Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning board recommends code fix to CIMD rules after public objections
Summary
City staff proposed and the board recommended a city‑initiated text amendment to section 28‑16‑44 to allow combined on‑site and off‑site nonresidential uses to meet CIMD requirements; the board voted 7‑0 despite public objections that the change favors developers and could worsen local retail deserts.
The Boca Raton Planning & Zoning Board on Sept. 4 recommended approval of a city‑initiated text amendment to the commercial‑industrial multifamily development (CIMD) rules that clarifies how nonresidential requirements may be met.
Peter Begovich, senior planner, said the current code unintentionally prevented developers from combining on‑site and off‑site nonresidential uses to meet CIMD thresholds, which in practice forced some projects to build large amounts of office or commercial area on‑site even when neighboring nonresidential uses existed. The proposed amendment would add a third criterion allowing projects located within a quarter mile of at least 25,000 square feet of nonresidential uses to combine existing off‑site and on‑site nonresidential components, provided the total meets the 25,000‑square‑foot threshold and includes at least 10,000 square feet of restaurant or retail sales/services.
The proposal drew strong public comment. Several speakers, including Jonathan Unchin and John Perlman, argued the change would let developers rely on a single nearby retail center and avoid producing on‑site services, worsening existing 'retail deserts.' Supporters including David Millidge said the amendment remedies a drafting glitch and would encourage smaller CIMD projects to add meaningful on‑site retail rather than unnecessarily building office space.
Staff and legal clarified the intent was a technical fix so the city could achieve mixed‑use outcomes consistent with the comprehensive plan and encourage on‑site retail in many cases. After discussion, the board voted 7‑0 to recommend the ordinance amendment to city council.
Because public commenters expressed concern about the policy’s potential to let developers ‘wrap’ residential around a single nonresidential anchor, staff said they will continue to explain how the criteria and on‑site minimums (including the 10,000‑sq‑ft retail threshold in some cases) apply when projects rely on off‑site uses.
