonfield @aol -com Cc: Joe Carosella Subject: Re- Shared Parking Analysis for Delray Place- Charlie: We have committed to you and recommit agairt to meet with SFCS and SAFE after the site plan has been approved to explore '17314'1 initiatives that could alleviate parking demand. Thank you very much for your support. Jeff -ey Lynne, E%q. Weiner, Lynne & Thompson, P.A. Cell: (561) 239 -0839 w-ww.zonelaw.corn Sent from my iPhone On Mar 7, 2013, at 11:37 AM, "ctbonfield aol.corn" < cttionfield aoi.q?m> wrote: Mr. Carosella Thank you and Jeff for your emails and for the Shared Parking Analysis, Matrix and Third -Party Justification for Delray Place prepared by Traf Tech and the supplement to that report prepared by Gentile, Glas, Holloway, O'Mahoney & Associates. These, indeed, are comprehensive studies and well reported_ First, let me say that SAFE understands the limitations that you have for installing bicycle lockers and showers in the facilities you have planned. SAFE therefore withdraws its recommendations that you install such facilities at Delray Place. Particularly, since you will not have on -site personnel to care for and maintain such facilities. And, we can see that with mixed -use tenants you will likely have it is not a feasible option. SAFE's remaining concern is parking. We will, of course, concur with whatever the Delray Beach P &Z Department decides regarding parking. Some types of businesses have more parking demand than others. For instance, someone picking up clothes from a cleaners will be parking for perhaps 15 minutes, whereas persons visiting a restaurant for dinner may need parking for 3 -4 hours_ So, the mix of businesses at Delray Place will determine parking demand. We would still like to have you meet with SFCS and SAFE after the site Dian has been approved to explore TDM initiatives that could alleviate parking demand. We hope you will do whatever possible to limit employee parking at the site. Some possibilities would be to encourage employee use of public transportation, commutating by bicycle or walking, and perhaps off -site parking for employees_ SFCS has effective information on these possibilities. Charlie Bonfield President, SAFE 220 Macfarlane Drive # 1203 Delray Beach FL 33483 1 561 330 6329 ctbonfield@aol.com Truxell, Rebecca From_ Jason Bregman <jab450 @hotmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2013 4'05 PM To: Truxell, Rebecca; Rustin, Janice; Pyburn, Terrill Subject: FVV: Delray Place Hi All, For the record, please see below. Also I received the letter From Mr. Lynn (which you have on file). Mr. C:aressello called my cell phone today but I am not available to speak with anyone at this time. I am taking care of a Friend in the hospital in addition to my job. I will be attending tomorrow at 6pm and pray the meeting does not run all night. I will be sure to mention these communications at the hearing. Thanks Jason From: JamesFJTMCHAR @aol.com [mailto:JamesFJTMCHAR @aol.com] Sent: Sunday, March 03, 2013 6:34 AM To: iab450` hotmail.com Subject: Delray Place Delray Place After analyzing the parking requirement of the proposed Delray Place project, SAFE believes that the applicant's request to provide only 407.410 parking spaces, or 3.511.000 S. F. will be totally inadequate to support the proposed development. According to Bridgid O'Connor of the Publix Real Estate Department, " Publix typically requires 5 spaces per 1,004 S.F. of retail to adequately accommodate our customers and associates ". According to a study SAFE conducted, The Boys Farmers Market has 173 parking spaces that are full at peak time. Based on an estimated 11,000 — 12,000 S .F., the parking ratio of The Says is a whopping 15.011,000 S. F. Therefore, if Delray Place's tenant Trader Joe's is as popular as The Boys (and, there is no reason to think otherwise based on Trader Joes popularity in other locations) applying the same formula to 13,000 S. F. of gross floor area would require 195 parking spaces. Since The Boys is a stand -alone facility, while Trader Joes is located in a proposed shopping center, Trader Joes seemingly would be able to take advantage of shared parking. However, the planned usage of the shopping center is not conducive to benefit fully from snared parking since the restaurants' and Trader Joe's peak parking demand will coincide during both lunch and dinner times. If the center were a mixed use development, with condos/apartments shared parking would apply better. If there are four restaurants in the shopping center with an average square footage of 6,000; the parking space requirement for those restaurants would total 288 parking spaces (6,000 S. F. X 12 X 4). So, if there were only 407 — 410 parking spaces originally provided, and you subtract the prime panko9 needs of both Trader Joes (119 5) and the four restaurants (288), the shopping center would be short 73 - 76 parking spaces before even considering the parking needs of all the other tenants! If nothing is done to either increase the number of parking spaces or reduce parking demand, or a combination of both, there will be considerable congestion in the parking lot during peak times and this will cause troublesome traffic backup onto Federal Highway and Linton Blvd. SAFE offers a few action plans for reducing demand: 1. Require off -site parking for employees, 2. Adopt TDM initiatives, and/or 3. Install "LOT FULL" signs with active management by parking attendants, Other SAFE concerns_ 1. SAFE understands that there will be no on -site management, 2. Trader Joes operating hours — will they stay open until 10:00 PM? 1 Will there be security personnel and security cameras? Note: The City may want to consider offering the applicant the rental use of the Atlantic Dunes parking Sot for employees. In any event, Delray Beach P & Z should consider implementing a "No Queue" condition that would apply if traffic backs up on Federal Highway. Click here: 1401 California: Trader Joe's And CVS Authorization This Week at SocketSiteTM Jim Smith, SAFE Chairman 1225 S. Ocean Blvd, # 202 Delray Beach, FL 33483 (561) 330 -6798 Phone & Fax j a m esej imchar@ aol . cam "Help Florida become the most motorist, pedestrian, and bicyclist friendly state in the USA" 2 Truxell, Rebecca From: ajfinst ajfinst @earthlink.net> Seat: Wednesday, February 20, 2013 4:06 PM To: rebecca Truxell, Rebecca Subject: Fw- Delray Place; CAR0003 Attachments: Letter to SPRAB. Feb 20 2013.pdf Please send over to the City Attorney. - - - -- Forwarded Message--- - From: Elizabeth Kolowich Sent: Feb 20, 2013 3:53 PM To: "ajfinst a earthlink.com" Cc: Jeffrey Lynne, Ashlee Coosaia Subject: Delray Place; CAR0003 Ms. Finst — Please see the attached letter from Jeffrey Lynne, Esquire. If you should have any questions, please contact Jeffrey directly. Thank you, Elizabeth Kolowich Legal Assistant WEINER, LYNNE &THOMPSON, P.A. 10 SE 1st Avenue, Suite C I Delray Beach, Florida 33444 Tel (561 ) 265 -2666 1 Direct (561) 900 -0712 National (877) 901 -2666 1 Fax (56i) 272 -6831 ekolowichezon e Law. corn I www.zonelaw.corn 1 � Please consider the env] i on ment before printing this email. NOTICE: This e -mail message and any attachment to this e-mail message contains confidential information that may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not review, retransmit, convert to hard copy, copy, use or disseminate this a -mail or any attachments to it. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail or by telephone at 561-265-2666 and delete this message. Please note that if this a mail message contains a forwarded message or is a reply to a prior message, some or all of the contents of this message or any attachments may not have been produced by the sender, MICIT A nL S. WEINER JEMMY C. LYNNE L4unIE& IHOM SON J usTiN M. C Aun L. DIANA HIKEMM February 20, 2013 VIA E -MAIL chi U.S. MAIL LAW OITIC1S WEINER, LYNNE & THOMPSON, P.A. ATMRNEYS AT LAW 10 SB 1" AvEhuE, Surm C X7FLRAv BizAM F1,0RrDA. 33444 Chain -nan and Members of the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board City of Delray Beach 100 NW 1sc Avenue Delray Beach, Florida 33444 Re: Delray Place Dear Mr. Chairman and Board Members of SPRAB; '1"E7MONE (561) 265 - 2666 mcsDcm (561) 272 - 6881 ILYNNIE@20NEI.A W .COM W WW- ZONELAW.COM On behalf of our client, Retail Property Group and its principals, Joe and Louis Carosella, we thank you again for allowing us to continue to March 13, 2013, our site plan review public hearing for the Delray Place retail shopping center project (on the southeast corner of S. Federal Highway and Linton Boulevard). This additional time has allowed the project's design team the opportunity to further work with the City's planning staff, the Tropic Isle Civic Association., Safety as Floridians Expect (SAFE), and most importantly, the residents directly abutting the project. Admittedly, designing this site has proven to be a daunting task., even for seasoned and experienced retail developers as Retail property Group. Unlike prior projects, there has been great pressure placed upon Joe and Lows by the national tenants they have been negotiating with to design the site'to meet those tenant's specific retail needs. There has been equal if not greater pressure placed upon Joe and Louis by the owners ofresidential property adjacent to the project to not diminish the quality of life those residents have enjoyed for a period of years. Then, there is the inherent pressure to create ail economically sustainable urban infill redevelopment project that is anticipated to serve as the catalyst for the resurgence and renaissance of the entire South Federal Highway corridor. Meeting each of these competing demands and achieving consensus has proven to be an art and not a science. But we believe we are there. At the first SPRAB hearing on the Delray Place project, there was not sufficient time during the Public hearing process for the project's consultants to fully explain the intentions behind the project's design. In an effort to ensure your time is best served during the March 13, 2013 hearing, our clients are makiL?g themselves and their desio consultants, as well as the site ztsel� available to you, at all hours and at your convenience to answer an uestions o� have. The goal of this offer is to endeavor to answer as many of your questions and concerns in p:1CAR0003\C orrespondetice\Letter To S P RAD.Doex Site Plan Review and Appcaranm Hoard Febru ary 20, 2013 Re: Delray Place Page 2 advance so that the Board will be able to use its time efficiently and effectively during the hearing on March 13tt'. Their direct contact information is contained below. We certainly appreciate that you may be concerned about the appearance of impropriety by Slaving such discussions. Everyone is very sensitive in today's age of ultra- transparency and eucs reform. Such discussions with the project's design professionals are lawful pursuant to state law and local ordinances, subject only to disclosure during the public heari3ig itself. Please feel free to confer with the City Attorney's Office if you have any concerns. You are also free to decline this offer. We also understand that serving on SI'RAB is voluntary and not your regular employment. This offer is therefore meant to provide you with a sufficient opportunity to fully explore the site plan at your convenience. Our clients are the developers, owners and managers of similar projects across southeast Florida. They live locally. They are committed to this property, to this project, and to the City of Delray Beach, They are therefore willing to provide you with whatever resources you need to make the best decision possible. We thank ou for your tame and consideration. 1 y JEFFREY C, LYNNE JCL -mmi Mr. Joe Carosella Project Developer jtarosel @,rpa123.com (954) 647 -6794 (cell) Mark Saltz, A1A Project Architect msaltrr saltzm iche lson,com (954) 266 -2700 (office) Jeff Brophy, RLA, ASLA Project Landscape Architect JBro h LandDesignSouth.coni (561) 309 -1525 {cell) Soaquin Vargas, P.E., PTOE Project Traffic Engineer oaquin traiiech.biz (954) 5820988 (office) Mr. Louis Carosella Project Developer [taros e i l aa.rpP; 123 .co j n (954) 873 -4597 (cell) Dodi Glas, AICP Project PIanner dodi(a�,2GHG.corn (561) 310 -7325 (cell) Dennis Schultz, PE Project Engineer dshult ilynnengineering.com (954) 522 -1004 (office) Jeffrey C. Lynne, Rsq. Project Agent "l ine a zanelaw.corn (551)239 -0839 (cell) LAW OFFICCFS V Y EIN 1L' R, LYNNE & THOMPSON 31 P.A. MICHAEL 5. WEMIt JEFTREY C. LYNNE LAumE A. T'HoMPsoN JUSTIN M. CLAUD December 11, 2012 Via .Nand Deiiuer� Mr. Ron Hoggard City of Delray Beach 104 NW I" Avenue Delray Beach, Florida 33444 Re: Delray Place Our File No.: CAR0003 Dear Ron: PROFESSIONAL AMOCAT[ON IO SE In AVEN UE, SurrE C DEL AY IIEACFI, FLORIDA 33144 TELLTHONE (561) 265 - 2666 FACs1MZu (561) 272 - 6831 Mt'VEn4FRC LONELAW.COM V0A W.ZONELA.W.CQM With respect to the above referenced project, we are confirming that the justifications set forth in our waivers shall be incorporated by reference into our presentation to SPRAB. We also enclose for the record the Staff Report, approval letter and Order of the City Commission relating to the Yacht Club at Delray Beach which project was granted a waiver from the requirement that relief otherwise be obtained via variance. Therefore, no special privilege will be_granted if the waivers were approved. Sincerely, Michael S. We' r MSW: ek Enclosures Cc: Jeffrey Lynne, Esquire Ms, Ashlee L_ Coosaia 0:ICAR00031CorrespondenaelLeller to }ion Hoggard re waivers1]ec 11 20I2.docx IN THE CITY COMMISSION CHAMBERS OF THE CIJ Y OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA WAIVER REQUESTS FOR THE MACH T CLUB AT DELRAY BEACH ORDER OF THE ci T `r COMM13310 N OF THE GM OF DELRAY 6EACH, FLORIDA These waiver request: nave come beiure the City Commission on October 3, 2006. 2, The App[icant and City staff presented documentary evidence and testimony to the City Commission pertaining to the waiver requests for the development known as the Yacht Club at Delray Beach. All of the evidence is a part of the record in this rase_ Required findings are made 'n accordance with Subsection 1. 1. WAIVER: a. Pursuant to Section 30.15 of the Code of Ordinances the Commission may grant a waiver to a Section of the land Development Regulations in which a waiver is not allowed under the LDR's. The Applicant has requested a waiver to Section 4,3.4(x) to allow an increase in height for the Yacht Club at Delray Beach Project, located in the RM zoning district, from 35' to 41'. In order to consider this waiver the Commission must waive the following: b. LDR Section 2.2.4(D)(3) -- provides no variance to height regulations may he granted by the Board of Adjustment. C. LDR Section 2.4J(B)(1)(b)(iii) provides that no waiver may granted, under LDR Section 2.4.7(B), by the Commission for which it is stated that there shall be no waiver and/or variance provided. d. LDR Section 4.3.4(J)(4)(a) -- provides that the Board of Adjustment may not rgrant an increase in height to any structure located in the RM zoning district. The Applicant has asserted that the street, MacFarlane Drive in which the height measurement will be made from the crown of the road, has an uncharacteristically low crown and is prone to flooding. The Applicant also asserts by allowing the increase in height the finished floor elevation will be raised to a height that is more consistent with the neighboring property. Should the waiver requests be granted based on the assertions listed above? Yes 4 No 1 1 r1f_ilVlil(rt 'iJ1JNlt"NTA ,N ; "`�,,: , TO: DAVID T H E CITY MAFIA R THRU: P L D CIN , A1Clz R!E OF PLANNING AND ZONING FROM: ESTELIO BRETO, SENIOR PLANNER SUBJECT: MEETING OF OCTOBER 3, 2006 CONSIDERATION OF WAIVER REQUESTS TO LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS (LDR) SECTIONS 4.3.4(x), 2.2.4(1)){3}, 2.4.7(B)(1)b)OM AND 4.3.4(J)(4)(aI FOR THE YACHT CLUB AT UELRAY BEACH, PURSUANT TO LDR SECTION 2.4.7(B)(5). -.� :ice �.,i il.•rle 3'' �•j' On April 26, 2006, the Site Plan Review and Appearance board (SPRA13) approved a Class V site plan and landscape plan associated with the construction of twenty (20) three- bedroom residential condominiums unils in a 4 -story building, 82 guest & resident parking spaces (lower level parking garage and surface parking), a 3,610 square foot yacht clubhouse, and 44' boat slip. The applicant is seeking an increase in allowed height in the RM (Multiple Family Residential - Medium Density) zoning district, which will require approval of four waivers to the Land Development Regulations. The first waiver is to LDR Section 4.3A(K) to allow the increase in building height from 35' to 41'. The other three waivers, to LDR Sections 2.2.4(D)(3), 2.4.7(I3)(1)(b) ('iii) and 4.3.4(J)(4)(a), are to waive the prohibitions against seeking a waiver for a regulation for which it is stated that there shall be no waiver and/or variance provided, as it pertains to an increase in the maximum building height for property zoned RM (Multiple Family Residential - Medium Density). The applicable node sections are described befow= LDR Section 4.3.4(K) -•- Development Standards Natrbc Pursuant to LDR Section 4.3.4(x), the Development Standards Matrix for Residential Zoning Districts depicts the maximum height for buildings in the RM (Multiple Family Residential -- Medium Density) zoning district as 35 feet. LOR Section 2.2.4 (D) (3) — Duties. Powers. and Resnonsibilities of the Boarcf &Adiusfrnent. Pursuant to LDR, Section 2.2.4(D)(3), no variance to height regulations may be granted by the Board of Adjustment. LDR Section 2.4.7 B) (1) 1W (iii} — Speciai Power to the City Commission. Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.7 (B) ('l) (b) (iii), the City Commission may grant a waiver to any provision of the LDRs when there is no other avenue for relief available in the regulations. However, waivers shall not be considered with respect to a regulation for which It is stated that there shall be no waiver and /or variance provided. LDR Section 4.3.4 4 a -- Increases to Hei ht R - ulations. There are no provisions which allow, nor is the Board of Adjustmeni empowered to grant, an increase of height for any purpose in the RM (Multiple Family Residential — Medium Density) zoning district_ Waiver Findings Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.1(13)(5), prior to granling a waiver, the approving bodyshall make a finding that the granting of the waiver: (a) Shall not adversely affect the neighboring area; (b) Shall not significantly diminish the provision of public facilities; (c) Shall not create an unsafe situation; and, (d) Does not result in the grant of a special privilege in that the same waiver would be granted under similar circumstances on other property for another applicant or owner. The following excerpts are Laken from the applicant's justification for the waiver requests: 10 .b IN THE CITY COMMISSION CHAMBERS OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA WAIVER REQUESTS FOR THE YACHT CLUB AT DELRAY BEACH ORDER OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA 1. These waiver requests have come before the City Commission on October 3, 2006. 2. The Applicant and City staff presented documentary evidence and testimony to the City Commission pertaining to the waiver requests for the development known as the Yacht Club at Delray Beach. All of the evidence is a part of the record in this case. Required findings are made in accordance with Subsection 1. WAIVER: a. Pursuant to Section 34.15 of the Code of Ordinances the Commission may grant a waiver to a Section of the Land Development Regulations in which a waiver is not allowed under the LDKs. The Applicant has requested a waiver to Section 4.3.4(K) to allow an increase in height for the Yacht Club at Delray Beach Project, located in the RM zoning district, from 35' to 41'. In order to consider this waiver the Commission must waive the following: b. LDR Section 2.2.4(D](3) — provides no variance to height regulations may be granted by the Board of Adjustment_ c. LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(1)(b )(iii) -- provides that no waiver may granted, under LDR Section 2.4.7(B), by the Commission for which it is stated that there shall be no waiver and/or variance provided. d. LDR Section 4.3.4(J)(4)(a) — provides that the Board of Adjustment may not grant an increase in height to any structure located in the RM zoning district. The Applicant has asserted that the street, MacFarlane Drive in which the height measurement will be made from the crown of the road, has an uncharacteristically low crown and is prone to flooding. The Applicant also asserts by allowing the increase in height the finished floor elevation will be raised to a freight that is more consistent with the neighboring property. Should the waiver requests be granted based on the assertions fisted above? Yes No F 1 �lI I � ...r 1 Q Q 0 0 Q Q CY Q WATERWAY EAST COMULRUAL CONDO BAR HARBOUR CONDO A V E N U E + rr ■1 It mill 11111//1 LANIKAI .�� OLLAS CONDO 0 4TH A3 N -- DELRAY BEACH YACHT CLUB CITY or nn RAY BFACH. n PLANWNG & Z0414G DEPARTMENT -- WOITAC BASE IWP SYSTC" -- 1u? REF: LW9U3 a VETERANS GROVE STk z A TLAN TIC PARK CONDO r PLAZA AE iri SPANISH DELRA Y nFACH- Ell TIE In! RrVER klAf214IC? l l N RESOR T 1 �lI I � ...r 1 Q Q 0 0 Q Q CY Q WATERWAY EAST COMULRUAL CONDO BAR HARBOUR CONDO A V E N U E + rr ■1 It mill 11111//1 LANIKAI .�� OLLAS CONDO 0 4TH A3 N -- DELRAY BEACH YACHT CLUB CITY or nn RAY BFACH. n PLANWNG & Z0414G DEPARTMENT -- WOITAC BASE IWP SYSTC" -- 1u? REF: LW9U3 �L t4 .w 1 F — i i }F xr �ogoeaoe�e� 11.11, 411 v` � s- F ;; � �4p�F396 RRH Y - �y' �+ [, i iC�� g � ��Y �a _� n,p[�,t >A�iK�/[Im; �1sM6 WVnnMx NJi cum X71 ;31!_d3d>7'.1d 1[7d1� ❑NV �N7[ ;3J.Y�YSY 1 g � +ix 34 n �" UFM1'' a3 P%>4ii OWV(3i93'd[il173A1F�iOLY dTTI'H?Y39aYY1mlyg l-- s I1DWF - YGMAI ii-mv xyma 133YARAvin3QtvRM- LHavF.11 I Is4ov X98 �L t4 .w 1 F — i i }F xr �ogoeaoe�e� 11.11, 411 v` � s- F ;; � �4p�F396 RRH Y Truxell, Rebecca From: Economic Solution Services Inc <esservices t @Jgmai[.com> Sent: Monday, October 15, 20124;52 PM To: Truxell, Rebecca Subject: FK Please consider this prior to tonights meeting at City Hall I received this letter Derline Pierre -Louis Economic Solution Services, Inc "Solution for Your Financial &Tax needs" 322 NW 9 st Ave Delray Beach, FL 33444 (561) 251- 1265(P) ($66) 923- 0403(F) ess ervicesl Cal e m ail . co m www.ecanomicso luti� IRS CIRCULAR 230 NOTICE REQUIREMENTS. Any tax advice expressed above was not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, by any taxpayer to avoid U.S. federal tax penalties. This email and any files transmitted with it are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this a -mail. From: Judy Craig fmailto:iudy@iudvcralp.comj Sent: Monday, October 15, 2012 3:14 PM To; clynch@plastridge.com; hansen.ianc(gmail.com; dreraig @spodakdental.com; shutts4 aLt.net; esservicesl @gmail.com_; frandosa4delrayCp?aol.com; sa45@aol.com; wmeduffie aim delra beach.com; came m delra beach.com ,agrayCtmydelraybeach.com; frankel@mydelraybeach.com; lac uet m delra beach,com Subject: Please consider this prior to tonight's meeting at City Hall Heads up, "Village by the Sea", this Atlantic Plaza proposed development is looking more like City Place than Delray! Are they kidding? (For those who have not viewed the video attached below, please take a look!) West Palm Reach is a city, that is their vision. Delray Beach has put a lot of thought, effort and money into our Village atmosphere. It's one of the reasons we were declared "All American City" twice, and designated as "Most fun Town" recently. Same of the major issues I would like to bring up with the current proposal are as follows: Where are the huildirig step backs? Other developers were required to graduate hack as they went up, so there was not this canyon effect going up from the sidewalk. And why the need for the dramatic increase in density, from 30 to 51 per acre? That's huge! Looks like a nightmare for delivery drivers, too. Imagine Mayflower moving vans trying to get around that little circle at 1" & 7 "', delivering furniture to — what- 400 or so apartments - as well as restaurant & goods delivery trucks, beer trucks, on & on. I'm not seeing much green space either, excepL for Veterans Park —do they get to count that? Which by the way, will be devoid of afternoon sun if this gets built. Parking garage (not sure but seemed to he positioned on the east side of the property) appears to have the prime views of ICL? Hummm ? ?? What happens if the economy tanks & the second phase is delayed for a considerable period (of course that could never happen! —but?) —where is phase one parking until phase two, which includes this parking garage, gets built? Why not have the parking garage built first, in phase one, positioned between Federal Hwy & 7`h Ave near Z" Street & not have all that traffic going back into the more residential area? Has anyone taken into consideration studies that point out shared parking only works in cities that depend heavily an mass transit, which we have none. I can't really foresee a large percentage of these proposed residents giving up their cars to ride the little "Downtowner' bus, even if it is free. The massive scale does not fit in with the one and two story buildings along Atlantic Avenue. (Exception is Colony Hotel, 3 stories— it adds so much charm to our Village atmosphere!) I'm sure there are other issues I have left nut, but these are the ones that came to mind during the P & Z meeting this week. How about someone, maybe an attorney, draft a petition that cites a valid legal issue we could use to defend our community against bad development? I'll bet if Palm Trail, and other neighborhood associations have the chance, we could mobilize to circulate it and get hundreds, mayhe thousands, of signatures. I don't know anyone, with the exception of the developers, who say they are in favor of this particular massive development. We need to do more than attend P & Z meetings, it's time we mobilize. As a long time Palm Trail Association resident and Realtor in Delray Beach, I'm infavor of smart development but not massive, inappropriate development that would destroy what we have here. Delray Beach has come a long way since 1.996, when 1 moved here. Most of it is good, and much of it was done with the community`s input and support. We have a very special Community, we need to keep it that way. Let's put our heads together & find a smart way to fighI this, project and the right way to do it, ane that fits OUR Delray Beach. Let's not bow to a developer who's primary interest is their "bottom line" profit, our community can do better; we can choose to do better! This is a sincere pie for our ELECTED OFT ICIALS TO DO THE RIG HT THING! Thank you Judy Craig 2 DELRAY PLACE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL. PROPOSED BY TROPIC ISLE GROUP 3/12/13 The following are conditions of approval prepared by the undersigned, Counsel to the group of Tropic Isle residents living adjacent to the Tropic Isle/Delray Place property line which l have publicly referred to as the "Tropic Isle Group ". This list of conditions are and have been heretofore, to my best knowledge and belief, found agreeable by the Developer /Applicant per communications between me and its attorney. These conditions should be, and the Tropic Isle Group hereby requests be, incorporated into any approval for the proposed Delray Place commercial developed, assuming that said proposed development is ultimately approved by the Delray City Commission. Should SPRAB decide to recommend approval of said development, we request that these conditions of approval be included in its recommendation to the City Commission. The requested conditions of approval are as follows: The buildings lying along and parallel to Linton Boulevard are to have a total and overall height of no more than Was measured from grade. Any and all air - conditioning and other mechanical equipment to be placed on the roof of any such building shall be placed no closer to the rear of the building than 16'. A parapet or screening wall shall run parallel to the east/west width of the building to screen said equipment no closer than f 6' to the rear of the building. 2. The exhaust fans integral to the loading bays shown on the site plan for the buildings parallel to Federal Highway and adjacent to Spanish Trail to the east thereof (buildings 500 -510) are not to face east towards the Tropic Isle residential community. 3. The existing vegetation, including the root systems thereof, with City owned easements located along Spanish Trail and Eve Street is not to be disturbed by the construction nor the operation of Delray Place. Included in this prohibition are walls and the footers therefore. Violation hereof will require the developer to promptly replace any such disturbed vegetation with that of like density and size. 4. Sound baffles (sound absorbing panels) are to be integrated along the parallel walls of the two large buildings (buildings 534 and 506) where a driveway between those two buildings is shown on the site plan. 5. The two large Banyan trees located proximate to the intersection of Spanish Trail and McCleary Street are not to be disturbed in any way other than the right of the owner of he Delray Place property to trim branches that overhang onto its property, and only to the extent of any such overhang. 6. Mature Areca Palms are to be integrated into the landscape plans for Delray Place so as to be planted within and along the boundary of the landscape buffers closest to the Tropic Isle residential community. These Areca Palms are to be in addition to all other proposed landscaping and are to run along the entire perimeter of the Delray Place property, from the easternmost boundary along the Linton Boulevard side to Spanish Trail; then running south along Spanish Trail to its intersection with Eve Street; then along Eve Street to the gate on Eve Street. The only exception to this is that Areca Palms are not to be planted in such a way as to disturb the two Banyan trees, or their root systems, at or proximate to the intersection of Spanish Trail and McCleary Street. The Areca Palms are to be place as close to those Banyan trees as possible without causing any such disturbance. 7. The existing wood fence running along the rear of the Delray Place property parallel to Spanish Trail and Eve Street, and just outside the City easement, Is to be removed. B. There is to be no construction access for the construction of Delray Place from Eve Street east of the gate, or from any other portion of the Tropic Isle residential community. 9. All trash areas are to be air - conditioned and enclosed. 10. Developer is to work in good faith with Tropic isle and the City to have a "No `U' Turn" sign installed at the intersection of Federal Highway and Tropic Isle Boulevard. 11. There are to be no rear doors for the buildings running parallel to Linton Boulevard. The large buildings running parallel to Federal Highway and adjacent to Spanish Trail are to have emergency rear doors only. 12. All mops, grease traps, buckets, and like equipment are to be internally stored within the buildings. 13. There are to be no additional access points to Delray Place beyond those shown on the site plan submitted to the City for its review on 212613. Submitted by: Ron Koiins PH: 561 -202 -1841 Cell: 561 -346 -4555 Email: CieanSlateR€t @Cmail.com DELRAY PLACE ADDITIONAL PROPOSED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL BY TROPIC ISLE GROUP 311 2113 Listed below are "additional" conditions of approval requested by the Tropic Isle Group represented by the undersigned, said additional conditions not having been agreed to by the developerlapplicant. Like the previously submitted agreed upon conditions, these are submitted because they are necessary for the protection of the quality of life of the residents of Tropic Isle who live adjacent to the proposed Delray Place commercial development. These additional conditions are as follows: 1. Sound baffles (sound absorption material) are also to be put on and integrated into the rear wall of the northernmost large building lying parallel to Federal Highway and parallel to Spanish Trail. 