Loading...
Minutes 12-18-03MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD HELD IN COMMISSION CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA, ON THURSDAY, DECEMBER 18, 2003 AT 6:30 P.M. Present: Lee Wische, Chairman William Cwynar, Vice Chair Sergio Casaine Steve Myott Woodrow Hay Absent: James McMahon Mike Friedland Mike Fitzpatrick, Alternate 1. Pledge of Allegiance Mike Rumpf, Planning & Zoning Director David Tolces, Assistant City Attorney Ed Breese, Principal Planner Eric Johnson, Planner Maxime Am~d~e-Ducoste, Planner Chairman Wische called the meeting to order at 6:33 p.m. and led members in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. 2. Introduction of the Board Chairman Wische introduced the Board Members, Assistant City Attorney Tolces, and the Recording Secretary. 3. Agenda Approval Motion Mr. Hay moved for approval. Motion seconded by Mr. Cwynar and unanimously carried. 4. Approval of Minutes Motion Mr. Hay moved for approval. Motion seconded by Mr. Cwynar and unanimously carried. 5. Communications and Announcements A. Planning and Zoning Report Mr. Rumpf reported on the disposition of the following items that were reviewed by the City Commission at the December 2, 2003 meeting. Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Meeting Boynton Beach, Florida December 18, 2003 1. The First Southern Bank Zoning Variance for an additional sign was denied. 2. The Boynton Beach Faith Based Community Development North Palm Way Variance was approved. 3. Renaissance Commons Phase II and Phase III new site plans were approved. 4. The site plan and the community design plan appeal for Fire Station #2 was approved. 5. Quantum Park lots 73A-76 site plan time extension was approved. 6. Staff's proposed amendments to the sign code were approved on first reading. At the December 16, 2003 City Commission meeting the same amendments to the sign code were approved on second reading. Attorney Tolces administered the oath to all persons who would be testifying. 6. Old Business None 7. New Business Dick Hudson, Senior Planner stated that the next two items are part of the City's large- scale amendment cycle and are the first ones for 2004. After the Board and the City Commission hear and approve the amendments, they will. be forwarded to DCA for review and they have 60 days to respond to the City. The City then has 60 days to respond to DCA's comments and to decide whether to adopt the amendment package. A. Annexation Project: Agent: Owner: Location: Description: Bermuda Bay (ANEX 03-002) Michael J. Covelli, Caulfield & Wheeler, Inc. National Land Company, Inc. East of 1-95, north of Lake Ida Road and south of Diane Drive Request to annex 17.12 acres of unincorporated land to be concurrently reclassified and rezoned for 17 single-family homes. Dick Hudson, Senior Planner presented the item on behalf of staff. The parcel is 17.12 acres and includes approximately 8% acres of submerged land. The property is located in Palm Beach County and is classified as medium residential that would allow 5 dwelling units per acre as a PUD. The zonings range from general commercial, industrial and residential single family in the County. The applicant is requesting to be 2 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Meeting Boynton Beach, Florida December 18, 2003 annexed into the City and is proposing a land use of Iow-density residential, which is 4.84 du/ac. The zoning will be R1-AAB, single family residential. The applicant is proposing to build 17 single-family residential homes as a regular subdivision. Mr. Hudson reviewed the location and the boundaries of the property on the location map. The industrial area will remain with the County and will not be annexed. The annexation is consistent with one of the policies in the Comprehensive Plan. There is adequate service available to serve the property and staff recommends approval of the annexation, the land use amendment and the rezoning. Michael J. Covelli of Caulfield & Wheeler, Inc., representing the applicant, stated that they have received a determination for concurrency from the School Board and they have approved the project. Chairman Wische announced the public headng. Attorney Tolces administered the oath to Mr. Gallik and other late arrivals. Bob Gallik, 424 NW 17th Street, Delray Beach, owns property across the street and inquired if any of the submerged land would be reclaimed. Mr. Hudson responded that it would not. Jeff Liggio, 3835 South Lake Drive, Boynton Beach, asked if there would be a barrier or sound wall placed between the subdivision and 1-95. Mr. Covelli stated that they are speaking with DOT to get this done. Mr. Liggio would also like to see the site plan when it is submitted. Chairman Wische closed the public hearing. Motion Mr. Myott moved to approve the request to annex 17.12 acres of unincorporated land to be concurrently reclassified and rezoned for 17 single-family homes. Motion seconded by Mr. Cwynar and unanimously carried. B. Land Use Plan Amendment/Rezoninq Project: Agent: Owner: Location: Description: Bermuda Bay (LUAR 03-007) Michael J. Covelli, Caulfield & Wheeler, Inc. National Land Company, Inc. East of 1-95, north of Lake Ida Road and south of Diane Drive Request to amend the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map to reclassify 17.12 acres from MR-5 Residential (Palm Beach County) to Low Density Residential (4.84 du/ac); and 3 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Meeting Boynton Beach, Florida December 18, 2003 Request to rezone 17.12 acres from CG - General Commercial, AR-Agricultural Residential, RS-Residential (Palm Beach County) to R1-AAB Single Family Residential. Proposed use is for 17 single-family residential lots. Motion Mr. Myott moved to approve the request to amend the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map to reclassify 17.12 acres from MR-5 Residential (Palm Beach County)to Low Density Residential (8.84 du/ac). Motion seconded by Mr. Hay and unanimously carried. Motion Mr. Myott moved to approve the request to rezone 17.12 acres from CG - General Commercial, AR-Agricultural Residential, RS-Residential (Palm Beach County) to Boynton Beach Zoning R1-ABB Single Family Residential. Motion seconded by Mr. Cwynar and unanimously carried. Project: Agent: Owner: Location: Description: Anderson PUD (LUAR 03-006) Julian Bryan & Associates, Inc. D.R. Horton Homes West side of Lawrence Road approximately 1,500 feet south of Hypoluxo Road Request to amend the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map to reclassify 18.32 acres from Agriculture (A) to Low Density Residential (4.84 du/ac); and Request to rezone 18.32 acres from AG- Agriculture to PUD-Planned Unit Development Proposed use is for 88 single-family detached residences. Julian Bryan, 1700 Arcadia Way, Boca Raton, representing the applicant assumed the podium. Dick Hudson, Senior Planner presented the item on behalf of staff. The property is comprised of 18.32 acres and was annexed into the City many years ago. At that time the City and the property owner entered into an agreement giving the landowner agricultural land use and agricultural zoning. If the owner at any time in the future requested, the City would give a new land use of Iow-density residential to rezone to Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Meeting Boynton Beach, Florida December 18, 2003 R1-AAB and the owner is now requesting this change. However, instead of straight zoning, he is requesting a PUD. Most of the homes in that area have zero lot lines and in order to develop zero lot line housing, it must be a PUD. Therefore, this is what the applicant is requesting, but the density would remain at 4.84 du/ac. Palm Beach County Traffic Division has reviewed the traffic study for the project and has determined that it meets all criteria. Although School Concurrency has not been received from the School District, staff does not anticipate a problem. The applicant will be coming back for site plan approval prior to approval of the land use amendment and staff recommends approval. Mr. Bryan pointed out that they expect to be back around May for the site plan approval. He explained that they are required to provide access at the south end of the property to align with the east-west road that runs below Nautica Sound, which