Loading...
Minutes 12-09-03MEETING MINUTES OF THE REGULAR COMMUNITY REDELEVOPMENT AGENCY MEETING HELD IN COMMISSION CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA ON TUESDAY, DECEMBER 9, 2003 AT 6:30 P.M. Present: Larry Finkelstein, Chair Jeanne Heavilin, Vice Chair Alexander DeMarco Don Fenton Charlie Fisher Michelle Hoyland Henderson Tillman Douglas Hutchinson, CRA Director Lindsey Payne, Board Attorney Susan Vielhauer, Controller II. Roll Call The Recording Secretary called the roll and declared a quorum was present. II1. Agenda Approval A. Additions, Deletions, Corrections to the Agenda Eric Johnson, Planner announced that the applicant for the All Brite Carwash has withdrawn both of his applications. Chairman Finkelstein stated that these two items should be deleted from the agenda. Vice Chair Heavilin requested that Item C. under New Business, "Consideration of the Ocean District Plan" be tabled to the next meeting. Vice Chair Heavilin has not had an opportunity to read the report and would like more time to do so. Vice Chair Heavilin requested that Item XI.A, under Legal, "Status of the $9,000 Invoice Investigation" be heard immediately after the Public Hearing Items. B. Adoption of Agenda Motion Mr. Tillman moved to approve the agenda, as amended. Motion seconded by Vice Chair Heavilin and unanimously carried. IV. Consent Agenda A. Approval of Minutes--November 13, 2003 Workshop and November 20, 2003 Regular Meeting I. Call to Order Chairman Finkelstein called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. Chairman Finkelstein welcomed Commissioner McCray. Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida December 9, 2003 B. Financial Report Motion Mr. DeMarco moved to approve the Consent Agenda. Motion seconded by Mr. Tillman and unanimously carried. V. Public Audience Chairman Finkelstein announced the Public Audience. Sister Lorraine Ryan, 145 NE 4th Avenue, Boynton Beach, was present as a representative of the Women's Circle and Boynton Beach PATCH. Sister Lorraine stated that in July, PATCH wrote a letter to Mr. Doug Hutchinson and the CRA with copies to the Commission and the Community Relations Board, requesting that PATCH be allowed to make a presentation to the CRA for a community health center in the Heart of Boynton. They would like to have the health center on Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard, if possible. There has been no response to their July communication, and she requested that they be placed on the next CRA agenda. Sister Ryan gave a brief history of PATCH for the benefit of the Board and stated that PATCH conducts health fairs, immunizations, HIV/Aids testing and has a functioning wellness center. They would like to expand from promotive, preventive health care to curative health care, but they are in need of a facility. She stressed that there is a need for health care for the uninsured in the Heart of Boynton area. Bethesda Hospital is willing to donate a doublewide trailer that they could use temporarily, but they need land to place it on. Chairman Finkelstein advised Sister Ryan to get together with Mr. Hutchinson and let him know what PATCH's needs are. After that, Mr. Hutchinson could report back to the Board. VI. Public Hearing Attorney Payne administered the oath to all persons who would be testifying. A. Zoninq Code Variance Project: Agent: Location: Descriptions: Mixed Use Core Addition Land Use Amendment (LUAR 03-008) City of Boynton Beach Area bounded by NE 4th Avenue on the north, NE 2nd Avenue on the South, the Intracoastal Waterway on the east and the parcels fronting North Federal Highway on the west. Request to reclassify multiple properties totaling +15.036 acres from Mixed Use (MX) to Mixed Use- Core (MX-C), retaining the existing Conservation Overlay. Dick Hudson, Senior Planner presented the item on behalf of staff and pointed out that the item was only a Land Use Amendment and is not a rezoning. The amendment was necessitated as the result of a response from DCA when the last Land Use Amendments were presented to them. DCA noted that the City has increased density to allow 80 units per acre in this area. The Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida December 9, 2003 area east of Federal Highway is within the Hurricane Evacuation Zone and State policy prohibits increasing densities in this Zone. Because there are some areas that would not be developed staff included them in the same land use, which evened out the densities. Mr. Hudson also pointed out that some projects are not coming in at the maximum density and will be more commercial/office type projects that would create a balance in this Zone. While going through the process, staff discovered that there is an additional parcel owned by the City that could be included in the Zone, which Mr. Hudson indicated on the plans. However, because the City must provide 30 days notice to property owners in the surrounding areas, they cannot meet the requirements. Therefore, staff will be bringing this back as a small-scale amendment, since it is under 10 acres. The Zone would be comprised of six parcels totaling 15.036 acres. The current land use is mixed use with a conservation overlay that restricts development, except to enhance the conservation area. The properties will be reclassified to Mixed Use-Core to allow 80 units per acre, while retaining the conservation overlay. Mr. Hudson noted that staff does not feel that there would be any objections from DCA since they recommended the Amendment. Vice Chair Heavilin asked what the northern boundary of the Zone would be and was informed that the Zone would not go any further north than 6th Avenue. Mr. Fisher asked if this would affect any residential homes and Mr. Hudson said that it would not. Mr. Henderson asked when the City would be notified by DCA. Mr. Hudson stated that the City would receive a response from DCA within 60 days of receipt by DCA. Chairman Finkelstein opened the public hearing. Since no one wished to speak, the public hearing was closed. Motion Mr. Tillman moved to approve. Motion seconded by Mr. Fisher and unanimously carried. B. Conditional Use Project: Agent: Owner: Location: Description: Boynton Delray Academy (COUS 03-008) Marty Madura Keith D. Kern Northwest corner of Martin Luther King Boulevard and Railroad Avenue Request Conditional Use approval for a primary/secondary Charter School C. Abandonment Project: Agent: Owner: Boynton Delray Academy (ABAN 03-012) Marty Madura Keith D. Kern Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida December 9, 2003 Location: Description: West of Railroad Avenue between NE 11th Avenue and NE 10th Avenue Request for an abandonment of a segment of a 5- foot east/west alley (right-of-way) extending west from Railroad Avenue in conjunction with the assembly and development of adjacent parcels. Eric Johnson, Planner presented the item on behalf of staff. The School would teach up to 125 students in grades six through nine. The property is comprised of two parcels that are separated by a five-foot wide alley that runs east/west. The applicant has also submitted a request to abandon the alley. Mr. Johnson requested that the abandonment be heard simultaneously with this item, but voted upon separately. Mr. Johnson noted that a Charter School is a conditional use in the R-2 Zoning District and must be evaluated against certain standards. The project proposes one point of ingress and one point of egress. The entrance would be off NE 11th Avenue and the exit would be off Railroad Avenue. The School is required to have one parking space for each 500' of floor area; therefore, 13 parking spaces are required and the applicant is proposing 16. A student drop-off area would be on Railroad Avenue and has been reviewed and approved by staff. The dumpster enclosure will be located along the western property line on the north parcel. The applicant is proposing a 6' high buffer wall at this location that would screen the dumpster. Mr. Fenton asked how close the dumpster would be to the nearest residence and Mr. Johnson said that it is located directly west of a residence; however, he did not know the distance. He estimated that it might be around 40'. There are no signs proposed for the project. If the applicant decides to put up a sign, they would have to apply to the CRA and the City Commission for review and approval. The proposed building would meet all setback requirements of a C-2 Zoning District. The only portion of the property located within the R-1 Zoning District would be the