Loading...
Minutes 01-14-03MINUTES OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY HELD IN COMMISSION CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA ON TUESDAY, JANUARY 14, 2003 AT 6:30 P.M. Present Larry Finkelstein, Chairman Jeanne Heavilin, Vice Chair Jose Aguila Alexander DeMarco Don Fenton Michele Hoyland Henderson Tillman Doug Hutchinson, CRA Director Lindsey Payne, Board Attorney Dale Sugerman, Assistant City Manager I. Call to Order Chairman Finkelstein called the meeting to order at 6:35 p.m. II. Roll Call The roll was called and all members were present. II1. Agenda Approval: A. Additions, Deletions, Corrections to the Agenda None B. Motion Adoption of Agenda Vice Chair Heavilin moved to approve the agenda. Motion seconded by Mr. Fenton and unanimously carried. IV. Consent Agenda B. C. D. Approval of Minutes - December 10, 2002 Financial Report Budget Transfer Request and Justification Adding a Fourth Signer to the Checking and Money Market Accounts Chairman Finkelstein removed Item D for discussion. Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida January14,2003 E. Request for Accounting Line Item Adjustment Motion Mr. Aguila moved to approve the Consent Agenda, as amended. seconded by Vice Chair Heavilin and unanimously carried. Motion Adding a Fourth Signer to the Checking and Money Market Accounts Chairman Finkelstein inquired if staff was looking to add another staff member as a signer to the accounts. Mr. Hutchinson responded that it would be beneficial to have another staff member who could sign checks. Checks would still have to be signed by one staff member and one Board member in the order that was previously approved. No two staff members would be allowed to sign checks. Staff was also recommending that a third Board member (Don Fenton) be added as an additional signer. Vice Chair Heavilin felt that having five signatories was too many and she did not see a need to add another Board member. Chairman Finkelstein inquired why there was a request to add a third Board member as a signer. Mr. Hutchinson responded that there have been occasions when both the Chair and Vice Chair were not available to sign checks. Chairman Finkelstein felt that either he or Vice Chair Heavilin were always available to sign checks. Motion Mr. Aguila moved to add the Controller as an additional signer. Motion seconded by Vice Chair Heavilin and unanimously carried V. Public Audience None VI. Public Hearing Attorney Payne administered the oath to all persons who would be testifying. A. Abandonment Project: Agent: Location: Daise Temple Church of God in Christ (ABAN 02-004) City of Boynton Beach NE 3rd Street, South of NE 12~ Avenue 2 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida January14,2003 Description: Request for right-of-way abandonment of a 90- foot segment of NE 3rd Street, south of NE 12th Avenue Maxime Ducoste-Amedee presented the item on behalf of staff and explained that this was a follow up to a previous abandonment of NE 3rd Street. The City is requesting the abandonment of an unimproved, 40' wide right-of-way that is located on NE 3rd Street. The right-of-way is surrounded by single-family homes and would be converted to an easement for ingress, egress, drainage and utility purposes. The City will be abandoning the lot to the adjacent property owners, which is the Daise Temple Church of God in Christ. Mr. Ducoste-Amedee presented some background of the right-of-way that had been dedicated to perpetual use for the public and reserving to the developers or their successors the right of reversion if it was not used as designated. The Daise Temple made a previous request to abandon NE 3rd Street on June 16, 2000. However, the application was denied by the City Commission due to the redevelopment study (The Heart of Boynton) that the City was undertaking. Further, several departments had to install fiber optic communication cables before the abandonment. Also, there was a 6" water main along the right-of-way. At the time of denial by the City Commission, it was recommended that when the redevelopment study was completed, the applicant could submit another application. The Heart of Boynton Plan has been adopted; staff is now reprocessing the application, and is recommending approval of the abandonment. Further, all utility companies were properly notified. Staff is recommending approval of the abandonment, subject to staff's comments. Chairman Finkelstein announced the public hearing. Since no one wished to speak, the public hearing was closed. Ms. Hoyland noted that Condition #1 under utilities asks that the easement be dedicated to the City of Boynton Beach and was FP&L was agreeable to this. Mr. Ducoste-Amedee pointed out that the easement would be the same dimension as the right-of-way so that there would be no impact upon any of FP&L's infrastructure. Ms. Hoyland inquired if the entire property was going to be replatted. Mr. Rumpf stated that this could be done by a separate document. Motion Mr. Tillman moved for approval. Motion seconded by Mr. DeMarco and unanimously carried. Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida January 14,2003 B. Major Site Plan Modification Project: Dakota Lofts (MSPM 02-006) Agent: Dror Trigger Owner: Dakota Lofts Development,Inc. Location: 3010 S. Federal Highway Description: Request for a major site plan modification for changes to the townhouse elevations and floor plans Eric Johnson presented the item on behalf of staff and noted that the project had been approved last year on January 15, 2002. Because the applicant applied for some revisions to the floor plans and the elevations, staff was not comfortable approving them administratively and decided to bring the revisions to the Board and the Commission for review and approval. There will be little change to the site and the landscaping since the previous approval, and the applicant was requested to only submit new floor plans and elevations. Mr. Johnson also noted that the site plan approval would be expiring on January 15, 2003. However, according to the Land Development Regulations, the approval of a major site plan modification would also extend the life of the site for another year. If the modification is not approved, the site plan would expire. The applicant also submitted a request for a site plan extension within the appropriate timeframe. The reason for the extension of the site plan is due to the failure of the applicant to pull a permit. Mr. Johnson pointed out that there was also a change of ownership for the project. If the Board does not approve the major site plan modifications, the Board would hear the applicant's request for a site plan extension at the next meeting. Mr. Johnson also pointed out that the conditions of approval were taken from the previous conditions of approval. He noted that the Board had some concerns the first time regarding some of the elevations and the windows on the east elevations facing the residential neighborhood. Some of the residents had concerns that the residents of the townhomes could look into their properties. Attorney Jerry Knight, representing the applicant, agreed to all staff comments and conditions. He reported that they would not be making changes in the site layout. The only changes being requested are changes to the architectural elevations that do affect the interior floor plans. The purpose of the changes is to make the buildings more aesthetically attractive and more uniform in appearance. A scale model of the project was presented that included the requested changes and colored renderings of the project both before and after the changes were distributed. Mr. Knight noted that the change of ownership took place last 4 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida January14,2003 summer and the new owners are trying to make the buildings more uniform in appearance. Mr. Trigger, the Project Manager, explained the various changes that they are requesting. They are trying to improve the rooflines to give the buildings a more up-dated look. The footprint of the buildings has not been changed. Mr. Knight also pointed out that the number of units has not changed. Mr. DeMarco asked if the square footage of the units would remain the same. Mr. Trigger responded that the unit sizes have been changed to be more uniform. Originally the floor areas ranged from 2,000 to 4,000 square feet. As a result of the disparity in the size of the units, bumps were created in the building. This has now been eliminated and there are only two floor plans. The units would contain 2,300 and 2,400 square feet. Chairman Finkelstein opened up the public audience. Since no one wished to speak, the public audience was closed. Mr. Aguila was not in favor of the project from an aesthetic point of view and could not support it. He felt that the design was mediocre with a little bit of fluff and is not the type of project that the Board would like to see along the Corridor. He also felt that the landscaping was sparse with no defined entrance to the development and does not represent the Board's vision for the City. He also questioned whether this was actually a major site plan modification, since it is still the same footprint with the same elevations. He also did not feel that one dumpster would be sufficient and that nothing was being done to improve the side of the buildings facing U.