Loading...
Minutes 04-22-96MINUTES OF THE JOINT WORKSHOP BETWEEN THE CITY COMMISSION AND THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT, HELD IN THE LIBRARY PROGRAM ROOM, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA, ON MONDAY, APRIL 22, 1996, AT 6:30 P.M. PRESENT Gerald "Jerry" Taylor, Mayor Shirley Jaskiewicz, Vice Mayor Matthew Bradley, Commissioner Henderson Tillman, Commissioner Jamie Titcomb, Commissioner Planning and Development Board: Carrie Parker, City Manager Sue Kruse, City Clerk Tambri Heyden, Director of Planning and Zoning William Hukill, Director of Development Chris Papandreas, Consultant, Berryman & Henigar Stan Dubb, Chairman Robert Eisner Barry Hill Maurice Rosenstock Lee Wische Pat Frazier, Alternate James Reed, Alternate 1. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Taylor called the meeting to order at 6:40 p.m. At his request, everyone introduced themselves. 2. FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT A. Overview of consultant findings (executive summary pages 1 and 2, 1-1 through 1-7, 1-10 through 1-12, and page 1-20 of EAR) Time Line 1989 1990-1995 1~6 4/96 6/96 8/96 897 Plan Adopted New "Stuff" Begin EAR Preparation Objectives Level Analysis Requirements of State Law Draft EAR and Submit to DCA on 5/1 Begin Preparing Plan Amendments EAR Adoption Adopt Plan Amendment MINUTES CITY COMMISSION/PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD WORKSHOP BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA APRIL 22, 1996 Ms. Papandreas went over the proposed time line. The plan was adopted in 1989. From 1990 through 1995, "new stuff" has happened. The Legislation has been changed in several instances. New reports have come out, and times and conditions have changed. Therefore, in these intervening years, a great deal of new information has become available that needs to be fit into the Comprehensive Plan framework. In January of 1996, we joined forces with your staff to begin this EAR preparation. The EAR is req Hired by the State to be prepared every five years. To prepare the EAR we have to do an analysis of the objectives of the plan, an analysis of the new information, and an analysis of the change and conditions, and meet the requirements of State law. We are recommending that in June of 1996, or slightly in advance of adoption the finalized EAR, you begin preparing your plan amendments. In August of 1996, you will be required to adopt an EAR in some format, and in August of 1997, you will req Hired to adopt the plan amenaments. We want to start creating a record of the issues that are important to the community in light of the changes in Legislation and changes in conditions, so that as the plan ~s updated, the information that we gather tonight will not be lost. We are required to review and update n~ne elements. She reviewed page 2 of the EAR SUmmary, which is attached to the original minutes. The population growth has been slower than anticipated when the Comprehensive Plan was adopted. The 1995 estimate was 49,085 versus a projected population of 55,943. The implications of this are that a lot of the land use requirements that had been projected for the year 2010 are going to be projections for the year 2015. That is, the time frame for development is going to be extended because the population has not grown as fast as initially projected. Most of the growth in the land use has come from development in single-family. There have been 389 acres added in single-family development. Multi-family has been added at the rate of 179 acres, and retail commercial at about 179 acres. Most of these permits were issued in the area west of 1-95. Very few permits were issued east of 1-95. Looking at the 1990 Census, we found that 30 percent of the population was over the age of 65. This is a relatively high percentage of the population and has implications for transportation plans and so forth. 2 MINUTES CITY COMMISSION/PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD WORKSHOP BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA APRIL 22, 1996 Although about one-quarter of the City's total acres were undeveloped, about half of them had development plans on them. The median household income in Boynton Beach was a bit lower than the County as a whole. There was a wide variation between per capita income of white residents and black residents. Many of the objectives and policies in the last plan were met by adoption of the land development regulations that were created. The "Problems and Opportunities" section of the plan has been used as a basis for zoning recreation, and site specific rezonings. One of the recommendations of the plan will be, as the planning process continues, to begin to develop area plans that build on these neighborhood level recommendations. Fifteen of the 20 objectives were achieved or partially achieved. M~. Rosenstock referred to item (e) and asked if there are only 874 acres left to be de~veloped in the entire City, assuming we do not annex any undeveloped land. It was determined that this was a typographical error, and it was clarified that there are a total of i2,749 vacant acres in the City, half of which development plans have been approved fo~. Mr. Rosenstock asked where this available vacant land is and how it is zoned. City Manager Parker advised that a majority of those acres are in Quantum Park. M~. Rosenstock suggested that this land be zoned commercial to get higher assessed valuations and use less police and fire services. He pointed out that multi-family has the highest usage of water, utilities, etc., and the lowest assessed valuation. Mr. Rosenstock felt we should know where that land is located and how it is zoned. He felt that wherever we are able to rezone to commemial and industrial, we should. Commissioner Bradley questioned whether or not our high density, mUlti-family level housing needs are being met. Mr. Rosenstock felt we have an obligation to the people Who currently live in the City. Direction regarding the following objectives from the "Objectives Achievement Matrix" (pages 1-14 through 1-19 of EAR and pages 1 and 2 of staff comments) - Objective 1.4 (Policy 1.4.8), Objective 1.8 (and Policy 1.8.2), Policy 1.9.2, Objective 1.1 0 (Policy 1.1 0.3 and Policy 1.1 0.4), Objective 1.1 3 (and MINUTES CITY COMMISSION/PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD WORKSHOP BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA APRIL 22, 1996 Policy 1.13.2), Objective 1.14 (Policy 1.14.6 and Policy 1.14.7), Objective 1.15, Objective 1.16, Objective 1.17 (and Policy 1.17.6 and Policy 1.17.9) With regard to Objectives 1.1, 1.2, and 1.3; Ms. Heyden advised that staff's concerns were minor in nature and discussed with Ms. Papandreas. The Commission and the Planning and Development had no comments on these objectives. Ms. Heyden reviewed only those objectives where there were concerns, Objective 1.4 After June 1, 1990, or when mandated by state statute, land development and future land uses shall be coordinated with the provision of potable water facilities in order to ensure that the levels of service established in the Potable Water Sub-Element are met. MS. Heyden advised that the recommendation was to eliminate some of the redundant policies. She asked Ms. Papandreas to itemize those redundant policies on the next revision. Policy 1.4.8 talks about water service agreements and it says that they shall specify the intensity and/or density of the land uses which would be served. Currently, we have gone through a revision of our standard water service agreement form and we limit the number of residential connections in the water service agreement. When a piece of property