Loading...
Minutes 09-22-05 MINUTES OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY WORKSHOP MEETING HELD IN COMMISSION CHAMBERS, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA ON THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 22, 2005 AT 6:30 P.M. Present: Jeanne Heavilin, Chairperson James Barretta Alexander DeMarco Don Fenton Steve Myott Doug Hutchinson, Executive Director Ken Spillias, Board Attorney Vivian Brooks, CRA Planning Director Absent: Henderson Tillman, Vice Chair Marie Horenburger I. Call to Order Chairperson Heavilin called the workshop to order at 6:32 p.m. II. Roll Call The Recording Secretary called the roll and declared a quorum was present. III. Approval of the Agenda There were no changes to the agenda. IV. New Business A. Consideration of the 20/30 Plan Chairperson Heavilin announced the purpose of the workshop was to allow staff the opportunity to present the first draft of the 20/30 Plan and the Design Guidelines Ordinance. Chairperson Heavilin requested that staff be allowed to make the presentation before asking questions. Ms. Vivian Brooks, CRA Planning Director, presented the two documents and reviewed them individually, along with a PowerPoint presentation, copies of which are on file in the City Clerk's Office. The first document presented was the new CRA Plan called Vision 20/30. The City planning staff will address the Board regarding some land use changes being considered to implement the plans. Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Workshop Boynton Beach, Florida September 22, 2005 The purpose of a CRA is to guide the social, economic and the physical form of a CRA. The Boynton Beach CRA is comprised of the Federal Highway Corridor, the Boynton Beach Corridor and the Heart of Boynton (HOB). The plan is founded on eight principles to establish an identity for the CRA and the City. This will be accomplished through gateway treatment, signage and the preservation of the marine tradition, which has been a part of Boynton Beach for many years. The plan also includes the potential for taking the Two Georges Marina. The plan will be predicated upon a condensed urban design that usually means mixed-use development and greater density to encourage pedestrian use and less dependence upon automobiles. The intent is to encourage more activity centers to add to the economic base of the CRA through infill residential development. Ms. Brooks noted there are many land uses that are no longer economically feasible. They also intend to capitalize on Town Square that is a great asset to the CRA and the City. Next discussed was the road system that includes several major roadways. Staff will be doing streetscaping along those roadways to improve people's impression of the City. Most of Federal Highway is completed, but the other major streets still need to be addressed. Boynton Beach Boulevard will be upgraded in conjunction with FOOT in 2006. Seacrest and MLK Boulevards should be done in 2006/2007. Also, the private sector is being encouraged to enhance the public areas along those roadways and will be asked to add 4' to the sidewalks along Boynton Beach Boulevard, MLK and Seacrest to create true urban sidewalks. Also, landscaping will be introduced. The private sector will be encouraged to put the overhead utilities underground to eliminate visual blight. The CRA wants to encourage preservation of the mangroves east of the Central Business District (CBD). Ms. Brooks noted the Promenade is a CRA project and its intent is to provide access to the waterfront for the public. The existing parks located within its boundaries would be enhanced. Other issues that need to be addressed are safety and mobility. These two items are critical when redeveloping a dense urban area. To address this, the CRA has its own neighborhood police officers and trolleys have been introduced. The CRA intends to create economic opportunity for the residents by encouraging workforce housing, small business development, Wi-Fi and self-assemblage. In addition, the CRA is trying to increase workforce housing and support heritage, culture and the arts. Consideration is being given to introduce a museum to the downtown area, plus events and festivals. The CRA intends to move forward with the renovation and preservation of the Old High School and to support public art. 2 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Workshop Boynton Beach, Florida September 22,2005 The 20/30 plan is a guideline of how the money and staff time would be allocated over the next five years. Staff is seeking the Board's input, as well as the public. The floor was opened to questions. Mr. Barretta questioned why installation of the sidewalks, burying the lines and landscaping requirements was not a mandate instead of just an encouragement. He felt this needed to be expressed more strongly. Whenever the eRA encouraged something, it normally fell by the wayside. Ms. Brooks was informed by Kimley-Horn they could ask the developers to do the sidewalks and additional public space. However, with regard to burying the overhead utilities, this may be difficult because of location of the lines. Kimley-Horn did not think this issue could be mandated. Mr. Barretta inquired if it was staff's intent to proceed this way and Ms. Brooks responded it was. Mr. Hutchinson noted Legal would have to look at this so they could proceed properly. Mr. Barretta just received the packet today and has not had an opportunity to review it. Ms. Brooks explained the packet was delivered to Mr. Barretta's office when the Board packets for the meeting were delivered. Mr. Barretta noted he received his Board packet when he was in Denver and it did not include the plan. Under these circumstances, he felt it would be difficult for the Board to provide comments. Mr. Hutchinson pointed out there would be additional workshops and Board members could provide comments before the next workshop. Comments could be incorporated into the plan. Mr. Hutchinson pointed out that staff has been working on the plan for a long time and have encountered some problems with the consultant, but the process needs to start now. Mr. Hutchinson announced there would be several more workshops where input, comment and recommendations would be considered and this is not a final document. It would be brought back to the Board prior to finalization of the plan. Mr. Barretta asked Ms. Brooks if she received his markup of the Urban Design Guidelines, since none of his recommendations were incorporated into the document. Ms. Brooks had received Mr. Barretta's version of the document, but staff has encountered problems with the consultant to get comments included into the document. Mr. Hutchinson added there are four sets of comments that were submitted to the consultant that were ignored. Ms. Brooks noted staff does not have the proper software to manipulate the document so suggestions and changes could be incorporated into the plan. The only recourse available to staff was to provide the recommended changes to the consultant, who returned the document with approximately one-half of the changes