2. Developer shall enter into a mitigation agreement with the Tropic Isle Group (resident of Tropic Isle living adjacent to Delray Place on Spanish trail, McCleary Street, and Eve Street), agreeable to the members of said Group, setting forth what is to be planted in replacement for one or both of the Banyan trees located proximate to the intersection of Spanish Trail and McCleary Street, in the event that the activities of the developer in constructing Delray Place injures either or both of the two Banyan trees to an extent causing or likely to cause its or their death. In such event, it shall also be the obligation of the developer, at its sole cost, to fully remove the dead or dying tree (s), including the root systems thereof. 3. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in any ordinance/resolution of the City of Delray Beach approving the Delray Place commercial development, truck deliveries to Delray Place establishments are to be limited to between the hours of 7 A.M. and 7 P.M. 4. External music associated with the operation of any of the uses within the buildings running parallel to Linton Boulevard shall (ease at g P.M. Submitted by: Ron Kolins PH. 561-202-1841 Cell: 551- 345 -4555 Email: CleanSlateRK @Gmail.com March 1 S, 2013 RONALD K. KOLINS 701 South Olive Avenue Unit 313 West Palms Seach, Florida M40', Mr. Scott Porters Porten Companies 333 Northeast 2nd Street Delray Beach, i= L.33483 Re, Delray Place Dear Mr. Porters �F, cc', -E r FM ` �AR 2 0 ,' l�� PLANNING & ZONING I am writing to you in your capacity as Criair of SPRAB. You will recall that t represent the Tropic tale Group, a group of Tropic We residents whose houses are along Spanish Trail, McCleary Street, and Eve Street, all adjacent to the property lines of the proposed commercial development commonly referred to as Delray Place. Consideration of tha revlaed site plan application and matters related thereto were the subjects of SPRAB's last meeting an March 13, 20113. I need not remind you that that hearing was lengthy and complex. The matter was ultimately continued until SPRAS s next regular meeting to give the applicant the opportunity to further revise its plan. Given the complexity of the last hearing, I am writing to be as certain as 1 can that I fully understand the outcome of the last hearing and the status of the matter. We are, as you know, at a critical stage where all parties are working in an attempt to marrow, it not kaliminate, their differences. It is in that regard that I want to try to memorialize where matters stand now, and to set forth the remaining issues as i�est as I understand them. Thss will allow me, and perhaps others, tc direct attention to those remaining matters. It is for that reason that I am sending a copy of this letter to all participating SPRAS members; members of the City's professional staff; the attorney representing the applicant; and my own diems. Previously, 1 submitted, on behalf of Tropic Isle Group, a list of conditions of approval. l have now revised that list and enclose the revised list herewith, This reviattd fiat its forth IS conditions that, to the hest of my knowledge and belief, both my client and the developer have gorse on record as agreeing to, and which also reflect what I believe to be the consensus of SPRAB. Unless contradicted in that regard, i request that those conditions all be incorporated into any recommendation /decision SPRAB may make approving the Delray Place plan. In addition to the matters reflected on that list of conditions, from the standpoint of the Tropic Isle Group, the only additional condition we request which SPRAB has not Shown a clear consensus about and to which the developer has not agreed, Is the requested movement of a portion of the westernmost building along Linton Boulevard (building 600) on the site plan a distance of 50', or the width of its two westernmost bays, to the east. The relocation of those bays would not in any way diminish the square footage of the proposed development, nor would it reduce the amount of green space. It would only retocate the two gays eastward, and would take come of the green space at the eastern end of the Linton Boulevard portion of the project and relocate it westward to the west side of the 600 building. i will not take the opportunity of this letter to set forte the arguments that support this request, for I am here oniy trying to accurately set forth the remaining issues. ;PRAB also indicated a consensus not to incorporate the condition suggest in the staff report to the effect that children's play equipment and picnic tables and the like be placed in the proposed green space located at the easternmost portion of the Linton Boulevard section of the site plan. Further, the record should now be clear that nothing about any dedision to approve the plan for Delray Place is to to interpreted to mean that, in the future, should this applicant or any other applicant come before the City with a proposal to redevelop Tropic Square, that there can be any Interconnection between Tropic Square and Delray Place without full site picn considerativn by S#31C3 and the City Commission, including the public hearings that attend such consideration. In addition to the foregoing, SPRAB has at least one additional waiver request to vote upon; is still considering the issue of the shortage of parking spaces, and await's revisions to the site plan showing some relocation of the proposed bank building on the corner of Federal Highway and Linton Boulevard. I do mat, by this letter, attempt to restrict the prerogatives of SP PAS, but given the myriad issues that attend this application, l thought all involved would be better served if the present status of things was set forth. I therefore ask that anyone getting a copy of this letter and the enclosed conditions advise me and other recipients of this letter should there be any disagreement with what is set forth herein. If, on the other hared, we are in agreement with what is set forth herein, we can all devote our attention to the relatively few, albeit Important, issues that remain. Thank you for your consideration. _ •- -�reiy "try #y your: ___ _._ - Ronald K. Kolins =� PH: 561 -202 -1 841 Email, cc: Rustern Gupl Ms. Alice Finst Jose Aguila Jason ®regman James Knight Paul ©orling Rory Hoggard Michael Young Dr. Addy Ross Wiliam Schnabel Kaj Strom Marc Rosenberg Barbarajayne DeGloyer Cheryl Sandhoff Bruno Pellegrini Gary Roc -kis Bob Lawandowski Charlie Young Steve Camp Todd Kumnick Jeffrey Lynne, Esq. DELRAY PLACE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Submitted By TROPIC ISLE GROUP 3117113 5D E C E-� �v3 [F, [0), H IIAR ? 0 x'13 PLAN iN64G & ZONI GA It is the position of the Tropic Isle Group, to its best knowledge and belief, that the following conditions of approval reflect the consensus of SPRAB based upon the discussions during its meeting of Larch 13, 2013; are agreeable to the applicant; and are agreeable to the members of the Tropic Isle Group. The buildings lying along and parallel to Linton Boulevard are to have a total and overall height of no more than 18' as measured from grade. Any and all air - conditioning and other mechanical equipment to be placed on the roof of any such building shall be placed no closer to the rear of the building than 18'. A parapet or screening wall, no closer than 1 F' to the rear of the building and of a height no lower than the height of the tallest element of mechanical equipment, shall run parallel to the easttwest width of the building to screen said equipment visually and from noise from the residential community to the soLAh thereof. 2. The exhaust fans integral to the loading bays shown on the site plan for the buildings parallel to Pederal Highway and adjacent to Spanish Trail to the east thereof (buildings 500 -510) are not to face east towards the Tropic Isle residential community. 3. The existing vegetation, including the root systems thereof, lying within City owned easements located along Spanish Trail and Eve Street, is not to be disturbed by the construction nor the operation of Delray Place. Included in this prohibition are walls and the touters therefore, Violation hereof will require the developer to promptly replace any such disturbed vegetation with that of like density and size. 4. Sound baffles (sound absorbing panels) are to be integrated along the parallel walls of the two large buildings (buildings 500 -504 and 506 -510) lying parallel to Spanish Trail where a driveway between those two buildings is shown on the site plan. Sound baffles are also to be integrated along the rear of building 505 -510 beginning at its southernmost point and running northward to the northern terminus of the loading bays. 5. The two large Banyan trees located proximate to the intersection of Spanish Trail and McCleary Street, and their root systems, are not to be disturbed in any way other than the right of the owner of the Delray Place property to trim branches that overhang onto its property, and only to the extent of any such overhang. la, Mature (no less than 14' in height) Areca Palms are to integrated into the landscape plans for Delray Place so as to be planted within and along the boundary of the landscape buffers closest to the Tropic Isle residential community. These Areca Palms are to be in addition to all other proposed landscaping and are to run along the entire perimeter of the Delray Place property, from the easternmost boundary along the Linton Boulevard side to Spanish Trail; then running south along Spanish Trail to its intersection with Eve Street; then along Eve Street to the gate on Eve Street. The only exception to this is that Areca Palms are not to be planted in such a way as to disturb the two Banyan trees, or their root systems, at or proximate to the intersection of Spanish Trail and McCleary Street. The Areca Palms are to be placed as close to those Banyan trees as possible without causing any such disturbance. 7. The existing good fence running along the rear of the Delray Place property parallel to Spanish Trali and Eve Street, and just outside the City easement, fs to be removed. 8. There is to be no construction access for the construction of Delray Place from Eve Street east of the gate, or from any other portion of the Tropic Isle residential community. g. All trash areas are to be air - conditioned and enclosed. 10. Developer is to work in good faith with Tro pic Isle and the City to have an "No `U' Turn" sign installed at the intersection of Federal Highway and Tropic isle Boulevard. 11. There are to be no rear doors for the buildings running parallel to Linton Boulevard. The Barge b►jildings (buildings 600-510) running parailei to federal Highway and adjacent to Spanish Trail are to have emergency rear doors only. 12. All mops, grease traps, bucket, and like equipment are to be internally stored within the buildings. 13. There are to be no additional access points to Delray Place beyond those shown on the site plan submitted to the City for its review on February 25, 2413. 14.Developer shall enter into a mitigation agreement with the Tropic Isle Group (residents of Tropic Isle living adjacent to Delray Place on Spanish Trail, McCleary Street, and Eve Street), agreeable to the members of said Croup and consistent with City Code requirements, setting forth what is to be planted in replacement for one or both of the jBanyan trees located proximate to the intersection of Spanish Trail and McCleary Street, in the event that the activities of the developer in constructing Delray Place injures either one or both of the two Banyan trees to an extent causing or likely to cause its or their death. In such event, it shall also be the obligation of the developer, at its sole cost, to fully remove the dead or dying trees), including the root systems thereof. 15. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in any ordinance/resolution of the City of Delray Reach approving the Defray Place commercial development, truck deliveries to Delray place establishments are to be limited to between the hours of 7 A. M. and 7 P.M. The only exception to the foregoing is that deliveries to a grocery store establishment within Delray Place may have its deWeries between the hours of 6 A.M. and 9 P. M. 16. External music associated with the operation of any of the uses within the buildings running parallel to Linton Boulevard shall cease at 9 P.M, Submitted Cry: Ronald K. Kolins, Esq. Attorney for Tropic Isle Group PH: 561 -262 -1841 Cell: 561- 346 -4555 Email: CleanSlateRK @Gmail.com r� ly tc TOO P? lice-- • Jeffrey Lynne Tree, Apr 2, 2013 at <j lynne zonelaw. oom> 5:31 PM To- Ron Kolins <cleanslaterk a g mai l.com> Cc: W. Young" <migman9 l 1 yahoo.00m> Lxvyyen are wordy by rlaturc,, aren't we? J 706 Ti VIV.7 f+T I Rf4 nrn- 7 ;r. .. Ok, let's try this format: My client does not oppose the right turn out of Delray Place onto [Eve Street] nor does my client oppose that the curbing which would so direct the traffic would be of a type relatively easily removed IF, ultimately, a pass through from Delray Place to/from Tropic Square were to be approved. THANK YOU. However, the question of whether or not the pass through is to be authorized is to be subject to public hearings and the complete regulatory approval process through the City of Delray Beach. That consideration will be part of the process, if and when it happens, of your client or any other applicant seeking authority from the City to redevelop Tropic square. AGREED. V00 12 YVJ r1 ;60 CTOZ /GTII �o This would include site plan approval; zoning if necessary; any waivers or variances, etc. AGREED. Thus, approval of the redevelopment of Tropic Square would NOT carry with it any sort of automatic approval to remove the said curbing and create the pass through. AGREED. However, we do agree that that issue, while a full part of any proceedings involving Tropic Square, would not involve a reopening of the site plan approval, should it happen, for Delray Place. AGREED. My client, and for that matter, others of whom I am aware, are VERY concerned about the traffic impacts and quality of life impacts to their residential community should the pass through be created, and they thus reserve the right to too i'Va i�T : Rn Fully {participate in any such proceedings and to oppose the pass through. AGREED. JEFFREY C. Ln+Ia>;, Esq., LEEO AP WFINER, LYwHE & TrlomnoH, P.A. 10 5E 1st Avenue, Suite C I betray Beach, Flowida 33444 Direct (561) 900 -0725 1 Cell (561) 239 -0834 Main (561; 265 -2666 1 Fax (561) 277 -6$31 National (877) 901 -2666 REAL ESTATE I ZONING I [i4YERmmEHT AFFAms t OTlrr Tm }lynne (Dxonelaw.com I www.zonelaw.com 50001 Y 4 BT AM f'7A71[2T Ii.n Truxell, Rebecca Subject: FW: Delray Place & House at 541 McCleary St. - - - -- Forwarded Message---- - From: Nancy Schnabel Sent: Jun 5, 2013 14:46 AM To: "aifinstZi�eaithlink.net" Subject. Delray Place & House at 901 McCleary St. Good morning Ms. Finst, My husband and I are the homeowners at 901 McCleary 5t. which abuts the Delray Place project on two sides. appreciated your support at the last SPRAB meeting and you seemed to understand and be sympathetic to our situation with the devastating effect that this site plan as proposed will have on our home. We are the homeowners most affected by this project. We have lived in our home for over 30 years and we did our due diligence and knew we were buying adjacent to a POC (Planned Office Center). Over the 30+ years, there have been no conflicts with the office complex. Offices are open primarily 8:00 am to 5:00 pm with generally no weekend or holiday hours. The proposed commercial complex is quite a different story. Retail establishments such as the proposed grocery store are open from 7:00 am until 10:00 pm or later and the developers have pushed for earlier and later delivery hours than are the norm for Delray Beach. This will have a severe impact on the peaceful enjoyment of our property. Building 600 of the proposed site plan will be 18' high and just 15' off our back property line. The developer now proposes that the wall behind the grocery store be increased by two feet. If this is approved, we will have a 10' concrete & stucco wall along the entire west side of our property and, from our grade level which is 2 feet lower than the grade level of Delray Place, a 20' high building just 15' from the entire length of our north property line. This will totally enclose our property on two sides -- we will have no view to the west or to the north. It might as well be a prison. During the SPRAB process, the developer eliminated two of the buildings along Linton Blvd. that were directly behind houses on McCleary 5t. tie did not, however, eliminate Building 600 even though we have asked him countless times to consider doing this to give us relief on at least one side of our property. We countered with the comporinise of moving Buiding 600 and the other remaining buildings half the distance of the building east (50') just to give us some relief on part of one side of our property. This is not ideal for us and he refused. Since the developer did not agree, this compromise is off the table. Please help us retain the peaceful enjoyment and value of our home. Delray Beach LDF 2.4.5(F)(5) requires that the approving body must make findings that: 1. Development of the property pursuant to the site plan will be compatible and harmonious with adjacent and nearby properties (I don't believe it is compatible and harmonious with the McCleary St. homes) 2. 5o as not to cause substantial depreciation of property values (If Building 1500 is allowed to be constructed according to the current site plan, this will have a devasting effect on the value of our homey I would like to meet with you to discuss this prior to the SPRAB meeting on June 12th, l am available at any time and will meet you anywhere. I would be happy to have you come to my house so that you can see the situation. We are not trying to stop this project -- we just want to protect our home. Building 600 must be eliminated from this site plan. This space could be used for additional green space or for much - needed parking that would be ideally located to serve both the grocery store and the shops along Linton. Please help us save our home. Nancy Schnabel Vice President - Finance Associated Builders & Contractors Florida East Coast Chapter, Inc. 3730 Coconut Creek Pkwy., Suite 200 Coconut Creek, FL 33066 Phone: 954 -984 -0075, Extension 819 Cell: 561- 859 -3963 nsch n a bel Casa bceastflo rida.com PleasE ccnsicz- r the environment before printing this e -mail The infonriauon in this email and any atLachMents are confidential and may be legally privileged. It Is Intended solely for the add resseetsj.Access to anyone else is unauthorized. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the Intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communlcation is strictly prohibited. If Ibis message fias been sent to you In error, do not review, disseminate, distribute or copy it. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this email. Truxeil, Rebecca From: Jim Knight <jkncalco @gmail.com> Sent: Monday, April 29, 2013 7:57 PM To: Truxell, Rebecca Subject: FW: Proposed Developer meeting with Delray SPRAB member Jim Knight to explain SPRAB requested open Gateway Feature Design for planned Delray Place @ SEC of Linton Blvd & Federal Highway Intersection Corner Attachments: Gateway Feature Elevation & Overhead Sketch Delray Place Feature 4- 16- 13.pdf; Jim Knight.vcf Rebecca below is correspondence I received from toe Carosella. Jirr j Jim Knight ; j The Knight 'ioup L'.cemE!0 Real Estate Broker (56!) 279 -8601 i:'•,r i561j 755 -2833 {belie i Jl:ntalca�gmail.t�m A 5E 15t Ave Del ray Beach, FL 334 4 j From: Joe Carosella [mai1to:JCarosel1a @rpg123.com] y Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2013 1:49 PM To; jkncalco @gmail.com Cc: 'Mark Saltz (Msaitz dsaitzmichelson.com)'; 'Victor Alvarez (Valvarezlo)5aitzmichelson .cam)'; Louis Carosella; 'Jeff Brophy (JBrophy @LandDesignSouth.corn)' Subject. Proposed Developer meeting with Delray SPRAB member Jim Knight to explain SPRAB requested open Gateway Feature Design for planned Delray Place @ SEC of Linton Blvd & Federal Highway Intersection Corner Hi Jim As you requested today, since we are not going to be able and meet this week, i am sending you our attached planned gateway feature Please consider that we have worked thru many hours and with different parties to provide this significant gateway feature material enhancement This gateway feature now provides intersection focus on the water fountain, colonnades, landscaping, stonework, project signage and other related features, and not the required outparcel building behind same I We have even modified this rear of gateway feature outparcel to have a corner centered tower with stone and signature clock that will tie into and coordinate properly with the gateway feature The attached has a detailed section view to understand heights and shows the plan view on each of the two sheets showing the gateway feature without rear outparce and gateway feature with rear outparcel Our project architect designed this gateway feature and we are all very proud of the high quality presentation this overall project will provide the city We look forward to your continuing support and i will follow up with you on Monday to further explain our overall progress to proceed further Thank you very much Joe Carosella President Retail Property Group, Inc. Royal Palm Place 101 Plaza Real South Suite 200 Boca Raton, Florida 33432 Direct: 561 - 951 -1732 Cell: 954 - 647 -6790 Fax: 561 -961 -1744 Email: 'carosella r 123.com From: Joe Carosella Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2013 7:54 AM To: 'jkncalco @gmail.com' Cc: `Mark Saltz (Msaltz asaltzmichelson.com)', `Victor Alvarez ( Valvarez-�saltzmichelson.com)'; Louis Carosella Subject: RE: Proposed Developer meeting with Delray SPRAB member Jim Knight to explain SPRAB requested open Gateway Feature Design for planned Delray Place @ SEC of Linton Blvd & Federal Highway Intersection corner Good morning Jim I hope you wife is feeling better We will be in east delray today from 5 -6pm C If your schedule permits, we can meet with you today after at about 6:15pm or prior at 4pm Please let us know what you suggest is best Thank you very much Joe Carosella President Retail Property Group, Inc. Royal Palm Place 101 Plaza Real South Suite 200 Boca Raton, Florida 33432 Direct: 561 - 961 -1732 Cell: 954 - 647 -6790 Fax: 561- 961 -1744 Email: icarosella @rpg123.com From: Joe Carosella Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2013 6:24 PM To: 'jkncalco@gmail.com' Cc: 'Mark Saltz (Msalr<asaltzmichelson.com)'; 'Victor Alvarez (Valvarezrcbsaltzmichelson.com)'; Louis Carosella Subject: RE: Proposed Developer meeting with Delray SPRAB member Jim Knight to explain SPRAB requested open Gateway Feature Design for planned Delray Place @ SEC of Linton Blvd & Federal Highway Intersection Corner Hi Jim As we discussed today, we are going to be going to another meeting with our design and principal architect owner this Thursday from 5 -6pm about two blocks walking distance from your east delray office to further present and explain our revised gateway feature design I understand your wife has not been feeling well so you need to further work thru your scheduling this week, however, please consider that i am bringing our design and principal architect owner up from Hollywood florida to delray this Thursday afternoon at 5pm, so if your schedule permits, we would like to meet at your office this Thursday at about 4pm or about 6:15pm If you can't meet this Thursday, i will work to accommodate meeting you with another time later this week or early next week 3 Please let us know what scheduling works out best for you Best regards Joe Carosella President Retail Property Group, Inc. Royal Palm Place 101 Plaza Real South Suite 200 Boca Raton, Florida 33432 Direct: 561 -961 -1732 Cell: 954 -647 -6790 Fax: 561 - 961 -1744 Email: Ica rose IIa @rpg 123.com From: Joe Carosella Sent: Friday, April 12, 2013 5:03 PM To: 'jkncalco@gmail.com' Cc: 'Mark Saltz (Msaltz�psaltzmichelson.com )'; Victor Alvarez (Valvarez�q)Lsaltzmichelson.com]; Louis Carosella Subject: Proposed Developer meeting with Delray SPRAB member Jim Knight to explain SPRAB requested open Gateway Feature Design for planned Delray Place . SFC of Linton Blvd & Federal Highway Intersection Corner Good afternoon Delray SPRAB Member Jim Knight I am the developer of the Delray Place project on the southeast corner of South Federal Hwy. and Linton Blvd. We have been working tirelessly with our team the last 18 months to secure a positive SPRAB approval, We have met many times over the last 18 months with the adjacent Tropic Isle residential neighborhood and more specifically with the neighbors living immediately adjacent to our property. After our most recent SPRAB hearing, I believe we have addressed and resolved all material issues except one, which was the final design of our corner. After reviewing our detailed notes and speaking with all our consultants which attended our last hearing, it was clear there were many various SPRAB member opinions as to what the most important feature of that corner should be. Some SPRAB members wanted to better understand how the corner could be further designed to provide a more open gateway feature commensurate with the importance of the location. To that end, we have consulted with various artists and have selected our 4 project design architect to create an open gateway feature commensurate with the importance of the location. Based upon our collective experience, we all know it will be difficult at best to be abie to effectively present the details of such a significant open gateway feature within the very short allowed public hearing time frame. Therefore, we believe it is in everyone's best interests to briefly meet to show you the exceptional direction we are headed and to get your input before our final plans are shortly resubmitted. While we understand this is not how SPRAB generally likes to review plans, we strongly feel these are unique circumstances which warrant just a short amount your time prior. A brief meeting would allow us to confirm we are on the right path towards both your and our vision for this corner design. We understand and agree that you will not be bound by any such direction provided to us. Please consider this request and let us know of your availability next week. If you simply want us to email you our open gateway design plans to get your preliminary comments, we would be happy to do that as well, or if you just want to speak with me, please do not hesitate to call my cell. We value your time and your commitment to the City. We only ask for this brief meeting to ensure we are meeting all remaining expectations and to avoid any further unnecessary continuances due to any potential misunderstandings. Best rega rds Joe Carosella President Retail Property Group, Inc. Royal Palm Place 101 Plaza Real South Suite 200 Boca Raton, Florida 33432 Direct: 561 - 961 -1732 Cell: 954 - 647 -6790 Fax: 561 -961 -1744 Email: jcarosella @rpo123.com 5 vQwQrd,lj;Nw AWTBU N01133BUILNI rAIQ NOINIL OW AMM 14fdBMd iltrl 33V'ld AVH130 J.V JLVMBJ.VD z. IN pd 1ptrdcld,mvo30 AwkMpo ADIA03mo1ml cA-P Kc w aw :mq,' qa 9A t-sn 30VId Avui3a iv Avm3ivo TT7 4 0q F L I TruxelI, Rebecca From: ajfinst <ajfinst @earthlink.net> Sent: Friday, April 12, 2013 5:41 PM To: rebecca; Truxell; Rebecca Subject: Fw: RE: Proposed Developer meeting with Delray SPRAB member Alice Finst to explain SPRAB requested open Gateway Feature Design for planned Delray Place @ SEC of Linton Blvd & Federal Highway Intersection Corner Could you send this over to legal? Would it be legal for me to have them to e-mail me their gateway design plans? _— Forwarded Message---- - From: Joe Carosella Sent: Apr 12, 2013 5:05 PM To: "a finst "Vearthlink. net" Cc: "'Marls Saltz (Msallzrasaltzmic_hel son . corn) ' , "Victor Alvarez Valvarez ,saitzmichelson.com)" , Louis Carosella Subject: RE: Proposed Developer meeting with Delray SPRAB member Alice Finst to explain SPRAB requested open Gateway Feature Design for planned Delray Place C SEC of Linton Blvd & Federal Highway Intersection Corner Good afternoon Delray SPRAB Member Alice Finst I am the developer of the Delray Place project on the southeast corner of South Federal Hwy. and Linton Blvd. We have been working tirelessly with our team the last 18 months to secure a positive SPRAB approval. We have met many times over the last 18 months with the adjacent Tropic Isle residential neighborhood and more specifically with the neighbors living immediately adjacent to our property. After our most recent SPRAB hearing, I believe we have addressed and resolved all material issues except one, which was the final design of our corner. After reviewing our detailed notes and speaking with all our consultants which attended our last hearing, it was clear there were many various SPRAB member opinions as to what the most important feature of that corner should be. Some SPRAB members wanted to better understand how the corner could be further designed to provide a more open gateway feature commensurate with the importance of the location. To that end, we have consulted with various artists and have selected our project design architect to create an open gateway feature commensurate with the importance of the location. Based upon our collective experience, we all know it will be difficult at best to be able to effectively present the details of such a significant open gateway feature within the very short allowed public hearing time frame. Therefore, we believe it is in everyone's best interests to briefly meet to show you the exceptional direction we are headed and to get your input before our final plans are shortly resubmitted. While we understand this is not how SPRAB generally likes to review plans, we strongly feel these are unique circumstances which warrant just a short amount your time prior. A brief meeting would allow us to confirm we are on the right path towards both your and our vision for this corner design. We understand and agree that you will not be bound by any such direction provided to us. Please consider this request and let us know of your availability next week. If you simply want us to email you our open gateway design plans to get your preliminary comments, we would be happy to do that as well, or if you just want to speak with me, please do not hesitate to call my cell. We value your time and your commitment to the City. We only ask for this brief meeting to ensure we are meeting all remaining expectations and to avoid any further unnecessary continuances due to any potential misunderstandings. Best regard s Joe Carosella President Retail Property Group, Inc. Royal Palm Place 161 Plaza Real South Suite 266 Boca Raton, Florida 33432 Direct: 561- 961 -1732 Cell: 954 - 647 -6794 Fax: 561- 961 -1744 Email: jcaroselIa(-@rpg 123.com 2 Truxell, Rebecca From: Jason Bregman <jab450@hotmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2013 3:26 PM To: 'Joe Caroseiia' Cc: 'Mark SaIff; 'Victor Alvarez'; 'Louis Carosella'; Pyb urn, Terrill; Rustin, Janice; Truxell; Rebecca Subject: RE: Proposed Developer meeting with Delray SPRAB member Jason Bregman to explain SPRAB requested open Gateway Feature Design for planned Delray Place @ SEC of Linton Blvd & Federal Highway Intersection Corner Joe, Thank you for your email. I have to decline your offer to meet. I am very busy taking care of an ill friend who just got out of the hospital. Trying to juggle that while working and my normal commitments to SPRAB have