in the County wants to develop and is within our water service area, the County requires them to approach the City to enter into a water service agreement. If that piece of property is currently contiguous, we require them to annex. We have been approving the water service agreement and simultaneously requiring an annexation application. In some cases, the type of use that is being proposed is not allowed in the City's zoning district or the land use category. We have been addressing these on a case by case basis. There is an opportunity here with the water service agreements to get involved with the County's process to review the site plans so that when the property is annexed, to the greatest extent possible, it will meet the City's requirements. She said Ms. Papandreas' idea on this particular objective is to put forth a recommendation that would require more involvement with the Palm Beach County planning and Zoning Department so that we would have more leverage to require compliance with some our Land Development Regulations when these kind of uses come through. This would be more along the lines of reviewing the proposed landscaping, signage, and building design. In some cases, we are not going to be able to avoid a use coming in that does not meet our Zoning Code. 4 MINUTES CITY COMMISSION/PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD WORKSHOP BoYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA APRIL 22, 1996 Objective 1.8 By June 1, 1990, or when mandated by state statute, land development projects and future land uses shall provide and/or be provided with parks and recreation facilities which meet the levels of service which are set forth in the Recreation and Open Space Element. Ms. Heyden referred to the recommendation to reconsider refining this objective to cite the current dedication requirement of 6 acres per 1,000 population. She advised that this recommendation is being moved to the Recreation Element. There is also an inconsistency that we are going to correct. Policy 1.8.2 requires that the City adopt an impact fee ordinance to collect fees or require land dedication for properties that are not residential, that have an impact on parks, and also do not require platting but are residential. Ms. Hoyden advised that there were situations where because multi-family rental projects did not require replatting, they were allowed to get out from under the parks and recreation dedication requirement. We have not codified this to date. Ms. Hoyden was given direction to codify this. Ms. Heyden advised that this would also require impact fees for uses that would have impact on parks and recreation, but may not necessarily be residential. Mr. Rosenstock asked what is used to judge that and how much the impact fee would be. City Manager Parker advised that this is illegal. Ms. Heyden said if you can prove that there is a rational nexus between the use and the recreation, then it would be legal. City Manager Parker advised that we cannot prove that on commercial property. Ms. Hoyden recommended that this policy be revised to drop the connection to nonresidential uses. Commissioner Bradley asked if this has happened anywhere else at the County level or in other municipalities. Ms. Papandreas knows of one community that charges every p~rcel a small amount for community open space. Residential uses are charged an additional impact fee based on the impact of the population. She does not know if this h~s been tested in Court; however, it has been applied for about 15 years now. COmmissioner Bradley suggested that this could be looked at from a beautification standpoint and assess them a fee for how the City looks. MINUTES CITY COMMISSION/PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD WORKSHOP BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA APRIL 22, 1996 Mr. Rosenstock knows of several cities that have passed ordinances relative to an across the board assessment based on the total value of the development of residential, commercial, or otherwise, it requires them to provide artwork (sculpture, paintings, etc.) to be either on the project for public view or in public places, or for shrubbery and trees to be planted in open spaces. This has gone to the Courts and has been implemented. Commissioner Bradley stated that although not required by law, developers are strongly encouraged to give a certain percentage of money to a beautification fund. However, he did not know that some of these things could be codified. Mr. Rosenstock offered to get Ms. Heyden a model ordinance passed by several cities covering this point. City Manager Parker advised that this whole section on the recreation set aside was developed before the recreation impact fee was allowed. Therefore, it was not developed under the impact fee criteria, nor does it meet the current impact fee requirements. She wondered if we should have an impact study on parks and recreation to see if our fee or set aside is adequate or not. Mr. Hukill stated that as part of the rezoning process, the County levies a fee as a development condition when someone wants to do something different than what it states in the land development regulations. He did not believe the City would be able to co,me up with a connection between commercial development and a local impact fee; nor did he believe we could introduce an impact fee. City Manager Parker advised that this was a condition that the City developed before impact fees were discussed. We had a set aside for parks long before it was the vogue. We might find that if we de a financial nexus study, that we could charge more, orwe might find that we should charge less. Mr. Rosenstock suggested investigating it at this point to see what our rights are as to what we can do and what we cannot do. MINUTES CITY COMMISSION/PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD WORKSHOP BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA APRIL 22, 1996 Objective 1.9 Eliminate blighted residential neighborhoods and business districts through the adoption and implementation of Community Redevelopment Plans and the Coastal Management Element. AS stated earlier in the meeting, Ms. Papandreas will itemize the redundant policies on the next revision. Objective 1.10 By the Year 2000, eliminate nonconforming commercial and industrial uses which are located in residential zoning districts, and all uses which create a significant risk of fire, explosion, toxic or other hazard to existing or future dwellings located in residential land use categories. MS. Heyden said this was an objective that was of great concern at the last workshop. This objective relates to the elimination of nonconforming commercial and industrial uses in residential areas or within a certain footage of residential uses by the Year 2000, based on distance alone or risk of fire, explosion, etc. There are currently two uses in the City that may create a fire/explosion hazard. One is on North Federal Highway and the other is on Industrial Avenue. They are basically pbtroieum or bulk storage. This objective was adopted in 1989. The target date was the Year 2000. This objective is not codified, and we have not made any strides towards getting voluntary agreement from the property owners to relocate these uses. Ms. Heyden advised that these are the only two uses that can be linked to a possible eXplosion/fire hazard. However, there are other nonconforming uses. Mr. Rosenstock s[Jggested that Ms. Heyden make a list of all the nonconforming uses and their locations and bring them to the Commission or Planning and Development Board and got through the process. City Manager Parker pointed out that part of that process