Ord 23-99 FAILED ON FIRST READING - JULY 6, 1999
ORDINANCE NO. 23- 99
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING SECTION 4.4.13,
"CENTRAL BUSINESS (CBD) DISTRICT", SUBSECTION (G),
"SUPPLEMENTAL DISTRICT REGULATIONS", AND SECTION
4.6.9, "OFF-STREET PARKING REGULATIONS",
SUBSECTION 4.6.9{E), "LOCATION OF PARKING SPACES",
OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS OF THE CITY OF
DELRAY BEACH, TO AMEND PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR
RESTAURANTS IN THE CENTRAL BUSINESS (CBD)
DISTRICT; PROVIDING A GENERAL REPEALER CLAUSE, A
SAVING CLAUSE, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, pursuant to LDR Section 1.1.6, the Planning and
Zoning Board reviewed the proposed text amendments at a public
hearing on June 21, 1999, and voted 5 to 2 to forward a
recommendation that the changes not be adopted; and
WHERrieS, the City Commission has determined and finds that
the proposed text amendments are consistent with and further the
objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That Chapter Four, "Zoning Regulations",
Article 4.4, "Base Zoning District", Section 4.4.13, "Central
Business (CBD) District", Subsection 4.4.13(G), "Supplemental
District Regulations", and Article 4.6, "Supplemental District
Regulations", Subsection 4.6.9(E), "Location of Parking Spaces", of
the Land Development Regulations of the City of Delray Beach,
Florida, be, and the same are hereby amended as set forth in Exhibit
"~' attached hereto and made a part hereof.
Section 2. That all ordinances or parts of ordinances in
conflict herewith be, and the same are hereby repealed.
Section 3. 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 4. That this ordinance shall become effective
immediately upon its passage on second and final reading.
PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session on second and final
reading on this the day of , 1999.
MAYOR
ATTEST:
City Clerk
First Reading: July 6, 1999
Second Reading:
EXHIBIT "A" to ORD. NO. 23-99
AMENDMENT 1:
Section 4.4.13 Central Business (CBD) District:
(G) Supplemental District Regulations: In addition to the supplemental district
regulations as set forth in Article 4.6, except as modified below, the following shall also
apply.
(1) Parking:
(a) Within that portion of the CBD bounded by Swinton Avenue on the
west, N.E. 1st Street on the north, the Intracoastal Waterway on the
east and S.E. 1st Street on the south, parking requirements shall apply
to new floor area and restaurants only. Except for restaurants,
changes C,,ha,o, ges in use (both residential and non-residential) shall not
be required to provide additional on-site parking. The parking required
for the creation of new non-residential floor area, except restaurants
shall be at the rate of one space for each 300 square feet, or fraction
thereof, of floor area in addition to the replacement of any previously
required parking which may be eliminated. Within all other geographic
areas of the CBD Zone District, the provisions of Section 4.6.9(C) shall
apply, as further modified within this Subsection (G)(1).
(f) Off-site parking lots in which, there exists an off-site parking agreement
providing for an easement, lease or license for such use may be used
to meet 25% of the required parking for changes in use, additions or
new construction for restaurants pursuant to subsections 4.6.9(E)(4),
4.6.9(E)(5) and the following provisions:
(1) If the off-site parking lot is located within 300' of the restaurant, the
restaurant is not required to provide a valet service; and,
(2) If the off-site parking lot is located between 300' and 1000' of the
restaurant, the restaurant is required to provide a valet service a
minimum of 3 nights per week, including Friday and Saturday night;
and,
(3) The number of parking spaces provided in the off-site parking lot(s)
must satisfy the additional parking requirements for the use as well
as compensate for the loss of on-street spaces in the queue; and,
(4) When in-lieu fees are used to meet a portion of the parking
requirements, the 25% credit shall not be rounded up or down to
the nearest whole space (e.g. 5 spaces x 25% = 1.25 spaces).
(g) Off-site parking lots may be used to meet 100% of the required parking
for changes in use, additions or new construction for restaurants in
accordance with Section 4.6.9(E)(4) and the following provisions:
(1) The parking lot is owned by the same entity that owns the
restaurant, and the property owner has recorded a restrictive
covenant related to the parking lot proPerty, in a form acceptable to
the City Attorney's Office, that provides that a certain number of
parking spaces will be used solely for the restaurant and that if the
parking lot is ever sold separately from the restaurant, the
restaurant must immediately comply with the City's current
Ordinances regarding parking; and,
(2) A valet service must be provided for the entire time that the
restaurant is open for business, unless the off-site parking lot is
located within 300' of the restaurant; and,
(3) The parking lot must be located within 1000' of the restaurant.
AMENDMENT 2:
Section 4.6.9 Off-Street Parking Regulations:
(E) Location of Parking Spaces:
(4) Off-Site Parking: In instances where uses do not have sufficient
space to accommodate customer and employee parking demands, parking
requirements may be provided off-site in accordance with the following
(a) Normal Operations: Parking for day-to-day operation
may be provided on other property within three hundred feet
(300') or within one thousand feet (1,000') in the Central
Business District for restaurants providing valet parking
services, provided that both properties are of the same
general type of zone designation (i.e. commercial, industrial,
office, etc.) or when the off-site parking site is zoned CF and
a conditional use approval for use as a parking lot has been
approved, and when in compliance with, and pursuant to,
the following:
(1) The 300' distance or 1,000' distance, if applicable,
shall be measured along an acceptable pedestrian
route;
2
(2) Approval of such off-site parking may be granted by
the body, which has approval authority of the related
site and development plan;
(3) An off-site parking agreement providing for an
easement, lease or a license for such use is prepared
pursuant to Subsection (E)(5) and either an easement
or a memorandum of off-site parking agreement is
recorded prior to certification of the site and
development plan. However, if the off-site parking lot
is owned by the same entity that owns the restaurant
and the property owner has recorded a restrictive
covenant related to the parking lot property, in a form
acceptable to the City Attorney's Office, that provides
that a certain number of parking spaces will be used
solely for the restaurant and that if the parking lot is
ever sold separately from the restaurant, the
restaurant must immediately comply with the City's
current Ordinances regarding parking, then an
agreement will not be required;
(4) The provision of the parking easement, lease or
license shall not diminish the ability of the property
upon which it is placed, to accommodate its required
parking.
