Loading...
Minutes 10-12-04 MINUTES OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY REGULAR MEETING HELD IN COMMISSION CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA ON TUESDAY OCTOBER 12,2004 AT 6:30 P.M. Present: Jeanne Heavilin, Chairperson Henderson Tillman, Vice Chair Alexander DeMarco Don Fenton Marie Horenburger Steve Myott Douglas Hutchinson, CRA Director Lindsey Payne, Board Attorney Susan Vielhauer, Controller Absent: James Barretta I. Call to Order Chairperson Heavilin called the meeting to order at 6:32 p.m. II. Roll Call The Recording Secretary called the roll and declared a quorum was present. III. Agenda Approval A. Additions, Deletions, Corrections to the Agenda Mr. Hutchinson stated that there was a request to pull Item F. on the Consent Agenda. B. Adoption of Agenda Motion Vice Chair Tillman moved to approve the Agenda. Motion seconded by Ms. Horenburger and unanimously carried. IV. Consent Agenda A. Approval of Minutes of September 14th Meeting Removed from the Agenda for correction. B. Financial Report Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida October 12, 2004 C. Consideration of Fac;ade Grant Payment for Delray Boynton Academy D. Consideration of Fac;ade Grant Payment for Provident Missionary Baptist Church E. Consideration of Police Contract for the 2005/2006 year F. Consideration of Lease with Purchase Option for CRA Office Removed from the Consent Agenda by Mr. Fenton for discussion. Motion Mr. DeMarco moved for approval, as amended. Motion seconded by Ms. Horenburger and unanimously carried. Chairperson Heavilin asked Pastor Singleton to come to the podium. Vice Chair Tillman, on behalf of the CRA Board, presented Pastor Singleton with a check in the amount of $12,440, which represented the fac;ade grant payment for Provident Missionary Baptist Church. A. Approval of Minutes of September 14th Meeting Ms. Horenburger pointed out that on page 16, at the top of the page, there was discussion of the Selection Committee where she requested to become a member. However, the minutes do not indicate that she withdrew her request when she learned that the Committee had already started to rank the applicants. She asked that this be indicated in the minutes. Motion Ms. Horenburger moved to approve the minutes of September 14, 2004, as amended. Motion seconded by Vice Chair Tillman and unanimously carried. F. Consideration of Lease with Purchase Option for CRA Office Ms. Horenburger inquired if the Board went out for proposals. Mr. Hutchinson explained that the Board instructed staff to pursue the purchase of office space and to bring it back to the Board. He explained that the item is a lease-purchase contract for the Board's review. Ms. Horenburger inquired why the Board did not go out for proposals. Mr. Hutchinson stated that they did not go out for proposals because staff has a list of projects that would be going up and they have been working on this for over a year. Mr. Hutchinson stated that going out for proposals was still possible, but he went by direction of the Board. Mr. Fenton was not certain that staff was given this direction. He recalled that staff was authorized to give a $10,000 deposit to pursue the location 2 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida October 12, 2004 because there was something in the works and they needed to act quickly. However, nothing ever happened and Mr. Fenton was under the assumption that the money was never spent. He feels that the deal is moot and requested clarification. Mr. Fenton was not sure if the CRA should purchase property for its own use considering the lawsuit on height limitation pending against the City. The CRA recently negotiated a new lease at its current location for larger offices and he did not think they needed to take the risk, as a public agency, to purchase a piece of property that mayor may not be used in the next five years. Vice Chair M3yor Tillman concurred with Mr. Fenton. He noted that Mr. Hutchinson was instructed to look for better office space for the CRA and if the Board did decide to seek the purchase of office space, it should be done through an RFP. He further felt that at this point in time, the Board was not in a position to make a decision on the contract. If the Board moved on this, it could result in some negative connotations and he felt the issue was also moot. He recommended that Mr. Hutchinson be given direction to bring additional options to the Board. Mr. Hutchinson requested that he be provided direction, since they have entered into a new lease for office space. If the Board so wished, they could go out for an RFQ to secure leased space. Ms. Horenburger pointed out that the agenda item was an agreement with MPLF Investments, Inc. It appeared to her that the Board is being asked to approve it, and she would like to have had the agreement signed by the party presenting the contract and have it approved for legal sufficiency before it was brought to the Board. Mr. Myott inquired about the status of the site plan in the agenda packet. Mr. Hutchinson pointed out that the principal of MPLF was present to answer any questions. Mr. Myott did not think they should rule out purchasing land or a building, but he felt that the Board needed to be better informed. Ms. Horenburger inquired if the option to purchase was the entire building or just the 3,000 square feet of office space. Mr. Hutchinson stated it was just the 3,000 square feet. Ms. Horenburger also thought that any interest earned on the deposit should go to the lessee, which was not stated in the agreement. Chairperson Heavilin stated that normally the CRA would not go out for an RFP on leased property. The item was brought to the Board so that staff would have the work space that it has needed for a long time with an option to purchase at today's rates, rather than waiting for prices to appreciate. Mr. Hutchinson reported that the building has not been fully designed. Mr. Hutchinson explained that they now have a one-year lease that can be renewed in one-year increments. The two blocks where the office was currently located would be 3 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida October 12, 2004 eventually redeveloped, and they would have between 24 to 36 months before they would have to relocate. Ms. Horenburger inquired what the CRA office needs are. Mr. Hutchinson stated that they need 3,000 square feet, including meeting rooms. He felt it was important for the CRA to have proper meeting space and noted that there was not much cond%ffice space earmarked for the CRA area, which is why staff brought the item to the Board. Vice Chair Tillman recommended that staff perform a needs assessment that would include costs and space. Mr. Hutchinson stated that they did do a space study, which is how they arrived at the 3,000 square feet. Mr. Fenton did not think it was necessary for staff to enter into another new lease since they have just signed a one-year lease. Mr. Fenton inquired what the square footage rental was on the new lease. Mr. Hutchinson stated it was $1,600 per month for 1,200 square feet. Mr. Fenton pointed out that if they entered into a new contract, the CRA costs for rent would double. Mr. Hutchinson noted that some of the office buildings coming onboard would be charging rent of approximately $24 to $36 per square foot. Chairperson Heavilin confirmed that there is a dearth of office space in the CRA. Motion Vice Chair Tillman moved to table. Motion seconded by Mr. Fenton. Mr. Myott would like to have more information on the property included with the recommendations that Mr. Hutchinson would be bringing back to the Board. Ms. Horenburger requested that any agreement brought before the Board be signed off by the Board Attorney. Mr. Myott also pointed out that it was important to find a first tenant for a proposed project to encourage others to move forward. Chairperson Heavilin felt that approving this would have demonstrated a strong commitment to the community in terms of redevelopment. Mr. Fenton recommended that Mr. Hutchinson come back with more than one proposal and he stated that he would try. Vote Motion carried 5-1 (Wf;e-Chair Heavilin dissenting). Chairperson Heavilin requested that the new CRA Secretary be introduced. Ms. Vielhauer introduced Nicole Monet Fenton. Mr. Hutchinson reported that they received over 300 resumes. Ms. Vielhauer stated that they interviewed several times and the first person they hired left. Ms. Fenton comes with very good credentials and was highly recommended. 