been a challenge. As I have stated in the various meetings my concerns- in addition to those which you are addressing with your neighbors, are primarily about parking mitigation should your parking plan fail to meet demand. Your mitigation plans in writing as a commitment are critical. I have also mentioned a layered screening of landscape along Federal Highway, saving as many existing mature trees on site as possible, naturalizing and protecting the open space at the east end of your property, considering LED lights for glare reduction and reduced energy consumption, and connecting your underground water storage tanks to your irrigation system (which will save potable water and reduce your water bill). Regarding the'gateway' my only consideration is that the corner not be completely visually dominated by the bank pushed very close to the edge of your property. I am very open to how you accomplish this visual mitigation and frankly I am not a huge fan of'plop art' placed at intersections. That said I am one vote, and if the other board members like the idea of art I am open to that. Take care, Jason From: Joe Carosella [mailto:JCarosella rpg123.com] Sent: Friday, April 12, 2013 4:55 PM To- jab45QCghotma1l.com Cc: 'Mark Saltz (_ saltz Osaltzmichelson.com)'; Victor Alvarez (Valvarez�saitzmichelson.com); Louis Carosella Subject: Proposed Developer meeting with Delray SPRAB member Jason Bregman to explain SPRAB requested open Gateway Feature Design for planned Delray Place C SEC of Linton Blvd & Federal Highway Intersection Corner Goad afternoon Delray SPRAB Member Jason Bregman I am the developer of the Delray Place project on the southeast corner of South Federal Hwy, and Linton Blvd. We have been working tirelessly with our team the last 18 months to secure a positive SPRAB approval. We have met many times over the last I8 months with the adjacent Tropic Isle residential neighborhood and more specifically with the neighbors living immediately adjacent to our property. After our most recent SPRAB hearing, I believe we have addressed and resolved all material issues except one, which was the final design of our corner. After reviewing our detailed notes and speaking with all our consultants which attended our last hearing, it was clear there were many various SPRAB member opinions as to what the most important feature of that corner should be. Some SPRAB members wanted to better understand how the corner could be further designed to provide a more open gateway feature commensurate with the importance of the location. To that end, we have consulted with various artists and have selected our project design architect to create an open gateway feature commensurate with the importance of the location. Based upon our collective experience, we all know it will be difficult at best to be able to effectively present the details of such a significant open gateway feature within the very short allowed public hearing time frame. Therefore, we believe it is in everyone's best interests to briefly meet to show you the exceptional direction we are headed and to get your input before our final plans are shortly resubmitted. While we understand this is not how SPRAB generally likes to review plans, we strongly feel these are unique circumstances which warrant just a short amount your time prior. A brief meeting would allow us to confirm we are on the right path towards both your and our vision for this corner design. We understand and agree that you will not be bound by any such direction provided to us. Please consider this request and let us know of your availability next week. If you simply want us to email you our open gateway design plans to get your preliminary comments, we would be happy to do that as well, or if you just want to speak with me, please do not hesitate to call my cell. We value your time and your commitment to the City. We only ask for this brief meeting to ensure we are meeting all remaining expectations and to avoid any further unnecessary continuances due to any potential misunderstandings. Best regards Joe Carosella President Retail Property Group, Inc. Royal Palm Place 101 Plaza Real South Suite 200 Boca Raton, Florida z 33432 Direct: 561- 961 -1732 Cell: 954 - 647 -6790 Fax: 561- 961 -1744 Email, icarosellaOrpQ121com Hoggard, Ron From: Jeffrey Lynne <jlynne @zanelaw.com> Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2013 9:56 AM To: Ron Kolins; Joe Carosella Cc: M. Young; tarheel_bill@bellsouth.net; Dr. Andrew Ross; Bill Schnabel (seasidebldrs @bellsouth.net); Nancy Schnabel (nschnabel @ahceastflorida.com); Louis Carosella; Michele Burns; Mark Saltz (Msaltz @saltzmichelson.com); Dodi Glas (dodi@ 2GHCf.com); Jeff Brophy (JBrophy @Land Design5outh.com); Dennis Shultz (dshultz@flynnengineering.com); Hoggard, Ron; Ashlee Coosaia Subject. RE: proposed final developer plans, conditions of approval and ordinance for planned Delray Place SPRAB 6/12/13 and Commission 7/2/2013 final hearings Attachments: Comments from Ron Kolins.pdf Finn — Just so we can be clear and understand each other — Your clients wanted a 20 foot wall; the City said it could not support. We explored other sound mitigation techniques and suggested the sound baffling, which everyone agreed to. We then spent a lot of money and time working with a sound engineer to design the baffling to make sure we get it right. The sound engineer then said that the sound baffling as proposed is not going to mitigate any noise as desired by your clients, and actually increasing the wall height from 6' to 8' is superior and preferred, which is also consistent with your client's initial desires (see your demands in writing, as attached). Now your clients are saying that they do not want a wall, that they want sound baffling that a well - regarded sound engineer said is not going to do what your client's think it is going to do (except cause our clients to unnecessarily spend even more money). You had said Mr_ Young had his own sound engineer review our consultant's information. We are asking that you immediately provide his/her written report. Let's not proceed based upon mistrust, supposition and emotion but based upon empirical facts and data. JEFFREY C. LYNNE, Esq., LEED AP WEINER, LYNNE Ft TFIOmPSON, P.A. 10 SE i st Avenue, Suite C I Delray Beach, Florida 33444 Direct (561) 900 -0725 1 Cell (561) 239 -0839 Main (561) 265.2666 1 Fax (561) 272 -6831 National (877) 901 -2666 REAL ESTATE I ZONING I GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS I LITIGATION jtynne @zonelaw.com I www.zonetaw.com 11 y� Please consider the ernrironment before printing this email. NOTICE: This e-mail message and any attachrnent to this e -mail message contains wMidentiaf information that may be legally privileged. If you are riot the intended recipient, you must not review. nutransmif, convert to hard ropy, copy, use or disseminate this e-mail or any attachments io it. If you Have received this a -mail in error, please notify us immediately by return a -mail or by telephone at 561 - 265.2666 and delete this message. Please note that if this a -mail message contains a forwarded message or is a reply to a prior message, some or ail of the contents of this message or any attachments may not have been produced by the sender. From: Ron Kolins [mailto:cleansiaterk @gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2013 9:08 AM To: Joe Carosella Cc: Jeffrey Lynne; M. Young; tarheel_ bill @bellsouth.net; Dr. Andrew Ross; Bill Schnabel (seasidebidrs @bellsouth.net); Nancy Schnabel (nschnabel @abceastFlorida.com); Louis Carosella; Michele Burns; Mark Saltz (Msalt2 (c-bsaitzmichelson.com); Dodi Glas (dodi @2GHO.com); Jeff Brophy (J Brophy @LandDesignSouth.com); Dennis Shultz (dshultz @flynnengineering.com) Subject; Re: proposed final developer plans, conditions of approval and ordinance for planned Delray place SPRAB 6/12/13 and Commission 7/2/2013 final hearings My client has reviewed your sound report and is not in agreement therewith and still wants the sound suppression we previously agreed to- If you would like to have a call or meeting to discuss this. we )&Pill make ourselves available at the earliest mutually convenient time. Please also adNise when you will be going again to SPRAB. Thank you. On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 7:22 PM; Joe Carosella <JCarosella@Mg 123. com> wrote: Good Evening We have reviewed all our last SPRAB hearing notes and our discussions, and based on same, we have this week submitted to the city our attached final SPRAB drawings, sound engineer report, conditions of approval and ordinance and for your review and final comments We went line item by line item through the last plans, last conditions and last ordinance and for items that have been resolved and/or incorporated into our revised plans, we removed such items from our conditions and/or modified same into our ordinance Instead of a long email outlining all our revised plans items, satisfaction of conditions and revised ordinance, we are available to meet or have a call in conference call to work thru any questions with our revised plans, sound report, conditions of approval, and ordinance Our group has left their early summer schedule open for our proposed final 6/12/2913 sprab hearing and final 7/2/2013 commission hearing, so we are available prior to continue working together We have all put our best efforts into designing this exceptional project the approx past 2 years and we are encouraged that with all our joint resolutions, we will obtain final city approvals as outlined above and deliver this successful project we all will enjoy and be proud of Please feel free to call my or Iouis carosella cell at 954 -873 -4597 any time Best regards Joe Caroseila President Retail Property Group, Inc. Royal Palm Place 101 Plaza Real South Suite 290 Boca Raton, Florida 33432 Direct: 561 - 961 -1732 Cell: 954 - 647 -6790 Fax: 561- 961 -1744 Email: icarosella@rpa123.com 3 105 1 OT 1 ► : ► 11"d TO: Mayor and City Commissioners FROM: Ronald Haggard, AICP, Principal Planner Paul Darling, AICP, Director Planning and Zoning THROUGH: Louie Chapman, Jr., City Manager DATE: July 2, 2013 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM MAI -REGULAR COMMISSION MEETING OF JULY 9, 201.3 WAIVER REQUESTSIDELRAY PLACE ITEM BEFORE COMMISSION Consideration of two waiver requests from the following Land Development Regulations associated with the Class V site plan for the Delray Place project: 1. A waiver to LDR Section 4.4.25(D)(1), for pavement encroachment into the required 15' perimeter setback for the SAD zoning district. 2. A waiver to LDR Section 4.6.9(D)(3)(c), which requires a stacking distance of 50 feet for parking areas that contain 51 or more parking spaces. BACKGROUND At its meeting of March 13, 2013, the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board (SPRAB) considered a site development plan and associated waivers for the Delray Place project. The Board tabled the Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevations for the project (later approved on June 12, 2012). However, the Board approved five associated waivers for the project, and recommended approval to the City Commission of the two waivers which are the subject of this document. Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5), prior to granting a waiver, the approving body shall make a finding that the granting of the waiver: (a) Shall not adversely affect the neighboring area; (b) Shah not significantly diminish the provision of public facilities; (c) Shall not create an unsafe situation; and (d) Does not result in the grant of a special privilege in that the same waiver would be granted under similar circumstances on other property for another applicant or owner. SAD Perimeter Setback Landscape Requirements: Pursuant to Section 4.4.25(D)(1), "A minimum setback of fifteen feet shall be established around the perimeter of any property developed under the SAD designation. Within the front and any street side setback, the fifteen foot (15') setback area shall be a landscape area and no pavement shall be allowed therein except for pedestrian ways and driveways (or streets) which provide access to the property and which are generally perpendicular to the abutting street." The applicant has requested a waiver to this requirement. The verbatim excerpt from the applicant's narrative in support of the waiver is attached as Exbibit "A ": Waiver Analysis: The first pavement encroachment into the required landscape area involves the parking aisle along Linton Boulevard. The existing office development has a parking aisle in this location with the paving approximately 9 feet from the Linton Boulevard right-of-way. This is a nonconforming situation. The applicant proposes to leave the parking aisle in the same location, but cut back the asphalt to allow the cars to overhang the landscape area by 18 inches. While this will reduce the impervious area on the site and provide additional green area, it cannot be counted toward the required 15' landscape area, since it is still technically a part of the parking space. Therefore, the effective landscape area for the purpose of this code section will remain at 9 feet. A significant portion of the frontage along Linton Boulevard is extremely narrow and the proposed buildings are only 50 feet deep in this area. The area directly in front of these buildings has significant landscaping and wider sidewalks to provide outdoor dining opportunities and enhance the pedestrian experience in this area. In order to provide additional landscaping along Linton Boulevard, the buildings would have to be even narrower, which is impractical; or the sidewalk/landscape area in front of the buildings would have to be reduced. Given the situation, the trade -off is appropriate and the waiver should be granted. The second encroachment involves an outdoor dining area along Eve Street on the south side of the 400 building. The outdoor dining adjacent to this building is an extension of the perimeter sidewalk on Eve Street and will be utilized for a sidewalk cafe. Under these circumstances, a waiver to the requirement at this location is appropriate. Reduction of the landscaping in these two locations will not negatively affect the neighboring areas, create an unsafe situation or diminish the provision of public facilities. Granting of the waiver will not result in the grant of a special privilege as similar waivers have been granted to other projects on similar basis. Consequently, positive findings with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5) can be made for the reduction of the required landscape areas in these two locations as indicated on the site plan. Stacking Distance: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.9(D)(3)(c)(1), provisions must be made for stacking and transitioning of incoming traffic from a public street, such that traffic may not backup into the public street system. The minimum stacking distance between a right-of-way and the first parking space or aisle way in a parking lot that contains 51 or more spaces is fifty feet (50'). This distance has not been provided at the driveway connections to Eve Street and Linton Boulevard. The applicant has requested a waiver from the stacking requirements. The verbatim excerpt from the applicant's narrative in support of the waiver is attached as Exbibit "B ": Waiver Analysis: Based upon the provision of four (4) access points to the site, including the primary access on South Federal Highway, which has adequate stacking, the requested waiver is supportable. The stacking provided will not negatively affect the neighboring areas or create an unsafe situation. Granting of the requested waiver will not diminish the provision of public facilities or result in the grant of a special privilege as similar waivers have been granted to other projects on similar basis. Consequently, positive findings can be made for the reduction of the stacking distance requirement at the entrances on Linton Boulevard and Eve Street with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5). RECOMMENDATION By Separate Motions: 1. Approve the waiver to LDR Section 4.4.25(D)(1), for pavement encroachment into the required 15' perimeter setback for the SAD zoning district, for the driveway /parking aisle along Linton Boulevard and the outdoor dining area along the south side of the 400 building, based on positive findings with LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5). 2. Approve the waiver to LDR Section 4.6.9(D)(3)(c), "Stacking Distance ", to reduce the required 50 foot stacking distance between a right -of -way and the first parking space or aisle way in a parking lot to twenty-seven (27) feet for the two entrances on Linton Boulevard and thirty-three (33) feet for the entrance on Eve Street, based on positive findings with LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5). IN THE CITY COMMISSION CHAMBERS OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA ORDER OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH: FLORIDA WAIVER REQUESTS IN ASSOCIATION WITH THE CLASS V SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR DELRAY PLACE 1. These waiver requests in association with the Class V site plan approval for Delray Place came before the City Commission on July 9, 2013. 2. The Applicant and City staff presented documentary evidence and testimony to the City Commission pertaining to the waiver requests in association with the Class V site plan approval for Delray Place. All of the evidence is a part of the record in this case. Required findings are made in accordance with Subsection I. WAIVER: Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.7(13)(5), prior to granting a waiver, the approving body shall make a finding that the granting of the waiver: (a) Shall not adversely affect the neighboring area, (b) Shall not significantly diminish the provision of public facilities; (c) Shall not create an unsafe situation; and, {d} Does not result in the grant of a special privilege in that the same waiver would be granted under similar circumstances on other property for another applicant or owner. A. Waiver #1 — Pavement Encroachment into the Required 15' Perimeter Landscape Setback: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.4.25 (D)(1) "A minimum setback of fifteen feet shall be established around the perimeter of any property developed under the SAD designation. Within the front and any street side setback, the fifteen foot (15') setback area shall be a landscape area and no pavement shall be allowed therein except for pedestrian ways and driveways (or streets) which provide access to the property and which are generally perpendicular to the abutting street." The applicant has requested a waiver to allow various paved areas for use as pedestrian access to the site, to maintain existing parking use along Linton Boulevard, and for potential future use as sidewalk cafe areas, all of which are generally parallel to the abutting street. Does the waiver request meet all the requirements of 2.4.7(B)(5)? Yes No B. Waiver #2 — Vehicular Stackinq Distance: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.9(D)(3 )(c )(1 ), the minimum stacking distance between a right -of -way and the first parking space for a parking area that has fifty one (51) or more parking spaces is fifty feet (50') for all driveway connections along Linton Blvd. and Eve St. The applicant has requested a waiver to reduce the required stacking distance for the driveway connections off of Linton Blvd. and for the driveway connection off of Eve St., by providing for a stacking distance of twenty seven feet {27'} for the driveway connections along Linton Blvd. and a stacking distance of thirty three feet (33') for the driveway connection off of Eve St. Does the waiver request meet all the requirements of 2.4.7(B)(5)? Yes No 3. The City Commission has applied the Comprehensive Plan and LDR requirements in existence at the time the original development application was submitted and finds that its determinations set forth in this Order are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 4. The City Commission finds there is ample and competent substantial evidence to support its findings in the record submitted and adopts the facts contained in the record including but not limited to the staff reports, testimony of experts and other competent witnesses supporting these findings. 5. Based on the entire record before it, the City Commission approves denies the waiver requests to LDRs. 6. Based on the entire record before it, the City Commission hereby adopts this Order this 9th day of July, 2013, by a vote of in favor and opposed. ATTEST: Chevelle Nubin, City Clerk K Cary D. Glickstein, Mayor I I � 5 LEWS COVE CENTRAL AVE. S.E. 12TH RD. r BROOKS W. C,7 x WHITE DR. a` i I k RHODES -VILLA AVE- } � BANYAN .� TREE LANE �q DEL -HAVEN D . Ld 1z' Q L I N T 0 N H 0 U L E V A R ¢ � D z z d L; WC CLEARY S 7�= DEL- HARBOUR DR, EVE STREET DIE J � � Q � F D TROPIC BOULEVARD Ln J Q O W CJ W Q W SOLENDER STREET w F BER uD } RO 0 Uptivi ALLAMAR A a BANYAN DRIVE CYPRESS DRIVE I SUBJECT PROPERTY DEL RAY PLACE PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT LOCATION MAP -- DfGITAL BASE AMP SYSTEM -- MAP REF: 5:\Planning do Zomriq\DBMS\FI- Ca6\Z -LM 1001- 150D\LM1310 Delray Place UOVICI RI Exhibit A Applicant's Justification Waiver to SAD Perimeter Setback Landscape Requirements: Pursuant to Section 4.4.25(D){1), "A minimum setback of fifteen feet shall be established around the perimeter of any property developed under the SAD designation. Within the front and any street side setback, the fifteen foot (19) setback area shall be a landscape area and no pavement shall be allowed therein except for pedestrian ways and driveways (or streets) which provide access to the property and which are generally perpendicular to the abutting street." The applicant has requested a waiver to this requirement. The verbatim excerpt from the applicant's narrative in support of the waiver is attached as Exbibit "A ": This written request for a Waiver pursuant to Section 2.4.7(B )(2) of the Delray Beach Land Development Regulations ( "LDRs'), is intended to supplement the same request previously submitted, seeking relief from LDR Section 4.4.25(D), which provision requires a fifteen foot (15 ) setback which is landscaped with no pavement other than for access which is generally perpendicular to the abutting street. We are requesting a waiver to allow various paved areas for use as pedestrian access to the site, to maintain existing parking use along Linton Boulevard, and for potential future use as sidewalk cafe areas, all of which are generally parallel to the abutting street, as further indicated on the site plan. For the reasons set forth below, we believe the Project meets or exceeds the requirements of LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5) and therefore, we respectfully request the waiver be granted. A. Approval of the waiver will not adversely affect the neighboring area. The proposed design is the result of numerous neighborhood meetings, particularly with the Tropic Isle community, and is intended to improve the community feel and optimize the pedestrian retail experience. Since all design possibilities could not have been captured by the City's LDR, Section 4.4.25(D)(7)(d) provides that pedestrian ways may be allowed within the setback "which are generally perpendicular to the abutting street. " The pedestrian experience within the perimeter setback is intended to compliment and be a part of the "urban edge" design sought by the City as a continuation of the existing public sidewalks. The project's design enhances the pedestrian connections by locating benches and refuse receptacles under a landscaped trellis at the urban edge at each connection from within the project. In addition, a bicycle rack is located at each of their connections to encourage bicycle use by the patrons. This design is allowed by LDR Section 4.4.25(D)(1)(d) as such pedestrian ways are not required to be perpendicular, simply preferred. However, the policy of the City is to allow for creative flexibility in design which provides for a superior project and in this instance, retail experience by the community. To only permit perpendicular pedestrian ways would otherwise undermine the urban feel of the project which both the city and the developer are endeavoring to create, consistent with modern retail redevelopment projects within an urban corridor like South Federal Highway. See the enclosed article, "National Retailers Adapt Stores for South Florida Urban Areas," Daily Business Review, February 7, 2473. Therefore, the developer strongly urges a finding that the proposed design will not adversely affect the neighboring area but rather will lend to a sustainable retail plaza that is a community asset. B. Approval of the waiver will not significantly diminish the provision of public facilities. Approval of the Waiver would significantly add to the provision of public facilities. This request improves the aesthetic feel and experience for people along the corridor. Therefore, a positive finding as to this element can be made as well. C. AoDroval of the waiver will not create an unsafe situation. Allowing separate vehicle and pedestrian connections between the plaza, the public right of way and the parking lot as depicted on the site plan is intended to create a more safe and predictable situation, including the retention of the parking adjacent to Linton Boulevard. Patrons will be able to access the property via multiple points on designated walks rather than walking through the landscaping. Therefore, a positive finding as to this element can also be made. D. Approval of the waiver will not result in the -grant of a special privilege in that the same waiver has been granted under similar circumstances on other property for other applicants or owners. The approval of similar waivers has been granted for the Alta Congress project and the Delray Community Pharmacy project. Both were proposed and ultimately approved to increase the use and functionality of the site, for which the LDR could not have otherwise contemplated. Exhibit B Applicant's Justification Waiver to Stacking Distance: This written request for a Waiver pursuant to Section 2.4.7(B )(2) of the Delray Beach Land Development Regulations (IDRs' ), is intended to supplement the same request submitted previously, seeking relief from LDR Section 4.6.9(D)(3)(c )(7) which requires a stacking distance of fifty feet (54) for all driveway connections along Linton Boulevard and Eve Street. The developer is requesting a waiver to reduce the required stacking distance for the driveway connections off of Linton Boulevard and for the driveway connection off Eve Street, by providing for a stacking distance of twenty seven feet (27) for the driveway connections along Linton Boulevard and a stacking distance of thirty three feet (33) for the driveway connection off Eve Street, as farther indicated on the site plan. For the reasons set forth below, the Project meets or exceeds the requirements of LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5) and therefore, we respectfully request the waiver be granted. A. Approval of the waiver will not adversely affect the neighboring area. The driveways as proposed on Linton Boulevard are existing and are functioning adequately as they exist. The depth of the property would prohibit any meaningful building configuration if strict application of the land development regulation section was applied. The current and proposed stacking distance is approximately twenty -seven feet (27 ) as indicated on the site plan. Therefore, approval of this request for stacking waiver to keep existing conditions should not adversely affect the neighboring area. Similarly, the Eve Street curb cut effectively affords a real stacking length of approximately two hundred sixteen feet (216) feet to the property line on South Federal Highway as there is no through- traffic on this street. Therefore, approval of this request for stacking waiver also should not adversely affect the neighboring area. B. Approval of the waiver will not significantly diminish the provision of public facilities. As referenced above, though the request is to reduce the stacking distance measured from the property line, the actual effect of this waiver will cause the stacking distance to only be reduced slightly less along Linton Boulevard (approximately 31) and greater than required (approximately 56) along Eve Street when measured respectively from the edge of pavement as indicated on the site plan. Therefore, approval of this waiver will not significantly diminish the provision of public facilities. In fact, this permits for redevelopment of a currently underutilized property within the city. C. Approval of the waiver will not create an unsafe situation. For the same reasons set forth above, approval of this waiver will not create an unsafe condition. D. Approval of the waiver will not result in the grant of a special privilege in that the same waiver has been -granted under similar circumstances on other property for other applicants or owners. Relief from this LDR requirement are commonplace and are routinely granted under similar circumstances on other property for other applicants or owners. Therefore, the developer is not seeking any special privilege not afforded to similarly situated properties throughout Delray Beach. SITE PLAN REVIEW AND APPEARANCE BOARD CITY OF DELRAY BEACH -- -STAFF REPORT - -- MEETING March 13, 2013 DATE: ITEM: II. B. Delray Place: Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevations associated with construction of a 126,418 sq. ft. shopping center consisting of multiple commercial buildings, parking and landscaping on a 9.95 acre site located on the southeast corner side of Linton Boulevard and South Federal Highway. (1801 and 1845 South Federal Highway). GENERAL DATA: Agent...... _ _ _ __ ................ Weiner, Lynne & Thompson, P.A. Location ... ............................... Southeast corner of Linton Boulevard and Federal Highway (1801 and 1845 South Federal Highway) Property Size .......................... 9.95 acres Existing FLUM ......................... TRN (Transitional) Current Zoning ........................ PCC (Planned Office Center) Proposed Zoning ..................... SAD (Special Activities District) Adjacent Zoning ............ North: PC (Planned Commercial) and RM (Multiple Family Residential - Medium Density) East: R- 1 -AA -B (Single Family Residential) And CD (Conservation District) South: PC (Planned Commercial); RM (Multiple Family Residential- Medium Density); R- 1 -AA -B (Single Family Residential. West: PC (Planned Commercial) Existing Land Use ................... Old Harbor Office and Bank Facility Proposed Land Use............ Water Service. . . . . . . . . ........... Multiple building commercial shopping center development Available via connection to a 12" water main located on the east side of S. Federal Hwy., a 14" water main on Eve Street, and a 6" water main on the south side of Linton Boulevard. Sewer Service ..................... Available via connection to a 8" sewer main located on Eve Street. ITEM BEFORE THE BOARD The item before the Board is the approval of the following aspects of a Class V site plan request for Defray Place, pursuant to Land Development Regulations (LDR) Section 2.4.58: ❑ Site Plan; ❑ Landscape Plan; ❑ Architectural Elevations; and ❑ Waivers The subject parcels are located at the southeast corner of Linton Boulevard and South Federal Highway (1861 and 1845 South Federal Highway). BACKGROUND ANALYSIS The 9.95 acre property was originally annexed into the City of Delray Beach in the early 1980's. The existing development on the property, which was constructed in 1983, is known as the Old Harbor Office and Bank Facility, and consists of 96,702 square feet of office use in three buildings. In 1991, the City of Delray Beach adopted new Land Development Regulations and the property was assigned the new zoning designation of POC (Planned Office Center), which was consistent with the existing office development. A policy requiring that a redevelopment plan be prepared for South Federal Highway was added to the Comprehensive Plan in Amendment 2068 -1, adopted on December 9, 2068. In March of 2011, staff attended two public workshops with property owners, residents and business owners in the area to discuss existing conditions, identify problems and listen to what the attendees had to say about how the area should be redeveloped. After the initial workshops, staff prepared a series of recommendations for the redevelopment area and held a second set of two workshops in June of 2011 to discuss the recommendations and get feedback from the attendees. Staff presented two alternatives for the redevelopment of the subject property at these workshops. One alternative was to rezone the property to PC (Planned Commercial) to allow development of a commercial shopping center. The second alternative was to rezone the property to AC (Automotive Commercial) to allow development of an automobile dealership. Staff's recommendation was for the Planned Commercial alternative and the response from residents was generally favorable, although some residents felt that the area was better suited for automobile sales, which they also felt would be less impacting to the adjacent neighborhood. The property was acquired by the current owner in September, 2011, and an application to initiate a Future Land Use Map amendment and a zoning change to PC (Planned Commercial) was submitted on January 6, 2012. Since the proposal was in keeping with staff's recommendation, the application was supported by staff. However, residents were concerned that the redevelopment of the property would not have to comply with buffering and setback provisions which had been previously presented for inclusion in the redevelopment plan, and felt that action on the proposal should be delayed until the Redevelopment Plan was completed. Ultimately, the application was continued for a period of up to six months at the public hearing on the ordinance by the City Commission on April 3, 2612. This continuance was to give the applicant time to address the concerns of the residents of the adjacent neighborhood to the east. Since the residents' concerns were mostly site development issues related to building size, setbacks, location of service areas, and buffering, an alternative rezoning to SAD (Special Activities District) was also discussed. This zoning district requires that a site plan be included as part of the rezoning action and would provide a higher level of comfort to the adjacent residents. SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 2 The South Federal Highway Redevelopment Plan was adopted by the City Commission on September 20, 2012. The Plan recommended that the subject property retain its original POC zoning with the option for a privately- initiated rezoning by the property owners to SAD. Since the original rezoning application was submitted prior to adoption of the Redevelopment Plan, the current proposal for redevelopment of the subject property is not required to comply with the Redevelopment Plan per se. However, it is noted that the underlying issue of compatibility with the adjacent residential neighborhood, discussed in the Redevelopment Plan, must still be addressed during consideration of the project proposal. If the current rezoning action does not go forward, any future redevelopment of the subject property will be required to comply with the Redevelopment Plan. On August 21, 2012, the City Commission approved the applicant's request for up to an additional 6 months (in addition to the 6 months previously granted) to submit a privately sponsored rezoning from POC (Planned Office Center) to SAD (Special Activities District) for the subject property. The applicant amended the rezoning application on September 7, 2012 to request SAD zoning. The SAD rezoning process is shown below: 1. Planning and Zoning Board review of the SAD and a recommendation made to the City Commission; 2. First reading of the SAD Rezoning Ordinance by the City Commission; 3. Review of the site plan by the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board; and 4. Second and final reading of the SAD Rezoning Ordinance, which will include the approved site plan, by the City Commission. The site plan for Delray Place was reviewed by SPRAB on December 12, 2012 and received denials on the Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and six of the associated waivers. On December 14, 2012, the applicant submitted an appeal of the SPRAB decisions to the City Commission. This appeal was to be scheduled for January 3, 2013, in conjunction with the second reading of the SAD rezoning ordinance. On December 17, 2012, the applicant submitted a letter requesting that SPRAB reconsider its denial of the Delray Place Site Plan, which included denials of a Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and associated Waivers, subject to the conditions that the appeal to the City Commission be withdrawn; and that the revised Site Plan, Landscape Plan and Architectural Elevations be brought back before SPRAB no later than March 13, 2013. At its meeting of December 19, 2012, SPRAB moved to reconsider denial of the project subject to the two conditions. On December 20, 2012, the applicant submitted a letter requesting that the appeal be withdrawn and that the second reading of the ordinance be deferred. At its meeting of January 3, 2013, the City Commission agreed to defer second reading of the ordinance to no later than May 5, 2013. Now before the Board for consideration is a Class V Site Plan proposal for the project which includes construction of a 124,238 sq. ft. (126,418 sq. ft. with alternative layout) shopping center consisting of twelve buildings, parking and landscaping on the subject property. This is Step 3 in the SAD rezoning process. The Planning and Zoning Board recommended approval of the SAD rezoning on October 15, 2012 and the City Commission passed the SAD Rezoning Ordinance on 15F Reading on November 6, 2012. Second and Final reading of the Ordinance is scheduled for April 9, 2013. It is noted that both the P&Z Board recommendation and City SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 3 Commission approval did not endorse the related site development plan. It was anticipated that modifications of the site plan would be made to ensure compatibility with adjacent properties. Actions on the site plan as it relates to this compatibility were deferred to SPRAB. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The development proposal consists of the following elements: ❑ Building "100 3,967 sq. ft. bank with drive -thru lanes; or alternative plan with 6,147 sq. ft. of retail/restaurant use. ❑ Building "200 ": 5,600 sq. ft. of retail /restaurant use with outdoor dining area. ❑ Building "300 ": 5,694 sq. ft. of retail/restaurant use with outdoor dining area. ❑ Building "400 ": 7,882 sq. ft. of retail/restaurant use with outdoor dining area. ❑ Building "500 - 504 ": 32,015 sq. ft. of retail use with enclosed truck wells, loading area and trash compactor. ❑ Building "506 - 510 ": 46,882 sq. ft. of retail use and enclosed truck wells, loading area and trash compactor. • Building "600 ": 5,000 sq. ft. of retail/restaurant use with outdoor dining area. • Building "700 ": 5,000 sq. ft. of retail/restaurant use with outdoor dining area. • Building "800 ": 5,000 sq. ft. of retail/restaurant use with outdoor dining area. ❑ Building "900 ": 5,476 sq. ft. of retail/restaurant use with outdoor dining area. ❑ Construction of a 403 space parking lot (410 with alternative Building 100 layout) ❑ Installation of associated landscaping and design elements, including trellises, benches and trash compactor enclosures. The following requests for relief are associated with this Class V application 1. A waiver for pavement encroachment into the required 15' perimeter setback for the SAD district. Pursuant to LDR Section 4.4.25(D)(1), "Within the front and any street side setback, the fifteen foot {15] setback area shall be a landscape area and no pavement shall be allowed therein except for pedestrian ways and driveways (or streets) which provide access to the property and which are generally perpendicular to the abutting street." Final approval of this waiver is by the City Commission. 2. A waiver to LDR Section 4.3.4(H)(6)(b)(1 ), requiring a 25 foot landscape buffer along South Federal Highway. Final approval of this waiver is by SPRAB. 3. A waiver to LDR Section 4.3.4(H )(6 )(b )(4), requiring a special landscape buffer at the smaller distance of either 30' or 10% of the average depth of the property along Linton Boulevard. Final approval of this waiver is by SPRAB. 4. A waiver to LDR Section 4.6.9(D)(3)(c), Stacking Distance, requiring a stacking distance of 50 feet between a right -of -way and the first parking space or aisle way in a parking lot. Final approval of this waiver is by the City Commission. 5. A waiver to LDR Section 4.6.16(H )(3)(i), requiring landscape islands which contain a minimum of one hundred thirty -five (135) square feet of planting area, with a minimum dimension of nine (9) feet, exclusive of the required curb, to be placed at intervals of no less than one landscaped island for every thirteen (13) standard parking spaces or fifteen (15) compact parking spaces. Final approval of this waiver is by SPRAB. SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 4 6. A waiver to LDR Section 4.6.16(H )[3 )[k), requiring a 5' landscape strip with a two foot hedge to be placed between abutting parking tiers. Final approval of this waiver is by SPRAB. SITE PLAN ANALYSIS COMPLIANCE WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS: Items identified in the Land Development Regulations shall specifically be addressed by the body taking final action on the site and development application /request. SAD Rezoning Ordinance: The applicant submitted a revised SAD Rezoning Ordinance (attached). Staff has one concern with the following section of the Ordinance which has an impact on the site plan approval: Section 10(c) Loading Hours. All loadinglunloading /delivery of goods to the Subject Property may begin no earlier than 6:00am and shall terminate by 9:00pm daily, except as further modified, allowed and limited as follows: (►) All loadinglunloadingldelivery of goods to the enclosed loading bays associated with Buildings 500 -510 of the Subject Property may begin no earlier than 7:00am and shall terminate by 8pm daily with the exception of a supermarketlgrocery store, for which all loadinglunloadingldelivery of goods may ,begin no earlier than 6:00am and shall terminate by 9:00pm daily; however, should a specialty food store to be determined prior to the date this Ordinance is effective, and known as " " become a tenant or occupant of the Subject Property, then all loadinglunloadingldelivery of goods for such specific specialty food store tenant may begin no earlier than 5:00am and shall terminate by 10:00pm daily (ii) if loading occurs after the loading trucks are in the enclosed loading bays stopped and loading, and the trucks engines, refrigeration, andlor beeping mechanical forklifts are operating, then all overhead doors for all enclosed loading bays in Buildings 500 -510 shall be required to remain closed at all times that delivery vehicles occupy these spaces; (iii) Delivery vehicles which have backup beepers shall not be permitted to unload at the rear of Buildings 500 -510 between the hours after 7.00 pm and before 7.00 am; (iv) any delivery vehicle on the Subject Property for the purpose of loadinglunloadingldelivery to the rear of Buildings 500 -510 before 7: 00am and which vehicle is not in the process of operating to load within an enclosed loading bays, shall turn off its engine and disable any additional noise - generating mechanical equipment associated therewith; (v) notwithstanding the forgoing Section 10(c)(i►) to the contrary, if loading occurs whereas after the loading trucks are in the loading bays stopped and loading or unloading and the loading trucks engines, refrigeration, andlor beeping mechanical forklifts are not operating, then all overhead doors for all enclosed loading bays in Buildings 500 -510 shall not be required to remain closed at all times that delivery vehicles occupy these spaces; and (v►) the overhead doors shall remain closed when loadinglunloading operations are not faking place. The early morning and late hours are a concern for a grocery store or specialty food store adjacent to the residential community to the east. These delivery times should be adjusted to prohibit deliveries before 7:00 am or after 7.00 pm for any use in the 500 -510 buildings. Section 4.4.25 Special Activities District [SAD] Regulations Perimeter Setback Landscape Requirements: Pursuant to Section 4.4.25(D)(1), "A minimum setback of fifteen feet shall be established around the perimeter of any property developed under the SAD designation. Within the front and any street side setback, the fifteen foot (15') setback area shall be a landscape area and no SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 5 pavement shall be allowed therein except for pedestrian ways and driveways (or streets) which provide access to the property and which are generally perpendicular to the abutting street. " This requirement has not been met (see waiver analysis below). Waiver to Perimeter Setback Landscape Requirements: A waiver has been requested to allow pavement to encroach into the required landscape areas of the perimeter setback along Linton Boulevard and Eve Street. Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.7 {B}(5), prior to granting a waiver, the approving body shall make a finding that the granting of the waiver: (a) Shall not adversely affect the neighboring area; (b) Shall not significantly diminish the provision of public facilities; (c) Shall not create an unsafe situation; and {d} Does not result in the grant of a special privilege in that the same waiver would be granted under similar circumstances on other property for another applicant or owner. The applicant has provided the following justification statement regarding the waiver request: This written request for a Waiver pursuant to Section 2.4.7(B)(2) of the Delray Beach Land Development Regulations ( "LDRs'), is intended to supplement the same request previously submitted, seeking relief from LDR Section 4.4.25(D), which provision requires a fifteen foot (15) setback which is landscaped with no pavement other than for access which is generally perpendicular to the abutting street. We are requesting a waiver to allow various paved areas for use as pedestrian access to the site, to maintain existing parking use along Linton Boulevard, and for potential future use as sidewalk cafe areas, all of which are generally parallel to the abutting street, as further indicated on the site plan. For the reasons set forth below, we believe the Project meets or exceeds the requirements of LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5) and therefore, we respectfully request the waiver be granted. A. Approval of the waiver will not adversely affect the neigghboring area. The proposed design is the result of numerous neighborhood meetings, particularly with the Tropic Isle community, and is intended to improve the community feel and optimize the pedestrian retail experience. Since all design possibilities could not have been captured by the City's LDR, Section 4.4.25(D)(1)(0 provides that pedestrian ways may be allowed within the setback `which are generally perpendicular to the abutting street." The pedestrian experience within the perimeter setback is intended to compliment and be a part of the "urban edge" design sought by the City as a continuation of the existing public sidewalks. The project's design enhances the pedestrian connections by locating benches and refuse receptacles under a landscaped trellis at the urban edge at each connection from within the project. In addition, a bicycle rack is located at each of their connections to encourage bicycle use by the patrons. This design is allowed by LDR Section 4.4.25(D)(1)(d) as such pedestrian ways are not required to be perpendicular, simply preferred. However, the policy of the City is to allow for creative flexibility in design which provides for a superior project and in this instance, retail experience by the community. To only permit perpendicular pedestrian ways would otherwise undermine the urban feel of the project, which both the city and the developer are SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 6 endeavoring to create, consistent with modern retail redevelopment projects within an urban corridor like South Federal Highway. See the enclosed article, "National Retailers Adapt Stores for South Florida Urban Areas," Daily Business Review, February 7, 2013. Therefore, the developer strongly urges a finding that the proposed design will not adversely affect the neighboring area but rather will lend to a sustainable retail plaza that is a community asset. B. Approval of the waiver will not significantly diminish the provision of public facilities. Approval of the Waiver would significantly add to the provision of public facilities. This request improves the aesthetic feel and experience for people along the corridor. Therefore, a positive finding as to this element can be made as well. C. Approval of the waiver will not create an unsafe situation. Allowing separate vehicle and pedestrian connections between the plaza, the public right of way and the parking lot as depicted on the site plan is intended to create a more safe and predictable situation, including the retention of the parking adjacent to Linton Boulevard. Patrons will be able to access the property via multiple points on designated walks rather than walking through the landscaping. Therefore, a positive finding as to this element can also be made. D. Approval of the waiver will not result in the -grant of a special privilege in that the same waiver has been granted under similar circumstances on other property for other applicants or owners. The approval of similar waivers has been granted for the Alfa Congress project and the Delray Community Pharmacy project. Both were proposed and ultimately approved to increase the use and functionality of the site, for which the LDR could not have otherwise contemplated. Staff Review of Waiver: The first pavement encroachment into the required landscape area involves the parking aisle along Linton Boulevard. The existing office development has a parking aisle in this location with the paving approximately 9 feet from the Linton Boulevard right -of -way. This is a nonconforming situation. The applicant proposes to leave the parking aisle in the same location, but cut back the asphalt to allow the cars to overhang the landscape area by 18 inches. While this will reduce the impervious area on the site and provide additional green area, it cannot be counted toward the required 15' landscape area, since it is still technically a part of the parking space. Therefore, the effective landscape area for the purpose of this code section will remain at 9 feet. A significant portion of the frontage along Linton Boulevard is extremely narrow and the proposed buildings are only 50 feet deep in this area. The area directly in front of these buildings has significant landscaping and wider sidewalks to provide outdoor dining opportunities and enhance the pedestrian experience in this area. In order to provide additional landscaping along Linton Boulevard, the buildings would have to be even narrower, which is impractical; or the sidewalk /landscape area in front of the buildings would have to be reduced. Given the situation, the trade -off is appropriate and the waiver should be granted. The second encroachment involves an outdoor dining area along Eve Street on the south side of the 400 building. The outdoor dining adjacent to this building is an extension of the perimeter sidewalk on Eve Street and will be utilized for a sidewalk cafe. Under these circumstances, a waiver to the requirement at this location is appropriate. SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 7 Reduction of the landscaping in these two locations will not negatively affect the neighboring areas, create an unsafe situation or diminish the provision of public facilities. Granting of the waiver will not result in the grant of a special privilege as similar waivers have been granted to other projects on similar basis. Consequently, positive findings with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5) can be made for the reduction of the required landscape areas in these two locations as indicated on the site plan. Parking: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.4.25(E)(1), "Parking and loading requirements (number of spaces) shall be as set forth on the site and development plan." The parking requirement for shopping centers of this size is typically 4 spaces per 1,000 square feet in the City [LDR Section 4.6.9(C)(3)(e).] This would result in a requirement of 458 spaces for the 114,400 square foot shopping center. The proposed site plan shows 403 spaces, a reduction (12 %) from this requirement with a deficit of 55 spaces. The alternative plan for the 100 building would require 466 spaces for the 116,580 square foot shopping center, while 410 have been provided, a deficit of 56 spaces or (12%). The site plan has been revised since the last submittal to reduce the total building area by 11 % (14,302 square feet); and the SAD Rezoning Ordinance has been modified to reduce the maximum potential restaurant area in the shopping center. A "Shared Parking Analysis Matrix", which provides a method to calculate the total parking demand for the shopping center based on uses, has also been included in the ordinance. The previous ordinance would have allowed up to 50% (65,441 square feet) of the total building area to be restaurants. The current ordinance will allow only 25% (29,145 square feet) of the total leasable building area to be restaurants until a parking utilization study is prepared during the first peak season at least 6 months after receipt of the first Certificate of Occupancy to evaluate the adequacy of the parking. This 25% figure is based on the standard figure used by Palm Beach County for shopping centers to determine traffic concurrency. If supported by the parking utilization study and approved by the City, the restaurant area may be increased to approximately 31% (36,270 square feet) of the total leasable building area, which is the maximum restaurant area shown in the Matrix. There is approximately 4,900 square feet of potential outdoor dining area (sidewalk cafes) around the buildings in the shopping center. Sidewalk cafes create a vibrant atmosphere that enhances the area and adds to the overall shopping experience of the customers. While additional parking is not required for areas designated as sidewalk cafes, an annual permit fee is required. The permit fee is currently $4.75 per square foot of approved sidewalk cafe space. If the parking study mentioned above shows that parking at the shopping center is not adequate, the permits for some or all of the outdoor cafe areas may not be renewed until some mechanism is employed to reduce the parking deficit. This could include a change of use in one or more of the buildings with a lower parking demand or employing Transportation Demand Management (TDM) initiatives to reduce automotive dependence. While a waiver is not required for the SAD zoning District, the number of spaces must be adequate to support the proposed development. A parking study has been provided by Traf Fech to support this reduction. The overall parking ratio for the project as designed is 3.53 per 1,000 square feet of commercial space. The Parking Needs Analysis in the Study, which is based on a Shared Parking Analysis Matrix and information published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) in their Parking Generation (4th Edition) manual, sets the maximum parking required for the center at 397 spaces. Staff reviewed the ITE report and notes that the figure presented represents the "average peak period parking demand" of 2.94 vehicles per 1,000 sq. ft. The applicant also provided additional supporting data, including information on 2 shopping centers with comparable parking to support the reduced number. SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 8 The actual parking requirements of the shopping center will ultimately be determined by the mix of uses in the center. A balance must be struck between uses with higher and lower parking demand. This is where a successful shopping center developer and management company is needed. Retail Property Group, Inc. "RPG" is a locally based shopping center developer with significant long term successful shopping center industry experience. RPG currently owns and operates thru wholly owned separate affiliated companies without any partners, 7 quality shopping centers averaging about 175,000 sf each for a total of approx.1,200,000 sf throughout southeast Florida which have been successfully developed by RPG from ground up and/or thru major redevelopment. RPG will be the developer and operator of Delray Place and an affiliated wholly owned company of RPG designated as Delray Place, LLC, is the owner of Delray Place. RPG is putting its reputation and money on the line that this project will be successful. Based on their experience and their current leasing efforts, they insist that the parking provided in this project is adequate. It is also noted that the applicant has committed to meeting with South Florida Commuter Services (SFCS) and SAFE to explore TDM initiatives that could alleviate parking demand, especially for employees at the shopping center. To ensure that this does occur, this has been added as a condition of approval to occur prior to site plan certification. The proposed shopping center at this location is a highway - oriented development. Due to the major perimeter roadways, walls around the rear of the property and the vehicular gate on Eve Street, overflow parking is highly unlikely to impact the surrounding residential neighborhood or the adjacent commercial properties. Eve Street itself is the only logical overflow parking area if the parking lot at the shopping center is full. To negate this possibility, no- parking signs must be placed on Eve Street and the applicant must pay for these signs. This has been added as a condition of approval. L D R Section 4.3.4(x) Development Standards Matrix- Nonresidential Zoning Districts: The following address the Development Standards of LDR Section 4.3.4 {K} as it pertains to the Special Activities (SAD) zoning district: Building Height: The maximum height in the SAD zoning district is 48 feet. Although all the proposed buildings are 1 -story with the top of roof at 18 feet, they appear much higher from the front and sides adjacent to the parking areas with decorative parapets, towers, and entry features projecting up to 40 feet in some instances. It is noted, however, that these elements do not occur in the rear of the buildings, adjacent to the residential area to the east. The parapets are 23 feet in height in the rear of the 500 buildings with the 500 -504 building located approximately 30 feet from the rear property line. While the 506 -510 building is located only 15 feet from the rear property line, it is further buffered from the residential area by Spanish Trail and a 10' park reservation. At the request of the residents on McCleary Street, the parapet has been eliminated in the rear of the 600 -1000 buildings and an aluminum screen placed further towards the front of the building to screen mechanical equipment. This reduced the height of the buildings in this area from 23 feet to 18 feet and improved compatibility with the adjacent residential development. Building Setbacks: The required perimeter building setback in the SAD zoning district is 15 feet, and all of the proposed buildings meet this requirement. The front and side street setbacks vary throughout the site with the four outbuildings creating an urban edge along South Federal Highway. These SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 9 buildings are set back 15 feet. To maximize the available parking area, the larger 500 buildings are positioned to the rear of the parcel with the 500 -504 building approximately 30 feet from the rear property line and the 506-510 building at the rear 15 foot setback line. The 600 to 900 buildings facing Linton Boulevard are also positioned at the rear 15 foot setback line in order to provide adequate area in the front for parking and pedestrian connectivity along this narrower section of the property. Open Space: The required open space in the SAD zoning district is 25% and 25.3% (25.2% with the alternate layout) has been provided. In order to provide the required open space for the project, the existing parking area in the eastern portion of the property along Linton Boulevard is being removed and the area landscaped. While it would be better if the required open space could be distributed throughout the site, it is acknowledged that this dogleg area does present challenges to redevelopment, and the proposed solution does meet the requirements of the LDRs. It is recommended that this large landscaped area be modified to provide opportunities for employees of the shopping center to use it as an outdoor break /lunch area (picnic tables) and for the children of customers to play (tot lot). This has been added as a condition of approval. LDR Article 4.6 - Supplemental District Regulations: Bicycle Parking: LDR Section 4.6.9(C)(1 )(c) and Transportation Element Policy D -2.2 of the Comprehensive Plan recommend that a bicycle parking facility be provided. The minimum requirement for shopping centers is 5 spaces per 100,000 square feet of gross floor area, which means that a total of 6 spaces are required for the project. Five (5) bike racks, each with 4 spaces, are proposed for the project, thereby meeting the minimum number of spaces required. These racks are all located along pedestrian connections to the perimeter sidewalk system which provide convenient access points to all buildings on the site. Since, this project does not meet the City's standard minimum automotive parking requirements for shopping centers, the use of bikes as an alternative transportation method, especially for employees at the shopping center should be encouraged as much as possible. Therefore, an assessment must be made during the first peak season at least 6 months after receipt of the first Certificate of Occupancy to determine if the number of bike racks is adequate for the project. This has been added as a condition of approval. Handicap Accessible Parking: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.9(C)(1 )(b), special parking spaces designed for use by the handicapped shall be provided pursuant to the provisions of Florida Accessibility Code for Building Construction. Pursuant to the Florida Accessibility Code for Building Construction, the nine (9) of the parking spaces serving the development must be handicap accessible. A total of thirteen (13) handicap accessible parking spaces are proposed. Thus, this LDR requirement has been met. Stacking Distance: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.9(❑ )(3)(c)(1), provisions must be made for stacking and transitioning of incoming traffic from a public street, such that traffic may not backup into the public street system. The minimum stacking distance between a right -of -way and the first parking space or aisle way in a parking lot that contains 51 or more spaces is fifty feet (50'). This distance has not been provided at the driveway connections to Eve Street and Linton Boulevard. (see waiver discussion below): SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 10 Waiver to Stackina Distance Requirement: A waiver has been requested to reduce the stacking distance from the fifty feet (59') for parking lots with fifty -one (51 ) or more spaces required pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.9(D )(3)(c )(1 ) to twenty -seven (27) feet for the two entrances on Linton Boulevard and to thirty -three (33) feet for the entrance on Eve Street. Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5), prior to granting a waiver, the approving body shall make a finding that the granting of the waiver: (a) Shall not adversely affect the neighboring area; (b) Shall not significantly diminish the provision of public facilities; (c) Shall not create an unsafe situation; and, (d) Does not result in the grant of a special privilege in that the same waiver would be granted under similar circumstances on other property for another applicant or owner. The applicant has provided the following justification statement regarding the waiver request: This written request for a Waiver pursuant to Section 2.4.7(B )(2) of the Delray Beach Land Development Regulations ( "LDRs'), is intended to supplement the same request submitted previously, seeking relief from LDR Section 4.6.9(D)(3)(c )(1) which requires a stacking distance of fifty feet (50) for all driveway connections along Linton Boulevard and Eve Street. The developer is requesting a waiver to reduce the required stacking distance for the driveway connections off of Linton Boulevard and for the driveway connection off Eve Street, by providing for a stacking distance of twenty seven feet (27) for the driveway connections along Linton Boulevard and a stacking distance of thirty three feet (33) for the driveway connection off Eve Street as further indicated on the site plan. For the reasons set forth below, the Project meets or exceeds the requirements of LDR Section 2.4.7(B) (5) and therefore, we respectfully request the waiver be granted. A. Approval of the waiver will not adversely affect the neighboring area. The driveways as proposed on Linton Boulevard are existing and are functioning adequately as they exist. The depth of the property would prohibit any meaningful building configuration if strict application of the land development regulation section was applied. The current and proposed stacking distance is approximately twenty -seven feet (27) as indicated on the site plan. Therefore, approval of this request for stacking waiver to keep existing conditions should not adversely affect the neighboring area. Similarly, the Eve Street curb cut effectively affords a real stacking length of approximately two hundred sixteen feet (216) feet to the property line on South Federal Highway as there is no through-traffic on this street. Therefore, approval of this request for stacking waiver also should not adversely affect the neighboring area. B. Approval of the waiver will not significantly diminish the ,provision of ,public facilities. As referenced above, though the request is to reduce the stacking distance measured from the property line, the actual effect of this waiver will cause the stacking distance to only be reduced slightly less along Linton Boulevard (approximately 31) and greater than required (approximately 56) along Eve Street when measured respectively from the edge of pavement SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 11 as indicated on the site plan. Therefore, approval of this waiver will not significantly diminish the provision of public facilities. in fact: this permits for redevelopment of a currently underutilized property within the city. C. Approval of the waiver will not create an unsafe situation. For the same reasons set forth above, approval of this waiver will not create an unsafe condition. D. Approval of the waiver will not result in the grant of a special privilege in that the same waiver has been -granted under similar circumstances on other Property for other applicants or owners. Relief from this LDR requirement are commonplace and are routinely granted under similar circumstances on other property for other applicants or owners. Therefore, the developer is not seeking any special privilege not afforded to similarly situated properties throughout Delray Beach. Staff Review of Waiver: Based upon the provision of four (4) access points to the site, including the primary access on South Federal Highway, which has adequate stacking, the requested waiver is supportable. The stacking provided will not negatively affect the neighboring areas or create an unsafe situation. Granting of the requested waiver will not diminish the provision of public facilities or result in the grant of a special privilege as similar waivers have been granted to other projects on similar basis. Consequently, positive findings can be made for the reduction of the stacking distance requirement at the entrances on Linton Boulevard and Eve Street with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B )(5). Bank Drive -thru Stacking Distance: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.8.9(❑ )(3 )(c)(2), provisions must be made to provide for one hundred feet (100`) of clear stacking from the first point of transaction for each lane of a drive -thru facility. The development proposal consists of a two (2) lane drive -thru facility in which each lane provides the minimum 100' of stacking. Thus, this standard has been met. Site Visibility Triangles: Although site visibility triangles have been indicated on the site and landscape plans for the driveway entrances at Linton Boulevard and South Federal Highway, they have not been depicted for the driveway entrance at Eve Street on the landscape plan; and while they are shown for the intersection of Eve Street and South Federal Highway, the visibility is shown in the wrong location. Additionally, pursuant to Section 4.6.14(B )(5), "Sight visibility measurements at the intersection of a right -of -way, access way, or driveway and a right -of -way under County, State or Federal jurisdiction are subject to sight visibility requirements from those authorities." Provide modify the site visibility triangles shown on the plans for the driveway connections and roadway intersections involving South Federal Highway to meet the requirements of Florida DOT. Add sight visibility triangles where missing and modify the Site, Landscape and Engineering plans as required to depict the correct site visibility triangles. This has been added as a condition of approval. Refuse Enclosures: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.8.8(C)(1), dumpster, recycling containers and similar service areas must be enclosed on three sides and have vision obscuring gates on the fourth side, unless SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 12 such areas are not visible from any adjacent public right -of -way. 11 foot high free - standing trash compactor enclosures with roll up doors have been proposed for the 100 to 400 buildings. The enclosures have green walls and design elements to match the architectural features and colors of the adjacent buildings. Enclosed trash compactors have been integrated into the 500 -504, 506 -510, 800 and 900 buildings. Therefore, this LDR requirement has been met. Lighting: A submitted photometric plan and details of the light pole and wall mounted light fixtures have been submitted. Wall mounted, under overhangs, and under canopy light fixtures will be LED units (light- emitting -diode fixtures). Mercury halide fixtures mounted on light poles at a height of 25' are provided throughout the parking lot. The illumination levels for the parking area as well as for the buildings at the entrances and under canopies, drive -thru and overhangs comply with the standards of Section 4.6.8. Based on the CPTED review, it is recommended that the parking lot fixtures be changed to LEDs, as they provide the best light with the least amount of glare. Wire cages or industrial strength shatter resistant lenses be placed over the light to deter vandalism. A note to this effect must be included on the site plan. This has been added as a condition of approval. Also note that Florida Statutes include certain requirements with regard to the lighting of automated teller machines (ATM). These requirements are as follows: O F.S. 655.962(1)(a): There shall be a minimum ten (10) footcandle power whereat the face of the automated teller machine and extending in an unobstructed direction outward five feet (5). ❑ F.S. 655.962(9) (b): There shall be a minimum of two (2) footcandle power within 50' in all unobstructed directions from the face of the ATM. 17 F.S. 655.962(1)(c): There shall be a minimum of two (2) footcandle power in that portion of the defined parking area within 60' of the ATM. If the bank is to have an exterior ATM, the photometric plan must be consistent with the above Florida Statutes, as well as meet the requirements of LDR Section 4.6.8. Signs: The signs depicted on the site plan are not included with this site plan approval. OTHERISSUES Special Landscape Setbacks: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.3.4 {H}(6)(b), "Within the following special landscape setbacks, no structures shall be erected, altered, or reconstructed, nor shall any paving be allowed except for driveways and sidewalks leading to structures on the premises. Such driveways and walkways shall be generally perpendicular to the frontage. However, waivers may be granted to these restrictions at the time of site plan review in order to accommodate landscape features, decorative walls, meandering sidewalks, and other decorative pedestrian ways." Linton Boulevard: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.3.4 {H } {6 } {b } {4}, a special landscape area shall be provided along Linton Boulevard, from A -1 -A to the western City limits. This landscape area shall be the smaller distance of either 30' or 10% of the average depth of the property; however, in no case shall the landscape area be less than ten feet (10'). Therefore, a 15.5 foot buffer is required along the narrow portion of the property along Linton Boulevard; and a 30 foot buffer is SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 13 required along the deeper portion of the property to the west. This requirement has not been met (see waiver discussion below) Waiver to Special Landscape Setback Requirement for Linton Boulevard: A waiver has been requested to reduce the special landscape setback required pursuant to LDR Section 4.3.4(H )(6 )(b )(4) from 15.5 feet for the narrow portion of the property and 30 feet for the deeper portion of the property to nine (9) feet. Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.7(8 )(5), prior to granting a waiver, the approving body shall make a finding that the granting of the waiver: (a) Shall not adversely affect the neighboring area; (b) Shall not significantly diminish the provision of public facilities; (c) Shall not create an unsafe situation; and (d) Does not result in the grant of a special privilege in that the same waiver would be granted under similar circumstances on other property for another applicant or owner. The applicant submitted the following justification in support of the waiver: This written request for a Waiver pursuant to Section 2.4.7(B)(2) of the Delray Beach Land Development Regulations ( "LDRs'), is intended to supplement the same request previously submitted, seeking relief from LDR Section 4.3.4(H)(6)(b)(4) which requires a special landscape buffer at the smaller distance of either 34' or 74% of the average depth of the property along Linton Boulevard. We are requesting a waiver to allow the property to maintain the existing nine foot (9) buffer so as to preserve the existing mature free canopy and to accommodate landscape features, decorative walls, meandering sidewalks, and other decorative pedestrian ways as indicated on the site plan. R waiver from this provision is authorized by LDR Section 4.3.4(H)(6)(b), which provides: Special Landscape Setbacks: Within the following special landscape setbacks, no structures shall be altered, erected, or reconstructed, nor shall any paving be allowed except for driveways and sidewalks which lead to structures on, or provide access to, the site and then only when generally perpendicular to the frontage. However, waivers may be granted to these restrictions at the time of site ,elan review in order to accommodate landscape features, decorative walls, meandering sidewalks, and other decorative pedestrian ways. (Emphasis added). As has been discussed and refined with staff, the intent is to provide a community context to this redevelopment project. The direction of discussion for the corridor, and as permitted by current code, is an ability to provide interaction along the public right of way to activate the area. The revised site plan for the project includes such interactive features that not only provide physical interest but serve to activate the site for patrons and pedestrians. There are multiple landscape features, with interconnected pedestrian ways that are amenitized with trellises, and street furniture like benches, trash receptacles and bike racks. Linton is a continuation of the interaction that is also planned for S. Federal Highway to create an improved sense of place to encourage pedestrian activity as intended under the Special Setback requirements. Therefore, the project is eligible for this waiver consideration. SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 14 For the reasons set forth below, the Project meets or exceeds the requirements of LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5) and therefore, we respectfully request the waiver be granted. A. Approval of the waiver will not adversely affect the neighboring area. This is an existing developed parcel that is being redeveloped to be consistent with the City's desire to create a more active and inviting corridor. Staff and the City's Landscape Plan Reviewer have determined that maintaining the existing nine foot (9 ) buffer was preferable to alternative action so as to preserve the existing mature tree canopy. Removal of the tree canopy for purposes of otherwise meeting this LDR requirement itself would adversely affect the neighboring area, which has expressed a strong desire to maintain the existing trees to the maximum extent feasible. it is also recognized, as a redevelopment site, that there are inherit constraints to parcels within the area. The depth of the parcel along Linton is such the case. The extremely narrow and odd - shaped parcel adjacent to Linton Boulevard competes not only with trying to redevelop the parcel, but with the special landscape setback which further limits opportunities to create "a more urban feel at the street front. Furthermore, it is in conflict with principles of new urbanism" to have more interaction between the people and the places that form our built environment. The uses along Linton are designed to "address" the street as well as be compatible to the neighboring residents. This is consistent with the South Federal Highway Redevelopment Plan which provides, in part, that: "Parking areas must be distributed around large buildings and shopping centers in an attempt to balance the parking and shorten the distance to all buildings, public sidewalks, and transit stops. Parking located at unrealistic distances from the buildings that it services should be prohibited." Requiring the implementation of this special landscape setback would be inconsistent with that intent by off - setting the natural flow of the uses. Therefore, the developer believes the site plan design as submitted will not adversely affect the neighboring area. The reduction of the Special Landscape Setback along Linton Boulevard was intentionally designed to enhance and reinforce the idea of bringing the urban edge and character of the Project closer to the roadway as a continuation of the existing corner development which is also consistent with spirit of Ordinance 17 -99 which eliminated the special setback for the North Federal Highway corridor "to hasten the revitalization of the area." More specifically, the staff report to Ordinance 17 -99 justified the elimination of the special landscape setback as follows: "The typical strip center development scenario with parking up front and buildings set towards the back of the lot is designed for the automobile. This arrangement is destination - oriented and does not promote pedestrian movement between businesses along the corridor. Future development of this type is discouraged in the North Federal Highway area. Instead a neo- traditional approach consisting of buildings located closer to the roadway's edge with wide, shade - covered sidewalks, and pedestrian scaled lighting and other street furniture is recommended. Although on- street parking will be located in the front of business for convenience, the bulk of the required parking will be located in the rear. This arrangement will promote rather than inhibit pedestrian flow between adjacent businesses. The current regulations require that a special landscape setback be provided along the entire Federal Highway frontage. This requirement makes it impossible to move storefronts close to the roadway's edge. In order to implement the Redevelopment Plan, this setback must be eliminated except where off - street parking directly abuts the roadway. " SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 15 Therefore, approval of this waiver is actually encouraged for this area so as to "provide a more urban feel at the street front" and to be consistent with "principles of new urbanism. "As such, it will not adversely affect the neighboring area. B. Approval of the waiver will not significantly diminish the ,provision of ,public facilities. While the special landscape setback itself is not an aspect of public facilities such as water, sewer and drainage, granting this waiver will allow existing utilities to be utilized more efficiently and effectively, which is the intent behind urban infill redevelopment. The request also permits for the enhancement of the pedestrian system along Linton. C. Approval of the waiver will not create an unsafe situation. Elimination of the special landscape waiver does not create an unsafe situation. Therefore, this criteria is also inapplicable to the analysis. D. Approval of the waiver will not result in the -grant of a special privilege in that the same waiver has been granted under similar circumstances on other crocerty for other applicants or owners. This waiver is supported by the recently adopted "South Federal Highway Redevelopment Plan" which recognized this comer as being a catalyst for economic development in the City. " Consistent with the anticipated land development regulations to implement the South Federal Highway Redevelopment Plan, future redevelopment in this corridor will not need to seek such a similar waiver. While not currently subject to the South Federal Highway Redevelopment Plan, the design is in keeping with the intent of its provisions. Therefore, approval of this specific waiver request will not grant the developer or the project a special privilege. Likewise, the City readily acknowledged the reality that "[tjhe private sector will be the driving force behind the revitalization of the Redevelopment Area." More specifically, the Plan itself states: "it is the intent of this [Pjlan to make South Federal Highway a unique place that will encourage the development of commercial, office and residential uses in an urban setting. It is our hope that it will also serve as a catalyst to increase property values and increase the City's employment. The private sector will be the driving force behind the revitalization of the Redevelopment Area. This Plan will give property owners and developers a clear understanding of what the future could hold if they develop in the prescribed manner as suggested by the Plan. " The Plan continues: "This section of the Plan provides all the recommendations for the redevelopment area, including Future Land Use Map amendments, rezoning and amendments to the Land Development Regulations. " The Applicant is seeking to provide a project that not only implements proven designs for retail centers but to kick off excitement for the area and its redevelopment. This Applicant has been willing to take the risk of being first for which anticipated amendments to the City's Land Development Regulations for properties within the Plan area have yet to be developed. The design as further refined with staff is proposed to be directly in -line with the vision for the corridor and the overlay itself. SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 16 This framework was then utilized to design a neighborhood retail center that could accommodate all of these needs and remain economically feasible for years to come. As a result of these discussions, the Applicant has worked very hard to design an optimized site plan that intended to meet both the needs and desires of the City, the adjacent community, as well as the reasonable requirements of the types of quality retail and dining tenant the Applicant seeks to place, who themselves seek to protect and promote their own business models, trade dress, and goodwill. Such design requires needed relief from the existing land development regulations to allow for the "urban edge" design. The City, through adoption of LDR Section 2.4.7(B), has consistently recognized that waivers are a viable tool to assist in the orderly development of parcels in the City. As such, approval of this specific waiver request will not grant the developer or the Project a special privilege not already granted to similarly situated parcels and projects. Staff Review of Waiver: The existing office development on the property has a parking aisle adjacent to Linton Boulevard with the paving approximately 9 feet from the Linton Boulevard right -of -way. This is a nonconforming situation. The applicant proposes to leave the parking aisle in the same location, but cut back the asphalt to allow the cars to overhang the landscape area by 18 inches. While this will reduce the impervious area on the site and provide additional green area, it cannot be counted toward the required special landscape setback, since it is still technically a part of the parking space. Therefore, the effective landscape area for the purpose of this code section will remain at 9 feet. A significant portion of the frontage along Linton Boulevard is extremely narrow and the proposed buildings are only 50 feet deep in this area. The area directly in front of these buildings has significant landscaping and wider sidewalks to provide outdoor dining opportunities and enhance the pedestrian experience in this area. In order to provide additional landscaping along Linton Boulevard, the buildings would have to be even narrower, which is impractical; or the sidewalk /landscape area in front of the buildings would have to be reduced. Given the narrowness of the dogleg portion of the property, staff supports this waiver with the existing nonconformity maintained. Since requiring an increased buffer in this area would cause a reduction in the landscape /pedestrian area being provided in the interior of the site, the trade- off is not warranted. It is also noted that the existing landscape buffer is consistent with that along the north side of Linton Boulevard where nine feet is provided for Old Harbor Plaza. Additional landscape materials and design features, including trellises, seating, bike racks and sidewalk connections to the interior of the property have been added along the existing sidewalk to enhance the pedestrian experience along Linton Boulevard. Pursuant to LDR Section 4.3.4(1-1)(6 )(b), the provision of these elements is also justification for the waver. Based on the above, the requested waiver is supportable. The reduced special landscape setback will not negatively affect the neighboring areas or create an unsafe situation. Granting of the requested waiver will not diminish the provision of public facilities or result in the grant of a special privilege as staff believes that the waiver would be granted to other projects on similar basis. Consequently, positive findings with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B )(5) can be made for the reduction of the required special landscape setback from 15.5 feet and 30 feet to 9 feet. South Federal Highway: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.3.4(H )(6 )(b )(1), a 25' special landscape area must be provided along Federal Highway (U.S. Highway 1), including the one way pairs (5th and 6th Avenues), extending from the south City limits to S. E. lath Street. This requirement has not been met (see waiver discussion below). SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 17 Waiver to Special Landscape Setback Requirement for South Federal Highway: A waiver has been requested to reduce the special landscape setback required pursuant to LDR Section 4.3.4 (H)(6)(b)(1) from 25 feet to 15 feet. Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.7 {B }(5), prior to granting a waiver, the approving body shall make a finding that the granting of the waiver: (a) Shall not adversely affect the neighboring area; (b) Shall not significantly diminish the provision of public facilities; (c) Shall not create an unsafe situation; and {d} Does not result in the grant of a special privilege in that the same waiver would be granted under similar circumstances on other property for another applicant or owner. The applicant submitted the following justification in support of the waiver This written request for a Waiver pursuant to Section 2.4.7(B )(2) of the Delray Beach Land Development Regulations (IDRs'), is intended to supplement the same request submitted previously, seeking relief from LDR Section 4.3.4(H)(6 )(b )(7) which requires a twenty -five foot (25) Special Landscape Setback along South Federal Highway. We are requesting a waiver to reduce the Special Landscape Setback to provide a fifteen foot (95) setback along South Federal Highway in order to create the desired `urban edge" as set forth in the City's adopted South Federal Highway Redevelopment Plan and to accommodate landscape features, decorative walls, meandering sidewalks, and other decorative pedestrian ways as indicated on the site plan. A waiver from this provision is authorized by LDR Section 4.3.4(H )(6 )(b), which provides: Special Landscape Setbacks: Within the following special landscape setbacks, no structures shall be altered, erected, or reconstructed; nor shall any paving be allowed except for driveways and sidewalks which lead to structures on, or provide access to, the site and then only when generally perpendicular to the frontage. However, waivers may be -granted to these restrictions of the time of site ,elan review in order to accommodate landscape features, decorative walls, meandering sidewalks, and other decorative ,pedestrian ways. (Emphasis added) As has been discussed and refined with staff, the intent is to provide a community context to this redevelopment project. The direction of discussion for the corridor, and as permitted by current code, is an ability to provide interaction along the public right of way to activate the area. The revised site plan for the project includes such interactive features that not only provide physical interest but serve to amenitize the site for patrons and pedestrians. There are multiple landscape features, green walls, meandering sidewalks, and other decorative pedestrian ways with trellises, seating and bike racks throughout the perimeter, both along S. Federal Highway and continuing eastbound adjacent to Linton Boulevard. Therefore, the project is eligible for this waiver consideration. For the reasons set forth below, the Project meets or exceeds the requirements of LDR Section 2.4.7(B) (5) and therefore, we respectfully request the waiver be granted. A. Approval of the waiver will not adversely affect the neighboring area. SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 18 The reduction of the Special Landscape Setback along South Federal Highway is to enhance and reinforce the idea of bringing the urban edge and character of the Project closer to Federal Highway, consistent with the South Federal Highway Redevelopment Plan. This is also consistent with Ordinance 17 -99 which eliminated the special setback for the North Federal Highway corridor "to hasten the revitalization of the area. " More specifically, the staff report to Ordinance 17 -99 justified the elimination of the special landscape setback as follows: The typical strip center development scenario with parking up front and buildings set towards the back of the lot is designed for the automobile. This arrangement is destination - oriented and does not promote pedestrian movement between businesses along the corridor. Future development of this type is discouraged in the North Federal Highway area. instead a neo- traditional approach consisting of buildings located closer to the roadway's edge with wide, shade- covered sidewalks, and pedestrian scaled lighting and other street furniture is recommended. Although on- street parking will be located in the front of business for convenience, the bulk of the required parking will be located in the rear. This arrangement will promote rather than inhibit pedestrian flow between adjacent businesses. The current regulations require that a special landscape setback be provided along the entire Federal Highway frontage. This requirement makes it impossible to move storefronts close to the roadway's edge. In order to implement the Redevelopment Plan, this setback must be eliminated except where off - street parking directly abuts the roadway. Therefore, approval of this waiver is actually encouraged for this area so as to `provide a more urban feel at the street front" and to be consistent with "principles of new urbanism. " As such, it will not adversely affect the neighboring area. B. Approval of the waiver will not sicinificantly diminish the provision of ,public facilities. While the special landscape setback itself is not an aspect of public facilities such as water, sewer and drainage, granting this waiver will allow existin utilities to be utilized more efficiently and effectively, which is the intent behind urban infill redevelopment. C. Approval of the waiver will not create an unsafe situation. Elimination of the special landscape waiver does not create an unsafe situation. In fact, the waiver provides for additional considerations that promote and improve the pedestrian experience. Therefore, this criterion is also inapplicable to the analysis. D. Approval of the waiver will not result in the -grant of a special privile -ge in that the same waiver has been -granted under similar circumstances on other Property for other applicants or owners. This waiver is supported by the recently adopted "South Federal Highway Redevelopment Plan" which recognized this comer as being `a catalyst for economic development in the City. " Consistent with the anticipated land development regulations to implement the South Federal Highway Redevelopment Plan, future redevelopment in this corridor will not need to seek such a similar waiver. While not currently subject to the South Federal Highway Redevelopment Plan, the design is in keeping with the intent of its provisions. Therefore, approval of this specific waiver request will not grant the developer or the project a special privilege. SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 19 Likewise, the City readily acknowledged the reality that "[t]he private sector will be the driving force behind the revitalization of the Redevelopment Area." More specifically, the Plan itself states: "it is the