is the rear entrance to 300 Meadows. However, the connection was never made and the road is used by that community as a second access. All this will be provided with the site plan. Chairman Wische opened the public hearing. Since no one wished to speak, the public hearing was closed. Mr. Casaine inquired if the access road were approved, would it enter into the Meadows, and Mr. Bryan stated that it would not. There will be a second access to the north into a community that D.R. Horton Homes is presently building. Mr. Myott noted that since the credit for recreational facilities has been eliminated, there are no recreation facilities planned for these subdivisions. He would like staff to continue to encourage these types of facilities to provide recreational amenities in order to create quality communities. Mr. Myott would like to see more quality when the site plan is submitted. Mr. Rumpf responded that the projects that staff has seen have recreational areas that are proportional to the project. The project being reviewed tonight has a recreation area in its prior phase that this project would have access to. Motion Mr. Cwynar moved to approve the request to amend the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map to reclassify 18.32 acres from Agriculture (A) to Low Density Residential (4.84 du/ac). Motion seconded by Mr. Hay and unanimously carried. Motion Mr. Cwynar moved to approve the request to rezone 18.32 acres from AG-Agriculture to PUD-Planned Unit Development. Motion seconded by Mr. Hay and unanimously carried. 5 MeeUng Minutes Planning and Development Board Meeting Boynton Beach, Florida December 18~ 2003 C. Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment Project: Agent: Description: Urban Central Business District (CPTA 04-001) City-Initiated Request to amend the comprehensive Plan to add 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 Mr. Cwynar requested that this item be heard last since this is city-initiated. Attorney Tolces stated that this could be done by motion. Motion Mr. Cwynar moved to move Item 7.C.1. to the end of the agenda. Motion seconded by Mr. Myott and unanimously carried. D. Zoning Code Variance Project: Agent: Owner: Location: Description: Clear Copy (ZNC 03-027) Laura Segura, Blue Chip Lending Services Bob Feldman 660 West Boynton Beach Boulevard Request for relief from the City of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2, Zoning, Section 11, H.16.d. (19), to allow thirteen (13) parking spaces in lieu of the nineteen (19) required by code, a variance of six (6) spaces for a medical office use in a C-2 zoning district. Chairman Wische informed the applicant that staff has denied the request. Maxime Am6d6e-Ducoste, Planner, stated that the subject property was developed in 1996 as a two-story print shop with a total of 3,780 square feet. The parking space ratio for a printing use requires one parking space for each 300 square feet of gross floor area. Therefore, 13 parking spaces were required and provided. Due to site constraints, the parking spaces provided constituted the maximum number of spaces that the site could accommodate. The owner is in the process of selling the property to be used as a chiropractor's office. Parking requirements for a medical office are based upon a parking ratio of one space per 200 square feet of gross floor area. Therefore, the proposed project needs a minimum of 19 parking spaces. However, the applicant only has sufficient land to 6 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Meeting Boynton Beach, Florida December 18, 2003 provide 13 spaces. Staff feels that a medical use would intensify the use of the property. Current parking regulations for medical and retail uses could not be accommodated on this site unless the building itself was reduced. Mr. Ambdbe-Ducoste road a list of uses that the building could accommodate. Staff does not feel that the applicant has met the hardship criteria and recommends denial of the variance. Attorney Tolces administered the oath to persons who had not been previously sworn in. Attorney David Schmidt, 100 NE 5th Avenue, Delray Beach, was present on behalf of the prospective purchaser, Dr. Alexander. Attorney Schmidt stated that Dr. Alexander Provides transportation for many of his patients via a shuttle service. Dr. Alexander currently has an office east of 1-95 in Boynton Beach that is the approximate size of this building with the same amount of parking. Because he provides a transportation service, he does not have a problem with parking. The applicant does not want to relocate his business outside Boynton Beach. Robert Feldman, 3915 Diamond Palladium Terrace, Boynton Beach, is the current owner of the property. He felt that the doctor would be able to schedule his appointments so that there would not be a problem with parking. He stated that he has never had a parking problem. He requested that the applicant be granted the variance .so that he could sell the building. Dr. Alexander, 444 West Boynton Beach Boulevard, Stated that he is currently practicing in the City and would like to remain. If he cannot obtain this building, he would have to move outside the City. He does not want to leave the City and his patients. He explained that he sees patients by appointment only and that the appointments aro scheduled accordingly. He also reiterated that a groat many of his patients do not have vehicles and he provides transportation for them, which would free up some of the parking. He does not have a large staff. He felt that the current parking would be sufficient and he did not anticipate a problem with his neighbors and the City in general. He requested that the Board take this into consideration in making their decision. Laura Segura, the foal estate agent for the transaction, felt that the variance should be granted because the doctor schedules his patients much further apart than a regular doctor and she did not think the parking would be a problem. She pointed out that Dr. Alexander would like to stay in this vicinity since his current office is only a mile or so away. Chairman Wische opened the public hearing. Dr. Mark Roberts, 650 West Boynton Beach Boulevard, owns the property directly next door and was against the variance. He noted that when the building was originally Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Meeting Boynton Beach, Florida December 18, 2003 built, these same issues were raised. The owner at that time stated that he was aware if the property was utilized for a different use, there could be parking problems. He questioned whether only one doctor would use a building of this size since normally there is one doctor for every 1,000 square feet. The number of staff needed by one doctor is around four to five people. He did not think that the parking could be accommodated for the doctor and his staff, let alone for the patients. He stated that his building has 26 sparking spaces for two doctors and there is not enough parking at times. Dr. Roberts asked for the request to be denied. Chairman Wische closed the public hearing. Mr. Hay noted that one of the requirements for obtaining a variance is to show a hardship and asked the applicant what the hardship would be if he had to add six more spaces. Attorney Schmidt pointed out that there is not enough room to add six additional spaces, which is a hardship. Attorney Schmidt felt that by reconfiguring the parking lot they might be able to add an additional two to three spaces. Mr. Casaine asked if there was room for 19 parking spaces. Mr. ^m6d~e-Ducoste said that the dumpster could be eliminated since it is not required and this would allow for an additional parking space. Mr. Casaine inquired that since only 14 parking spaces would be possible and 19 are required, would this constitute a hardship. Mr. Rumpf, Planning and Zoning Director, explained that staff looks at the variance to determine if the variance is the minimum necessary to make reasonable use of the land. Not all uses can be accommodated by a particular zoning. The building is maxed out for certain types of uses and the proposed use would intensify the use that could lower the overall appearance of the project. Motion Mr. Myott moved to deny the request for relief from the City of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2, Zoning, Section 