4 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida October 12, 2004 V. Public Audience Francois Cannel, 461 SW 3rd Avenue, Boynton Beach, asked what the CRA was doing to reach out to the Haitian Community. He is not aware of anything happening and requested that the CRA disseminate information through media that Haitians read and listen to. He would also like to know how his community could participate in redevelopment efforts. Chairperson Heavilin pointed out that the CRA has a Web site; however, everything is in English because they do not have anyone on staff that could translate information into Creole. She pointed out that they are trying to address the entire CRA community. Mr. Cannel stated that he is a teacher and linguist, and he has come to various meetings offering his assistance, but has never been contacted. Mr. Hutchinson responded that they have a program in the CRA that is area wide and they actively go to meetings held by other communities, neighborhoods and associations. His office is always open to anyone that would like to come to see him. He also pointed out that they have had many outreach events and Ms. Gray has worked very hard to include minorities in the Winter Carnival and the HeritageFest. They advertise on minority stations and in local papers, such as the Boynton Times that have included neighborhood inserts. Past events have also been advertised in the City's water bill. If anyone feels that they have been left out, Mr. Hutchinson requested that they contact him. The CRA will be sending out a newsletter that will also be available on the Web site and they are always looking for articles. Vice Chair Tillman added that the CRA continues to look for citizen participation and requested that Mr. Cannel contact the CRA Office. Chairperson Heavilin introduced Mayor and Mrs. Jerry Taylor, Vice Mayor Ferguson, Commissioner Ensler and Lee Wische, Chairman of the Planning and Development Board, who were in the audience. VI. Public Hearing Old Business None Attorney Payne administered the oath to all persons who would be testifying. New Business A. Conditional Use 5 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida October 12, 2004 1. Project: Agent: Owner: Location: Descri ption: B. ZoninQ Code Variance 1. Project: Agent: Owner: Location: Description: Gateway Shell (COUS 03-007) Seril Kruger, of Beril Kruger Planning & Zoning Consultants Suau Enterprises, Incorporated 2360 North Federal Highway Request for conditional use/major site plan modification approval for a 681 square foot building addition to an existing gas station/convenience store on a 0.48-acre parcel in the C-3 zoning district Gateway Shell (ZNCV 03-010 to 03-012) Beril Kruger, of Beril Kruger Planning & Zoning Consultants Suau Enterprises, Incorporated 2360 North Federal Highway Request for relief from the City of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2. Zoning, Section 11. Supplemental Regulations L.3.d (1) requiring parking lot driveways to be located 120 feet from the intersection of the right-of-way lines along streets of higher classification to allow a 97- foot variance, resulting in a distance of 23 feet, and to allow an 88-foot variance for a second driveway, resulting in a distance of 32 feet from the intersection of Federal Highway and Las Palmas Avenue for an existing gas station business; Request for relief from the City of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2, Zoning, Section 11, Supplemental Regulations L.3.d. (3) requiring that driveways shall not be located less than thirty (30) feet from any interior property line to allow a 10-foot variance, resulting in a distance of 20 feet for an existing gas station business; Request for relief from the City of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2, Zoning, Section 11, Supplemental Regulations L.3.d. (4) requiring that driveways will be limited to one (1) per street frontage to 6 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida October 12, 2004 2. Project: Agent: Owner: Location: Description: 3. Project: Agent: Owner: Location: Description: allow two (2) driveways along the street frontage for an existing gas station business. Gateway Shell (ZNCV 03-013) Beril Kruger of Beril Kruger Planning & Zoning Consultants Suau Enterprises, Incorporated 2360 North Federal Highway Request for relief from the City of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2, Zoning, Section 11, Supplemental Regulations L.3.e. (3) requiring a twenty (20) foot rear setback to allow a 10-foot variance, resulting in a rear setback of 10 feet for an addition to an existing gas station. Gateway Shell (ZNCV 03-014 and ZNCV 03- 015) Beril Kruger, of Beril Kruger Planning & Zoning Consultants Suau Enterprises, Incorporated 2360 North Federal Highway Request for relief from the City of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2, Zoning, Section 11, Supplemental Regulations L.3.e.(a) requiring that no canopy shall be located less than twenty (20) feet from any property line to allow a 10.5 foot variance, resulting in a distance of nine (9) feet-six (6) inches for an existing canopy for a gas station business; and Request for relief from the City of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2, Zoning, Section 11, Supplemental Regulations L.3.e.(b) requiring that no gasoline pump island shall be located less than thirty (30) feet from any property line to allow a 10.2 foot variance, resulting in a distance of 19.8 feet for an existing gasoline pump island for a gas station business. 7 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida 4. October 12, 2004 Project: Agent: Owner: Location: Description: 5. Project: Agent: Owner: Located: Description: Gateway Shell (ZNCV 03-016 and ZNCV 03- 017) Beril Kruger, of Beril Kruger Planning & Zoning Consultants Suau Enterprises, Incorporated 2360 North Federal Highway Request for relief from the City of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2, Zoning, Section 11, Supplemental Regulations L.3.F.(1) requiring a ten (10) foot wide landscape buffer along the street frontage to include one tree ten (10) to fifteen (15) feet in height with a minimum three-inch caliper every forty (40) feet, a continuous hedge twenty-four (24) inches high, twenty-four (24) inches on center at time of planting with flowering groundcover to allow a variance of 10 feet, resulting in a zero (0) landscape buffer along the street frontage for an existing gas station building; and Request for relief from the City of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2, Zoning, Section 11, Supplemental Regulations L.3.f.