Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Plantation staff previews major zoning and parking rewrite; vote postponed to allow legal review
Summary
Dan Holmes, the city’s planning, zoning and economic development director, and Michael Alpert, assistant director, presented a comprehensive rewrite of Chapter 27 (PP24-0028) on April 8 that reorganizes zoning articles, creates a Transit-Oriented Development district and substantially revises parking rules for Midtown and other priority redevelopment areas.
Dan Holmes, the city’s planning, zoning and economic development director, introduced a broad zoning and parking ordinance (PP24-0028) and said staff would present the measure for review but not take a vote at the April 8 Planning & Zoning Board meeting. “It’s a very large item and there are some things that we kind of got a little ahead of ourselves that we have to still go over and clear with the city attorney’s office,” Holmes said.
Michael Alpert, assistant director, walked members through the scope: the draft ordinance contains 25 exhibits revising four articles of Chapter 27 and adds a new Transit Oriented Development (TOD) zoning category. Alpert said most changes are reformatting and clarifications but that several substantive policy changes include reduced minimum parking requirements (and in Midtown removal of minimums and the adoption of parking maximums for gateway and transit areas), incentives for increased density and height tied to workforce housing thresholds, relaxed setback rules for redevelopment with workforce housing, shared parking requirements, and limitations on single-use outparcels in the central Midtown village.
Alpert said the proposed Article 8 parking rewrite eliminates many drive‑way references from other sections, revises bicycle parking policies, and addresses EV-charger requirements that the presenter said are preempted by state law. He also described proposed modifications for accessory dwelling units (ADUs), noting state-level bills could change local ADU parking and owner-occupancy requirements and that staff would adjust the ordinance as needed prior to final readings.
Board members pressed staff on timing and asked for a vote. Several members said they wanted the ordinance advanced to council because workshops and prior review had produced a near-final draft; Alpert and Holmes replied that legal review remained and that the board’s action would be taken at a future meeting. Holmes said staff would aim to return the item for a board action at the next meeting and would consider a special meeting if necessary to ensure board members could vote.
Public commenters praised the redevelopment focus and urged attention to circulation and parking-system costs for new garages and mixed-use projects. One commenter asked whether a standalone big‑box, such as Target, would be allowed to remain or be redeveloped into mixed-use if it closed; staff replied that some department-store uses would remain permitted while other big-box retail and drive‑through uses would be restricted or prohibited in the central Midtown village so that future redevelopment would favor walkable, mixed-use forms.
No formal vote was taken on PP24-0028 at the April 8 meeting. Staff said they will bring the ordinance back after city attorney review for a formal advisory recommendation to City Council and that council will conduct the ordinance readings and final action.