submitted. The consultant attributed this to a glitch in the software, but Ms. Brooks felt it was shoddy work on the part of the consultant. Chairperson Heavilin inquired why the CRA could not ask the consultant to format the document so it would be compatible with the CRA software. Ms. Brooks noted the CRA did not have the proper graphics software for the plan. Staff is considering purchasing 3 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Workshop Boynton Beach, Florida September 22, 2005 the appropriate software so it could be done in-house. Ms. Brooks did not think the consultant would turn over the document to staff because they are still in the contract phase and there are monies still outstanding. She did not think the consultant would turn over the document to the CRA until the contract terms were satisfied. Mr. Barretta was opposed to paying the consultant for doing a poor job. Ms. Brooks is working diligently with the consulting firm to get a final document. For the time being, she would like to receive comments from the members on content and asked if this is the direction they want staff to go. Mr. Fenton inquired about the comment on page 6 that stated, "continued funding of additional neighborhood police officers." He felt there was not enough accountability from the CRA police. He heard comments at a previous workshop that the residents in the HOB did not know there were CRA police officers in that district all the time. Also, he asked about accountability for the downtown area as well. He was opposed to continue funding CRA police unless there was accountability. Chairperson Heavilin agreed about the accountability issue, but noted the plan was a vision and not necessarily an operational document. Mr. Fenton questioned the comment that Town Square was an asset. Again, Chairperson Heavilin pointed out the document was a vision. Mr. Hutchinson noted that over $6 million is being invested in a new Library and over $8 million has been invested in the Children's Schoolhouse Museum. Mr. Hutchinson pointed out a big investment has already been made in Town Square and the CRA's direction is to keep this going. Mr. Fenton asked about the transportation plan mentioned on page 11. Mr. Hutchinson responded this referred to the Traffic Concurrency Exemption Area that was a study paid for by the CRA and the document was filed with DCA. Ms. Brooks said this is a guide for future planning and at some time in the future, the City would have a transportation hub. Mr. Hutchinson pointed out it would be located along the FEC track site on 4th Street and an additional parking garage would be introduced. The Board authorized a $3 million note to purchase the property on 4th Street for this purpose. This has been included as part of the Comprehensive Plan for quite some time. Ms. Brooks noted this does not mean the CRA is funding it, but the CRA is aware of it and supports this vision, whether it is carried out by the private sector or other sources. Mr. Fenton asked what the cost per slip would be to purchase the Two George's Marina. Mr. Hutchinson responded two appraisals were done for the two separate owners. The first appraisal came in at $3.6 million and another appraisal was closer to $5 million. The other piece of property was appraised at $500,000 to $750,000. Mr. Fenton inquired how many slips were involved. Mr. Hutchinson responded there were 28 slips for the first piece of property. The $500,000 to $750,000 was for one slip only. The reason behind purchasing this is to ensure that this remains an active marina, rather than have it become a yacht basin. 4 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Workshop Boynton Beach, Florida September 22, 2005 Mr. Fenton inquired who would be operating the marina. Mr. Hutchinson explained a property improvement district would manage it. Several options will be brought to the Board when it is time to address those issues. The marina would be operated for the public benefit of small businesses. Mr. Myott inquired if it was the same consultant that was working on both documents and Ms. Brooks responded that it was. Mr. Myott recommended that the CRA purchase the necessary software to allow staff to do the required changes. Mr. Myott asked when the Board would officially adopt both documents and when it would be going before the Commission. Mr. Hutchinson reported City staff had some issues that must be addressed. He anticipated the plans would be ready to go to the City Commission by the first of the year, as well as the anticipated changes to the LOR. Some joint workshops have been scheduled and he felt the plans could be finalized by early December. Affordable housing will also be discussed at the workshops. Mr. Hutchinson felt by next summer, they would have projects that could go for permitting. Mr. Myott inquired if copies were available at the CRA office for the public to view. Mr. Hutchinson said they were available at the office. Staff has also requested the documents on CD's and digitally, but Mr. Hutchinson did not want to do this until the documents were finalized. Chairperson Heavilin requested that Board members provide Ms. Brooks with any corrections they have noticed in the documents. Ms. Brooks requested the corrections be done on the hard copy members were furnished in order for her to track the changes. Ms. Brooks pointed out that most the outstanding items were clerical in nature and there were no major changes Mr. DeMarco inquired how much money the consultants were paid to date. He felt it was important to know if the CRA was getting what it paid for. Mr. DeMarco was opposed to paying any more money if the CRA staff had to finish the job. Mr. Hutchinson will provide this information to Mr. DeMarco. Mr. Hutchinson explained that staff has to work with the consultant in order to get the plans done in a timely manner, because he wanted to avoid having any legal ramifications. The most important thing is to get the documents in hand so they could move forward. If staff is unsuccessful, it will be brought to the Board's attention. Mr. Myott inquired by what date comments could be submitted to staff. Mr. Hutchinson requested all comments be submitted by Friday of next week, i.e. September 30th. Staff also anticipated receiving comments from the public. Mr. Hutchinson welcomed the public to come to the eRA office to discuss the documents. Mr. Barretta asked about the termination clause in the consultant's contract regarding ownership of the documents. Mr. Hutchinson said staff would have to research this and will be discussing this with Legal Counsel. 