Loading...
Minutes 05-08-01 MINUTES OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY REGULAR MEETING HELD IN COMMISSION CHAMBERS BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA, ON TUESDAY, MAY 8, 2001 AT 6:30 P.M. PRESENT Larry Finkelstein, Chairman Jeanne Heavilin, Vice Chair Michelle Hoyland (arrived at 6:40 p.m.) Jos6 Aguila Al DeMarco Don Fenton Henderson Tillman ALSO PRESENT Quintus Greene, Director of Development Lindsey Payne, Board Attorney Nancy Byrne, Assistant Director of Development Dan DeCarlo, Neighborhood Specialist Dick Hudson, Senior Planner Octavia Sherrod, Community Redevelopment Administrator I. Call To Order Chairman Finkelstein called the meeting to order at 6:35 p.m. I1. Roll Call The Recording Secretary called the roll and a quorum was declared present. II1. Agenda Approval: A. Additions, Deletions, Corrections Vice Chair Heavilin requested that Item IX. A, "The Bruce Group" be moved to Item VI "Announcements and Presentations". B. Adoption Motion Vice Chair Heavilin moved to approve the agenda, as amended. Motion seconded by Mr. Aguila. Mr. Greene reported that Item VIII, Zoning Code Variance for John and June Trach has been cancelled and should be removed from the agenda. The motion for approval was further amended and seconded and unanimously carried. Meeting Minutes .... Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, FL May 8, 2001 IV. Approval of Minutes: Workshop Meeting April 7, 2001 Regular Meeting'April 10, 2001 Mr. Fenton requested that the minutes of the April 7, 2001 Workshop be amended on Page 16 under "Town Center- CRA Project or City Project". Mr. Fenton stated that the words "CRA seemed to disagree" in the next to the last paragraph should read that the CRA was stronger in their feeling and this wording did not correctly express the sentiments of the Board. Mr. Fenton felt there was a strong consensus among the members against spending CRA funds on City projects. Chairman Finkelstein concurred with Fenton's assessment of the discussion. Mr. Greene reported that when the Financial Reports are discussed, they have been revised to exclude the items that the Board questioned at the workshop. Motion Vice Chair Heavilin moved to approve the minutes, as amended. Motion seconded by Mr. Aguila and unanimously carried. V. Director's Report Mr. Greene reported on the following: A. Financial Updates: The Financial Statement of the CRA as of April 2001 was included in the agenda packet and showed the balance in the account was $1,051,828. Interest income for April is not included as yet. Chairman Finkelstein noted that the budget did not contain a line item with regard to the Board's contract for services with the City. Chairman Finkelstein would like to see monthly expenditures so that they could keep track of the $25,000 annual allotment. Mr. Greene referred members to their packet, which included a summary for the month April, that reflected staff costs for that month, as well as a cumulative summary of January through April. Mr. Greene noted since the CRA is being charged a maximum of $25,000 annually, staff saw no point in prorating this every month and that the $25,000 would be assessed at the end of the year. Mr. Greene further reported that this amount would be far exceeded because staff costs are already at $16,376. Meeting Minutes ~ Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, FL May 8, 2001 Chairman Finkelstein also questioned "Page 2 of 3" entitled "Employee Billings by Project: April". Mr. Greene responded that this refers to time spent by staff on the Town Square Area and by the Administrative Secretary of the Development Department. Mr. Greene distributed a report that was prepared by the Finance Director regarding funding for the CRA to begin work. Mr. Greene reported that discussions have been ongoing among the Finance Department and the City Manager's Office in order to meet the Board's request of securing between $3 million to $5 million for land purchases. Included in the packet is an amortization schedule for $2.5 million and $3 million with a 15-year amortization schedule and consideration was given to what the CRA could currently support in terms of increment income. $2.5 million over 15 years at 4.75% would come to $236,802 annual debt service. $3 million would be $284,163. The CRA is currently generating a little over $300,000 per year. B. Project Updates Mr. Greene reported there are several projects in the CRA currently underway as follows: Eastridge PUD. This is a 31-single family residential project on 5 acres east of 4th Avenue and south of Gateway. There is a new developer and staff will be asking the City to commit $80,000 in SHIP funds for site improvements to assist the developer. The price of the houses will be in the under $100,000 range. Staff was asked to look into funding through the Brownfields Economic Development Initiatives that was presented at the last meeting by Ms. Meg Smith, Economic Development Specialist from the County. The issue was referred to Ms. Octavia Sherrod, Community Redevelopment Manager, and Mr. Greene requested that Ms. Sherrod report on her findings. Ms. Sherrod stated she read the rules and regulations and obtained an application packet. Ms. Sherrod stated in applying for these grants it must be done in conjunction with a Section 108 loan, which is a commitment by the City to pledge future CDBG funding. There is approximately $25 million available on an annual basis and the grant is competitive. The definition of a brownfield is a site that is or has a suspicion of contamination and the applicant must own the property. Whatever funding that the City would request would have to be 3 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, FL May 8, 2001 matched by an equal amount. Ms. Sherrod gave an overview of the purposes for which the funding could be used. The three national objectives for Community Redevelopment must be met which are: (a) it must benefit Iow and moderate income persons; (b) it must be used for the prevention or elimination of slums and urban blight; and (c) it must address eminent threats or urgent needs. Ms. Sherrod also pointed out that the purpose of Brownfield Economic Development Initiatives (BEDI) aro to minimize the City's future CDBG allocations and was designed to strengthen the economic feasibility of projects financed with Section 108 Loans. Also, the City would not receive notice of funding unless HUD has approved the Section 108 Loan. Ms. Sherrod also reviewed the restrictions for receiving BEDI funds. Mr. Greene asked Ms. Sherrod if she was aware of any eligible sites in the CRA and she stated she was not aware of any contaminated sites. Ms. Sherrod determined in her research that a groat deal of funding was used towards industrial sites and old abandoned factories or vacant plazas. Ms. Sherrod said it is important that if the City :pledges its CDBG allocation. The project must be designed to create an income to help pay the loan off. Mr. Greene pointed out that there is a lot involved in applying for these grants and these grants require the City to utilize the Section 108 Program, which mortgages the City's future CDBG allocation. Mr. Fenton suggested looking at Zero Coupon Bond Funding and Mr. Greene said he would look into this. Mr. DeMarco inquired if Mr. Scott Blasie of the City's Code Compliance Department was consulted to determine if thero were any brownfields in the City? Ms. Sherrod stated that she did not consult with him on this and Mr. DeMarco suggested she do so. Chairman Finkelstein inquired on the amount of a minimum loan and Ms. Sherrod did not think thero was a minimum; however, thero is a cap of $2 million. With regard to the MLK Boulevard project, Mr. Greene reported that a contract was awarded May 1st to the Strategic Planning Group of Jacksonville in the amount of $45,000 with $5,000 for reimbursables. These funds were derived from a grant that was secured by Mr. Dan DeCarlo, the City's Neighborhood Specialist. The company was selected based upon their strengths, economic analysis and community participation. 