HomeMy WebLinkAboutR-2008-189 Towne Place Variance RESOLUTION NO. 2008-189
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF DANIA BEACH, FLORIDA, APPROVING
THE VARIANCE REQUEST SUBMITTED BY SCOTT BACKMAN, ESQUIRE
REPRESENTING PROPERTY OWNER JOAN LETO TRUSTEE, JOAN LETO
REVOCABLE TRUST,FROM CHAPTER 28,"ZONING",ARTICLE 6.22,"OFF-
STREET LOADING REQUIREMENTS" AND ARTICLE 5.20, HEIGHT
REGULATIONS,FOR PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTH
SIDE OF STIRLING ROAD APPROXIMATELY'/4 MILE NORTHWEST OF THE
I-95 /STIRLING ROAD EXIT, IN THE CITY OF DANIA BEACH; PROVIDING
FOR CONFLICTS; FURTHER, PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the Dania Beach Code of Ordinances, Chapter 28, "Zoning", Article 6.22,
prescribes the off street loading regulations for the City of Dania Beach; and
WHEREAS, the Dania Beach Code of Ordinances, Chapter 28, "Zoning", Article 5.20,
prescribes the height regulations for the City of Dania Beach; and
WHEREAS,Scott Backman,Esquire representing Joan Leto Trustee,Joan Leto Revocable
Trust, has applied for a variance (VA-43-08) to allow the following:
1. To allow one(1) loading berth; (Chapter 28, "Zoning", Article 6.22, "Off-Street Loading"
requires four(4));
2. To allow the building height to be 6-stories / 55 feet; (Chapter 28, "Zoning", Article 5.20,
"Height Regulations" allows a maximum of 5-stories/62 foot height);
for property generally located on the north side of Stirling Road approximately''/4 mile northwest of
the I-951 Stirling Road exit, Dania Beach; and
WHEREAS,the Planning&Zoning Board on September 17, 2008 recommended that the
City Commission grant the variance requests of Application VA-43-08, based upon the criteria set
forth in section 10.13 of Article 10, of Chapter 28,"Zoning",of the Code of Ordinances of the City
of Dania Beach;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF DANIA BEACH, FLORIDA:
Section 1. That that certain application VA-43-08, for the variances described above
from requirements in Chapter 28,"Zoning",of the City of Dania Beach Code of Ordinances,a copy
of which application is attached and made a part of this Resolution as Exhibit "A", is approved.
Section 2. That all resolutions or parts of resolutions in conflict with this Resolution are
repealed to the extent of such conflict.
Section 3. That this Resolution shall be in force and take effect immediately upon its
passage and adoption.
PASSED AND ADOPTED on October 14, 2008.
ALBLfkT C. JONES
MAYOR—COMMISSI ER
ARDS f�Rrr
ATTEST: — �o
LO ISE STILSO MC
CITY CLERK
��aarFv •`'
APPROVED AS T O AND CORRECTNESS:
BY:
THOM)kSV A BRO
CITY ATTORNEY
2 RESOLUTION#2008-189
City of Dania Beach, Florida
Department of Community Development
Planning and Zoning Division
(954)924-3645 Phone
www.daniabeachfl.gov
General Development Application
❑ Administrative Variance
■ Assignment of Flex/Reserve Units
❑ Land Use Amendment
❑ Plat
❑ Plat Delegation Request
❑ Rezoning Date Rec'd: \�
■ Site Plan ��
❑ Special Exception f 7 2DD8 Petition No.:
❑ Trafficway Waiver
■ Variance
❑ Roadway Vacation
❑ Extended Hours
❑ Other:
THIS APPLICATION WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED UNTIL IT IS COMPLETE AND SUBMITTED WITH
ALL NECESARRY DOCUMENTS. Refer to the application type at the top of this form and "Required
Documentation"checklist to determine the supplemental documents required with each application.
For after the fact applications, the responsible contractor of record shall be present at the board hearing.
Their failure to attend may impact upon the disposition of your application. As always, the applicant or their
authorized legal agent must be present at all meetings. All projects must also obtain a building permit from
the City's Building Department.