may be that the City would have to pay these businesses. She said the gas business generates a pretty good business every year and we would have to follow the same 7 MINUTES CITY COMMISSION/PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD WORKSHOP BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA APRH, 22, 1996 condemnation procedures that D.O.T. would have to, and pay for business loss for the next "x" number of years. Ms. Heyden recommended deleting from this policy the nonconforming uses that present no risk; however, there was a consensus that this would be discriminatory. Ms. Heyden will prepare a list of the nonconforming uses and their locations. City Manager Parker will add to that list the assessed value of the properties and a statement from the City Attorney regarding proper procedure. Then the City Commission can determine whether they want to leave it in, change it, or remove it. MS. Papandreas suggested that the City monitor all the nonconforming uses and do an annual report as to their status to see if it is an increasing problem or if attrition is taking care of it. Objective 1.13 Discourage urban sprawl by creating a compact urban service area within the City and the City's utility service areas. Ms. Heyden advised that the recommendation to consider providing additional policy direction will be reworded to specify what we are currently doing through our in-fill housing program and to recognize our existing initiatives. Objective 1.14 Ensure the availability of land for utilities by evaluating the need for such land, particularly in the review of development projects, and allowing adequately-zoned land for same. Mr. Heyden advised that this objective deals with utility sites and the recommendation was to consider revising policies for utility siting, and she has asked Ms. Papandreas to identify those policies. Ms. Heyden advised that Policy 1.14.6 indicates that we were to modify our Land Development Regulations to allow sites for electric substations and switching stations in all land use categories and zoning districts, but require site plan review and screening MINUTES CITY COMMISSION/PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD WORKSHOP BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA APRIL 22, 1996 for these facilities. She stated that Ms. Papandreas has indicated that the chance of us encountering a new electric substation is close to nil. However, there may be a possibility of new switching stations. She asked the Commission if they want to take this policy out or if we should expand our zoning category to allow them in all zoning categories, but set up a system for site plan review and screening. She also had an idea to add some policies to upgrade the existing facilities in terms of screening, especially in residential areas. City Manager Parker brought up the issue of cellular phone towers. She advised that right now, those towers are allowed in industrial and commercial zones. We have been steering people to the governmental lands in order to get the revenue from the annual leases. Our Zoning Code does not permit those towers, except for our own towers, on those lands. Sprint and a new cellular telephone company called Pro Systems have su~bmitted requests for towers. These towers are 150 feet, cylindrical, stainless steel, and do not require aviation lights. Ms. Heyden will add a policy about communication towers and change the Zoning Code. Reverting back to the electric substations and switching stations, Ms. Heyden stated that we can expand our current Zoning Code to allow them in more land use categories orall of our land use categories, or we can keep it the way it is. If we do expand them, we can require site plan review and screening, as the current policy states. Mr. Rosenstock asked if Florida Power and Light was asked if they think they will need more substations in the future and if so, where. Ms. Papandreas shared some of her experience with telephone switching stations. Although the electric grid is pretty well set, the number of telephone users is greatly ~ncreasing. As recently as several years a~lo, it was common for the phone company to try to locate telephone switching station bqildings in proximity to users, which frequently meant residential areas. The stations were small, single-stow buildings, about 20 by 20 feet. This might be more of a common request than an electrical utility substation. Ms. Heyden felt it was appropriate to delete this policy. M¢. Heyden advised that Policy 1.14.7 is the same as Policy 1.14.6; however, this policy relates to utility facilities. She would like to include screening of utility facilities. She sa d we do not require any kind of screening for lift stations that are constructed by developers. If we require screening, the City would have to maintain it. MINUTES CITY COMMISSION/PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD WORKSHOP BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA APRIL 22, 1996 CitY Manager Parker advised that we are going through an upgrade of all our existing lift stations. It is not our policy to screen lift stations because Parks and Recreation does not have the manpower or money to take care of the landscaping. However, we are researching the cost to plant bougainvillea and install irrigation around our 64 lift stations. It is going to cost about $2,000 and $3,000 per lift station. If we want the developer to screen the lift station and, in the areas where there are homeowners' associations, turn the maintenance over to them, we have to codify this. Pete Mazzella, Assistant to the Utilities Director, stated that the actual lift station site would be the City's. The perimeter could be common area. Usually there is a buffer between lift stations and homes and it usually falls into some type of common area. So technically, it is under the auspices of the homeowners' associations anyway. City Manger Parker stated that we can spell out that the exterior screemng around the station would be the responsibility of the homeowners and any interior repair, etc., would be the City's responsibility. Objective 1.15 Encourage planned development projects which are sensitive to the characteristics of the site and to surrounding land uses, and mixed-use projects in locations which are appropriate, and utilize other innovative methods of regulating land development. Ms. Heyden stated that this objective contains several policies that are quite intricate and deal with regulations to establish a mixed-use district, which has not been done to date. These policies need to be evaluated in greater detail during the amendment process. We recommend keeping the policies in, revising the land development regulations, and instead of requiring a new zoning district to be created, we would allow it under a planned development district where we have more latitude to allow mixed-use projects. Ms. Papandreas stated that typically, the Zoning Codes are amended to reiterate and refine the policies that are in the Comprehensive Plan. Boynton Beach's COmprehensive Plan policies are much more detailed than most other communities' policies. However, it seems as though we are m~x~ng separate ideas in Objective 1.15 and she recommended that Objective 1.15 be broken out into two policies. 