4 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, FL May 8, 2001 4. Town Square and the Marina Project will be discussed further on in the meeting. C. Future Agenda Items None D. Commission Action Update Mr. Greene reported that on May 1, the City Commission approved two variances that came before the CRA to allow single-family homes on substandard lots in R- II Zoning Districts. The Commission tabled on second reading the Federal Highway Corridor Redevelopment Plan, pending staff's responses to questions raised by Commissioner Fisher. Commissioner Fisher had concerns regarding the definitions of hotels and motels, timeshares, bed and breakfasts and whether or not retail goods could be displayed outside. Staff is preparing a formal written response to the Commission to address those questions. Also, Ms. Mellgren will be at the next Commission meeting to answer any questions. VI. Announcements and Presentations Chairman Finkelstein announced that there will be a joint workshop to discuss apartments among the City Commission, Community Redevelopment Agency and the Planning and Development on Thursday, May 10, 2001 at 6:30 p.m. in the Library Program Room. A. The Bruce Group: Presentation of design concept for proposed Boynton Beach Promenade and Adjacent Marina Project (moved up on the agenda) Mr. Bruce Jarvis assumed the podium and stated they were present tonight to get an approval from the Board in concept with regard to the design of the Boynton Beach Boulevard extended project. Mr. Jarvis introduced Messrs. Roger Fry, the Marina's design architect, Mike Fawley, the Civil Engineer and James Hoffman, the architect for Two Georges. Mr. Jarvis presented several artists' renderings of their proposal, which included aerials and surveys. Mr. Roger Fry, the Architect, pointed out changes in the design beginning with the roadway. The original roadway was behind the building and will be moved over to the Marina in order to link the pedestrian connection between the park and the retail and restaurants out on the marina instead of behind the parking garage. It is intended to connect the vehicles and pedestrians all in one instead of using two separate means of getting to the Marina. In order to achieve this, the sidewalks will be separated from the streets by landscaping and large trees 5 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, FL May 8, 2001 and parallel parking spaces will be provided. Pointing to the artist's rendering, Mr. Fry indicated that the street would begin where the mangroves start, which will be done in pavers with parallel parking on both sides along the Marina. In order to accomplish this, a 60' right-of-way would be necessary. With regard to the park, Mr. Fry stated it has no defined edge and they are proposing to put up an urban type wrought iron fence along the park. The fence would be separated from the sidewalk by a 4' hedge. There would be defined entrances and exits with trees, flowers and lights. The Park would be completely accessible and could be locked at night, if this was desired. The sidewalk would be approximately 10' to 12' from the apartment building to give the feeling that the apartments are part of the street. Mr. DeMarco inquired if the street would be one-way and was informed the street would be two-way. Mr. Fry explained how they intended to create a loop so that a person could get back to the point where he started from. Mr. Fenton inquired if the developer owned the right of way and discussion ensued on who owned the property beginning at the Moore property to Federal Highway. Mr. Jarvis stated if they received approval of the cross-section of the extended Boynton Beach Boulevard, they could move forward. Mr. Fry said when he came onboard he noticed that the parking was on the bulkhead and there was a change in elevation from the two parking areas. By redesigning the apartment buildings they were able to find 10 %' that could be used as a boardwalk. He said they would like to bring this same idea around the site to create friendly walking streets. Mr. Jarvis said that an additional 8' of footage was found after reviewing the surveys. The walkway will be extended over to the Two Georges' marina and they will bring their elevation up to the same level of the street. The original retaining wall has been replaced with 6' of landscaping with more parking and 10' of walkway along the edge of the marina. Mr. Tillman inquired who owned the streets in front of the apartments. Mr. Jarvis illustrated on the drawing where the public street ends and the private street begins. There will be public and vehicular access for everyone. Ms. Hoyland inquired why some of the street was pavers and some was asphalt? Mr. Fry said that the public street would be asphalt. Ms. Hoyland said she would like to see continuity in the streets and not go from asphalt to pavers. Mr. Jarvis responded that they could use a combination of asphalt and pavers. Chairman Finkelstein pointed out when the Promenade was envisioned it was envisioned as a convertible street that could be converted from vehicular to pedestrian. This would allow the area to be used for events that would utilize the entire length of the Promenade. Chairman Finkelstein inquired if parallel parking 6 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, FL May 8, 2001 would be placed on the proposed Promenade portion to satisfy parking requirements for the residential element. He felt the original intent was that the area would be open to people using the park? Mr. DeMarco asked if the shops in the area are in favor of this concept and would it have any effect upon their businesses? Mr. Jarvis felt that any traffic that is generated into this area would help all the shop owners including the shop owners on Ocean Avenue. Chairman Finkelstein asked if consideration would be given to placing any 12' landscaped medians on the roadway. Mr. Fry stated that there would not be enough room for a median, which would require an additional 20'. Ms. Hoyland said she would prefer not to see a fence around the park or a locking gate since the park is more of a passive park and suggested adding