$.1. Ms. Hoyland noted that when the project was first approved with the conditions of the Board, the Board noted that the north and south elevations of the buildings on Federal Highway, as well as the western elevation of that building needed to be significantly improved. She further pointed out that this was the first project along Federal Highway on that side of the road, which makes it a gateway project into the City. At that time, the Board wanted to set standards for other developments coming into the City. Ms. Hoyland did like the elevations that faced the courtyard and pool and liked the dormers. She would like to see the enhancements on the inside of the project applied to the exterior of the project. Ms. Hoyland was not in support of the elevations in the rear of the building. Ms. Hoyland inquired what the minimum driveway aisle width for two-way traffic was, and Mr. Johnson stated it was 22'. Ms. Hoyland asked why this project was being allowed to have a 15' two-way drive aisle along the north and south boundaries of the project. She did not think that a vehicle could be maneuvered Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida January14,2003 in this small a space. Mr. Johnson responded that this was reviewed and approved by Engineering. Mr. Rumpf reported that the Engineering Division holds projects to the City standards and if there is a different interpretation of the Code, they usually have a good reason. Engineering felt that because there were so few units going one way, it would not be very likely to have opposing traffic whenever a car pulls in or out of the driveway and there should be sufficient space. Ms. Hoyland noted that this was not an issue for consideration by the Board tonight, but she had concerns with the 15' drive aisles. She did like the recreation area with the pool and the marina and docking area. She felt that with some minor improvements, the project could become a better quality development. Chairman Finkelstein recalled at the first hearing, the Board asked that the rear elevation facing Federal Highway, as well as the south and north end of that building, be enhanced and questioned why this was not a condition of approval. Chairman Finkelstein inquired if there was a bath at the pool and cabana and was informed there was none. He also asked about a wall along Federal Highway, which was not on the artist's rendering, and which is included in condition #10. Mr. Knight responded that there will be a wall along Federal Highway, as well as a landscaped area. They had intended to bring back the wall approval as a separate item. Chairman Finkelstein also inquired about signage, and Mr. Knight said that this would also come back for review. Chairman Finkelstein also requested that the applicant address the notation of removable bollards that is on one of the plans. Press Tompkins, the Project's Engineer said that this was addressed with the Fire Department and by providing removable bollards, a 40' opening has been provided at the end of the property for use by emergency vehicles. Therefore, the gate would be a removable bollard. Mr. Johnson requested that if the Board members had specific recommendations, they should be made tonight so that they could be included with staff's report. Chairman Finkelstein also had concerns about the eight unit building that faces Federal Highway. He also would like to have more information on the wall. Mr. Trigger stated that they had to submit plans for the project on Federal Highway to the State for approval. After they receive the State's approval, they would provide the City with the plans for this area. They would like to put in a landscaped area instead of a paved area along the sidewalk. They also intended to include a 6' wall along the property line that would be highly decorated by local artists for uniqueness. 6 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida January14,2003 Chairman Finkelstein requested that the applicant address the Board's concern about the elevation of the western building on Federal Highway. Mr. Trigger said that they have not made any changes to this building and the balconies have been moved 4' outside the building. The line of the balconies does not infringe on the footprint of the building. Chairman Finkelstein reiterated the Board's concerns that they feel that more improvements need to be made to the building that faces Federal Highway and the landscaping on Federal Highway needs to be improved. Mr. Knight felt that the project, when completed, will present a much better image on Federal Highway as the result of the new landscaping and decorative wall. Mr. Aguila said that he would like to see this first before the Board approves the project. Mr. Knight said that they would be willing to readdress the Board's concerns and suggested that the Board's requests be made a condition of approval. He would like the project to continue to move forward. Mr. Knight said that they have resolved the outstanding issues, including Bamboo Lane, and would like to proceed. Chairman Finkelstein pointed out that condition #2 addresses the landscaping along Federal Highway and condition #3 addresses the bollards. However, condition #4 has not been