parking lot. If the applicant did decide to have a freestanding sign, it would have to be a monument sign, but they are allowed wall signage. The project is located within the Heart of Boynton Master Plan Schematic Design Area and that plan calls for two to three story buildings with mixed use for retail/office/residential. The charter school would not be compatible with that plan, but the plan, in actuality, is a guiding tool for development and has not been codified. The structure meets all height restrictions. Staff would have preferred a more intense use and hoped in the future that if the business expands and prospers, the developer would put back into the property. With incorporation of the staff comments, the proposed project would comply with all requirements of the Code. There are 38 conditions of approval and the applicant informed staff that they would meet all of them. Therefore, staff is recommending approval of the conditional use request and the abandonment request. With regard to the abandonment, the total area that would be abandoned would be only 0.0134 acres and is a very small area. There have been no objections filed and the Engineering Division, Public Works and Utilities have reviewed the abandonment request and have no objections. Florida Power & Light, Florida Public Utilities and the cable company have no Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida December 9, 2003 objections to the abandonment, but they have not heard from BellSouth. Staff recommends approval. Chairman Finkelstein opened the public hearing for both items. Sister Lorraine Ryan, 145 NE 4th Avenue, Boynton Beach, noted that St. John Missionary Baptist Church and the R.M. Lee CDC have plans for a charter school and hoped that the planning for the proposed school has been done in conjunction with those other schools. She felt that this was important for community planning. Reverend Clarence Ellington, Executive Director of R.M. Lee CDC, stated that they have no opposition to the project and are in full support of the school. Chairman Finkelstein closed the public hearing. Marty Madura, representing the applicant, agreed with all 38 conditions of approval. They also received a letter from BellSouth stating they had no objection to the abandonment. Mr. Fisher inquired if the school was a not-for-profit organization and was informed that it was. Mr. Fisher also inquired if at sometime the school looses its funding, to whom would the property revert. Mr. Joe Green responded that the property would revert back to the School District of Palm Beach County. Mr. Fisher pointed out that the location of the property was the anchor to the MLK Boulevard and he would like the CRA to have the right of first refusal to the property. Mr. Green said that he could not speak for the School Board, but he did not think that this would be a problem. Mr. Fisher asked if the CRA could forward something to the School Board to make this request. Attorney Payne stated that this was permitted and the CRA could ask them if they would agree to this. Mr. Fisher asked if this could be a condition to approval. Attorney Payne did not think that this could be a condition of approval, but the Board could withhold approval until the School Board responds to the request. Ms. Hoyland recommended that it be added as a condition and if the School Board does not agree, it could come back to the Board for renegotiation. Attorney Payne thought that this would be permissible. Mr. Tillman inquired why the students would be dropped off on Railroad Avenue as opposed to on the grounds itself. Mr. Madura said that Engineering requested that the drop off be placed on Railroad Avenue. Mr. Tillman pointed out that this is next to train tracks, a major highway and MLK Boulevard. He felt that this would pose a safety risk for the students. Mr. Madura pointed out that sidewalks would be added and it is intended that Railroad Avenue would be turned into a one-way road. Mr. Tillman also asked about the drop off area on Railroad Avenue and questioned where the cars would wait since this is a through street and cars would be lining up on the street. Mr. Madura stated that the cars would also be able to enter the parking area and Mr. Tillman pointed out that the parking area is not designated as a drop off area. Mr. Madura explained that a drop off lane would be provided and students would not be getting out on the street. Ms. Hoyland noted that there was only enough room for two cars to queue. 5 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida December 9, 2003 Mr. Green stated that this was the recommendation of the City's Engineering Division and he would be willing to have the buses go into the parking lot area to drop off the students. The students are too young to drive and over 95% of the students arrive by bus. They have a small student enrollment and do not expect to go beyond that figure. Mr. Tillman felt that this created a dangerous situation. Quintus Greene, Development Director stated that while the recommendation was made by the Engineering Division, he felt that the traffic on Railroad Avenue becomes very light after 13th Avenue. Further, he noted that of the three drop off options available, Railroad Avenue, MLK Boulevard or 11th Avenue, Engineering considered Railroad Avenue to be the best option. Chairman Finkelstein pointed out that Railroad Avenue becomes one way south of MLK. Mr. Tillman inquired how many students would be attending and Mr. Green stated presently there are 70 students with a maximum of 125. Mr. Tillman inquired how many buses would be utilized and Mr. Green said that they have one bus and as the enrollment increases, they may request a second bus. Also, the buses would not arrive at the same time because they would be coming from different directions and he expected that they would have a maximum of two buses. Mr. Fenton was concerned about the dumpster being so close to a residence and asked how the applicant intended to address this. Mr. Green noted that there is a wall separating the dumpster from the residential property. It will be their responsibility to keep the dumpster clean and deodorized. The dumpster cannot be moved to another location because the trucks picking up the trash need enough room to maneuver. Mr. DeMarco inquired about the size of the staff and was informed that there are nine. Ms. Hoyland did not think it was appropriate to have a school located at the MLK corridor. She would prefer to have a building that had more permanency, rather than a modular building. To her, this appears to be a temporary structure and plans for this area recommend a Floribbean architectural style, which this building does not have. She was in favor of Boynton Beach having a charter school, but she did not approve of the entire design. She also echoed the concerns of Mr. Tillman regarding the drop off area for the students. Ms. Hoyland noted that the sidewalk on Railroad Avenue cut into the property and she thought that this was supposed to be a public sidewalk. Ms. Hoyland asked where the school received its funding. Mr. Green explained that the school was designed for inner-city, at-risk youth and has been operating for five years and led the County in FCAT gains. They need to find a location in this area, because 90% of the student population would come from this community. He understood that the school was in the redevelopment area of Boynton Beach and did not intend to come into the community to stick out and be a sore thumb. Ms. Hoyland stated that one of the duties of the CRA Board is to look at program content and development activities in the district; she could not support a modular building going up on this location. She would like to have a permanent building. Mr. Madura explained that the building was a permanent building and meets Code. The entire project has been valued at $820,000 and the building costs $400,000. Ms. Hoyland stressed that the building looks manufactured and modular and is not the kind of building she would like to see in the MLK community as the first project and questioned the types of projects that would 6 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida December 9, 2003 follow. Mr. Tillman felt that this was a step backwards, and he did not think that this was what they were looking for in this area. Chairman Finkelstein introduced Commissioner Ensler. Quintus Greene, Development Director, stated that this is not what staff was looking for and realized that it is not FIoribbean, which is the style for the Heard of