(2)(a) requiring a ten (10) foot wide landscape buffer on all interior property lines to allow a variance of eight (8) feet - six (6) inches, resulting in a one (1) foot-six (6) inch landscape buffer for an existing gas station. Gateway Shell (ZNCV 03-023) Beril Kruger, of Beril Kruger Planning & Zoning Consultants Suau Enterprises, Incorporated 2360 North Federal Highway Request for relief from the City of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations, Chapter 21, Signs, Article III. Section 5, requiring that all signs must meet a minimum ten (10) foot setback from the property line to the closest surface of the sign to allow a five (5) foot variance from the property line, 8 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida October 12, 2004 resulting in a five (5) foot setback for an existing gas station business. Ed Breese, Senior Planner, distributed an updated matrix of the planning and zoning items for the Texaco/Shell station that was before the Board tonight. Chairperson Heavilin inquired if all the items could be heard together, and Eric Johnson, Planner, agreed to this. Mr. Johnson gave a history of events. In 2002, the owner of the property wanted to construct a building addition to the existing gas station. Staff determined at that time that the gas station was a legal non-conforming use, which prohibited any addition to the existing building. As a result, the applicant filed an Administrative Appeal that was heard by the City Commission. The Appeal was to reverse staff's determination and that the applicant be permitted to build the addition. When the City Commission heard the Appeal, they approved the applicant's request to build the addition. However, it was conditioned that the addition be limited to 600 square feet. Therefore, anything dealing with the site plan tonight would be for a 600 square foot addition, not 681 square feet. Staff has several conditions of approval that are based upon a 600 square foot addition and the applicant has agreed to a 600 square foot addition. If the item were approved, the plans would have to be revised to indicate the correct square footage. Mr. Johnson explained that the applicant submitted site plans in 2003 requesting conditional use approval for the building addition to the gas station, along with building a car wash on the adjacent property to the east. He pointed out that the applicant has abandoned the request for the car wash and tonight they would only be concentrating on the building addition and the nine variances. Staff reviewed the request for the building addition. Whenever there is a major site plan modification, the whole site has to be brought up to code. To do this for this site, it would require the approval of nine variances. Last year, staff, the CRA and the City Commission heard the request for conditional use and the nine variances. Staff recommended denial of two of the variances, but it was approved by the CRA and the City Commission that also approved the site plan. Since the time of that approval and now, the City Commission subsequently repealed that decision. Therefore, the applicant is present tonight to seek approval to build the addition to the gas station. Ms. Horenburger inquired if the Commission gave the reason for rescinding the approval. Mr. Johnson stated the decision was rescinded because there was no hardship for a variance. Mr. Johnson reviewed the site and pointed out where the addition would be built. The applicant is proposing to upgrade the parking lot by adding three new parking spaces. Eight of the nine variances pertain to existing conditions. One variance is for the building setback. The drive aisle on the property to the east has been abandoned and 9 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida October 12, 2004 the three parking spots will be placed in this space. Whenever there is an 800 square foot of impervious area, a drainage plan is required, which the applicant did submit. Staff reviewed this. Since the drive aisle is being eliminated, the 5' wide landscape buffer needs to be increased to 8.5' because the existing parking area encroaches into the 10' wide landscape buffer by 8'6". Staff has reviewed the request for conditional use and with the variances in place, the project complied with the standards for evaluating conditional uses. Staff is recommending denial of two of nine variances as follows: ./ The request for the building setback to be reduced; and ./ The relief for the existing pylon sign. By code, the sign needs to be lower in height and 10' feet back from the property line. The existing sign is only 5' from the property line. Staff feels that the sign could be eliminated, remodeled and pushed back. Attorney Payne requested that Mr. Johnson read the nine variances into the record. 1. The three variances dealing with the driveways are ZNCV 03-010, ZNCV 03- 011 and ZNCV 03-012. 2. The fourth variance relates to the building setback and is ZNCV 03-013, and staff is recommending denial. 3. The fifth and sixth variances relate to the existing canopy and the gasoline pump islands. ZNCV 03-014 relates to the canopy and ZNCV 03-015 relates to the gasoline pump islands. 4. The seventh and eighth variances deal with the existing landscape buffers and are ZNCV 03-016 and ZNCV 03-017. Staff is recommending approval of these variances with two conditions of approval as follows: ./ The applicant will provide a substitute form of screening of the site along north Federal Highway where possible, such as planter pots or boxes. Staff recommends installing the Ixora "Nora" Grant that is proposed on the landscape plan at 36" in height at the time of installation, rather than 24" in height along Las Palmas Avenue. 5. The ninth variance request is ZNCV 03-023 and this relates to the sign set back. Staff is recommending denial of this request. Mr. Myott asked if the Board reviewed the Conditional Use Major Site Plan Modification first and denied this, the variances would be moot. Mr. Johnson stated that this was correct. Mr. Myott then asked if the Board should consider each variance individually first and then consider the Conditional Use. Chairperson Heavilin recommended hearing the Conditional Use first and then the variances. 10 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida October 12, 2004 Ms. Horenburger inquired how a legal non-conforming use that would still be non- conforming could become a permitted use. Mr. Breese responded that the City Commission took action on the appeal of a staff decision to allow the 600 square foot expansion. The Board is being asked to consider the Conditional Use for the Major Site Plan Modification for the addition, since the ability to put the addition on has been agreed to by the City Commission. Ms. Horenburger inquired if the Board was considering the conditional use for the entire new plan along with the existing and additional improvements. Mr. Breese responded that this was correct. Mr. Breese noted that the property would become a legally non-conforming use. Mr. Fenton inquired if it would become legally non-conforming because it was not on a major intersection, which Mr. Breese stated was right. Mr. Breese also noted that there were a lot of non-conforming issues for the gasoline station because it was built in 1965 under a different code. Beril Kruger, of Beril Kruger Planning & Zoning Consultants, assumed the podium and stated that he was representing the petitioner. The first time the items went to the City Commission, they approved the gasoline station with all the variances and the car wash. However, when the items came before the new City Commission, the applicant was requested to remove the car wash since the neighbors were against it, and he agreed to do so. The applicant at that time also agreed to upgrade the gas station and add the 600 square foot addition. In order to build the addition, the entire site must be approved for conditional use. If any portion of the request were removed, it would make it impossible for the applicant to continue business at this location. Mr. Kruger noted that a majority of the neighbors shop at the convenience store and buy gas and his client provides an important service in the neighborhood. Mr. Kruger was requested to deal with the two variances being denied. He pointed out that the addition would be used for dry storage only and the refrigeration units would be enclosed to cut down on the noise. They also plan to introduce a great deal of landscaping that would make the addition invisible from Las Palmas. With regard to the variance for the sign, if the applicant moved the sign back 10,' the development to the south of the applicant's property would block the sign. They are requesting