Loading...
Minutes 07-12-05 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, HELD IN COMMISSION CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA, ON TUESDAY, JULY 12, 2005 AT 6:30 P.M. Present: Jeanne Heavilin, Chairperson Henderson Tillman, Vice Chairperson Alexander DeMarco Don Fenton Marie Horenburger (arr. 6:38 p.m.) Doug Hutchinson, CRA Director Ken Spillias, Board Attorney Absent James Barretta Steve Myott I. Call to Order Chair Heavilin called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. II. Roll Call The Recording Secretary called the roll and declared that a quorum was present. Mr. Hutchinson introduced three new CRA staffers: Lisa Bright, Assistant Director, in her fourth week with the CRA; Margee Adelsperger, Events Coordinator, who will begin work in August and Robert Reardon, Controller, who will begin work full time next week. III. Agenda Approval A. Additions, Deletions, Corrections to the Agenda The following items were pulled from the Consent Agenda for discussion. Chair Heavilin pulled the approval of Minutes of the June 9, 2005 meeting. Vice Chair Tillman pulled the Fal;ade Grant Reimbursement to the Delray-Boynton Academy. Attorney Spillias pulled the Consideration of Property Exchange Agreement Between St. Paul AME Church and the CRA. Don Fenton asked to move the Interim Audit and Staffing items from the Director's Report to follow the Consent Agenda. B. Adoption of Agenda Motion Vice Chair Tillman moved to approve the agenda as amended. Mr. DeMarco seconded the motion that passed 4-0. IV. Consent Agenda A. Approval of Minutes - June 6, 2005 Meeting* B. Financial Report - May 31, 2005 1 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida July 12, 2005 C. Consideration of the Boynton Beach Boulevard Self-Assembly Group Redevelopment Incentive Grant - $15,000.00 D. Consideration of Property Exchange Agreement between St. Paul AME Church and the CRA * E. Consideration of Award of the Retail Demand Analysis - The Chesapeake Group - $24,500.00 F. Consideration of Placing an Ad in the 2006 Greater Boynton Beach Chamber Business Guide G. Fal;ade Grant Application - Sea Mist Marina, Inc. $8,750.00 H. Fal;ade Grant Application - Ocean Chiropractic Center - $14,678.75 I. Fal;ade Grant Reimbursement - J. Kent MacMillian - $15,000.00 J. Fal;ade Grant Reimbursement - Delray-Boynton Academy - $15,000.00* K. Molly's Trolleys Reimbursement Expenses - $34,620.49 L. Assembly and Redevelopment Incentive Grant Reimbursement - SEBOF - $7,494.80 *These items were pulled for discussion. Motion Vice Chair Tillman moved to approve the Consent Agenda as amended. Mr. Fenton seconded the motion that passed 4-0. Chair Heavilin called Kent MacMillian forward to accept a $15,000 Fal;ade Grant reimbursement check, thanking him for his investment in the CRA. Mr. MacMillian expressed appreciation for the grant reimbursement. Chair Heavilin recognized Mayor Taylor in the audience. Consideration of Interim Audit from Director's Report Mr. Hutchinson proposed a third-party audit of the books, saying that it was just good business practice to do this when changing controllers. It was not suggested as the result of a suspicion of improper activity. The audit would focus on potential discrepancies in the system, allow staff to reconsider and consolidate the chart of accounts, and assess the overall effectiveness of the produced financials and the Carillon accounting software. In the past the CRA was small, and now that the staff was in place, they would be changing some protocols and safety measures. He was impressed with Mr. Reardon's experience and very happy to have him on board. The board agreed that this was a prudent business practice. Motion Mr. Fenton moved to approve the Interim Audit as outlined on Page 8696 of the Agenda. Vice Chair Tillman seconded the motion that passed 4-0. 2 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida July 12, 2005 Consideration of StaffinQ from Director's Report Mr. Hutchinson requested board ratification of the Events Coordinator at a salary of $45,000 per annum, per established procedure of ratification of all hires with salaries above the midpoint. Motion Mr. Fenton moved to approve the hiring of the Events Coordinator, Margee Adelsperger, at a salary of $45,000. Vice Chair Tillman seconded the motion that passed 4-0. Marie Horenburger arrived at 6:38 p.m. V. Public Audience Chair Heavilin opened the floor for the public to speak on items not on the agenda and closed it when no one came forward to speak. VI. Public Hearing Attorney Spillias asked whether any board members had ex parte communications with any of the individuals coming before the board at this meeting. Chair Heavilin stated that she had spoken to Michael Weiner two months previously about the Heritage Club project. Ms. Horenburger stated that she had a brief conversation with the representatives of Heritage Club after the last CRA meeting. Attorney Spillias outlined the Quasi-Judicial Board procedures and swore in all persons who would be speaking during the Public Hearing. Old Business - None New Business A. Zoning Code Variance 1. Project: Agent: Owner: Location: Description: 2623 Lake Drive North (ZNCV 05-002) Jeff Tomberg John Trach 2623 Lake Drive North Request for relief from the City of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2, Zoning, Section 5.C.2, regulating the maximum lot coverage, to increase the maximum lot coverage from 35% to 38.5% for a single-family residence within the R-1-M Single-Family Residential zoning district Eric Johnson, Planner, presented a summary of the request, stating the request was generated as a result of the owner's wanting to build a solid-roofed screen enclosure at the rear of the house. This enclosure conflicts with the current maximum lot coverage in R-1-M