Location Address: N/A
Lot(s): N/A Block: N/A Subdivision: N/A
Recorded Plat Name: Leto Park Plat
Folio Number(s): 5042 3337 0011 Legal Description: See Attached Exhibit"A"
Applicant/Consultan al Representative Circle one)Scott Backman. Eso.
Address of Applicant: 5355 Town Center Road Suite 801 Born Raton FL 33486
Business Telephone: (561)237-1537 Home: N/A Fax: (561)544-8858
Name of Property Owner: Joan Leto Trustee,Joan Leto Revokable Trust
Address of Property Owner: 31 an Stidin0 Road Hollymod FL 33021
Business Telephone: N/A Home: N/A Fax: N/A
Explanation of Request: See attached Variance Justification Statement
For Pfats please provide proposed Plat Name for Variances please attach Criteria Statement as per
Art cle 10.13 of Chapter 28, Zoning Code.
Prop. Net Acreage: 2.34 Gross Acreage: 2.34 Prop. Square Footage: 101.828 so.ft.
Existing Use: Vacant Proposed Use: 127 room hotel
Is property owned individually, by a corporation,or a joint venture? individually
- -- - ------ - --
I understand ite plan and variance approval automatically expires within 12
months mmission approval, Pursuant to Ordinance Na 21)05-040.
1-21aA � ? - /it -pS
iicant er signature Print Name Date
APPLICANT, CONSULTANT,OR LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE NOTARIZED SIGNATURE
Sworn to and subscribed before me Applimnt/Consulta ep n 've:
This day of .2C
SigriaRure'
Date; 7- /4 -08
�Q Scott Backman,Esq.
Sign Name of Notary Public (Print Narne)
state of( �7i-p Q lIDV�)
5355 Town Canter Road, Suite W1, Boca Raton.FL 33486
Print Name of Notary —� Street Address, City, State and Zip Code
NY.WNY.NMNNNNN.�
Co
S01016 A PMILLIPS F (561)237-1537 & (561)544-BOU
Seal .ma000r B Telephone No. &Fax No.
W'ftdM
VNN..NNN NRo,ift r::: :,r . .:.'. .L
INDIVIDUAL OWNER NOT BRED SIGNATURE:
This Is to certify that I am the f simple owner of subject hinds described above and that I have authorized
(Applicant/Consultant/Represent3We) to make and file the
aforesaid application.
Swoon to and subsdbed before me Owner. A -LE-f0
This��ay of V 2 T l_ a-
Signature*.
D
Date:
i ce Jo,4N tt LETo
Sign Name rr Notary Pubic (Print Name)
Stake of( j5�-144Ci cl )
Zf 31co
Print Name of Notary L / Street Address,City,State and tip Code
Commission Expires: T I� rco-i ) -i S`1 -`) 5 zz,
Seat: Telep%ne No. &Fax No.
ROM
NMN.�YYN.�IOM�.�NtWO..N
s 6pIiM 0/12ot1
Mary ---,.,i•-
rz:cc.un.NNNmwxN.Nunnvev«c:a
SIEGEL, LIPMAN, DUNAY, SHEPAKD & MISKEL, LLP
GARY S. DUNAY THE PLAZA • SUITE BOI
(561) 368-7700
KENNETH W. LIPMAN 5355 TOWN CENTER ROAD FAX (561) 355-9274
BONNIE MISKEL
JONATHAN L. SHEPARD BOCA BATON, FLORIDA 33486 WWW.SLDSMLAW.COM
CARL E. SIEGEL
I
LINDA 5. LYMAN "
JUL 17 20D8
i
VARIANCE JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT
Petitioner is proposing to develop a 130 room 6-story Towne Place Suites by
Marriott on a portion of the Leto Park Plat within the City of Dania Beach, Florida
("Property"). The Property is generally located on the north side of Stirling Road
approximately '% mile northwest of the 1-95 / Stirling Road exit. The Property is zoned
IROC — Industrial Residential Office & Commercial District, which permits the proposed
hotel use. The Property is currently undeveloped and has access to Stirling Road via
S.W. 19t" Court, a currently unimproved right-of-way that will be constructed in
connection with the development of the proposed hotel.