10 MINUTES CITY COMMISSION/PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD WORKSHOP BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA APRIL 22, 1996 Commissioner Bradley asked if this would apply to C-3. Ms. Heyden said right now the land use map does not show mixed use in that area. Commissioner Bradley felt it should. She said that as part of the amendment process, we could conduct a study as to whether or not our mixed-use land use needs to be expanded. Commissioner Bradley felt this would be a good idea. Objective 1,16 By June 1, 1990, or when mandated by state statute, regulate the use, density and intensity of land user by requiring that all land development orders be consistent with the Future Land Use Plan and other applicable policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Ms. Heyden stated that this particular section of the element makes recommendations for about 30 different areas in the City. Some of those recommendations involve the required rezoning which has already occurred, and some cannot be implemented until an application is submitted. Ms. Papandreas' recommendation is to revise and clarify policies for clarity, and consider excerpting "Problems and Opportunities" recommendations as neighborhood-based strategic plans. Ms. Heyden suggested having Ms. Papandreas list which policies she feels need clarity. Ms. Papandreas recommended that Policy 1.16.3 be rewritten because it appears that the first sentence contains a circular reference, and it seems like the essence of the policy was included in the second sentence. She recommended that this policy, which is specific to the operation of how the Zoning Code is interpreted, be revised. Ms. Heyden advised that she also asked Ms. Papandreas to transfer the following recommendation to the Housing Element: "Consider excerpting 'Problems and Opportunities' recommendations as neighborhood-based strategic plans." Looking at the "Problems and Opportunities", she said Ms. Papandreas feels that we have some new beginnings of a neighborhood plan. Neighborhood revitalization was identified as a goal and will be discussed at the Visioning Conference. However, Ms. Papandreas feels that some of that language could be extracted and started as part of a neighborhood planning exercise. 11 MINUTES CITY COMMISSION/PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD WORKSHOP BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA APRIL 22, 1996 Ms. Papandreas advised that there are a number of specific recommendations in the Land Use Element and the Parks and Recreation Element that relate to what you want to see happen on an individual neighborhood basis. She stated that Boynton Beach, east of 1-95, could benefit from neighborhood planning concepts. She recommended that we use the Comprehensive Planning process to set the stage and begin thinking about what the content of the neighborhood plan should be and the context (how the City can organize itself around the neighborhood planning program so that those neighborhood plans feed into the Comprehensive Planning process and the City's decision making process. She said you do not want neighborhoods getting enthused about putting together a neighborhood plan and then when it comes time to implement it, have it fall apart because it does not appropriately fit into the decision making content. Objective 1.17 Minimize nuisances, hazards and other adverse impacts to the general public, to property values, and to residential environments by preventing or minimizing land use conflicts. Ms. Heyden stated that there are a number of policies under this particular objective. policy 1.17.6 states, "Subsequent to Plan adOption, modify the land development regulations to require solid vegetative screening between industrial and residential uses, wherever practical, in addition to buffer walls." She advised that this policy has not been codified. Right now we require buffer walls, but we do not require vegetative screening in addition to the buffer walls. It was decided that this policy should be codified. MS. Heyden advised that Policy 1.17.9 relates to the sign ordinance. The sign ordinance has an amortization clause in it which requires all nonconforming signs to come into conformance. This lapsed in January, 1996. This policy requires that we review the performance of this ordinance at least once every five years and regulate signs to prevent aesthetically obtrusive signs. Most of the signs that are nonconforming dO not meet our height and setback requirements. This policy has never been promoted or enforced. MS. Papandreas presumed that the newly built signs are already conforming. She said the City needs to establish a net to bring in all the ones that were done prior to the ordinance. This would require setting up an inventory procedure, taking pictures and 12 MINUTES CITY COMMISSION/PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD WORKSHOP BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA APRIL 22, 1996 creating the records, then notifying the individual nonconforming sign owners that they have a certain amount of time to come into conformance. From her experience, the City will get a gush of requests for variances to keep the nonconforming signs. She said this is a good project and will make a difference in the way the City looks, but is a big commitment of resources and staff. It was decided that this policy should be kept and we need to start from scratch by taking an inventory of the nonconforming signs and notifying the individual sign owners, since they were not previously notified. City Manager Parker advised that Code Enforcement already made a list of the nonconforming signs. She said that when the billboard issue arose last year, staff notified her that the time frame for the sign ordinance was expiring soon. However, the CitY Attorney advised that five years was not sufficient amortization for the billboards. He also felt it may not be sufficient for the signs and was going to revisit that and advise us if we need to give them another two years. Direction regarding certain "Recommended Plan Amendments" - school siting, dredge spoil sites and mobile homes (pages 1-9 and 1-24 of EAR) School Siting Ms. Papandreas advised that we are still awaiting some information from the School BOard; therefore, this report is not complete. She stated that State laws regarding school siting were changed last year. By October of 1996, the City is required to have some additional plan amendments that address school siting in its jurisdiction. Specifically, the City will be required to provide land use categories in which schools can be sited, and the parameters under which the City will approve conditional uses. She stated that Ms. Heyden advised that the City has had increased interaction with the School Board in recent years, and school locations in Boynton Beach are pretty well set. It does not appear that compliance with this is going to be a problem. We will shlow the school sites that are planned and currently in operation, and indicate that schools are conditional uses in all zones. 