Loading...
57-91 ORDINANCE NO. 57-91 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, REZONING AND PLACING LAND PRESENTLY ZONED PC (PLANNED COMMERCIAL) DISTRICT IN POD (PROFESSIONAL AND OFFICE DISTRICT); SAID LAND BEING LOTS 1 THROUGH 5, INCLUSIVE, LESS THE WEST 38 FEET ST ROAD R/W & ABANDONED 10 FOOT ALLEY EAST OF AND ADJACENT THERETO, BLOCK 24, DEL-RATON PARK, TOGETHER WITH LOTS 6 THRU 10, INCLUSIVE, LESS THE WEST 38 FEET ST ROAD R/W AND 10 FOOT ABANDONED ALLEY LYING EAST OF AND ADJACENT THERETO, BLOCK 24, DEL-RATON PARK, TOGETHER WITH THE EAST 77 FEET OF LOTS 1 THRU 9, INCLUSIVE, AND LOTS 10, 11, 12, 26 AND 27, AND THE 10 FOOT ABANDONED ALLEY LYING WEST OF LOTS 10 AND 27, BLOCK 25, DEL-RATON PARK, ALL AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 14, PAGE 9, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA; AND AMENDING "ZONING DISTRICT MAP, DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, 1990"; PROVIDING A GENERAL REPEALER CLAUSE; PROVIDING A SAVING CLAUSE; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the following described property in the City of Delray Beach, Florida, is hereby rezoned and placed in the POD (Professional and Office District) as defined in Chapter Four of the Land Development Regulations of Delray Beach, Florida, to-wit: Lots 1 thru 5, Inclusive, less the West 38 feet St. Road R/W & Abandoned 10 foot alley east of and adjacent thereto, Block 24, Del-Raton Park, together with Lots 6 thru 10, Inclusive, less the West 38 feet St. Road R/W and 10 Foot alley lying east of and adjacent thereto, Block 24, Del-Raton Park, together with the East 77 feet of Lots 1 thru 9, inclusive, and Lots 10, 11, 12, 26 and 27, and the 10 foot abandoned alley lying west of Lots 10 and 27, Block 25, Del-Raton Park, all as recorded in Plat Book 14, Page 9, of the Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida. The subject property is located on the east side of Federal Highway, between LaMat Avenue and Avenue "F" Delray Beach, Florida The above described parcel contains a 1.33 acre parcel of land, more or less. Section 2. That the Planning Director of said City shall, upon the effective date of this ordinance, change the Zoning District Map of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, to conform with the provisions of Section 1 hereof. Section 3. That all ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith be, and the same are hereby repealed. Section 4. 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 5. That this ordinance shall become effective imme- diately upon passage on second and final reading. PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session on second and final reading on this the 10th day of September , 1991. ATTE ST: CitY ~le~k First Reading Auqust 27, 1991 Second Reading September 10, 1991 -2- Ord. No. 57-91 REZONING OF A PORTION OF BLOCKS 24 and 25 DEL-RATON PARK · /l~//l///l lf[llll[ i~ -"-' ID C~DILL~ S)IF.A~ C'TII,II, II IllVK SH/.RWOOO PONT~IC IdOl#,~-#Ol~ PAl/, 1:1l P.M., BOCA RATON N~WS ~ BOYNTON B~ACH N~WS ", ~ Published Dally AN ORD~N~CE 0F Monday t~ru Sunday ~ ~ Boca Baton, Palm Beach County, Florida C~A.. ~0~mN~ T~0N~, ~ECTION Delray Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida 'A~TIVE C~RCIAL (~)~ DISTRICV, ~Dm~AL US~S AND STRUC- TURES ALL~E~, OF ~TAT~ OF FLORIDA T.~ co~E o~ ORm~CES OF THE C~W ~ DELRAY BEACH, PROVIOE FOR C~RCIAL appeared NANCY WATT who on oath says that she c~u~; ~s the Classified AdverMs~ng Mana2e~ of the Boca Raton News and the Del~ay Beach Mewa, dally newspapers published at Boca Rato~ ~ Palm Beach County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement was published in said newspapers c~) OISTRET in the issues of: ?mm; ~ID ~NO EEING LO~ 1 ~H~ S, mCLUS~VE, LESS ~5T ] FEET ST R~D ~ & ~ AgD AD~CEgT THERETO, ~ ~ IL~K  ' ' '~HER WI~ LOTS 6 THR~ ~ INCLUSIVE, LE~ THE ~T ~T ~1~ ~ ~E CI~ OF DELRAY ~H, FL~J~ CORRECTI~ ~ z~m c~o~ ~o~ Affiant further says that the said Boca Rat, on News and Delray Beach News are newspapers pt]b- ED ~ N.E. 6TH AVENUE, ~TH ~ g.E, ~H STREET, A ~RE )ARTICU~RLY DESCRIBED Hs~ed at Boca Raton, in said Palm Beach County, ~.m, ~ ~c ~RCt~) OtSTR~CT TO ~C Florida, Monday through SUnda.y, and have been a~o RE~TED 01STRI~; ANO CORRE~ING FLORIDm1~; PROYIDfNG ~OO~ R~to~, ~ ~ ~OllTl~,y, ~oF~d~. [OF ~ ~- GENERALREPEALER C~USE, ~OVIDI~A ~VING tlon of the attached copy of advertisement; and affiant further says that she has neither paid nor AN O. DI~EOF T~fClI~ promised any person, firm or cra'potation any dis- MIZION ~ THE CITY O~ T~S ZOm~ C~T~O~ ~0~ count, rebate, eotnmisslon or r~fund for the put- A PARC~L~ ~NDL~ATEDON pose of securing this advertisement for publication ~ ~ ~ 0~ ~... in said [lewspapers. AND AOJACEN~ tO TRE ~ UNITED MET~DIST CHURCH DE.RIlED HEREIN, FR~ R-IA ($I~E F~Y RESIDENTIAL) DISTRICT TO CF (C~UNITY F~ CILITIEg DISTRICT; AND COR- RE~I~ ~ONI~ ~P ~ DEL* VID~ A GENERAL C~USE; PR~IDI~ A ~VI~ C~USE; PROVIOtNG AN EFFEC- TIVE ~TE, Sworn to and subscribed before me this ~-~ ~' ~, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~1 any day of A.D., 19 / TH~ ~E~r.y/~yntm B .... MEMORANDUM TO: MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS FROM: CITY MANAGER.~ SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM # IOH - MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 10, 1991 ORDINANCE NO. 57-91 DATE: September 6, 1991 This is a second reading of an ordinance rezoning property located on the east side of Federal Highway, between La Mat Avenue and Avenue "F" from PC (Planned Commercial) zone district to POD (Professional and Office District) zone district. In February 1991, as part of Plan Amendment 91-1, the owner of Lots 1-5, Block 24, Del-Raton Park, sought a change from the "Transitional" land use designation to "General Commercial" At that time it was noted that the existing zoning of PC (Planned Commercial) for Lots 1-5, Block 24, as well as other lots included in the petition were not consistent with the underlying future land use designation of '~Transitional". At their April 22nd meeting the Planning and Zoning Board recommended approval of the land use change request. At your April 30th special meeting, the Commission moved to retain the "Transitional" designation for this property. Subsequently, at your July 9th meeting the Commission authorized staff to initiate a zoning change from PC to POD or a zoning district as allowed under the "Transitional" land use designation. Due to the restrictions on lot width, depth and minimum lot development sizes, only two zoning designations appear to be appropriate: RM (Medium Density Residential) or POD (Professional and Office District). The RM designation is appropriate if aggregation of these properties with those to the east is desired. POD is appropriate if aggregation is not desired. At your August 27th meeting the Commission determined that POD was the most appropriate zoning district. The Planning and Zoning Board at their August 19th meeting recommended denial of the rezoning request on a 4-2 vote. The Board felt it was more appropriate to amend the Land Use Plan to General Commercial and to increase the depth of commercial properties as recommended with the Levy Land Use Plan Amendment. Staff recommends approval of a rezoning from PC (Planned Commercial) to POD (Professional and Office District) subject to positive findings with respect to Chapter 3 (Performance Standards) of the Land Development Regulations, polices of the Comprehensive Plan and Section 2.4.5 (D) (5). A detailed staff report is attached as backup material for this item. ORDINANCE NO. 57-91 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, REZONING AND PLACING LAND PRESENTLY ZONED PC (PLANNED COMMERCIAL) DISTRICT IN POD (PROFESSIONAL AND OFFICE DISTRICT); SAID LAND BEING LOTS 1 THROUGH 5, INCLUSIVE, LESS THE WEST 38 FEET ST ROAD R/W & ABANDONED 10 FOOT ALLEY EAST OF AND ADJACENT THERETO, BLOCK. 24, DEL-RATON PARK, TOGETHER WITH LOTS 6 THRU 10, INCLUSIVE, LESS THE WEST 38 FEET ST ROAD R/W AND 10 FOOT ABANDONED ALLEY LYING EAST OF AND ADJACENT THERETO, BLOCK 24, DEL-RATON PARK, TOGETHER WITH THE EAST 77 FEET OF LOTS 1 THRU 9, INCLUSIVE, AND LOTS 10, 11, 12, 26 AND 27, AND THE 10 FOOT ABANDONED ALLEY LYING WEST OF LOTS 10 AND 27, BLOCK 25, DEL-RATON PARK, ALL AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 14, PAGE 9, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA; AND AMENDING "ZONING DISTRICT MAP, DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, 1990"; PROVIDING A GENERAL REPEALER CLAUSE; PROVIDING A SAVING CLAUSE; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the following described property in the City of Delray Beach, Florida, is hereby rezoned and placed in the POD (Professional and Office District) as defined in Chapter Four of the Land Development Regulations of Delray Beach, Florida, to-wit: Lots 1 thru 5, Inclusive, less the West 38 feet St. Road R/W & Abandoned 10 foot alley east of and adjacent thereto, Block 24, Del-Raton Park, together with Lots 6 thru 10, Inclusive, less the West 38 feet St. Road R/W and 10 Foot alley lying east of and adjacent thereto, Block 24, Del-Raton Park, together with the East 77 feet of Lots 1 thru 9, inclusive, and Lots 10, 11, 12, 26 and 27, and the 10 foot abandoned alley lying west of Lots 10 and 27, Block 25, Del-Raton Park, all as recorded in Plat Book 14, Page 9, of the Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida. The subject property is located on the east side of Federal Highway, between LaMat Avenue and Avenue "F", Delray Beach, Florida. The above described parcel contains a 1.33 acre parcel of land, more or less. Section 2. That the Planning Director of said City shall, upon the effective date of this ordinance, change the Zoning District Map of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, to conform with the provisions of Section 1 hereof. Section 3. That all ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith be, and the same are hereby repealed. Section 4. 