zoning districts of 35%. The lot 3 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida July 12, 2005 coverage with the proposed project would be 38.5% or a variance of 3.5%. Staff had not received any letters in support or denial from the surrounding property owners. Staff recommended that the project be denied for lack of traditional hardship. The board may wish to consider, however, that an ordinance to amend the LDR to allow maximum lot coverage of 45% in R-1-M zoning districts had passed first reading at the City Commission and was scheduled for second reading on July 19, 2005. If the ordinance passed, this issue would be moot. Attorney Jeff Tomberg appeared on behalf of the owners, Mr. and Mrs. John Trach. He stated that there was a pending Code Enforcement issue on this property for the addition of a balcony that would be between the first and second floor of the home. The variance was being sought because his clients hired a contractor to put in a balcony, assuming he had pulled the appropriate permits and gotten the appropriate permissions. The contractor proceeded to erect the balcony. Code Enforcement notified the Trachs that they were in violation of the City's Code. If the variance were not granted, it would seem unfair to have the Trachs tear down the balcony now and come back for a new permit if the new LDR ordinance were approved at the next City Commission meeting. The Code case had not proceeded to the fine stage and was not going to be heard again until the September Code meeting. After discussion by the board, it was decided to continue this item pending Commission action. Motion Ms. Horenburger moved to continue request ZNCV 05-002 until the next regularly scheduled CRA meeting pending Commission action. Vice Chair Tillman seconded the motion that passed 5-0. 2. Project: Agent: Owner: Location: Description: 2625 Lake Drive North (ZNCV -05-003) Jeff Tomberg Avon Investments, Inc. 2625 Lake Drive North Request for relief from the City of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2, Zoning, Section 5.C.2, requiring a seventy-five (75) foot minimum lot frontage to allow a 22-foot variance, resulting in a fifty-three (53) foot minimum lot frontage within the R-1-M Single-Family Residential zoning district. Eric Johnson, Planner, presented a summary of the request for variance, stating the subject property is comprised of two lots that form a single parcel, zoned R-1-M. The lots were platted in 1922 as part of the Lakeside Gardens subdivision. The 0.188-acre parcel is vacant and does not conform to current R-1-M zoning district regulations related to lot width. The owner applied for a building permit to construct a new single-family detached dwelling. From a preliminary review, the placement of the house would comply with Code, except that the lot frontage does not meet the minimum required by the R-1-M zoning district. According to the Code on non-conforming Lots, the applicant would meet all of the criteria for being allowed to construct a home without the necessity of a variance, under these non-conforming provisions, except the applicant has 53 feet of frontage and not the requisite 60 feet, a deficit of 7 feet. Staff recommended approval of the requested variance of 22 feet, to reduce the minimum required lot frontage from 75 feet to 53 feet. Jeff Tomberg, agent for Avon Investments, Inc., asserted that Avon Investments had been building homes in Boynton Beach for the last eight to nine years. He had built in excess of 100 4 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida July 12, 2005 homes in the Cypress Creek community and was in the process of building and rebuilding in Atlantis Country Club. They believe that this house would be an asset to the community. Chair Heavilin opened the floor to the public. Mike Mrotek, 2624 Lake Drive North, Boynton Beach, speaking on behalf of the Lakeside Gardens residents, expressed opposition to the granting of this variance because there was a 30% difference between the Code and the request. Chair Heavilin closed the floor to the public since no one else came forward to speak. Jeff Tomberg stated that the variance should be granted because all of the legal criteria necessary to allow the variance had been met. The house would comply with all setback and other requirements. Chair Heavilin voiced the opinion that the City had a number of lots in the City that were platted many years ago and did not conform to the current Code. She thought the board should continue to address the 50-foot lot frontage requests as special cases. The board supported her view. Motion Mr. DeMarco moved to approve the request (ZNCV 05-003) for relief from the City of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2, Zoning, Section 5.C.2, requiring a seventy-five (75) foot minimum lot frontage to allow a 22-foot variance, resulting in a fifty-three (53) foot minimum lot frontage within the R-1-M Single-Family Residential zoning district. Vice Chair Tillman seconded the motion that passed 5-0. 