that the sign be permitted at its current location. Mr. Kruger presented a drawing of the current sign, which is 33' in height. Ms. Horenburger felt if the sign were changed to a monument sign, it would be visible, to which Mr. Kruger did not agree. He pointed out that the applicant has already increased the landscaping around the sign as previously requested. Mr. Myott inquired why the addition was "T" shaped. Mr. Kruger stated it was designed this way to enclose the refrigeration equipment to cut down on the noise for the residence on the east. 11 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida October 12, 2004 Mr. DeMarco inquired if the residents were aware of the applicant's petition and Mr. Kruger stated that every resident has known about it for three years. The residents also agreed that as long as the applicant eliminated the car wash, they would agree to the variances for the proiect car w3sh. Mr. DeMarco noted that when the item was originally heard, he was opposed to the car wash because it would take up almost one-third of the lot and he was pleased that there would be no car wash. Ms. Horenburger felt that a large monument sign close to the road would benefit the applicant since the trees would eventually grow and block the current sign. Mr. Kruger did not think that the trees would block the sign at its current location. If the sign were moved in, it would be blocked. Chairperson Heavilin opened the public audience. Brian Edwards, 629 NE 9th Avenue, Boynton Beach, patronizes the gas station on a regular basis. Mr. Edwards pointed out that the owner of the property is trying to make the property blend in with the development taking place in the neighborhood. He pointed out that this is a very busy gas station and it is not located at a major intersection. He felt that enhancing the gas station with additional landscaping would be an improvement to the corner. Mr. Edwards was in favor of approving the storage area in conjunction with approval of the variances that would add additional parking spaces that are needed at a very busy gas station. Lee Wische, 1302 SW 18th Street, Boynton Beach, Chairman of the Planning and Development Board, was familiar with this case for several years. He pointed out that the applicant has agreed to almost every request made by the City and all the neighbors are in favor of the addition to the storage area. Mr. Wische did not feel that adding an extension to the convenience store would cause any problems and that the storage was needed. He also did not feel that the height of the sign posed any problems. In conclusion, he noted that all the neighbors are very fond of the applicant and the establishment is very clean. Mr. Wische urged the Board to approve all nine variances. Robert Michele, 637 Las Palmas Park, Boynton Beach, lives in the neighborhood of the gas station and noted that there is a continuing flooding problem on the street. He felt that adding an addition would take away more surface area, thereby increasing the flooding. He recommended adding some kind of barrier in back of the building to block the view of the back of the station. He also recommended that some method be devised so that the water on the property could be contained. Chairperson Heavilin pointed out that the drainage would be addressed at the time of permitting, which Mr. Johnson confirmed. Mr. Johnson pointed out that the only site being reviewed today is the gas station and not the property located behind the site. The applicant is only responsible for the water on the gas station. If there was a flood problem, it should be addressed to the Director of Public Works. Mr. Johnson also pointed out that staff reviewed the drainage plan and found it to be adequate and at the time of permitting all the drainage solutions would be resolved. 12 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida October 12, 2004 Mr. Kruger stated that the applicant has gone through drainage plan approval and the site must retain the water from running off the site. Mr. Kruger pointed out that the landscape plan has heavy landscaping and he did not feel that the building would be visible from Las Palmas. Vice Chair Tillman was opposed to the practice of allowing non-conforming uses to continue in the City. He felt that projects should be built in accordance with the new Land Development Regulations and projects not in conformity should be brought up to code. He noted that legally non-conforming uses that continue to apply for variances perpetuate the non-conformity. Vice Chair Tillman stated that if this Board continued to approve variances, it gave an appearance that the Board supports non-conforming uses, which is contrary to one of the Board's missions, which is to eliminate non- conforming uses. He recommended that if the applicant wanted to do business at the current location, the building should be torn down and started over. Mr. Fenton was in favor of all nine variances and he would be making a motion for approval after the remainder of the Board speaks. He pointed out that the code under which the gasoline station currently does business dates back to 1965 and it is not located on a major thoroughfare. He was opposed to putting anyone out of business. Mr. Myott pointed out that the Planning and Development Board worked very hard to get the sign code revised. He was opposed to allowing this sign to remain in its current size and location. The City is working hard to get these non-conforming signs removed and the new projects coming in look a lot better. Mr. Myott also felt that the applicant was more concerned about increasing the grocery business than the gasoline station business. He also saw no reason for the grocery store to expand. Mr. Myott also was concerned about the quality of the materials used in the renovation. Chairperson Heavilin inquired if the site plan would come back to the Board and Mr. Johnson stated that it would not. Chairperson Heavilin agreed with Vice Mayor Tillman in not continuing non-conformity, but she was concerned that people that owned buildings before the current codes were enacted are being penalized for wanting to improve their property, while providing a viable service to the community. Mr. DeMarco was in favor of adding additional storage space as long as the neighbors did not oppose it. He also thought that the sign did need to be lowered, but he was prepared to allow the applicant to move forward with his plans. Many residents in that area have informed him that the applicant runs an excellent business. Ms. Horenburger stated that she could not support all nine variances. She could support the sign variance if the applicant agreed to adjust the height. She felt that if the Board allowed the variance for the rear setback, this would allow a legal non-conforming use to expand. Chairperson Heavilin noted that all the variances would have to be voted upon individually and that the items would still be going before the City Commission. 