building '"~;~ +~ .... ~; ...... ;~ intended +~ "~ ' ..... the p2rk!ng
(5) Off-site Parking Agreement and Other Requirements: The
owner of the principal use or building (including the land on which it is situated),
shall be allowed to locate on-site parking requirements on off-site locations
pursuant to Section 4.6.9(E) provided the owner enters into an off-site parking
agreement enforceable by the City and an easement, lease or license with the
owner(s) of the alternate off-street parking area which contains a minimum of the
following terms and as otherwise approved as to form by the City Attorney. The
owner of the principal use or building shall:
(a) Enter into an off-site parking agreement with the owner of
the alternate parking site with enforcement also running to
the City; and
(b) Enter into an easement, lease or license for alternative
parking locations in accordance with Section 4.6.9(E); and
(c) Provide an easement or provide a memorandum of the off-
site parking agreement to be recorded in the public records
by the City Clerk with expenses of recording and release to
be borne by the owner. The memorandum shall provide
notice of the parking requirements and of the off-site parking
agreements; and
(d) Submit to the City a copy of the lease or license and provide
annual notice of its effective dates if a lease or license is
used to secure off-site parking; and
(e) Provide that the easement, lease or license shall be in full
force and effect for as long as the principal use requiring the
off-site parking exists; and
(f) Cease the principal use in the event the lease or license
expires, is terminated or is unenforceable or the easement
or memorandum of off-site parking agreement is not
recorded; and
(g) Tender to the City sufficient in-lieu parking fees as provided
by Section 4.6.9(E)(3) or enter into an in-lieu fee agreement
with the City in accordance with the amount and payment
schedules allowed by Section 4.6.9(E)(3) if the owner fails to
secure a current, valid and enforceable easement, lease or
license within thirty days of the expiration or termination of
an easement, lease or license; and
(h) Be subject to the condition that if owner fails to tender in-lieu
of fees or enter into an in-lieu fee agreement with the City
within forty-five (45) days of the cessation of the easement,
lease or license, or fails to tender the required amount of the
in lieu-fees in accordance with Section 4.6.9(E)(3), the
4
owner shall immediately provide parking on site or cease
operation.
However, if the off-site parking lot is owned by the same entity that owns
the restaurant and the property owner has recorded a restrictive covenant
related to the parking lot property, in a form acceptable to the City Attorney's
Office, that provides that a certain number of parking spaces will be used solely
for the restaurant and that if the parking lot is ever sold separately from the
restaurant, the restaurant must immediately comply with the City's current
Ordinances regarding parking, then an agreement will not be required.
MEETING OF: JUNE 21, 1999
AGENDA ITEM: V.B. AMENDMENT TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT
REGULATIONS (LDRs) DEALING WITH THE PARKING
REQUIREMENTS FOR RESTAURANTS IN THE CBD.
The item before the Board is that of making a recommendation to the City Commission
on amendment of Section 4.4.13(G) Supplemental District Regulations, CBD and
Section 4.6.9(E) Location of Parking Spaces of the Land Development Regulations
(LDRs). The affected sections pertain to the subject of parking requirements for
restaurants in the CBD.
Pursuant to LDR Section 1.1.6, amendments to the Land Development Regulations
may not be made until a recommendation is obtained from the Planning and Zoning
Board.
The parking requirement for restaurants in the original DDA area is only 1 space per
300 square feet regardless of use. Therefore, conversions of existing floor area to more
intensive uses do not require additional parking. Restaurants also enjoy a reduced
standard in the remaining portions of the CBD with a requirement of only 6 spaces per
1,000 sq. ft. of building area. This is one-half the city's normal requirement. These
liberal parking requirements have helped to fuel the revitalization of the downtown area.
'However, the success of the downtown as an entertainment district with restaurants
and clubs has also significantly increased the demand for off-street parking and few
new spaces have become available to meet this new demand. Late last year, a
proposal was made by the Parking Management Advisory Board to increase the
parking requirement for restaurants in the original DDA area to 6 spaces per 1,000 sq.
ft. The proposed change was incorporated into an ordinance which also dealt with
increasing in-lieu parking fees. However, it was deleted from the in-lieu fee ordinance
so that the issues could be dealt with separately. The in-lieu fee ordinance was passed
earlier this year and fees were increased for the majority of the downtown area.
The Parking Management Advisory Board reviewed the restaurant parking issue again
at its meeting of February 23, 1999. The Board affirmed its original recommendation
and voted 7/0 to amend the regulations for the original DDA area to increase the
parking requirements from 1 space per 300 sq. ft. to 6 spaces per 1000 sq. ft. This
represents an increase of 2.67 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. Additionally, the requirement
would apply to future restaurant conversions. For example, if a 1,500 square foot retail
space is converted to a restaurant, the difference between the two requirements would
Planning and Zoning Board Memorandum Staff Report
Restaurant Parking Requirements in the CBD
Page 2
have to be provided to meet the increased parking demand. In this case, an additional
4 parking spaces would be required, (less the 1 space/one-time reduction when
available). Under the current codes, that additional parking is not required since the
requirement for all non-residential uses is the same (1 space/300 sq. ft.).
In order to give restaurants another avenue to meet the increased parking requirements
and reduce the financial burden of the increased in-lieu fees, staff proposes that a
credit be given to those restaurants that provide valet parking using off-site private
parking lots.
