Loading...
Minutes 06-27-23 MINUTES PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD 100 E. OCEAN AVENUE, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA TUESDAY, JUNE 27, 2023, 6:30 P.M. PRESENT: STAFF: Chris Simon, Acting Chair Amanda Radigan, Planner and Zoning Director William Harper Andrew Meyer, Senior Planner Courtlandt McQuire Jae Eun Kim, Principal Planner Thomas Ramiccio,Alternate Heather Needelman,Assistant City Attorney Leslie Hannon , Prototype, Inc. ABSENT: Butch Buoni, Vice Chair William Cwyner, Alternate Tim Litsch Jay Sobel GUESTS: None. Amanda Radigan, Planning and Zoning Director, noted that Trevor Rosencrans had resigned from the Board and the Vice Chair was absent. Motion made by Mr. McQuire, and seconded by Mr. Ramiccio,to appoint Mr. Simon as Acting Chair for the June 27, 2023,meeting. Motion passed unanimously(4-0.). The meeting was called to order at 6:30 P.M. 1. Pledge of Allegiance The Board recited the Pledge of Allegiance. 2. Roll Call Roll was called and it was determined that a quorum was present. 3. Agenda Approval Motion made by Mr. Ramiccio, and seconded by Mr. McQuire, to approve the agenda. The motion unanimously passed (4-0). 4. Approval of Minutes 4.A. Board minutes from the April 25, 2023, Planning&Development Board meeting Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page-2 3 LIii-e 23-,-M 23 Motion made by Mr.McQuire, and seconded by Mr. Harper,to the April 25, 2023,meeting minutes. The motion unanimously passed(4-0). 5. Communications and Announcements: Report from Staff Ms. Radigan reported that Mr. Rosencrans resignation was after 10 years of service and the City thanks him for his dedication. She said that the City Commission will be discussing the new Advisory Board ordinance on July 18, 2023, so it has been recommended to hold off assigning a new Chair or Vice Chair until the ordinance has passed. She also noted that City Commission heard and passed the items concerning the indoor training facility and the car wash. She welcomed new City Planner, Jae Eun Kim. 6. Old Business: None. 7. New Business: 7A. CPTA 23-001: Approve amendments to the Comprehensive Plan that implement the addition of a Property Rights element per new statutory requirements based on the Evaluation and Appraisal Review(EAR). Andrew Meyer, Senior Planner for the City, introduced the item. He noted that the EAR is required by State statute, and that every seven years the City must determine whether the need exists to amend the Comprehensive Plan, to reflect changes in State requirements since the last time it was updated. He explained the State requirements, the proposed amendments, and the phases for adoption. He said that staff recommends approval of the proposed Comprehensive Plan text amendments to transmittal to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity(DEO). He described the next steps and timeline. Mr. McQuire asked for the proposed amendment to be put in layman's terms and provide an example of where it may be used in the future. , Mr. Meyer said that the language is based on the State Statute. He noted that they require municipalities to adopt language or"own"language. He added that the"own"language of property rights cannot conflict with the statement of property rights in the State Statute. Ms. Radigan added that this does not afford any additional rights and it is essentially a restatement of Constitutional rights within the United States. Mr. McQuire asked if this has do with the issue that was brought up at the last Commission meeting regarding leasing agreements. Mr. Meyer replied no. Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board n_ lune-22023 Mr. Ramiccio asked if there is anything currently in the Comprehensive Plan that provides for property rights. Ms. Radigan reported not directly. She explained that it was never required to reiterate those requirements in City's Comprehensive Plans until last year's legislative session. She noted that it is taken almost verbatim from the State Statute requirements. Acting Chair Simon clarified that this is taking State verbiage and applying it to the Boynton Beach Comprehensive Plan. Ms. Radigan provided a brief history. Mr. McQuire asked if it has anything to do with recent closures of parcels. Ms. Radigan said no. Acting Chair Simon opened the floor to public comment. No one came forth to speak. Motion made by Mr. McQuire, and seconded by Mr. Ramiccio,to approve the proposed amendments for transmittal to the State Land Planning Agency (Florida Department of Economic Opportunity) and reviewing agencies. The motion passed unanimously(4-0). 7.B. Approve modifications (CDRV 23-005) amending Part III. Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2,Article Il, Section 5. Permit Applications and Chapter 4, Article I. Environmental Protection Standards, to create a landscape permit review and approval process and to modify preservation and mitigation regulations. Jae Eun Kim,Principal Planner for the City, introduced the item. She noted that the current LDRs do not outline or define a review criteria, or process,when it is necessary to remove tree,palms,or for land clearing. She said that the proposed amendment establishes a Landscape Permit in the LDRs to address such required or necessary removal, with respect to the preservation effort. She mentioned that the landscape permit includes three(3)notable points to direct applicants: 1. Exemption. The exemptions are currently defined to allow tree and palm removal without any replacement and are regulated under Chapter 4, Article 1. Environmental Protection Standards. The amendment proposes to relocate the exemptions under a new landscape permit procedure and further clarify them to be user-friendly. 2. Different events. The removal of trees or palms can be necessary to preserve a healthy environment and neighborhoods,and further public safety, such as tree clearance by a utility company,or removal of invasive species. Under the current regulations,replacement is not required for such removal. The proposed amendment will require replacement with respect to the approved landscape plan and consideration to the existing site conditions. Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board hge-4 _ ___ June-2-7-,2fl23 3. Review criteria and approval process. A landscape permit establishes and emphasizes the review criteria that warrant the requested removal of trees or palms being consistent with the expiration, as it is a permitting tool for tree or palm removal. She said that the amendment proposes different mitigation options regarding replacement requirements for tree or palm removal,whereas,the current LDRs regulate the tree caliper replacement only. She stated that this amendment also proposes to remove subsection E, Exemptions, from Chapter 4, Article 1 and rewrite them under a Landscape Permit to provide a comprehensive and uniform review process for tree or palm removal while being consistent with other Articles in the LDRs. She commented that the amendment for Article 1. Environmental Protection Standards can be outlined with three notable points: 1. Review and Exemptions • Exemptions to the City approval requirements for a development application pertaining to the existing trees and palms are removed or rewritten under a Landscape Permit. • The subsection referencing invasive species is updated and rewritten for clarification, and the removal process of invasive species is recollected under a Landscape Permit procedure. 2. Mitigation. Three types of mitigations will direct the development of applications pertaining to the tree or palm removal. • Caliper Replacement: The cumulative caliper inches of existing trees to be removed is required to be replaced on-site with an equal or greater number of caliper inches of replacement canopy tree(s). • Canopy Replacement: If trees or palms are removed before obtaining approval of a landscape permit, the number of replacement trees or palms required is based on the removed canopy areas, in square feet. This is determined by using aerial photography, photos, or review of a tree survey. Replacement canopy area credit is required to equal the canopy area removed. • Payment in-lieu of Replacement: Upon determining that replacement of removed or to be removed trees or palms is not feasible, due to the lack of available planting space, an applicant will have an option to meet all or part of the replacement for the tree(s) or palm(s)by paying into the Tree Canopy Trust Fund an amount of money based on the payment schedule set by the City Commission by resolution. 3. Fertilizer Use Regulations/ Fertilize regulations are currently defined under both Chapter 4, Article 1, Section 5. Fertilizer Regulations and Chapter 4, Article XII. Fertilizer Use Regulations. This amendment proposes to remove the fertilizer regulations from Article 1 and refer it to Article XII. Fertilizer Use Regulations, as approved via Ordinance 11-019. Acting Chair Simon opened the floor to public comment. No one came forth to speak. Mr. Ramiccio asked for clarification of the separation of trees and palms. Ms. Kim said that they are referred to separately since they have different values and functions, to be consistent with today's landscape industry. Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Llage-5 ,lune-27;2{02 Mr. Ramiccio said that he understands the separation but wants to make sure palms are not devalued too much. He asked about other issues. He asked about removing invasive species and replacement. Ms. Radigan stated that currently,if an invasive species is removed,there is no requirement to replace it. She said that if the removal of the invasive species was required as part of an approved plan, it must be replaced on a one-for-one basis. Discussion ensued about invasive species and replacement. Ms. Radigan said that the payment in lieu of can only be used with the Planning and Zoning Director's approval. She stated that it is not to provide mitigation of trees and it is a tool only if a tree cannot physically be put back. She provided an example from an HOA and their three-year phase approach to meet the mitigation requirements. She noted that this gives options to provide greening whenever possible and, if infeasible, to mitigate what is required. Acting Chair Simon stated that he understands the concerns of staff and the plan of the City. He said that in his experience, instead of mitigation dollars going into a fund, developers were required to install material equal to the mitigation. He asked if this type of arrangement could be considered in addition to the Tree Canopy Fund. Ms. Radigan said that it is a very interesting idea and it would alleviate the pressure on the staff. She said she would be happy to research. Acting Chair Simon said that in his experience,it is typically caliper or canopy. He spoke about a canopy credit. Ms. Kim said that the first option is to replace the caliper, and only use the canopy if the trunk has been completely removed. Ms. Radigan noted that this is a tool to correct mistakes that were done without City approval. Acting Chair Simon said that they need to add more trees and vegetation to projects. He noted that he does not see any verbiage or credits for natives versus non-natives. Ms. Kim said that it will be addressed in a separate amendment. Acting Chair Simon asked about requiring sod. Ms. Kim said that the current Code would require mulch or seed for clearing cropping. She said that they are removing old language and replacing with sod. Acting Chair Simon responded good, and he agrees with the sodding. Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page-6 —June-27-,-2023 Motion made by Mr. Harper, and seconded by Mr. Ramiccio, to approve the subject amendments to the Land Development Regulations to establish a procedure for a Landscape Permit and mitigation options to be utilized for development applications pertaining to the removal of trees or palms. Motion passed unanimously(4-0). 9. Comments by Members The Board requested that Ms. Radigan send them a copy of the Live Local Presentation. Mr. McQuire asked Ms. Radigan if she could send updates on projects that are in process. Ms. Radigan agreed to copy the Board on future economic update emails. Acting Chair Simon asked about the Annual Report. Ms. Radigan noted that they are still in the process of receiving and reviewing comments. Mr. McQuire noted that he attended the grand opening of the Avalon, and it is a nice apartment building. 10. Adjournment Upon Motion duly made and seconded,the meeting at was adjourned at 7:50 P.M. [Minutes prepared by T.Baclawski,Prototype,Inc.]