provided. He said that he would still want to see an enhancement of the elevation of the building facing Federal Highway before approving the project. Ms. Hoyland was of the same opinion, and she would also like to see details of the wall. Chairman Finkelstein pointed out that the wall would be coming back to the Board. Mr. Rumpf noted that anything that is discussed involving the site itself that represents a change has not been reviewed by staff. The only changes that generated the applicant's request was a change in the elevations. Any wall added would have to be reviewed by staff. Ms. Hoyland pointed out that this Board's original request to see a change in the elevation of the building on Federal Highway was made a year ago. She would like the elevation being presented tonight to come back to the Board. Mr. Knight asked that those changes be made a condition of approval in order to move the project forward. Mr. Tillman also pointed out that it has been a year since the original approval and no building permit has been pulled. It is only because the permit is about to expire that the applicant is now coming back to the Board with a few modifications. Mr. Tillman asserted that the applicant has not demonstrated good faith. Ms. Hoyland pointed out that if a 6' wall were added, it would block any ornamentation added to the building and only the second and third floors would be visible and those are the floors with the least amount of detail. 7 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida January 14, 2003 Mr. Rumpf suggested that the Board offer these recommendations to add certain elements to the side of the building before the item goes to the Commission for consideration. Mr. Aguila would like to have more articulation added to the building, plus more banding, color and detail in order to make a statement. He felt that a lot of things could be done to improve the building that would not cost a lot of money. (Mr. Fenton left the meeting at 7:30 p.m.) Chairman Finkelstein pointed out that when the Board approved the Harbors project, the Board requested that the project come back to the Board for approval of the changes. He felt that this same condition could apply to this project as well. Mr. Knight said they are agreeable to what the Board would like to see on the building facing Federal Highway, as well as the ends of the building. He said that the new owners are trying to do the right thing and they were not aware of all the details of the conditions of the prior approvals. They have had a lot of issues to deal with and they are trying hard to move forward. Mr. DeMarco inquired if the applicant agreed with all 10 conditions, and Mr. Knight said that they have no objections to the conditions. Further, they agree to improve the elevations, as well as adding the wall. Mr. Aguila said he would be willing to make a motion in order to move the project along and have it approved by the City Commission, subject to conditions. Motion Mr. Aguila moved for approval, subject to the following conditions: 1. The eight-unit building on Federal Highway be substantially improved aesthetically, even if the units had to be changed. 2. The architecture needs to be improved both horizontally and vertically to break up the buildings by taking advantage of color, texture, architectural elements, etc. 3. That this Board sees the improvements prior to the applicant pulling a building permit. Ms. Hoyland asked Mr. Aguila to consider amending his motion to include another condition as follows: 4. When the review of the elevations comes back to this Board, before and after plans be included in the agenda packet. 8 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida January 14, 2003 Mr. Aguila agreed to amend his motion to include this additional condition. Ms. Hoyland seconded the motion that unanimously carried. C. Code Review Project: Agent: Location: Description: Limited Access Self-Storage (CDRV 02-004) City of Boynton Beach C-2 Neighborhood Commercial, C-3 Community Commercial and C-4 General Commercial Zoning District Citywide Request to amend the Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2, Zoning, Sections 6(a), 6(b), 6(c), 6(d) and 11.O: To restrict self-storage facilities to the M-1 Industrial Zoning District; and To amend the supplemental regulations governing SELF-SERVICE STORAGE FACILITIES (MINI-WAREHOUSE) to remove all references to the C-1 Office/Professional Commercial Zoning District Dick Hudson, Senior Planner presented the item on behalf of staff. Mr. Hudson noted that in 1998 the Comprehensive Plan was amended to allow self-service storage (limited access-mini warehouse uses) in the office and commercial land use classification. The original intent of the amendment was to only allow those types of uses in C-1 or M-1 zoning districts. However, a recent interpretation allowed this type of facility to be built in a C-3 zoning district, which was approved for South Federal Highway. Staff has since issued a Notice of Intent to stop any more applications for storage uses. Staff is now taking these self-storage warehouse uses out of all commercial districts designated C-1 through C-4 limiting them to M-1 industrial districts only. Staff conducted a study of these uses and has determined that only three of these uses will now become non-conforming once the change takes place. Chairman Finkelstein announced the public hearing. Since no one wished to speak, the public hearing was closed. Motion Mr. Aguila moved to approve. Motion seconded by Mr. Tillman and carried 5-0. Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida January14,2003 Mr. DeMarco stated that he had a voting conflict because he is involved with a storage company and abstained from voting. Attorney Payne advised Mr. DeMarco that he must complete Form 8B. VII. Director's Report Mr. Hutchinson reported on the following: A. Updates 1. Workshop Date - January 23, 2003 at 6:00 P.m. at City of Boynton Beach Library Because staff is unable to have all the information on the projects at staff level ready for the workshop, it is necessary that it be cancelled. The survey quotes for the Hall property were handed out to the members for informational purposes. All three quotes came in under $5,000. Staff would like direction regarding the lot of the former Relax Inn. Currently it is a sand pit. Mr. Hutchinson asked if the Board would like to have a temporary fence placed on the property. Chairman Finkelstein inquired why the entire parking lot was not demolished. Mr. Hutchinson responded that this was done to handle the shortage of parking in that area. Even if the area is fenced in, parking could still take place. Chairman Finkelstein recommended that staff contact a fence firm to put a construction fence or orange netting around the property. Mr. Hutchinson said that he would bring back some options to the Board. February appears to be a very busy month for the Board. There are already at least 10 planning and zoning items on the agenda and it will probably be necessary to have an additional meeting on the third Thursday of the month. E. Items staff are working on are - (i) (ii) The Ocean District Study that should be ready next month; The Museum project; 10 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida January 14, 2003 (iv) (v) The wayfinding signage program. Designs should be available next month for review by the Board; Phase 2 property acquisitions of MLK; and The LDR is being rewritten, and a meeting has been scheduled for tomorrow at 3:00 p.m. Members requested that the workshop be set for late in the month of February so that they would have an opportunity to review the Ocean District Plan and wayfinding designs before the workshop. VIII. Old Business A. Consideration of Fa(;ade Grant for Grace Fellowship Church (tabled from the December 10, 2002 CRA Board Meeting) Mr. Aguila noted that this item was tabled last month because the Board was confused about the process and also the applicant was not present. Mr. Aguila said that people were pleased to see that enhancements were being made to the property, but the Board has some concerns regarding the west and north elevations of the building. Mr. Aguila pointed out that the applicant has requested a grant of $5,000, but he would be willing to recommend $15,000 to allow the applicant to make substantial improvements to the north and west sides of the building. Chairman Finkelstein reminded the applicant that the grant was a matching grant. Motion Mr. Aguila moved to remove the item from the table. Motion seconded by Vice Chair Heavilin and unanimously carried. The architect for the project presented the request on behalf of the owner of the property. Because of all the improvements being made along Federal Highway, the owner wanted to also improve his property. They do not plan to add any square footage or parking; they are merely improving the property to make it look better for the benefit of the City. Landscaping islands are being added to the parking lot. A canopy has been added to the front of the building to provide shade, as well as to allow people to walk the length of the building safely from the elements. He pointed out that in the back of the building there are a great deal of utility and power lines, and it would be difficult and expensive to improve this area if they had to move the utilities. 