11,H.16.d. (19)to allow thirteen (13) parking spaces in lieu of the nineteen (19) required by code, a variance of six (6) spaces for a medical office use in a C-2 zoning district. Motion seconded Mr. Cwynar. For clarification, Attorney Tolces noted that the denial was based upon the failure to make findings, as required pursuant to the applicable sections of the City's Land Development Regulations, which Myott confirmed. Vote Motion to deny carried 5-0. E. New Site Plan 1. Project: Olen Industrial (NWSP 03-018) Quantum Park Lot 50A 8 MeeUng Minutes Planning and Development Board Meeting Boynton Beach, Florida December 18, 2003 Agent: Owner: Location: Description: Steve Fike, Olen Properties Olen Properties 4875 Park Ridge Road Request for new site plan approval for a 17,726 square foot warehouse on a 1.41-acre parcel in The Quantum Park PID. Steve Fike, 1062 Coral Ridge Drive, Coral Springs, Florida was administered the oath by Attorney Tolces. Chairman Wische noted that there were 33 staff comments and Mr. Fike stated that they agreed with all staff comments. Chairman Wische opened the public hearing. Since no one wished to speak, the public hearing as closed. Mr. Myott recused himself from this item and filed the appropriate Form 8B with the City Clerk's Office. Motion Mr. Casaine moved to approve the request for new site plan approval for a 17,726 square foot warehouse on a 1.41-acre parcel in The Quantum Park PID. Motion seconded by Mr. Hay and carried 4-0 (Mr. Myott abstaining). 2. Project: Agent: Owner: Location: Description: Olen Office (NWSP 03-019) Quantum Park Lots 21 and 21B Steve Fike, Olen Properties Olen Properties 1425 Gateway Boulevard Request for new site plan approval for a 28,266 square foot office building on a 2.13- acre parcel in The Quantum Park PID. Mr. Myott also recused himself from this item. Chairman Wische noted that there were 31 staff comments. Mr. Fike stated that they agreed with all staff comments. Chairman Wische opened the public hearing. Since no one wished to speak, the public hearing was closed. Motion 9 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Meeting Boynton Beach, Florida December 18, 2003 Mr. Cwynar moved to approve the request for new site plan approval for a 28,266 square foot office building on a 2.13-acre parcel in The Quantum Park PID. Motion seconded by Mr. Hay and carried 4-0 (Mr. Myott abstaining). 3. Project: Agent: Owner: Location: Description: Venetian Villas (NWSP 03-021) Michael Hoeflinger, Atlantis Development Group, LLC. RSPB, LLC South side of Southwest 23ra Avenue (Golf Road) approximately 600 feet east of Congress Avenue Request for new site plan approval for 50 fee simple townhomes on a 4.69-acre parcel in a R-3 zoning district. Attorney Bonnie Miskel, 222 Lakeview Avenue, West Palm Beach, was present on behalf of the petitioner. Chairman Wische pointed out that there were 44 staff comments. Ms. Miskel requested clarification on comments #24 and #25. With regard to comment #25, Ms. Miskel stated that some of the trees used to calculate the caliper were not on their property. She requested that between tonight and the City Commission they would like to re-evaluate the trees used to arrive at that number. If the number is not correct, they will correct it prior to the City Commission meeting. Ms. Miskel requested that the formula used in comment #24 be clarified. She thought that it might have excluded consideration of pdvate recreational areas. If the formula is correct, they have no objection. This would also be clarified prior to the City Commission meeting. The applicant would like to eliminate the wall on the south boundary of the property contained in comments #37 and #39. She stated that the wall was supposed to protect the residents to the south had the property been developed as an ACLF. She felt a wall was not necessary since the project is a traditional residential use. She also pointed out that they have agreed to eliminate screen enclosures, patios and any other kinds of amenities on the south side in order to have the same water views that others have. With regard to comment #42, the Stipulation and Settlement Agreement intended to discourage other people from using the area on the south side of the property. She did not feel that a meandering path running along the back of the property was consistent with the intent of the Agreement and was not consistent with residential use. Ms. Miskel would like this comment eliminated. Edc Johnson, Planner, presented the item on behalf of staff. He explained that the applicant is proposing to build 50 fee-simple townhouse units on a 4.699 acre parcel 10 MeeUng Minutes Planning and Development Board Meeting Boynton Beach, Florida December 18, 2003 that is currently zoned R-3. The project is a gated community and would be located in a portion of the property known as Alhambra ACLF. In 1989 there was a Stipulation and Settlement Agreement between the property owners and the City that allows the rezoning of the property to R-3 to accommodate an ACLF. The agreement also covered building height, landscaping, roof pitch, number of stories, etc. Over a year ago, Centex Homes proposed a site plan with 66 townhouses that was denied by the Planning and Development Board and was never voted upon by the City Commission. Tonight's applicant is a different developer and is proposing a different plan. The developer is required to meet concurrency requirements and submitted a traffic impact statement. It was determined that Golf Road could accommodate 50 townhouse units. Also, City Engineering reviewed the applicant's drainage plan and found it to be adequate. A detailed drainage plan will be provided at the time of permitting. The plan shows that the outfall of the drainage would end up in the Lake Worth Drainage District Canal and would require the applicant to obtain a permit from that District. Mr. Johnson noted that staff has been informed that the project conforms to the school concurrency requirements. There is one main entrance off Golf Road with an additional subordinate egress lane on Golf Road. This has been reviewed by Engineering and the Fire Department and they determined that an egress area from 13~ to the subject property was necessary. It would not be open to the public. It would be gated and used for emergency only and would be equipped with a Knox Box. The project requires 105 parking spaces and the developer is proposing garages, driveways and on-street parking that results in 10 extra parking spaces. The outside lighting structures would be concrete, 25' high, and freestanding. The lighting poles would be internal to the parcel away from the abutting residential properties. The Stipulation Agreement provides that the lights must be turned off at 11:00 p.m., which conflicts with City code. Staff is recommending that the Agreement be amended to allow the lights to be on until 2:00 a.m. The previous area is 1.645 of an acre, or 35% of the site. The width of the north landscape buffer along Golf Road varies, but at minimum would be 15' wide. The minimum for the west side landscape buffer would be 20' and the south landscape buffer along the canal varies with a minimum of 40'. The east landscape buffer at minimum is 9' wide. The buildings, as proposed, meet the setback requirements for the R-3 zoning district. The Stipulation and Settlement Agreement provides that a buffer wall be provided along the south property line. The applicant is proposing no buffer wall and staff is recommending the wall. If this were the case, the Agreement would have to be amended to eliminate the buffer wall or to allow for a landscape buffer wall that staff is proposing. 