The proposed increase to the parking requirements applies only to restaurants in the
portion of the CBD bounded by Swinton Avenue on the west, N.E. 1st Street on the
north, the Intracoastal Waterway on the east and S.E. 1st Street on the south. The
success of the downtown as an entertainment district with restaurants and clubs has
significantly increased the demand for off-street parking. Based on the current success
of the downtown, it appears that a reduced parking requirement is no longer needed as
a redevelopment incentive. The proposed change requires restaurants in this area to
meet the same parking requirements as the rest of the CBD, OSSHAD and the West
Atlantic Avenue Redevelopment Area. The applicable rate is (6) spaces per 1,000 sq.
ft. of floor area. This is still one-half the normal code requirement for the rest of the city.
The requirement will be applied to changes in use as well as the construction of new
floor area. Under the proposed regulaticJns, restaurants will have to provide an
additional 2.67 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. than required under current code.
The use of off-site valet parking lots to off-set parking requirements is a logical
extension of the off-site parking provisions currently in the code. The advantage of this
system is that additional parking will be added to the supply immediately whereas
.payment of the in-lieu fee will provide additional parking sometime in the future.
However, two issues have been raised concerning how this system would work.
The first issue for discussion is the code provision dealing with the use of off-site
parking lots. The current code is too restrictive to be practical and would have to be
modified for this purpose. However, the monitoring and enforceability of off-site parking
agreements still needs to be considered. Although these concerns have been
addressed in the proposed amendments to the off-site parking regulations, the central
question of what the City would do as a final recourse for non-compliance with the
agreement should still be considered. Requiring that an established restaurant pay a
considerable in-lieu fee or close down should not be taken lightly. Monitoring for
compliance by code enforcement and the review of agreements and annual notices will
require a commitment of staff time and should also be considered.
The second issue for discussion is the methodology used to determine the parking
reduction. Issues include compensation for on-street public spaces lost to the valet
Planning and Zoning Board Memorandum Staff Report
Restaurant Parking Requirements in the CBD
Page 3
queue, the minimum number of days the service must run and the percentage
reduction.
The proposed amendments incorporate the following methodology:
1. The off-site valet parking lot must be located within 1,000 feet of the restaurant.
Staff has reviewed codes from several other municipalities and provisions exists to
allow off-site parking up to 1,000 feet for non-residential uses in the West Palm
Beach City Center and up to 700 feet in Ft. Lauderdale.
2. The valet service must operate a minimum of 3 nights per week, including Friday
and Saturday night.
3. The number of spaces provided in the off-site lot(s) must satisfy the parking
requirements for the use as well as compensate for the loss of on-street spaces in
the queue.
4. Restaurants meeting the above two provisions would get a credit for 25% of the
parking required for the change of use, addition or new construction.
5. Restaurants that own an off-site lot secured by a unity of title and which operate the
valet service during all hours of operation would get a credit for 100% of the parking
required.
Examples:
The examples assume that the parking requirements for restaurants is increased to 6
spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. To make the examples clearer, the one time 1-space reduction
has not be used. However, it would apply where applicable.
'1. A 500 sq. ft. restaurant addition would require 3 spaces. If it runs a valet service 3
nights a week, uses a valet queue of 4 spaces and has an off-site lot of 7 or more
spaces, it would get a credit of .75 spaces and pay an in-lieu fee for 2.25 spaces.
Note that under this program, the reduction is not rounded up or down. The actual
percentage is applied to the in-lieu fee. If the restaurant runs the service
continuously and owns the off-site lot, it would get full credit for the 3 spaces.
2. A 2,000 sq. ft. restaurant addition would require 12 parking spaces. If it runs a valet
service 3 nights a week, uses a valet queue of 4 spaces and has an off-site lot of 16
or more spaces, it would get a credit of 4 spaces and pay an in-lieu fee for 8 spaces.
If it runs the service continuously and owns the off-site lot, it would get full credit for
the 12 spaces.
3. A new 1,000 sq. ft. restaurant would require 6 parking spaces. If it runs a valet
service 3 nights a week, uses a valet queue of 4 spaces and has an off-site lot of 10
or more spaces, it would get a credit of 1.5 spaces and pay an in-lieu fee for 4.5
Planning and Zoning Board Memorandum Staff Report
Restaurant Parking Requirements in the CBD
Page 4
spaces. If it runs the service continuously and owns the off-site lot, it would get full
credit for the 6 spaces.
4. A 2,000 sq. ft. restaurant conversion would require an additional 6 parking spaces
(the difference between 1 space/300 and 6 spaces/1000). If it runs a valet service 3
nights a week, uses a valet queue of 4 spaces and has an off-site lot of 10 or more
spaces, it would get a credit of 1.5 spaces and pay an in-lieu fee for 4.5 spaces. If it
runs the service continuously and owns the off-site lot, it would get full credit for the
6 spaces.
5. A 6,000 sq. ft. restaurant conversion would require an additional 16 parking spaces
(the difference between 1 space/300 and 6 spaces/1000). If it runs a valet service 3
nights a week, uses a valet queue of 4 spaces and has an off-site lot of 20 or more
spaces, it would get a credit of 4 spaces and pay an in-lieu fee for 12 spaces. If it
runs the service continuously and owns the off-site lot, it would get full credit for the
16 spaces.
As is evident from these few examples, the incentive to use this program increases with
the size of the project. Smaller projects will probably not use the program unless they
involve an addition to an existing establishment which has enough business to benefit
from valet service.
The proposed amendments are as follows:
AMENDMENT 1:
Section 4.4.13 Central Business (CBD) District:
(G) Supplemental District Regulations: In addition to the supplemental district
'regulations as set forth in Article 4.6, except as modified below, the following shall also
apply.
(1) Parking:
(a) Within that portion of the CBD bounded by Swinton Avenue on the
west, N.E. 1st Street on the north, the Intracoastal Waterway on the
east and S.E. 1st Street on the south, parking requirements shall apply
to new floor area and restaurants only. Except for restaurants,
changes Gha,~je~ in use (both residential and non-residential) shall not
be required to provide additional on-site parking. The parking required
for the creation of new non-residential floor area, except restaurants
shall be at the rate of one space for each 300 square feet, or fraction
thereof, of floor area in addition to the replacement of any previously
required parking which may be eliminated. Within all other geographic
areas of the CBD Zone District, the provisions of Section 4.6.9(C) shall
apply, as further modified within this Subsection (G)(1).