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 5. That this ordinance shall become effective imme- diately upon passage on second and final reading. PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session on second and final reading on this the __ day of , 1991. MAYOR ATTEST: City Clerk First Reading Second Reading -2- Ord. No. 57-91 REZONING OF A PORTION OF BLOCKS 24 and 25 DEL-RATON PARK rD ¥ORSr CADILLAC Sl4F~WO00 DEI,.RAY DAIHUTSU PLAZA SHERWOOD PO#TIAC' RALPH B/diCK SH£RWOOO GMC TRUCKS fRO/q(: Drd. J~AY TOYOTA UORSK SATURI4 PARK sHrdlwOOO ~ HONOA CITY COMMISSION DOCUMENTATION TO: DAVID HARDEN, CITY MANAGER FROM: PAUL DORLING, PLANNER SUBJECT: MEETING OF AUGUST 27, 1991 REZONING FROM PC TO POD OR A SIMILAR ZONING AS ~T~WED UNDER THE TRANSITIONAL LAND USE DESIGNATION ACTION REQUESTED OF THE CITY COMMISSION: The action requested of the City Commission is that of aDproval of a rezoning ordinance on first reading. The rezoning is from PC (Planned Commercial) to POD (Professional and Office District) or a zoning district as allowed under the "Transitional" land use designation. BACKGROUND: In February, 1991, as part of Plan Amendment 91-1, Mr. Levy (Lots 1-5, Block 24) sought a change from "Transition" land use designation to "General Commercial". At that time it was noted that the existing zoning of PC for Lots 1-5, Block 24 as well as other lots included in the petition were not consistent with the underlying future land use designation of "Transitional". On April 22, 1991 the Planning and Zoning Board recommended approval of the land use change request for Lots 1-5, Block 24 on a 6 to 1 vote while the City Commission on April 30, 1991 denied the request on a 4 to 1 vote. The City Commission on July 9, 1991 initiated a zoning change from PC (Planned Commercial) to POD (Professional and Office Districts) or a zoning district as allowed under "Transitional" land use designation. PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD CONSIDERATION: The Planning and Zoning Board formally reviewed this item at its meeting of August 19, 1991. The Board recommended denial of the rezoning request on a 4-2 vote (Krall and Beer descending). The Board felt it was more appropriate to amend the Land Use Plan to General Commercial and to increase the depth of commercial properties as recommended with Levy Land Use Plan Amendment considered earlier this year as part of Amendment 91-1. City Commission Documentation Rezoning from PC to POD a Similar Zoning as Allowed Under the Transtional Land Use Designation Page 2 Discussion with respect to each consistent zoning designation is contained within the attached staff report. Due to the restrictions on lot width, depth and minimum lot development sizes only two zoning designations appear to be appropriate. These include RM (Medium Density Residential) or POD (Professional and Office District). The RM designation is appropriate if aggregation of these properties with those to the east (similar property owners) is desired while POD is appropriate if aggregation is not desired. Please refer to the staff report for further background on the project and discussion with respect to each consistent ~zoning designation. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Recommend approval of a rezoning from PC (Planned Commercial) to POD (Professional and Office District) subject to positive findings with respect to Chapter 3 (Performance Standards) of the Land Development Regulations, policies of the Comprehensive Plan and Section 2.4.5 (D) (5). Attachment * P&Z Staff Report of August 19, 1991 PD/#41/CCTLU.TXT LANNING & ZONING BOARD CITY OF DELRAY BEACH ° --- STAFF REPORT--- MEETING DATE: August 19, 1991 AGENDA ITEM: III. D. ITEM: RezoniR~from PC to RM and/or POD,. Levy et al, South Federal Highway, Tropic Bay Boulevard to Avenue "F". // TROPIC GENERAL DATA: Owner ........................... Stanley M. Levy George R. Paton Henry and Nanette Colombi Applicant ....................... David T. Harden, City Manager City of Delray Beach, Florida Location ........................ On the east side of Federal Highway, between La Mat Avenue and Avenue "F". Property Size ................... 1.69 Acres City Land Use Plan .............. Transitional City Zoning ..................... PC (Planned Commercial) Adjacent Zoning ................. Land to the east of the subject property is zoned RM (Multi- Family Residential - Medium Density), land the north and west is AC (Auto Related Commercial), and land to the south is PC. Existing Land Use ............... Small retail and service businesses, and vacant unimproved land. Proposed Zoning ................. POD (Planned Office Development), or equivalent zoning which is allowed under the Transitional III.D. Land Use Designation of the Future Land Use ITEMbBEFORE THE BOARD: The item before the Board is that of making a recommendation on a proposed zoning change from PC (Planned Commercial) to POD (Planned Office development) or an equivalent zoning which is' allowed under the "Transitional" Land Use designation. The effected property is located along the east side of Federal Highway between Tropic Bay Boulevard (LaMat) and the Ralph Buick dealership. The lots are described as Block 24 lots 1-5 (Levy), Block 24 lots 6-10 (Paton) and the abandoned 10' alley east of these lots, along with Block 25, lots 1-12, 26 & 27 and the 10' alley east of lots 1-12(Colombi). BACKGROUND: Prior to June, 1989, the subject property was in unincorporated Palm Beach County. The Planning and Zoning Board, during the Enclave annexations, recommended approval of the annexation and initial zoning for the property as part of Enclave 50 on June 19, 1989. At that time an alternative zoning for the above lots of either (GC) General Commercial or (SC) Specialized Commercial was presented. The (SC) alternative was advertised in anticipation of requests from the property owners of lots 1-10 Block 24 to retain the potential for auto related uses as was the previous use of the property (Auto Ranch). Pursuant to the Comprehensive Plan the Future Land Use Element Policy A2.4 restricted the use of the site for auto dealerships, unless the site was zoned and being used as an auto dealership. At that time the property was unoccupied and a staff recommendation for GC was put forth. The Planning and Zoning recommendation of GC for all of the lots included in this petition was forwarded and approved by the City Commission via Ordinance 38-89 on July 25~ 1989. Upon annexation on July 25, 1989 the GC zoning designation was consistent with the then "commercial" land use designation. A "transitional" land use designation was affixed to the property with the adoption of the Future Land Use Map on November 28, 1989. At this time the GC zoning designation became inconsistent with the "transitional" land use designation. In September, 1990 zoning changes City-wide were implemented to bring the zoning map consistent with the Land Use Map. At this time the zoning designation for the lots was changed from GC to PC. Properties abutting Federal Highway directly to the south were also rezoned to PC. However, neither GC or PC zoning designations are consistent with the current "transitional" land use designation. P&Z Staff Report Rezoning from PC to RM and/or POD Page 2 In February of 1991, as a part of Plan amendment 91-1, Mr Levy (Lots 1-5 Block 24) sought a change from "Transitional" land use designation to "General Commercial". At that time it was noted that the existing zoning of PC for lots 1-5 block 24 as well as other lots included in the petition were not consistent with the underlying future land use designation of "Transitional". On April 22, 1991 the Planning and Zoning Board recommended approval of the land use change request for Block 24 lots 1-5 on a 6 to 1 vote while the City Commission on April 30, 1991 denied the request on a 4 to 1 vote. The City Commission on July 9, 1991 initiated a zoning change'from PC (Planned Commercial) to POD (Professional and Office District) or a zoning designation allowed under "transitional" land use designation of similar intensity. This is the petition before you. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The properties being rezoned are owned by three property owners, (Levy) Block 24 lots 1-5, (Paton) Block 24 lots 6-10 and (Colombi) Block 25 lots 1-12, 26, 27. Lots 1-10, Block 24 are currently vacant and contain an asphalted area previously utilized for the "Auto Ranch" use. Lots 1-4, (Block 25) contains a spa/pool/dive supply retail use, lots 26 and 27 (Block 25) the spa supples parking lot, Lot 5 (Block 25) an insurance office use, lots 6-9 (Block 25) a pawn shop, Lot 10 and 11 (block 25) a Park Avenue Limousine use, and Lot 12 ( Block 25) is currently vacant. The RM property east of these lots to Frederick Boulevard are also owned by the above three property owners. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANALYSIS: Land Use Analysis: The current land use designation for the site is "Transitional". Pursuant to the Future Land Use Map two types of transitional land use exist, "Medium Density Residential Transitional" and "Commercial Transitional". Transitional - MediumDensity Residential is applied to land which is developed, or is to be developed, at a density between five and twelve units per acre. These uses include mobile home parks and apartment development in addition to condominiums. Continuing Care Facilities, A.C.L.F.s, and various types of group homes are appropriate under this designation. In some instances this designation provides for a transition between less intensive residential use and commercial uses. P&Z Staff Report Rezoning from PC to RM and/or POD Page 3 Transitional - Commercial is applied to land which is developed, or is to be developed, for nonresidential purposes but at an intensity equivalent to that associated with medium density residential land use. In some instances this designation provides for a transition between less intensive residential use and commercial uses. In other instances, this designation allows the establishment of uses which are compatible with adjacent residential uses. Wh%le in others, it provides for a use which is not as intensive as general commercial in areas where residential use is not desirable and/or appropriate. The specific type of transitional land use is controlled by the underlying zoning designations. However, the current zoning designation for all Lots (PC) is not consistent with either type of transitional land use designation (see discussion under zoning analysis). The surrounding Land Use Map designations to the north, west, and south is General Commercial, and transitional to the east. The existing land uses are Automotive Dealerships to the north (Ralph Buick); and (Delray Toyota) west across Federal Highway; , to