5 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Workshop Boynton Beach, Florida September 22, 2005 Chairperson Heavilin opened the public audience for the 20/30 Plan only. Herb Suss, resident of Quail Run, inquired when the public could see the changes made to the document. Mr. Hutchinson responded they would be available at the CRA office. Mr. Suss felt that the documents were very informative and congratulated the CRA staff on a job well done. Mr. Suss noted two Board members were missing and questioned how they would get their comments in if they did not attend this workshop. He felt all members should be present when issues like this are discussed. He noted Mayor Taylor was present, but thought other City Commissioners should be present to attend these presentations. Tim McTigue owns a construction company in Boynton Beach and asked what changes the CRA had planned for the NE 4th Avenue area and when those changes could occur. Mr. Hutchinson noted a map would be presented later in the meeting. It is anticipated that some of the changes to this area will soften the area and he would answer any questions Mr. McTigue might have after the map is presented. Mr. McTigue inquired when the next workshop was scheduled. Mr. Hutchinson responded the next workshop would be a joint workshop with the City Commission. A final date has not yet been selected, but it should either be October 24th or 25th. There may be more workshops scheduled. B. Consideration of the Design Guidelines Ordinance Ms. Brooks pointed out many of the graphics in the document are inappropriate. She spoke to the consultant and requested a generic drawing be used for simplicity. The purpose of the Design Guidelines is to create a vibrant, mixed-used urban environment that would result in an aesthetically pleasing environment and create visual and physical connectivity between the various districts and the CRA. Also the intent is to create inviting public spaces, unique urban character, unique architectural design, safe and aesthetically pleasing streets and parking areas, and long-term economic vitality. The intent is to provide this document to developers so they are aware of the CRA and City desires. The proposed zoning map was displayed that will be reviewed by the City's Planning staff. The map is the result of various planning documents that make up the 20/30 Plan and this document. She pointed out the plans have not been adopted and are being presented for discussion purposes. What staff is bringing forward are recommendations from the various plans that have already been adopted and include comments from the last joint workshop. Ms. Brooks noted the Planning staff would be discussing the map. 6 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Workshop Boynton Beach, Florida September 22,2005 Staff is proposing the following: ~ Mixed use zoning that is currently mixed-use low and mixed-use high, with nothing in between. Two additional categories will be added to bring more consistency to the development within the CRA. The new zoning categories are mixed-use low 1, which will be the lowest intensity, going to mixed use high. There will be a transition between the low to the high. Mr. Hutchinson noted currently mixed use high is 150' with 80 units per acre and mixed use low is 75,' with 40 units per acre. Two new mixed use impact areas will be added (1) low at 45', 20 units per acre, and (2) 65', 30 units per acre. This is in response to protect some of the edges and transitions going in and out of neighborhoods. This is fine-tuning for the corridors to provide a less severe edge from the high-density cores. Mixed-use low 1 will go down to 45' from 75' and will be more compatible with single family residential. Chairperson Heavilin pointed out that the table Ms. Brooks is discussing is contained on Page 24 of the 20/30 document. Ms. Brooks explained the area between the canal to the north to the intersection of Woolbright and Federal would be mixed use. Mixed use allows for two distinct uses within the same property. Buildings would come up to the front of the street. Parking would be in the rear and access would be through the side or rear from the street. There would be no front curb cuts, which cuts down on the amount of vehicles going in and out of properties onto Federal. There will be more public plazas at the corners and more public and pedestrian space. The intent is to eliminate barriers between properties that exist in suburban zoning. Staff is trying to create an environment to lessen road trips. Ms. Brooks presented a PowerPoint presentation of the Urban Design Guidelines, a copy of which is on file in the City Clerk's Office. An example of mixed-use low was illustrated that would have storefronts on the bottom and residential and offices on top. This is what staff is looking for on MLK Boulevard, which is a neighborhood friendly type zoning. Mixed-use low 2 would be located along Federal Highway and would be higher. Mixed- use low 3 would be located on Boynton Beach Boulevard, east of Seacrest and at the Woolbright intersection. A mixed-use low project has recently been approved at the Gulfstream Lumber site. It would be higher in intensity and have more units. Mixed-use high would be in the CBD that is a small area where high intensity zoning would be permitted. The intent is to create interaction between the pedestrian and the retailers to create a strong business district. Examples of mixed-used high were presented. Developers are afforded architectural freedom, but staff requires quality. Infill PUD would be employed primarily on the north and south end of the Federal Highway Corridor and would typically be townhouse developments. Staff is asking 7 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Workshop Boynton Beacht Florida September 22t 2005 developers not to construct walls along Federal Highway. The frontage along Federal Highway would have doors opening up to the sidewalk and public space would be enhanced. Most developers are complying with this request because staff is trying to avoid Federal Highway from becoming a walled corridor. If someone wants to construct a fence for security, they have been requested to construct an iron fence. This will make Federal Highway a nicer road to drive down as well as walk down. Ms. Brooks pointed out the IPUD projects have been the most popular projects coming into the City and there are several of those projects in the works now. The intent is to create community, not development. Multi-family R-3 zoning is higher density for apartments, townhouses and walkups. Staff continues to try to create the interaction between the street and the housing to create a neighborhood feel. Examples of the various zoning categories were displayed and discussed. Mr. Myott inquired where the IPUD zoning appeared in the document. Ms. Brooks referred Mr. Myott to the back of the document and pointed out the graphics were not inserted. Mr. Myott noted it was not included in the table of contents, which Ms. Brooks confirmed. She felt the consultant had not updated the table of contents. Ms. Brooks pointed out that the mixed-use high projects would not be built to single- family neighborhoods, but if they did, the edges would have to be softened. Some of the design criteria addressed in the document is elimination of blank walls. If a project does not have 20' x 10' windows, it must have design elements to avoid a "warehouse" look. Next discussed was fenestration. Staff is requiring a great deal of glass on the first floor and as the building goes up, there would be less glass. Again, this is to encourage pedestrian life along the