3. Project: 625 NE 15th Place (Deasy Variance) (ZNCV 05 05-005) Maryanne and John Duncan Maryanne Deasy 625 NE 15th Place Request for relief from the City of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2, Zoning, Section 5.C.2, requiring a ten (10) foot side yard setback to allow a six (6) foot variance, resulting in a four (4) foot side yard setback for a screen enclosure within the R-1-M Single-Family Residential zoning district. Agent: Owner: Location: Description: Ed Breese, Principal Planner, stated that the request had been initiated due to the homeowner's desire to screen an existing pool. The former owner did not take the location into account and as a result, created a situation that now limits the applicant's ability to construct the enclosure within the setback regulations. Based on the traditional hardship criteria, staff believed that the variance request should be denied. However, the board has previously granted variances for other than hardship criteria, and may want to consider that: 1) This was not a case where the applicant built the maximum size pool knowing it would preclude the installation of a screen enclosure and was now requesting to vary the City regulations to accommodate one; 2) The subject request represents the minimum amount of area required to screen the pool and deck, based upon the existing improvements; and 3) Staff had not 5 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida July 12, 2005 received any letters of objection and had received many letters of support from adjacent property owners. Maryanne Deasy, 625 N.E. 15th Place, Boynton Beach, stated that they wanted a screen enclosure for two reasons: 1) all the debris that blew into their pool after the hurricanes, and 2) her allergies to insect bites. Mr. Fenton inquired about the height of the screen enclosure, and Ms. Deasy responded that it would not be higher than the one-story house. Mr. DeMarco inquired whether other homeowners in their neighborhood had screen enclosures on their pools, and Ms. Deasy responded that of the eight or so neighbors with pools, four homes had screened enclosures. Chair Heavilin asked whether affixing the support posts to the existing concrete would be a violation. Mr. Breese responded that the Building Department would require special anchors. Chair Heavilin opened the floor for the public and closed it when no one came forward. Marie Horenburger felt that this was a self-imposed hardship since they were aware of the situation when they purchased the property. Motion Mr. DeMarco moved to approve the request (ZNCV 05-005) for relief from the City of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2, Zoning, Section 5.C.2, requiring a ten (10) foot side yard setback to allow a six (6) foot variance, resulting in a four (4) foot side yard setback for a screen enclosure within the R-1-M Single-Family Residential zoning district. Vice Chair Tillman seconded the motion that passed 4-1, Ms. Horenburger dissenting. B. Land Use Amendment/RezoninQ Description: Heritage Club at Boynton Beach (LUAR 05- 005) Michael Weiner, Esquire, Weiner & Aronson, P.A. Thirty Six Hundred Holdings, LLC Northwest corner of the intersection of Federal Highway and Gulfstream Boulevard Request to amend the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map from Local Retail Commercial to Special High Density Residential; and 1. Project: Agent: Owner: Location: Request to rezone from C-3 Community Commercial to PUD Planned Unit Development Proposed Use: Mixed use development containing 19,500 sq. ft. of commercial development (office, retail, restaurant) and 166 multi-family residential units 6 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida July 12, 2005 New Site Plan 2. Project: Heritage Club at Boynton Beach (NWSP 05- 014) Michael Weiner, Esquire, Weiner & Aronson, P.A. Thirty Six Hundred Holdings, LLC 3629 South Federal Highway Request New Site Plan approval in order to construct 70 townhouse units, a four (4)-story mixed-use building consisting of 84 dwelling units, 3,500 square feet of restaurant, 4,100 square feet of retail, and 5,164 square feet of office. The site plan also includes a three (3)-story mixed-use building consisting of 12 dwelling units, 5,394 square feet of retail, and 1,380 square feet of office, all of which are proposed on an 8.302-acre parcel zoned Planned Unit Development (PUD) Agent: Owner: Location: Description: Height Exception Description: Heritage Club at Boynton Beach (HTEX 05- 004) Jason S. Mankoff, Weiner & Aronson, P.A. Thirty-Six Hundred Holdings, LLC Northwest corner of the intersection of Federal Highway and Gulfstream Boulevard Request for a height exception of 10 feet pursuant to the City's Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2, Zoning, Section 4.F.2, to allow the decorative towers to be 55 feet in height, a distance of 10 feet above the 45-foot maximum height allowed in the (PUD) Planned Unit Development zoning district. 3. Project: Agent: Owner: Location: All three Heritage Club items were heard simultaneously, since they were integral to the rezoning request. Dick Hudson, Senior Planner, reported that the subject property was currently classified as Local Retail Commercial and zoned Community Commercial. The request is to change the Future Land Use Map to Special High Density Residential and rezone to Planned Unit Development for the purpose of building a Mixed Use project containing slightly less than 20K sq. ft. of commercial space, which includes office, retail, and restaurant space. There are 160 multi-family residential units. Staff recommends approval for the following reasons: o The proposed land use amendment and rezoning are consistent with the applicable Comprehensive Plan policies and also meet the review criteria required for the Land Development Regulations. o The project will replace an antiquated and declining strip commercial center with a mixed-use project that will be an aesthetic and physical improvement at the City's southern gateway. 