11 MeeUng Minutes Planning and Development Board Meeting Boynton Beach, Florida December 18, 2003 The 50 units would be in 10 different buildings. There will be no dumpster enclosure. The developer will be utilizing rollout containers. Staff is recommending approval contingent upon the 44 conditions of approval with one of those conditions being that the Stipulation and Settlement Agreement would have to be amended to allow the townhouses because currently the Agreement only allows an ACLF. Mr. Johnson addressed Ms. Miskel's remarks. With regard to comment #24 (impact fees), Parks and Recreation requires the impact fee to be based upon a standard calculation, which is $770 for each unit. If the applicant wanted to review this, staff would be agreeable. With regard to comment #25, if the applicant feels that the trees were miscounted, staff would be agreeable to looking at this as well. Mr. Johnson noted that when developing property that abuts a canal, the Lake Worth Drainage District requires that the trees or any vegetation in the canal would be removed. One of staff's comments is for the developer to petition the LWDD to be allowed to keep all the trees in place. He pointed out that the City has no control over the trees in the LWDD right of way. With regard to comment #37 regarding the wall, staff would like to have a wall and landscaping. Staff is recommending approval of the project, contingent upon the recommendations of approval. Mike Rumpf, Planning and Zoning Director, noted that the Settlement Agreement did not prohibit active activities or courtyards and walkways in the rear of the project, Mr. Rumpf felt that having a walkway in the rear of the project would be favorable to the development. He noted that the project is dense with limited recreation and a meandering walkway would be an added benefit. Chairman Wische opened the public hearing. Pat Burger, 2324 SW 13th Street, Boynton Beach, lives on the east side of the proposed development. Ms. Burger would like to have a buffer on the property. She pointed out that when the nursing home was constructed on the corner of 23rd Avenue and Congress Avenue, the construction blocked the drainage that now causes her street to flood whenever there is a heavy rain. Ms. Burger is concerned that there will be additional flooding. Also, Ms. Burger stated that her house has a small setback in the front and when she exits her house she will walk right into a two-story building. She had no objections to single story homes, but felt that she and her neighbors would have no privacy if the buildings were two stories. 12 MeeUng Minutes Planning and Development Board Meeting Boynton Beach, Florida December 18, 2003 Ms. Burger pointed out that all run off in the development would go into the canal and she felt that this would dirty a clean canal. She would also like to see the trees remain without any kind of dredging taking place. Ms. Burger also felt that the development would increase traffic and noted that people that live on 23rd Avenue have difficulty getting in and out of their driveways. ,She questioned the amount of traffic going up and down the street with no turn lane. Peter Ryland, 1311 SW 25th Avenue, Boynton Beach read a statement into the record giving a history of the property and the Settlement Agreement. Mr. Ryland stated that this property was supposed to be an ACLF. He pointed out the differences between residents of an ACLF and the proposed development. The proposed development would create luxury condominiums with three times the number of cars, seven more trips per day per vehicle, more water and sewer usage, plus require more safety services. Mr. Ryland noted that the court order might not allow the City to consider the development. The proposed project is not a PUD and he recommended that the Board obtain a written legal opinion before considering the project any further. Mr. Ryland felt that the light poles at their current height would shine into the single- family homes that surround the project. He would like to see the light poles at a maximum height of 10'. He noted that the Agreement says that no modifications are to be made to the LWDD land except for landscaping with approval of the neighboring homeowner associations. Mr. Ryland was against the removal of any trees since they provide screening to homeowners who live across the canal. He also urged that staff's recommendation that mature 12' to 16' trees be adopted. He requested that the developer be required to obtain the approval of the neighboring homeowner associations. Mr. Ryland pointed out that Golf Road corridor is the only east-west corridor and is a used as a back road to Bethesda Hospital. The development will add traffic to the road and many vehicles during rush hour cannot get out of their driveways to make a left turn on Golf Road. Chairman Wische closed the public hearing. Ms. Miskel requested to respond to some of the comments expressed. She stated that the court order in 2002 allows the City to consider amendments to the Stipulations that were previously agreed to and did not apply to a particular application. With regard to traffic, they have already received traffic concurrency approval from Palm Beach County and offered to put in a deceleration lane, even though it was not required. With regard to the vegetation along the canal, Ms. Miskel pointed out that this is not their property and LWDD can force the developer to remove the vegetation. They would prefer to keep the vegetation. 13 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Meeting Boynton Beach, Florida December 18, 2003 There will be no lighting around the perimeters of the property. The two-story buildings will actually screen the lighting. Ms. Miskel agreed with staffs presentation and noted that the plan is consistent with almost everything in the Stipulation Agreement except for the use. They are, however, objecting to the wall. Since there are no patios or balconies designated for the backyards, they would also like to have the same view afforded the other neighbors. Their only other objection is the meandering trail. Ms. Miskel pointed out that they have placed their recreation facilities at the front of the development to keep people from the back of the property. Mr. Myott requested to review the renderings of the project and remarked that it was a very handsome project. He lives east of the project in Chapel Hill and is familiar with the traffic on Golf Road. What is needed are more improvements to the road as the area continues to develop. He felt that the architect and developer have done an excellent job with the property. He stated that this was the type of project that would be in downtown Delray Beach and asked the residents to focus on the quality of the project. Mr. Cwynar asked what would happen if there were a great deal of additional cars visiting the project. Ms. Miskel pointed out that they exceed code and actually have 36 more parking spaces than code requires. The architect for the project stated that they have provided parallel parking along the pool area and the screened area. Chairman Wische asked Ms. Miskel about condition #37. Ms. Miskel restated that they do not feel that there should be a wall so that people could have a view from their backyards. Ms. Miskel also noted that there was an issue with the meandering trail. Mr. Rumpf pointed out that there is considerable depth in the rear of the property and he felt that a meandering trail could be placed a good distance away from the units. He thought that there was plenty of landscaping to make it very attractive for meandering. He stated that the canal would not be visible from the backyards because of the depth of the canal and the wall itself could be aesthetic along with the landscaping. Ms. Miskel stated that they feel that a wall is not necessary and a trail makes no sense. She pointed out that the new urbanism is to put people in the front and they have provided passive park-like areas as central areas for people to meet. Mr. Rumpf responded that staff does not see a great deal of interconnectivity. He felt that the meandering trail was a good recommendation that would yield great benefits to the project, as well as not being inconsistent with the settlement. Mr. Casaine recommended moving on the project and asked staff how they felt about the wall. Mr. Rumpf stated that staff does not have a strong position on the wall, but the wall would add continuity. He would like to see landscaping in place of a wall. Staff is trying to maintain compliance with the settlement and if the applicant and the City agree, the court would more likely allow the amendments Mr. Casaine asked Ms. Miskel if she would be amenable to adding landscaping that would be appropriate as well as providing a sense of security, to which she agreed. 