Boynton. He pointed out that when the decision was made regarding this project, there was no commitment from the Board to move forward on the properties on MLK. Mr. Greene questioned if they had a right to stop the school from putting up a legal building on a legal site in the neighborhood, when the City did not have the ability to acquire the property. Since staff received the applicant's project, the Board at its last meeting made a determination how it wanted to deal with property on MLK, but the applicant had already moved forward with the project. Staff also did not favor a modular building, but felt that they were in no position to deny the applicant the right to build on the property. Mr. Fenton favored the modular building and felt that the building could be enhanced to look better. Mr. Fenton also concurred with Mr. Tillman and Ms. Hoyland about the drop off area being unsafe and the sidewalk cut in. Also, he was concerned about the odors that would emanate from the dumpster. He would like to table the item to provide the applicant an opportunity to deal with the Board's major concerns. Mr. Fisher did not think that the drop off site was a problem and he did not think that the stacking of cars would require a great deal of time. He also would like to see some cosmetic improvements to the building. He pointed out that part of the CRA's responsibilities is to meet the needs of the community. This was the type of neighborhood that was in need of having charter schools, and he was in favor of having a charter school at this location. He felt that it would be a benefit, not a detriment, to the Heart of Boynton. Chairman Finkelstein recommended that the applicant look at the design guidelines in the Heart of Boynton Plan to determine what the Board is looking for. Mr. Green stated that they have already made some changes to the dbcor and do not want to be the worst looking building in the neighborhood. He agreed to make whatever modifications were necessary to make the building compatible with the intent of the Heart of Boynton. Chairman Finkelstein did not oppose having a school or the location, but he did have a problem with the aesthetics and the design. He did not agree with Mr. Greene's statement about purchasing property on MLK Boulevard. The Board approved purchasing property on the MLK Boulevard over three years ago and no one ever brought this parcel to the Board to see if the CRA would like to buy it. Further, he did not think that the CRA had a right to stop the applicant from developing the property. Chairman Finkelstein pointed out that the CRA Board is a recommending body to the City Commission that will have the final say, but it is the Board's job to look at the design guidelines and site plan issues. Vice Chair Heavilin did not have an issue with the parking and felt the City's Engineering staff was competent to know what was appropriate. She also would like to see the appearance of the building improved. She recommended that the applicant look at the modular building that the 7 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida December 9, 2003 Board approved for Southern Buildings on South Federal Highway that is absolutely beautiful. She would like the applicant to meet with staff to work out the issues raised. Chairman Finkelstein informed the applicant that the CRA has a fa(~ade grant program and may be able to help out the applicant with the design of the building. Ms. Hoyland asked staff to address the sidewalk issue. She noted that the sidewalk was on the applicant's property and she thought that it should be a public sidewalk. She asked if a sidewalk easement would be required to provide access rights to the public to cross the property. Mr. Johnson pointed out that Condition #4 states "provide additional right of way along the north property line and widen the roadway to minimum paved width of 24' and place the sidewalk within the public right-of-way in accordance with Standard Detail P-I." Mr. Madura stated that it was not a condition, but they are providing an additional right-of-way one foot behind the sidewalk all along Railroad Avenue, as well as the drop off area. Mr. Johnson stated that if the sidewalk had to go through the property line, an easement would be required and this could be done prior to permitting. Mr. Fisher asked the applicant if he would be willing to come back to the Board with aesthetic improvements in 30 to 60 days because he did not think that the Board would approve the item as presented. He also asked if the applicant was under any time constraints to proceed. Mr. Green said that they are under a time restriction, and he would prefer not having to wait an additional 30 days because there is a possibility of their current school being closed. Mr. Fisher said that he was prepared to make a motion to table the item to allow the applicant to come back before the Board after meeting with staff and making the requested changes. Mr. Green requested that they be permitted to come back at the January meeting. Chairman Finkelstein did not think that this Board could table an item and that it would still move on to the City Commission. It would be up to the applicant to request that the item be tabled or withdraw the item, which Mr. Johnson confirmed was correct. Chairman Finkelstein noted that the Board could approve the item with a recommendation that the elevations come back to the Board for approval. Mr. Fisher did not think that the item was ready to go to the Commission. Mr. Johnson requested that the Board vote on the abandonment because if the abandonment were tabled it would require an additional City Commission hearing. Chairman Finkelstein asked the applicant if he would agree to table the item until the January 13, 2004 meeting. Mr. Green preferred that the conditional use be approved upon the condition that they satisfy staff with the elevations and modifications. Motion Mr. Fisher moved to table the conditional use site plan approval until the first meeting of the CRA in January to allow the applicant time to improve the aesthetics and possibly improve the parking situation based upon the comments and notes made by this Board. Ms. Hoyland seconded the motion. 8 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida December 9, 2003 Ms. Hoyland would like to expand the motion in the event the City Commission wished to override the Board's recommendation. She would like to include aesthetics, the stacking and parking. Mr. Fisher amended his motion to include allowing the applicant an opportunity to improve the aesthetics of the building and the grounds in order to allow the project to be what the Board would consider the proper gateway to the MLK Corridor; to address the issues dealing with parking and stacking on the grounds for the safety of the children; and to allow the applicant time to meet with the School Board to find out whether the CRA and/or the City could have the right of first refusal on the property. Ms. Hoyland seconded the amended motion. Mr. Fenton was against the motion because he did not think it was within the Board's realm to involve a third party, such as the School Board, to approve the applicant's item. Ms. Hoyland recommended amending the motion that the applicant investigate the possibility of the School Board giving the CRA/City the right of first refusal on the land. After having the motion read back, members felt that the right of first refusal from the School Board was not a condition of approval, but was a request to find out if it were available. Vote Motion carried 6-1 (Mr. Fenton dissenting). Mr. Fisher requested that staff make this a priority issue over the next 30 days and to do their best to accommodate the applicant, which was agreed to by consensus of the Board. Motion Vice Chair Heavilin moved to approve the request for an abandonment of a segment of a 5-foot east/west alley (right-of-way) extending west from Railroad Avenue in conjunction with the assembly and development of adjacent parcels. Motion seconded by Ms. Hoyland and unanimously carried D. Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment Project: Agent: Description: Urban Central Business District- Text Amendments to Comprehensive Plan City-Initiated Addition of one (1) Objective and three (3) Policies to the Future Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan, to add development thresholds applicable to the Urban Central District Dick Hudson, Senior Planner presented the item on behalf of staff. He explained that the Comprehensive Text Amendment was necessitated by a process started by the City Commission in September 2003. It is now possible that any single project in the downtown could push the thresholds and become a DRI. The approval process for a DRI is a very involved process that includes review and approval by State agencies and staff was looking for a way to circumvent those situations. 