streets so people feel comfortable walking along the streets. Also, breaks must be inserted along the fac;ade to avoid a long block of concrete; roofline breaks are required to produce interesting architecture. Massing of the buildings would require a break in the front and sides to avoid a straight up and down building. The guidelines will inform developers how these requirements would be achieved. Ms. Brooks noted the City felt that compatibility was very important with existing residential and businesses, and they have tried to include this in the guidelines. Staff is asking developers to provide a fac;ade that would make their project an interesting place to be and four design elements are required that Ms. Brooks enumerated. Staff does not want to have windows and doors flat to the surface of the building that would be unattractive and industrial looking. Therefore, the requirements are for glass and doors to be setback from the building. The buildings are required to have horizontal and vertical scaling elements for visual appeal. Another item staff is stressing is urban open space by incorporating interior and exterior plazas that would include fountains, art, seating areas, landscaping and special unique 8 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Workshop Boynton Beach, Florida September 22,2005 areas that make the space inviting. Staff is asking developers to add additional area to the public streetscape. Mr. Hutchinson pointed out these new documents are more graphics driven and integrate examples of what they want to see. He noted the documents still needed further fine tuning to illustrate what staff is looking for. Mr. Barretta pointed out the mixed-use high area required a sidewalk with a minimum of 10', although the photograph in the document has 2' of landscaping, cutting down the walking area to 8'. He inquired if this was acceptable to meet the intent of the mixed-use high code. Mr. Rumpf responded that it was. Mr. Barretta interpreted this to mean that it did not have to be 10' paved for the entire length. Mr. Myott noted there was a reference to an Urban Landscape Code and asked if one has been drafted. Mr. Rumpf explained it would be represented by codification of the mixed-use low zoning districts. The Urban Landscape Code would be comprised of two components. The districts would be codified that would define mixed-use low 3 and the Urban Design Guidelines would accent or augment the Land Development Regulations by the design standards. Mr. Myott interpreted this to mean that the urban Design Guidelines set out the examples and intent of the code itself. Mr. Rumpf said this was an accurate statement and some guidelines would be quantifiable, while others are more subjective and versatile. Chairperson Heavilin inquired if some of the guidelines in the document would not be mandated. Mr. Rumpf responded this was not the case. Some of the guidelines would be stated in the design guidelines and some would be in the Land Development Regulations and projects should be held to the design guidelines, but staff is flexible. The Land Development Regulations would reference the design guidelines. Mr. Barretta pointed out it was the Board's responsibility to make sure the design guidelines are adhered to. Chairperson Heavilin commended staff for the amount of work it has done to come up with these documents. When the CRA started meeting over four years, one of the priorities was to come up with design guidelines. She pointed out it has actually taken all this time to come up with the document and she was gratified it has finally come to fruition. Mr. Hutchinson explained the intent of these documents is to have everything in one place that would match up with the districts on the maps that will be discussed later. Mr. Myott recommended dating the documents so people would know what document they were looking at. Mr. Hutchinson said this would be on the cover with the date it was approved. Chairperson Heavilin inquired if signage would be discussed and referred to examples of signage on page 169. Ms. Brooks noted these were recommendations from the 9 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Workshop Boynton Beach, Florida September 22, 2005 consultant. Since she was not current on the City's zoning codes for signage, she would have to speak with the City's Planning staff in order to provide accurate information to people. She will be following through on this. Chairperson Heavilin was opposed to freestanding and pole mounted signs. She would like to have only the signage that has been permitted for mixed-use. Ms. Brooks pointed out that it would depend upon the building where a sign would be located. Some signs cannot be placed on the building. Many communities have eliminated large pole signs or large signs on the building, but monument signs are permitted. Ms. Brooks pointed out that a developer is not required to do a mixed-use building in C-zoning areas and some buildings could simply have commercial use. Under those circumstances, an attractive hanging sign intended for a boutique would not be appropriate. She felt it was important to have flexibility within the zoning code for signs. Mr. Hutchinson pointed out signage would be submitted when a site plan goes before the Board. Chairperson Heavilin opened the meeting to the public. Steve Homrich, a resident of INCA said the plan looked good and acknowledged a lot of work went into it. INCA would like to see three more guidelines added. One would be an overnight parking guideline to prevent overnight parking. Currently there are some tractor-trailer trucks parking along Federal Highway, south of Gateway. In addition, there is a business on Federal Highway that has interpreted the 48-hour parking restriction to 48 months. He would like to see this enforced and recommended Mr. Blasie, the Code Compliance Administrator, be contacted to address this. Eliminating illegal parking would help beautify the area. INCA would also like to have bus stop guidelines. The bus stops along Federal Highway are unsightly and constantly have trash strewn about. The bus stops in Lantana are attractive and he would like to see this incorporated along Federal Highway. The County has a matching grant for bus stops if there were no advertisement placed on them. Lastly, Mr. Homrich noted that even though Ms. Brooks indicated that the beautification of Federal Highway is almost complete, there are maintenance issues in some areas that need to be cleaned up. He recommended having a special maintenance crew for this purpose. Kevin Ballard asked if any decisions have been made in the Heart of Boynton (HOB) for the 20/30 Plan and what the CRA would like to see in the HOB. Mr. Hutchinson explained the intent of the HOB Plan is carried through into the Design Guidelines document and the design guidelines for Cherry Hill and MLK will remain with what came out of the public process on this Plan. There are some new mixed-use districts that will be pointed out later in the meeting. Mr. Hutchinson recalled speaking with Mr. Ballard regarding the projects he wanted to introduce in the