14 MeeUng Minutes Planning and Development Board Meeting Boynton Beach, Florida December 18, 2003 Motion Mr. Casaine moved that the request for new site plan approval for 50 fee-simple townhomes on a 4.69-acre parcel in a R-3 zoning district be approved with the following conditions: (1) the conditions that have been presented by staff with the exception that staff is willing to take a closer look at the issue regarding the trees, as they have stated; and (2) that the petitioner will provide an adequate landscaping scheme that would provide the necessary security for the neighboring residents on the south side. Motion seconded by Mr. Hay. Motion carried 5-0. F. Major Site Plan Modification 1. Project: Agent: Owner: Location: Description: Krispy Kreme (MSPM 03-012) Michelle Hoyland, Jason Mankoff with Weiner & Aronson, P.A. Dynamic Doughnuts, Inc. 640 West Boynton Beach Boulevard Request for Major Site Plan Modification approval for a 20 foot tall "pole sign" on a 1.04- acre parcel in a C-2 zoning district Mr. Cwynar recused himself from this item and filed the appropriate Form 8B with the City Clerk's Office. Eric Johnson, Planner presented the item on behalf of staff. When the City first reviewed the project, there were three lots that were joined together and rezoned. At that time staff had concerns regarding the rezoning and had certain conditions placed in the approval to protect the residential properties to the south and east. The project was approved by the City Commission on January 15, 2002 and the site plan at the time of approval contained a 8' high monument sign that was to be erected 10' from both property lines as required by code. The applicant is requesting a modification for a 20' high pole sign. A picture of the existing sign was displayed. When the City first reviewed the plan, the applicant proposed a 20' tall pole sign that staff was not in favor of, even though it was permitted under code. At that time staff was reviewing and recommending the monument style sign. The current sign meets code, is 10' from the property and is visible to the right-of- way. Mr. Johnson also referred to the neon aspect of the sign and pointed out that staff has not been approving many neon signs. The wall sign on the east elevation has no neon because staff recommended that neon be removed from all wall signage. Mr. Johnson felt that the current sign looked good and noted that it contained neon and was visible from all directions at night, but not from the residential area. He also noted that the proposed new sign does not contain the address and staff is recommending that all signs contain the address. Staff feels that the sign that was approved is a 15 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Meeting Boynton Beach, Florida December 18, 2003 "classy" sign. The proposed sign would almost be as tall as the top of the building, which is at 22'. Mr. Johnson pointed out that the applicant planted trees along the north property line as required by code at 12' in height, meaning that the trunks of trees would be free of foliage to keep the sign visible. He explained that the intent of the code is to allow the sign to remain visible once the trees have matured. Mr. Johnson stated that locating the sign near the main entrance is difficult due to the infrastructure in place that includes a fire hydrant. Staff is recommending denial of the 20' pole sign and is recommending that the existing monument sign be relocated to an area that complies with code, such as closer to the main entrance, but away from the fire hydrant and possibly filling in a parking space, since there are six extra parking spaces Staff is recommending denial of the project, but if it were approved, staff would like to see the sign relocated east to a specified location, just west of the entry drive. Staff has rewritten the sign code and this site would not be allowed to have a 20' monument sign if they made application today. The allowable height of the sign would only be 12' tall. Attorney Michael Weiner, 102 N. Swinton Avenue, Delray Beach was present representing Dynamic Doughnuts, Inc. Since this is a quasi-judicial hearing, Attomey Weiner requested the opportunity to rebut any public comment and to have final closing argument. He pointed out that the standard is whether or not the City submits substantial competent evidence after the applicant demonstrates that it has met code. He noted that staff stated, "they meet the code, but we do not like the sign." In staff's presentation it was said that they want to deny it because the current sign is "classier." Attorney Weiner presented a PowerPoint presentation that covered the project and the area in which it is located. Also included in his presentation were photos of current signs in the City that were higher than the applicant's sign. Attorney Weiner acknowledged that the sign code did change, but Attorney Cherof at the Commission meeting announced on the public record that their application is to be considered under the old sign code. Attorney Weiner noted that the staff report states that if the sign were allowed, nothing would change with respect to traffic, drainage, schools, driveways, parking facilities, building or design. He did not think the sign was visible from the photos and pointed out that it is a six-lane road with medians and is 150' wide. They would be locating their sign 10' back from their property line, which means their sign would be further back from the .roadway than other signs in the City. They would like to put the sign in the right-of- way, but this was not allowed by FDOT. Attorney Weiner referred to an article entitled "Premises Signs and Traffic Safety." The article notes that a person traveling at 40 mph travels 59' per second, which means a person would have to make a decision within five seconds if he wants to turn left across 16 MeeUng Minutes Planning and Development Board Meeting Boynton Beach, Florida December 18, 2003 three lanes. In safety articles, it is recommended that signs be at least 28' high. He also pointed out that with the large number of higher signs in the area, one more sign would not make that much difference considering the safety factors involved. Attorney Weiner also stated that the sign would not spill into the residential neighborhood. Pete Russo, Metro Design Group, 2831 Exchange Court, West Palm Beach, stated that his firm was the architects and engineers for Krispy Kreme. Mr. Russo stated that Krispy Kreme is desirous of expanding its sign for visibility. He noted that Krispy Kreme even put in a deceleration and turning lane in the west bound lane. He pointed out that when exiting the west bound lane from 1-95, a person is only about 400' away from the site. If you have not made a decision to get over to the deceleration lane to enter Krispy Kreme, you will miss the entrance. Krispy Kreme is an impulse business and is not a destination place. Mr. Russo stated that Krispy Kreme is proposing a very expensive, well-made, high class, stainless steel pole sign. With regard to the sign being very visible at night, he pointed out that 70% of Krispy Kreme's business is during daylight hours. Any kind of diminished lighting makes the sign non-visible. Attorney Weiner presented some color renderings of the sign to the Board. He stated that the address will be added to the sign as staff requested. Chairman Wische opened the public headng. Since no one wished to speak, the public hearing was closed. Mr. Casaine pointed out that there is a code in the City that regulates signs. He noted that at the last meeting the Board heard the same type of presentation regarding signs and safety. At that meeting a representative presented safety statistics, similar to what was presented tonight. The information that person presented turned out to be distorted and untrue. Mr. Casaine was not prepared to accept any safety presentations regarding signs and eluded to photographs taken at certain angles that only benefit the party taking the pictures. Mr. Casaine was in favor of Krispy Kreme, which he felt was a good business with a good product that everyone likes. He did not think that a 20' sign was necessary so that people driving by could see the location. He also referred to the old signs that were illustrated tonight that should not be in the City today. The signs that will now be erected in the City will have to adhere to the code to make Boynton Beach look better. Mr. Casaine also said that he ddves by Kdspy Kreme everyday