more landscaping in place of a fence. Mr. Jarvis responded that the fence would be a see-through fence. Mr. Fry stated that a good urban park creates an edge to define what is the park and what is not the park. Ms. Hoyland used Old School Square in Delray Beach as an example, which achieves this look without a fence. Chairman Finkelstein inquired if they were looking for design guidelines tonight or a consensus from the Board that the project is moving in the right direction? Mr. Jarvis stated they were seeking the latter. Ms. Hoyland inquired how long it would take them to generate conceptual elevations? Mr. Fry stated that would be the next step. Mr. Jarvis said their objective is to begin construction in June. Mr. Hoffman stated they are planning to begin the work for Two Georges in June or July because they are waiting for direction from FPL. Ms. Hoyland inquired about the architectural style of the buildings and Mr. Fry stated that Visions 20/20 addressed a Keys/plantation style of design. Chairman Finkelstein asked if the developer had spoken to the City's Park Department to determine who would be responsible for electricity and clean up when festivals take place? Mr. Greene said there is no need tonight to address this and that tonight they are looking for a consensus. These details would be addressed as the design stages progressed. Mr. Greene also pointed out that tonight was to show how the City is working with the developer to get the Promenade built. Mr. DeMarco said he was very pleased with what he saw tonight and felt that the Board should vote on the concept so that the developer could continue to move forward. Mr. Fenton said he would like assurances that the continuation of the 7 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, FL May 8, 2001 Promenade would be the same plan throughout which the Board agreed they preferred. Mr. Jan/is inquired if the City was requesting that the color of the pavers match? Ms. Hoyland felt that whatever is used should be complementary with what is already in place. Chairman Finkelstein said that these items would come back to the Board and did not need to be addressed tonight. There was a consensus among the Board members that the project was heading in the right direction and they looked forward to seeing the project move to the next phase. VII. Unfinished Business Chairman Finkelstein stated he would like to set the date for the Board's next workshop. After discussion, it was determined that the next workshop would be held on Saturday, June 9th in Conference Room C from 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. VIII. Public Hearings Chairman Finkelstein requested that Attorney Payne administer the oath to all persons who would be testifying. Chairman Finkelstein stated that anyone who wished to speak was free to do so. Zoning Code Variance: Land Use Amendment/Rezoning Project Name: Agent: Owner: Location: Description: A Pink Princess - LUAR Bradley Miller George & Maron R. Uhazie 1120 S. Federal Highway Small scale Land Use Amendment from Office Commercial (OC) to Local Retail commercial (LRC) and Rezoning from Office and Professional Commercial (C- 1) to Neighborhood Commercial (C-2) for a .73 acre parcel of land. Mr. Bradley Miller, of Miller Land Planning Consultants, took the podium and stated he would be representing the applicant. Chairman Finkelstein requested that staff make their presentation first. Meeting Minutes - Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, FL May 8, 2001 Mr. Mike Rumpf, Planning and Zoning Director, stated this is a small-scale land use plan amendment tQ the rezoning on the east side of Feder~al Highway just north of Woolbright. Currently the building is part of the Colonial Center, which is an office complex, zoned C-1. The subject property previously was a bank and real estate office. The new owner of the property purchased it with the understanding that it could be used for retail purposes, thus necessitating tonight's hearing to use the property as a retail shop. Staff concluded that although this is not the most preferable zoning with respect to the surrounding zonings, staff feels that the corridor is in transition and the proposed use would be consistent with the vision and recommendations of the consultant for the corridor plan. Staff recommends approval of the project. Mr. Aguila asked what the store would be selling and Mr. Rumpf stated it would be used as a boutique and doll shop. Vice Chair Heavilin stated she had concerns because the Federal Highway Study stated that automotive should not be allowed and if the zoning were changed to C-2 this would allow this type of use. She asked if there was any way that the Board could prevent these uses. She felt the boutique and doll shop would be a good use for this area, but would like assurances that automotive uses would not be allowed. Mr. Rumpf concurred with Vice Chair Heavilin, but pointed out these uses are going to be addressed formally by the comprehensive revaluation. Staff will be 'following up with rezoning, land development regulation changes and comprehensive plan amendments to address this issue. Staff will be looking at each of the zoning districts that will be recommended in the corridor. Chairman Finkelstein pointed out that even without the zoning in progress, this parcel could be limited to C-1. Mr. Aguila stated that he has a problem with this request, and he felt it does not matter what the applicant wants to do with the property because the zoning goes with the land. Mr. Aguila asked what would happen if the property were changed to a C-2 zoning? Mr. Rumpf responded that C-2 would allow a host of retail uses, which could include automotive and marine related uses, as well as convenience stores. Vice Chair Heavilin inquired if the Board could grant a conditional use for this use? Mr. Rumpf replied if this approach were taken it would fall into "contract zoning". Mr. Miller stated that currently the applicant has a business in Boca Raton, which is similar to what she is proposing in Boynton Beach. The applicant chose this property because of its ambience and charm and the Banyan trees on the site. The applicant proposes to sell girls clothing, dolls and gift items. Mr. Miller also noted that the applicant purchased the property thinking that it could be used for 9 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, FL May 8, 2001 retail purposes. The applicant has already made some improvements, including painting the building. Mr. Miller pointed out that there are various current uses along the corridor which include the Colonial Center Office Complex, which is immediately to the south and there is a travel mart and hair salon to the north of the property. Immediately across the street is a closed gas station and a convenience store and laundromat. An I-Hop Restaurant is located to the south. Mr. Miller pointed out that they do not plan to make changes to the property except some interior changes and some outside improvements from an aesthetic standpoint. The property consists of two parcels and is bisected by Southeast 11th Street. The