13 MINUTES CITY COMMISSION/PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD WORKSHOP BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA APRIL 22, 1996 Ms. Heyden advised that the new State law requires that the Comprehensive Plan address land use categories where schools can be located. In addition to amending our land use plan, if necessary, the City has to enter into an interlocal agreement with the School Board regarding school siting criteria. This allows us an opportunity to address some of the things that we have encountered with the School Board with regard to new school locations. The School Board has been very agreeable about going through a voluntary technical review through the staff and we have generated staff comments based on our current Codes. However, oftentimes they will pick and choose which particular requirements they want to comply with. This will open up the door for the City to set forth different kinds of criteria. For instance, buffering and parking standards. Mr. Rosenstock felt we ought to make them comply with our Codes, and if we want to grant them a variance at some time, that can be addressed by the Commission and the City. City Manager Parker advised that they may be statutory exempt. Mayor Taylor did not want the City requirements to prevent schools from being built in Boynton Beach. Mr. Rosenstock suggested establishing criteria and doing an analysis of what other communities do. City Manager Parker asked if a school is defined as an educational facility run by the SChool Board only or if it can be run by anyone. Ms. Heyden defined a school as a pdblic school. There was a consensus that the School Board should be required to go through site plan review, and for staff to look at some criteria for schools. In iresponse to a question from Commissioner Bradley, Ms. Hoyden advised that the County ~s pretty close to finalizing their concurrency ordinance. She was not sure ~f th~s is going to be County-wide or if the City can opt into it. Dredge Spoil Sites Ms. Papandreas advised that State law requires local governments that are on the waterfront to designate dredge spoil disposal sites. City Manager Parker advised that we currently have a lease with the Florida Inland Navigation District (F.I.N.D.) for 90 years. The lease specifically states that the dredge spoil site (north of Colonial Club on U.S. 1) is a dredge site. This is why we are only 14 MINUTES CITY COMMISSION/PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD WORKSHOP BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA APRIl, 22, 1996 allowed to use it as a passive F~ark with no improvements that will impede their dredging. Commissioner Bradley inquired about the site that is south'of the Tradewinds development on the Delray/Boynton line. He asked if we will have access to that spoil site once we annex them. City Manger Parker advised him that it would depend on whether or not F.I.N.D. wanted to provide us access. City Manager Parker advised that F.I.N.D. is in the process of examining all their spoil sites to see which ~: wes they can release. They are discussing releasing the site on U.S. I to us as a park. She stated that there is a major perception problem in that the citizens think this site is a park. Mobile Homes Ms. Heyden advised that the Plan currently allows mobile homes in all residential zoning districts, subject to the building and site regulations of that particular zoning district. City Manager Parker asked if they can be limited to one zoning district. Mr. Rosenstock asked about the new laws that have been promulgated by the State with regard to hurricane resistance and mobile homes. Ms, Heyden advised that mobile homes have to meet the Building Code. Mr. Hukill stated that once the new regulations kick in, it is going to be awfully tough to build a mobile home in Boynton Beach. Mr. Rosenstock asked about the ones that already exist. Mr1 Hukill advised that they are tied down. 3. Traffic Circulation Element A. Overview of consultant findings (executive summary pages 3, 2-1 through 2-9, and 2-13 of EAR) Ms. Papandreas advised that this element will need to be expanded to comply with State requirements to include mass transit, bicycle, pedestrian, port and aviation needs. The City of Boynton Beach is in very good shape as far as compliance with its traffic 15 MINUTES CITY COMMISSION/PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD WORKSHOP BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA APRIL 22, 1996 goals and objectives. The City of Boynton Beach has an excellent level of traffic circulation. With the exception of 1-95, the City of Boynton Beach is meeting its traffic circulations for average daily circulation. According to the 2015 thoroughfare plan prepared by Palm Beach County, seven highway links are going to be over capacity. Five of these roadway links are constrained by physical or policy limitations. These seven links are outlined on page 2-8 of the EAR. Two of the links have no constraints on expansion. One of them is Congress Avenue, from Woolbright Road to S.W. 23rd AVenue. The other is Woolbright Road, from 1-95 to Seacrest Boulevard. Two of the objectives have not been followed up on and she suggested they be looked atto see if they are still relevant. Neighborhood circulation was included as an objective, but it has received limited attention. She recommended shifting it into the neighborhood planning effort. Most of the arterials are operated by other jurisdictions, but the City has Public Works input into that process. It might be appropriate for the Planning Department to participate in the efforts of the Metropolitan Planning Organization's committees. She recommended increased public involvement in the design of transportation improvements, specifically with regard to the expansion of the Ocean AvenUe Bridge and 1-95. She said local public involvement could help get what the communities feel ~s important, like landscaping along the 1-95 gateway or pedestrian access across the Ocean Avenue Bridge. COmmissioner Bradley asked if we are lacking public involvement. Ms. Papandreas stated that it is very important that local public involvement be communicated up to the D.O.T. level. MS. Papandreas advised that six of the twelve objectives have been achieved, specifically the concurrency objectives. B= Direction regarding the following objectives from the "Objectives Achievement Matrix" (pages 2-10 through 2-12 of EAR and pages 3 and 4 of staff comments) - Objectives 2.3 and 2.4 (and 2.4.7 and Policy 2.4.8), Objectives 2.5 and 2.7 and Policy 2.7.2, and Objectives 2.8 and 2.9 (Policy 2.9.5) Objective 2.2 Mr. Hukill advised that this objective needs to be revised. 16 MINUTES CITY COMMISSION/PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD WORKSHOP BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA APRH, 22, 1996 Objective 2.3 Within three years of Plan adoption, neighborhood circulation patterns shall be continuously monitored to assess local operating conditions and address the need for any capacity or safety-related road improvements. MS. Heyden advised that this objective has not been achieved. She stated that the specific policy that has been a problem is 2.3.1, which states that the City shall develop a traffic count program oriented to local streets and collector roadways to augment County and regional programs. City Manager Parker asked why we are doing this. She pointed out that our neighborhood streets are set. We are not going to change the size of the neighborhood streets. We are not going to go from two lanes to four lanes in the middle of a neighborhood~ and we are not going to change the routes. Therefore, why are we spending time and money to do traffic counts on all our roads. She said this would be very expensive to do and asked why we would do this, unless it is for a specific project, like a speed bump, stop sign, or traffic light. Ms. Papandreas could not see why the City would do this either and stated that this objective will be revised to reflect present practice. Objective 2.4 The City shall provide for a safe, convenient and efficient motorized and non-motorized transportation system. Ms. Heyden advised that the entire traffic circulation element has to be redone. Also, she advised that Policy 2.4.7 has not been codified and recommended that it be codified. That policy states, "Subsequent to Plan adoption, modify the land development regulations to include access criteria such as minimum spacing of driveways, requirements for exclusive turn lanes and signalization." - 17 MINUTES CITY COMMISSION/PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD WORKSHOP BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA APRIL 22, 1996 Objective 2.5 When reviewing development proposals, provide for the protection of existing and future right-of-way from building encroachment, provide for minima/negative impacts associated with driveway locations, and provide for safe and efficient on-site traffic circulation and parking, including provisions for handicapped users. Ms. Heyden advised hat the recommendation is to consider formulating separate objectives and policies for right-of-way and handicapped considerations, and to revise the measurement standard to delete the requirement to count handicapped spaces. Ms. Papandreas advised that this really contains two different ideas, and that right-of- way protection is different from safe on-site traffic circulation, including provisions for handicapped users. The adopted measurement is the number of developer projects permitted subsequent to performance review and the number of handicapped parking spaces provided. There is nothing in the adopted measurement that addresses the right-of-way protection. She did not think there was much to be gained by sending staff or consultants out to count the number of handicapped spaces provided. Presumably, this will be checked when the site plan review comes in. In response to a question from Mr. Hukill, Ms. Papandreas said it seems that providing for the protection of right-of-way should be an objective. City Manager Parker believes this relates to future right-of-way needs for road expansions. She stated that the County has thoroughfare plans with the expanded right-of-way delineated so that you cannot build into the expanded right-of-way area. Ms. Papandreas recommended separating them into separate objectives and having pdlicies that follOw along under each objective. Objective 2.7 In order to maximize highway system performance, the City shall support alternative Transportation System Management (TSM) strategies wherever feasible in lieu of, or in conjunction with, more expensive capital improvements. 18 MINUTES CITY COMMISSIONfPLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD WORKSHOP BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA APRIL 22, 1996 Ms. Heyden advised that Policy 2.7.2 states that if necessary, the City shall consider capacity improvements to U.S. 1 and Boynton Beach Boulevard through restriping of the existing pavement; this effort shall be predicated on a finding of minimal negative impacts regarding the loss of on-street parking either through lack of demand or by replacement with off-street parking in other areas. The objective is recommended to be retained or revised to relate more directly to improving transit use. MS. Papandreas said the policy talks about Transportation Systems Management improvements, which means trying to get people out of their cars and in buses to go to work, staggered work hours, car pooling, or anything to take singular occupied vehicles off the road. The measurement target is the number of Transportation System Management (TSM) improvements. Motorola is the only company she could think of that would be of sufficient magnitude to have any TSM programs. She did not know how this policy got in here. She said it does not link to TSM. She stated that it looks like it is related to a downtown plan. MaYor Taylor asked if the expansion of Palm Tran comes under this policy. MS. Papandreas stated that TSM refers to specific programs. It does not just refer to putting people on buses. However, she felt it is important to monitor the increased usage of Palm Tran and decide whether or not to discontinue the local route. She felt that a more appropriate policy for the City of Boynton Beach might be to cooperate and support those programs that are initiated by others. Objective 2.8 The City shall strive to reduce overall energy consumption due to transportation. Ms. Papandreas explained that the data is not available to determine whether we have c(~mplied with either of the measures (decrease in average vehicle delay or the increase in auto occupancy car pool users). Commissioner Bradley stated that the County is in the midst of putting a traffic light system on line. Ms. Papandreas advised that Policy 2.8.1 makes reference to that. She will change the target measure of Objective 2.8. 19 MINUTES CITY COMMISSION/PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD WORKSHOP BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA APRIL 22, 1996 Objective2.9 The City shall provide local transportation facilities that are visually and functionally pleasing and that conform to City guidelines. Ms. Heyden advised that Policy 2.9.5 states that the City shall continue to enforce local a~d state laws prohibiting dumping or littering in public right-of-way. The recommendation is to consider deleting the policy on littering. Ms. Papandreas explained that this is really not of the same magnitude of importance as a transportation policy and is really not a Comprehensive Plan policy issue. Commissioner Titcomb felt strongly about leaving this in this objective. Mr. Hukill felt there was a better place to put it. City Manager Parker suggested putting it in the Solid Waste Element. Direction regarding certain "Recommended Plan Amendments"- open space linkages (page 2-14 of EAR) Ms. Papandreas advised that her recommendation is consistent with some of the recent legislation that has been established that allows Federal funds to be used for beautification. She recommends that the City consider adding policies that will support using funds for open space linkages on eligible roads in Boynton Beach. It can be a bicycle path, landscape gateways, or landscape medians. This could also fit in with the neighborhood planning concept. City Manager Parker stated that we have been allowing homeowners associations to landscape the rights-of-way, but they have to paY for the landscaping. Some of them have been buying their own signs to install on the rights-of-way at the entrances to their subdivisions. She asked the CommiSsion if they want the City to set aside money to do this. Mayor Taylor would rather spend the money to plant shade trees in the parks. 20 MINUTES CITY COMMISSION/PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD WORKSHOP BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA APRIL 22, 1996 Sanitary Sewer, Potable Water, Natural Groundwater, Aquifer Recharge, Drainage and Solid Waste Sub-elements A. Overview of consultant findings (executive summary page 4 and pages 3-1 through 3-10 and page 3-24 of EAR) An oral overview was not given. Direction regarding the following objectives from "Objectives Achievement Matrix" (pages 3-11 through 3-23 and staff comments - pages 4, 5 and 6) - Objectives 3A.2 and 3A.5, Policy 3C.1.7, Objectives 3C.3 and 3E.3 (Policies 3E.3.1, .2, .8 and .9), and Objective 3E.6 Ms. Heyden advised that Policy 3A.1.3 states that development with individual septic tanks will only be permitted for densities of one dwelling unit per acre or less. Mr. Mazzella had no problem with the recommendation to consider revising this policy. He said we only allow septic tanks in existing structures where it is not cost effective to retrofit that area for sewer. However, all new developments have sewer. With regard to Policy 3A.2, Ms. Heyden advised that the recommendation is to consider modifying this policy in regard to the Master Plan. Mr. Mazzella referred to Policy 3A.2.3, which states that a master plan for facility expansion will be updated and implemented at least every five years. He pointed out that the population has lagged behind projections; therefore, there was no need to update the master plan. He suggested that this policy