7 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida July 12, 2005 o The project supports the "Eastward Ho" Initiative, which emphasizes redevelopment of the coastal area where infrastructure is already in place as opposed to encouraging development patterns in the suburban areas to the west. o The project proposes a sizeable number of residential units in a variety of sizes and styles, with a commercial portion designed to provide a year-round customer and employment base, which supports the revitalization of the downtown. Eric Johnson, Planner, displayed a map that showed the townhouse buildings on the west side and two mixed-use buildings along Federal Highway. The property in the southeast corner was not part of the project. The office square footage is 6,544 sq. ft. The retail square footage is 9,494 sq. ft. Restaurant area is 3,500 sq. ft. There would be 70 townhouse units and 96 multi-family units. The project meets the Traffic Performance Standards of Palm Beach County, contingent upon the dedication of a right-turn lane into the development from North Federal Highway. Staff reviewed the project for concurrency with respect to potable water, sanitary sewer, Police/Fire, drainage, and school and all conditions were met. There are three points of ingress and egress, two on Federal Highway and a third on Gulfstream Boulevard. Mr. DeMarco asked Mr. Johnson if the entrances to the property were one-way or two-way, and Mr. Johnson explained the configuration of the different ingresses and egresses. Ms. Horenburger asked how people coming from the west on Gulfstream Boulevard would access the property. The response was that they would have to go north on Federal Highway and make a U-turn. She asked if there were a plan for a U-turn lane and the response was affirmative. There is no ingress from Gulfstream Boulevard. Chair Heavilin inquired about which parking garage the residents would use. Mr. Johnson said that any shared parking would occur in Building 2. Staff had reviewed the shared parking aspect of the project and technically, it met the requirements with parking spaces to spare. However, the applicant had to make the owners aware that they would only have one parking spot. Parking spaces cannot be designated for just one use in a shared parking scenario. Ms. Horenburger believed that no parking spot would be designated for the residents and requested clarification. Mr. Johnson elaborated, saying shared parking occurred in Buildings 1 and 2, but the restaurant users would only have access to the parking garage in Building 2. Persons living in Building 1 would have access to a space in the parking garage in Building 1. People in Building 2 would also have access to a space in Building 2, except that during peak times, there would probably not be any guest type spaces. Vice Chair Tillman inquired whether there would be a bottleneck at the turnaround at the end of the main drive aisle. Mr. Johnson responded that the City's Engineering Department had reviewed it for turning movements and radii and found no problem. Mr. Johnson stated that the applicant had been made aware of the shared parking restrictions and he thought the applicant would be willing to put this in the Homeowners Association documents. Ms. Horenburger wanted to make awareness of the parking restriction by the residents a condition of approval. 8 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida July 12, 2005 Jason Mankoff affirmed that they were going to designate twelve of the parking spaces in Building 2 for the twelve units in that Building. Also, they would have documentation in the contract advising buyers that they would only be guaranteed one space. Mr. Johnson reviewed the Height Exception. The buildings comply with Code, but there are some decorative elements that exceed the forty-five foot height maximum height in a PUD. However, the features of the building that exceed the height limits are interesting and make the whole project "work. " Staff felt that the proposed project was good for the City and recommended approval of the Height Exception and Site Plan. Chair Heavilin invited the CRA Planner to add her comments at this time. She thought this should become a regular feature in future hearings. Vivian Brooks, CRA Planner, had participated in the Technical Review Committee. In spite of having to work around the use on the southeast corner, the applicant had hidden the garages and actively addressed Old Dixie Highway, Gulfstream Boulevard, and Federal Highway. All the townhouses connect with walkways to the sidewalks. They were going to create a community that would, hopefully, set the trend for the rest of Old Dixie Highway and the other projects that will occur in that area. She thought the project was interesting architecturally, with no long, unbroken expanses. They had done a good job and she recommended approval of the project. Mr. Fenton asked Ms. Brooks to comment on the architectural value of the features that called for the Height Exception. Ms. Brooks said the features added value to the project to a focal gateway project in the south. To have something that stands out architecturally was what the City had been looking for on its gateways. The applicants for the project on Woolbright Road and Federal Highway were asked to bring that project up in height. She personally liked it. Mr. DeMarco inquired whether the project would have security and protection from surrounding uses, particularly the one to the southeast. Ms. Brooks responded that the community was protected visually and physically since an actual physical structure, Building 2, separated them. Jason Mankoff of Weiner .. Aronson, P .A., 209 N. Seacrest Boulevard, Boynton Beach, spoke as agent for the project. Robert Mathias, David Biggs, and J. P. DiMisa, principals with the developer, New Century Companies, were present along with Jim Knight, principal of Thirty-six Holdings, the current owner of the property and Stuart Debowsky and Jose Samuel with MSA Architects. Jeffrey Schnars, President of Schnars Engineering, and Hugh Johnson, landscape architect with Architects Alliance, were in attendance as well. Mr. Mankoff distributed a booklet summary of the project to the board members and showed visual renderings of the Site Plan to the board and to the audience. Mr. Mankoff stated that this project was very similar to a successful project