9 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida December 9, 2003 Staff determined that the Florida Administrative Code and Florida Statutes have provisions to increasing DRI thresholds under certain circumstances. One way to do this is to declare an Urban Central Business District. The process for this is simple. The Commission would hear the first reading of an ordinance delineating the Urban CBD; it is sent to Tallahassee; DCA has 30 days to review it; and it then comes back to the City with either approval or denial. When the ordinance goes through a second reading, the City must, as soon as possible, adopt an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan recognizing the CBD and setting the boundaries. Mr. Hudson pointed out that this is only the second time in the State's history that a City has applied for this designation. When DCA sent it back to the City, it was heard for a second reading by the City Commission on December 2, 2004. DCA required that a Iocational map be included with the text. The text will consist of one objective and three policies in accordance with the Statute. Chairman Finkelstein opened the public hearing. Since no one wished to speak, the public hearing was closed. Mr. Fisher inquired if this would affect any residential areas. Mr. Hudson said that there was very little residential in the CBD of the City. Motion Vice Chair Heavilin moved to approve the proposed amendments to the Text of the Future Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan to add development thresholds applicable to the Urban Central District. Motion seconded by Mr. Fisher and unanimously carried. The meeting recessed at 7:55 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 8:05 p.m. Chairman Finkelstein welcomed Mayor Jerry Taylor. E. Major Site Plan Modification 1. All Brite Carwash (MSPM 03-009) (removed) Project: Agent: Owner: Location: Description: City Library (MSPM 03-011) Choli Lightfoot, SchenkelSchultz Architecture City of Boynton Beach 208 South Seacrest Boulevard Request for a Major Site Plan Modification for a 35,166 square foot addition to the existing library building in the Public Use (PU) zoning district. Eric Johnson, Planner presented the item on behalf of staff. This is a major site plan modification to construct a two-story addition to the existing City Library, which is located in the City's "Municipal Complex." The Municipal Complex includes all City buildings except City Hall and the Police Station. The plans call for a 35,166 square foot addition to the existing building that is one story; the addition would be two-stories. Palm Beach County Traffic Division will have to approve the traffic impact statement prior to the issuance of any building permits, which is a condition of approval. 10 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida December 9, 2003 The Engineering Division reviewed the proposed paving and drainage plans and found them acceptable. It is subject to full review at the time of permitting. The existing driveway along Seacrest Boulevard would be relocated further north to 96' south of Ocean Avenue and the code requires 120'. Therefore, the CRA and the City would have to approve a variance. Two new parking lots are proposed; one due north of the building and the other due east of the building addition. These lots would provide for 76 parking spaces. The project is considered to be an expansion of the Library. Since the Library is located within the Municipal Complex, staff looked at it as a shared parking facility and reviewed a shared parking analysis to ensure that there are enough parking spaces to accommodate the expansion. It was determined that peak- hour parking would require 202 spaces; therefore, a 10% buffer would be required in addition to the 202 parking spaces. Staff determined that 223 parking spaces are required for the project that was available through the shared parking analysis; otherwise 378 parking spaces would have been required. The shared parking analysis actually showed that there would be a surplus of 30 parking spaces and this has to be approved by the CRA and the City Commission and is a condition of approval. The pervious area of the project is 24% and the building and all site improvements are in accordance with the code requirements after the conditions of approval are met. Staff is recommending approval, subject to satisfying all the conditions of approval contained in Exhibit C and the City will meet all 55 conditions of approval. Chairman Finkelstein announced the public hearing. Since no one wished to speak, the public hearing was closed. Mr. Fisher asked how many parking spots would be lost through the library expansion. Choli Lightfoot, of SchenkelSchultz Architecture, 1300 N. Congress Avenue, West Palm Beach, stated that 9 parking spaces would be lost, but there are 30 more spaces when using the shared parking analysis. Mr. Fisher inquired if street parking was possible on SE 1st between the Art Center and Civic Center. Mr. Johnson explained that on-street parking would have to be reviewed by the City and said that staff would be willing to look at this. Motion Mr. Fisher moved to approve the request for a Major Site Plan Modification for a 35,166 square foot addition to the existing library building in the Public Use (PU) zoning district. Motion seconded by Mr. Henderson and unanimously carried. F. Hei.qht Exception Project: Agent: Owner: Location: Description: City Library (HTEX 03-007) Choli Lightfoot, SchenkelShultz Architecture City of Boynton Beach 208 South Seacrest Boulevard Request for a height exception to allow the atrium tower feature of the library addition to exceed the allowable 45-foot height limit by approximately nine (9) feet. 11 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida December 9, 2003 Ed Breese, Principal Planner, presented the item. The decorative atrium tower is 53'8" and requires approval for a height exception. The remainder of the expansion meets the height requirements. Staff has determined that the project meets the criteria of Chapter 2. The decorative entry (atrium tower) adds a focal point for the entrance and is an attractive feature. He pointed out the importance of civic buildings having some character, which the atrium tower provides. There will be a study area located below the atrium tower. Staff is recommending approval. Chairman Finkelstein opened the public hearing. Since no one wished to speak, the public hearing was closed. Motion Mr. Fisher moved to approve the request for a height exception to allow the atrium tower feature of the library addition to exceed the allowable 45-foot height limit by approximately nine (9) feet. Motion seconded by Mr. Tillman and unanimously carried. F. Community Desi,qn Plan Appeal 1. All Brite Carwash (CDPA 03-001 ) (Removed) H. Code Review Project: Agent: Location: Description: High Ridge Community Center II (CDRV 03-005) Penni Greenly, Southern Dance Studio Citywide Request to amend Chapter 2, Zoning, Section 8.A.l.d. (9) to include dance instruction as a permitted use in the M-1 zoning district Maxime Ducoste-Ambdbe, Planner presented the item on behalf of staff. Even though the project is in the High Ridge Commerce Center, the code amendment would affect the entire industrial district throughout the City. The LDR currently allows gymnastic centers in the M-1 Zoning District, and the applicant is requesting that dance instruction be added to permitted uses in the M-1 Industrial Zoning District. Even though both uses function similarly and require the same amenities, staff was opposed to adding another non-industrial use to the M-1 Zoning District that would diminish the industrial square footage in the City. He pointed out that an industrial use would require less parking than a dance studio. Staff denied the request because it would have a certain impact upon the Citywide distribution of uses and the public welfare within the industrial zoning district. If the Board and/or the Commission approves the request, staff would request that the use be permitted as a conditional use and would also apply to gymnastic centers, so that they could be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This