13 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida October 12, 2004 Mr. DeMarco noted that the City approved the 600 square foot addition. Ms. Horenburger pointed out that the Commission has not yet approved all the variances and setbacks. Mr. Fenton did not think that the addition could be approved without approval of the variances. Mr. Breese noted that the addition could be approved without the variance if the applicant agreed to reconfigure the building so that it would not involve changing the setback. This is one of staff's recommendations and that is why staff is recommending denial because the applicant has created a self-imposed hardship. Mr. Breese further pointed out that the City agreed to allow a 600 square foot addition, but did not approve the configuration of the addition. Attorney Payne asked for clarification from staff on what the Board would be voting on. Mr. Breese reported that if the Board approved the variances as requested, the addition would be built as submitted with a 10' encroachment into the 20' setback. Attorney Payne inquired if the Board could approve the 600 square foot addition as a conditional use and then vote on the variance separately. Mr. Breese stated that is how the items are being proposed and the conditional use would be voted on first and then any variances subsequent to the conditional use would be dealt with individually. Chairperson Heavilin asked the applicant if they would be willing to reconfigure the addition. Mr. Kruger responded that they designed the addition this way to cut down on the noise from the refrigeration units. Mr. Kruger further stated that the landscaping alone would not cut down on the noise of the refrigeration units, but the addition would. Attorney Payne inquired what refrigeration units the applicant referred to. Mr. Kruger stated that there were two large coolers in the main building plus the air conditioning units on the outside that would be enclosed. Mr. Myott also thought that the niches in the building would be filled in with other kinds of storage and he felt that they were very large for equipment that was merely used for beer and milk coolers. Mr. Myott also thought that the addition could be designed in another fashion. Motion Mr. Fenton moved to approve the request for conditional use/major site plan modification approval for a 600 square foot building addition to an existing gas station/convenience store on a 0.48-acre parcel in the C-3 zoning district. Motion seconded by Mr. DeMarco. The Recording Secretary called the roll. The motion carried 4-2 (Vice Mayor Tillman and Mr. Myott dissenting). Motion Mr. Fenton moved to approve ZNCV 03-010. Motion seconded by Mr. Myott. Motion carried 5-1 (Vice Chair Tillman dissenting). Motion Mr. Fenton moved to approve ZNCV 03-011. Motion seconded by Mr. DeMarco. Motion carried 5-1 (Vice Chair Tillman dissenting). 14 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida October 12, 2004 Motion Mr. Fenton moved to approve ZNCV 03-012. Motion seconded by Mr. DeMarco. Motion carried 5-1 (Vice Chair Tillman dissenting). Motion Mr. Fenton moved to approve ZNCV 03-013. Motion seconded by Mr. DeMarco. Mr. Myott pointed out that this was the setback variance and staff has recommended denial. Vote The Recording Secretary called the roll. The motion failed 3-3 (Vice Chair Tillman, Ms. Horenburger, and Mr. Myott dissenting). Motion Mr. Fenton moved to approve ZNCV 03-014. Motion seconded by Ms. Horenburger. Motion carried 5-1 (Vice Chair Tillman dissenting). Motion Mr. Fenton moved to approve ZNCV 03-015. Motion seconded by Mr. DeMarco. The motion carried 5-1 (Vice Chair Tillman dissenting). Motion Mr. Fenton moved to approve ZNCV 03-016. Motion seconded by Mr. DeMarco. Mr. Myott pointed out that this was the variance dealing with landscaping. Ms. Horenburger inquired if the landscaping was located along Federal Highway. Mr. Breese responded that the landscaping was located along Las Palmas and Federal Highway. Vote The Recording Secretary called the roll. The motion failed 3-3. (Vice Chair Tillman, Ms. Horenburger, and Mr. Myott dissenting). Motion Mr. Fenton moved to approve ZNCV 03-017. Motion seconded by Mr. DeMarco. 15 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida October 12, 2004 Vote The Recording Secretary called the roll. The motion failed 3-3. (Vice Chair Tillman, Ms. Horenburger, and Mr. Myott dissenting). Motion Mr. Fenton moved to approve ZNCV 03-023. Motion seconded by Mr. DeMarco. Vote The Recording Secretary called the roll. Motion failed 4-2 (Chair Heavilin, Vice Chair Tillman, Ms. Horenburger and Mr. Myott dissenting). C. Site Plan Time Extension 1. Project: Agent: Owner: Location: Sunbelt Hydraulics (SPTE 04-008) Joseph Houston, Kerns Construction, Inc. C & C Realty Investments Lot 9 West Industrial Avenue Description: Request for a second one (1) year time extension of the site plan approval originally granted on August 6, 2003, from August 6, 2004 to August 6, 2005 Mr. Breese, Principal Planner, presented the item on behalf of staff. The property's proposed use would be for a one-story, 12,480 square foot industrial building with related parking. The business would service truck bodies. Chairperson Heavilin inquired why the applicant was seeking a one-year extension. Mr. Breese pointed out that a major customer of the applicant requested to re-bid their services contract. Because the applicant was not sure if they would continue servicing this customer, they had to stop the process until that was determined. The contract has been renewed and the applicant is now ready to proceed. Permit plans were submitted on June 30th and they are in the process of moving forward, but now need a time extension. Staff recommends approval. Chairperson Heavilin opened the public audience. Since no one wished to speak, the public audience was closed. Motion Ms. Horenburger moved to approve a second (1) year time extension of the site plan approval originally granted on August 6, 2003, from August 6, 2004 to August 6, 2005. Motion seconded by Vice Mayor Tillman and carried 5-0 (Mr. Fenton had left the dais). 16 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida October 12, 2004 2. Project: Boynton Beach Marina Townhomes (SPTE 04-007) Bonnie Miskel, Ruden McClosky TRG - Boynton Beach Ltd. 734 NE 1s Avenue Request for a one (1) year time extension of the site plan approval granted on July 15, 2003, from July 15, 2004 to July 15, 2005 Agent: Owner: Location: Description: Ed Breese, Principal Planner, presented the item on behalf of staff. Mr. Breese explained that the town homes were a small part of a much larger project. The Mediation Agreement and securing all the permits necessary for this large project resulted in the applicant devoting most of their time to these items. The applicant has now received their permits and is ready to move forward with the marina plans. Staff is recommending approval. Chairperson Heavilin opened the public audience. Since no one wished to speak, the public audience was closed. Mr. Myott inquired if the townhouse plans as originally designed were in for permitting. Mr. Breese stated that they have been submitted and there are no changes. Motion Ms. Horenburger moved to approve the request for a one (1) year time extension of the site plan approval granted on July 15, 2003, from July 15, 2004 to July 15, 2005. Motion seconded by Mr. DeMarco and unanimously carried. RECESS WAS DECLARED AT 8:18 P.M. THE MEETING RECONVENED AT 8:28 P.M. VII. Director's Report Mr. Hutchinson reported that he attended two conferences, one being the Florida Redevelopment Association in Hollywood, Florida. He noted that Boynton Beach per capita is the most active CRA in the State of Florida and was mentioned several times during the lectures. Also present with Mr. Hutchinson was Chairperson Heavilin, Mr. Myott, Mr. DeMarco and Ms. Horenburger. Chairperson Heavilin noted that when they first started to attend this Conference, Boynton Beach was one of the newest CRAs. After attending the Conference this time, she and the members felt that they had surpassed many of CRAs in terms of programs and achievements. Mr. Hutchinson stated that this CRA is being used as a benchmark for other CRAs. 17 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida October 12, 2004 The second Conference he attended was the International Downtown Association. As Boynton Beach becomes an actual downtown, there are many issues that must be dealt with. He obtained a great deal of insight that he would be sharing with the members at various workshops. Next year, he anticipates that they will be able to invite the City Commissioners and some staff from planning. The next IDA Conference will take place next September in Denver. Mr. Hutchinson proposed a Board retreat sometime in November to discuss programs and priorities. Mr. Fenton inquired why the Museum Feasibility Study was not on the agenda. Mr. Hutchinson said