In association with the proposed development of the Property, Petitioner is
requesting the following variances from the City of Dania Beach Zoning Code ("Code"):
1. Variance from Chapter 28, Article 5.20 of the Code
to permit a maximum heigh
t of 6 stories or 67 feet
10 inches where the Code requires a maximum
height of 5 stories or 62 feet (the "Height
Variance");
2. Variance from Chapter 28, Article 6.22 of the Code
to permit a total of 1 loading berth where the Code
requires 4 loading berth spaces (the "Loading
Berth Variance");
3. Variance from Chapter 28, Article 28.120 of the
Code to permit wall signs on the north and south
sides of the building where the Code only allows
signage on the side facing the street (the "Wall
Sign Variance").
As discussed in greater detail below, each of the above variance requests comply with
the City's variance review criteria. In particular, Petitioner will demonstrate that: (a)
special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the land; (b) the special
conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the petitioner; (c) the
granting of the variance will not confer on the petitioner any special privileges; (d) the
literal interpretation would deprive the petitioner of rights commonly enjoyed by others in
the IROC zoning district; (e) the variance is the minimum variance that would make
granting of the variance would be in harmony with
reasonable use of the land; and (f) the gra g
the intent of the land development regulations.
Height_ V� ariance -Variance from Chapter 28, Article 5.20 of the Code to permit a 6-
story building with a maximum height of 67 feet, 10 inches where the Code
permits a 5-story building with a maximum height of 62 feet.
(a) Special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the Property and
which are not applicable to other lands, structures or buildings in the same zoning
district;
Special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the Property and are
not applicable to other lands, structures or buildings in the same zoning district. As
noted above, the Property is located on the north side of Stirling Road approximately %-
mile east of the 1-95 / Stirling Road exit. The Property does not have direct frontage on
Stirling Road. The vast majority of patrons staying at the hotel are projected as business
travelers and tourists visiting South Florida, most of whom will be unfamiliar with South
Florida geography and travelling to the Property by way of 1-95. In order for the
proposed hotel to operate effectively, potential patrons must know where the hotel is
located. Making matters worse in this case is the recent development of the 6-story Best
Western hotel located directly between the Property and 1-95, which will significantly
impair line of sight to the Property from 1-95. Therefore, Petitioner is requesting the
Height Variance to allow for the development of a hotel similar to that which was already
approved on the neighboring property.
(b) The special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of
Petitioner,
The special conditions and circumstances noted above do not result from the actions of
Petitioner. In particular, the lack of visibility associated with the Property is the result of
the urban sprawl impacting South Florida, which has resulted in several developed
properties located between 1-95 and the Property. Petitioner is proposing to develop a
property that does not front directly on Stirling Road and has impaired visibility from 1-95
due to the Best Western hotel that was recently constructed. Therefore the additional
height is needed to direct patrons to the proposed use as well as match the height of
similar uses in the area.
(c) Granting the variance requested will not confer on Petitioner any special privilege
that is denied by this chapter to other lands, buildings or structures in this same zoning
district,
Granting the Height Variance would not confer on Petitioner any special privilege that is
denied to other properties within the IROC zoning district. The Best Western adjacent to
the site was previously granted a similar variance to allow for the development of one
additional story. Petitioner is simply requesting the Height Variance in order to provide
greater visibility for the hotel considering the location of the Property in relation to 1-95
and Stirling Road as well as adjacent to the 6-story Best Western.
, R
uL
(d) Literal interpretation of the provisions of this chapter would deprive Petitioner of
rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same zoning district under the terms
of this chapter and would work unnecessary and undue hardship on Petitioner,
Literal interpretation of the Code would deprive Petitioner of rights commonly enjoyed by
other properties in the same zoning district and would work unnecessary and undue
hardship on Petitioner. In particular, because the Property is not immediately adjacent
to 1-95 or Stirling Road like many other hotels in the City, existing and potential
customers would likely have a difficult time making their way to the hotel from the airport.