intent of this [Pjlan to make South Federal Highway a unique place that will encourage the development of commercial, office and residential uses in an urban setting. It is our hope that if will also serve as a catalyst to increase property values and increase the City's employment. The private sector will be the driving force ,behind the revitalization of the Redevelopment Area. This Plan will give property owners and developers a clear understanding of what the future could hold if they develop in the prescribed manner as suggested by the Plan." The Plan continues: "This section of the Plan provides all the recommendations for the redevelopment area, including Future Land Use Map amendments, rezoning and amendments to the Land Development Regulations." The Applicant is seeking to provide a project that not only implements proven designs for retail centers but to kick off excitement for the area and its redevelopment. This Applicant has been willing to fake the risk of being first for which anticipated amendments to the City's Land Development Regulations for properties within the Plan area have yet to be developed. The design as further refined with staff is proposed to be directly in -line with the vision for the corridor and the overlay itself. This framework was then utilized to design a neighborhood retail center that could accommodate all of these needs and remain economically feasible for years to come. As a result of these discussions, the Applicant has worked very hard to design an optimized site plan that intended to meet both the needs and desires of the City, the adjacent community, as well as the reasonable requirements of the types of qualify retail and dining tenant the Applicant seeks to place, who themselves seek to protect and promote their own business models, trade dress, and goodwill. Such design requires needed relief from the existing land development regulations to allow for the "urban edge" design. The City, through adoption of LDR Section 2.4.7(B), has consistently recognized that waivers are a viable tool to assist in the orderly development of parcels in the City. As such, approval of this specific waiver request will not grant the developer or the Project a special privilege not already granted to similarly situated parcels and projects. Staff Review of Waiver: As described in the applicant's justification statement, the reduced landscape setback is to allow four outbuildings to be located closer to South Federal Highway. The parking areas between these buildings will maintain the required 25' deep special landscape setback. As with the reduction requested for Linton Boulevard, this waiver is also supported pursuant to LDR Section 4.3.4 (H){6){b) through the provision of additional landscape materials and design features, including trellises, seating, bike racks and sidewalk connections to the interior of the property to enhance the pedestrian experience along South Federal Highway. This type of reduction of the special landscape setback was specifically recommended in the recently adopted South Federal Highway Redevelopment Plan. Although the provisions of the Plan have not yet been coded into the Land Development Regulations, processing of the text SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 20 amendment is scheduled later this year. Since the City Commission fully adopted the Plan, no issues with the text amendment are expected. Based on the above, the requested waiver is supportable. The reduced special landscape setback will not negatively affect the neighboring areas or create an unsafe situation. Granting of the requested waiver will not diminish the provision of public facilities or result in the grant of a special privilege as staff believes that the waiver would be granted to other projects on similar basis. Consequently, positive findings with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5) can be made for the reduction of the required special landscape setback from twenty -five (25) feet to fifteen (15) feet between the four outbuildings and the property line. The 25 feet special landscape setback will be maintained where parking is adjacent to the roadway. South Federal Highway /Linton Boulevard Intersection: At its meeting of December 12, 2012, SPRAB expressed concerns about the bank building located in the corner of the property at this intersection. The Board felt that the building crowded the corner too much and should be removed to provide a more open vista into the property. Staff discussed this issue with the applicant during the process to modify the site plan, but the applicant felt that this building was too important to the economic feasibility of the project and that the building design complemented the corner. The applicant has since indicated that he already has a bank that is interested in this location and that the building size is at the minimum size that the bank needs. Based on SPRAB's strong objections to the location of this building at the earlier meeting, staff has added a condition of approval that the building be eliminated or reduced in size to provide a vista into the property and allow for additional parking. To be fair, it is noted that given the larger issues with the overall site plan, the applicant did not attempt to defend this building at the earlier meeting. Since the applicant does not agree with this condition, this issue can be discussed at the meeting and the Board can make a decision based on the applicant's presentation. Undergrounding of Utilities: Pursuant to LDR Section 6.1.8, utility facilities serving the development shall be located underground throughout the development. Therefore, it is attached as a condition of approval that all existing and proposed utilities associated with the development must be located underground and that a note be provided on the site plan to this effect. Right -of -way Dedication: Pursuant to Table T -1 of the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan, the required right -of -way for Linton Boulevard is 120 feet where only 106 feet exists on the north side of the subject property. Pursuant to LDR Section 5.3.1(❑ )(5), a reduction in the required right -of -way width of existing streets may be granted by the City Engineer upon favorable recommendation from the Development Services Management Group (DSMG). On October 4, 2012, the City Engineer and DSMG considered and approved the reduction of right -of -way for Linton Boulevard to the existing width. No additional dedications are required. Bus Shelters: As noted in the Findings section of this report, pursuant to Transportation Element A -1.5 of the Comprehensive Plan, a City approved bus shelter and Mass Transit easement may be required. Work with the Engineering Department to determine if a mass transmit easement should be provided along South Federal Highway. If so, this must be depicted on the site plan, landscape plan, and civil engineering plans. If the project is not adjacent to a bus stop a contribution of SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 21 approximately one -half the cost of a bus shelter must be paid in -lieu of providing the bus shelter on site. This has been added as a condition of approval and must be addressed prior to site plan certification. Plat: As the development proposal necessitates the dedication of utility easements, the property must be repiatted. The recordation of a plat prior to the issuance of a building permit is attached as a condition of approval. Sidewalk Cafes: Many paved outdoor areas surrounding the various buildings in the project have been designated as potential sidewalk cafes on the plans. Pursuant to LDR Section 6.3.3, Sidewalk Cafe, `A sidewalk cafe is a group of tables with chairs and associated articles approved by the City situated and maintained outside whether on public or private property (excluding interior courtyard seating which is subject to parking requirements) and used for the consumption of food and beverages sold to the public from an adjoining business. All tables and chairs and associated articles must be located within the sidewalk cafe permit area. Sidewalk cafes allowed only when in compliance with this Section." While additional parking is not required for areas designated as sidewalk cafes, an annual permit fee is required. The permit fee is currently $4.75 per square foot of approved sidewalk cafe space. (Also see the Parking Section related to sidewalk cafes.) Preliminary Engineerinq Technical Items: While revised plans have accommodated most of staffs concerns, the items attached in Appendix "C" remain outstanding and will need to be addressed prior to site plan certification. CPTED REVIEW The following review was provided by Officer G. Wesner of the Delray Beach Police Department. Note: since this CPTED review was based on the earlier site plan submittal, notations have been added to denote chances in the current site ❑Ian. Overview The site is situated at the busy S. Federal Hwy and E. Linton Blvd intersection, and extends all the way to the Intracoastal Waterway [1CWJ. On the adjacent North side of E. Linton is a successful strip mall containing a popular Carrabas Restaurant, and several retail businesses. Diagonally across S. Federal Hwy the "Plaza at Delray" contains several restaurants and retail ,businesses including an (18) screen Regal theatre. Upscale homes along McCleary and Eve Streets in the "Tropic isles" neighborhood will sit less than 100 feet from the rear of the "500 " and "506 "buildings once completed. Currently, the site contains two four story office buildings facing S. Federal Hwy with a third ,building to the East along E. Linton Blvd. Most recently, one of the four story buildings had been home to a regional banking center, both four story buildings have been largely empty for several years. Delray Place will be completed in several phases; eventually with existing buildings being demolished to make room for new construction. The project will also get a reconfigured parking lot. It will accumulatively encompass (12) separate one -story buildings; over 106,000 square feet of restaurant and retail space. For the most part, the site will be a "medium high risk" location for patrons and employees because (11) of the buildings will be suited for a restaurant; SPRAB staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place - Class V site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 22 they will likely serve alcohol. The 100 building will be high risk location once it is occupied as a bank. This CPTED review was provided using following resources: Several visits to the location during daytime lighting conditions; Delray Beach Police Department Records (available upon request); site plans containing a comprehensive Photometric Study [PS] and certified by Mark Saltz on 11/19112; and accepted Crime Prevention Thru Environmental Design [CPTED] standards. Natural Surveillance: Natural Surveillance [NS] for each building will be greatly enhanced by the large floor to ceiling windows for each building. overall NS will also be enhanced by the broad stroke of sidewalk cafes areas, and trellis covered benches located throughout the project. Security and CCTV. Historically, crime trends for the site have been at acceptable levels. However, a project such as this will see patronage at levels far higher than those previously seen at the site. Additionally, restaurants will bring higher numbers in the evening hours than those seen during the site s previous uses. Therefore, there should be management onsite during normal business hours. Each vender should make use of the latest digital CCTV technology. Building entrances and all "points of purchase" should have facial recognition cameras as well as "anti - shoplifting" alarm devices. Retail users should make use of a cash - control system; have signs indicating that cashiers have limited cash on hand. Additional CCTV systems at the management office(s) will provide coverage at parking lot entrances, as well as store front areas. These should be able to record images of approaching vehicles and their license plates. Lighting and Landscaping: The PS indicates that most of the outdoor spaces will receive between 7 and 8 Foot candles [Fc] Overall Fc levels are acceptable; however, Fc levels should be increased to a minimum of 2 Fc along the East end of the property. This secluded area of the parking lot sits next to the iCW; has an ongoing history for homeless activity. (Note: This parking area next to the ICW was eliminated in the revised site plan. Since, it is now a landscaped area, the comment is not applicable] "Shoe-box" type fixtures mounted on 15 and 25 foot poles will have L.E.D. fixtures. These L.E.D. fixtures will deter glare, and provide the best visual quality of color available. Furthermore, their high initial cost will be offset in a matter of months by the formidable energy savings that are common with their use. [Note: This was reported in error. LED fixtures are only being used on wall mounted fixtures only, not in the parking lot fixtures] Much of the existing landscaping will be relocated or completely replaced, an important point made readily obvious by the poor condition of the current landscaping. The landscape plan indicates that appropriate trees, shrubs, and ground cover will be used. Proper maintenance will ensure that new landscaping will not inhibit natural surveillance; create ambush points in the parking lot. Natural Access Control FNACI: Egress from the parking lot has always been a concern at this site. The main entrance -exit will continue to be at S. Federal Hwy,- it only provides right turn egress from the lot. Furthermore, the entrance along E. Linton Blvd has always been a difficult place to turn left for those wishing to SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 23 exit West bound; towards 1 -95. Those who chose to exit on Eve St. will only be able to turn right once they are at S. Federal Hwy. Once inside the parking lot, renovations will enhance 111RC for all users, and improve safety for pedestrians moving to and from parking areas. Fencing and walls along the southern perimeters will make quick access on foot difficult for abnormal users. The "enclosed truck wells" to the rear of the 500 and 506 buildings will be accessed from the main entrance. Once delivery trucks negotiate customer vehicles, they will be able to easily access loading areas. However, they will also be less than 700 feet from the exclusive "Tropic Isles" Therefore, truck engine noise will be a chronic issue for nearby residents if large trucks are left running in the truck wells. Even covered truck wells project noise several blocks away. (Note : this has been addressed in the SAD Ordinance] CPTED Technical Items: Based on the above CPTED review, the following items need to be addressed prior to site plan certification. 1. CCTV technology should be incorporated into the project. The applicant shall work with the police department to ensure compliance. 2. It is recommended that the light fixtures used in the parking lot be LED as they provide the best light with the least amount of glare. Wire cages or industrial strength shatter resistant lenses be placed over the light to deter vandalism. The photometric plan and other plans that may be affected must be revised to comply with this requirement. LANDSCAPE PLAN ANALYSIS Pursuant to LDR section 4.8.16 {C } {1 } {a}, prior to the issuance of a building permit for a structure or a paving permit, compliance with the requirements of Section 4.6.16 shall be assured through the review and approval of a landscape plan submitted pursuant to Section 2.4.3 (C). A landscape plan has been submitted and evaluated by the City's Senior Landscape Planner. The plan provides for some building foundation, site perimeter, and parking area landscaping to address the landscaping needs for the proposed commercial development. The total landscape area required for the proposed project is 19,304 sq. ft. and 20,441 sq. ft. are being provided. The proposed development requires a total of 154 interior shade trees and 155 interior shade trees are being provided. The total number of perimeter trees required for the project is 160 trees and the applicant is providing 202 perimeter trees. It is noted that the project will provide a total of 357 trees. All proposed trees along the r -o -w meet "The Right Tree - Right Place as defined by the Florida Power Light company. It is important to mention that the applicant has made an effort to save a total of 7 existing trees that will be relocated on site. The landscape material proposed for the project appears to be abundant and diverse. It is noted that a total of 357 trees which include Gumbo Limbo trees, Pitch Apple, Japanese Fern Trees, Jatropha trees, Japanese Privet, Lignum Vitae, High -rise Live Oak, Southern Live Oak, Golden Cassia, and Pink Tabebuia will be planted. Regarding Palm trees the landscape material for the project includes Alexander Palms, Wild Date Palms, Christmas Palms, and Montgomery Palms. A variety of large accents, shrubs, groundcover materials and vines are employed to enhance the proposed development. Accents and Shrubs include variegated Shell Ginger, Red Ti Plant, Mammey Croton, Bird of Paradise, Red Tip Cocoplum, Muhly Grass, Podocarpus, Wild Coffee, Viburnum and others. The proposed under plantings include Blue Flax Lily, Green Island Ficus, Spider Lilly, Pentas, and Dwarf Podocarpus. Vines include Confederate Jasmin and Bleeding Heart Vine. SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 24 The City's Senior Landscape Planner has evaluated the landscape plan and found that the plan partially complies with the LDR Section 4.6.16. There are still a number of landscape technical items that the applicant needs to address. These items have been listed below and will be attached as conditions of approval. Thus, once these technical items are addressed, the Landscape Plan will be in compliance with LDR Section 4.6.16. Landscape Technical Items: The following Landscape Plan item remains outstanding, and will need to be addressed prior to certification of the site plan. 1. A Special Landscape Setback is established for this property along Federal Highway and Linton Boulevard. The Special Landscape Setback along Federal Highway is twenty -five (25') feet. The Special Landscape Setback along Linton Boulevard is fifteen and five /tenths (15.5') feet for the narrow portion (eastern -half) of the site and thirty (30') feet for the wider portion (western- half). Note: Waivers to the Special Landscape Setback requirements for Linton Boulevard and South Federal Highway are discussed on the "Site Plan Analysis" section of this report. 2. There are still discrepancies with the Existing Tree Survey. During a site visit with the Landscape Architect, we had agreed to mitigate for several trees. Tree numbers 88, 102, 104, 219 and 229 were all agreed to be mitigated for (in addition to those already listed in the chart). Revise the chart to show these as being mitigated with their respective caliper measurements. Without these trees, the total number of caliper inches that would need to be mitigated for is 1,324 inches. Based upon the caliper dimensions for the proposed trees, it appears that the total number of inches provided is 728.5 inches. This is a deficiency of 595.5 inches. This is a substantial deficiency. I would suggest to increase the caliper size of the trees that are being proposed for the site. We also need a letter stating how you intend to make up the difference. You may elect to pay $100 per caliper inch deficient or donate trees that would collectively make up the number of caliper inches that you are deficient. The City would have to agree to the size and type of trees donated. 3. All landscape islands are required to contain a canopy tree with the above specifications. Canopy trees are defined as a tree that will attain a minimum spread of twenty (20') feet. Green Buttonwoods, East Palatka Hollies and Sabal Palms are NOT considered canopy trees. Switch to larger growing trees such as Live Oak (many varieties are available), Gumbo Limbo, etc. 'Highrise' and 'Cathedral' Oaks are popular choices because they grow more vertically before branching out allowing better storefront visibility. Significant progress has been made, however, there are a few instances where flowering trees and/or palms or located in a landscape island. The Landscape Code requires that shade trees only be used in these islands. Either revise plan or seek a waiver. 4. All required parking lot trees must be in the form of canopy or shade trees. Palm trees will not be credited towards the interior tree count. Revise planting plans and chart tabulations. (Also see comment #3) 5. Several required landscape islands are missing. Pay particular attention to the parking rows in front of Buildings 600 thru 1000, between Buildings 100 and 200 and along the north side of Eve Street. Parking rows are allowed thirteen (13) standard parking spaces between islands. Parking rows are also required to begin and terminate with a landscape island. All islands are to be curbed and have minimum dimensions of nine (9') in width, exclusive of curbing. Each island shall have a minimum planting area of one hundred and thirty -five square feet (135 SF) and contain seventy -five square feet (75 SF) of shrubs and groundcovers and one (1) canopy tree that is sixteen (16') feet in height with a seven (T) foot spread. Make sure all islands are of proper dimensions and contain the required plant material. Progress has been made, but there are still five (5) landscape islands that are SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 25 missing. Note: A waiver to this requirement is discussed below under the headi "Landscape Waivers ". 6. Several of the required landscape islands do not meet the required minimum width of nine feet (9'), exclusive of curbing. Thus, they do not meet the minimum planting area of one hundred and thirty -five square feet (135 SF). Revise all plans and adjust planting plan as needed. Note: A waiver to this requirement is discussed below under the heading "Landscape Waivers ". 7. All landscape islands are required to contain a minimum of seventy -five (75 SF) square feet of shrubs and groundcovers. Shrubs shall be placed at the back of the island with low groundcovers in the nose to eliminate sight visibility issues. Shrubs are not allowed to be used throughout the entire island (as proposed on the plan). They are only allowed at the back of the island with the nose planted with low groundcovers. 8. Per LDR 4.6.16(H )(4), all buildings shall have foundation trees spaced so that their canopies will be touching at maturity. Size specifications are to adhere to the chart listed within this regulation. This requirement has not been met for Buildings 600, 700, 800, 900, 1000, 500- 504 and 506 -510. No Foundation trees have been proposed. Revise planting plans and chart tabulations. Although some progress has been made, the requirements of this section have not been met. See comment #11. 9. Show light poles on landscape plans. Coordinate with Engineer to move light poles so that potential conflict between tree canopy and light pole is minimized. This comment was addressed, but has now resurfaced as an issue during this re- design. There are several instances where light poles are proposed on top of or immediately adjacent to required trees. Coordinate with the Engineer to move these light poles away from the trees, so that there will minimal conflict between light pole and tree canopy. 10. Two required landscape strips between parking tiers are missing. The applicant has chosen to install a sidewalk and trellises. While this can be a nice decorative feature, our code requires this landscape strip along with interior shade trees and hedges. The proposed feature will not offer any shade benefits to the customers or the surrounding parking lot. Therefore, the plans must be changed to address this code requirement. Note: A waiver to this requirement is discussed below under the heading "Landscape Waivers ". 11. There are excellent opportunities for foundation plantings directly adjacent to the building walls along the storefronts of building #'s 500, 600, 700, 800 and 900. There is a vast area of pavers proposed with very little foundation landscaping. The creation of landscape beds directly adjacent to the building edge will allow for additional foundation plantings that will lessen the impact of all the hardscape features. These landscape beds can be utilized in between the proposed tree cutouts and the planter boxes and located up against the building edge. Small palms and understory plants can do very well in these tight spaces. A minimum of a three foot (3') bed would be adequate enough to support these plantings. 12. Move the proposed fire hydrant located adjacent to Linton Boulevard closer to the edge of the sidewalk. This will allow for the proposed hedge to run continuously along the parking lot without interruption. Based upon the aforementioned landscaping comments, a positive finding of compliance with the requirements of LDR section 4.6.16 can be made when all outstanding Landscape Technical items are addressed. SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 26 Landscape Waivers: Waivers have been requested by the applicant to address two of the above Landscape Technical items. Both of these involve requirements for parking lots. The first is for landscape islands and the second is for the required landscape strip between adjacent parking tiers. The following analysis addresses these waivers: Parking Lot Islands: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.8.18 {11-1}(3)(i), "Landscape islands which contain a minimum of one hundred thirty -five (135) square feet of planting area, with a minimum dimension of nine (9) feet, exclusive of the required curb, shall be placed at intervals of no less than one landscaped island for every thirteen (13) standard parking spaces. One shade tree shall be planted in every island with a minimum of seventy -five (75) square feet of shrubs and groundcovers. Tree specifications shall adhere to those listed in Section 4.6.16(E)(5) and 4.6.16(E)(6). Where approval for the use of compact parking has been approved, islands may be placed at intervals of no less than one (1) island for every fifteen (15) compact parking spaces." (see waiver discussion below): Waiver to Parking Lot Island Requirement: A waiver has been requested to eliminate the requirement that five internal parking lot islands be provided; the minimum width for 8 islands be reduced to 8 feet, exclusive of the required curb; and the minimum planting area for 4 islands be reduced from 135 square feet to 100 square feet, as depicted on the site plan. Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.7(B )(5), prior to granting a waiver, the approving body shall make a finding that the granting of the waiver: (a) Shall not adversely affect the neighboring area; (b) Shall not significantly diminish the provision of public facilities; (c) Shall not create an unsafe situation; and (d) Does not result in the grant of a special privilege in that the same waiver would be granted under similar circumstances on other property for another applicant or owner. The applicant has provided the following justification statement regarding the waiver request: This written request for a Waiver pursuant to Section 2.4.7(B)(2) of the Delray Beach Land Development Regulations ( "LDRs'), is intended to supplement the same request previously submitted, seeking relief from LDR Section 4.6.16(H)(3)(i) regarding the requirements for landscape islands. LDR Section 4.6.16(H)(3)(i) requires landscape islands which contain a minimum of one hundred thirty -five square feet (135 s.f.) of planting area, with a minimum dimension of nine feet (9), exclusive of the required curb, to be placed at intervals of no less than one landscaped island for every thirteen (13) standard parking spaces or fifteen (15) compact parking spaces. The waivers requested are as follows: The LDR requires a total of sixteen (16) landscape islands. We are requesting a waiver to provide fifteen (15) landscape islands, one (1) less than required. 2. We are also requesting a waiver from the spacingllocational requirement to allow the islands to be sited within the project at flexible intervals other than one (1) island per 13 spaces (or SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 27 15 compact spaces) so as to allow for additional free canopy over the proposed pedestrian walkways. 