be revised to update the Master Plan as needed (development driven). Ms. Heyden will modify this policy~ MS. Heyden advised that Policy 3A.5.2 states that sanitary sewer facilities will only be extended through the service area in a systematic fashion. Services will not be extended more than 1/2 mile for a single development. The recommendation is to revise the policy; some services extend past 1/2 mile in cases where development already existed and/or full cost of extension paid. Ms. Heyden advised that essentially, 21 MINUTES CITY COMMISSION/PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD WORKSHOP BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA APRIL 22, 1996 we have not been following this policy. Mr. Mazzella recommended deleting it or changing it to say "development driven", and that we will provide sewer in our service area if they pay the cost of extending the lines. City Manager Parker suggested stating that the City will not extend more than 1/2 mile for a single development at the City's ezpense. Mr. Mazzella stated that the way it reads now sounds as though we do not all;ow an extension for more than 1/2 mile. MS. Papandreas advised that Policy 3A.5.3 states that Urban Sprawl will be discouraged by requiring new development to pay the full cost of extending sanitary sewer facilities. Thus, the development of remote parts of the service area will be more expensive than compact development. She said this really refers to two different facets of the same problem. She advised that Urban Sprawl is a topic that DCA has focused on in the past when they reviewed plan amendments. COnsidering we have large developed areas to the north, west, and south of us, Mr. Mazzella wondered how are we preventing Urban Sprawl by not filling in those areas in our service area. He felt this was written for another part of Florida. MS. Papandreas inquired about the maximum the City has ever extended. Mr. Mazzella advised that in the 1970s, we extended from Military Trail to Seacrest Boulevard. He fett if someone wants to develop and is more than 1/2 mile from our nearest facility, that we have to allow them to pay the cost. Otherwise, we are forcing them into a septic tahk scenario. He stated that the furthest corner of the service area is two miles. He felt we can eliminate 3A5.2 completely. Ms. Papandreas will explain the situation to DCA and report back at the next meeting. POlicy 3C. 1.7 states that development with individual private wells will only be permitted for densities of one dwelling unit per acre or less. It is recommended that the wording be changed to state that development with individual private wells will only be permitted in areas unserved by City water. Objective 3C,3 Water Conservation. The City of Boynton Beach will minimize demands for water to reduce system expansion costs and the need for increased groundwater withdrawals. 22 MINUTES CITY COMMISSION/PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD WORKSHOP BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA APRIL 22, 1996 Ms. Heyden stated that this objective and these policies came about because there was a temporary water shortage when the City was looking at expanding the water plant. There is also a general conservation policy. The recommendation is to consider revising this objective to set a target for conservation, if appropriate. The City has developed an extensive and innovative water storage system which may reduce the need to conserve water. City Manager Parker advised that previously, all we had was the inverted rate structure to provide an incentive. Since 1990, we did the original tower and the aquifer storage and recovery, and we are in the process of spending over $5 million to do the reuse system at the Golf Course. All those facilities conserve water, and we were thinking of revising this. We are going to be looking at two systems of rates--the inverted block rate and a regular straight rate (consumption based rate). We think the need for using the inverted block rate structure no longer exists because of some of the other water conservation things we are doing with the utility system. In response to a question by Commissioner Titcomb, Mr. Mazzella advised that the large volume water users make up a small percentage of our revenue stream. He believes that the severity of the inverted block actually hurt our revenue stream overall and did not really promote conservation among the large block of Iow users. City Manager Parker suggested stating that the City is going to look at a variety of methods, including rates, aquifer storage and recovery, and reuse to implement water conservation. Objective 3C.5 Prevention of Urban Sprawl. The City will prevent urban sprawl by requiring orderly, compact development of the potable water service area as it approaches buildout. Ms. Heyden advised that Policy 3C.5.2 states that potable water facilities will only be extended through the service area in a systematic fashion. Services will not be extended more than 1/2 mile for a single development. She felt the best way to handle this is to set a two mile limit. Ms. Papandreas is going to check with DCA to see if this would be acceptable. 23 MINUTES CITY COMMISSION/PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD WORKSHOP BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA APRIL 22, 1996 If it is not acceptable, City Manager Parker suggested stating that we will not do "leap frog" development. She also suggested qualifying it by saying "extend it two miles, but only through existing developed areas." Ms. Papandreas suggested going one mile, unless there is an overriding public interest, and in the event there is a need to go farther than one mile, then this will be addressed at that time. She will see what see can do to get what the City is doing within its designated service area adopted. She will alSo express to DCA that the City's service area is within the urban growth boundary and outside the urban reserve area and see if that applies. Objective 3E.3 In order to maintain the adopted level of service standard, and in support of the recycling goals of the So/id Waste Authority, the City shall attempt to reduce the solid waste stream of the City by 30 percent by 1994. MS. Heyden stated that this objective has not been achieved. The City had a recycling rate of about 9.47 percent. The recommendation is to revise the numeric goal and target year. City Manager Parker said that percentage is incorrect. It should be about 30 percent. She said the 9.47 percent may be the Solid Waste Authority stream from us. They may pick up 9.47 percent, but we pick up about 30 percent. Ms. Papandreas will double check that figure. City Manager Parker pointed out that we cannot meet a 30 percent reduction of a 1990 number when we had a 50 percent growth rate. It has to be an adjusted number. Ms. Heyden advised that 3E.3.1 states, "Continue to assist the efforts of the SWA in initiating individual pilot recycling programs within the City." City Manager Parker advised that we received the County award last year. Ms. Heyden advised that Policy 3E.3.2 states, "By June of 1990, identify potential neighborhoods (e.g. Meadows PUD, Boynton Lakes PUD, etc.) for future pilot recycling prOgrams." City Manager Parker advised that all of those areas have residential recycling implemented. We are ~100 percent implemented in residential, about 80 percent implemented in multi-family, and about 25 percent in commercial. During the meeting, Ms. Papandreas made note of the issues brought up. Attached to these minutes is a list of those issues. 