HOB. Mr. Hutchinson said Mr. Ballard's projects would fit in with the guidelines. The CRA will be 10 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Workshop Boynton Beach, Florida September 22, 2005 sticking with the neighborhood intent for the HOB that has been in the planning documents for years for those corridors. Mr. Ballard said at a previous meeting, a tremendous project was being presented for the corner of MLK area and he questioned if his type of project would fit in with the project that had been presented. Mr. Hutchinson said that staff's recommendations have been sent to the Board and the City Commission for direction. Mr. Ballard inquired when the direction on how they want the CRA to proceed would be known because he would like to move forward with his plans, but wanted assurances they would be acceptable. Chairperson Heavilin informed Mr. Ballard that no changes to the HOB Plan have been made. There may be some minor changes, but she anticipated proceeding as outlined in the Plan, unless a community steps up and requests some changes. Mr. Ballard inquired if the density for the MLK corridor has been increased. Mr. Hutchinson responded staff's recommendation followed the anticipated densities when the Vision 20/20 Plan was adopted. This will also be discussed later in the meeting. Herb Suss asked if there would be sitting areas along the new sidewalks. When he visited Toronto, Canada, that City had triple-bin trash receptacles and he thought this should be incorporated in Boynton Beach. Even though Toronto was a large City, the streets were very clean. Mr. Hutchinson said there are funds in the CRA budget this year to do a pilot program in cooperation with the City to purchase $4,000 worth of trash receptacles that have an easy collection style that will be placed in certain corridors. Mr. Hutchinson noted there was a dearth of trash receptacles throughout the City, thus necessitating improvement in this area. Brian Edwards, 629 NE 9th Avenue, Boynton Beach, commended staff for a job well done. Mr. Edwards did not see the affordable housing issue addressed in the documents and pointed out that $36,000 annual income is considered poverty and 40% of the County makes this amount or less. He would like to see affordable housing defined in the documents, as well as defining exactly where people that fall into this category are supposed to live and what is the CRA going to do to help. Mr. Hutchinson pointed out that staff had discussed this. The City and CRA are looking at four majors avenues for affordable housing that will be addressed at their next joint workshop. The CRA Direct Incentive Program will provide that projects would be mandated to do affordable housing for residential and small business owners. Staff has drafted ordinances dealing with these issues to keep these units affordable for generations. Mr. Hutchinson reported the Board has requested staff to bring to the Board a proposed bond issue for consideration between $9 and $10 million that would be used for major 11 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Workshop Boynton Beach, Florida September 22, 2005 corridor linkages for the neighborhoods to come into a more cohesive downtown and affordable access issues. Also, staff is working with the CDC's to find out what real affordability actually is. Staff is taking the $285,000, which is the County's affordable housing figure, and bringing this down to realistic amounts. There will be programs available for people to purchase homes. The document presented currently does not address this and when it is solidified, it will be added to the document. Developers need to be informed that affordability is part of their responsibility and they need to keep this in mind when designing a project. Mr. Fenton felt that mandating the private sector to do certain things only drives up the cost of a project and would drive developers out of the City. Mr. Hutchinson said staff is aware of this and is developing programs to address this. Ms. Brooks pointed out that research on inclusionary zoning does not support Mr. Fenton's comments and does not scare developers away. Actually, areas that have inclusionary zoning development have continued to move strongly because there is a great demand for housing. She pointed out Florida's growth and felt they were in a good position marketwise to implement these requirements. Mr. Hutchinson explained the programs are based upon economic modeling and the reason for direct incentives is to address the gap. It is important to have a balanced approach and staff is working with developers to accomplish this. Staff is very conscious of developers' needs. Harry Woodworth, 685 NE 15th Place, Boynton Beach said he just received the document at 4:00 p.m. and felt INCA would have some comments after they had an opportunity to review it thoroughly. He anticipated they would be providing some written input by the end of next week. Whenever height is mentioned in a document, Mr. Woodward would like the actual height to be stated, so people will know what those numbers really are. He referred to the document that showed a picture of mixed-use low at 75', but the picture showed a three-story building. Mr. Hutchinson explained that the three stories are required for a 75' building to provide a 45' step back. Mr. Woodworth felt the pictures in the document were misleading. With regard to affordable housing, Mr. Woodworth did not think people in those communities could actually afford to purchase affordable housing and inquired what percentage of the people that live there now will still be there when the community is redeveloped. Bob Brown, Seacrest Boulevard, Boynton Beach, mentioned in the Design Guidelines, single-family residential height was 30' and under the guidelines for mixed- use low, the height is 35'. He then noticed that the heights went to 45' to 65', 75' and 150' in the core. Mr. Brown did not see much difference between a 35' house and 45' 12 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Workshop Boynton Beach, Florida September 22, 2005 mixed-use. He also did not see much difference between 45' and 65'. On all the documents in the Urban Design Guidelines, regardless of the classification, the maps showed frontage streets and secondary streets. Mr. Brown asked if any streets running off MLK, Seacrest, Boynton Beach Boulevard and Federal Highway would be considered frontage streets. Mr. Hutchinson responded none are considered frontage streets. Mr. Brown felt the map was misleading because it looked like all those streets would be included, when in fact the only place these guidelines would apply, are directly adjacent and contiguous to the major arterials. Mr. Hutchinson confirmed this was true. Mr. Brown felt the CRA was building a wall around the perimeter with some doctoring of the structures that would border the streets. Mr. Hutchinson said this is not the case. There are assembly rules in place that allow projects to go blocks at a time, such as downtown, with the intent to protect the neighborhoods. The neighborhoods have requested mixed use and it has to start with