majority of the property is located to the south of SE 11th. The parking space that is there would be sufficient. Mr. Miller said he read the Corridor Study and felt the applicant's business would meet the requirements of recommended businesses. Chairman Finkelstein announced the public hearing. Mr. Don Kree, 630 Castilla Lane, Boynton Beach, was administered the oath by Attorney Payne. He stated that his property abuts the applicant's property to the east. Mr. Kree would not like to see a convenience store or auto parts store located next to his property. However, he was in agreement with the proposed use, but would not like to see the zoning changed. He said he would support the use if it could be limited to what is being proposed tonight. Mr. Miller said that the applicant's proposed use would be far less intensive than when the building was a bank with a drive-thru. Mr. Miller stated that the applicant is committed to the property and will be closing her business in Boca Raton in order to move to Boynton Beach. She is currently moving her inventory to Boynton Beach. Mr. Miller said they would be in agreement to restrict some of the possible uses if that was an option. Mr. Harvey Oyer, 512 N. Seacrest Boulevard, Boynton Beach said that tonight's problems highlight a problem that exists in the City which is there is no ordinance to protect historic buildings. Mr. Oyer stated this property was built as a bed and breakfast back in the early 1930's. Mr. Oyer would like the City to adopt an ordinance to protect buildings over a certain age. If this kind of ordinance were in existence, it would be impractical to change the building to a convenience store or auto parts store. Mr. Oyer also stated that he would like to see a requirement that older buildings be saved and moved to other sites. Mr. Brian Edwards, 629 NE 9th Avenue, Boynton Beach noted that there has been a lot of discussion about the Corridor. Mr. Edwards said he was sorry to see that the zoning in progress was not extended and that could have addressed the issue at hand. Chairman Finkelstein closed the public hearing. 10 Meeting Minutes L . Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, FL May 8,2001 Mr. Aguila inquired what the square footage of the building was and was informed it was a two-story building and including both floors, it is approximately 5,300 square feet. Mr. Tillman stated that he felt the project would fit well into the community. Mr, Tillman pointed out that this same scenario came up previously before the City regarding a project being proposed for the MLK Boulevard. Mr. Tillman would not like to see the City get into a spot zoning type situation and does not want the Board to sway from its decision to stick with the consistency being sought for the Federal Highway corridor. Although he liked the project, he could not support it. Mr. Aguila said he is looking at the item if it became C-2. When he sees the permitted uses in a C-2 zone, there are uses that he would not like to see in this area. The City would have no control if the applicant at some time went out of business and another business came in. Also, Mr. Aguila was not in favor of spot zoning and was not in favor of changing the zoning because of what could happen in the future. Mr. Miller inquired if there would be a method to employ a restrictive covenant that would preserve the proposed use. Attorney Payne said this could not be done. Mr. Greene pointed out there is a basic zoning principle called "contract zoning" and you cannot condition the zoning. Vice Chair Heavilin asked Mr. Rumpf if there were any alternatives to approach the issue. Mr. P, umpf replied that retail sales are not allowed in a C-1 zoning district. Other than a Code modification, there is no other way. A Code modification can be more complicated because it would involve an entire City zoning district. Chairman Finkelstein summed up by stating that the Board liked the idea of the applicant, but wanted to stay with their plan and to abide by the Corridor study and not make spot zoning decisions. Mr. Miller said they first approached the project by doing a text amendment to the Code and to create a category for a boutique-type use, limited by square footage, hours of operation and the use itself. Mr. Miller asked if a text amendment would be possible to a C-1 zoning to permit this type of use? Mr. Aguila stated that to do a text amendment to allow one particular retail in a zoning that otherwise doesn't allow it, could end up causing more problems. Mr. Rumpf agreed with Mr. Aguila. Mr. DeMarco inquired why a gasoline station was allowed across the street and Mr. Rumpf stated that the west side of iFederal Highway is a C-3 zoning district. I . Mr. DeMarco felt that the projeCt was lworthwhde and that the Board was just 11 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, FL May 8, 2001 second-guessing on what might occur in the future. Mr. Finkelstein pointed out that the applicant still has to appear before the City Commission for approval. Ms. Heavilin pointed out that the subject property abuts a neighborhood of upscale homes in the $400,000 and up category. Ms. Hoyland said that she could support the project because there is a great distance between the subject property and the property to the west and perhaps the applicant could put in a heavier density of landscape area on any side that abuts a residential area. Mr. Tillman said that if the Board took this approach, it would be setting a precedent and that the Board needs to be consistent in its direction. Ms. Hoyland pointed out that staff did a study and determined that the project meets the requirements and a justification for rezoning exists. Mr. Miller pointed out that this location is the only C-1 pocket of zoning along the Federal Highway Corridor. Mr. Aguila stated that the C-1 zoning was put in to protect the residential neighborhood. Motion Mr. Tillman moved to disapprove. Motion seconded by Mr. Aguila. Motion to deny carried 5-2 (Ms. Hoyland and Mr. DeMarco dissenting). Mr. Aguila requested that procedurally, once the Board hears from staff, the applicant and public audience and the applicant again, at that point, he would like to keep the discussion among the Board members only. Chairman Finkelstein agreed to this procedure. Zoning Code Variance Project Name: Agent: Owner: Location: Description: John and June Trach - setback variance N/A John and June Trach 2623 Lake Drive North Request relief from Chapter 2 Zoning, Section 5, C.2.a., to construct an addition to the rear portion of an existing home allowing a six (6) foot setback on the south side and the north side of the property in lieu of the 7.5 foot side setback required by code. ITEM CANCELLED AND REMOVED FROM AGENDA 12 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, FL May 8, 2001 Zoning Code Variance Project Name: Agent: Owner: Location: Description: Zuhair Marouf- Lot Size Variance N/A Zuhair Marouf A portion of lots 4 & 5 of Sam Brown Subdivision Request relief from Land Development Regulations Chapter 2, Zoning Section 6.C.3. to allow development of a car wash facility on