24 MINUTES CITY COMMISSION/PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD WORKSHOP BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA APRIL 22, 1996 C. Other City Manager Parker advised that there is a 250,000 square foot development planned for Boynton Beach Boulevard and El Clair Ranch Road. it is a 16 screen movie theatre and shopping/entertainment complex. That is not in conjunction with the West Boynton plan. Additionally, Mr. Morton has been negotiating to try to get a 16 screen movie theatre in Tradewinds, Obviously, if one goes on El Clair Road, we are not going to get one in the City. She asked the Commission if they want her to protest that development on behalf of the City. Mayor Taylor felt this was an opportunity for us to support West Boynton because we bought into that West Boynton plan. City Manager Parker was directed to protest that development on behalf of the City. 5. Set Next Meeting Date Ms. Heyden advised that the submittal date is May 1st. We are not going to meet the submittal date. DCA has advised us that there are no repercussions as long as we adopt on time. The next meeting was scheduled for May 13, 1996 at 6:30 p.m. in the Library Program Room. 25 MINUTES CITY COMMISSION/PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD WORKSHOP BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA APRIl, 22, 1996 6. Adjournment Them being no further business to discuss this evening, the meeting was adjourned at 10:26 p.m. CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH ATTEST: Cite/Clerk Recording Secretary (Four Tapes) Cor~missioner .~ Co~issioner 26 Bo 'eton Beach Cam rehenslve Plan, Evaluation end · art Summa Overall recommendations The C..i.ty consider structuring the rewrite of the Comi~i~tSive Plan usP-- a_nd ut;zen suJ:~committee~ ~o nrovi,~= - .~-*-- .......... "t~ staff documents have ve~, I~-- ,------ ........ pl~ffie plan. The pr. sent · x ,.,,v ~-,=.u.[ aa a pua,c In/ormalion document. The plan has a great deal of redundancy, (examples noted in lite Objeclkes The plan has a ,~re-° -*-, --.; - :.-. ~~te~inf~mation. · lev., ,nm the Conservation , · Fu~lura L~Ki.. U~e, Pml~ and Recr~llon a El.menlo, nd Th~ have t~e n/i . I"'vm 'hould be '=,,..,--,~, ...- ;.'_'L_' "~. ~ _,=~,~.,,,,.en~auon~ On a'neighborhood include .... .~_'~',"P'"~'~'~ v. m cre~e neighborhood =hms?rl~a=-~g2,,,., uown traffic which is usin,~ nei,,h~--,---- - - , ~e?atl?a f~r ~low~ng strategies. = . ,~v,,,~ s~reets and hct~'g renewal Evaluedon m:d Future I. Jnd U~e Element f. g. Objectives Achievement MatJix (OAM): many objeCtives and Because growth has been slower than projected' the land use needs .which'were calcula..t? for 2010 can be assumed to serve ,=~u~u~aee me reno neeos lo ~ewe the projected population. .M?~__~lhe ~g _n:~th_ in land u~e ha~ come in single family residenflel (+3~ re:ms), TOIlOWad Dy mulU fmnlly residen~l (+17g ~'em anti ret~ommerclei(+l?gacres). Very few perm~ for new ' c:on~lmct/on were iz~ued in the area eest et I-e~. 30.%..of the populatio.n, was over 65 years old in 1990. This is a rmaavely high proportion of older residents. About one-quarter of the C;~y's total acres were undeveloped. However, development plans were approved which committed about half of these vaoant 1,749.acres. Median household income in Boy-nlon Beach was lower than the t~b~nunty'wide ~old income, There..was a wide variation pe.r.~apita Income of white res,dents ($19,104) comoarecl msldents ($7,088).. " pollclas ~efe met by the adoption or the revised land development code. '='~' ~: ' The 'Problems and Opportunities" sec'do- --' ..... '-- - ,, m u,e fLU element has a number of specific, detailed neighborhood level. These should ~tl_l?.b_U?ed !n the back Of the aupport documents. . m~ whl~ conform to recognized affinity areas =r~ consistent with available data so ..... ~- ....... ' - .-.'"' ~... _, .... u~ ~=~ Ulri~Ulg De C~earJv ,nd r mm a,onspreparec~ aed .,.~ua~u:u uaaeo on mase Clmtrict needs. Additional needs will be expressed, once the neighborhood planning basis used as a common basts for analysis.. 15 of the 20 o .bJecUves were achieved or partially achieved. Traffic Circulation a. T~.e City's traffic c/rculatlon element i-e o!co/K]-'"--- * -- -, ,---.-,,,.,~..u by the analysis luons on state and federal roads. b. With ..~ .~on of 1-95. the arterial system in Boynton Beach is operaling at an acceptable level ~f ~erviek e. The ~Dl$ lhomughfare p/an presented by Palm Beach Court ?' ,,ksover in -.....-_ ?. ---z-J . -- . ~'--'P~"~'~.I~ 4;Ult. i'lV~a 01' mese cong? un~ ere corm,dered to be ~onatmined · .or.polic~ Iimii~ons. Two links have -,. '------,--- by p_ .h~s,cal D.t elm ...:_..~_ J ~ "~' ~,,~*dl/l~ On e~nslon ,;-,, ~.? ~qu~e~ ~o oDeral~ over cansu-;k~ ,%, ..... - _ _, .... = .... ----,, ~, =~, ,:om,,wenue. and Woolbright Road I-g$ lo 8eacrest Boulevard. ' . ~. d. ~. ~n~me= ~c~ ~_Be gr.eatl¥ exp,~ to compS, with ,tate i ransportation elame..rlt that Includes e. Ojll~, ~,.,jm..uv,u relailllg tO ener~, ~lServatJon, visual a.p.Pe ..atonce of marls, have had no follow, up in practice. These _.__u:'..~mmuo circulation was included as an nhi,,~h,. snOUlO De Shitled irllo the -m'~o,~, -.~,.~,.,-:: ---';-:'" :"~ g. ,.,~., I:, . .._.. u, um tutorials m uoynton Beach .,..___,__, ~__ .. ~ · and Sttde. Partlc~a.tlnn hu, ~.=,,'-,,--_-~-._.-.~. ,.?~-u :uy me Coun~ · j_,.___,,__ _. .-.---'_. -z -.-f ,,iry OTnClaiS In II18 efforts of the ~r~/~:=~cerga' sn~aJe°n~a.,~c°~l~.milteas IS very 'mporlant. Deparlale~tm--,- ,,.o .,q ~ ueyoncl the Engineering h J~ ...... ' ---'-"J .... - .-i~.,i~....,,,r. aa ~aUllL. IilYU~vf=lll~Jl[ "~'-'~-~-- ....... ~mpr?.?ments is very Important. Specifically, the City should. providing extensive review of plane for the (~:ean Avenue Bridge. L 6 Of the 12 objectives have been achieved. 3 in~d~ h~ ~r ~n~nu~. planning under ~e ~m~ve '~nni~ ~w *~ S~p~y avm~b? to s~ ~e C~. Re~ of ~ ,a~~ ISSUES .¸ 11~ 12i 131 14~ Maximize commercial on remaining vacant land. Desired percentage for land use. 1.4.8 - Improve coordination with County on water service agreement parcels (design). 1.8.2 - Include residential, even if no subdivision. Community artwork/beautification assessment. Is recreation open space fee "fair"? Study. 1.10.3.4 - Want to try to relocate petro storage uses. How many? $? Alternate space? List all nonconforming uses by site and use. How to address. Consider Planning and Development Board review of all non-conforming uses and potential to correct. 1.14.6 - Change zoning [or cell phone towers to allow on City properties (2 applications pending). Add policy for cell phone towers. Restrict to public land and/or away from residences. Ham operator towers. Delete 1.14.6. 1.14.7 - City to set standard and landscape lift stations. Need to codify need for developers to landscape lift stations. Homeowners to maintain. Amend LDRs to allow mixer use in PD districts. CBD/CRA congruence for mixed uses (MLK Blvd.). Neighborhood plans - begin to evolve. Vegetative screening in addition to buffer walls. 19. Amortize nonconforming signs? 20. Billboard removal. 21. Public info benefits of sign code. 22. School facilities Siting - Are maintenance facilities covered? 23. Need annual review of objectives achievement. 24. Want site plans for school. 25. Want landscape and access criteria. 26. Designate dredge spoil disposal site on plan. 27. Any need for City dredge spoil disposal? (Boat Ramp) 28. Can we limit mobile homes to some districts? 29. Can we eliminate existing mobile home parks? 30. 2.3.1 - Delete neighborhood traffic count requirement. 31.. Traffic calming efforts study. 32. Show extension of S.W. 23rd for ROW reservation. 33. Support FEC purchase for comuter rail. 34. Neighborhood gateway improvements, funded by individuals or neighborhood.