they had completed in Delray Beach. Stuart Debowsky, project manager of MSA Architects, said they were proud to present this project to the City. This is a mixed-use project that has 96 condominium units, 84 of which are in Building 1. The residents in Building 1 have exclusive use of the parking spaces and Building 2 only has 12 residential units. There are three-story townhouses with 70 units to the west. They had tried to put together a project resembling a village. The east-west road was meant to simulate a "main street" concept, with angled parking and a large pedestrian arcade. The applicant is planning a cafe concept for the corner of Building 1 in support of a theme of street activity, both 9 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida July 12, 2005 day and night. They were considering townhouse models with two "fronts," so they would not have to present their "back" to Old Dixie Highway. They hoped that all the elements they were putting together would be reminiscent of a village that had come together over a period of years. Ms. Horenburger asked what they had done to screen the uses to the north of the project. She had been told there would be a parking garage between the residential and that area and it appears the residences would be facing it. Stuart Debowsky said that it was a tough site on all sides: cars on Federal Highway, the train on Old Dixie Highway, the use to the southeast, and the storage facility on the north. They had created an access/service road as an adequate buffer. The first unit occurs thirty to forty feet from the edge of that. Special care had been taken to screen the property on all sides with landscaping, but especially on the northern boundary. They felt the actual living spaces were set well apart from the northern border. Mr. DeMarco asked why they had chosen the name Heritage Club. Mr. Mankoff responded that there were other Heritage Clubs in Delray Beach and it was like a brand name. In regard to the property to the south, if they were able to acquire it, they could possibly have a Phase II. Mr. DeMarco then asked about the price ranges of the units. Robert Mathias, New Century Companies, said the condo building would have one, two, and three bedrooms and they would be between $200-400K and the townhouse units would be between $400-500K. Mr. Fenton questioned what kind of noise buffering the developer had in mind for the units next to the railroad tracks. Mr. Mathias responded they were going to use landscaping and building materials that would provide an amazing amount of sound insulation. They had developed two projects close to railroad tracks and they had not had any issues. Jose Samuels, MSA Architects, commented that the taller features helped to create visual appeal for the project. Most main streets did not have long buildings with flat tops, but ones of varying heights. Marie Horenburger asked staff whether additional density or height would be involved if the developer were able to obtain the parcel on the southeast corner. She thought this might occur since the property owner to the southeast was asking an exorbitant amount of money, additional incentives might be involved. Mike Rumpf, Planning & Zoning Director, stated that this project had come in under the current land use and zoning scheme - it solved the problems. To go outside that, because the developer was at those thresholds, would exceed what the system allows and would be inconsistent with the Corridor Plan. Prior proposals were well above the current thresholds. Ms. Horenburger thought it would be nice to have a more cohesive site as the entrance to the City. Mr. Mankoff stated the applicant agreed to all 71 conditions of approval. He praised staff for their assistance and cooperation in the planning of this important, gateway project. The applicant added two conditions based on the discussions at this meeting: 1) designate twelve spaces for the condominium owners, and 2) provide notice in the condo documents or in the contract at the time of signing that each of the individual owners would only be guaranteed one space. They believed that the height was important for the project and that they had met all the requirements for such a request. 10 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida July 12, 2005 Chair Heavilin opened the floor to the public, and closed it when no one wished to speak. Mr. Fenton took issue with the passive voice in some of the Conditions of Approval, pointing out item 1 that asks: "Please indicate number and size of containers." He felt that a more declaratory or dictatorial tone was in order. Mr. Johnson responded that staff was confident that all the conditions would be met and if not, permits would not be issued. Staff felt that it had protected the City with the Conditions of Approval. A large number of the conditions had already been satisfied. Mr. DeMarco confirmed with the agent that the applicants were in agreement with all 71 Conditions of Approval and were adding two more. He expressed appreciation for what the developers had done for that corner of the City. Mr. Johnson declared that staff agreed with the two new conditions of approval suggested by the applicant. Motion Ms. Horenburger moved to amend the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map from Local Retail Commercial to Special High Density Residential (LUAR 05-005). Vice Chair Tillman seconded the motion that passed 5-0. Motion Ms. Horenburger moved to approve the request to rezone from C-3 Community Commercial to PUD Planned Unit Development (LUAR 05-005). Vice Chair Tillman seconded the motion that passed 5-0. Motion Ms. Horenburger moved to approve the Site Plan approval for the Heritage Club at Boynton Beach (NWSP 05-014) subject to all 73 Conditions of Approval. Mr. Fenton seconded