a 9,908 square foot parcel in lieu of the 15,000 sq. foot minimum lot area required by the C-3 Zoning District Regulations. Mr. Rumpf said that the applicant is seeking relief from the minimum lot size requirements. Staff has researched and determined that the property was originally zoned C-1, which would have limited it to a minimum lot size of 9,000, which the lot would have met. Changing the zoning to C-3 in 1975 made the lot subject to a minimum lot size of 15,000 square feet. The property owner purchased the property subsequent to the property being severed with the understanding that it would be developed. Mr. Rumpf said that the gas station is non-conforming and originally the applicant asked staff if the lot could be assembled with the gas station parcel and staff stated that it could not. The gas station, being non-conforming, prohibits expansion. Staff only focused on how the property became non-conforming, rather than the proposed use. The variance issue is limited to the fact of whether there is a hardship and how the property became legally non-conforming. Staff recommends approval of the project. Mr. Michael Weiner assumed the podium and stated he was present on behalf of the applicant who is also present tonight. Mr. Weiner stated that the applicant has substantially upgraded the station. Mr. Weiner stated that the item is completely different from the first item heard tonight. Mr. Weiner stated the property is already zoned C-3. Mr. Weiner stated that there were six staff conditions and the applicant meets all six. Mr. Weiner read the six staff conditions into the record. Mr. Weiner pointed out that the property was changed to C-3 zoning by the City and not the applicant. The applicant wants to blend in with the neighborhood and not stand out. The applicant proposes the following: He will meet or exceed all landscaping codes; He would place a no left turn sign at the exits to keep vehicles from going through the neighborhood; The car wash would close at dark; 13 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, FL May 8, 2001 A 6' privacy wall will be put up; and Purchase the most efficient equipment so that there would be little or no noise associated with the operation of the equipment. Mr. Weiner gave the Recording Secretary to place in the public record a petition that was signed by 1,300 Boynton Beach residents in favor of the car wash. Also, there is a letter from the President of the Inlet Harbor Association and all 65 unit owners do not object to the project. Mr. Weiner also stated that the applicant meets the law and that the minimum lot size would deprive him of all beneficial use. Mr. Weiner distributed two case laws for the record to support this. Mr. Weiner requested to speak after the public hearing is closed. Richard Zoller, 649 Las Palmas Park, Boynton Beach said he was speaking on behalf of the residents on Las Palmas Parkway. He pointed out there are 11 homes on this street and at the end of the street is a newly developed community called Presidential Way. Mr. Zoller said that neither he nor other residents in the area received notice of the variance. Mr. Zoller stated that he has a petition signed by residents in the area that are against the variance (a copy of the petition is included with the original minutes). Mr. Zoller stated the property had originally been purchased to build an office for the limousine service operated by Mickey Pepper Limousine ServiCe, but never got built. Mr. Zoller said when Mr. Pepper purchased the property he was told he could not build an office because it was only zoned for residential. Also, Mr. Zoller had concerns that a car wash would create traffic congestion at the beginning of the street because of the narrowness of the two-lane road. Mr. Zoller said he could envision cars lined up blocking the street to get into the car wash. Mr. Zoller also presented a letter from Colleen Beckner who lives adjacent to the property opposing the car wash (a copy of the letter is included with the original minutes). Ms. Beckner in her letter states that she has a big · drainage/flood problem, which begins at the driveway to the Texaco station and runs into her driveway, carport and yard. Ms. Beckner in her letter also pointed out that there are already three car washes in the North Federal Highway area. Mr. James Warnke, 617 Lakeside Harbor, Boynton Beach, a 35-year resident of Lakeside Harbor, said the area has been R1-AA since it was platted in 1896. Mr. Warnke felt that the car wash, which would be 500' from his home, would create noise. He pointed out that the variance is less than one-third of the required lot for the project. Mr: Warnke presented a petition of the residents of Lakeside Harbor that are against the car wash (a copy of which is included with the original minutes). 14 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, FL May 8, 2001 Ms. Sandra Bailey, 644 Las Palmas Park, Boynton Beach was administered the oath by Attorney Payne. Ms. Bailey said that the added traffic exiting frem the gas station has made it difficult to walk her dog on the street. Ms. Bailey feels that much more traffic would be added if a car wash was permitted. Mr. Terry Pereira, 7692 Colony Lake Drive, Boynton Beach said he has been a customer of the gasoline station for 20 years. Mr. Pereira said he signed the petition in favor of the car wash and would like to see a car wash on the preperty. Mr. Pereira said that a car wash would be much quieter than a repair shop that used to be part of the gasoline station. Mr. Pereira pointed out that this has always been a bad intersection and nothing has changed. He did not feel that a car wash would increase traffic. Mr. Brian Edwards, 629 NE 9th Avenue said he was in favor of the car wash. Mr. Edwards pointed out that the car wash would be in back of the gas station. Further, Mr. Edwards stated that of all the businesses on Federal Highway, the owner of this preperty has gone above and beyond his duty to clean up the area. Mr. Edwards felt that the owner would do the right thing for the neighborhood. Mr. Richard Conklin, 1C Cressings Circle said he lives directly acress the street from the gasoline station and said he is favor of the car wash. Mr. Conklin said that the car wash would beautify the area. He pointed out that a car wash would generate more revenue for the City and would look better than just having an empty lot. Ms. Marilyn King, 632 Las Palmas Park, Boynton Beach stated she never received notice of the variance and was not in favor of looking out her window and seeing a car wash. She felt the value of her property would decrease by having a car wash in the neighborhood. Chairman Finkelstein closed the public audience. Mr. Weiner presented photos of the vacant lot to the members. Mr. Weiner pointed out that they would be impreving the area by putting in landscaping and a wall to separate the car wash from the neighbors. He said they want to work with the neighbors and would be willing to design the ingress and egress so that people would be entering and exiting in one direction. Mr. Aguila inquired if there were any