that he would speak with Mr. Fenton on this. As soon as the Study is available, it will be presented to the Board. Chairperson Heavilin requested that the Police provide definitions for the codes they use in their reports so they would be understandable to a layperson. Mr. Hutchinson is aware of this problem. He pointed out how active the Police have been. The community has welcomed them and other communities are now requesting the same seNices. VIII. Old Business A. Consideration of Direct Incentive Application for the Promenade at Boynton Project Mr. Hutchinson explained that the applicant has requested a $2 million upfront loan against the increment. The Incentive Application is similar to The Arches, but that was under different circumstances. Mr. Hutchinson further noted that even if the Board wanted to comply with the request, the CRA does not have the funds. Mr. Hutchinson reviewed the scoring process for a project receiving a Direct Incentive. Much of the scoring is done by a set formula. Staff has scored this project based upon the criteria within the incentives and it totals 68 points. This translates to the developer receiving 68% of the incentive program, if no other points were awarded. The Board, however, is allowed 40 subjective points that could be added to staff's scoring. Scoring rewards behavior and style of the project that the CRA wants to encourage coming in to the City. The Board is allowed to adjust any of the points, including the 68 points awarded by staff. Mr. Hutchinson referred to his memo in the agenda packet that contains benchmarks that should be considered in the scoring. Some of these benchmarks include excess parking, public improvements, and public areas. This project has more public space than any other downtown project submitted to date. The developer is proposing to design a raised concrete stage that could be tented with a plaza in order to utilize the park area. This will provide a great venue for entertainment. All these costs would be borne by the applicant. The final design would be subject to the CRA's review and the Parks Department. 18 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida October 12, 2004 Mr. Hutchinson felt that this project sets a new standard for benchmarks and creates a great cityscape. The design of the project presents a Mizner-type area between the cityscape and the buildings that are set way back from Federal Highway. The architecture is classic with good detail. The developer is the first developer to make a commitment to public art in the City and the project will be the first condo-hotel in the downtown area. Chairperson Heavilin requested a motion to remove the item from the table. Motion Vice Chair Tillman moved to remove the item from the table. Motion seconded by Mr. Myott and unanimously carried. Mr. Hutchinson noted that the memorandum in the agenda packet has typographical errors and he will be furnishing a corrected one. Vice Chair Tillman felt that the Board should stay with the guidelines that have been set for recipients of the Direct Incentive Program, which is to receive their funds when the project is completed, is on the tax rolls, and pays taxes. He was opposed to granting any funds prior to these occurrences. Mr. Hutchinson concurred with Vice Mayor Tillman and noted that the Direct Incentive Program is a performance-based program and that the rules must be adhered to. Mr. Hutchinson explained that the 68% scoring he came up with is the base points that the applicant scored before the Board's input. Mr. Hutchinson pointed out that the Program has no loan provisions and is an incentive program. He is requesting that the Board score the project based upon funding after the project goes on the tax rolls and the City receives its money. At that point the applicant would receive their incentive funds. The Program provides that the developer could receive up to 50% of the new tax money that the project generates over a 10-year term. Mr. Fenton inquired if the incentive would max at $2 million. Mr. Hutchinson stated that it did not have a cap: the bigger the project, the larger the incentive. The formula provides that the developer would receive 50% of the revenue. In this particular case the developer is seeking a $2 million loan upfront against those funds. Mr. Hutchinson pointed out that over a 10-year period the developer would receive a great deal more money than $2 million. Mr. Fenton inquired if the Board is being asked to complete the scoring tonight and Mr. Hutchinson responded affirmatively. After the scoring, staff could prepare the necessary documents that would include the formula figure and then award the project. Mr. Myott inquired if the conformance of the project, after it is completed, would be checked against the scoring. Mr. Hutchinson responded that if developer made any changes to the site plan, it would come back to this Board for approval. Mr. Myott inquired how the affordable housing portion of the project would be checked and Mr. 19 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida October 12, 2004 Hutchinson stated that there would be a system in place to check this every year for 10 years. Mr. Myott inquired if the incentive award could be transferred to different owners and Mr. Hutchinson stated that it could be transferred with approval of this Board. Mr. Hutchinson pointed out that they want to see the project built and on the tax rolls. He also noted that there was language in the contract that stated that approval of the transfer of the incentive award would not be unreasonably withheld, but that the Board must be notified. Members next discussed scoring the project. Each member's scoring would be added up and then divided by the number of members to attain an average. Any scoring over 100% would not count. Mr. Fenton asked Mr. Hutchinson why he only gave the developer a score of 5 points for "Economic Impact." Mr. Hutchinson explained that this category could be scored from 5 points to 15 points and it would depend upon the economic impact that the project would have upon third parties. Mr. Fenton felt that the economic impact that this project would have upon the City would be much greater and that this score should be higher. The scoring of the members were as follows: Don Fenton Alexander DeMarco Vice Mayor Tillman Mr. Myott Ms. Horenburger Chairperson Heavilin 32 points 32 points 30 points 20 points 32 points 35 points The scoring averaged 30.17 points and was rounded off to 30 points. Adding staff's scoring of 68 points gave the developer a total of 98 points. This equates to the developer receiving 98% of the 50% increment due to them. Motion Mr. Fenton moved that the Incentive Project be set at 98% of the allotted amount of TIF income for the Panther Group Project (The Promenade). Motion seconded by Ms. Horenburger and unanimously carried. Mr. Hutchinson will bring the Incentive Program documents back to the Board. (Vice Chair Tillman left the meeting at 9:05 p.m.) IX. New Business A. Consideration of Review and Approval of Promenade 90% Drawings and Authorization to submit same for SFWMD Approval 20 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida October 12, 2004 Mr. Hutchinson noted that the Board has seen the 30% drawings and since those drawings, there have been changes to minimize mitigation impacts. He wanted the Board to review the drawings before they are forwarded to South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD). Chairperson Heavilin noted that Option 7 in the agenda packet does not match the plans that she has. Dennis Haines of Burkhardt Construction stated that Chairperson Heavilin was correct. The bound set of plans that the members have are the correct plans that will be submitted to SFWMD. The plans in the agenda packet are schematic renderings of the color theme. Mr. Haines noted that when they first presented the 15% plan to the Board, the Board asked them to proceed with the 90% plan and