the motion. Chair Heavilin commented that the applicant had raised the bar for development in Boynton Beach. She thought it was the best project the board had seen. Mr. Mankoff commended City staff for its efforts. The motion passed 5-0. Motion Mr. Fenton moved to approve the request for height exception of 10 feet for Heritage Club of Boynton Beach (HTEX 05-004). Vice Chair Tillman seconded the motion that passed 5-0. C. New Site Plan 1. Project: Neelam (fka Schnars) Business Center (NWSP 05-022) J. Ernest Brady, Stephen James Inc. Anand D. Patel (Contract Purchaser) 924 N. Federal Highway Request for Site Plan approval for a three (3) story, 8,754 square foot office/retail building in a Mixed Use Low (MU-L) zoning district. Agent: Owner: Location: Description: Ed Breese, Principal Planner, stated that this property had changed hands and the site plan approval expired. The new owner would like to build the same building as previously approved. 11 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida July 12, 2005 Chair Heavilin opened the floor for the public, and closed it when no one wished to speak. Motion Ms. Horenburger moved approval of NWSP 05-022, Neelam Business Center, request for Site Plan approval for a three (3) story, 8,754 square foot office/retail building in a Mixed Use Low (MU-L) zoning district. Vice Chair Tillman seconded the motion that passed 5-0. THE MEETING RECESSED FROM 8:06 P.M. TO 8:12 P.M. D. Condominium Hotels in Mixed Use Districts Code Review Description: Condominium Hotels in Mixed Use Districts (CDRV 05-013) Staff-initiated Mixed-Use High Intensity (MU-H) and Mixed Use Low Intensity zoning districts Request to amend the Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2, Section 6.F Mixed Use Zoning Districts to add "Hotel, Extended Stay" as a permitted use in the Mixed Use-High Intensity (MU- H) zoning district; as a conditional use in the Mixed Use-Low Intensity (MU-L) zoning district; and to amend the definitions of "Hotel" and "Hotel, Extended Stay" to include condominium hotel units. 1. Project: Agent: Location: Dick Hudson, Senior Planner, reviewed this request, stating that the "condo hotel" had become a popular product in the hotel industry since the project could be financed more like a residential condominium project. Many local governments are revisiting their LDRs and making revisions to address this type of project and insure that the facilities truly operate as hotels and not residential developments. An owner would be limited to a six-month stay per year to assure that individuals do not take up permanent residence in the units. The condo hotels would probably take the form of an "extended stay hotel," so City staff is recommending that the City Commission amend the permitted uses table for the "Mixed Use-High" zoning district to make it clear that "extended stay hotels," which would be the likely category to accommodate a condo hotel, are permitted in that district. Staff recommended approval of this item. Ms. Horenburger inquired whether the County's Bed Tax would come into play for stays shorter than six months. Mr. Hudson responded that it would be subject to the Bed Tax because it would be considered transient lodging. Ms. Horenburger asked the difference between the condo hotel and the condo with mostly seasonal residents. Mr. Hudson said that a condo was considered a residence and the residential parking regulations would apply. A hotel was considered a commercial use. The parking requirements for condos and hotel condos were very similar (one bedroom condos call for 1.33 per unit and hotel condos call for 1.25 per unit). Mr. DeMarco asked if the condo laws would apply to the hotel condos. Mr. Hudson believed it did. Mr. DeMarco suggested the City contact someone who could give an authoritative answer on this. 12 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida July 12, 2005 Ms. Horenburger declared the law only applies to the type of sale. Chair Heavilin's understanding from the project that was already taking reservations for their condo hotel units is they would be under the Condominium Declarations statute. Chair Heavilin opened the floor to the public, and closed it when no one came forward. Chair Heavilin commented there was a growing trend across the country for condo hotel units. Motion Vice Chair Tillman moved to approve CDRV 05-013, request to amend the Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2, Section 6.F Mixed Use Zoning Districts to add "Hotel, Extended Stay" as a permitted use in the Mixed Use-High Intensity (MU-H) zoning district; as a conditional use in the Mixed Use-Low Intensity (MU-L) zoning district; and to amend the definitions of "Hotel" and "Hotel, Extended Stay" to include condominium hotel units. Mr. DeMarco seconded the motion that passed 5-0. VII. Pulled Consent Agenda Items A. Approval of Minutes from June 9,2005 Meetinq Attorney Spillias stated that on page 19 under Future Agenda Items, in the second paragraph, sixth line, "he had been the attorney for" should be replaced with "his firm had represented." Also, on page 20 in the second paragraph, it should properly read: "In the middle of public hearing, staff or the applicant should not be called to answer questions, Attorney Spillias said, so anyone from the public does not raise the question of his or her time being taken up with questions." On the last page, the last motion should read that it passed 5-0, because Ms. Horenburger left before the motion. Also, the fact that she left should be placed before the motion. Motion Ms. Horenburger moved to approve the minutes of the June 9, 2005 meeting as amended. Vice Chair Tillman seconded the motion that passed 5-0. D. Consideration of Property Exchanqe Agreement Between St. Paul AME Church and the CRA Attorney Spillias