and can see the sign traveling both east and west with enough time to turn into the site. He recommended approving staff's recommendation to move the existing sign to a better location. Mr. Myott recalled that there was a meeting in the past where it had been discussed that all non-conforming signs would be removed. Property owners would be notified and allowed so much time to take them down. Mr. Myott asked if Krispy Kreme's sign were 17 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Meeting Boynton Beach, Florida December 18, 2003 originally approved at 20', would they now be notified to remove it and replace the sign with a 12' sign in the new location. Mike Rumpf, Planning and Zoning Director, stated that the City was going to sunset non-conforming signs and a groat deal of work went into this. Language was inserted in the LDR sign code that stated that non-conforming signs, as defined by a combination of three criteria, would be removed by a certain date. Mr. Myott pointed out that the applicant would be able to go up to 12' under the code and moving the sign to the recommended location would give them more visibility. Mr. Myott asked staff when the applicant came in with the sign modification a couple of months ago were they informed that the sign code was undergoing changes. Mr. Rumpf stated that when the sign code changes were initiated, the application had not been filed and stated that the applicant had every right to submit the application. Mr. Rumpf confirmed that the maximum sign height in the City is 20', but there are other site regulations that had to be adhered to. Therefore, an applicant would have to justify going to the maximum height. Mr. Myott inquired if the new sign code setting the limit at 12' had been adopted yet. Attorney Tolces stated that it was adopted by the Commission at their Tuesday meeting. Mr. Rumpf read from Section 3 of Article III of the City's Sign Code dealing with aesthetics that states the "scale of the sign must be consistent with the scale of the building." Mr. Rumpf pointed out that staff has not made any recommendations for reduction in the height of proposed signs based upon aesthetics. Signs have been based upon their proportionality to the project, visibility, trend, and appearance. He pointed out that the signs displayed in the applicant's presentation were signs that were approved before the 1980s. Staff is recommending that a sign less than the maximum height be placed near the entrance, closer to the property line, and under the tree canopies, so that the sign would remain visual when the trees mature. He also recommended altedng the landscaping around the base to make suro that the sign is very visible. Mr. Rumpf did not feel that a 20' sign would be proportional to the project, nor is it necessary. Attorney Weiner was of the opinion that his pictures and staff's pictures showed the same thing, i.e. the difficulty of the sign being seen. Attorney Weiner pointed out that their proposed new sign meets code and they are allowed to have a 20' sign. He acknowledged that the signs displayed were older, but felt their sign would only be similar to the signs that are already on the same block. Attorney Weiner again discussed the safety factor and noted that a person would only have 5 seconds to decide if they want to turn into the property. He did not think that the proposed sign is outlandish and that it would be compatible and fit in aesthetically with the area. 18 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Meeting Boynton Beach, Florida December 18, 2003 Mr. Hay inquired if a 20' pole sign would be allowed in the City. Attorney Tolces responded that the City Commission adopted an ordinance that was effective the date of passage. Since this application was submitted prior to that time, the applicant is allowed to come in under the old code provisions. Mr. Hay noted that there are many signs in the area that are higher than the proposed Krispy Kreme sign. Mr. Rumpf stated that in order for the City to attain its vision, it needs to start today and then proceed incrementally over time. Mr. Rumpf was not in favor of sunsetting non- conforming signs because it is not publicly friendly and the Commission agreed not to sunset those signs. The City's position is conservative in its signage and that marketability and visibility has improved with the lower type signs. Mr. Hay asked Attorney Weiner if they would be willing to go with staffs recommendation to keep the current sign and relocate it as recommended. Attorney Weiner stated that it was hard to consider a compromise when their proposed sign would be lower than any other signs in the area. He further noted that staff is creating a greater burden on the code by recommending that the applicant apply for a variance. They did not intend to apply for a variance since they met the sign code. Mr. Hay inquired why Krispy Kreme did not include a higher sign when it made its original application. Attorney Weiner stated that after the sign was erected, it was determined that the sign could not be seen and this was an oversight on the applicant's part. Mr. Hay agreed with Mr. Rumpf that a consistency for signs in the City has to start somewhere. Attorney Weiner agreed with this, but pointed out that their sign meets the sign code. He did not think that the City should start requiring the new recommendations with this sign. He referred to staffs report that called it zoning in progress and Attorney Cherof said that it does not apply in this instance. Attorney Weiner recommended that the new guidelines begin with the next application that the City receives. Chairman Wische said that he was confused. He noted that an ordinance was passed, but there was no effective date. Attorney Tolces responded that the ordinance was effective upon adoption. The issue in this instance is that the application was submitted prior to the adoption of that ordinance. Chairman Wische pointed out that Krispy Kreme has been good neighbors and have done everything that the City asked them to do. Originally, he was in favor of moving the sign, but since they meet code, he did not think that the Board should deny the request that could possibly end up in a lawsuit. Motion Mr. Casaine moved that the request for Major Site Plan Modification approval for a 20 foot tall "pole sign" on a 1.04-acre parcel in a C-2 zoning district be denied. Motion died for lack of a second. 19 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Meeting Boynton Beach, Florida December 18, 2003 Motion Mr. Hay moved that the request for Major Site Plan Modification approval for a 20 foot tall "pole sign" on a 1.04-acre pamel in a C-2 zoning districted be approved. Motion seconded by Mr. Myott and carried 3-1 (Mr. Casaine dissenting and Mr. Cwynar abstaining). Project: Agent: Owner: Location: Description: Bethesda Memorial Hospital Parking Garage (MSPM 03-010) Shayne Conover and Kieran Kilday Kilday & Associates, Inc. Bethesda Memorial Hospital, Inc. 2815 South Seacrest Boulevard Request for Major Site Plan Modification approval for a 82,500 square foot parking structure on an existing surface parking lot in a Public usage (PU) zoning district. Wes Blackman, Director of Planning at Kilday and Associates, was present on behalf of the applicant. Chairman Wische noted that there were 27 comments and Mr. Blackman requested clarification on comment #22 and agreed with all the other conditions. They have considered the intent of comment #22 because of their past experience with planter boxes in parking structures. He noted that they require irrigation and constant maintenance and tend to look more like an eyesore. Chairman Wische pointed out that planter boxes were mentioned in comment #26 and an updated list of staff comments was furnished to the applicant. Mr. Myott inquired what other methods of softening and screening the applicant intended to utilize. Mr. Blackman stated that they intend to plant around the perimeter of the parking garage a substantial amount of landscaping that would be 30' in height at time of planting and would grow. They also intend to maintain the mature oak trees on the north side of the structure off Golf Road that will create a softening effect. Ed Breese, Principal Planner, thanked the applicant for saving the oak trees at staff's recommendation. Mr. Breese