Without the Height Variance on the Property, the proposed hotel would lose significant
visibility from I-95 and Stirling Road, which would ultimately impact business operations
for the hotel.
(e) The variance granted is the minimum variance that will make possible the
reasonable use of the land, building or structure;
The Height Variance is the minimum variance that will allow Petitioner to make
reasonable use of the Property. As noted above, Petitioner is permitted to develop a 5-
story building with a maximum height of 62 feet. Through the Height Variance, Petitioner
is simply seeking an additional story although the height is only increasing 5 feet, 10
inches more than what is currently permitted.
(0 Granting the variance will be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of this
chapter, and such variance will not be injurious to the area involved or otherwise
detrimental to the public welfare.
Granting the Height Variance would not be injurious to the surrounding properties or to
the public welfare. Indeed, the Height Variance will simply permit the proposed hotel
sufficient visibility from 1-95 to allow hotel patrons to find the Property. This request is
consistent with several of the other hotels approved in the City along this corridor. In
addition, approval of the Height Variance will further serve to promote the City as a
business and tourist destination.
Loading Berth Variance - Variance from Chapter 28, Article 6.22 of the Code to
permit a total of 1 loading berth where the Code requires 4 loading berth spaces.
(a) Special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the Property and
which are not applicable to other lands, structures or buildings in the same zoning
district.
Special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the Property and which
are not applicable to other lands, structures or buildings in the same zoning district. In
this case, Petitioner is requesting a variance to reduce the required number of loading
berth spaces for the proposed hotel by 3 spaces. The Loading Berth Variance is
necessitated by the fact that the proposed hotel will have one loading area located in the
rear of the building. The proposed hotel is a commercial use that does not require the
typical loading spaces that other commercial and retail uses require. The proposed hotel
handles all laundry on-site and any light food items that are served will be brought in by
hotel staff or an occasional small box truck delivery. As such, the one loading space at
the rear of the building will be sufficient to serve the proposed use.
Jui 1 7 [nG6
(b) The special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the
applicant.
The special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of Petitioner.
Indeed, the loading berth requirements as established by Chapter 26, Article 6 of the
Code do not differentiate between the various commercial and retail uses that typically
result,require loading berth spaces. As a
demand forr load ng spaces that othercommer hotel cial uses generallyrreque early the same
e.
confer on
titioner
that srdemed by thisr chapter toe
oeother lands,tbuildings or
structures inyth special pr
ivilege
district.
Granting the Loading Berth Variance will not confer any special privileges on Petitioner
that are typically denied to others within the same zoning district. The City has granted
variances from loading berth requirements for other hotels in the City; by granting these
variances the City has recognized the excessive nature of this requirement and is in the
process of modifying the Code accordingly.
(d) Literal interpretation of the provisions of this chapter would deprive Petitioner of
rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same zoning district under the terms
of this chapter and would work unnecessary and undue hardship on Petitioner.
Literal interpretation of the Code would deprive Petitioner of rights commonly enjoyed by
other properties in the same zoning district and would work unnecessary and undue
hardship on Petitioner. If the required loading berth requirements are enforced,
Petitioner would have to request a larger variance from parking requirements.
(e) The variance granted is the minimum variance that will make possible the
reasonable use of the Property.
The proposed Loading Berth Variance is only for 3 loading berth spaces, which is the
minimum variance necessary to make possible the reasonable use of the Property.
Petitioner understands that the City is preparing to amend the Code requirement for
loading berth space requirements. The reduction of 3 loading spaces will allow Petitioner
to make reasonable use of the Property.
(0 Granting the variance will be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of this
chapter, and such variance will not be injurious to the area involved or otherwise
detrimental to the public welfare.
Granting the Loading Berth Variance will be in harmony with the general intent and
purpose of the Code and will not be injurious to the City or otherwise detrimental to the
public welfare. Indeed, Petitioner is proposing a Towne Place Suites by Marriott, which
will provide another upscale hotel chain for the City that will appeal to business travelers
and tourists alike. The Property has been designed to accommodate the basic intent of
the loading berth requirement by providing the loading area at the rear of th e building for
the few instances that deliveries are made to the hotel. T
Wall Sian Variance - Variance from Chapter 28, Article 28.180 of the Code to
permit Wall signs on the north and south sides of the building where the Code
only allows signage on the side facing the street.