11 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida January 14, 2003 The landscape plans were presented to the Board, as well as the enhancements that would be made on the west side of the property. Mr. Aguila would like to see a double wide dumpster added that could be placed in the single parking space next to the current dumpster and asked that the applicant consider this request. Also, Mr. Aguila would like to keep the metal awning on the west and not use canvas because the metal would last longer. He would also like to see the molding be continued around the west elevation and suggested that it could be painted a different color. He would like to have the air conditioning and vents from the laundromat screened, which he felt could be done by utilizing lattice. He also suggested that the building be painted in two colors instead of one color. The architect noted that the owner of the property is spending $300,000 on the project. He stated that banding the building is difficult because there are power lines on the back of the building. He did not think that changing the dumpster would be a problem. With regard to screening the air conditioning units, he felt that if lattice were put around the units, the lattice would deteriorate over time and would make the situation worse. Mr. Aguila did not realize that there were so many power lines on the property and noted that it would not be feasible to rewire the building. Mr. Aguila asked that they make every practical effort to provide some screening of units for the benefit of the western residents. Ms. Hoyland felt that the use of the awnings would add an additional color to the property and would offset the rear of the building. She did not feel that canvas awnings would be a problem. She would also like to see the building painted in two colors, but did not think that the banding was necessary. Also, she would like to see some kind of screening even by utilizing landscaping. Mr. Aguila would like to recommend a $15,000 matching grant and asked the applicant to modify their request to $15,000. Mr. Tillman inquired if the Board could authorize a grant more than what the applicant applied for and would this set a precedent. Attorney Payne responded that this would not set a precedent, and the Board could increase the grant. Mr. Tillman suggested that the applicant contact Tony Newbold at the Chamber of Commerce, who represents FP&L to see if they would be willing to assist with improving the back of the building. 12 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida January 14, 2003 Motion Mr. Tillman moved to approve. Ms. Hoyland seconded the motion and noted that the motion included the maximum of the grant program in the amount of $15,000. Mr. Hutchison recited the recommc,",d~tio,-,s conditions made by the Board as I follows: The applicant would add the landscaping as presented. The southwest dumpster site would be expanded. The elevations would be painted two-tone. Screening the backside of the building as much as possible. Vice Chair Heavilin felt that this is going to be a wonderful improvement for Federal Highway. Vote The motion unanimously carried. (Mr. Ti#man left the meeting at 8:20 p.m.) RECESS WAS DECLARED AT 8:20 P.M. THE MEETING RECONVENED AT 8:30 P.M. B. Consideration of a Direct Incentive Program Mr. Hutchinson noted that it was the intent to provide flexibility in the program. Staff is recommending that the Program not be based upon a job creation mechanism because it is difficult to construe what full time versus part time means, and what is a real job, etc. This is a system that will work on ratios and the projects could go up or down, depending upon the modifications made. Therefore, the incentives would have to be adjusted accordingly. It is important to have flexibility. The Board has reviewed the program several times and members' comments have been added in color to the actual document in order to provide staff with more direction. The following comments and recommendations were made: Mr. Aguila stated that on Page 760, in the fifth paragraph it states, "If the application is denied, the applicant shall have the right to resubmit a revised application for reconsideration." Mr. Aguila inquired how often 13 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida January 14, 2003 could an applicant resubmit. After discussion it was decided to delete the words "shall have the right to" and to substitute the word "may." Vice Chair Heavilin had a question regarding the "program scoring criteria." She inquired if the Board could request that the owners only rent to these types of tenants. Chairman Finkelstein said that this was not the intent. What this means is that certain types of tenants would score higher than other types. Chairman Finkelstein requested that the Board go back and start at the beginning of the document. Chairman Finkelstein noted that the first sentence in the last paragraph on Page 753 states, "An area that Staff seeks direction is the element of 'need' that the project applicant is to show, if any." He questioned whether this was necessary and requested it be eliminated. On Page 756, Chairman Finkelstein felt that the fifth paragraph was not clear and should