commented that on page one of the lease agreement, paragraph 1. TERM, the ending date should be 2006 instead of 2005. Motion Vice Chair Tillman moved approval of Consent Agenda Item D. as amended. Mr. DeMarco seconded the motion that passed 5-0. J. Facade Grant Reimbursement - Bovnton/Delrav Academy - $15.000.00 Vice Chair Tillman was concerned the building on which a Fal;ade Grant was requested was in limbo as to whether it would be an educational institution or not. He was not comfortable with issuing a grant to an entity if the use/name changed. The School District had not made a decision about this yet. 13 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida July 12, 2005 Others felt that the Fal;ade Grant had been applied for, the work had been done, and all the requirements for reimbursement had been met and the money should be presented to the applicant, regardless of the potential future use of the building. The improvements were made and many people had called the CRA to compliment the look of the building. Mr. Hutchinson commented that if the building(s) sat empty, the area would still improved. Commissioner Bob Ensler stated that the future of the Boynton/Delray Academy was up in the air and that the CRA might want to wait for about a month until the School Board had made a decision. Chair Heavilin felt that the improved building would make it easier to find another occupant. Mr. Hutchinson said staff would continue to follow this and keep the board up to date. Joe Green, Boynton/Delray Academy, related that he did not know whether they would have to go through a name change, but the building would remain an educational institution. They were careful to put up the type of building the board and the City expected. They had received hundreds of calls from people who were pleased with the way the building looks. Motion Don Fenton moved to approve the $15,000.00 Fal;ade Grant Reimbursement to the Boynton/Delray Academy. Ms. Horenburger seconded the motion. Chair Heavilin asked Attorney Spillias what the board's contractual obligations were since the applicant had fulfilled the requirements of the grant. Attorney Spillias had not looked at the documents and had not been asked previously to determine whether or not the application process and completing the process constitutes a binding contract. He would review the documents with that in mind. Chair Heavilin did not think the use and operation of a building should be confused with the physical facility, which is what the grant is for. Mr. Fenton asked about the operational grant, and Mr. Hutchinson responded the operating_grant had been taken under advisement by staff and the board would be kept apprised of developments. The motion to approve passed 3-2, Vice Chair Tillman and Mr. DeMarco dissenting. Chair Heavilin presented the Fal;ade Grant Reimbursement check to Mr. Joe Green. VIII. Old Business - None IX. New Business - None X. Commission Action - None Chair Heavilin asked what the response had been from the letter the CRA sent the City Commission asking for an opportunity to review the car wash ordinance once it was drafted, and Mr. Hutchinson responded that he had not received a response. XI. Director's Report Mr. Hutchinson noted the trolley was running and people were riding it, but it was only operating on a trial basis at the moment for the purpose of gathering experience and information. The CRA would 14 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida July 12, 2005 be rolling out a complete marketing program with route information, maps and so forth in the near future. Chair Heavilin remarked about a conversation with Lou Fraser, the Marketing Director for the Holiday Inn, who said the hotel really likes to see the trolley go by. Mr. Hutchinson said it was a real benefit to the City. It is possible to go to and from the Holiday Inn and the CRA office on the trolley. There are several restaurants in walking distance of the Holiday Inn. Mr. DeMarco indicated he had seen the trolley several times and had only seen two people on the trolley on one occasion. He was concerned about that because it was using a lot of gas and felt the trolley had not been sufficiently publicized. He understood that it was free and Mr. Hutchinson confirmed this, saying that the trolley had not been publicized yet, since it was still in the trial run stages. XII. Board Member Comments Vice Chair Tillman clarified his "no" vote on the Boynton/Delray Academy Fal;ade Grant, commenting that the CRA had to be concerned about the grants it makes and what is put in the CRA community. They also had to make sure that the projects that were initiated were the projects that were presented upon completion of the project and grant reimbursement. Even though they were talking about a building, they were also giving the applicants a grant because the CRA agreed with what the applicant was initiating up to that point. He thought the language needed to be more specific in the grant application in terms of what the end product would be, as opposed to just a "building." He felt that the Boynton/Delray Academy might not exist and if it did not, then the grant application should become null. He believes that the business initiating the grant application should be the business that is awarded the grant. The prevalent feeling seemed to go against this idea, expressing a belief the fal;ade grants were given to property owners who improve the appearance of their properties for the good of the City and the CRA area. One example given was the fal;ade grant given to Scully's Restaurant. If the owner had "flipped" that business to someone else, the fal;ade was still improved and it should not matter who owns the building. Chair Heavilin summed up, saying that the intent of the Fal;ade Grant Program was to