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