would ensure the safety of the children using those facilities. Chairman Finkelstein opened the public hearing. Since no one wished to speak, the public hearing was closed. Penni Greenly, 140 N. Congress Avenue, Boynton Beach, owner of Southern Dance Studio stated that she has operated her school in the Boynton Beach and Delray Beach area for over 12 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida December 9, 2003 20 years. She questioned why a gymnastic school had been approved two years ago for an M-1 district, but not dance schools, since they operate similarly. She had her studio in the Cross Creek Plaza for seven years, which is a C-3 Zoning District, and never had a parking problem. She would like to purchase a unit in the High Ridge Commerce Center because she cannot afford to purchase square footage in a C-3 area. She has been looking for over a year to have a place for her school so that she could continue to stay in Boynton Beach. This is the only thing that she can afford that would provide her what she needs to run a dance studio. Vice Chair Heavilin inquired what businesses are currently located in High Ridge Commerce Center I1. Mr. Ducoste-Ambdbe stated that it has not been built yet and will be located along High Ridge and Miner Roads. Ms. Hoyland inquired when gymnastic centers were added to the M-1 Zoning District, did staff recommend approval at that time, and Mr. Ducoste-Ambdbe stated that staff recommended denial. Ms. Hoyland also referred to the distance requirements between these types of uses and other industrial uses and this could possibly limit industrial uses. She was not in support of that provision and asked if staff reviewed a conditional use, would staff put that requirement on the applicant. Mr. Ducoste-Am~dbe stated that this was highly likely so that they could be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. Ms. Hoyland asked if this distance requirement would have to be determined now. Mr. Ducoste- Ambdbe stated that this would have to be done in advance, which means if the Board approved the application tonight, they would have to set a distance for the dance studio location to other industrial uses. Ms. Hoyland was not in support of any distance requirement and was in support of the request. Vice Chair Heavilin pointed out that High Ridge Commerce Center is located within the PID and Mr. Ducoste-Ambdbe stated that High Ridge Commerce Center II would be in an M-1 Zoning District. Ms. Greenly noted that many gymnastic and dance schools in the surrounding communities operate in industrial parks because these are the only places that can accommodate their size needs. Chairman Finkelstein said that he concurred with Mr. Hoyland's comments. Mr. Fisher pointed out that when the gymnastic request first came to the City Commission, the Commission had no problem approving it because so many other cities already have them in industrial areas. Mr. Fisher felt that if dance studios were made conditional uses, it would appear that Boynton Beach does not want art in its City. He also did not see the need for a conditional use or a distance requirement. Vice Chair Heavilin was in favor of the conditional use because it might serve as protection to keep heavy industrial uses away from this type of facility, to which Mr. Tillman also agreed. Mr. Tillman felt that this would be a positive project for the City. Ms. Hoyland did not think that even if the use were a conditional use that this would restrict industrial uses from being located near the dance studio. Mr. Rumpf pointed out that PIDs have an established use approval list and to increase the applicant's chance to get into one of these areas, she has requested use approval for High Ridge Commerce Park PID. This would not 13 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida December 9, 2003 come to this Board, because there are no PIDs in the CRA, but will be going to the Planning and Development Board and the City Commission. He pointed out that those parks are more accommodating and the parking and safety situation are better. Ms. Greenly pointed out that when she submitted both applications, both places were available. Now the unit in phase 1 is no longer available. Ms. Hoyland recommended that the PID application be withdrawn under these circumstances. Ms. Greenly pointed out that going into the Commerce Park most of the businesses operate between 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Most dance classes take place in the evening so she did not anticipate a parking issue. Motion Vice Chair Heavilin moved to approve the request to amend Chapter 2, Zoning, Section 8.A.l.d. (9) to include dance instruction as a conditional use in the M-1 Zoning District. Motion seconded by Mr. Tillman. Mr. Fisher asked Vice Chair Heavilin if she would be willing to remove the "conditional approval" portion of her motion. Vice Chair Heavilin was not willing to change her motion. Mr. Rumpf did not think that the site could accommodate the parking requirement, which was one space per 500' of floor space. Chairman Finkelstein asked Ms. Greenly if she knew the parking requirement at High Ridge and Ms. Greenly stated that there was parking on both sides and she thought that the parking was one space per 500 square feet. Vote Motion failed 3-4 (Chairman Finkelstein, Messrs. Fisher and Fenton and Ms. Hoyland dissenting). Motion Mr. Fisher moved to approve the request to amend Chapter 2, Zoning, Section 8.A.l.d (9) to include dance instruction as a permitted use in the M-1 Zoning District. Motion seconded by Mr. Fenton. Motion carried unanimously. XI. Legal (moved up on the agenda) A. Status of the $9,000 Invoice Investigation (Tabled 11/20/03) Attorney Payne referred to a memo from her and additional materials that she prepared in connection with this item. After this was prepared, she received a telephone call from Mr. Hutchinson's Attorney, Andrew Selden. Mr. Seiden proposed that the CRA would pay the $9,000 to AR Funding and that Doug Hutchinson would agree to pay it back over a period of one (1) year to be deducted in 26 equal installment payments to be deducted from his paycheck. Motion Mr. Fenton moved to accept the recommendation of Mr. Hutchinson's attorney of the settlement by the Director. Motion seconded by Mr. DeMarco. Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida December 9, 2003 Vice Chair Heavilin inquired what the Board's legal costs have been and Attorney Payne stated there were $3,800 in legal fees. Vice Chair Heavilin felt that this should be added to the settlement. Mr. Fisher had an issue with employees paying for things that they did by mistake. He felt that the Board still needed to determine what happened in a public forum. Chairman Finkelstein pointed out that even if the Board approves or disapproves the motion, the Board still has the opportunity to address the issue. Also, Chairman Finkelstein pointed out that the Board did not ask Mr. Hutchinson to pay it back; it was offered as a means to solve the issue. Ms. Hoyland pointed out that management did not ask the employee to pay back the mistake; it is what the employee wished to do. Chairman Finkelstein pointed out that the Board has many options. The factoring company is going to sue if they do not get paid, and the Director can be asked to defend the suit. Mr. Fisher noted that the CRA has to pay the invoice because they owe the money, but he is having an issue with an employee paying back a mistake using this method. Mr. Fenton pointed out that Mr. Hutchinson hired an attorney and this is his attorney's advice to settle it. Ms. Hoyland inquired that if the Board accepts this as payment for a mistake, would the Board open themselves up to a lawsuit by not representing their employee. Attorney Payne stated that she would prepare an agreement that Mr. Hutchinson will sign to prevent this from occurring. Attorney Payne stated without the agreement, Mr. Hutchinson would have the right to sue if he wished. Ms. Hoyland also inquired if the agreement would override any legal issues. Attorney Payne said that there would be a statement in the agreement that this would resolve the issue for both parties. Ms. Hoyland inquired how the CRA would recover the funds if Mr. Hutchinson terminated his position with the CRA prior to the one-year payment period. Attorney Payne said that some type of agreement or promissory note would have to be executed where he agreed to make the payments even if Mr. Hutchinson is no longer receiving a paycheck. Ms. Hoyland would like to make the payment period spread out longer and suggested a two-year payment plan. Mr. Fisher pointed out that there are still issues outstanding, such as missing public records and mismanagement issues. Mr. Fenton requested to amend his motion. Motion Mr. Fenton amended his motion to instruct the Attorney to create a document and a promissory note with the Director, Doug Hutchinson, to guarantee payment of $9,000 to AR Funding, even if he does not get a paycheck. Mr. DeMarco seconded the amended motion. Motion carried 5-2 (Ms. Hoyland and Mr. Fisher dissenting). Mr. Fisher asked Mr. Hutchinson to explain about the cruise, who went on the cruise, and who paid for it. Mr. Hutchinson responded that the Chamber of Commerce sponsored the cruise and he paid for his own room and all his expenses. The CRA did not pay for anything. Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida December 9, 2003 Mr. Fisher asked about the missing public records and Mr. Hutchinson stated that they do not exist. The one document that he made notes on was not a CRA document. He did keep his own notes. Mr. Fisher felt that those notes should be the CRA's public record notes. He referred to the State's Sunshine Laws that require that everything must be saved. Mr. Fisher asked about the document that Mr. Hutchinson signed and Mr. Hutchinson stated that this was an administrative mix-up and he was only one person in a three-person deal and that is why he is paying it back. The originals were removed from the office and he should have kept copies. However, staff was in a crunch time and he should have had better control. He stated "the buck stops here" and of all the documents submitted, there is only one that contains any initials or signatures of his. This was an isolated document that was sent out by fax and he did not have a copy of it. Mr. Hutchinson noted that they do not have any policy and procedures for retaining faxes since this issue never came up prior to this. Mr. Fisher stated that there is an issue here that public records are not being properly maintained in accordance with the law. Mr. Fisher was not pointing fingers at staff, but felt it was the entire responsibility of Mr. Hutchinson, since he is the Director of the Department. Mr. Fisher has a problem that the law has been violated and there are missing public record documents. Mr. Fisher said that on several occasions contract awards were given to sole contractors, instead of going through the appropriate bid process. He felt that what has transpired is a reflection on this Board and the City. Mr. Fisher felt that Mr. Hutchinson should be written up in a disciplinary nature documenting the events and that it be placed in his file. Mr. Fisher asked that the Board ask Legal to prepare the necessary document. Vice Chair Heavilin agreed that the policy for going out for bids is not being followed and this creates potential liability for the CRA. Mr. Hutchinson did not think he did anything wrong regarding bids. He said that a document was taken from the premises that he should have retained. Also, Vice Chair Heavilin felt that there was inappropriate behavior going on in the office regarding unprofessional e-mails and she was in favor of disciplinary action. Mr. Tillman recommended that the CRA look at the laws dealing with public records and e-mails because what has been going on in the office is illegal. He noted that information is not made available to everyone. Secondly, before anyone is written up, you need to show what written procedures and policies have been violated. Mr. Tillman noted that the CRA staff has done a tremendous amount of work with minimum staff and little support. What transpired should never have happened, but they must find measures to deal with it and to do it appropriately. Mr. DeMarco also noted how much work has been accomplished by the CRA since its inception and commended staff for doing so much in so little time. He agreed with Mr. Tillman. The Board needs to stop throwing stones, and if there is a mistake, it should be corrected. He felt that what took place tonight was the right thing and they should move on. Chairman Finkelstein was not opposed to an internal investigation, but he felt that there was a fundamental misunderstanding of the purchasing manual. Chairman Finkelstein pointed out that Mr. Hutchinson had been working with these people for some time and he should have gotten three bids. Mr. Hutchinson said that the project had been discussed with BODA in a partnership agreement to move forward. Chairman Finkelstein said that BODA informed him that they were not onboard with this and did not have the staff or money. Mr. Hutchinson explained that the CRA would be staff to that organization. He had meetings with Kristen Conti 16 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida December 9, 2003 and that she would bring documents to BODA and the CRA to be signed, but this never came to fruition. He asserted that there is no contract and there never was a contract. Mr. Hutchinson stated that the factor invoice was a mistake that left the office. He misunderstood the intent of AP, Factoring and he may, at his own expense, take this up further with that company and Ms. Dunsford. Ms. Hoyland inquired if Mr. Hutchinson would be bringing his own lawsuit against those parties and he said that is an option to him. Mr. Hutchinson felt that he was the person who was defrauded. Mr. Hoyland inquired if Mr. Hutchinson did bring suit, could the Board be named as a party to the suit. Attorney Payne stated that Mr. Hutchinson could not do this, but the other party could. However, since they were paid, she did not think this would happen. Attorney Payne said that these are issues between Mr. Hutchinson and his attorney. Mr. Hutchinson said that there is one party that has made a tremendous amount of allegations against him and they have taken a great personal toll on him and he may consider further action against this party. Ms. Hoyland thought that this was getting way out of hand and she was inclined to ask the Board to revoke the approval of Mr. Hutchinson paying back the $9,000 to the CRA. She recommended that the CRA pay the $9,000 and discipline Mr. Hutchinson. Mr. Hutchinson stated that the purpose of his paying back the CRA was to move the CRA forward. He referred to the many projects in the works and the momentum it was gathering. He took responsibility and has offered to pay it back. He did not want the CRA to become consumed in dwelling upon something that is an isolated incident. He urged everyone to move forward and that he is taking the comments to heart. Ms. Hoyland would like the public and staff to know that the Board is serious and this will not happen again. Chairman Finkelstein agreed with this statement and noted that there are policies in place that were not followed. Mr. DeMarco was of the opinion that these matters should be discussed between a client and his attorney. He stated that he voted for this motion because the Board's Attorney informed him that what they did tonight was legal. He did not think that it was appropriate for this Board to discuss legal matters without knowing the law. Chairman Finkelstein pointed out that the Board is the client and they are discussing matters with the Board's Attorney and not Mr. Hutchinson's issues. Mr. Fisher pointed out that in the State of Florida, the Board is limited to what can be discussed behind closed doors and this issue does not qualify for a closed session; it must be discussed in the Sunshine. Mr. Tiilman felt it was time to move on. He recommended setting a timeframe on how the Board wants to deal with the issue. Mr. Fisher asked if anyone on the prevailing side wished to reconsider having Mr. Hutchinson pay back the $9,000. No one on the prevailing side wished to move to reconsider. Motion Ms. Hoyland moved that disciplinary action against Doug Hutchinson be considered at the Board's January 13, 2004 meeting after the Board has had an opportunity to review the manual 17 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida December 9, 2003 as to how the procedure is to be handled and that the Board Attorney assist in this matter with options. Mr. Hutchinson requested that he be furnished with this ahead of time to review with his legal counsel. Ms. Hoyland did not think that he should have an option to review his disciplinary action until it is taken. She asked the Board Attorney to address this. Attorney Payne stated that it would depend upon the type of discipline and if it were serious