the east a combination of vacant lots and single family homes and to the south commercial uses. The Housing element of the Comprehensive Plan has designated the area as a housing redevelopment area. However the Land Use Plan doesn't designate the area as one of the "redevelopment area". Therefore thought there is an enthuses on housing mixed uses are not precluded by virtue of the transitional land use designation. The following Comprehensive Plan, Goals, Objectives and Polices apply to this proposal: Land Use Objective Al: Vacant property shall be developed in a manner so that the future use and intensity is appropriate in terms of soil, topographic, and other applicable physical considerations, is complementary to adjacent land uses, and fulfills remaining land use needs. The proposed zoning change would allow for development of less intense use than those commercial uses which exist to the north, south, and west, as well as those which could be developed under the current zoning of (PC). The less intense office or similar intensity uses would provide a transition area for residential uses to the east. P&Z Staff Report Rezoning from PC to RM and/or POD Page 4 Land Use Policy A-1.3: Additional strip commercial zoning on vacant land shall be avoided. This policy shall not preclude rezonings on land that at the time of rezoning has improvements on it. Where existing strip commercial uses or zoning exist along an arterial street, consideration should be given to increasing the dePth of the commercial zoning in order to provide for better project design. The current depth of the commercial parcels lends itself to. strip commercial uses. With a change of zoning from a commercial designation this potential will be removed. The City Commission did review a Land Use designation change (Levy) Lots 1-5, Block 24 with 91-1 which would have increased commercial property depth. On April 30, 1991 they denied the request. Land Use Policy A-5.6 For each item acted upon by the Local Planning Agency, the revised land use regulations shall require that the LPA make specific findings as to: * consistency with the Future Land Use Map and its supporting policies. * internal consistency with other elements of the Comprehensive Plan. * concurrency pursuant to Policy B-2.2 of the Land use Element. * other items as they apply to the level of decision being made and corresponding principles and practices of urban planning. These requirements have been included in the LDR's and, and ,Required Fundings of Section 3.1 states the zoning must be consistent with the land use designation. Capital Improvement Policy A-7.1: A finding of consistency shall not be made if the zoning designation for the project is not consistent with the designations on the Future Land Use Map, and its supporting policies. A finding of consistency shall not be made if the project will not meet the test of concurrency pursuant to Policy A-3.6 of this element. A finding of consistency may be made even though the project will be in conflict with some individual policy statements contained within the Plan; provided that the LPA finds that the beneficial aspects of the project (hence implementation of some policies) outweighs the negative impacts of the identified points of conflict. P&Z Staff Report Rezoning from PC to RM and/or POD Page 5 Neighborhood Task Team: An Ad Hoc Committee was appointed by the City Commission with a goal to review 17 specific neighborhoods. These neighborhoods were analyzed against policies contained within the Housing elements and formal reCommendations were presented to the City Commission. Neighborhood #16 included property from Avenue F south to Avenue H between Federal Highway and Florida Boulevard, which includes the subject lots. The Task Team recommended the following for this neighborhood: * That the residential character of the area be maintained and the zoning be changed to RM to accommodate multi-family residential~ development such as townhouses. * Code Enforcement activity is needed to address overgrown vacant lots within the area. * That commercial establishments on Federal Highway, the Car Rental, 7-Eleven, Discount Lighting, all refurbish building exteriors, upgrade landscaping and provide a wall to separate the commercial from the residential area. These recommendations were contained within the Final Task Team report which was recommended for approval by Planning and Zoning Board on February 25, 1991, and was accepted as the final report by the City Commission on March 13, 1991. ZONING ANALYSIS: The current zoning designation for Lots 1-10 Block 24 and Lots 1-12 and lots 26 & 27 of Block 25 is PC (Planned Commercial) The PC designation appear to have been affixed to the parcels in September, 1990 as a drafting error resulting from a failure to check closely the zoning designations against the Future Land Use Map. The above parcels appear to be an extension of the PC areas which exist to the south yet have a consistent Commercial Land Use designation. The PC zoning is applied to properties designated as commercial on the Future Land Use Map where unified development is, or will be, in excess of five acres; or when it is appropriate to preserve the character of certain speciality retail and office centers: or to ensure that certain high visibility areas are attractively developed. The PC zoning also requires that any free standing structure shall have a minimum floor area of 6,000 sq.ft, further encouraging aggregation of smaller commercial properties. Given the size of individual lots 25' x 87' and 25' x 115', multiple land owners, as well as the inconsistency with the "transitional" land use designation the existing zoning designation of PC is inappropriate. P&Z Staff Report Rezoning from PC to RM and/or POD Page 6 The Zoning districts which are consistent with the current "Transitional Commercial" land use designation are: - Residential Office (RO) - Neighborhood Commercial (NC) - Planned Office Center (POC) - Community Facilities (CF) - Professional and Office District (POD)* - Medium Density Residential (RM) - Mobile Home Parks (MH) * This district is being added via comprehensive plan amendment 91-1 ** Medical, Office & Institutional (MOI) is listed as consistent in the Comprehensive plan but is removed pursuant to 91-1 Comprehensive Plan amendment Residential Office (RO): The residential office district provides for a mixed use of a neighborhood office and residential nature. The RO district is appropriate as a transitional land use between commercial areas and residential areas, an incentive zoning in older residential areas , or to accommodate professional offices which will serve the nearby neighborhoods. All uses in this district will require all buildings and structures to be residential in character regardless of the actual use. The district further requires a minimum lot width of 80', a minimum depth of 100' and an 8,000 minimum lot size. Given the location and size of the lots along with the mixed use requirements (residential component) this zoning designation is not appropriate for these parcels. Professional Office District (POD): This zoning designation is created to provide a very limited application of Professional, office, and similar intensity uses to transitional land use categories thus mitigating against adverse effects which may occUr with higher intensity applications of such usage. This district has no minimum lot sizes, width, or depth. This district would accommodate development of these lots with office uses. Neiqhborhood Commercial (NC): This zoning district provides the opportunity to locate limited retail and service uses orientated to neighborhood uses. The NC district may be located in transitional land use areas where nonresidential use is appropriate for the location. This P&Z Staff Report Rezoning from PC to RM and/or POD Page 7 district contains a one (1) acre minimum lot size, 100' minimum lot width, 200' lot depth and a 4,000 square foot minimum building size. The existing lots do not accommodate these required minimums. Further, if NC zoning was applied to these lots, given there size and width,~ the resulting commercial development would be strip commercial in conflict with the Land Use Policy A.1.3. Planned Office Center (POC): The Planned Office Center District provides for the concentration of office and support uses in a well planned and managed environment. It is not intended that the district be for commercial activities in which commercial activities goods and merchandise are stored, displayed, or sold except as appropriate to meet the needs of uses of the POC. The POC district has a 1 acre minimum lot size, 3 acre minimum development size and a 4,000 sq.ft, minimum building size. Given these restrictions this zoning district is not appropriate. Community Facilities (CF): The Community Facilities is a special purpose zone district primarily intended for facilities which serve the public and semipublic purposes. This is a site specific zoning designation for existing or proposed facilities and is therefore an inappropriate zoning designation. Medium Density Residential (RM): The medium density residential district provides a residential zoning district with flexible density having a base of six (6) units per'acre and a range to twelve (12) units per acre. Given the depth, width and location of the lots, a zoning designation of RM would be inappropriate. However, if aggregation of these lots with properties to the east is desired, this would be an appropriate zoning designation. It is noted that the properties to the east are RM and are of similar ownership. Pursuant to Section 2.4.5(D) with a zoning change application traffic information which addresses the development of the property under reasonable intensity pursuant to existing and proposed zoning is requested. The following information has been prepared by the Cities Traffic Engineer and represents maximum development densities for each zone district. It is noted that both PC and NC have minimum building square footages of 6,000 sq.ft, and 4,000 sq.ft, which cannot be accommodated on Lots 1-5 and 6-10. However, maximum development potential is provided for comparison purposes. P&Z Staff Report Rezoning from PC to RM and/or POD Page 8 Property PC NC POD POC RM RO (1) (1) (.3) (3) (5) (7) Blk 24 Lt 1-5 2273(TPD) 2273(TPD) 160(TPD) 160(TPD) 12 Levy (1) (1) (3) (3) (5) (7) Blk 