be eliminated. Mr. Hutchinson responded that the previous owners of the Marina Project were required to use these standards and there are companies that routinely do these assessments on incentive programs. It was agreed to leave this in. On Page 757 in the section titled "Type of Project (up to 20 pts)," Chairman Finkelstein thought that "Hotels/Conference Centers" should receive 20 points. Mr. Aguila felt that 10 points would be appropriate because this was not in the mixed-use category, which deserves more points. After discussion, it was agreed that this category would receive up to 20 points. On Page 757 in the same section, Chairman Finkelstein did not think that medical/health care should receive up to 15 points. Mr. Hutchinson recommended listing all the projects without any points and state "up to 20 points." At the time the project is reviewed, the appropriate points could then be applied. There was a consensus to word the section as suggested by Mr. Hutchinson. Vice Chair Heavilin requested that "business and financial services" be separated from "medical/health care services." On Page 757, in paragraphs 5 and 6, the "up to 10 pts" would be deleted. Therefore, any category could go up to 20 points and the total amount a project could score would be 120. On Page 758, "Economic Impact, "Mr. Hutchinson will furnish the members with some documents for the Board to review. He explained the reasoning for this paragraph is that there are some projects that could create negative impacts. On Page 758, last paragraph, Chairman Finkelstein requested for clarification that the first sentence be changed to read, "The incentive 14 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida January 14, 2003 shall be normally disbursed in ten (10) annual installments..." Attorney Payne suggested adding to Page 758, in the middle of the page, a sentence that would read, "However, the CRA may consider other financial considerations being made to the project, such as City of Boynton Beach contributions or incentives to determine the final amount or the timing of the disbursements." This would allow for more flexibility because the program has been set up as a reimbursement program. Attorney Payne also stated that the last paragraph on Page 760 needs to be changed the same way to be consistent. Therefore, there was a consensus that the paragraphs discussed on Page 758, "Establishing Incentive Percentage", and on Page 760 "Request for Incentive Funds" should be changed as discussed. Chairman Finkelstein questioned the need for the third paragraph on Page 760 that states, "Staff shall secure third party credit information and background checks on Applicants(s)." He pointed out that performance bonds would have to be furnished in order to receive credit. Ms. Hoyland disagreed and felt that this should remain. Mr. Hutchinson pointed out that if credit history was furnished, it would become public record. Ms. Hoyland inquired where this wording came from and Mr. Hutchinson responded that many applications where money is lent have this statement. Chairman Finkelstein felt this was not applicable to the program. Except for Ms. Hoyland who dissented, there was a consensus to remove this language. On Page 760, the sixth paragraph, the appeals process will be eliminated. On Page 762, in the first paragraph 5, Chairman Finkelstein would also like a resume on the "principals" instead of "contact person" so that the "applicant and principals" would furnish resumes. On Page 763, Paragraph 8 that states "property value and inflation increases shall be no greater than 3% annually." Chairman Finkelstein suggested that this be included with the feasibility study as a separate paragraph. Chairman Finkelstein requested that Pages 764 and 765 be deleted. Motion Vice Chair Heavilin moved to accept the Direct Incentive Program with the changes. Motion seconded by Mr. Aguila and unanimously carried. IX New Business A. Consideration of RFQ for Design/Build Services for Boynton Beach Boulevard Project. Mr. Hutchinson reported that by doing an RFQ, it would cut costs and put together a team for the primary project, which is the Boynton Beach Boulevard 15 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida January14,2003 Extension, Promenade and Riverwalk. Also, if any problems or issues surface, the same team could be used again to do a design/build. All the notices are ready to be published and the packages are ready to go out. There will be a 15- day response period due on February 3, 2003. This will provide staff time to review the responses that would be furnished to the Board on the following Tuesday to decide on how to proceed. Ms. Hoyland suggested that this be discussed at the February workshop and that it be put off to the March meeting. She did not think there would be enough time to review the information if it were placed on