other reasons why the gas station was non- conforming, and Mr. Rumpf replied they did not evaluate the project in this manner. Mr. Aguila inquired if the variance was granted would the properties be unified by title and would this constitute an expansion of the non-conforming use? Mr. Rumpf replied if the properties were tied together this would be an expansion of the non-conforming use. Mr. Rumpf stated, however, that the granting of the variance would not make the car wash a non-conforming use. 15 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, FL May 8, 2001 Mr. Fenton inquired if the car wash would create more run off in the neighborhood? Mr. Rumpf stated the car wash would recycle the water and the operation itself would be very contained. Ms. Hoyland inquired if the lot has always been vacant and Mr. Rumpf stated that it has as far as he knows. Ms. Hoyland said she would like to look at any conceptual plans if any were available because once the variance is granted, another use could be permitted. Attorney Payne pointed out that the Board is granting a variance for this use only. Ms. Hoyland would like assurances that the car wash would remain totally independent of the gas station. Mr. Tillman asked if there would be an attendant taking money or would it be automated? Mr. Steve Marouf, owner of the property, took the podium said he could hire a cashier to keep the businesses separate. Mr. Tillman inquired what would actually be built on the property. He further stated that it would be a full service car wash. Mr. Tillman felt this would create a traffic line out to Federal Highway. Mr. Marouf stated that the car wash would be fully automated and that there would be no back up of cars because people would remain in their vehicles as they drive through the car wash. Mr. Aguila asked staff when the property is developed would all the development standards imposed upon the property be as if it were a stand-alone, owned by an individual not associated with the owner of the Texaco station? Chairman Finkelstein said that he spoke to Mr. Rumpf on this same subject and noted there were problems regarding egress and ingress and that there were problems with the neighbors. He further pointed out that there are properties already in the City that have cross parking, cross egress/ingress, cross easements and the properties are owned by separate owners. Mr. Rumpf replied that there are certain uses in the City that share access points. Mr. Aguila further asked when the site plan comes to staff for review and the access and egress was shown as through the gas station and not through Las Palmas, what would staff do? Mr. Rumpf said staff would feel this is inappropriate and contrary to what has been discussed with the applicant. Mr. Rumpf said the property would be treated as a stand-alone site and would require buffering against the two abutting properties where needed. Mr. Aguila said he is not certain that the applicant has met the six criteria for hardship. Mr. Weiner said that the City can put conditions on the application and that they want to be a good neighbor. He stated that the applicant has met the burden of proof on the six items and meets the standards for a variance in accordance with State law. 16 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, FL May 8, 2001 Ms. Hoyland inquired if the Board could put restrictions on the variance with regard to the wall or landscaping and Attorney Payne stated they could not with this type of condition. Ms. Hoyland asked the applicant what his current hours of operation were? Mr. Marouf replied they operate from 6:00 a.m. to 12 midnight. The car wash, however, would close at dark. Ms. Hoyland suggested limiting the operating hours of the car wash from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Motion Mr. Aguila moved to recommend denial of the request for relief from LDR Chapter 2, Zoning Section 6.C.3 to allow development of a car wash facility based on the fact that he is not certain that the burden of proof has been demonstrated. Motion seconded by Mr. Fenton. Chairman Finkelstein requested that that the Recording Secretary call the roll. Chairman Finkelstein pointed out that an "aye" vote would be for denial of the car wash. Motion failed 3-4 (Chairman Finkelstein, Vice Chair Heavilin, Ms. Hoyland, and Mr. DeMarco dissenting). Motion Ms. Hoyland moved to approve the variance request with the condition that the hours of operation would be limited from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Motion seconded by Mr. DeMarco. Vice Chair Heavilin suggested amending the hours of operation to accommodate the working population. Ms. Hoyland amended her motion to limit the hours of operation from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., seven (7) days per week. Mr. DeMarco seconded the amended motion. Chairman Finkelstein reqUested that the Recording Secretary call the roll. Motion carried 4-3 (Messrs. Tillman, Aguila and Fenton dissenting). Project Name: Owner: Location: Description: Mangrove Park School (Old High School) City of Boynton Beach 125 East Ocean venue Staff report on demolition vs. rehabilitation Mr. Greene referred members to the report included in their packet dated April 4, 2001, which outlines the costs associated with refurbishing the Old High School versus costs associated with demolishing it and creating approximately 50 parking spaces on the site. The cost to rehabilitate is estimated to be in the 17 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, FL May 8, 2001 range of $3 to $5 million, depending upon the use. Demolition and the installation of the parking would cost approximately $250,000. Staff recognizes that there are citizens that would like to see the building preserved. Mr. Greene went on to point out that since preservation was discussed in 1993, the building has since deteriorated and none of the proposals brought forward for preservation have included a realistic plan to finance the renovations. All proposals have been based on the City providing the funding to cover the refurbishing costs. Even if the building qualified as an historic structure, the maximum funding available for restoration from State or Federal sources is less than $250,000 and usually comes with stringent conditions. The High School itself is of questionable architectural character and obscures the views of the 1913 Children's Museum. Based upon the facts and expenses involved, Mr. Greene stated that staff finds it difficult to commit any City funds to this project. The redevelopment plan being prepared for the surrounding area will provide the City with a true Town Square; therefore, staff recommends demolition of the Mangrove Park School. Members were referred to the artists' rendering of the proposed Town Square area, which excludes the old High School. The following persons spoke in favor of preserving and refurbishing the old High School. Marie Shepard, 1 Ridge Point Drive, Boynton Beach stated she is a native of the City and that she and her siblings graduated from the old High School. Ms. Shepard pointed out that the City has