Planning and Zoning Board Memorandum Staff Report
Restaurant Parking Requirements in the CBD
Page 5
(f) Off-site parking lots in which there exists an off-site parking agreement
providing for an easement, lease or license for such use may be used
to meet 25% of the required parking for changes in use, additions or
new construction for restaurants pursuant to subsections 4.6.9(E)(4),
4.6.9(E)(5) and the following provisions:
If the off-site parking lot is located within 300' of the restaurant, the
restaurant is not required to provide a valet service; and,
(2) If the off-site parking lot is located between 300' and 1000' of the
restaurant, the restaurant is required to provide a valet service a
minimum of 3 nights per week, including Friday and Saturday night;
and,
(3) The number of parking spaces provided in the off-site parking lot(s)
must satisfy the additional parking requirements for the use as well
as compensate for the loss of on-street spaces in the queue; and,
(4) When in-lieu fees are used to meet a portion of the parking
requirements, the 25% credit shall not be rounded up or down to
the nearest whole space (e.g. 5 spaces x 25% = 1.25 spaces).
(g) Off-site parking lots may be used to meet 100% of the required parking
for changes in use, additions or new construction for restaurants in
accordance with Section 4.6.9(E)(4) and the following provisions:
(1) The parking lot is owned by the same entity that owns the
restaurant, and the property owner has recorded a restrictive
covenant related to the parking lot property, in a form acceptable to
the City Attorney's Office, that provides that a certain number of
parking spaces will be used solely for the restaurant and that if the
parking lot is ever sold separately from the restaurant, the
restaurant must immediately comply with the City's current
Ordinances regarding parking; and,
(2) A valet service must be provided for the entire time that the
restaurant is open for business, unless the off-site parking lot is
located within 300' of the restaurant; and,
(3) The parking lot must be located within 1000' of the restaurant.
Planning and Zoning Board Memorandum Staff Report
Restaurant Parking Requirements in the CBD
Page 6
AMENDMENT 2:
Section 4.6.9 Off-Street Parking Regulations:
(E) Location of Parking Spaces:
(4) Off-Site Parking: In instances where uses do not have sufficient -
space to accommodate customer and employee parking demands, parking
requirements may be provided off-site in accordance with the following
(a) Normal Operations: Parking for day-to-day operation
may be provided on other property within three hundred feet
(300') or within one thousand feet (1,000') in the Central
Business District for restaurants providing valet parking
services, provided that both properties are of the same
general type of zone designation (i.e. commercial, industrial,
office, etc.) or when the off-site parking site is zoned CF and
a conditional use approval for use as a parking lot has been
approved, and when in compliance with, and pursuant to,
the following:
(1) The 300' distance or 1,000' distance, if applicable,
shall be measured along an acceptable pedestrian
route;
(2) Approval of such off-site parking may be granted by
the body, which has approval authority of the related
site and development plan;
(3) An off-site parking agreement providing for an
easement, lease or a license for such use is prepared
pursuant to Subsection (E)(5) and either an easement
or a memorandum of off-site parking agreement is
recorded prior to certification of the site and
development plan. However, if the off-site parking lot
is owned by the same entity that owns the restaurant
and the property owner has recorded a restrictive
covenant related to the parking lot property, in a form
acceptable to the City Attorney's Office, that provides
that a certain number of parking spaces will be used
solely for the restaurant and that if the parking lot is
ever sold separately from the restaurant, the
restaurant must immediately comply with the City's
current Ordinances regarding parking, then an
agreement will not be required;
Planning and Zoning Board Memorandum Staff Report
Restaurant Parking Requirements in the CBD
Page '7
(4) The provision of the parking easement, lease or
license shall not diminish the ability of the property
upon which it is placed, to accommodate its required
parking.
(5) Off-site Parking Agreement and Other Requirements: The
owner of the principal use or building (including the land on which it is situated),
shall be allowed to locate on-site parking requirements on off-site locations
pursuant to Section 4.6.9(E) provided the owner enters into an off-site parking
agreement enforceable by the City and an easement, lease or license with the
owner(s) of the alternate off-street parking area which contains a minimum of the
following terms and as otherwise approved as to form by the City Attorney. The
owner of the principal use or building shall:
(a) Enter into an off-site parking agreement with the owner of
the alternate parking site with enforcement also running to
the City; and
(b) Enter into an easement, lease or license for alternative
parking locations in accordance with Section 4.6.9(E); and
(c) Provide an easement or provide a memorandum of the off-
site parking agreement to be recorded in the public records
by the City Clerk with expenses of recording and release to
be borne by the owner. The memorandum shall provide
notice of the parking requirements and of the off-site parking
agreements; and
(d) Submit to the City a copy of the lease or license and provide
annual notice of its effective dates if a lease or license is
used to secure off-site parking; and
Planning and Zoning Board Memorandum Staff Report
Restaurant Parking Requirements in the CBD
Page 8
(e) Provide that the easement, lease or license shall be in full
force and effect for as long as the principal use requiring the
off-site parking exists; and
(f) Cease the principal use in the event the lease or license
expires, is terminated or is unenforceable or the easement
or memorandum of off-site parking agreement is not
recorded; and
(g) Tender to the City sufficient in-lieu parking fees as provided
by Section 4.6.9(E)(3) or enter into an in-lieu fee agreement
with the City in accordance with the amount and payment
schedules allowed by Section 4.6.9(E)(3) if the owner fails to
secure a current, valid and enforceable easement, lease or
license within thirty days of the expiration or termination of
an easement, lease or license; and
(h) Be subject to the condition that if owner fails to tender in-lieu
of fees or enter into an in-lieu fee agreement with the City
within forty-five (45) days of the cessation of the easement,
lease or license, or fails to tender the required amount of the
in lieu-fees in accordance with Section 4.6.9(E)(3), the
owner shall immediately provide parking on site or cease
operation.