the main highways to take the impact. The assembly rules on ratios would apply to make sure there are no strange patterns or lots put together in those neighborhoods. He pointed out a project must have enough property to apply the massing and mixed uses. If a project does not have enough property, they will be asked to scale the project back. Mr. Brown wished to publicly state that INCA does not speak for him and regardless of how many people in that community vote that community does not speak for all the other people that live in that district. Mr. Brown pointed out that changing the zoning hurt him and he saw no advantage to lower the density and have it only border Federal Highway when the prime border of the City is the land that is adjacent to the Intracoastal. He questioned why District 2 was exempted from the zoning and felt it was the result of some changes enacted by the CRA in the past. Mr. Hutchinson asked Mr. Brown what he referred to as District 2. Mr. Brown considered District 2's north border to be from the Boynton Canal to St. Mark's Church. Mr. Brown felt that the CRA intentionally excluded District 2 from the zoning changes for the future as the result of INCA's influence upon the City. Mr. Brown further opined that when the Arches went up, he would be able to see it from his home on S. Seacrest. Mr. Brown also noted that many of the rental properties in the City have converted to condos. Because of this, he questioned how many people would be living in the City five years down the road after the City gets built out. He felt it was unfair to limit the height to certain areas in the CRA and he would like District 2 to be allowed to develop along the I ntracoasta I. Mr. Brown noted in Dade and Broward Counties, finger canals and direct waterfront access has produced larger and taller developments, resulting in significantly higher property bases. Excluding the Intracoastal Waterway and confining new development to Federal Highway would hurt the City in the long run. Mr. Hutchinson responded that Mr. Brown was correct in his comments regarding development along the Intracoastal Waterway. 13 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Workshop Boynton Beach, Florida September 22, 2005 Mr. Hutchinson also pointed out that the CRA's direction was not done for one group. They received input from a great number of people and it was a policy decision that the Board needs to take another look at. The map that will be displayed takes a lot of density out of the City. Mr. Hutchinson felt staff was trying to make a point of when enough is enough and when does the City begin to value its neighborhoods. Mr. Hutchinson felt they were now at the point where the Boards and the City Commission have to make these policies. Mr. Hutchinson wanted it clear that staff's recommendation in all the CRA area takes out a tremendous amount of future potential tax base, but with the current plan, the tax base will be over $1 billion. Mr. Barretta agreed with Mr. Brown and the policy decisions that this Board and the City Commission make should be made on sound planning principles and to achieve the economic base they were trying to accomplish with the redevelopment plan and not on political pressure. Mr. Barretta felt staff's recommended plan is very political and is a disappointment to Mr. Barretta. Harry Woodworth, 685 NE 15th Place, Boynton Beach said the City has a representative form of government and this Board reports to the Commission that was elected by the people to represent them. The element of the constitution and how the government is run should not be overlooked. Steve Homrich, a member of INCA, explained that INCA sent out a monthly newsletter to its members and on the cover of one newsletter was an article he wrote discussing the zoning issue and the possibility it might be changed. The committee discussed the pros and cons of the zoning and at their next monthly meeting they would discuss the position INCA would be taking. Flyers are available to every resident in this area and as a result, Mr. Brown attended one of their meetings. He noted there are neighborhoods in this area that have sat in limbo for years speculating and hoping that hi-rises would be built. He acknowledged that there are hi-rises in many cities along the Intracoastal, but they put a lot of thought and effort into INCA's support for the proposed zoning. Buck Buchanan, 807 Ocean Inlet Drive, stated that preservation of residential areas and homesteads is not bad, but is consistent with Florida law and the philosophy of the government and the Supreme Court of Florida. Where is the mandate to mow down residential areas to put up as many condos as possible? Local government is supposed to protect to property and way of life of the citizens. Mr. Barretta responded he was not opposed to preserving neighborhoods. However, the CRA is charged with revitalizing the downtown and in order to do this a certain number of residential units are needed to bring the downtown alive. This plan cuts out far too many residential units without replacing them in other locations. If they do not belong in the INCA neighborhood, Mr. Barretta felt they belonged someplace in the downtown area; otherwise the City would not realize the economic base to have a revitalized downtown. 14 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Workshop Boynton Beach, Florida September 22, 2005 Brian Edwards, 629 NE 9th Avenue pointed out they have been dealing with this issue for over five years. He thought that it had been resolved, but now it appears it is not over yet. Mr. Edwards pointed out it was a majority that wanted the proposed zoning and asked the CRA and the City Commission to do something for this neighborhood. He felt that the INCA neighborhood would complement what is going into the CRA. Mr. Barretta pointed out that his remarks were not aimed at INCA, but the Board would be looking at some category 1 zoning that should be moved up to category 2 zoning. He pointed out there are other areas in the City that could make up the density that the current proposal loses. Mr. Hutchinson responded that staff has looked at density and have worked with Mr. Barretta. The Board needs to look at the massing to see if it makes sense in those corridors and its relationship to the neighborhoods. Mr. Barretta asked if City staff did a density or unit count for this proposal versus the current zoning. Mr. Rumpf responded that the net change has not been reviewed. Mr. Barretta felt this should be done and requested that staff do an analysis. Mr. Hutchinson said he would work with City staff on this. David Zimet, Boynton Beach Faith Based CDC, 2191 N. Seacrest, thought one of the major objectives of a CRA was to remove urban blight, revitalize urban space and preserve communities. He was opposed to eliminating any communities and was opposed to urban renewal that was a disguise for urban removal. Recess was declared at 8:30 p.m. The meeting resumed at 8:40 p.m. Mike Rumpf, Planning and Zoning Director, presented some background on the redevelopment planning process and what it has meant to the