to discuss it further with Chairman Finkelstein and Mr. Hutchinson. The plans presented tonight are the result of those discussions. Mr. Hutchinson pointed out that the walkway has been expanded to allow for the maximum size pedestrian area. Mr. Haines explained that if the Board approved the plan, the permit applications would be submitted to the SFWMD and to the Army Corps of Engineers. There have been initial meetings with both these agencies and they think what they are submitting is what those agencies are looking for. Mr. Fenton asked how the applications would be submitted. Mr. Hutchinson responded that there was actually one application that would be filed simultaneously with both agencies. The SFWMD would first approve the plan. It is possible that the Army Corps of Engineers may have issues that they want to address after the SFWMD approval. Mr. Haines noted that in most cases after SFWMD approval, the Corps of Engineers would go through their public notice process and approve the plans, but they do have the right to make additional comments. Mr. Haines explained that the difference between the 90% and the final construction documents would be if the permitting entities impose any requirements upon the plan or other construction details that may need to be addressed in the 100% plan. Mr. Hutchinson pointed out that the plans required a tremendous amount of design work that took a great deal of time. Chairperson Heavilin inquired if colors should be included in these plans and Mr. Haines stated that this did not need to be addressed at this time. Burkhardt's design professional spoke with the design professional for Marina Village regarding the colors of their light poles. Chairperson Heavilin thought that it was important for all these projects to be integrated in terms of colors. Mr. Hutchinson pointed out that there are no public rest rooms in this public area. Also, there is no area for a public safety vehicle when events are taking place. He would like these two items addressed at a future date. 21 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida October 12, 2004 Motion Mr. Myott moved to approve the 90% design drawings and to submit them to the South Florida Water Management District. Motion seconded by Ms. Horenburger. Chairperson Heavilin requested that the Army Corps of Engineers be added to the motion. Mr. Myott amended his motion to include the Army Corps of Engineers. The motion carried unanimously. B. Consideration of Burkhardt Construction Work Authorization Number Seven for Off-Site Water Main Improvement Pass-Through Contract for the City of Boynton Beach Mr. Hutchinson stated that the CRA has a letter on record from Assistant City Manager Dale Sugerman pledging that the City would reimburse the CRA on the pass-through. He also pointed out that the City has been involved in the design interface for the pass- through. Mr. Hutchinson stated that Burkhardt Construction has been working closely with the City on this. He pointed out that it was important that the Board approve the contract and if the Board so chose, it could be contingent upon any additional assurances that the Board would like from the City. Mr. Fenton asked if Mr. Sugerman had the authority to give this approval, and Mr. Hutchinson stated that he did. Mr. Fenton also asked if there was a time certain on repayment to the CRA for these costs, and Mr. Hutchinson stated there was none. Mr. Hutchinson said that the CRA would be repaid in three days after the City is invoiced. Attorney Payne pointed out that there is no contract with the City. Mr. Hutchinson noted that the CRA has a letter of agreement. Mr. Fenton pointed out that the Board is being asked to spend $357,000 based upon a letter. Motion Ms. Horenburger moved to approve the Burkhardt Construction Work Authorization Number Seven for off site water main improvement pass-through contract for the City of Boynton Beach. Motion seconded by Mr. DeMarco. Chairperson Heavilin had concerns about signing a work authorization without having a written contract with the City. She would approve the request if the Board's Legal Counsel reviewed the letter from Dale Sugerman and approved the contract. Attorney Payne pointed out that they only have the commitment from Mr. Sugerman; they do not have an agreement with the City. Ms. Horenburger requested to restate her motion. 22 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida October 12, 2004 Motion Ms. Horenburger moved to approve the Burkhardt Construction Work Authorization Number Seven for off site water main improvement pass-through contract for the City of Boynton Beach, subject to an Interlocal Agreement. Mr. Hutchinson pointed out that an Interlocal Agreement would have to be reviewed by the Board first. Ms. Horenburger amended her motion further. Motion Ms. Horenburger moved to approve the Burkhardt Construction Work Authorization Number Seven for off site water main improvement pass-through contract for the City of Boynton Beach, subject to an Interlocal Agreement on this item only. Mr. DeMarco amended his second of the motion. Mr. Myott inquired what the pass-through involved. Mr. Hutchinson explained that this was for the looping for all the big projects that include the Promenade, the Bank America site, Marina Village, etc. Mr. Haines stated that this would give all those projects the flow calculations needed for their water mains. Vote The motion unanimously carried. Chairperson Heavilin inquired if the Board wanted to continue the meeting to another date or to carry on. Motion Ms. Horenburger moved for continuation of the meeting. Motion seconded by Mr. Myott. Chairperson Heavilin pointed out that a motion was not necessary. C. Consideration of Items Regarding CRA Bond Issue Ms. Horenburger noted that there was a reference to Section 4-2 of the RFP regarding Technical Qualifications and there was no Section 4-2 in the RFP itself. Susan Vielhauer, CRA Controller, will correct the renumbering of the RFP. Ms. Horenburger inquired how the selection process would work. Ms. Vielhauer responded that she worked with the CRA Financial Advisor, Julie Turner, to develop the RFP. Ms. Turner has recommended that all the submittals would come to the CRA staff, 23 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida October 12, 2004 with copies to Ms. Turner. Ms. Turner will review them and come back to the November meeting with a recommendation for the underwriter. Julie Turner, of RBC Dain Rauscher, the CRA's Financial Advisor, explained that the Board would be selecting the underwriter. Once the underwriter is selected it would be a negotiated sale versus a competitive sale of the bonds. The underwriter is paid based upon a negotiated underwriting fee that will be negotiated with the underwriter. This will be set forth in a Bond Purchase Agreement that would be sold after the bonds are sold. The underwriter is selected upon the criteria enumerated in the RFP. Mr. Fenton inquired where the RFP would be advertised, and Ms. Turner responded in The Palm Beach Post. Also the RFP will be sent to firms that provide underwriting services. Ms. Vielhauer explained that this item is being brought to the Board in accordance with the timetable set forth in the agenda packet. Ms. Turner noted that the timetable is subject to change because there are third parties involved that they have no control over. If there are delays, it may be necessary to have a special meeting at the end of November. Motion Ms. Horenburger moved to approve the RFP for underwriting services. Motion seconded by Mr. Myott and unanimously carried. Motion Ms. Horenburger moved to recommend that Julie Turner, the CRA Financial Advisor, review submittals and select the qualified candidates at the next Board Meeting. Motion seconded by Mr. Myott and unanimously carried. Ms. Vielhauer noted that Mark Raymond, the CRA Bond Counsel, prepared a Resolution that needs to be adopted by the Board. The Resolution will