However, if the off-site parking lot is owned by the same entity that owns
the restaurant and the property owner has recorded a restrictive covenant
related to the parking lot property, in a form acceptable to the City Attorney's
Office, that provides that a certain number of parking spaces will be used solely
for the restaurant and that if the parking lot is ever sold separately from the
restaurant, the restaurant must immediately comply with the City's current
Ordinances regarding parking, then an agreement will not be required.
REQUIRED FINDINGS
LDR Section 2.4.5(M)(5), Amendment to the Land Development Regulations,
Findings: In addition to the provisions of Section 1.1.6(A), the City Commission
must make a finding that the text amendment is consistent with and furthers the
Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan.
A review of the objectives and policies of the adopted Comprehensive Plan was
conducted and the following applicable policies were noted:
Planning and Zoning Board Memorandum Staff Report
Restaurant Parking Requirements in the CBD
Page 9
Future Land Use Element Policy C-4.1 The Central Business District (CBD) Zoning
District regulations shall facilitate and encourage rehabilitation and revitalization and
shall, at a minimum, address the following:
· deletion of inappropriate uses
· incentives for locating retail on the ground floor with office and residential use on
upper floors
· accommodating parking needs through innovative actions
· incentives for dinner theaters, playhouses, and other family oriented activities
· allowing and facilitating outdoor cafes
· incentives for mixed use development and rehabilitation
· elimination of side yard setback requirements
· allow structural overhang encroachments into required yard areas
The proposed amendments require restaurants and clubs in the original DDA area to
meet a greater portion of their parking demand. If additional on-site parking is not
possible, in-lieu parking fees and off-site valet parking lots are two options for
compliance. The use of off-site valet parking lots will allow restaurants to meet a
portion of their total parking requirement by utilizing existing private parking. Overall,
this represents a more efficient use of existing resources and is encouraged where
possible.
A positive finding can be made that the amendments are consistent with and further the
Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan.
The Parking Management Advisory Board recommended approval of the proposed
amendment dealing with the increase in parking requirements for restaurants in the
'original DDA area at its meeting of February 23, 1999. The amendments dealing with
the use of off-site valet parking lots to satisfy a portion of those parking requirements
were reviewed in concept by the Parking Management Advisory Board on May 25,
1999. The Board approved the concept at that time. The Board will make a
recommendation on the final language of the amendment at its June meeting. This
recommendation will be included in the final report to the City Commission for action.
The proposed amendments were reviewed by the Community Redevelopment Agency
on May 13, 1999. The Board recommended approval of the off-site parking lot/valet
provisions, but recommended denial of the increased parking requirements for
restaurants.
The proposed amendments were reviewed by Pineapple Grove MainStreet on June 8,
1999. The Board had no comments.
The proposed amendments will be reviewed by the Downtown Development Authority
on June 16, 1999. The Board had no objections to the proposed amendments.
Planning and Zoning Board Memorandum Staff Report
Restaurant Parking Requirements in the CBD
Page 10
1. Recommend approval of the proposed amendments.
2. Recommend denial of the proposed amendments, in whole or in part.
3. Continue with direction.
Recommend that the City Commission adopt the amendments to Section 4.4.13(G)
Supplemental District Regulations for the Central Business District and Section 4.6.9(E)
Location of Parking Spaces of the Land Development Regulations (LDRs) as attached.
Report Prepared by Ron Hoggard, Senior Planner
Attachments:
· Parking Requirement Comparison in Se/ected Areas
RECEIVED
J U L - 1 1999
Bertha and Albert Richwagen
217 East Atlantic Avenue CITY MANAGER
Delray Beach, FL 33444
(561) 243-2453
David Harden
City Manager
City of Delray Beach
100 NW l't Ave.,
Delray Beach, FL 33444
Dear Mr. Harden, June 30, 1999
We are aware of the proposed changes concerning the parking requirements in the Central
Business District for restaurants and reside.ntial projects that the City is discussing on June 21,
1999, at the Planning and Zoning Board meetihg. With respect to the change in restaurant
parking, we offer the following comments:
We are the owners of two buildings, 217 and 229 East Atlantic Avenue, known as
Richwagen Cycle Center and Power's Lounge. For the past three years, we have been in the
planning stages for renovation of the two buildings. We plan to follow through with renovation
following the expiration of the Power's Lounge lease in 2000. With respect to the bike shop, we
would like to add a second floor apartment for my mother. Since we do not have room for
additional parking on the cycle shop property, we will face paying an in-lieu-of parking fee.
Therefore, we strongly support the reduction in residential parking requirements to make our
project feasible.
We, on the other hand, strongly object to the increase in the parking requirements for
restaurants in the downtown district. If the measure passes, we may find ourselves unable to
continue our plans as hoped. Even though Power's Lounge occupies a first and second floor and
would, therefore, be considered a current restaurant, we anticipate a newly renovated restaurant
would add onto the rear of the property to accommodate a new kitchen and an outdoor "tiki"
area for dining. With an increase in the parking ratio, the project would become unfeasible.
Our proposed changes already anticipate unusually high costs because of the high costs of
historic renovation. The proposed changes would be considerably less if the two buildings were
demolished and we were to build a new two story building. Of course, we would lose the historic
building and a piece of Delray history, which we would rather save than destroy. Our family has
been a part of Delray for generations, and we want to continue to preserve our family history as
well as Delray's history. How can we do this with the cominued increase of fees and little
assistance from our community and City for historic preservation? We would like to see Atlantic
Avenue beautified historically with not only restaurants and antique stores, but Richwagen Cycle
Cemer as well. Please note our concerns for our property and Delray as a whole.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Bertha and Albert Richwagen
cc: Ms. Diane Dominguez, Director of Planning and Zoning
Ms. Pat Cayce, Historic Preservation Planner
Sheet1
Power's Lounge Redevelopment
Under Under
New Regulations Current Regulations
Current Size of Building 1,574 s.f. 1,574 s.f.
Add on for kitchen 1,500 s.f. 1,500 s.f.