enough, he may be afforded the opportunity to review it. Attorney Payne will make this determination. Mr. Fisher expressed concern that Mr. Hutchinson did not work with the Board's Legal Counsel within a quick timeframe. Chairman Finkelstein requested that these types of comments be discussed at the next meeting. Vote Mr. Fisher seconded the motion by Ms. Hoyland that carried 5-2 (Messrs. DeMarco and Fenton dissenting). Attorney Payne requested clarification when and how the Board wanted the invoice paid and whether the Board's motion was not contingent upon the CRA being reimbursed by Mr. Hutchinson. Mr. Fisher stated that the invoice should be paid first by the CRA and that Attorney Payne should begin drafting an agreement for Mr. Hutchinson to pay the CRA back. Attorney Payne was instructed that the check should be sent prior to Mr. Hutchinson executing the agreement. VII. Directors' Report Mr. Hutchinson announced that there is a joint CRA/City Commission Meeting at 5:30 on Wednesday, December 17th in Conference Room C, West Wing. If any member has any items they would like included on the agenda to forward them to him. City Manager Bressner is working on an agenda. A. Updates Included in the agenda packet. VIII. Old Business A. Recommendation of the Regions Core Grant from Boynton Seafood to Yellowbeard, Inc. d/b/a Boynton Seafood Chairman Finkelstein asked for clarification on who actually owned the business and was informed it was Yellowbeard, Inc. Motion Mr. Tillman moved to approve. Motion seconded by Vice Chair Heavilin and unanimously carried. B. Consideration of City Cooperative Purchasing Agreement 18 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida December 9, 2003 Mr. Hutchinson noted that this was placed back on the agenda due to time constraints on the TCEA. Chairman Finkelstein asked if this could be used on a case-by-case basis, and Mr. Hutchinson felt that this was possible. Chairman Finkelstein pointed out that the Board has the right to override the purchasing manual and he was amenable to overriding the purchasing manual for this item, but he did not want to change the language. Chairman Finkelstein also pointed out that this was unanimously defeated the last time it was brought before the Board. C. Consideration of City TCEA Study Contract Dick Hudson, Senior Planner presented the item on behalf of the City. He noted that several months ago staff came before the Board with regard to looking into performing a Traffic Concurrency Exemption Area Study Contract for the CRA area. Staff is proposing to use the City's approved list of consultants under the City's Consultants' Competitive Negotiation Act (CCNA) for this purpose. The base amount of the contract is $56,000, and there are optional elements that could go as high $48,000, for a total of $104,000. Mr. Hudson explained that the timeframe is short because staff petitioned the County on October 1, 2003 in order to be included in the first round of amendments for the coming year. Staff has also met with the appropriate agencies to request the item be included in their amendment. A TCEA requires amendments to the County's Comprehensive Plan and the Traffic Performance Standards Ordinance, as well as an amendment to the City's Comprehensive Plan. The County will be transmitting their plan amendment package on March 24, 2004, which means it must be filed in final form with the County by early February at the latest. Mr. Fisher inquired if Kimley-Horn was comfortable with the timeline issues and was informed that they could meet the deadlines. Chairman Finkelstein noted that there was no breakdown of the $48,000 and inquired what tasks this amount covered. Mr. Hudson noted that the three items for $48,000 are included in the proposal and are Tasks 5, 6 and 7. Motion Mr. Fisher moved to approve. Motion seconded by Mr. Tillman and unanimously carried. Recommendation for a language change for compensation in the CRA Financial Auditor Contract (Tabled on 11/20/03) Motion Mr. Fisher moved to remove the item from the table. Motion seconded by Mr. Tillman and unanimously carried. Ms. Vielhauer stated that the contract with DuFresne & Associates, CPA called for a final lump sum payment. Normally, they like to have a 70/30 split. The amendment sets this out and this is the only change in the contract. It also will have no impact because the audit is almost complete. 19 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida December 9, 2003 Ms. Vielhauer also explained that DuFresne also quoted the Board a fee of $75 to perform ancillary work, which she would like to utilize when she has a question that would require an expert. Mr. Hutchinson pointed out that staff needs to have this type of advice readily available. Ms. Vielhauer pointed out that DuFresne would receive $5,900 each year for three years. Chairman Finkelstein noted that the word "annually" is missing from the contract in Section 4 and requested that this be corrected. Chairman Finkelstein also inquired what "substantial amount of field work" consisted of. Mr. Vielhauer explained that the auditors physically came to Boynton Beach for two and one-half days that accounts for this work. Chairman Finkelstein asked if the Board was also approving Arbitrage Rebate Services that were included in the fee schedule. Ms. ¥ielhauer explained that these are services that would be necessary if the CRA utilized a bond counsel. If this became necessary, the Board would have to approve this. Mr. Fisher asked what line item the auditing would be paid from and Ms. Vielhauer stated that there is an audit line item in the budget for $7,500 and the funds are available. Motion Vice Chair Heavilin moved to approve. Motion seconded by Mr. Fisher and unanimously carried. Consideration of Approval of the CSC Financial Advisory Committee Recommendation for Financial Advisory Service (Tabled 11/20/03) Motion Vice Chair Heavilin moved to remove from the table. Motion seconded by Mr. Tillman and unanimously carried. Ms. Vielhauer reported that the Board asked staff to look into the investigation that was listed on the William Hough & Co. RFC), which she did. Their response is included in the agenda packet. At Ms. Vielhauer's request they also contacted the Board's Attorney. She also spoke with the City's Finance Director to determine if the City ever dealt with Hough. Ms. Reese informed her that the City's Bond Counsel had dealings with them. Attorney Payne furnished the Board with further documentation regarding the legal proceedings against Hough & Co. Ms. Vielhauer also checked their references and they were highly recommended. E-mails to support this recommendation were also furnished, as well as a list of their clients that includes the State of Florida. Ms. Julie Turner, First Vice President of William Hough & Co., is also present tonight to answer any questions. Chairman Finkelstein asked Attorney Payne to address this. Attorney Payne stated that she contacted the City's Bond Attorney and he is familiar with the legal proceedings. She recommended that if the Board wanted additional advice, they should contact a bond attorney. Attorney Payne noted that the legal proceedings involved Hough & Co. entering into an Administrative Agreement with the SEC in 2000 that involved yield burning, which is improper. Attorney Payne read the findings into the record and Hough was required to pay money back to the U.S. Government and the City of Boynton Beach. She pointed out that there were other companies that were also involved in this practice. Chairman Finkelstein noted that the order 20 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida December 9, 2003 required Hough to pay back the City of Boynton Beach over $555,000 that dealt with a refunding that was settled on October 20, 1992. Attorney Payne again stated that the City's Bond Attorney was intimately involved in this matter and he should be contacted if the Board wished to discuss this further. Chairman Finkelstein asked if the Committee did any investigative work when they saw this on the RFP and Ms. Vielhauer stated that they did not. Ms. Julie Turner, First Vice President of William Hough & Co. said that they have 50 financial advisory clients in the State of Florida that include State of Florida, Division of Bond Finance, DOT, and many, many municipalities. They are ranked as one of Florida's leading financial advisers and underwriters. Ms. Turner explained that the legal case was an industry investigation and settlement that occurred in the late 1990s involving 20 different