the February agenda. Chairman Finkelstein would like to move on this as soon as possible. Chairman Finkelstein asked if staff was prepared to provide the information at the February meeting. Mr. Hutchinson felt that if Chairman Finkelstein assisted with the review, as well as Jeff Livergood, Public Works Director, it could be done. Mr. Aguila pointed out the issues that he had concerns with and Attorney Payne responded that she has not read the document. Discussion ensued on whether the same team could be used more than once, and Attorney Payne said that she would have to check into this also. Attorney Payne felt that the RFQ had to be project specific and could not be used again. Chairman Finkelstein did not want to hold up the project for this reason and it could be decided at a future time whether it was in fact project specific. Mr. Aguila suggested that for now the RFQ be treated this way. Board members had the following comments, questions and suggestions: Mr. Aguila noted that on Page 778 the sentences in section 5.2.5, which read, "These projects should be located in Florida. Projects undertaken outside of the State of Florida will not be considered as part of the selection" were too restrictive. It was agreed to eliminate these two sentences. Discussion ensued on whether the furnishing of financial statements as required on Page 778 was necessary. It was decided to leave the wording as is. Attorney Payne pointed out that this requirement is common. Chairman Finkelstein pointed out that on Page 771 in Section 1.0, second paragraph "4000 foot" is incurred. The correct figure is "1300." On Page 772, under "Drainage", Section 2, Chairman Finkelstein requested that the wording "as identified within the attached scope 16 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida January14,2003 of work" be deleted and a "period" be inserted after the word "analysis." On Page 772, Paragraph 4. under "Boardwalk", Finkelstein suggested inserting the words "Mangrove the word "existing" and prior to the word "boardwalk." Chairman Park" after v' On Page 773, in Paragraph 4.3, the date "Friday, January 10, 2003" should be changed to "Monday, February 3, 2003." On Page 783, Chairman Finkelstein requested that the word "FIRM" be defined or change the word to "PROPOSER TEAM." Also, in the same section the word "ARCHITECT" needs to be changed to "PROPOSER TEAM." Wherever the word "Firm" appears, this should be changed to "Proposer Team." On Page 784, in the third line of the first paragraph, "$50,000" in general liability insurance should be changed to "$1,000,000." Also, on the same page in the last line of Section IX, the "$2,000,000" should be changed to "$1,000,000." Also, the words "shall not exceed twice the total compensation received by the FIRM under this Agreement or" and "whichever is greateY' in the first paragraph should be deleted, so that the sentence would read "...shall not exceed $1,000,000." Chairman Finkelstein pointed out the inconsistency on Pages 785 in the last paragraph of Section X where it states "CRA and the CRA Board" and on Page 783 it states "CRA and the CITY Commission. This needs to be changed for consistency. Also, wherever the words "PRIME DESIGN PROFESSIONAL" appears, it needs to be changed to "PROPOSER TEAM." (Mr. DeMarco left the meeting at 9:45 p.m.) v' On Pages 783 and 785 "$2,000,000" should be changed to "$1,000,000" for consistency. Members next discussed the timing of advertising the RFQ. Mr. Hutchinson pointed out that after publication on Sunday, January 19th, there are 15 days for response time, i.e., Monday, February 3rd at 4:00 p.m. Vice Chair Heavilin inquired if all the changes could be made in time for the publication date. Mr. Hutchinson felt that the dates could still be met. Ms. Hoyland did not think that 15 days was enough response time. After discussion, it was determined to move forward as recommended by staff. 17 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida January 14, 2003 Attorney Payne recommended stating who the selection committee was in the RFQ, but members felt that this was not necessary as long as it states there is a "Selection Committee." Motion Mr. Aguila moved to move forward with the recommended dates. Motion seconded by Ms. Hoyland and unanimously carried. B. Recommendation for Outside Annual Audit. Motion Mr. Aguila moved to approve. Motion seconded by Vice Chair Heavilin and unanimously carried. Motion Vice Chair Heavilin moved to table items C. and D. under New Business. Motion seconded by Ms. Hoyland and unanimously carried. C. Investment Policy and Florida Statutes D. State Board of Administration (SBA) X. Other Items Xl. Adjournment There being no further business, the meeting properly adjourned at 10:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Barbara M. Madden Recording Secretary (three tapes) (January 14,2003) 18