6 spaces
Current Parking 6 spaces
2 spaces
2 spaces
Lost Spaces
5 spaces
New Spaces Required 9 spaces
at 1,500 s.f.
6 spaces
New and Lost Spaces 10 spaces
Required Less I Free Space
In Lieu Parking Fee $120,000 $72,000
at $12,000
Cost per Square Foot $80.00 $48.00
TO: DAV~ T. HAR~EN, C~ITY MANAGER
THRU: PAUL DORLING,/)~,]I'ING DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF JULY 6, 1999
AMENDMENT TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS (LDRs)
DEALING WITH THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR
RESTAU~NTS IN THE CBD.
The parking requirement for all uses in the original DDA area (generally 1 block no~h and
south of Atlantic Avenue, be~een Swinton Avenue and the Intracoastal Wate~ay) is 1
space per 300 square feet. Therefore, conversions of existing floor area to more intensive
uses (restaurants) do not require additional parking. Restaurants also enjoy a reduced
standard in the remaining potions of the CBD with a requirement of 6 spaces per 1,000 sq.
ff. of building area, which is one-half the city's normal restaurant parking requirement.
These liberal parking requirements have helped fuel the revitalization of the downtown area.
However, the success of the downtown as an entedainment district with restaurants and
clubs has also significantly increased the demand for off-street parking and few new spaces
have become available to meet this new demand. Late last year, a proposal was made by
the Parking Management Adviso~ Board to increase the parking requirement for
restaurants in the original DDA ama to 6 spaces per 1,000 sq. ff. The proposed change was
incorporated into an ordinance which also dealt with increasing in-lieu parking fees.
However, it has been deleted from the in-lieu fee ordinance so that the issues could be
dealt with separately.
The Parking Management Adviso~ Board reviewed the restaurant parking issue again at its
meeting of February 23, 1999. The Board reaffirmed its original recommendation and voted
7/0 to amend the regulations for the original DDA area to increase the parking requirements
from 1 space per 300 sq. ff. to 6 spaces per 1000 sq. ff. This represents an increase of
2.67 spaces per 1,000 sq. ff. Additionally, the requirement would apply to future
conversions to restaurants.
In order to give restaurants another avenue to meet the increased parking requirements and
reduce the financial burden of the increased in-lieu fees, the proposed amendment includes
a credit to those restaurants that provide valet parking using off-site private parking lots.
Additional background and an analysis of the request can be found in the attached Planning
and Zoning Board staff repod.
Parking Management Advisory Board
The Parking Management Advisory Board recommended approval of the proposed
amendment dealing with the increase in parking requirements for restaurants in the original
lo.B.
City Commission Documentation
Meeting of July 6, 1999 - Restaurant Parking Requirements in the CBD
Page 2
DDA area at its meeting of February 23, 1999. The amendments dealing with the use of
off-site valet parking lots to satisfy a portion of those parking requirements were reviewed in
concept by the Parking Management Advisory Board on May 25, 1999. The Board
approved the concept at that time. The Board reviewed the final language of the
amendment at its June 22, 1999 meeting and recommended approval of the amendment.
Community Redevelopment Agency
The Board reviewed the proposed amendments on May 13, 1999 and recommended
approval of the off-site parking lot/valet provisions. The Board recommended denial of the
increased parking requirements for restaurants.
Pineapple Grove Main Street
Pineapple Grove Main Street reviewed the proposed amendments on June 8, 1999 and had
no comments.
Downtown Development Authority
The Board reviewed the proposed amendments on June 16, 1999 and had no objections.
Planning & Zoning Board
The Planning and Zoning Board held a public hearing on the proposed amendments at its
meeting of June 21, 1999. Eight members of the public, including Bill Wood (Chamber of
Commerce), Chris Brown (CRA), Bill Branning (Pineapple Grove Mainstreet) and several
downtown property owners, spoke against the amendments. The reasons for opposition
included statements that "there isn't a parking problem", "it will hurt small businesses", and
"it will stop redevelopment". Bruce Gimmey (Parking Management Advisory Board) spoke
in favor of the amendment.
There was extensive discussion by the P & Z Board with the overall theme being that there
isn't a parking problem. Mr. Bird spoke in favor of the proposed amendments, citing the
need to maintain a balanced mix of businesses downtown. After discussion, the Board
recommended denial of the proposed amendments by a vote of 5 to 2 (Robin Bird and Gary
Eliopoulos dissenting).
Adopt the amendments to Section 4.4.13(G) Supplemental District Regulations for the
Central Business District and Section 4.6.9(E) Location of Parking Spaces of the Land
Development Regulations (LDRs) as attached.
Attachments: · Proposed Ordinance
· Planning & Zoning Staff Report
From: The Staff To: Dave Harden Date: 7/6/99 Time: 2:20:26 PM Page 'f of 2
GREATER
DEL Y BEACH
Ch~ber of ~mmerce
City Commission Agenda Tonight-Proposed Parking Ordinance
Revision--Please attend--7:00 p.m.
To: Govt. Affairs Committees, Executive Cmte., Board Members,
Downtown Merchants
From: Bill Wood, 561/279-1380 X14
Subject: Proposed Downtown Parking Amendments On City Commission Agenda
Tonight, Tues., July 6, 1999, 7:00 p.m. (See agenda below and chamber
position)
Date: July 6, 1999
Farking issues continue to challenge us as we struggle to find solutions that are workable and do not hinder our
progress in promoting Delray Beach as a viable commercial opportunity site. We encourage you to voice your
opinion this evening as parking issues top the agenda at the City Commission Meeting, public hearings
beginning at 7:00 p.m.
B. /'O~.DXNANC~ ~O. 23-99 (FZR~T R~A~IZN~3/F'rRBT p~]'~v.'t'C ~ZN'Q): An
/ ordinance amend~n9 Section 4. %. 13, "Central ~siness (CBD)
/ District", Subsection (G), "Supplemental District Regulations",
/ and Section 4.6.9, "Off-Street Parking Regulations", Subsection
/ 4.$.9(E), "Location of Parking Spaces", of the Land Development
/ Regulations of. the City of Delray Reach, to amend parking
I requirements for restaurants in the Central Business (CBD]
I District. If passed, a second public hearing will be scheduled
~ for July 20, 1999.