securities firms to protect their clients and to prevent their bonds from being investigated for their tax-exempt status. She also pointed out that a limited RFP was issued by the City of Boynton Beach recently and their firm received one of them, in addition to Raymond James and Bank of America. These other two companies also entered into settlements with the SEC. Mr. Fenton stated that he is a direct competitor of William Hough and they have an outstanding reputation in the State of Florida with regard to bonds. He also noted that the CRA bond issues would be small. Mr. Fenton recommended approval of William Hough & Co. Motion Mr. Tillman moved for approval. Motion seconded by Vice Chair Heavilin and unanimously carried. IX. New Business Consideration of Burkhart Construction Contact Amendment for Authorization of up to 100% of Construction Documents Mr. Hutchinson reported that Burkhart Construction would like to move forward with 100% of construction documents. There is a great deal of work taking place and there are timetables that must be met. Burkhart Construction is proceeding with the design of the Promenade and Riverwalk Area. Dennis Haynes of Burkhart Construction was present to answer questions. Chairman Finkelstein referred to the December 9, 2003 letter from Mr. Haynes to Mr. Hutchinson that states, "tasks 1.2, 1.4 and 3.12 are related to City Utilities and shall be invoiced separately for reimbursement by same." Chairman Finkelstein inquired that even though they would be invoiced separately, was this included in the dollar amounts furnished. Mr. Haynes stated that they are included in the dollar amounts in the proposal request, and Utilities would reimburse the CRA. Chairman Finkelstein what like to know what those costs would be, and Mr. Haynes stated that they would furnish them. 21 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida December 9, 2003 With regard to task 4, Gateway and Promenade Monument Design, the cost is listed at $87,000. Chairman Finkelstein would like to hold off on this since the project is now up to $4,835,827, minus the Utilities' reimbursement. With regard to geotechnical investigations, which are task 2 at $54,500, Chairman Finkelstein would also like to hold off on this as well and the cost for this is not included in the $4.85 million. Mr. Haynes stated that there are portions that could be eliminated, but if the CRA down the line wanted to include an architectural feature at those locations, you should know what the soil conditions are; it could cost a lot more later if this had to be done. Chairman Finkelstein understood the importance of doing the geotechnical investigations and only wanted to hold off on the monument design. Mr. Haynes pointed out that the tasks in the document and in the narrative do not match. Also, Chairman Finkelstein did not think it was necessary to include task 3.7 (Gateway/Entry Features), which Mr. Haynes agreed with. Chairman Finkelstein also questioned the $150,000 for the cost of a temporary parking lot. He felt that this was the cost of an actual parking lot and Mr. Haynes said that this is a parking lot that could be permitted by the City under the Code that includes landscaping, lighting and irrigation. Dale Sugerman, Assistant City Manager, said that the City's Code does not allow for temporary parking lots. The Code states that a "non- permanent" parking lot must meet certain requirements. Chairman Finkelstein inquired what "Mobilization/General Conditions" for $475,000 pertained to. Mr. Haynes responded that this is an opinion of costs and is not a set figure. They have used past experience as a guideline. From past experience, "mobilization/general conditions" is typically in the 12% to 14% range of the construction value. Mr. Haynes pointed out that certain items in the contract are one-time costs and there are other costs that would be in direct proportion to the construction value. Mr. Fisher asked if the Utilities Department was prepared to reimburse the CRA for the utility items previously discussed. Mr. Haynes stated that items that are related to water utilities and sanitary sewer utilities are not CRA responsibilities. Chairman Finkelstein said that he discussed this with the City Manager who agreed that items not related to the CRA and the promenade project would be reimbursed. Mr. Sugerman said that he understood that there would be costs beyond the scope of the project, but he was not aware of internal costs of the project that the Utilities Department would be paying for. Also, Mr. Sugerman was not aware of any conversations that Chairman Finkelstein had with the City Manager. Chairman Finkelstein confirmed that he was only referring to projects that were outside the scope of the project. Attorney Payne stated that if the Board approves the contract, they should make it subject to the City paying these items. Mr. Sugerman said that this could be accomplished by an Interlocal Agreement or a letter. Motion Mr. Fisher moved to approve to include all Chairman Finkelstein's comments in the motion. Motion seconded by Mr. Tillman and unanimously carried. Consideration of Contract for the Independent Feasibility Study for the Savage Creatures of Ancient Seas Proposal. Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida December 9, 2003 Mr. Hutchinson stated that the contract for the feasibility study came in under budget and was submitted earlier than anticipated. The contract has been reviewed by Legal and Mr. Hutchinson has compared it to the original feasibility study. Chairman Finkelstein asked what defined the expenses because the contract called for $50,000 plus expenses. Jose Aguila of the Curry Partnership stated that expenses would normally include travel above and beyond the norm, and large reproduction of reports. Included in the $50,000 are the costs for meeting with staff, travel within the area, copying, etc. If the Board wanted to have 500 copies of a report for distribution to the public, then this would be an additional expense. Anything that they need to do their job would be included in their original fee. Chairman Finkelstein recommended including a non-to-exceed figure for expenses. Mr. Aguila said that he would provide a list of anticipated expenses. Mr. Aguila did not think that their expenses would exceed $5,000. Chairman Finkelstein also wants the CRA to be named as an additional insured and Mr. Aguila said that he would take care of this. Mr. Fisher recommended that it be added as a condition to the motion. Chairman Finkelstein noted that there was no language in the contract that stated the CRA would be informed if the project were not feasible. Mr. Aguila concurred with this and stated that if, at anytime, it was determined that the project were not feasible they would inform the CRA. Chairman Finkelstein requested that in the paragraph "Applied Technology & Management", he would like the word "should" in the sixth line changed to "will.". Motion Vice Chair Heavilin moved to approve the contract for the independent Feasibility Study for the Savage Creatures of Ancient Seas Proposal with the noted changes on the Agreement contract, the inclusion of the Boynton Beach CRA as a named insured and expenses not to exceed $5,000. Motion seconded by Mr. Fisher and unanimously carried. C. Consideration of the Ocean District Plan (tabled) X. Commission Action None XI. Board Member Comments None XlI. Legal A. Status of the $9,000 Invoice Investigation (Previously addressed) 23 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida December 9, 2003 Xlll. Other Items None XlV. Future Agenda Items Ao Joint CRA and City Commission Workshop December 17th at 5:30 P.M. at City Hall, West Wing Conference Room C. Consideration of RFP for Architectural Model of the CBD to Seacrest Area (January) XV. F. G. H. Consideration of Pilot Program for Trolley Service in the CBD (January) Consideration of Special Pilot Program for Police Patrol in Heart of Boynton and the CBD (January) Consideration of CRA Logo and Stationary (January) Presentation of Boynton Beach Boulevard Corridor Plan (January) CRA Audit Report (January) Recommendation for contract change to add additional services for Legal Contract (January) I. Consideration of funding for the Wheels Weekend Event April 2004 (January) J- Consideration of Securing CBD Surface Parking Rights (March) Adjournment There being no further business, the meeting properly adjourned at 10:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Barbara M. Madden Recording Secretary (December 11, 2003) 24