City and the residents. He pointed out that the CRA and the City are dealing with three redevelopment plans- Heart of Boynton (HOB), U.S. 1 Corridor Redevelopments Plan and the Ocean District Plan. He estimated that over one year's work went into a majority of the work in each of the projects. After the last workshop, some people were critical of the redevelopment plan and the densities involved, plus the magnitude of the project presented at that workshop was too intense to absorb. Mr. Rumpf discussed that planning efforts were done by several entities besides the Boards and staff. The HOB Plan was done by an outside agency that is not present tonight. It was a lengthy document that addressed zoning, existing conditions, neighborhoods, individual neighborhood units in HOB, plus design, streetscapes, density, etc. Staff is sensitive to changes and a lot has been said regarding planning exercises, credibility, and quality. A document could be considered a success if it represents the people's voice and what is important. Mr. Rumpf felt the documents presented tonight represent the public and need to continue representing that. 15 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Workshop Boynton Beach, Florida September 22,2005 With regard to public versus private implementation of the plans, this will be reviewed and the changes will be listed. The documents being changed will be identified and the time period necessary to implement the change. Mr. Rumpf pointed out that City staff would implement these plans as directed and in an impartial manner. The remainder must be done by the private sector or joint ventures to implement the plans. The next step would be to put those zoning districts and land uses on the ground, which is not going to be done now. Discussion tonight only involves recommendations. If land were rezoned, due process is involved. This would include newspaper advertisements and public hearings before the Board and the City Commission. At these hearings, the public can speak and have a voice. The Commission and the Boards always listens to the people and takes what is said into account when making decisions. Therefore, nothing will happen without public involvement and due process. Dick Hudson, Senior Planner posted a larger version of the map that was displayed at the previous workshop on August 18th. At that workshop, Mr. Greene, Development Director summarized some changes that are being brought forward tonight. Also distributed was a table illustrating the recommended changes in zoning to the redevelopment plans. Mr. Rumpf reviewed each change that Mr. Hudson exhibited on the map, as follows: Map Description Location Implementation Procedure Time # 1 C-2 to MU-L 1 West of Seacrest, opposite St. Amend HOB, codify MU-L 1 4-6 mo John's 2 R-1 to R-3 (status "Boynton Terrace" west Amend HOB 3mo quo) 3 C-2 to MU-L 1 St. John's Church/School Amend HOB, Codify MU-L 1 4-6 mo Campus 4 MU-L to R-3 Southeast quad of HOB Amend HOB, Amend R-3 Urban 4-6 mo (Urban) 5 MU-L (current) to West of Seacrest, North of NE Amend HOB, Codify MU-L 1 4-6 mo MU-L 1 3rd Ave. 6 MU-L! to MU-L3 NW/SW corners Boynton Amend HOB, Codify MU-L2 4-6 mo Beach Blvd and Seacrest 7 M-1 to MU or R-3 West of FEC, east of NE 3ra Amend HOB, Codify MU-(?) 4-6 mo St. 8 No MU along US-1 Planning Area #2 No procedures if left status quo N/A where lots are too shallow 9 MU to LDR (Future SF neighborhoods in Area #2 LUAR 6-8 mo Land Use) 10 C-3 SW/SE Corners of Woolbright Amend US-1 Corridor Plan, 4-6 mo & US-1 Codify MU-L3 16 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Workshop Boynton Beach, Florida September 22, 2005 Map #1 was first addressed. Mr. Rumpf explained that low 1, low 2, low 3 and mixed- use high actually exist and two still need to be created. Staff knows where the mixed use high is, what it is and where it is. Mixed-use Low 3 will be new, but is comparable to the low, for example the Schnars project, is mixed-use low 3. Low 1 and low 2 have to be written. C-2 to MU-L 1 is recommended in the HOB Plan and MU-L 1 is being proposed west of Seacrest opposite St. John's Church Campus. This is a small triangular piece on the west side of Seacrest, north of where Boynton Terrace was located on the west side. Map #2 is the former Boynton Terrace West apartments. R-1 to R-3 is status quo. It is zoned R-3 and is classified for high density residential now. There is a development plan filed for this location. It will be maintained at 10.8 units per acre. Mr. Rumpf is under the impression that affordability will be emphasized. Mr. Fenton inquired about the difference in densities for R-1 and R-3 and would both remain at 10.8 acres. Mr. Rumpf noted the HOB Plan on the west side recommends single-family on the entire west side. R-1 is generally between 4 and 7 units per acre, single-family detached, no duplexes. Mr. Rumpf requested that Mr. Hutchinson address Map #1. Mr. Hutchinson responded that the HOB has this area as C-2 and there was a request to change it to mixed use. This is part of the park expansion for the Sara Sims Park and one option is for a joint venture for public improvements on this property with the private sector. Mr. Rumpf referred to the table set out in the Implementation Procedure column how these changes would be implemented. Map #3 is the St. John's Baptist Church School Campus and is recommended in the HOB Plan for C-2 zoning and mixed-use low 1, which is similar to the property to the north of the school campus. There is street frontage along Seacrest Boulevard and no single-family homes abut this property. Mixed-use low 1 is the lowest intensity mixed- use district. Mr. Rumpf does not anticipate that this would conflict with the intent of the HOB Plan. Map #4 in the original plan was recommended for the mixed-use low district, which is in place now. The height limit is 75' with 40 units per acre, which is one step down from the highest downtown. This has been reconsidered and as a result the recommendation has been downsized. This change will now require street frontage for mixed-use low projects. Staff would allow for minor adjustments as projects come in, if it were a project that staff deemed desirable. Mr. Hutchinson pointed out there are a lot of single-family homes in this neighborhood. To accomplish the new zoning, the HOB Plan would have to be amended. 