24 Lt 6-10 2273(TPD) 2273(TPD) 160(TPD) 160(TPD) 12 Paton (2) (2) (4) (4) (6) (7) Blk 25 Lt 1-12 3536(TPD) 3536(TPD) 513(TPD) 513(TPD) 98 26,27 Colombi (1) Based on 2,800 sq.ft. Convenience Store with Gas Pumps (2) Based on 4,000 sq.ft. Convenience Store with Gas Pumps and a 7,094 sq.ft. Strip Commercial Center (3) Based on 6,500 sq.ft. General Office Building (4) Based on 26,000 sq.ft. General Office Building (5) Based on 2 Residential Units (6) Based on 8 Residential Units (7) Due to the Mixed Use nature of RO traffic generation rates will be between those of RM and POD/POC. REQUIRED FINDINGS: (Chapter 3) Pursuant to 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 use or structures must be allowed in the zoning district and the zoning district must be consistent with the land use designation). A proposed use has not been provided at this time. The zoning district under consideration are all consistent with the "Transitional" land use designation. Concurrency: 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 P&Z Staff Report Rezoning from PC to RM and/or POD Page 9 Comprehensive Plan. For sewer and water, concurrency shall mean that direct connection to a functioning municipal system is made. For streets (traffic), drainage, open space (parks), and solid waste, concurrency shall be determined by the following: * The improvement is in place prior to issuance of the occupancy permit; * The improvement is bonded, as part of the subdivision improvements agreement or similar instrument, and there a schedule of completion in the bonding agreement; * The improvement is part of a governmental capital improvement budget; it has been designed; and a contract for installation has been solicited. Water: Water is available from an 8" main within Tropic Bay Boulevard (LaMat). Future development will require extension of the 8" main from LaMat north to the north property lines. Fire hydrants along this main must also be provided. Sewer: Sewer is available within Tropic Bay Boulevard (LaMat). Future development will require sewer main extension north from Tropic Bay Boulevard. Drainage: Drainage must be accommodated on-site either through swale areas, exfiltration trenches or a combination of both. Streets and Traffic: Traffic information has been provided with the application. As we do not have a specific development proposal, worse cause scenarios were used to calculate potential traffic impact differences between the development potential under the existing and proposed zoning districts. The traffic information notes a potential of between 2273 and 3536 trips from the current zoning and a potential of from 12 and 98 TPD to 2273 and 3536 TPD for the potential zoning districts. (See traffic graph.) Parks and Open Space: Park dedication requirements do not apply for nonresidential uses. Open space requirements are a function of Section 4.6.4(A)(District boundary) and Section 4.6.16(H)(3)(perimeter requirements), Section 4.6.16(E) (Internal landscape requirements) as well as Section 4.3.4.(H)(6)(b) (Special P&Z Staff Report Rezoning from PC to RM and/or POD Page 10 Landscape Setbacks). These requirements must be met with future development proposals. Solid Waste: As we do not have a specific development proposal no concerns with respect to solid waste can be addressed at this time. Consistency: Compliance with the performance standards set forth in Section 3.3.2, along with the required findings in 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 of a finding of overall consistency. The applicable performance standards of Section 3.3.2 and other policies which apply are as follows: A) Performance Standard 3.3.2(A) states that a rezoning to other than CF within stable residential areas shall be denied. All lots are not located within a stabilized neighborhood and the above is therefore not applicable. B) Performance Standard 3.3.3(C) states:' Additional strip commercial zoning on vacant properties shall be avoided. This policy shall not preclude rezonings on land that at the time of rezoning has improvements on it. Where existing strip commercial areas or zoning exists along an arterial street, consideration should be given to increasing the depth of the commercial zoning in order to provide for better project design. (LU A-1.3) Given the size and depth of the lots any commercial zoning designation would promote establishment of strip commercial uses. C) Performance Standard 3.3.2(D) states: That the rezone 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 rezoning would allow a transitional land use designation between commercial uses along Federal Highway and transitional residential uses to the east. It could be argued that the' transitional nature of the neighborhood west of Frederick Boulevard makes Frederick Boulevard a more appropriate border between commercial and residential districts. P&Z Staff Report Rezoning from PC to RM and/or POD Page 11 Adjacent property compatibility can be enhanced through application of specific regulations of Section 4.6.4.(A) (District separation requirements) and 4.6.16 (H)(3)(e) (perimeter landscape requirements). These include: Pursuant to Section 4.6.4(A)(1) (Commercial Zoning Adjacent to Residential Zoning) where the rear or side of commercially zoned property directly abuts residentially zoned property'without any division or separation between them, such as a street, alley, railroad, waterway, park, or other public open space, the commercially zoned property shall provide a ten foot building setback from the property line' located adjacent to the residentially zoned property. In addition, either a solid finished masonry wall six feet in height, or a continuous hedge at least 4-1/2 feet in height at the time of installation, shall be located inside and adjacent to the portion of the boundary line of the commercially zoned property which directly abuts the residentially zoned property. Pursuant to Section 4.6.16 (H)(3)(e) (Landscape requirements) where any commercial area abuts a residential Zoning District or properties in residential use, one tree shall be planted every 25' to form a solid tree line. LDR Compliance: Pursuant to Section 2.4.5 (D)(1), a justification statement providing the reason for which the change is being sought must accompany all rezoning requests. The code further identifies certain valid reasons for approving the change being sought. These reasons include the following: * That the zoning had previously been changed, or was originally established, in error; * That there has been a change in circumstance which makes the current zoning inappropriate; * 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. P&Z 'Staff Report Rezoning from PC to RM and/or POD Page 12 Pursuant to Section 2.4.5(d)(5), the City Commission is required to make a finding that the petition will fulfill one of these reasons. The applicable reason for this zoning change was that the zoning was originally established in error. The PC designation, appears to have been applied to these parcels as an extension of the PC zoning designation to the south. REVIEW BY OTHERS: The development proposal is not in a geographic areas requiring review by either the (HPB) Historic Preservation Board, DDA (Downtown Development Authority), or the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency). Special notice has been provided to the Tropic Palms Homeowners Association (TPHA). As of this writing there has not been a formal response from TPHA. ASSESSMENT AND CONCLUSIONS: It is acknowledged that the current zoning has been affixed to the property in error. The current (PC) zoning designation is inconsistent with the underlying "transitional" land use designation. Therefore, pursuant to the policies with in the Comprehensive Plan and Section 3.1.1(A) of the LDR's the zoning designation must be consistent with the Future Land Use Plan. This can be achieved either through amendment of the Future Land Use Map or the Zoning Map. The City Commission has recently denied a Land Use designation change for a portion of the properties which would have been consistent with the PC district. This factor, along with Land Use Element Policy A-1.3 which discourages strip commercial zoning, and an expressed desire of the City Commission to aggregate properties in this area would make a change in land use designation to be consistent with PC zoning inappropriate. Therefore, a zoning change would be required to achieve consistency between the plans. Each consistent zoning designation has been discussed and if aggregation of the properties with properties to the east is desired RM zoning is appropriate. If aggregation is not desired POD (Professional and Office District) is appropriate. ALTERNATIVES: A. Continue with direction. B. Recommend denial of the rezoning request based upon a failure to make a positive finding with respect to Chapter 3 (Performance Standard) and a failure to fulfill one of the reasons established under Section 4.4.5(D)(5). P&Z Staff Report Rezoning from PC to RM and/or POD Page 13 C. Recommend approval of the proposed zoning change to an appropriate designation as an allowed under the "transitional" land use designation. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Recommend approval of a rezoning from PC (Planned Commercial) to POD (Professional and Office District) subject to positive findings with respect to Chapter 3 (Performance Standards) of the Land Development Regulations, polices of the Comprehensive Plan and Section 2.4.5(D)(5). PD/#41/LEVYRE1.TXT SHERWOOD GMC TRUCKS RAL?H BUICK _ AVENUE G DELRAY , TOYOTA : LA-MAT ~ AVENUE AVENU~ H ' SHERWOOD Ot~C TRUCKS RALPH BUICK .~ AVENUE F 0 AVENUE G ,r.,,_ DELRAY TOYOTA ,, LA-IdAT ~ AVENUE - AVENUE H LYIIll lIST FLORIDA, I~; PROVIDING A GENEKN. REPEAL.ER Q.AU~E; PRO~/SDING A SAVING ~; PROVIDING All EFFECt'lYE GATE. MII~ NB. IlIt AN ORDINANCE O~ THE OTY CI~ MISSION OF THE CITY OF OELRAY BEACH, FLOEIDA, CORRECTING THE ZOIIING CLA,SSIFICATION FOIl THREE PARCELS OF LANO LO~AT- ED Off H.E. &TH AVENUE, SOUTH OF N.E. ITH STREET, A PARTICULARLY DESCRIEED HEREIN, FRGM GC COA~MERCIAL) DLSTRK~T 1'0 AC (AUTO RELATEO C~MMERCIN, J DISTRId~; ANO CORRECTING "ZONING MAP OF DELRAY .BEACH, FLORIDA, 1~'; PROVIDING A GENERAL REPEALER CLAUSE, PROVIDING A SAVING CLAUSE; PE~VIDING AN EFFECTIVE GATE. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY MISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, P~DIIIOK, CORRECTING THE ZONING CLASSI,~ICATION FOR A PARCEL OF LAHO LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF /~.W. 4TH STREET, LYING WESTERLY OF AND ADJACENT TO THE UNITED METHODIST CHURCH FA, OLITY, A,S MORE FARTICULARY DESCRIBED HEREIN° FROM R.IA DISTR~CT TO CF (COA~AUNITY OLITIES) DISTRICT; ~J~ ~ RECTING 'ZONING M~F OF De.- CI~I'MIILqAYIIAIli RAY BEACH, FLORIDA, I~; FRO* VII)lNG A GENIEP~bL. REPEAL,ER CLAUSE; PROVIDING AN EFFEC, A PUELIC HEARING ~ Im Item m TIVE 7:ll P.M., (ar It My caMMuMIm M mk:~ time lw Oty cmmmlM v, wl MM a rKm'e M time ilncmdlngs, cons,Mm' m.k' Nmqk. Inio Ira,,. T~ RNc//o W M~IIIM ~rd~Mnc~ CITY Of: DELRAY DiIlllMI IlO. li41 ~Mn MOL'6~'Elff M AN ORDINANf~ OF THE CITY COM. MiSSION DE 114E CITY OF DELRAY I~JIUS~: J~31, ~ IRACH, FLDfflOA. )ASEWNG THE CHAPTER 4,~ZlOlll NG REGUL~ ~ RMiMOi~/~II~il kedl DISTRICT', ~ECTfeI~ ~ONOITIONAL USES AND STRUt. Tt.~E.I ALJ.OI~G~, OF THE LAMO THE CITY ~ DEUSAY IEAC& I~LORIGA, LIY ~ 'A ~ SU~.SUlS~"Rml 4.4.11D)(I) TO CLAUSE; ~ & ~ IEPEALEI~:: CLAUSl~ REOVlmNI' AN EFFECI~m lEACH, FLORIDA, REZO~IING AgD !~.A. CING LAND PRESENTLY ZONED  PRIIOFESSlON/d~ AND OFFICE DI~* lC'T); SAiO LAND BEING LOTS 1 THE~U~H ~, INCLUSIVE, LESS THE I~ST 31 FEET ST RGAD ~ & AIAIIDI~IED W FOOT ALLEY EAST ~F AND ADJACENT THERETO, BLOCK Z4, DEL-RATON PARR, TO- ~E'THER WITH LOTS 6 THROUGH 11, INCLUSIVE, LESS THE W~ST 31 ' : '.. L~:.::;:~:_:f~ Lake Tippecanoe Leesburg, Indiana 46538 Real Estate -- Sales and Appraisals ;:0 0 Specializing in Lake Property ~'~ : Phone (219) 453-3671 -',~.', : ,-,. ~ September 4 1991 To the Mayor and City Council of Delray Beach 100 N.W. 1st Avenue Delray Beach, Florida 33444 Regarding File #91-137 Proposed City initiated zoning of lots 6-10 Block 24 Del-Raton Park. (also lots ll and 12). This letter to be submitted and made a part of the Record at the public hearing, September 10, 1991. We own the five highway lots and two in back of them. The front lots are only 80 ft. deep, and not large enoughtto build on. The two back lots are needed to give the front lots sufficient depth. They are zoned differently, making it impossible to lease or sell the property. Please let us know what we should do with it. It should all be zoned the same., We would prefer GC. We were here first, in about 1956, and did not buy for an lnvestment.- That was before there were any condos or big b~siness in the area. We did not complain when the condos were built, but found out that they block all breeze from the ocean, and the height of the buildings allows them to look down on us all the time. We believe the only use we can make of these lots is GC, and cater to the needs of the condo people. Please consider combining all seven lots under one classifi- cation, so we can use them, as we are paying high taxes and unable to get anything in return. Yours truly, TO: MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS FROM: CITY MANAGER ~I SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM 9 ~ - MEETING OF AUGUST 27, 1991 ORDINANCE NO. 57-91 DATE: AUGUST 22, 1991 This is first reading of an ordinance rezoning Property located on the east side of Federal Highway, between LaMat Avenue and Avenue "F" from PC (Planned Commercial) District to POD (Professional and Office District). In February 1991, as part of Plan Amendment 91-1, the owner of Lots 1-5, Block 24, Del-Raton Park, sought a change from the "Transitional" land use designation to "General Commercial". At that time it was noted that the existing zoning of PC (Planned Commercial) for Lots 1-5, Block 24, Del-Raton Park, as well as other lots included in the petition were not consistent with the underlying future land use designation of "Transitional". At its April 22nd meeting, the Planning and Zoning Board recommended approval of the land use change request. At your April 30th special meeting, the Commission moved to retain the "Transitional" designation. Subsequently, at your July 9th meeting, the Commission authorized' staff to initiate a zoning change from PC to POD or a zoning district as allowed under the "Transitional" land use designation. Due to the restrictions on lot width, depth and minimum lot development sizes, only two zoning designations appear to be appropriate: RM (Medium Density Residential) or POD (Professional and Office District). The RM designation is appropriate if aggregation of these properties with those to the east is desired. POD is appropriate if aggregation is not desired. A determination as to the zoning category deemed most appropriate or desirable should be made by the Commission. The Planning and Zoning Board at their August 19th meeting recommended denial of the rezoning request on a 4-2 vote. The Board felt it was more appropriate to amend the Land Use Plan to General Commercial and to increase the depth of commercial properties as recommended with the Levy Land Use Plan Amendment. Staff recommends approval of a rezoning from PC (Planned Commercial) to POD (Professional and Office District) subject to positive findings with respect to Chapter 3 (Performance Standards) of the Land Development Regulations, policies of the Comprehensive Plan and Section 2.4.5 (D) (5). A detailed staff report is attached. ORDINANCE NO. 57-91 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, REZONING AND PLACING LAND PRESENTLY ZONED PC (PLANNED COMMERCIAL) DISTRICT IN POD (PROFESSIONAL AND OFFICE DISTRICT); SAID LAND BEING LOTS 1 THROUGH 5, INCLUSIVE, LESS THE WEST 38 FEET ST ROAD R/W & ABANDONED 10 FOOT ALLEY EAST OF AND ADJACENT THERETO, BLOCK 24, DEL-RATON PARK, TOGETHER WITH LOTS 6 THRU 10, INCLUSIVE, LESS THE WEST 38 FEET ST ROAD R/W AND 10 FOOT ABANDONED ALLEY LYING EAST OF AND ADJACENT THERETO, BLOCK 24, DEL-RATON PARK, TOGETHER WITH THE EAST 77 FEET OF LOTS 1 THRU 9, INCLUSIVE, AND LOTS 10, 11, 12, 26 AND 27, AND THE 10 FOOT ABANDONED ALLEY LYING WEST OF LOTS 10 AND 27, BLOCK 25, DEL-RATON PARK, ALL AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 14, PAGE 9, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA; AND AMENDING "ZONING DISTRICT MAP, DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, 1990"; PROVIDING A GENERAL REPEALER CLAUSE; PROVIDING A SAVING CLAUSE; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the following described property in the City of Delray Beach, Florida, is hereby rezoned and placed in the POD (Professional and Office District) as defined in Chapter Four of the Land Development Regulations of Delray Beach, Florida, to-wit: Lots 1 thru 5, Inclusive, less the West 38 feet St. Road R/W & Abandoned 10 foot alley east of and adjacent thereto, Block 24, Del-Raton Park, together with Lots 6 thru 10, Inclusive, less the West 38 feet St. Road R/W and 10 Foot alley lying east of and adjacent thereto, Block 24, Del-Raton Park, together with the East 77 feet of Lots 1 thru 9, inclusive, and Lots 10, 11, 12, 26 and 27, and the 10 foot abandoned alley lying west of Lots 10 and 27, Block 25, Del-Raton Park, all as recorded in Plat Book 14, Page 9, of the Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida. The subject property is located on the east side of Federal Highway, between LaMat Avenue and Avenue "F", Delray Beach, Florida. The above described parcel contains a 1.33 acre parcel of land, more or less. Section 2. That the Planning Director of said City shall, upon the effective date of this ordinance, change the Zoning District Map of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, to conform with the provisions of Section 1 hereof. Section 3. That all ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith be, and the same are hereby repealed. Section 4. 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 5. That this ordinance shall become effective imme- diately upon passage on second and final reading. PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular, session on second and final reading on this the __ day of , 1991. MAYOR ATTEST: City Clerk First Reading Second Reading -2- Ord. No. 57-91 REZONING OF A PORTION OF BLOCKS 24 and 25 DEL-RATON PARK SHERWOOD GMC TRUCKS aa TROPIC BAY' DEJ,,RAY TOYOTA IllOilL~ - HOIl( PARK SHERWOOD HONOA CITY COHMI SS ION DOCUMENTATION TO: DAVID HARDEN, CITY MANAGER FROM: PAUL DORLING, PLANNER II~~ SUBJECT: MEETING OF AUGUST 27, 1991 REZONING FROM PC TO POD OR A SIMILAR ZONING AS ~T.T~WED UNDER THE TRANSITIONAL LAND USE DESIGNATION ACTION REQUESTED OF THE CITY COMMISSION: The action requested of the City Commission is that of approval of a rezoning ordinance on first reading. The rezoning is from PC (Planned Commercial) to POD (Professional and Office District) or a zoning district as allowed under the "Transitional" land use designation. BACKGROUND: In February, 1991, as part of Plan Amendment 91-1, Mr. Levy (Lots 1-5, Block 24) sought a change from "Transition" land use designation to "General Commercial". At that time it was noted that the existing zoning of PC for Lots 1-5, Block 24 as well as other lots included in the petition were not consistent with the underlying future land use designation of "Transitional". On April 22, 1991 the Planning and Zoning Board recommended approval of the land use change request for Lots 1-5, Block 24 on a 6 to 1 vote while the City Commission on April 30, 1991 denied the request on a 4 to 1 vote. The City Commission on July 9, 1991 initiated a zoning change from PC (Planned Commercial) to POD (Professional and Office Districts) or a zoning district as allowed under "Transitional" land use designation. PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD CONSIDERATION: The Planning and Zoning Board formally reviewed this item at its meeting of August 19, 1991. The Board recommended denial of the rezoning request on a 4-2 vote (Krall and Beer descending). The Board felt it was more appropriate to amend the Land Use Plan to General Commercial and to increase the depth of commercial properties as recommended with Levy Land Use Plan Amendment considered earlier this year as part of Amendment 91-1. City Commission Documentation Rezoning from PC to POD a Similar Zoning as Allowed Under the Transtional Land Use Designation Page 2 Discussion with respect to each consistent zoning designation is contained within the attached staff report. Due to the restrictions on lot width, depth and minimum lot development sizes only two zoning designations appear to be appropriate. These include RM (Medium Density Residential) or POD (Professional and Office District). The RM designation is appropriate if aggregation of these properties with those to the east (similar property owners) is desired while POD is appropriate if aggregation is not desired. Please refer to the staff report for further background on the project and discussion with respect to each consistent zoning designation. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Recommend approval of a rezoning from PC (Planned Commercial) to POD (Professional and Office District) subject to positive findings with respect to Chapter 3 (Performance Standards) of the Land Development Regulations, policies of the Comprehensive Plan and Section 2.4.5 (D) (5). Attachment * P&Z Staff Report of August 19, 1991 PD/#41/CCTLU.TXT LANNING & ZO-NING BOARD CITY OF DELRAY BEACH ' --- STAFF REPORT----- MEETING DATE: August 19, 1991 AOENDA ITEM: III,D. ITEM: Rezoni~qfrom PC to RM and/or POD, Levy et al, South Federal ltighwa¥, Tropic Bay Bouleva[d to Avenue "F". ~ ~ TROPIC GENERAL DATA: Owner ........................... Stanley M. Levy George R. Paton Henry and Nanette Colombi Applicant ....................... David T. Harden, City Manager City of Delray Beach, Florida Location ........................ On the east side of Federal Highway, between La Mat Avenus and Avenue "F". Property Size ................... 1.69 Acres City Land Use Plan .............. Transitional City Zoning ..................... PC (Planned Commercial) Adjacent Zoning ................. Land to the east of the subject property is zoned RM (Multi- Family Residential - Medium Density), land the north and west is AC (Auto Related Commercial), and land to the south is PC. ~ Existing Land Use ............... Small retail and service '** businesses, and vacant unimproved land. Proposed Zoning ................. POD (Planned Office Development), or equivalent zoning which is allowed under the Transitional III.D. Land Use Designation of the Future Land Use MaD. I?E~ BEFORE THE BOARD: The item before the Board is that of making a recommendation on a proposed zoning change from PC (Planned Commercial) to POD (Planned Office development) or an equivalent zoning which is allowed under the "Transitional" Land Use designation. The effected property is located along the east side of Federal Highway between Tropic Bay Boulevard (LaMat) and the Ralph Buick dealership. The lots are described as Block 24 lots 1-5 (Levy), Block 24 lots 6-10 (Paton) and the abandoned 10' alley east of these lots, along with Block 25, lots 1-12, 26 & 27 and the 10' alley east of lots 1-12(Colombi). BACKGROUND: Prior to June, 1989, the subject property was in unincorporated Palm Beach County. The Planning and Zoning Board, during the Enclave annexations, recommended approval of the annexation and initial zoning for the property as part of Enclave 50 on June 19, 1989. At that time an alternative zoning for the above lots of either (GC) General Commercial or (SC) Specialized Commercial was presented. The (SC) alternative was advertised in anticipation of requests from the property owners of lots 1-10 Block 24 to retain the potential for auto related uses as was the previous use of the property (Auto Ranch). Pursuant to the Comprehensive Plan the Future Land Use Element Policy A2.4 restricted the use of the site for auto dealerships, unless the site was zoned and being used as an auto dealership. At that time the property was unoccupied and a staff recommendation for GC was put forth. The Planning and Zoning recommendation of GC for all of the lots included in this petition was forwarded and approved by the City Commission via Ordinance 38-89 on July 25~ 1989. Upon annexation on July 25, 1989 the GC zoning designation was consistent with the then "commercial" land use designation. A "transitional" land use designation was affixed to the property with the adoption of the Future Land Use Map on November 28, 1989. At this time the GC zoning designation became inconsistent with the "transitional" land use designation. In September, 1990 zoning changes City-wide were implemented to bring the zoning map consistent with the Land Use Map. At this time the zoning designation for the lots was changed from GC to PC. Properties abutting Federal Highway directly to the south were also rezoned to PC. However, neither GC or PC zoning designations are consistent with the current "transitional" land use designation. P&Z Staff Report Rezoning from PC to RM and/or POD Page 2 In February of 1991, as a part of Plan amendment 91-1, Mr Levy (Lots 1-5 Block 24) sought a change from "Transitional" land use designation to "General commercial''. At that time it was noted that the existing zoning of PC for lots 1-5 block 24 as well as other lots included in the petition were not consistent with the underlying future land use designation of "Transitional". On April 22, 1991 the Planning and Zoning Board recommended approval of the land use change request for Block 24 lots 1-5 on a 6 to 1 vote while the City Commission on April 30, 1991 denied the request on a 4 to 1 vote. The City Commission on July 9, 1991 initiated a zoning change from PC (Planned Commercial) to POD (Professional and Office District) or a zoning designation allowed under "transitional" land use designation of similar intensity. This is the petition before you. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The properties being rezoned are owned by three property owners, (Levy) Block 24 lots 1-5, (Paton) Block 24 lots 6-10 and (Colombi) Block 25 lots 1-12, 26, 27. Lots 1-10, Block 24 are currently vacant and contain an asphalted area previously utilized for the "Auto Ranch" use. Lots 1-4, (Block 25) contains a spa/pool/dive supply retail use, lots 26 and 27 (Block 25) the spa supples parking lot, Lot 5 (Block 25) an insurance office use, lots 6-9 (Block 25) a pawn shop, Lot 10 and 11 (block 25) a Park Avenue Limousine use, and Lot 12 ( Block 25) is currently vacant. The RM property east of these lots to Frederick Boulevard are also owned by the above three property owners. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANALYSIS: Land Use Analysis: Th'e current land use designation for the site is "Transitional". Pursuant to the Future Land Use Map two types of transitional land use exist, "Medium Density Residential Transitional" and "Commercial Transitional". Transitional - Medium Density Residential is applied to land which is developed, or is to be developed, at a density between five and twelve units per acre. These uses include mobile home parks and apartment development in addition to condominiums. Continuing Care Facilities, A.C.L.F.s, and various types of group homes are appropriate under this designation. In some instances this designation provides for a transition between less intensive residential use and commercial uses. P&Z Staff Report Rezoning from PC to RM and/or POD Page 3 Transitional - Commercial is applied to land which is developed, or is to be developed, for nonresidential purposes but at an intensity equivalent to that associated with medium density residential land use. In some instances this designation provides for a transition between less intensive residential use and commercial uses. In other instances, this designation allows the establishment of uses which are compatible with adjacent residential uses. While in others, it provides for a use which is not as intensive as general commercial in areas where residential use is not desirable and/or appropriate. The specific type of transitional land use is controlled by the underlying zoning designations. However, the current zoning designation for all Lots (PC) is not consistent with either type of transitional land use designation (see discussion under zoning analysis). The surrounding Land Use Map designations to the north, west, and south is General Commercial, and transitional to the east. The existing land uses are Automotive Dealerships to the north (Ralph Buick); and (Delray Toyota) west across Federal Highway; , to the east a combination of vacant lots and single family homes and to the south commercial uses. The Housing element of the Comprehensive Plan has designated the area as a housing redevelopment area. However the Land Use Plan doesn't designate the area as one of the "redevelopment area". Therefore thought there is an enthuses on housing mixed uses are not precluded by virtue of the transitional land use designation. The following Comprehensive Plan, Goals, Objectives and Polices apply to this proposal: Land Use Objective Al: Vacant property shall be developed in a manner so that the future use and intensity is appropriate in terms of soil, topographic, and other applicable physical considerations, is complementary to adjacent land uses, and fulfills remaining land use needs. The proposed zoning change would allow for development of less intense use than those commercial uses which exist to the north, south, and west, as well as those which could be developed under the current zoning of (PC). The less intense office or similar intensity uses would provide a transition area for residential uses to the east. P&Z Staff Report Rezoning from PC to RM and/or POD Page 4 Land Use Policy A-1.3: Additional strip commercial zoning on vacant land shall be avoided. This policy shall not preclude rezonings on land that at the time of rezoning has improvements on it. Where existing strip commercial uses or zoning exist along an arterial street, consideration should be given to increasing the depth of the commercial zoning in order to provide for better project design. The current depth of the commercial parcels lends itself to strip commercial uses. With a change of zoning from a commercial designation this potential will be removed. The City Commission did review a Land Use designation change (Levy) Lots 1-5, Block 24 with 91-1 which would have increased commercial property depth. On April 30, 1991 they denied the request. Land Use Policy A-5.6 For each item acted upon by the Local Planning Agency, the revised land use regulations shall require that the LPA make specific findings as to: * consistency with the Future Land Use Map and its supporting policies. * internal consistency with other elements of the Comprehensive Plan. * concurrency pursuant to Policy B-2.2 of the Land use Element. * other items as they apply to the level of decision being made and corresponding principles