Chamber Position on Proposed Parking Requirements in the CBD Amendment
On behalf of the Greater Delray Beach Chamber of Commerce we respectfully request you keep the number of
parking spaces for restaurants in the CBD as they currently are Apparently some see this change from the
approximately 3 spaces per 1000 sq fl to 6 as a way to control the number of restaurants in the downtown-kind
of a statement that "we have enough and we don't need any more restaurants and oh, by the way, this will help
with the parkin9 problem."'
64 SE 5th Avenue Delray Beach, FL 33483 5611279-1380, ext 13
kag ui rre(~delraybeach.com
From: The Staff To: Dave Harden Date: 7/6/99 Time: 2:20:26 PM Page 2 of 2
I do want to remind us all that these restaurants - that some say we have enough of- are in large measure
responsible for the resurgence and success of our downtown. As patrons have come to enjoy the great food
and the entertainment our restaurants provide, they also have discovered the shops, galleries and the
ambiance of Atlantic Ave. Those same patrons will be the ones who tell us - and the restaurants - when there
are "too many"- and they will tell us that by not coming.
In the mean time, we have already doubled or more, the fee for in-lieu parking to more accurately reflect actual
cost for developing spaces. This change is new enough that we don't yet know the actual impact on restaurant
development. However, we do know it will have a dampening effect on restaurant investment in the CBD.
Higher fees or not, investors of larger restaurants considering downtown will be very pragmatic. They know they
must have satisfactory parking for patrons.
The combination of higher fees and increased requirements for spaces will hurt most, those least likely to
impact on the parking problem, small food establishments like ice cream parlors and coffee shops, businesses
which make up the character and quaintness of our downtown. Currently, a newly built 1,000 sq ft coffee shop,
assuming they had no available parking, would pay $24,000 in in-lieu parking fees. Under the proposed
amendment, the fee would jump to $60,000. That is simply not possible for a small, family run business.
We don't believe this change to six spaces per thousand sq ft is necessary, particularly in light of the new
$12,000 per space in-lieu reform. Our rush to control something that is inherently self controlling will effectively
shut down both new and expansions of existing food establishments.
We urge your careful consideration of our arguments as downtown revitalization does not have an "end" but
challenges us to use our economic tools more creatively and carefully as we continually progress.
64 SE 5th Avenue Delray Beach, FL 33483 5611279-1380, ext t3
kaguirre(~delraybeach.com
From: The Staff To: Dave Harden Date: 7/6/99 Time: 2:20:26 PM Page 1 of 2
GREATER
DELRAY BEACH
Chamber of Comm~rc.
City Commission Agenda Tonight--Proposed Parking Ordinance
Revision-Please attend--7:00 p.m.
To: Govt. Affairs Committees, Executive Cmte., Board Members,
Downtown Merchants
From: Bill Wood, 561/279-1380 X14
Subject: Proposed Downtown Parking Amendments On City Commission Agenda
Tonight, Tues., July 6, 1999, 7:00 p.m. (See agenda below and chamber
position)
Date: July 6, 1999
Parking issues continue to challenge us as we struggle to find solutions that are workable and do not hinder our
progress in promoting Delray Beach as a viable commercial opportunity site. We encourage you to voice your
opinion this evening as parking issues top the agenda at the City Commission Meeting, public hearings
beginning at 7:00 p.m.
/ORDIN~N~ ,..NO. 23-99 (FIRST P~F~%~IN~/FZRST ~LIC ~RIN~): An
ordinance amen~n9 ~ec~ion %.4.13, "central BuSiness (CBD)
D=scric=", Subsec=ion (G), ~Supplemental District Re~ulat&ons",
and Section 4.6.9, "Off-$treeu Parking /egulauions", Subsecuion
4.6.9(E), "Location of Parkin9 Spaces", of the Land Development
Regulations of the City of Delray Beach, to amend parkin~
requirements for restaurants in the Central Business (CBD]
District. If passed, a second public hearing will be scheduled
for July 20, 1999.
Chamber Position on Proposed Parking Requirements in the CBD Amendment
On behalf of the Greater Delray Beach Chamber of Commerce we respectfully request you keep the number of
parking spaces for restaurants in the CBD as they currently are. Apparently some see this change from the
approximately 3 spaces per 1000 sq fl to 6 as a way to control the number of restaurants in the downtown--kind
of a statement that "we have enough and we don't need any more restaurants and oh, by the way, this will help
with the parking problem."'
64 SE 5th Avenue Delray Beach, FL 33483 5611279-1380, ext 13
kag uirre(~delraybeach.com
From: The Staff To: Dave Harden Date: 716/99 Time: 2:20:26 PM Page 2 of 2
I do want to remind us all that these restaurants - that some say we have enough of- are in large measure
responsible for the resurgence and success of our downtown. As patrons have come to enjoy the great food
and the entertainment our restaurants provide, they also have discovered the shops, galleries and the
ambiance of Atlantic Ave. Those same patrons will be the ones who tell us - and the restaurants - when there
are "too many"- and they will tell us that by not coming.
In the mean time, we have already doubled or more, the fee for in-lieu parking to more accurately reflect actual
cost for developing spaces. This change is new enough that we don't yet know the actual impact on restaurant
development. However, we do know it will have a dampening effect on restaurant investment in the CBD.
Higher fees or not, investors of larger restaurants considering downtown will be very pragmatic. They know they
must have satisfactory parking for patrons.
The combination of higher fees and increased requirements for spaces will hurt most, those least likely to
impact on the parking problem, small food establishments like ice cream parlors and coffee shops, businesses
which make up the character and quaintness of our downtown. Currently, a newly built 1,000 sq fl coffee shop,
assuming they had no available parking, would pay $24,000 in in-lieu parking fees. Under the proposed
amendment, the fee would jump to $60,000. That is simply not possible for a small, family run business
We don't believe this change to six spaces per thousand sq fl is necessary, padicularly in light of the new
$12,000 per space in-lieu reform. Our rush to control something that is inherently self controlling will effectively
shut down both new and expansions of existing food establishments.