allow the CRA to be reimbursed for its expenditures. Attorney Payne read Resolution 04-02 by title only. Motion Ms. Horenburger moved for approval of Resolution No. 04-02. Motion seconded by Mr. Fenton and unanimously carried. D. Consideration of Assembly and Redevelopment Incentive Grant Program Mr. Hutchinson noted that this program had been discussed at workshops. The application has since been revised for clarity. He anticipates that the program will have 24 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida October 12, 2004 a positive benefit for the area. The grant is a 50/50 grant and is identical to what was discussed during the workshops. Mr. Fenton reported that he has received several negative calls from the general public regarding this program. These are people who own property in the downtown area that have no comprehension of what is involved in the program. Mr. Fenton did not feel that they did a very good public relations effort on behalf of the downtown property owners. Mr. Hutchinson responded that seven letters were sent to the property owners. Also staff has held several meetings, to which the property owners were invited. He explained that this is a learning process and it is each property owner's decision whether they want to participate or not. Mr. Hutchinson has not received any negative calls regarding the program and he has met with over 12 citizens. He did not think that anyone that he has met with left mad or were under the assumption that their property would be taken. The whole point of the program is if a group of people want to get together and market their property as a whole, the costs are high and the CRA will help with these costs on a 50-50 basis. If any of these groups decide not to move forward, the CRA would request their money back. Mr. Hutchinson also pointed out that this is strictly voluntary and the CRA acts as a go-between for the property owners to insure that they receive the correct information. Mr. Hutchinson also reported that there are two areas that are really excited about the program and have already submitted checks. The letters that have gone out do not ask the property owners to sell their property, they merely ask if they would like to join their neighbors in attending a series of meetings. He noted that many people are being pressured by developers and are upset about what is going on. Mr. Fenton inquired why the program only applies to mixed-use low and mixed-use high. Mr. Hutchinson explained that these two areas require the most assembly to achieve the necessary density. Mr. DeMarco noted that he and Mr. Hutchinson visited with a group of 11 people that were against the entire program because ignorance breeds suspicion. Mr. DeMarco has since learned that Mr. Hutchinson revisited with this group that has now agreed to work as a team. Mr. Hutchinson confirmed this and stated that he has already received checks from these people. This involves almost three acres on Boynton Beach Boulevard in an area that needs redevelopment. Mr. Hutchinson explained that it is the CRA's role to abate these rumors and to assist people in achieving their goals by working together. Mr. DeMarco noted that communities that have good communication were successful in their efforts. Mr. DeMarco would like to see the CRA do even more communicating to educate the public on what is going on. Mr. Hutchinson pointed out the importance of having a Web site and newsletter and in addition, the Annual Report will be available soon. 25 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida October 12, 2004 Motion Ms. Horenburger moved for approval of the Assembly and Redevelopment Incentive Grant Program Guidelines and the Program Agreement. Motion seconded by Mr. Myott and unanimously carried. Mr. Hutchinson reminded the Board that each agreement would come to the Board for approval. E. Consideration of Single Family Residential Fac;ade Grant Program This grant program mimics the commercial fac;ade grant program. The purpose of this program is to bring up neighborhood standards. The property must be owner-occupied and certain criteria need to be met. Chairperson Heavilin had some questions regarding the guidelines. She felt that a definition of "a home that faces main and/or secondary access streets" was needed. Mr. Hutchinson responded that this means if a person has a home, wherever it faces, it would be eligible. He was trying to avoid having a person apply for a grant for a detached garage that is behind a house and does not face anything. Mr. Hutchinson stated that staff would clarify this language. Mr. Fenton inquired if $15,000 was too high for a residential fac;ade program. Mr. Hutchinson pointed out that the recipient of the grant must match it 100%. Chairperson Heavilin inquired who would determine the value of "sweat equity" and how would that be monitored. Mr. Hutchinson explained that the grant states the property owner must submit the costs for the materials and sweat equity could equal the amount of the materials. Mr. Hutchinson explained that the person doing the work would not receive any money; they would get credit for doing the work. Ms. Horenburger pointed out that the grant agreement states that all work must be in compliance with City building codes and all contractors must be licensed in Boynton Beach and Palm Beach County. Mr. Hutchinson responded that some work does not require a contractor. Mr. Myott noted that there is a list of items in the Building Division that does not require a licensed contractor. Mr. Hutchinson stated that the recipient of the grant must comply with all City codes. Ms. Horenburger pointed out that there is a hold harmless clause if no contractor is involved. Motion Ms. Horenburger moved for approval of the Single Family Owner Occupied Residential Fac;ade Improvement Grant Program Guidelines and Program Agreement as proposed. Motion seconded by Mr. Myott and unanimously carried. 26 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida October 12, 2004 F. Consideration of Recommendations of Legal Selection Committee Mr. Hutchinson reported that there were two finalists from the responses received. The Selection Committee is recommending that the two finalists attend a Board meeting for interview purposes. The Board could review all seven responses, but the Committee is recommending that only the two finalists be interviewed. The finalists are Nancy Stroud of Weiss, Serota, Helfman, Pastoriza, Guedes, Cole and Boniske, P.A. and Kenneth F. Spilias of Lewis, Longman & Walker, P.A. Mr. Fenton recommended inviting them to a 5:30 p.m. workshop that could precede the regular November Board meeting. There was a consensus to proceed this way and Attorney Payne stated that the workshop prior to the meeting needed to be noticed. X. Commission Action XI. Board Member Comments XII. Legal XIII. Other Items XIV. Future Agenda Items A. Consideration of Interlocal Agreement with the City of Boynton Beach for the Boynton Beach Boulevard Extension Promenade and Riverwalk (November) B. Consideration of Interlocal Agreement for the MLK Phase 1 Project C. Consideration of CRA Workshop (November) D. Consideration of Executive Director's Employment Contract (November) E. Interview and Selection of New Legal Representation for the CRA (November) F. Consideration of CRA Amended 2004/2005 Budget (November) G. Consideration of Amendment to CRA Procurement Policy (November) H. Consideration of Modification to the Direct Incentive Program to include Arts Commission Elements for Incentive Scoring (December) I. Consideration of Arches Project Site Plan and Incentive Amendment (TBD) 27 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida October 12, 2004 XV. Adjournment There being no further business the meeting properly adjourned at 10: 1 0 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ." '/.--(I.r&t!-Ut1J-' Jl\, Ii{, tL:-.t!r.tt1r-.. Barbara M. Madden Recording Secretary (October 15,2004) 28