also noted that many of the trees on the property where the garage is being built would be relocated along the east side of the parking garage to provide a buffer for the residents on that side. Staff was concemed that even with the height of the trees at planting, there was still a great deal of garage that would be visible. Staff is recommending that the trees be at 35' to 40' on the west side and the Golf Road side to provide better screening of a very large structure. Mr. Breese also referenced staff comment #20 that requests that the applicant be required to plant additional Sabal, Washington and Royal Palm trees along any side of the parking structure if any resident requested it. Mr. Cwynar inquired how many residents would have to speak up for this to occur, and Mr. Breese said that it would be addressed on a one-on-one basis. If a resident has a wide-open view of the garage and 2O Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Meeting Boynton Beach, Florida December 18, 2003 their property is not propedy screened, the applicant would be required to totally screen that resident's property. Mr. Cwynar stated that many residents on 4~ Street have complained about dust and debris blowing onto their property and nothing has been done. Mr. Breese stated that the City Forester has worked with residents on that street to resolve those issues. Mr. Cwynar also asked about stormwater retention. After the last heavy rain, the water from Bethesda ran down 27th Avenue and there was water at the intersection of 8th Street and 27th Avenue that was over 3' high. Mr. Breese responded that the Engineering Division has looked at the preliminary drainage and has indicated that the drainage would meet City code and would be contained in the area where the construction is taking place. Mr. Blackman stated that they did not have an issue with comment #20 and he would also recommend that language be added to state that it be to the satisfaction of the City Forester, which was included in the original staff report. He pointed out that they received Exhibit C by fax on Monday that contained 24 conditions. Subsequent to that time, they had not received any additional information from the City until tonight when they were presented with 27 conditions. Therefore, there are five conditions that they are not aware of. Mr. Blackman requested an opportunity to look those over. Mr. Breese was not sure how this happened and noted that there have been no changes since the agenda item was prepared. Chairman Wische declared a recess at 9:50 p.m. to allow the applicant and staff to review the staff conditions. The meeting reconvened at 10:00 p.m. The applicant and staff had an opportunity to review the staff comments and agreed that there was a mix up. Mr. Blackman said that they do have a problem with comment #17 that states that the Washington Palm Trees should be changed to Royal Palm Trees. Mr. Blackman stated that this would incur a significant cost and he was not certain that they could purchase trees at the recommended height. He also did not think that the area on the east side of parking structure could accommodate the width of a Royal Palm. The Hospital is amenable to planting 35' Royal Palm Trees at the front of the garage along Golf Road, but is not willing to plant them on all four sides of the structure. Mr. Breese stated that staff had concerns regarding the backyards of the residents, but if the applicant planted large canopy trees that screened their visibility of the structure, staff would be agreeable with that. Mr. Breese stated that if the applicant is willing to treat the Golf Road issue as discussed and address the issue of the backyards with the caveat that as complaints arise during the installation of the landscaping from the surrounding residents that it be worked out among the City Forester and the resident in order to protect the surrounding residents. Chairman Wische asked the applicant if they would agree to that and Mr. Blackman stated that they did. 21 MeeUng Minutes Planning and Development Board Meeting Boynton Beach, Florida December 18, 2003 With regard to the residents living along the western property line, Mr. Blackman stated that they are planting an Areca Hedge on the hospital side of the wall at about 9' high. The existing wall is 6' and therefore this would provide a 3' screen to screen out any distant parking structure. With regard to the SW 2nd Street area to the east, they will be relocating a lot of mature plants where the parking garage will be built to shield the view of the parking structure from the adjacent neighborhood. Chairman Wische opened the public hearing. Thomas Mahady, 125 SW 25th Avenue, Boynton Beach, stated that he was never notified about this item, but had been notified about the physicians' garage, which drew a tremendous crowd. He questioned why no one in the neighborhood was ever notified about this garage going up. Mr. Breese explained that this item does not require notification. Mr. Breese said that staff received several calls from the residents and they were informed when the meetings would be held. Mr. Mahady said that he resides on the east side of the project and would like to have a zero view of the garage. He would like assurances that if he was not pleased with the landscaping that he could let staff know and Mr. Breese confirmed that this is one of the conditions of approval. Thomas Mahady, Jr., 125 SW 25th Avenue, Boynton Beach, felt that there was sufficient room to plant Royal Palm Trees and would like to see some credible facts as to why the trees could not be planted. He would also like to see more landscaping that was torn down at the emergency room entrance replaced, since this entire area is visible from his property. Since no one else wished to speak, the public hearing was closed. Mr. Myott encouraged the residents to contact the City's Forester to make sure that they receive the necessary landscaping to screen out the emergency room and the garage. Mr. Myott noted that they have asked for master plans from the Hospital for years and they have never been furnished. Also, Mr. Myott felt it was not proper that these types of projects did not require public notice. Motion Mr. Hay moved to approve the request for Major Site Plan Modification approval for a 82,500 square foot parking structure on an existing surface parking lot in a Public Usage (PU) zoning district, subject to staff's comments. With regard to comment #17, the Royal Palm Trees would be planted along Golf Road and the other four elevations would be screened from the residents' backyard or the edge of the property, rather than right up against the structure itself. The City Forester would be the person who would visit the site and work with the residents and the applicant to a resolution. Motion seconded by Mr. Casaine and carded 4-1 (Mr. Cwynar dissenting) 22 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Meeting Boynton Beach, Florida December 18, 2003 G. Hei.qht Exception Project: Agent: Owner: Location: Description: Bethesda Memorial Hospital Parking Garage (HTEX 03-008) Shayne Conover and Kieran Kilday Kilday & Associates, Inc. Bethesda Memorial Hospital, Inc. 2815 South Seacrest Boulevard Request for a height exception of approximately 11 feet to allow elevator and stair towers associated with a proposed parking garage to extend above the 45-foot maximum height provision in the Public Usage (PU) zoning district. Ed Breese, Senior Planner stated that the elevator and stair towers on the structure would exceed the 45' height limit. The elevator tower is approximately 11' above the height limit. The conditions associated with the prior item are the same for this item. Therefore, this item has no additional conditions. Chairman Wische opened the public hearing. Since no one wished to speak, the public hearing was closed. Mr. Myott requested to view the renderings of the colored elevations. The southern tower is the tallest tower and is the closest to the Hospital. The colors of the garage will be the same colors of the hospital. Mr. Cwynar inquired about the type of elevator being installed. Richard Cannell, of Redford, Michigan, is installing the elevator, which is hydraulic. If the elevator were cable, the top elevation would have to be raised substantially higher. Mr. Cwynar inquired why the mechanical room was on the roof and was informed that the mechanics were on the ground level adjacent to the stair tower. Mr. Cannell stated that they need the additional height over the top level to accommodate the overrun and the height of the cab. Motion Mr. Hay moved to approve the request for a height exception of approximately 11 feet to allow elevator and stair towers associated with a proposed parking garage to extend above the 45-foot maximum height provision in the Public Usage (PU) zoning district, subject to staff comments. Motion seconded by Mr. Casaine and carried 4-1 (Mr. Cwynar dissenting). 