Riviera Beach planning board denies RM‑20 setback text change and linked Turnberry site plan amid notice concerns

The City of Riviera Beach Planning and Zoning Board voted Wednesday to recommend denial of a proposed zoning code text amendment (ZA240005) that would let developers pay a fee in lieu of required high‑rise setbacks in the RM‑20 district, and immediately denied the linked site plan (SP240013) for a proposed 200‑foot, 52‑unit condominium at 3930 North Ocean Drive.

The proposal from applicant HHC Singer Island LLC would have amended section 31‑2435(e) of the city's zoning code to permit a payment instead of providing enhanced setbacks above the second story, and would have established a parks and recreation trust fund to receive the payments. Principal Planner Kurt Thompson told the board the change would apply to all properties zoned RM‑20 and described how the applicant’s project would trigger a payment: the plan shows about 3,326 square feet of deficiency that, at $30 per square foot, calculates to roughly $99,780 and therefore would meet the ordinance’s $100,000 minimum contribution.

The request also included a site plan (SP240013) for a 200‑foot high‑rise residential condominium with 52 ownership units over a two‑story parking podium and a 21‑space private garage on a 3.33‑acre vacant parcel identified as 3930 North Ocean Drive (parcel control number 56434222000005010). Planner Thompson said the proposed density (52 units) fits within the RM‑20 standards (the technical maximum for the lot is 56 units under certain programs) and that staff found the site plan consistent with review criteria, subject to the conditions in the staff report.

Discussion at the hearing centered less on building design than on notice and process. Several board members and speakers said residents near Singer Island and along North Ocean Drive had not seen on‑site posting or received mail notice before the planning board hearing. Board member Shepherd said she could not find the site without GPS and that neighbors “deserve to know what’s coming into their neighborhood.” Land use counsel Hope Calhoun, representing the applicant, said the team had met two to three times with the condominium associations on either side (Oasis and Martinique) and that those groups had seen the plans. “We have met the requirements and standards,” Calhoun said, and “we have met with them” multiple times, she added.

Staff and the city attorney explained the legal basis for notice: Florida Statute 166.041 and the city’s section 31‑4 require newspaper advertising for ordinance changes and set different posting and mailing rules for rezoning applications. Thompson and staff emphasized that because the text amendment is citywide rather than site‑specific, the code does not require on‑site posting for the planning board hearing and that required newspaper advertising would occur before any City Commission readings.

Board members pressed the practical effect: if adopted, the text amendment would permit a developer to provide less physical open space at the tower setback in exchange for a monetary contribution to the new parks trust fund. Thompson and Calhoun explained the mechanics: the draft ordinance would require at least 50 percent open space be retained on the lot to qualify, and the contribution calculation would be $30 per square foot of deficiency with a $100,000 minimum per project. Calhoun said the applicant’s design has about 65 percent open space and that the contribution option would allow a design that avoids a “flat wall” pushed far back on the narrow parcel.

After discussion, an initial motion to place ZA240005 on the agenda failed for lack of a second. The board then voted 4‑1 to deny the text amendment (Board members Brown, Gallen, Joseph and Fernandez voted to deny; Board member Shepherd dissented). Following that vote, the board voted to deny the site plan SP240013 (vote recorded as unanimous). Staff noted that a site plan that depends on an amendment that the board has denied would be out of alignment with that action, but the board recorded the site plan denial so the matter would be included in the record forwarded to the City Commission.

The board’s comments and the applicant’s presentation record a clear split between staff’s reading of code‑based notice requirements and several board members’ view that the city should expand on‑site and mail notice practices so neighbors see projects before advisory hearings. Several board members asked staff to return with options to amend the municipal code’s notice requirements.

Votes at a glance: ZA240005 (zoning text amendment to RM‑20 minimum high‑rise setback, fee‑in‑lieu to parks trust fund) — Recommendation: Deny (4 yes to deny, 1 no). SP240013 (Turnberry site plan, 3930 North Ocean Drive, 200 ft, 52 units) — Recommendation: Deny (vote recorded as passing).

The board’s actions were advisory; final decisions on code amendments and the site plan rest with the City Commission. Staff told the board it will prepare materials on changing notice rules for future consideration at a subsequent meeting.