and practices of urban planning. These requirements have been included in the LDR's and, and 'Required Fundings of Section 3.1 states the zoning must be consistent with the land use designation. Capital Improvement Policy A-7.1: A finding of consistency shall not be made if the zoning designation for the project is not consistent with the designations on the Future Land Use Map, and its supporting policies. A finding of consistency shall not be made if the project will not meet the test of concurrency pursuant to Policy A-3.6 of this element. A finding of consistency may be made even though the project will be in conflict with some individual policy statements contained within the Plan; provided that the LPA finds that the beneficial aspects of the project (hence implementation of some policies) outweighs the negative impacts of the identified points of conflict. P&Z Staff Report Rezoning from PC to RM and/or POD Page 5 Neiqhborhood Task Team: An Ad Hoc Committee was appointed by the City Commission with a goal to review 17 specific neighborhoods. These neighborhoods were analyzed against policies contained within the Housing elements and formal recommendations were presented to the City Commission. Neighborhood #16 included property from Avenue F south to Avenue H between Federal Highway and Florida Boulevard, which includes the subject lots. The Task Team recommended the following for this neighborhood: * That the residential character of the area be maintained and the zoning be changed to RM to accommodate multi-family residential development such as townhouses. * Code Enforcement activity is needed to address overgrown vacant lots within the area. * That commercial establishments on Federal Highway, the Car Rental, 7-Eleven, Discount Lighting, all refurbish building exteriors, upgrade landscaping and provide a wall to separate the commercial from the residential area. These recommendations were contained within the Final Task Team report which was recommended for approval by Planning and Zoning Board on February 25, 1991, and was accepted as the final report by the City Commission on March 13, 1991. ZONING ANALYSIS: The current zoning designation for Lots 1-10 Block 24 and Lots 1-12 and lots 26 & 27 of Block 25 is PC (Planned Commercial) The PC designation appear to have been affixed to the parcels in September, 1990 as a drafting error resulting from a failure to check closely the zoning designations against the Future Land Use Map. The above parcels appear to be an extension of the PC areas which exist to the south yet have a consistent Commercial Land Use designation. The PC zoning is applied to properties designated as commercial on the Future Land Use Map where unified development is, or will be, in excess of five acres; or when it is appropriate to preserve the character of certain speciality retail and office centers: or to ensure that certain high visibility areas are attractively developed. The PC zoning also requires that any free standing structure shall have a minimum floor area of 6,000 sq.ft, further encouraging aggregation of smaller commercial properties. Given the size of individual lots 25' x 87' and 25' x 115', multiple land owners, as well as the inconsistency with the "transitional" land use designation the existing zoning designation of PC is inappropriate. P&Z Staff Report Rezoning from PC to RM and/or POD Page 6 The Zoning districts which are consistent with the current "Transitional Commercial" land use designation are: - Residential Office (RO) - Neighborhood Commercial (NC) - Planned Office Center (POC) - Community Facilities (CF) - Professional and Office District (POD)* - Medium Density Residential (RM) - Mobile Home Parks (MH) * This district is being added via comprehensive plan amendment 91-1 ** Medical, Office & Institutional (MOI) is listed as consistent in the Comprehensive plan but is removed pursuant to 91-1 Comprehensive Plan amendment Residential Office (RO): The residential office district provides for a mixed use of a neighborhood office and residential nature. The RO district is appropriate as a transitional land use between commercial areas and residential areas, an incentive zoning in older residential areas , or to accommodate professional offices which will serve the nearby neighborhoods. All uses in this district will require all buildings and structures to be residential in character regardless of the actual use. The district further requires a minimum lot width of 80', a minimum depth of 100' and an 8,000 minimum lot size. Given the location and size of the lots along with the mixed use requirements (residential component) this zoning designation is not appropriate for these parcels. Professional Office District (POD): This zoning designation is created to provide a very limited application of Professional, office, and similar intensity uses to transitional land use categories thus mitigating against adverse effects which may occur with higher intensity applications of such usage. This district has no minimum lot sizes, width, or depth. This district would accommodate development of these lots with office uses. NeighborhOod Commercial (NC): This zoning district provides the opportunity to locate limited retail and service uses orientated to neighborhood uses. The NC district may be located in transitional land use areas where nonresidential use is appropriate for the location. This P&Z Staff Report Rezoning from PC to RM and/or POD Page 7 district contains a one (1) acre minimum lot size, 100' minimum lot width, 200' lot depth and a 4,000 square foot minimum building size. The existing lots do not accommodate these required minimums. Further, if NC zoning was applied to these lots, given there size and width, the resulting commercial development would be strip commercial in conflict with the Land Use Policy A.1.3. Planned Office Center (POC): The Planned Office Center District provides for the concentration of office and support uses in a well planned and managed environment. It is not intended that the district be for commercial activities in which commercial activities goods and merchandise are stored, displayed, or sold except as appropriate to meet the needs of uses of the POC. The POC district has a 1 acre minimum lot size, 3 acre minimum development size and a 4,000 sq.ft, minimum building size. Given these restrictions this zoning district is not appropriate. Community Facilities (CF): The Community Facilities is a special purpose zone district primarily intended for facilities which serve the public and semipublic purposes. This is a site specific zoning designation for existing or proposed facilities and is therefore an inappropriate zoning designation. Medium Density Residential (RM): The medium density residential district provides a residential zoning district with flexible density having a base of six (6) units per acre and a range to twelve (12) units per acre. Given the depth, width and location of the lots, a zoning designation of RM would be inappropriate. However, if aggregation of these lots with properties to the east is desired, this would be an appropriate zoning designation. It is noted that the properties to the east are RM and are of similar ownership. Pursuant to Section 2.4.5(D) with a zoning change application traffic information which addresses the development of the property under reasonable intensity pursuant to existing and proposed zoning is requested. The following information has been prepared by the Cities Traffic Engineer and represents maximum development densities for each zone district. It is noted that both PC and NC have minimum building square footages of 6,000 sq.ft, and 4,000 sq.ft, which cannot be accommodated on Lots 1-5 and 6-10. However, maximum development potential is provided for comparison purposes. P&Z Staff Report Rezoning from PC to RM and/or POD Page 8 Property PC NC POD POC RM RO (1) (1) (3) (3) (5) (7) Blk 24 Lt 1-5 2273(TPD) 2273(TPD) 160(TPD) 160(TPD) 12 Levy (1) (1) (3) (3) (5) (7) Blk 24 Lt 6-10 2273(TPD) 2273(TPD) 160(TPD) 160(TPD) 12 Paton (2) (2) (4) (4) (6) (7) Blk 25 Lt 1-12 3536(TPD) 3536(TPD) 513(TPD) 513(TPD) 98 26,27 Colombi (1) Based on 2,800 sq.ft. Convenience Store with Gas Pumps (2) Based on 4,000 sq.ft. Convenience Store with Gas Pumps and a 7,094 sq.ft. Strip Commercial Center (3) Based on 6,500 sq.ft. General Office Building (4) Based on 26,000 sq.ft. General Office Building (5) Based on 2 Residential Units (6) Based on 8 Residential Units (7) Due to the Mixed Use nature of RO traffic generation rates will be between those of RM and POD/POC. REQUIRED FINDINGS: (Chapter 3) Pursuant to 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 use or structures must be allowed in the zoning district and the zoning district must be consistent with the land use designation). A proposed use has not been provided at this time. The zoning district under consideration are all consistent with the "Transitional" land use designation. Concurrency: 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 P&Z Staff Report Rezoning from PC to RM and/or POD Page 9 Comprehensive Plan. For sewer and water, concurrency shall mean that direct connection to a functioning municipal system is made. For streets (traffic), drainage, open space (parks), and solid waste, concurrency shall be determined by the following: * The improvement is in place prior to issuance of the occupancy permit; * The improvement is bonded, as part of the subdivision improvements agreement or similar instrument, and there a schedule of completion in the bonding agreement; * The improvement is part of a governmental capital improvement budget; it has been designed; and a contract for installation has been solicited. Water: Water is available from an 8" main within Tropic Bay Boulevard (LaMat). Future development will require extension of the 8" main from LaMat north to the north property lines. Fire hydrants along this main must also be provided. Sewer: Sewer is available within Tropic Bay Boulevard (LaMat). Future development will require sewer main extension north from Tropic Bay Boulevard. Drainage: Drainage must be accommodated on-site either through swale areas, exfiltration trenches or a combination of both. Streets and Traffic: Traffic information has been provided with the application. As we do not have a specific development proposal, worse cause scenarios were used to calculate potential traffic impact differences between the development potential under the existing and proposed zoning districts. The traffic information notes a potential of between 2273 and 3536 trips from the current zoning and a potential of from 12 and 98 TPD to 2273 and 3536 TPD for the potential zoning districts. (See traffic graph.) Parks and Open Space: Park dedication requirements do not apply for nonresidential uses. Open space requirements are a function of Section 4.6.4(A)(District boundary) and Section 4.6.16(H)(3)(perimeter requirements), Section 4.6.16(E) (Internal landscape requirements) as well as Section 4.3.4.