improve the appearance of the community and it was tied to structures and not to operation. Mr. Hutchinson will work with Legal staff to explore the question about whether the board is obligated to give the grant at the completion of the work. He will bring the results to the board. Chair Heavilin commented on the vacant buildings that were awaiting demolition on Seacrest and believed the deteriorating conditions there should be addressed in some way. It was becoming unsightly and vagrants were beginning to frequent the property. She had received many calls about this. This property is under the jurisdiction of the City's Code Compliance Division. Mr. Hutchinson stated that he investigate the situation. There were two large CRA projects, several acres in size, within blocks of each other that had vacant buildings. The Police force was putting extra coverage on it and the CRA was working with the developers. 15 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida July 12, 2005 XIII. Legal Chair Heavilin asked Attorney Spillias to consider putting CRA staff comments on Public Hearing Items in the board's procedures. Attorney Spillias suggested that these comments be placed after the City staff presentations and before the applicant presentations. If City staff leaves something out of its oral presentation, it would still be in the record. Mr. Hutchinson wanted the CRA Planner's comments to be in writing and placed in the agenda packets. XIV. Other Items - None XV. Future Agenda Items A. Consideration of Interlocal Agreement with the City of Boynton Beach for the Boynton Beach Boulevard Extension, Promenade and Riverwalk (August) B. Consideration of the Old High School Agreement (August) C. Consideration of Interlocal Agreement between the CRA and the City of Boynton Beach for Events and Festival Services (TBD) D. Consideration of Design Modification for Drainage Improvements on 4th Street (TBD) E. Consideration of Workshop Meetings to be held on the following dates: 1. Monday, July 18, 2005 at 6:30 p.m. (Place TBD) .:. Heart of Boynton Plan Workshop (CRA/City Commission) Ms. Horenburger stated that she would not be able to attend the Heart of Boynton Plan Workshop and wondered whether there were other board members who could not attend. Mr. Hutchinson responded this was the preferred date in light of quorums and other considerations. He believed the only other CRA member unable to attend was Steve Myott. Ms. Horenburger asked to have a letter sent to the City Commission advising that two board members were unable to attend and ask if there were some way it could be rescheduled. Chair Heavilin believed this meeting had probably already been posted. 2. Thursday, July 21,2005 at 6:30 p.m. at 639 E. Ocean Avenue, Ste. 107 .:. Consideration of 2005-2006 Budget 3. Thursday, August 18, 2005 at 6:30 p.m. at 639 E. Ocean Ave., Ste 107 .:. Consideration of Human Resources Policy Recommendations .:. Consideration of CRA 2030 Plan, Design Guidelines and CRA Land Development Regulations (LDR) Ms. Horenburger was not able to attend this meeting. Mr. Hutchinson said this was the third Thursday default date and they would follow up on this and do the best they could to accommodate as many board members as possible. 2. Thursday, September 15, 2005 at 6:30 pm. At Holiday Inn Catalina on Congress Avenue 16 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida July 12, 2005 .:. Consideration of Feasibility of Attraction Complex .:. Consideration and Review of Parks & Recreation Plans for CRA Ms. Horenburger inquired about the wayfinding signage permit packages. She thought the permit packages had to be resubmitted. Mr. Hutchinson stated each one had various issues and he would be glad to go over them with her. They were not systematically all denied. It was a case of details such as moving back two feet because of churches or other issues. The original permits had never been acted on and the State has a "Hold" on them. They had tried to move as many signs off the right-of-way as possible and upgraded the ones that remained to facilitate approval of the permits. This project was almost complete. The trolley signs were up and City and County approvals had been obtained. Ms. Horenburger asked to speak on something that should have been brought up under Board Comments. She wanted the board members to be kept abreast of all the people who had approached the CRA regarding any project whatsoever, whether it pertained to groups doing assembly of properties or large projects. An email communicationwouldbefine.Mr. Hutchinson agreed this would be done. They already have an inside tickler system and they would see that the information gets to the board members. Ms. Horenburger asked for this on the days when there were such contacts. Mr. Hutchinson advised each board member had a copy of his calendar for the past month and current month listing every meeting. This calendar also reveals each person he speaks with and the topic. Chair Heavilin expressed a preference for the calendar over daily emails. Chair Heavilin asked if the Police Reports could be deleted from the agenda packets. If she wanted to know about them, she could come in to get copies. She commented she did not believe the board needed as much detail as they sometimes get. Ms. Horenburger said it was like the "blue sheets" they had discussed previously. If there were something of import in a local newspaper, she would like to see it faxed or emailed to the board members that day. Mr. Hutchinson said that they did not have the resources to do that at this time. XVI. Future Project Review - None XVII. Adjournment Since there was no further business before the board, the meeting was duly adjourned at 9:03 p.m. Respectfully submitted, (""'~'- /"/"p - ~~~~/ Susan Collins Recording Secretary (071305) 17