(a) Special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the Property and
which are not applicable to other lands, structures or buildings in the same zoning
district;
Special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the Property and are
not applicable to other lands, structures or buildings in the same zoning district. As
noted above, the Property located on the north side of Stirling Road approximately ''/<-
mile east of the 1-95 / Stirling Road exit. The Property does not have direct frontage on
Stirling Road. The vast majority of patrons staying at the hotel are projected as business
travelers and tourists visiting South Florida, most of whom will be unfamiliar with South
Florida geography and travelling to the Property by way of 1-95. In order for the
proposed hotel to operate effectively, potential patrons must know where the hotel is
located. Additionally, the Property's visibility is impaired by the recently constructed Best
Western hotel. The Property's zoning designation specifically permits Wall signs on the
side of the property fronting a street, which would be the east side. However, Petitioner
has determined that the proposed Wall Sign Variance would allow the hotel to have
sufficient visibility from both northbound and southbound 1-95.
(b) The special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of
Petitioner,
The special conditions and circumstances noted above do not result from the actions of
Petitioner. In particular, the lack of visibility associated with the Property is the result of
the urban sprawl impacting South Florida, which has resulted in several developed
properties located between 1-95 and the Property. Petitioner is proposing to develop a
property that does not front directly on Stirling Road and has impaired visibility from 1-95
due to the Best Western hotel that was recently constructed. Therefore the signage is
needed to direct patrons to the proposed use.
(c) Granting the variance requested will not confer on Petitioner any special privilege
that is denied by this chapter to other lands, buildings or structures in this same zoning
district;
Granting the Wall Sign Variance would not confer on Petitioner any special privilege that
is denied to other properties within the IROC zoning district. Indeed, the proposed hotel
is permitted to place signage on the east side which is adjacent to S.W. 19`" Court,
however the only traffic using this street would be the patrons of the proposed use as
well as the uses to the north and south. Petitioner is simply requesting the Wall Sign
Variance in order to provide greater visibility for the hotel considering the location of the
Property in relation to 1-95 and Stirling Road. The Variance would not be necessary if
the Property was fronting directly on Stilring Road.
(d) Literal interpretation of the provisions of this chapter would deprive Petitioner of
rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same zoning district under the terms
of this chapter and would work unnecessary and undue hardship on Petitioner,
Literal interpretation of the Code would deprive Petitioner of rights commonly enjoyed by
other properties in the same zoning district and would work unnecessary and undue
hardship on Petitioner. In particular, because the Property is not immediately adjacent
to 1-95 or Stirling Road like many other hotels in the City, existing and potential
customers would likely have a difficult time making their way to the hotel from the airport.
Without the Wall Sign Variance on the Property, the proposed hotel would lose
significant visibility from 1-95, which would ultimately impact business operations for the
hotel.
(e) The variance granted is the minimum variance that will make possible the
reasonable use of the land, building or structure;
The Wall Sign Variance is the minimum variance that will allow Petitioner to make
reasonable use of the Property. As noted above, Petitioner is permitted to place signage
on the east side of the Property which fronts S.W. 191h Court. Through the Wall Sign
Variance, Petitioner is simply seeking additional signage in order to achieve the
necessary visibility for the proposed hotel.
(0 Granting the variance will be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of this
chapter, and such variance will not be injurious to the area involved or otherwise
detrimental to the public welfare.
Granting the Wall Sign Variance would not be injurious to the surrounding properties or
to the public welfare. Indeed, the Wall Sign Variance will simply permit the proposed
hotel sufficient visibility from 1-95 to allow hotel patrons to find the Property. This request
is consistent with several of the other hotels approved in the City along this corridor. In
addition, approval of the Wall Sign Variance will further serve to promote the City as a
business and tourist destination.
^ri'4
JUG 1 Lulu