TO: Mayor and Commissioners
FROM: Anthea Gianniotes, Development Services Director
THROUGH: Terrence R. Moore, ICMA-CM
DATE: November 2, 2026
Title
ORDINANCE NO. 45-26: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, REZONING A PARCEL OF LAND MEASURING APPROXIMATELY 0.24 ACRES LOCATED AT THE 116 SOUTHWEST 5th AVENUE, AS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED HEREIN, FROM CENTRAL BUSINESS (CBD) DISTRICT TO MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (RM) DISTRICT ; AMENDING THE “CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, ZONING MAP, JULY 6, 2021” AND FURTHER AMENDING FIGURE 4.4.13-B-2, “WEST ATLANTIC NEIGHBORHOOD SUB-DISTRICT REGULATING PLAN” IN SECTION 4.4.13, “CENTRAL BUSINESS (CBD) DISTRICT,” OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS; PROVIDING A CONFLICTS CLAUSE AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE; AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES. (QUASI JUDICIAL/FIRST READING)
Body
Recommended Action:
Recommendation
Consider Ordinance No. 45-26, a privately initiated request for a rezoning from Central Business District (CBD) to Medium Density Residential (RM) for a 0.24-acre parcel of land located at 116 SW 5th Avenue.
Body
Background:
The applicant has requested a rezoning of a 0.24-acre property located at 116 SW 5th Avenue from CBD) to RM. The rezoning request is being reviewed concurrently with a small-scale Land Use Map Amendment from Commercial Core (CC) to Medium Density Residential 12du/ac (MD).
The property and surrounding parcels were zoned RM before a City initiated rezoning to General Commercial (GC) in 2004, and CBD in 2005. The rezoning was part of a broader city effort to implement the 2003 Southwest Area Redevelopment Plan, which called for the “redevelopment of properties along 5th Avenue… to include neighborhood-oriented retail and office uses, as well as a variety of housing types.” The subject property was envisioned as a parking lot for adjacent retail and office uses abutting to the north, however, no part of this proposal has ever been completed. Additionally, in 2006, the properties abutting to the north were rezoned to Community Facilities (CF), leaving the subject site as the only CBD parcel in an otherwise residential block.
The applicant intends to build a duplex for two members of the Daniels family in collaboration with the “We Are Home” workforce housing project. The current CBD zoning does not permit duplex structures as a primary or conditional use. Under the current zoning designation, the lot’s size mandates that the applicant use the revitalization to build a minimum of three units (including one affordable unit) and a maximum of 7 units (including two affordable units). If the property is rezoned to RM, the standard density allows the applicant to build the desired duplex, though there would be no requirement or guarantee that the units remain affordable. Alternatively, the applicant could use the revitalization incentive to build up to five units (including one affordable unit).
LDR Section 2.4.5(B)(3), Change of zoning district designation: Required Information
Valid reasons for approving a change in zoning are:
• 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 Land Use Map and that it is more appropriate for the property based upon circumstances particular to the site and/or neighborhood.
The applicant justification identifies the second and third criteria as the basis for the rezoning, attesting that the circumstances have changed and the proposed MD land use designation and RM zoning district is more appropriate to the property and neighborhood.
Pursuant to LDR Section 3.2.2, Standards for Rezoning Actions, rezoning requests must meet five standards:
(A) The most restrictive residential zoning district that is applicable given existing development patterns and typical lot sizes shall be applied. Requests for rezonings to a different zoning designation, other than Community Facilities, Open Space, Open Space and Recreation, or Conservation shall be denied unless the proposed changes implement an adopted neighborhood or redevelopment plan.
The existing development pattern and typical lot sizes support RM as the most restrictive residential zoning district applicable to the site. The Planning and Zoning Board determined that the circumstances and redevelopment plans that initially supported the departure from residential zoning are no longer applicable.
(B) Rezoning of land located west of Interstate-95 to accommodate auto dealerships or to AC (Automotive Commercial) is prohibited pursuant to Policy NDC 2.5.2 of the Neighborhoods, Districts, and Corridors Element of the adopted Comprehensive Plan.
Not Applicable.
(C) Zoning changes that would result in strip commercial development shall be avoided. Where strip commercial developments or zoning currently exists along an arterial street, consideration shall be given to increasing the depth of the mixed-use zoning to provide for more substantive, mixed-use projects that provide compatible transitions in form and use to the surrounding area.
Not Applicable.
(D) Rezoning of land shall result in allowing land uses deemed compatible with adjacent and nearby land uses 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 subject property is surrounded by MD and CC land use designations and RM, CF, and CBD zoning districts. An MD land use designation and RM rezoning will result in land uses that are generally compatible with adjacent properties.
(E) Remaining infill lots within the Coastal High Hazard Area of the Coastal Planning Area shall be developed using zoning which is identical or similar to the zoning of adjacent properties or that results in less intense development.
Not Applicable.
A more detailed analysis of all required findings and other relevant information is provided in the attached Planning and Zoning Board staff report.
On September 28, 2026, the Planning and Zoning Board reviewed the request and recommended approval by a vote of 6 to 0.
City Attorney Review:
Ordinance No. 45-26 was approved to form and legal sufficiency.
Funding Source/Financial Impact:
N/A
Timing of Request:
The rezoning request will be heard concurrently with Ordinance No. 44-26 for the Land Use Map Amendment. The second reading is anticipated for November 17, 2026.