(H)(6)(b) (Special P&Z Staff Report Rezoning from PC to RM and/or POD Page 10 Landscape Setbacks). These requirements must be met with future development proposals. Solid Waste: As we do not have a specific development proposal no concerns with respect to solid waste can be addressed at this time. Consistency: Compliance with the performance standards set forth in Section 3.3.2, along with the required findings in 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 of a finding of overall consistency. The applicable performance standards of Section 3.3.2 and other policies which apply are as follows: A) Performance Standard 3.3.2(A) states that a rezoning to other than CF within stable residential areas shall be denied. All lots are not located within a stabilized neighborhood and the above is therefore not applicable. B) Performance Standard 3.3.3(C) states: Additional strip commercial zoning on vacant properties shall be avoided. This policy shall not preclude rezonings on land that at the time of rezoning has improvements on it. Where existing strip commercial areas or zoning exists along an arterial street, consideration should be given to increasing the depth of the commercial zoning in order to provide for better project design. (LU A-1.3) Given the size .and depth of the lots any commercial zoning designation would promote establishment of strip commercial uses. C) Performance Standard 3.3.2(D) states: That the rezone 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 rezoning would allow a transitional land use designation between commercial uses along Federal Highway and transitional residential uses to the east. It could be argued that the transitional nature of the neighborhood west of Frederick Boulevard makes Frederick Boulevard a more appropriate border between commercial and residential districts. P&Z Staff Report Rezoning from PC to RM and/or POD Page 11 Adjacent property compatibility can be enhanced through application of specific regulations of Section 4.6.4.(A) (District separation requirements) and 4.6.16 (H)(3)(e) (perimeter landscape requirements). These include: Pursuant to Section 4.6.4(A)(1) (Commercial Zoning Adjacent to Residential Zoning) where the rear or side of commercially zoned property directly abuts residentially zoned property without any division or separation between them, such as a street, alley, railroad, waterway, park, or other public open space, the commercially zoned property shall provide a ten foot building setback from the property line located adjacent to the residentially zoned property. In addition, either a solid finished masonry wall six feet in height, or a continuous hedge at least 4-1/2 feet in height at the time of installation, shall be located inside and adjacent to the portion of the boundary line of the commercially zoned property which directly abuts the residentially zoned property. Pursuant to Section 4.6.16 (H)(3)(e) (Landscape requirements) where any commercial area abuts a residential Zoning District or properties in residential use, one tree shall be'planted every 25' to form.a solid tree line. LDR Compliance: Pursuant to Section 2.4.5 (D)(1), a justification statement providing the reason for which the change is being sought must accompany all rezoning requests. The code further identifies certain valid reasons for approving the change being sought. These reasons include the following: * That the zoning had previously been changed, or was originally established, in error; * That there has been a change in circumstance which makes the current zoning inappropriate; * 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. P&Z Staff Report Rezoning from PC to RM and/or POD Page 12 Pursuant to Section 2.4.5(d)(5), the City Commission is required to make a finding that the petition will fulfill one of these reasons. The applicable reason for this zoning change was that the zoning was originally established in error. The PC designation appears to have been applied to these parcels as an extension of the PC zoning designation to the south. REVIEW BY OTHERS: The development proposal is not in a geographic areas requiring review by either the (HPB) Historic Preservation Board, DBA (Downtown Development Authority), or the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency). Special notice has been provided to the Tropic Palms Homeowners Association (TPHA). As of this writing there has not been a formal response from TPHA. ASSESSMENT AND CONCLUSIONS: It is acknowledged that the current zoning has been affixed to the property in error. The current (PC) zoning designation is inconsistent with the underlying "transitional" land use designation. Therefore, pursuant to the policies with in the Comprehensive Plan and Section 3.1.1(A) of the LDR's the zoning designation must be consistent with the Future Land Use Plan. This can be achieved either through amendment of the Future Land Use Map or the Zoning Map. The City Commission has recently denied a Land Use designation change for a portion of the properties which would have been consistent with the PC district. This factor, along with Land Use Element Policy A-1.3 which discourages strip commercial zoning, and an expressed desire of the City Commission to aggregate properties in this area would make a change in land use designation to be consistent with PC zoning inappropriate. Therefore, a zoning change would be required to achieve consistency between the plans. Each consistent zoning designation has been discussed and if aggregation of the properties with properties to the east is desired RM zoning is appropriate. If aggregation is not desired POD (Professional and Office District) is appropriate. ALTERNATIVES: A. Continue with direction. B. Recommend denial of the rezoning request based upon a failure to make a positive finding with respect to Chapter 3 (Performance Standard) and a failure to fulfill one of the reasons established under Section 4.4.5(D)(5). P&Z Staff Report Rezoning from PC to RM and/or POD Page 13 C. Recommend approval of the proposed zoning change to an appropriate designation as an allowed under the "transitional" land use designation. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Recommend approval of a rezoning from PC (Planned Commercial) to POD (Professional and Office District) subject to positive findings with respect to Chapter 3 (Performance Standards) of the Land Development Regulations, polices of the Comprehensive Plan and Section 2.4.5(D)(5). PD/#41/LEVYRE1.TXT SHERWOOD OMC TRUCKS RALPH BUICK ~ AVENUE G DELRAY ~I .... TOYOTA ~~ ~I I -- -- ! ~ 1 LA-MAT ~ AVENUE 0 "!~t.~J ' ' AVENUE H ' SHERWOOD Ok, lC TRUCKS RALPH BUICK .~ AVENUE F O DELRAY , TOYOTA ', J LA-MAT.u:=) AVENUE 0 AVENUE H File # 91-137 SUBJECT: PROPOSED CITY INITIATED REZONING OF YOUR PROPERTY LYING WITHIN BLOCK 24 DEL-RATON PARK PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: LOTS 1 THRU 5 INCLUSIVE~ LESS THE WEST 38 FEET ST ROAD R/W~ & ABANDONED 10' ALLEY EAST OF ADJACENT THERETO~ BLOCK 24~ DEL-RATON PARK RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 14~ PAGE 9 CURRENT ZONING: PC (PLANNED COMMERCIAL) DISTRICT PROPOSED ZONING: POD OR AN EQUIVALENT ZONING WHICH IS ALLOWED UNDER THE TRANSITIONAL LAND USE DESIGNATION OF THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP. Pursuant to Chapter Two of the Land Development Regulations of the City of Delray Beach, you are hereby notified that the Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, as Local Planning Agency, is considering whether to recommend to the City Commission a change in the zone district for your property as shown on the attached map. The Planning and Zoning Board will hold a Public Hearing on Monday~ August 19~ 1991~ at 7:00 P.M., in the City Commission Chambers at the City Hall, 100 N.W. 1st Avenue, Delray Beach, Florida, for the purpose of receiving public comment, and your comments or those of your representative with regard to this proposed action. You are not required to attend this meeting or to have someone there to represent you; however, you are 'welcome to do so if you desire. The City Commission will consider the Planning and Zoning Board's recommendation on the rezoning of this property on first reading of the enacting Ordinance at a meeting to be held on Tuesday, August 27~ 1991. This meeting will begin at 6:00 P.M., with the public hearing / comments portion of the agenda occurring at 7:00 P.M. A Public Hearing in conjunction with second reading of the enacting~Ordinance will be held on Tuesday, September 10, 1991~ at 7:00 P.M. for the purpose of receiving public comment, and your comments or those of your representative with regard to this PUBLIC NOTICE FILE 91-137 PAGE TWO proposed action. You are not required to attend this meeting or to have someone there to represent you; however, you are welcome to do so if you desire. The City Commission meetings are held in the City Commission Chambers at the City Hall, 100 N.W. 1st Avenue, Delray Beach, Florida, PLEASE BE ADVISED THAT IF A PERSON DECIDES TO APPEAL ANY DECISION MADE BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD OR CITY COMMISSION WITH RESPECT TO ANY MATTER CONSIDERED AT THESE HEARINGS, SUCH PERSONS WILL NEED A RECORD OF THESE PROCEEDINGS, AND FOR THIS PURPOSE SUCH PERSONS MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS BASED. THE CITY DOES NOT PROVIDE OR PREPARE SUCH RECORD. PURSUANT TO F.S. 286.0105. If you would like further information with regard to how this proposed action may affect your property, please contact the Planning Department, City Hall, 100 N.W. 1st Avenue, Delray Beach, Florida 33444, Phone: 407/243-7040, between the hours of 8:00 A.M. and 5:00 P.M. on weekdays (excluding holidays). CITY OF DELRAY BEACH Alison MacGregor Harty City Clerk