We urge your careful consideration of our arguments as downtown revitalization does not have an "end" but
challenges us to use our economic tools more creatively and carefully as we continually progress.
64 SE 5th Avenue Delray Beach, FL 33483 5611279-1380, ext 13
kaguirre(~delraybeach.com
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH
' NOTIC'E OF PROPOSED
AMENDMENTS TO THE
LAND DEVELOPMENT
REGULATIONS ASSOCIATED,
PARKING REQUIREMENTS
gog S AVP. A TS
CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT
{c v) ZON VISmCT..
The City Commi.~sion of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, 'laroposes
to ,,aopt tbe foUowins Orm,~,,~:
ORDINANCE NO. :l~9 .....
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE LAND
DEVF_~OP~ REOULATIONS OF TI~ CITY OF DELRAY
BEACH BY AMENDINO SECTION 4.4.13, "CENTRAL
BUSINESS (CBD) 'DISTRICT", SUBSECTION (O),
"SUPPLEbiENTAL DISTRICT REGULATIONS", AND SECTION.
4.6.9, "OFF-STREET PALCO REOU~TIONS", SUBSF~ON
(ii), "IL)CATION OF PARlilNG SPACES", ALL TO AMEND
PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR RESTAUR~S IN THE
CF_~ BUSINESS (CED) ZONE DISTRICT
CITY OF DEi. RAY BEACH; PROVIDINO A OENEP,~a~L
REPEALER CLAUSE, A SAVINO CLAUSE,
EPFEC'IIVE DATE. : ~:~ ._ ~.
']'he City C. ommim$ioll wi]] r. olidu~t two (2) Public
purpose of ae~¢pfiug public testimony regarding .the proposed
Ordinan~. The first Public Hearing will be held ou
.lilLY 6. l~ AT ?dM} P~M. (Or at any ex)uliuU,fiou of stroh meetiug
which is set by the Commi~ioll), in the Commission Chambers at City
Hall, 100 N.W. 1st Avenue, Delray Be.a~h, Florida. If the Ordinau¢¢ is
passed on first reading, a second Public Hearing will be held ou
'I~DAY. JULY 20. I~'D AT 7:00 P.M. (Or atauy ~utinuatiou of
such meeling which is set by tbe Commim~o{l).
~tl int~m~xl citirt~ ar~ invited to ~ the tmbUc
comme~ upon the proposed ~ Or submit theft comments in
writing o~ Or before the date of tbe~ beariags to thc Flam~g and
Zoaing ~nt For further information Or to obtaia a copy of the
ordimmce, please contact the Plamfiag ~nd
L Oty l~II, 100 N.W. l~t Aveaue, Delra¥ Beach, Florida
33~?.~. (Pboae 561/243o7040), betwee~ the bouts of 8:00 a.m. ~ $:00
p.m., Mo~iay throa~ Frkhy, e~duding holidays..
PLEASE BE ADVISED THAT IF A PERSON DECIDES 'TO
APPEAL ANY DECISION MADE BY THE CITY COMMISSION
WITH RESP~ TO ANY MATTER CONSIDERED AT THESE
HEARINGS, SUCH PERSON MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A
VERBATIM RECORD I~CLUDES TH~ TESTIMONY AND
EVIDEnCE UPON ~HICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. THE
CITY DOE~ NOT PROVIDE NOR PREP~ SUCH RECORD.
PURSUANT TO F.S. 286.0105.
PUBLISH: ~1'!~ Boca R~gou NeWs ~ OF DELRAY BEACH
-/uly 14, 1999 C~y
AdS 782582
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH
NOTICE OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT
REGULATIONS ASSOCIATED WITH THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR
RESTAURANTS IN THE CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT (CBD) ZONE
DISTRICT
The City Commission of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, proposes to adopt the
following ordinance:
ORDINANCE NO. 23-99
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY
BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS OF
THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH BY AMENDING SECTION 4.4.13, "CENTRAL
BUSINESS (CBD) DISTRICT", SUBSECTION (G), "SUPPLEMENTAL DISTRICT
REGULATIONS", AND SECTION 4.6.9, "OFF-STREET PARKING
REGULATIONS", SUBSECTION (E), "LOCATION OF PARKING SPACES", ALL
TO AMEND PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR RESTAURANTS IN THE CENTRAL
BUSINESS (CBD) ZONE DISTRICT WITHIN THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH;
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 will be held
on TUESDAY, JULY 6, 1999 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. 1st
Avenue, Delray Beach, Florida. If the ordinance is passed on first reading, a second
Public Hearing will be held on TUESDAY, JULY 20, 1999 AT 7:00 P.M. (or at any
continuation of such meeting which is set by the Commission).
All 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. For further information or to obtain a
copy of the proposed ordinance, please contact the Planning and Zoning Department,
City Hall, 100 N.W. 1st Avenue, Delray Beach, Florida 33444 (Phone 561/243o7040),
between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.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 MAY NEED TO
ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND
EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. THE CITY DOES
NOT PROVIDE NOR PREPARE SUCH RECORD. PURSUANT TO F.S. 286.0105.
CITY OF DELRAY BEACH
Alison MacGregor Harty
City Clerk
PUBLISH: The Boca Raton News
June 28, 1999
July 14, 1999
Instructions to Newspaper:
This ad is not to be placed in the legal ads/classified section of the newspaper. It must be
at least two standard columns wide and ten inches long. The entire headline [CITY OF
DELRAY BEACH NOTICE OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE LAND
DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS ASSOCIATED WITH THE PARKING
REQUIREMENTS FOR RESTAURANTS IN THE CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT
(CBD) ZONE DISTRICT] must be an 18 point bold headline. Thank you.