never made any attempts to save the building in order to prevent deterioration and just let the building sit. She said she was under the impression that the old High School could qualify for the National Register. Ms. Shepard requested that the City reconsider its decision and to allow the school to be used as a charter school or auditorium which has been proposed. Mr. Wayne Owens, Chairman of the Board of Directors and co-founder of the Charter School of Boynton Beach would like to put a charter school in the old High School to serve children ages K through 5 to focus on computers and foreign languages. Mr. Owens spoke on the importance and needs of a charter school in the City. He pointed out in 1993 there was a survey that indicated that over 80% of residents wanted to see the old High School renovated. Mr. Owens said that they were not seeking all the financing from the City. Ms. Pamela Owens, Principal of the Charter School of Boynton Beach said she intends to collaborate with the alumni of the Old High School to maximize the use of the building. Ms. Owens stated that they could receive help to rehabilitate the building from the State and the Federal government. She said you cannot put a 18 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, FL May 8, 200'1 price on quality education for the children in the City. She further discussed the school situation in the City, a great majority of which have students receiving free or reduced lunch. She pointed out the benefits of bringing a Charter School into the City and how everyone would benefit. Mr. Harvey Oyer, 512 N. Seacrest Boulevard, Boynton Beach said that he and his sisters graduated from the old High School. Mr. Oyer pointed out that when the school was originally closed, the City asked the School Board to give the property to the City, which in fact it did at no cost to the City. He too said that the City has neglected the building. Mr. Oyer suggested the school could be refurbished through a bond issue. Mr. Oyer summed up by saying that the City needs some cultural attractions in order to bring people into the community. Mr. Brian Edwards, 629 NE 9th Avenue, Boynton Beach said that for the past six months he has served on the PATCH committee and he learned that there are a great many needs in the community that most people are not aware of. Mr. Edwards would like to see the City partner with the community to bring the Charter School to Boynton Beach. Mr. Edwards pointed out that by refurbishing the school, there would be a beautiful building in the City which would display the City's heritage and serve the community at the same time. Mr. Edwards said he would like to know the cost of the Town Square: Ms. Voncile Smith, 1747 Banyan Creek Court, Boynton Beach said that the City needs to preserve its history and that the City has an obligation to its youth to establish a heritage in the City. Chairman Finkelstein closed the public hearing. Ms. Hoyland felt that some of the architectural details could be salvaged and might be useable in other buildings in Town Square, but saw no point in keeping the building. Spending $3 to $5 million to rehab is an exorbitant amount of money. Ms. Heavilin asked if the $5 million would cover all the expenses to refurbish the building? Mr. Greene stated this is an estimate and it would depend upon the specific use of the building. The building is not suited to become a school and does not meet the code requirements to be a school. Also, Ms. Heavilin raised the point of the possibility of asbestos being present in the building, as well as soil contamination. Mr. Aguila pointed out that when 80% of the people in 1993 wanted to refurnish the school when the question of paying for it was raised, the support diminished. Mr. Aguila said he would like to see the building stay and suggested that parts of the building could be salvaged, but did not realistically think that the building could be saved. Mr. Aguila suggested that further studies should be undertaken before making a final decision. However, he does not want to see the City spend this amount of money to try to save the building. 19 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, FL May 8, 2001 Mr. Tillman said that he agreed that heritage is important, but in reality the building has to go and the City has to move on. Mr. Fenton pointed out that if refurbishing the old High School has been in discussion since 1993, where is all the money that people were going to raise? Also, he questioned why a decision has not been made before this point? Mr. Fenton inquired if a decision had to be made tonight and perhaps the money could be raised to save the building? Ms. Hoyland pointed out that the longer the building sits, the more it would cost to preserve it and that she is willing to make a decision tonight. Vice Chair Heavilin pointed out just because a building is old doesn't mean that it has to be saved. She did agree with Ms. Hoyland about salvaging some of the building if possible. Chairman Finkelstein pointed out that the Visions 20/20 plan does include the old High School, but the same questions were discussed at that time as well. Chairman Finkelstein would like the Board to make a decision tonight. The E~oard is an independent Board and was appointed to take the political aspects out of the process. He pointed out that no tax income would be generated from saving the school and the Board needs to decide whether the school would remain part of the Town Center plans. Vice Chair Heavilin stated that the City has much more important needs for the money than to save the old High School. Mr. Fenton suggested delaying the issue for six months to see if any funds could be raised. If not, they could then vote for the demolition. Mr. DeMarco suggested that expert people who have worked with historical properties could market the property and that the property could be placed on the Internet. Mr. Fenton said that this should be done by the private sector and he would not want to see the City spend another dollar on saving the property. Mr. Greene pointed out that the Fire Department has directed City Departments to remove all their storage from the building because the building has been condemned. Motion Mr. Tillman motioned to move forward with staff's Town Center conceptual plan. Motion seconded by Mr. Aguila with a request for clarification. Mr. Aguila inquired if the motion was to proceed with the plan or was the motion to proceed with the demolition of the building, Mr, Tillman stated that his motion includes approval of staff's recommendation to demolish the building. 