23 MeeUng Minutes Planning and Development Board Meeting Boynton Beach, Florida December 18, 2003 H. Code Review Project: Agent: Location: Description: High Ridge Commerce 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. Penni Greenly, 140 N. Congress Avenue, Suite 8B, Boynton Beach, assumed the podium. Mr. Rumpf presented the item on behalf of staff. He explained that the applicant has initiated the code amendment request to add dance instruction to the list of permitted uses in the M-1 Industrial Zoning District. The City's LDR, Chapter 2, Section 8.A. 1. limits that district to industrial type uses, except that gymnastic centers were added in November 2001. Dance instruction is currently allowed in 0-2 and 0-3 zoning districts. Mr. Rumpf presented photographs of certain industrial areas in the City and pointed out that the proposed use requires a greater parking ratio of one space for every 300 square feet of use. Whereas, industrial environments are typically built with one space for every 800 square feet for a warehouse use and one space for every 500 square feet for more intense use. Most of the industrial sites in the City are antiquated and unimproved and do not meet current regulations. Mr. Rumpf also reported that because industrial areas are older, they cannot accommodate pedestrians due to lack of sidewalks. Mr. Rumpf distributed a copy of the code dealing with industrial environments that allow plastics, paints, petroleum, oils, heavy equipment, pesticides, solvents, chlorine, ammonia, and other flammable liquids and products. Many of these uses have distance separation requirements from adjacent residential neighborhoods. Staff is recommending denial because (1) industrial sites have not been designed for intense parking needs; (2) industrial sites have not been designed for pedestrians, particularly children; (3) the City's M-1 zoning district insolates industrial uses from other uses; and (4) allowing further non-industrial uses would further diminish the availability of industrial land in the City. Ms. Greenly stated that gymnastics and dance are very similar and involve a drop off and pick-up type of business. She noted that the buildings being constructed in phase 1 and 2 in High Ridge Commerce Center are aesthetically nicer than the older industrial areas that Mr. Rumpf presented. In the area that she wants to place her dance studio there would be 40 to 50 parking spaces. Ms. Greenly has operated for over 20 years in the City's C-2 and C-3 zoning districts. Parking has always been a problem in these areas where she has had to share parking with several other businesses. She pointed 24 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Meeting Boynton Beach, Florida December 18, 2003 out that most of her business is in the evening and the other businesses that operate during the day would be closed by 5:00 p.m. The area where she would like to have her dance studio allows cars to enter in a circular path so that the children could be dropped off. She pointed out that the businesses going into phase 2 of High Ridge Commerce Center would be a machine shop, an electronics' distributor, All Star Business Machines, a vitamin distributor, and a business that services machinery. She would like to own her own building and needs at least 5,000 to 6,000 square feet to do so. Ms. Greenly also pointed out that gymnastic schools, karate schools, and dance schools are a very popular means to provide physical and art activities for children and can no longer be run in 1,000 square foot spaces. She has over 300 students and requires open space with high ceilings. Because the costs in the C-2 and C-3 zoning districts are so high, she cannot afford to purchase or rent there. Ms. Greenly noted that Delray Beach allows dance and gymnastic schools in the M-1 districts. The Boca Ballet moved into 10,000 square feet of space in Arvida Commerce Center. There are also dance schools located in M-1 zoning areas in Wellington and Ft. Lauderdale. She has spoken to many owners of these schools and none of them had anything negative to say about running their businesses in an industrial area. Mr. Casaine agreed that there are no facilities in the City that could accommodate her needs and he acknowledged that in many cities these types of activities are allowed in M-1 zoning districts. He did not think there is much difference between gymnastics and dancing, and he would like an exception granted to allow the applicant's request. He also pointed out that the industrial areas being constructed today are different than the older industrial areas. Mr. Hay inquired what the difference was between dancing and gymnastics. Mr. Rumpf stated that staff considers them very similar and the code treats them identically. Staff, when it reviewed the gymnastics application, also recommended that dance be denied for the same reasons. Motion Mr. Myott 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. Casaine and unanimously carried. C. Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment (heard out of order) Project: Agent: Description: Urban Central Business District (CPTA 04-001) City-Initiated Request to amend the Comprehensive Plan to add one (1) objective and three (3) policies to the Future Land Use Element of the 25 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Meeting Boynton Beach, Florida December 18, 2003 Comprehensive Plan, to add development thresholds applicable to the Urban Central District Mr. Rumpf presented the item for Dick Hudson, Senior Planner, who had been ill and had to leave. The item involves implementing one of several mechanisms that the City wants to take advantage of to promote the development of downtown. This would address single, larger projects that otherwise might be subject to a DRI requirement under the Florida Administrative Code. By increasing the thresholds of the DRI requirements the City would not have to go through a specific review process for approval that would involve the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council and the State of Florida. On September 16, 2003, the City Commission adopted on first reading an ordinance to establish an Urban Central Business District for the downtown. The proposed ordinance was reviewed by the Florida Department of Community Affairs for sufficiency prior to final adoption by the City Commission. In addition, the rule requires the City to "subsequently adopt the UCBD ordinance by an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan at the next opportunity for amendment." The proposed amendment would add one objective and three policies to the existing Future Land Use Element and would include a location map with the text. The amendment will be sent to the DCA and should come back to the City after their review for ultimate adoption. Mr. Casaine inquired about the time frame involved in getting this adopted. Mr. Rumpf stated that this is the second and final step, which is to amend the Comprehensive Plan and will take approximately three months to be reviewed by the DCA. It would then come back to the City with comments to be addressed and then adopted. Mr. Rumpf anticipated that this would probably take place sometime in ^pdl or May of 2004. Motion Mr. Hay moved to approve the request to amend the Comprehensive Plan to add 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. Mr. Casaine seconded the motion that unanimously carried. 8. Other 9. Comments by members 26 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Meeting Boynton Beach, Florida December 18, 2003 10. Adjournment There being no further business, the meeting properly adjourned at 10:55 p.m. Barbara M. Madden Recording Secretary (December 19, 2003) 27