17 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Workshop Boynton Beach, Florida September 22, 2005 Map #4 currently has R-3 zoning, but there is no urban R-3. Urban R-3 is a transition zoning to provide better pedestrian areas and would not include the so-called conventional townhomes or apartment complex projects. Mr. Hutchinson pointed out this creates a street for walking and discourages parking along the streets. It is anticipated parking would be massed and hidden so when people walk, they would be walking through neighborhoods. Map #5 is located east of Seacrest Boulevard, north of NE 3rd and is a small exception to the previous changes just discussed. This is a transition area along Seacrest coming from Boynton Beach Boulevard. Mr. Hutchinson pointed out this is a one-block area. Chairperson Heavilin noted the table stated "west" of Seacrest. Mr. Rumpf said this is an error and should be changed to "east." This small area would allow for a mixed- use project and frontage would have to be on Sea crest. Mr. Hudson distributed maps to the members for reference purposes. Mr. Rumpf pointed out the maps being distributed do not include the changes illustrated by the orange dot on the larger map. Map #6 addressed the northwest and southwest corner of Boynton Beach Boulevard and Sea crest. This resulted from a comment at the August workshop suggesting this corner be more symmetrical. The assembly of land at these two corners is recommended to have the same mixed-use as the east side. This would provide symmetry on all four corners. Map #7 is the M-1 area, which is the existing industrial district, west of the FEC Railroad tracks. This is the City's heaviest industrial district. On the west side, the area is flanked by a C-4 zoning district, which is intense commercial. The HOB Plan recommends C-4 areas be reduced and consolidated with the M-1 district. From the August workshop, recommendations were made to change it to mixed-use or R-3, and to remove M-1 due to its proximity to residential neighborhoods, opportunities for land assemblage and greater return on development. Mr. Rumpf noted the M-1 district is being studied Citywide under a zoning in progress process and all the sites in the City are being reviewed in general for compatibility, uses, aesthetics and design. Map #8 addresses the U.S. 1 Corridor Plan. There are five planning areas in the Plan as follows: . Area #1 is north of the C-16 Canal. . Area #2 is south of the C-16 Canal to St. Mark's Church. . Area #3 is the core area. . Area #4 is from the core area to Woolbright Road. . Area #5 is from Woolbright to the City's southern border. 18 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Workshop Boynton Beach, Florida September 22,2005 With regard to the comment made previously regarding planning area #2, those parcels are shallow and have been established to preserve the single-family areas. Assembly depth is limited, which may eliminate mixed-use projects in this planning area. This resulted from a comment made at the August workshop. Mr. Fenton thought there was a comment made at the workshop, to extend this area south of Woolbright Road. Mr. Hutchinson stated there was a comment made requesting this. Map #9 is located immediately adjacent to the area just discussed and has been mentioned several times. Mr. Rumpf stated this map is different from the other maps discussed. The other maps deal with zoning and Map #9 deals with land use. In 1989 the single-family areas displayed in yellow on the map were included in a greater area and reclassified to mixed-use. At that time the Comprehensive Plan was being rewritten in accordance with the 1985 Act. However the zoning was never changed and has remained single-family R-1 and R-1A. When the land use was reclassified, the zoning districts should have been created and implemented, but this never happened. Many residents were concerned about this. Since nothing has been done to redevelop those properties, it would make sense to reverse the C-4 reclassification, since the neighborhoods have remained single-family neighborhoods. To accomplish this would require a change to the future land use map and would take approximately six months to complete the process. Map #10 is located at the southwest and southeast corners of Woolbright Road and U.S. 1. The Corridor Plan recommended the mixed-use districts should end at Woolbright Road. The City has since approved a project at this area and staff does not think it makes sense to stop the process at this corner. If the City moved to this change, a comprehensive text amendment is required. Currently the Comprehensive Plan sets some development thresholds that would be inconsistent with this location and the MU-L3 zoning. The current land use classification would not fit the mixed-use district. There are two land use classifications; one is mixed- use core that corresponds with the mixed-use high zoning, and the second one is mixed-use. Mr. Rumpf anticipated that the Comprehensive Plan would have to be changed and would be done in this round. After this it would be sent to the Commission for approval. If the Commission did not approve the changes, they would not be sent to the State for review and adoption. Mr. Barretta asked what the current height limit is in M-1 zoning districts. Mr. Rumpf responded 45', but the consultant is reviewing this. With regard to the southwest and southeast corner of Woolbright Road, Mr. DeMarco asked about the zoning change for the northwest and northeast corner as well. Mr. Rumpf said it would have the same zoning and does not represent a change in the Corridor Plan. 19 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Workshop Boynton Beach, Florida September 22,2005 Mr. Hutchinson announced there would be more workshops. Mr. Rumpf anticipated at the next workshop, staff would have brief narratives for the corresponding maps. Mr. Hutchinson will try to have the unit counts available for the next workshop as well. Mr. Barretta requested to clarify the comments he made regarding heights and displayed a drawing of how the various heights compared to one another and the transition from one height to another. Mr. Barretta favored having four height differentials, instead of three, that would provide for a better transition and could supply for more density. He was not referring to the INCA neighborhood, but felt it could be applied to other areas that are going to mixed-use low zoning. By using four mixed-use low districts, instead of three, Mr. Barretta felt they would be able to recapture some of the density that had been lost and would make a better-looking skyline without losing density and disturbing the INCA residents. Mr. Hudson pointed out that the code limits an average 40 units per acre, east of Federal Highway in the mixed-use category. Mr. Barretta said that the four height categories could apply to those mixed-use districts west of Federal Highway. Brian Edwards, 629 NE 9th Avenue thought that going to four height categories instead of three made more sense and felt this would not affect anything else that was discussed at the August workshop. Mr. Barretta also had concerns regarding the small amount of mixed use between Federal Highway and the yellow area displayed on the map. He noted those properties are so narrow, it would almost be impossible to achieve 40 units per acre. The density lost in this area would have to be captured elsewhere. Mr. Hutchinson said he would speak with the City staff about this and bring some concepts back to the next workshop. Mr. Barretta pointed out they only have one time to get enough people downtown to make the downtown work, while preserving the neighborhoods. IV. Adjournment There being no further business, the meeting properly adjourned at 9:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ~ p....~ Barbara M. Madden Recording Secretary (September 29,2005) 20