3. The LDR also requires a minimum of one hundred thirty -five (135) square feet of planting area. We are requesting a waiver to provide a minimum of one hundred square feet (104 s. f.) of planting area. 4. Last, the LDR requires landscape islands to have a minimum dimension of nine feet (9), exclusive of the required curb. We are requesting a waiver to reduce this dimension for eight (8) of the landscape islands by one foot (1) to eight feet (8), exclusive of the required curb. For the reasons set forth below, the Project meets or exceeds the requirements of LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5) and therefore, we respectfully request the waiver be granted. A. Approval of the waiver will not adversely affect the neighboring area. The current design seeks to eliminate various parking islands and alter their configuration in a way to provide for an improved project design for the public. This waiver requests the allowance of an internal interconnected pedestrian circulation system that the applicant believes to be important to the safe and convenient operation of the center. The proposed waiver serves to improve and enhance the center for the use and enjoyment of patrons, thus, there are no adverse impacts on the neighboring community. The waiver request is in keeping with the desire to grant consideration that improves upon the standard design provisions of the code. Specifically, two paver lined trellised walks intersect the parking areas to provide direct pedestrian connection through the parking areas. There are technically five (5) fewer islands than required by code (as a result of the spacing requirement) and eight (8) islands that have altered dimensions by reducing the width up to one foot (1) to accommodate the design of the center to while maintain efficiency in the parking field for circulation. The remainder of the parking field is designed to the typical code standards. The applicant has coordinated with staff to balance the circulation of the pedestrians and vehicles with the intent to prevent the parking field from being a "sea of asphalt. " The site design emphasizes not only standard landscape requirements for plantings, but endeavors to create a sense of place and experience. Paved walks with trellises, benches, open plaza areas with wall planters, punctuated with landscaping permit gathering and seating areas that serve the public. Landscape islands and planted areas in themselves do not provide any true amenity for people by incorporating the desired design into the flow of the center, a people - oriented experience is created. Therefore, the current design is not only preferred but strongly suggested by other design professionals as a more appropriate approach. This request is also consistent with the stated intent of the South Federal Highway Redevelopment Plan which provides, in part, that "Parking areas must be distributed around large buildings and shopping centers in an attempt to balance the parking and shorten the distance to all buildings, public sidewalks, and transit stops. Parking located at unrealistic distances from the buildings that it services should be prohibited." This waiver provides for better connectivity with the parking itself. Therefore, approval of this waiver will not adversely affect the neighboring area. B. Approval of the waiver will not significantly diminish the provision of public facilities. The alternative landscape design including spacing of parking islands is not an aspect of public facilities such as wafer, sewer and drainage and therefore is inapplicable to the analysis. SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 28 Though if should be recognized that that providing improved pedestrian circulation should be considered an important public facility to expand and maintain in a city. C. Approval of the waiver will not create an unsafe situation. As stated above, the proposed alternative design to standard code provisions is intended to fake into consideration the need of pedestrians and the visiting public by implementing recognized design techniques for how people and vehicles circulate through the site, as well as the type of experience visitors to the project will have. Standard landscape islands often break up parking fields requiring patrons to walk longer distances or behind and among the cars. The current design is preferred in modern urban infill projects where sites are constrained and actually make for a safer experience for all. D. Approval of the waiver will not result in the -grant of a special privile -ge in that the same waiver has been -granted under similar circumstances on other property for other applicants or owners. LDR Section 4.4.25, governing SAD -zoned properties, and by its own language, provides that the zoning is meant for "large scale and mixed projects for which conventional zoning is not applicable. " The uses and design of each SAD project are established by ordinance, adopted by the City Commission, as a rezoning and as set forth on the site - specific development plan, per LDR 4.4.25(C). The developer strongly believes the site design is supported by the intent of the recently adopted "South Federal Highway Redevelopment Plan" which recognized this corner as being "a catalyst for economic development in the City. " Likewise, the City readily acknowledged the reality that "ftjhe private sector will be the driving force behind the revitalization of the Redevelopment Area. " More specifically, the Plan itself states: "It is the intent of this fPjlan to make South Federal Highway a unique place that will encourage the development of commercial, office and residential uses in an urban setting. It is our hope that it will also serve as a catalyst to increase property values and increase the City's employment. The private sector will be the driving force behind the revitalization of the Redevelopment Area. This Plan will give property owners and developers a clear understanding of what the future could hold if they develop in the prescribed manner as suggested by the Plan." The Plan continues: "This section of the Plan provides all the recommendations for the redevelopment area, including Future Land Use Map amendments, rezoning and amendments to the Land Development Regulations." The Applicant is seeking to implement proven designs for retail centers for which anticipated amendments to the City's Land Development Regulations for properties within the Plan area have yet to be developed. The design as proposed is directly in -line with the vision for the corridor and the overlay itself. The City, through adoption of LDR Section 2.4.7(B), has consistently recognized that waivers are a viable tool to assist in the orderly development of parcels in the City. As such, approval of this specific waiver request will not grant the developer or the Project a special privilege not already granted to similarly situated parcels and projects. SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 29 Staff Review of Waiver: Staff does not support this waiver as it relates to elimination of the 5 required landscape islands. Shade trees are an important component to make parking areas more comfortable. This is South Florida -- we should be trying to put in more trees, not less. Shaded parking spaces are premium spaces, which becomes quite evident upon entering almost any parking lot. Due to the limited parking, the applicant is resistant to eliminate any spaces to provide the required islands. The applicant describes this development as a high -end center. The site design needs to reflect that high -end status. Therefore, the five islands should be provided as required. To reduce the number of parking spaces affected by the provision of these islands, staff would support reducing their width to 8 feet so that only one parking space is eliminated for each island. Under these circumstances with the site being completely redeveloped, it is unlikely that this waiver would be granted under similar circumstances on other property for another applicant or owner. Therefore, granting of the waiver would result in the grant of a special privilege and positive findings cannot be made with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B )(5). To minimize the effect on the total parking count, staff supports a minor reduction in width from 9 feet to 8 feet for the 8 islands requested in the waiver as well as the additional 5 islands mentioned above; and the reduction in size of 4 islands from a minimum of 135 square feet to 100 square feet. This minor adjustment will not negatively affect the neighboring areas, create an unsafe situation or diminish the provision of public facilities. Granting of the waiver will not result in the grant of a special privilege as staff believes that a waiver would be granted to other projects on a similar basis. Consequently, positive findings with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B )(5) can be made. Landscape Strips Between Parking Tiers: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.16(H )(3 )(k), "Whenever parking tiers abut, they shall be separated by a minimum five (5) foot wide landscape strip. This strip shall be in addition to the parking stall and be free of any vehicular encroachment, including car overhang. In addition, a two foot (2) hedge shall be installed within this landscape strip and run the entire length of the strip. Pedestrian walkways are permitted to allow passage through the hedge. Nonmountable curbs are not required for these landscaping strips, providing carstops are provided." (see waiver discussion below): Waiver to Landsca,ne Striro Requirement: A waiver has been requested to eliminate the requirement that landscape strips be provided in two areas where they are required between abutting parking tiers. Pursuant to LDR Section 2.47(13)(5), prior to granting a waiver, the approving body shall make a finding that the granting of the waiver: (a) Shall not adversely affect the neighboring area; (b) Shall not significantly diminish the provision of public facilities; (c) Shall not create an unsafe situation; and (d) Does not result in the grant of a special privilege in that the same waiver would be granted under similar circumstances on other property for another applicant or owner. The applicant has provided the following justification statement regarding the waiver request: SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 30 This written request is for a Waiver pursuant to Section 2.4.7(B)(2) of the Delray Beach Land Development Regulations (IDRs') is intended to supplement the same request, seeking relief from LDR Section 4.6.16(H)(3)(k), which requires five foot (5) wide landscape strips and two foot (2) wide hedges whenever parking tiers abut. We are requesting to waive this requirement for two (2) of the required landscape strips and provide in lieu of the planting area and hedge a five foot (5) wide pedestrian walkway, as further indicated on the site plan. This waiver is authorized pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.16(C )(4). For the reasons set forth below, the Project meets or exceeds the requirements of LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5) and therefore, we respectfully request the waiver be granted. A. Approval of the waiver will not adversely affect the neighboring area. This waiver provides for a more pedestrian oriented design element that has not yet been incorporated into the Land Development Regulations for the South Federal Highway Corridor. Traditionally, parking areas are designed for cars and to prevent the sea of asphalt that large parking lots for shopping area have been known to resemble. The next progression is to have more pedestrian friendly elements. These considerations go beyond providing shade to a parked car to considering how a parent with a stroller andlor young child can walk from the main center to an outparcel without being in the parking lot. This goes "hand -in- hand" with the requested waivers relating to setback considerations and the landscape island placement. The proposed site design provides interconnected pedestrian walkways for all patrons in a location where the otherwise required landscaping strip and hedges would be placed. However, this does not mean the site will be barren at these locations; trellises with plantings are provided along paver walks that permit for safer, directed access routes. This also permits for points for people to interact instead of standing in the drive aisle to talk. This pedestrian amenity still serves the purpose of breaking up the sea of asphalt as well. By meeting code alone, the typical landscaping would come at the expense of proving a safer experience for the patrons throughout the entire site. To that end, the site design is consistent with improved pedestrian safety, parking lot aesthetics and is consistent with national trends to encourage walk - ability. Additionally, the developer remained sensitive to the demands from the City to maintain a minimum twenty -five percent (25%) open space green area in the project. Significant retail gross leasable area has to be eliminated in the process which was the preferred City direction over higher utilization of this site. However, this more forward - thinking design feature has been maintained to support the integrity of the developer's desire to create a community- oriented project. This request is also consistent with the stated intent of the South Federal Highway Redevelopment Plan which provides, in part, that: "Parking areas must be distributed around large buildings and shopping centers in an attempt to balance the parking and shorten the distance to all buildings, public sidewalks, and transit stops. Parking located at unrealistic distances from the buildings that it services should be prohibited." Therefore, approval of this waiver will not adversely affect the neighboring area. B. Approval of the waiver will not significantly diminish the provision of public facilities. The landscaping in question is not a public facility however, to the extent parking lots are intended for the public, this optimized and safer pedestrian experience should be considered an important public facility which is not significantly diminished but rather substantially expanded SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 31 where otherwise not required. The requested waiver facilitates public purpose by providing a continuation of walks and interconnected pedestrian circulation. C. Approval of the waiver will not create an unsafe situation. The proposed design is intended to ,better address the needs of the public by implementing current recognized design techniques for people and vehicles to best circulate through the site, as well as the type of experience visitors to the project will have to maintain project sustainability by increasing repeat visitors. Standard landscape islands often break up parking fields requiring patrons to walk longer distances around or behind and among the cars. Landscape areas in parking lots often become subject to trampling as patrons prefer a more direct route, further defeating the purpose of the installed landscape material. The current design is preferred in modern urban infill projects, having people as the primary focus of the design. D. Approval of the waiver will not result in the -grant of a special privilege in that the same waiver has been granted under similar circumstances on other property for other applicants or owners. This waiver is necessary to alleviate the burden that is created by the additional effort to provide a safer and more aesthetic pedestrian experience. The project endeavors to reach beyond quantities of landscaping and meeting of code requirements to instead provide a sense of place and destination through the built environment. As stated before, additional hardscape and amenities have been added to provide thoughtful pedestrian circulation and added visual qualities to the center. The Land Development Regulations acknowledge the ability to provide for simple pedestrian crossing but not for the level of interconnected pedestrian circulation that is provided by this design. SAD zoning contemplates unique, site - specific site design to meet such contemporary and progressive developments. SAD zoning allows for waivers which are unique to a specific project based upon an overall policy decision that a certain project, as designed, merits such attention. The City, through adoption of LDR Section 2.4.7(B), has consistently recognized that waivers are a viable tool to assist in the orderly development of parcels in the City. As such, approval of this specific waiver request will not grant the developer or the Project a special privilege not already granted to similarly situated parcels and projects. Staff Review of Waiver: As stated in the previous landscape waiver, shade trees are an important component to make parking areas more comfortable. Staff agrees that the two pedestrian connections provided between parking tiers are important. A strong pedestrian connection is needed to connect the major anchors in the rear of the site to the outbuildings in the front. This connection is so important that staff agrees that if space only permits one or the other to be provided, the pedestrian connection should trump the landscape strips. However, this does not mean that shade should be sacrificed. Therefore, two landscape islands have been placed on either side of the each walkway instead of the one required, and these islands have been offset to provide more shade coverage in the area. Additionally, three trellises along the northern walkway and four along the southern walkway will be covered in vines to add shade and enhance the pedestrian experience. Substitution of the required landscape strips with walkways at these two locations will not negatively affect the neighboring areas, create an unsafe situation or diminish the provision of public facilities. Granting of the waiver will not result in the grant of a special privilege as staff SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 32 believes that a waiver would be granted to other projects on a similar basis. Consequently, positive findings with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5) can be made. ARCHITECTURAL ELEVATIONS ANALYSIS LDR Section 4.6.18(E) - Criteria for Board Action: The following criteria shall be considered, by the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board (SPRAB), in the review of plans for building permits. If the following criteria are not met, the application shall be disapproved. The plan or the proposed structure is in conformity with good taste, good design, and in general contributes to the image of the City as a place of beauty, spaciousness, harmony, taste, fitness, broad vistas, and high quality. 2. The proposed structure, or project, is in its exterior design and appearance of quality such as not to cause the nature of the local environment or evolving environment to materially depreciate in appearance and value. 3. The proposed structure, or project, is in harmony with the proposed developments in the general area, with the Comprehensive Plan, and with the supplemental criteria which may be set forth for the Board from time to time. The architectural design style utilized in the design of the proposed commercial development is an eclectic representation of a modern contemporary style with architectural design elements typically featured in the southeast Florida area. Four outbuildings have been located close to the South Federal Highway frontage with parking areas shielded behind the buildings. Two major anchor tenants for the development are located to the rear, opposite the main parking area. Six buildings are located towards the rear property line with the parking lot area facing Linton Boulevard. The concept of an eclectic style of architecture can be defined as the borrowing of various architectural styles to create a functional and cohesive look through color, texture, physical volumes and shapes. The style of Architecture of the proposed commercial development building is an eclectic cotemporary combination of the Caribbean style and colors with a renovated Old Florida Vernacular style of architecture. The architectural elevations include many features and design elements, such as: white translucent laminated glass with aluminum finish mullions, standing seam metal roof, manufactured stone, stucco texture, cantilever wire suspended overhangs, decorative medallions, suspended awnings, metal roofs, decorative wall mounted light fixtures, score lines, stucco texture finishes, smooth stucco banding around the windows, cornice finished flat roofs, various shapes of roofs including flat, arched, and asymmetric roof shapes, decorative brackets to support the roof of some portions of the buildings. Eight different colors are incorporated into the buildings of the commercial development including white, light yellow moonraker, light green, artichoke green, threshold taupe, light brown, robust orange, light blue scandal and van dyke dark brown. The proposed colors will help distinguish among different retail bays and portions of the proposed buildings. The proposed colors combined with different roof shapes and roof lines will create a visually attractive streetscape both along South Federal Highway and Linton Boulevard. The proposed commercial development is a high quality design product and will improve the aesthetics of this important double frontage site and will be in harmony with developments in the area; thus, positive findings can be made with respect to LDR Section 4.6.18 (E). SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 33 REQUIRED FINDINGS REQUIRED FINDINGS (Chapter 3): Pursuant to LDR Section 3.1.1 (Required Findings), prior to the approval of development applications, certain findings must be made in a form which is part of the official record. This may be achieved through information on the application, the staff report, or minutes. Findings shall be made by the body, which has the authority to approve or deny the development application. These findings relate to the following four areas. Future Land Use Map: Pursuant to Section 3.1.1(A), the resulting use of land or structures must be allowed in the zoning district within which the land is situated and said zoning must be consistent with the applicable land use designation as shown on the Future Land Use Map. The subject property has a Future Land Use Map (FLUM) designation of TRN (Transitional) and the proposed zoning designation is SAD (Special Activities District). Pursuant to the Land Use Designation /Zoning Matrix (Table L -7, Future Land Use Element), SAD Zoning is consistent with any land use designation on the Future Land Use Map. Pursuant to LDR Section 4.4.25(A) "Purpose and Intent' for the SAD zoning district, "While SAD zoning is deemed consistent with any land use designation on the Future Land Use Map, the uses allowed within a specific SAD shall be consistent with the land use category shown on the Future Land Use Map. The uses, activities, and characteristics of a SAD are to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, suitable and compatible with surrounding existing developments, and with the proposed character of the area. " Pursuant to LDR Section 4.4.25(8 )(1), -Allowed Uses and Structures ", all uses which are to be allowed in a particular SAD shall be established at the time of establishment of the SAD zoning designation through inclusion in the rezoning ordinance. Additional uses may be allowed after review and recommendation by the Planning and Zoning Board and approval by ordinance of the City Commission. The proposed SAD rezoning ordinance, prepared by the applicant, was amended to incorporate a list of the uses allowed within the SAD and the maximum intensity (square footage) of each use is controlled by the Shared Parking Analysis Matrix attached to the ordinance. Based upon the above, it is appropriate to make a positive finding with respect to consistency with the Future Land Use Map designation. CONCURRENCY: Pursuant to Section 3.1.1(B), facilities which are provided by, or through, the City shall be provided to new development concurrent with issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. These facilities shall be provided pursuant to levels of service established within the Comprehensive Plan. As described in Appendix "A ", a positive finding of concurrency can be made as it relates to water and sewer, streets and traffic, drainage, parks and recreation, open space, and solid waste. CONSISTENCY: Compliance with performance standards set forth in Article 3.2 and required findings in appropriate sections of LDR Section 2.4.5 shall be the basis upon which a finding of overall consistency is to be made. Other objectives and policies found in the adopted Comprehensive Plan may be used in making a finding of overall consistency. SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 34 As described in Appendix "B ", a positive finding of Consistency can be made as it relates to Standards for Site Plan Actions. A review of the objectives and policies of the adopted Comprehensive Plan was conducted and the following applicable objective and policy were found: Future Land Use Element Objective A -1: Property shall be developed or redeveloped in a manner so that the future use and intensify is appropriate in terms of soil, topographic and other applicable physical considerations, is complimentary to adjacent land uses and fulfills remaining land use needs. Since the subject property is already developed, soil, topographic and other applicable physical considerations do not have an impact on the appropriate development intensity. Ensuring that the proposed development will be complimentary to adjacent land uses and fulfill remaining land use needs is discussed below. Due to its close proximity to Interstate 95 and the Linton Boulevard Interchange, the Federal Highway 1 Linton Boulevard intersection is a prime location for destination shopping for goods and services. Commercial activity in Delray Beach has greatly expanded and this intersection has become a robust commercial hub. There are major developments on all four corners of the intersection: the Plaza at Delray Shopping Center at the northwest corner; the Old Harbour Plaza at the northeast corner; the Linton Tower and SunTrust Bank development at the southwest corner; and the Old Harbor Office and Bank Facility on the subject property at the southeast corner. While the subject property is zoned POC (Planned Office Center), all three of the other corners are zoned PC (Planned Commercial). Staff continues to support the property owner's proposal to redevelop the site as a high end shopping center, subject to the site plan adequately addressing the development's compatibility with adjacent residential development, and feels that a major retail center at this corner will anchor the South Federal Highway Redevelopment Area and encourage additional redevelopment. The POC zoning designation currently assigned to the property may have been adequate in the past, but office use at this location now represents an economically infeasible use of the property and current market trends indicate that a zoning designation which permits commercial development is more appropriate. Much of the office space in this project is currently vacant and the demand for office space has been marginal in this area. The City is currently promoting office development in the downtown area and in the "Innovation Corridor' along Congress Avenue in the MROC (Mixed Residential, Office and Commercial) zoning district. It would be better if this site did not compete with those initiatives. The proposed SAD zoning designation will allow development of a major commercial shopping center at this location. Since the site plan for the project will be included in the rezoning ordinance, compatibility with the adjacent Tropic Isles single - family residential development to the east can be assured at the time of the rezoning. It is not unusual for commercially zoned property to directly about single- family residential development since properly designed shopping centers can and do exist adjacent to residential development throughout the City. Residential and general commercial uses can be compatible and complimentary in that the commercial uses provide necessary goods and services for residential neighborhoods and the residents provide the market base to support the commercial uses. Key issues that needed to be addressed to ensure compatibility included the mix of uses, the level of intensity and appropriate buffering. As discussed below, the revised site plan has addressed these issues with a substantial reduction in building area, a decrease in the maximum potential restaurant area and an increase in open space on the site. Additional issues of compatibility are being addressed in the SAD ordinance. SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 35 Commercial Development Intensity Comparison Project Name Total Building Area Floor Area Ratio (Square Feet) [Total Building ArealTotal Land Area] Delray Place 116,580' 0.27 1801 -1845 South Federal Highway Plaza at Delray 293,327 0.19 1400 South Federal Highway Harbor Plaza 52,679 0.21 1725 South Federal Highway South Delray Shopping Center 91,402 0.24 3001 South Federal Highway Linton Center (Target) 206,008 0.24 1200 Linton Boulevard New Century Commons 89,164 0.23 500 Linton Boulevard Lavers International 88,376 0.24 660 Linton Boulevard To present a fair comparison, the building area does not include enclosed loading areas, which are not normally provided. The applicant has continued to work with staff and the neighboring residents to mitigate the impacts of the proposed development. While not everyone is completely happy, significant strides have been made to and the revised site plan represents a significant reduction in building area from the prior submittal. The parapets on the back of the buildings adjacent to the single family lots on McCleary Street have been eliminated to reduce the overall height of the buildings to 18 feet in order to be more compatible. The trees in this area have been selected to ft in the narrow setback area and the applicant has agreed to a request by the adjacent residents to provide areca palms between the trees along the rear property lines to provide a more effective screen of the buildings. The developer has also agreed to provide sound baffles along the south side of the 500 -504 building and along the north side of the 506 -510 building to mitigate the noise from trucks in this area. Staff concurs with the necessity of this sound mitigation and recommends that it be expanded to include the east side of the 500 -504 building. This has been added as a condition of approval. The previous elimination of the doors in the rear of the 600 -900 buildings for loading functions and enclosing the outdoor dining areas between the buildings addressed staff's previous concern that noise would impact the adjacent homes; and the revised SAD ordinance does not permit live outdoor entertainment in this area. Although pre - recorded music is allowed, it shall not exceed City noise limits for properties adjacent to single- family residential zoned districts and shall terminate no later than 10:00 pm daily. Future Land Use Element Policy C -7.72: The following pertains to the South Federal Highway area, south of Linton Boulevard. In Fiscal Year 201 CV11, the City's Planning & Zoning Department shall review existing land uses in this area and shall create a redevelopment plan, overlay district or other development tool to promote and guide future redevelopment of the area. The South Federal Highway Redevelopment Plan was adopted by the City Commission on September 20, 2012. Since the original rezoning application was submitted prior to adoption of the Redevelopment Plan, the current proposal for redevelopment of the subject property will not be required to comply with the Redevelopment Plan per se. However, if the current rezoning action does not go forward, any future redevelopment of the subject property will be required to comply with the Redevelopment Plan. It is noted that the Redevelopment Plan supports redevelopment of the subject property with a commercial shopping center development, subject to the site plan adequately addressing the SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 36 development's compatibility with adjacent residential development, and recommends the option for a privately- initiated rezoning by the property owners to SAD. While the PC zoning district would have allowed the proposed uses, the SAD zoning district, with its required site plan, provides the mechanism to ensure compatibility at the time of rezoning. Transportation Element Policy A -1.5: New residential projects over 25 units and nonresidential projects over 10,000 square feet adjacent to existing or future Palm Tran bus stops shall provide an easement and install a city- approved bus shelter on site. If the project is not adjacent to a bus stop, or a bus shelter already exist, a contribution shall be made to the City in -lieu of providing the bus shelter on site. The applicant must work with the Engineering Department to determine if a mass transmit easement should be provided along South Federal Highway. If so, this must be depicted on the site plan, landscape plan, and civil engineering plans. If the project is not adjacent to a bus stop a contribution of approximately one -half the cost of a bus shelter must be paid in -lieu of providing the bus shelter on site. This has been added as a condition of approval and must be addressed prior to site plan certification. Subject to it being addressed at that time, the development will comply with Transportation Element Policy A -1.5. COMPLIANCE WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS: Items identified in the Land Development Regulations shall specifically be addressed by the body taking final action on the site and development applicationfrequest. As described under the Site Plan Analysis of this report, a positive finding of compliance with the LDRs can only be made when all outstanding items attached as conditions of approval are addressed and the requested waivers are either approved or the plans are modified to eliminate the need for said waivers. Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.5(F)[5], In additions to provisions of Chapter Three, the approving body must make a finding that development of the property pursuant to the site plan will be compatible and harmonious with adjacent and nearby properties and the City as a whole, so as not to cause substantial depreciation of property values. The following table identifies the zoning designations and uses that are adjacent to the subject property: Since a rezoning to SAD is linked to a site plan at the time of rezoning, the specific uses are known and compatibility with adjacent and nearby land uses can be assured at that time. This is a unique situation which only occurs with this zoning district. Staff supports SAD zoning at this location, because of this uniqueness. The SAD can be tailored to the situation, allowing both appropriate and compatible commercial development. With this in mind, the compatibility of SAD zoning is entirely dependent on the SAD rezoning ordinance and the associated site plan. As stated earlier in this report, the revised site plan and SAD ordinance have undergone Adjacent Zoning: Adjacent Land Uses: North PC (Planned Commercial) and RM 0 I Harbor Shopping Plaza and Harbors Edge (Multiple Family Residential) Multiple family Residential Development West PC (Planned Commercial) SunTrust Bank and Burger King East R- 1 -AA -B (Single Family Residential) and Tropic Isles Single Family Residential CD (Conservation District) Development South PC (Planned Commercial) & R- 1 -AA -B Tropic Square Shopping Center and Tropic Isles (Single Family Residential) Residential Development Since a rezoning to SAD is linked to a site plan at the time of rezoning, the specific uses are known and compatibility with adjacent and nearby land uses can be assured at that time. This is a unique situation which only occurs with this zoning district. Staff supports SAD zoning at this location, because of this uniqueness. The SAD can be tailored to the situation, allowing both appropriate and compatible commercial development. With this in mind, the compatibility of SAD zoning is entirely dependent on the SAD rezoning ordinance and the associated site plan. As stated earlier in this report, the revised site plan and SAD ordinance have undergone SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 37 significant modifications to increase compatibility with the adjacent residential development to the east. With these modifications and compliance with the additional conditions of approval contained in this staff report, a positive finding with respect to Section 2.4.5(F){5} can be made. REVIEW BY OTHERS The development proposal is not within a geographical area requiring review by the DDA (Downtown Development Authority) or CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency). Courtesy Notices: A special courtesy notice was provided to the following homeowners and/or civic organizations: ■ Neighborhood Advisory Council ■ Delray Citizen's Coalition • Tropic Isle Civic Association ■ Banyan Tree Village ■ Domain Delray ■ Harbour's Edge ■ Harbourside Public Notices: • Linton Woods • Pelican Pointe • Pelican Harbor • Spanish Trail Condo • Tropic Bay • Tropic Harbor Formal public notice has been provided to property owners within a 500' radius of the subject property. A substantial number of emails and letters have been received and are attached to this staff report. Other letters of objection and/or support, if any, will be presented at the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board (SPRAB) meeting. ASSESSMENT AND CONCLUSION Staff continues to support the property owner's proposal to redevelop the site as a high end shopping center, subject to the site plan adequately addressing the development's compatibility with adjacent residential development, and feels that a major retail center at this corner will anchor the South Federal Highway Redevelopment Area and encourage additional redevelopment. The proposed SAD zoning designation will allow development of a major commercial shopping center at this location. Since the site plan for the project will be included in the rezoning ordinance, compatibility with the adjacent Tropic Isles single - family residential development to the east can be assured at the time of rezoning. Key issues that needed to be addressed with the revised site plan to ensure compatibility included the mix of uses, the level of intensity and appropriate buffering. The currently proposed site plan for Delray Place has adequately addressed these issues subject to conditions of approval and approval of six waivers. The required positive findings cannot be made for one of the landscape waivers (elimination of 5 landscape islands in the parking lot) and the plans must be modified to add those landscape islands. As stated earlier, a commercial shopping center is the best use of this property and it will be a catalyst for redevelopment of the South Federal Highway corridor. There are still a number of outstanding issues that will be addressed as conditions of approval, including a number of Landscape and Engineering items. SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 38 ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS A. Move postponement of the waivers, Class V site plan, landscape plan and architectural elevations for Delray Place, by electing to continue with direction. B. Move approval of the waivers, Class V site plan, landscape plan and architectural elevations for Delray Place, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and meets the criteria set forth in Sections 2.4.5(F)(5), 2.4.7(B)(5) and Chapter Three of the Land Development Regulations, subject to the attached conditions of approval. C. Move denial of the waivers, Class V site plan, landscape plan and architectural elevations for Delray Place, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan and does not meet the criteria set forth in Sections 2.4.5(F)(5), 2.4.7(B)(5) and Chapter Three of the Land Development Regulations. [Motion to be stated in the affirmative] STAFF RECOMMENDATION By Separate Motions: Waivers 1. Recommend approval to the City Commission of a waiver to LDR Section 4.4.25(D)(1), for pavement encroachment into the required 15' perimeter setback for the SAD zoning district, for the driveway /parking aisle along Linton Boulevard and the outdoor dining area along the south side of the 400 building, based on positive findings with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(8)(5). 2. Move approval of a waiver to LDR Section 4.3.4(H)(6)(b)(1), to reduce the required 25 foot special landscape buffer along South Federal Highway to 15 feet, based on positive findings with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5). 3. Move approval of a waiver to LDR Section 4.3.4(H)(6)(b)(4), to reduce the required special landscape buffer along Linton Boulevard from the required 15.5 and 30 feet to 9 feet, based positive findings with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5). 4. Recommend approval to the City Commission of a waiver to LDR Section 4.6.9(D)(3)(c), Stacking Distance, to reduce the required 50 foot stacking distance between a right -of -way and the first parking space or aisle way in a parking lot to twenty-seven (27) feet for the two entrances on Linton Boulevard and thirty -three (33) feet for the entrance on Eve Street, based on positive findings with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(8)(5). 5a. Move denial of a waiver to LDR Section 4.6.16(H)(3)(i), requiring landscape islands to be placed at intervals of no less than one landscaped island for every thirteen (13) standard parking spaces or fifteen (15) compact parking spaces, based on a failure to make positive findings with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(8)(5). Five (5) required landscape islands are not being provided. (Motion to be stated in the affirmative) 5b. Move approval of a waiver to LDR Section 4.6.16(H)(3)(i), requiring landscape islands which contain a minimum of one hundred thirty -five (135) square feet of planting area, with a minimum dimension of nine (9) feet, exclusive of the required curb, based on positive findings with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(8)(5). Thirteen (13) islands are being reduced from 9 feet to 8 feet (including 5 above in proposed waiver 5a.) and Four SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 39 (4) islands are being reduced in size from a minimum of 135 square feet to a minimum 100 square feet. 6. Move approval of a waiver to LDR Section 1.6.16(H )(3 )(k), requiring a 5' landscape strip with a two foot hedge to be placed between abutting parking tiers, to allow sidewalks to be placed in two required landscape strips, based on positive findings with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(8 )(5). Site Plan: Move approval of the Class V site plan for Delray Place, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and meets the criteria set forth in Section 2.4.5(F)(5) and Chapter Three of the Land Development Regulations, subject to the following conditions: The building at the corner of Linton and Federal Highway shall be eliminated or reduced in size to provide a vista into the property and allow for additional parking. 2. Add sight visibility triangles where missing and modify the Site, Landscape and Engineering plans as required to depict the correct site visibility triangles. 3. A note shall be placed on the site plan that all existing and proposed utilities associated with the development must be located underground. 4. The signs depicted on the site plan are not included with this site plan approval. 5. The developer shall work with the Engineering Department to determine if a mass transmit easement should be provided along South Federal Highway. If so, this must be depicted on the site plan, landscape plan, and civil engineering plans. If the project is not adjacent to a bus stop, a contribution of approximately one -half the cost of a bus shelter must be paid in -lieu of providing the bus shelter on site. 6. The property must be replatted and the plat must be recorded prior to the issuance of a building permit. 7. Satisfy the Preliminary Engineering Technical Items identified in "Appendix C" of the staff report prior to site plan certification. 8. CCTV technology should be incorporated into the project. The applicant shall work with the police department to ensure compliance. 9. Light fixtures used in the parking lot shall be changed to LED as they provide the best light with the least amount of glare. Wire cages or industrial strength shatter resistant lenses be placed over the light to deter vandalism. The photometric plan and other plans that may be affected must be revised to comply with this requirement. 10. The developer will pay for the manufacture and installation of "no parking" signs along Eve Street. 11. If any of the uses in the Delray Place project requires an auxiliary power generator pursuant to the Specific Requirements for Specific Uses in LDR Section 4.3.3, the generator(s) shall not be located outside the building in the rear of the development adjacent to the residential neighborhood, unless located on the roof and appropriately screened. 12. The exhaust ports for any restaurant ventilation hood system in the 600 to 1100 buildings must be located on the roof and not in the rear wall facing the residential neighborhood. SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 40 13. If the adjacent Tropic Square shopping center proposed cross access is not in place by the time the 1st major tenant in Delray Place buildings 500 -510 opens, then Delray Place shall by the date the first major tenant opens, install an island that restricts exiting traffic to right -turn only onto Eve Street, which shall stay in place until the date that the Tropic Square proposed cross access is built and in place, and at that time the island may be removed. 14. If approved by DOT, a no u -turn for trucks sign shall be placed at the intersection of Federal Highway and Tropic Isle Boulevard. 15. Modify the SAD Ordinance to prohibit deliveries before 7:00 am or after 7:00 pm for any use in the 500 -510 buildings. 16. A parking utilization study must be prepared during the first peak season at least 6 months after receipt of the first certificate of occupancy to evaluate the adequacy of the parking. 17. An assessment must be made during the first peak season at least 6 months after receipt of the first certificate of occupancy to determine if the number of bike racks is adequate for the project. 18. The developer shall honor his commitment to meet with SFCS and SAFE to explore TDM initiatives that could alleviate parking demand at the shopping center. 19. It is recommended that the large landscaped area on the east side of the property be modified to provide opportunities for employees of the shopping center to use it as an outdoor break /lunch area (picnic tables) and for the children of customers to play (tot lot). 20. Sound baffles shall be provided along the south and east sides of the 500 -504 building and along the north side of the 506 -510 building to mitigate the noise from trucks in this area. 21. The landscape plan shall be modified to install areca palms between the shade trees along the rear property lines of the site adjacent to the single- family neighborhood. 22. Provide an updated letter from Palm Beach County that the project meets traffic concurrency based on the mix of uses in the revised site plan. Landscape Plan: Move approval of the landscape plan for Delray Place, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request is consistent with Section 4.6.16 of the Land Development Regulations, subject to the following conditions: 1. That all Landscape Plan Technical Items be addressed prior to certification of the site plan. 2. That the five missing landscape islands be provided. [Note. If the proposed waiver is approved by the Board, this condition can be eliminated] Architectural Elevations: Move approval of the architectural elevations for Delray Place, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request meets the criteria set forth in Section 4.6.18(E) of the Land Development Regulations. Attachments: ■ Appendix 'A" SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 41 • Appendix "B" • Appendix "C" • Location Map • Aerial • Reduced Plans • Parking Study and Support Documents • Public CommentslCorrespondence • SAO Rezoning Ordinance No. 41 -12 • Color Board SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 42 APPENDIX "A" CONCURRENCY FINDINGS Pursuant to Section 3.1.1(8), Facilities which are provided by, or through, the City shall be provided to new development concurrent with issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. These facilities shall be provided pursuant to levels of service established within the Comprehensive Plan. Water and Sewer: The site is already served by water and sewer service. Municipal water service is available via connection to a 12" water main located the east side of S. Federal Hwy., a 10" water main on Eve Street, and a 6" water main on the south side of Linton Boulevard. Fire protection is provided by two fire hydrants located on the south side of Linton Boulevard and one along the north side of Eve Street. Additional fire hydrants may be required and this was noted in the Fire Department's technical comments. Sewer service is available to the site via connection to an existing 8" sewer main which is located along on Eve Street. On site sewer main improvements will be considered as part of the site development approval process. Pursuant to the Comprehensive Plan, treatment capacity is available at the South Central County Waste Water Treatment Plant for the City at build -out. The Comprehensive Plan also states that adequate water and sewer treatment capacity exists to meet the adopted LOS at the City's build -out population based on the current Future Land Use Map. Thus, a positive finding with respect to this level of service standard can be made. Streets and Traffic: A traffic analysis report for the proposed development was prepared by TrafTech Engineering. The traffic report determined that the proposed redevelopment will generate a net increase of 4,817 Average Daily Trips (ADT), with a net reduction of 225 A.M. peak hour trips, and a net increase of 398 new P.M. peak hour trips. The report concluded that the adjacent street network has adequate available capacity to accommodate the project traffic associated with the Delray Place Project and that the project is not anticipated to negatively affect the roadway network located within the project study area. The applicant transmitted the traffic study to the Palm Beach County Traffic Division for review. Although a letter from Palm Beach County indicating that the project meets the Traffic Performance Standards of Palm Beach County has been provided, the mix and intensity of uses is not consistent with the current site plan. Since the intensities given in the letter exceed the current proposal, traffic concurrency can be met. Thus, a positive finding with respect to this level of service standard can be made. However, a revised letter will be required prior to certification of the site plan. Drainage: Engineering has requested that the applicant provide a signed and sealed drainage report indicating the proposed system's ability to meet storm water quality and quantity requirements in accordance with the South Florida Water Management District regulations per LDR Section 2.4.3 (❑)[7). In addition, the surface water management system needs to be designed in accordance with LID Section 6.1.9 for a minimum of a 10 yr. 1 24 hr. storm event. The system needs to provide for positive drainage of lots, streets, roads, and other public areas as well as handling any run -off from adjacent areas that historically flowed into the subject area. Include drainage calculations confirming that there will be no negative post development impacts on adjacent homes, structures or properties. The applicant has indicated that the drainage calculations will be provided at final engineering and show that the parking lot is designed to be protected from the 10 yr. 1 24 hr. storm event while maintaining the existing discharge from the site. Thus, a positive finding with respect to this level of service standard can be made. Parks and Open Space: Park dedication requirements do not apply for non - residential uses. Thus, the proposed development will not have an impact with respect to this level of service standard. The 25% minimum open space requirement for the project has been met. SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 43 Schools: School concurrency findings do not apply for non - residential uses. Thus, the proposed development will not have an impact with respect to this level of service standard. Solid Waste. As shown on the following table, the proposed redevelopment of the property will result in a net increase of 618.4 tons per year in solid waste generation. In its annual capacity letter, dated January 6, 2012, the Solid Waste Authority indicates that it has sufficient capacity for concurrency management and comprehensive planning purposes. As stated in the letter, "Capacity is available for both the coming year, and the five and ten year planning periods specified in 9J- 5- 005(4)." Based on population projections, waste generation rate projections, waste reduction, and recycling, the Solid Waste Authority forecasts that capacity will be available at the existing landfill through approximately the year 2047. Thus, a positive finding with respect to this level of service standard can be made. Solid Waste Generation Delray Place Existing Development Proposed Development 56,515 SF General Office @ 5.4 Ibslsf = 152.6 tons/year 80,310 SF Retail @10.2 Ibslsf = 409.6 tons/year 29,366 5F Medical Office @ 4.6 Ibslsf = 67.5 36,270 SF Potential Restaurants @ 24.9 Ibslsf = tons/year 451.6 tons/year 4,459 SF Retail @ 10.2 Ibslsf = 22.7 tons/year Total: 242.8 tons/year Total: 861.2 tons/year SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place — Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 44 APPENDIX "B" STANDARDS FOR SITE PLAN ACTIONS A. Building design, landscaping and fighting (glare) shall be such that they do not create unwarranted distractions or blockage of visibility as it pertains to traffic circulation. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X Does not meet intent B. Separation of different forms of transportation shall be encouraged. This includes pedestrians, bicyclists and vehicles in a manner consistent with policies found under Objectives D -1 and D -2 of the Transportation Element. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X Does not meet intent C. Open space enhancements as described in Policies found under Objective B -1 of the Open Space and Recreation Element are appropriately addressed. Not applicable X Meets intent of standard Does not meet intent D. The City shall evaluate the effect that any street widening or traffic circulation modification may have upon an existing neighborhood. if it is determined that the widening or modification will be detrimental and result in a degradation of the neighborhood, the project shall not be permitted. Not applicable X Meets intent of standard Does not meet intent E. Development of vacant land which is zoned for residential purposes shall be planned in a manner which is consistent with adjacent development regardless of zoning designations. Not applicable X Meets intent of standard Does not meet intent SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 45 F. Property shall be developed or redeveloped in a manner so that the future use and intensity are appropriate in terms of soil, topographic, and other applicable physical considerations; complementary to adjacent land uses; and fulfills remaining land use needs. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X- Subject to conditions of approval. Does not meet intent G. Redevelopment and the development of new land shall result in the provision of a variety of housing types which shall continue to accommodate the diverse makeup of the City's demographic profile, and meet the housing needs identified in the Housing Element. This shall be accomplished through the implementation of policies under Objective B -2 of the Housing Element. Not applicable X Meets intent of standard Does not meet intent H. The City shall consider the effect that the proposal will have on the stability of nearby neighborhoods. Factors such as noise, odors, dust, traffic volumes and circulation patterns shall be reviewed in terms of their potential to negatively impact the safety, habitability and stability of residential areas. if it is determined that a proposed development will result in a degradation of any neighborhood, the project shall be modified accordingly or denied. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X- Subject to conditions of approval. Does not meet intent 1. Development shall not be approved if traffic associated with such development would create a new high accident location, or exacerbate an existing situation causing it to become a high accident location, without such development taking actions to remedy the accident situation. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X Does not meet intent J. Tot lots and recreational areas, serving children from toddler to teens, shall be a feature of all new housing developments as part of the design to accommodate households having a range of ages. This requirement may be waived or modified for residential developments located in the downtown area, and for infill projects having fewer than 25 units. Not applicable X Meets intent of standard Does not meet intent SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 46 APPENDIX "C" PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING TECHNICAL ITEMS 1. Provide a response letter with a detailed description of how each of these comments has been addressed and reference plans sheet number for accurate review. 2. The Survey, Site, Landscaping and Civil Plans need to be at the same scale. All plans needs to be drawn on 24" x 36" sheets and at a scale of 1" = 10', 1" = 20' or 1" = 30' per LDR Section 2.4.3 (B) (1) and (D) (1). A proper Engineering review cannot be done at a 1" = 50' scale. 3. Please coordinate location of all existing and proposed easements on Site, Civil, Landscape and Composite Utility Plans. Existing and proposed easement locations and labeling needs to be consistent on all plans. Please label easement on all plans. 4. Clearly indicate all improvements which are proposed and which are existing. 5. Rename proposed water and sewer main easements to "Water Easement" and "Sewer Easement ", respectively, remove "main ". 6. Clearly indicate location of drainage connection to off -site system on Linton Boulevard 7. Indicate sight distances at all ingress /egress points and all intersections. Sight triangles must be indicated on Landscape and Engineering plans per LDR Section 4.6.14. All visual obstructions within the site visibility shall provide unobstructed cross- visibility at a level between 3 -feet and 6 -feet, this includes tree trunks. Sight triangles are to be measured from the edge of pavement for driveways and from the ultimate right -of -way line for alleys and streets. 8. Indicate sight visibility triangles in accordance with the FDOT Design Standard Index 546, Sight Distance at applicable FDOT intersections. 9. Provide a minimum 10 -foot General Utility Easement (GUE) through the property for all other utilities. This GUE is not allowed in public right -of -way. Water, sewer or drainage system(s) cannot occupy or share this GUE. 10. Indicate location of required F P L easements. 11. Palm Beach County permit(s) or permit modification through the Traffic Division required for this project per LDR Section 2.4.2 (C) (2) (d). Provide documentation indicating applicant has met with Palm Beach County regarding proposed project. Actual copies of the drainage and utility permits must be submitted prior to any building permit issuance. 12. Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) permit(s) required for this project per LDR Section 2.4.2 (C) (2) (c). Submit copy of FDOT pre - application letter. Actual copies of the drainage, driveway and utility permits must be submitted prior to any building permit issuance. 13. Provide Demolition Plans at a scale to match civil plans. Include any underground utilities to be removed or abandoned in place. Provide notes that state the disposition of all existing facilities including service lines and cleanouts. 14. Clearly dimension driveway width on civil plans. SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 47 15. Provide note that parking layout and striping needs to follow City of Delray Beach current standards. Provide latest Parking Lot Detail RT 4.1 and Typical Parking Space Details RT 4.2 A thru C, as applicable on Civil Plans. On plan view, indicate double striping at parking spaces. 16. Provide finished floor elevation. In accordance with LDR Section 7.1.3 {B} (2), if finished floor elevation is less than 18- inches above centerline of adjacent road, but above the 100 - year storm or National Flood Insurance minimum elevations, then a letter is required from a professional registered engineer certifying that the drainage conditions have been investigated and the proposed floor elevation is above the flooding level. It must be shown that the property will have adequate drainage to ensure that flooding will not occur in a 100 - year, 3 -day storm event. 17. Provide finish floor elevations for nearest adjacent structures 1 buildings abutting all property boundaries on civil plans. 18. Provide signed and sealed drainage report indicating the proposed system's ability to meet storm water qualit and quantit requirements in accordance with the South Florida Water Management District regulations per LDR Section 2.4.3 (D) (7). In addition, the surface water management system needs to be designed in accordance with LDR Section 6.1.9 for a minimum of a 10 yr./24 hr. storm event. The system needs to provide for positive drainage of lots, streets, roads, and other public areas as well as handling any run -off from adjacent areas that historically flowed into the subject area. Include drainage calculations confirming that there will be no negative post development impacts on adjacent homes, structures or properties. 19. Show nearest existing drainage structures per LDR Section 2.4.3 (D) (3) on civil plans. 20. Provide drainage easements for all proposed private drainage systems in accordance with LDR Section 5.3.4. 21. Location of existing 12" water main on Federal Highway will need to be confirmed. It is advised to determine the exact location of this line since City has been unable to locate in the past. 22. On Eve Street, indicate proposed fire connection will be a straight run into DDCV, no 90 degree bends. 23. At intersection of Eve Street and Spanish Trail, indicate a new sanitary sewer manhole will be installed, outside drop connection not possible at existing manhole. 24. Indicate a Hydro Guard automatic flusher will be installed at hydrant end for all hydrant leads greater that 50 -feet (only for hydrants on a dead end line). 25. Confirm location of two 6" water mains running perpendicular to Linton Boulevard, only one line exist. 26. Indicate existing 6" water main running parallel to Linton Boulevard will be extend in order to provide straight service connections to Building 900. 27. Confirm a sanitary sewer cleanout is provided a maximum distance of 18- inches from the easement line, two locations identified, refer to service line close to McCleary Street. SPRAB Staff Report: Meeting of March 13, 2013 Delray Place - Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Waivers Page 48 28. Please revise sanitary sewer design at proposed Buildings 500 and 600, sanitary sewer mains need to be at least 10' away from building foundations. 29. Provide updated signed and sealed calculations indicating current and proposed estimated flows into existing system. Submit to my attention at the Engineering Division. Upon review and approval, a letter from the Deputy Director of Public Utilities stating that the City's system has sufficient capacity to treat proposed flows will be issued. This is a requirement in accordance with LDR Section 5.3.3 (D) for the Off -Site Impact Assessment to the City's water and sewer systems. 30. Provide a Composite Utility Plan signed by a representative of each utility provider attesting to the fact that services (water, sewer, drainage, gas, power, telephone and cable) can be accommodated as shown on the Composite Utility Plan. The Composite Utility Plan needs to address the responsibility for relocation of existing services and installation of new services in accordance with LDR Section 2.4.3 (F) (4). Composite Utility Plan is also used to ensure physical features do not conflict with each other and existing or proposed utility services. 31. Indicate City approved bus shelter and mass transit easement will be provided per City of Delray Beach Comprehensive Plan, Policy A -1.5. New residential projects with over 25 units and nonresidential projects over 10,000 square feet which are adjacent to existing or future Palm Tran bus stops are required to provide an easement and install a City approved bus shelter on site. If the project is not adjacent to a bus stop or a bus shelter already exist, a contribution made to the City in -lieu of providing the bus shelter on site is required. 32. If bus shelter is required, please indicate on plans a City approved bus shelter will be installed in accordance with Palm Tran and ADA requirements (e.g. 5' x 8' landing area, 30' from intersection, direct access to site, etc.). 33. Submit revised plans and any required documentation for Preliminary Engineering review with next submittal. Please ensure a complete set is provided for the City of Delray Beach Engineering Division and indicate which documents are for the Engineering Division. 34. Additional comments may follow after review of revised plans. I I � 5 LEWS COVE CENTRAL AVE. S.E. 12TH RD. r BROOKS W. C,7 x WHITE DR. a` i I k RHODES -VILLA AVE- } � BANYAN .� TREE LANE �q DEL -HAVEN D . Ld 1z' Q L I N T 0 N H 0 U L E V A R ¢ � D z z d L; WC CLEARY S 7�= DEL- HARBOUR DR, EVE STREET DIE J � � Q � F D TROPIC BOULEVARD Ln J Q O W CJ W Q W SOLENDER STREET w F BER uD } RO 0 Uptivi ALLAMAR A a BANYAN DRIVE CYPRESS DRIVE I SUBJECT PROPERTY DEL RAY PLACE PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT LOCATION MAP -- DfGITAL BASE AMP SYSTEM -- MAP REF: 5:\Planning do Zomriq\DBMS\FI- Ca6\Z -LM 1001- 150D\LM1310 Delray Place r 11 I M'l I 3 f N A Ai M'l I 3 f N A It N 3- - I