2O Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, FL May 8, 2001 Vice Chair Heavilin requested that the motion include a statement for staff to determine what could be salvaged. Mr. Greene said there may be some architectural features worth preserving and staff is prepared to consider that. Mr. Tillman further amended his motion that staff retain certain architectural features as deemed necessary by staff. Mr. Aguila seconded the amended motion. Mr. Fenton requested that the motion be amended to not take effect until November 7, 2001. It was agreed to let staff determine the timing. Motion carried 6-1 (Mr. Fenton dissenting) IX. Public Audience None X. Other Mr. Aguila inquired when the Board would be fumished with more legible maps? Ms. Hoyland also requested that the Board be furnished with surveys with all applications. Ms. Hoyland was extended condolences on the passing of her grandfather, which resulted in her missing the past two meetings. Xl. Adjournment There being no further business, the meeting propedy adjourned at 10:35 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Barbara M. Madden Recording Secretary (four tapes) 21 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT Community Redevelopment Division Memorandum DD 01-078 TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Quintus Greene, Director of Development Octavia S. Sherrod, CRD Manager 5/02/01 Brownfields Economic Development Initiatives Brownfields Economic Development Initiative (BEDI) Grants as you know are available to CDBG entitlement communities. A request for new Section 108-loan guarantee must accompany each BEDI application in which the same economic development project is used. Each of the activities must meet one of the CDBG Programs three national objectives, which are: · benefiting Iow and moderate income persons, · preventing or eliminating slum or blight, and or · Addressing imminent threats and urgent needs. BEDI Grant Funds can be used for: · land writedowns, · site remediation costs, · funding reserves, · over Collateralizing the Section 108 loan, · direct enhancement of the security of the Section 108 loan, and · Provisions of financing to for-profit businesses at below market interest rates. The minimum BEDI to Section 108 ration is one to one, and the maximum grant amount is $2,000,000.00 The rating factors for these loans is based upon the capacity of the applicant and relevant organization experience, the distress and or extent of the problem, the soundness of the approach, how the resources are leveraged, and for comprehensiveness and coordination of the project. Br6wnfields Economic Development Initiative grants were designed to enhance the security or to improve the viability of projects financed with new Section 108-guarantee loan authorities. As you are aware, Section 108 is the loan guarantee provision of the CDBG program, which provides communities with a source of financing for economic development, housing rehabilitation, public facilities, and large scale physical development projects. These funds may be used for any eligible activity under the Section 108 Loan Guarantee program. The purpose of the BEDI funds is to minimize the potential loss of future CDBG allocations used to secure Section 108 loan guarantees. The fund was designed to strengthen the economic feasibility of projects financed with Section 108 funds by increasing the probability that the project will generate enough cash to repay the guaranteed loan and enhancing the security of the guaranteed loan. HUD's intentions for BEDI and Section 108 funds are to finance projects and activities that demonstrate economic benefits such as job creation and increase the local tax base. Local J:\SH RDATA\COMMU NITYRD\MEMOS\2001\BP, OWN FIELDS-DOC Brownfields Economic Development Initiatives (Cont.) Memo 001-078 2 of 2 governments may use BEDI funds to address site remediation costs, or to use a combination of Section 108 and BEDI to acquire a brownfield property and convey the site to another party at a discounted price from its purchase price. Ultimately, the redevelopment focus of BEDI assisted projects is prompted by the need to provide additional security for Section 108 loan guarantees beyond the pledge of CDBG funds. Now, the limitations of the use of BEDI grants and Section 108 funds are that they may not immediately repay the principle of a loan guaranteed under Section 108, nor can they be used to provide public or private sector entities with funding to remediate contamination caused by their own actions. There is also a lot of caution as far as sites listed on EPA's national priority list, as well as against proposing projects on sites where the nature and degree of environmental contamination is not well quantified or are the subject of ongoing litigation or environmental enforcement action. Brownfields are defined as abandoned, idle, or underused Industrial and Commercial property where expansion or redevelopment is complicated by actual or perceived contamination. In conclusion, HUD also encourages local communities to integrate projects proposed for assistance with other federal, state and local brownfields redevelopment efforts. J :\SHRDATA\COMMU NITYRD\MEMOS'4?-001\BROWNFI ELDS.DOC 85/87/2881 16:25 5613756316 B B FINANCE PAGE 81 Initial Loan Amount: Initial In%erest Rate: Initial Periods: Points: Origination Date: First Payment Due; ~ayment MethOd; Compounding Method: Amortizing Method: Rate Basis: Points Paid; $2,500,000,00 06/01/01 05/01/02 Annually Annually Normal Ordinary At Origination ~epa~acl. 0~: 05/07/01 Amortiza~on 8ohedule #/Yr Date Payme~C p=~n~pal Interest ~lance !~p~ o6/o~/o~ ~0,00 $o.oo , ~o:00 ~2~o0,000.oo Annual Totals: $0-~0 $0.00 $0.00 Running Totals: $0-~90 $0.00 $0.00 1/01 05/01/02 $236,802.84 $126,629.23 $110,173.61 Annual Totals: ..... ~236,802.84 $126,629.23 $110,173.61 Running Totals: $236,802.84 $126,629.23 $110,173.61 2/02 05/01/03 S236,802.$4 $124,067.73 $112,735.1! Annual Totals~ ~ $236,802.84 $124,067.73 $112,7~.11 RunDing Totals: $473,605.~8 $250,696.96 $222,908.72 3/03 05/01/04 $236,802.84 $129,960.95 $105,841.89 Annual Totals: "' $236,802.f4 $129,960.95 $106,841.89 Running Totsls~ $710,408.52 $380,657.9I $329,750.61 4/04 05/01/05 $236,802.~4 $136,134.09 $100,668.75 Annual Totals: "$236,$02.$4 '~136,134.09 $i00,668.75 Running Tot~Is: $947,211.36 $516,792.00 $430,419.36 5/05 05/01/06 $236,802.84 $142,600.46 $94,202-38 Annual Totals: $236,802~'4 $I~2,6dO'.46 $94,2022~'8 Running To,als: $1,i84,014.20 $659,392_~6 $524,621.74 6/06 05/01/07 $236,802.8.4 $149,373.98 $87,428.86 Annual Totals: $23~,802.84 $149,373.98 587,428.86 Running Totals: $1,420,817.~4 $808,766.44 $612,050.60 7/07 05/01/08 $236,802.84 $156,469.25 $80,333.59 Annual Totals: '"~36,802.~4 $156,469.2~ $80,333.59' Running Totals: $1,657,~19,88 $965,235.69 $692,384.19 8/08 05/01/09 $236,802.84 $163,901.54 $72,901.30 Annual Totals: $236,802.84 $16~'~901.54 $72,901.30 Running Totals: $1,894,422.72 $1,129,137.23 $765,285.49 9/09 05/01/10 $236,802.84 $171,686.86 $65,115.98 Annual Totals: ..... $236,802.84 $171,'~86.86 $65,115.98 Running To=als: $2,131,225.56 $I,300,824.09 $830,401.47 10/10 05/01/11 $236,802.84 $179,841.98 $56,960.86 Annual Totals; $236,802~14 $179,841.98 $56,960.86 Running Totals: $£,368,028.4~ $1,480,666.07 $887,362.33 tl/11 05/01/12 $236,802.84 $188,384.48 $48,41~.36 Annual Totals: ~36,802.84 $1~,384.4~ $48,418.36 Running Totals: $2,604,831.24 $1,669,050.$5 $935,780.69 12/12 05/01/13 $236,802.84 $197,332.74 $39,470.~0 Annu~i ToCaI$: $236,802.84 $197,332.74 $39,470.10 Running Totals: $2,841,634.00 $1,866,383.29 $975,250.79 !3/13 05/01/14 $236,802.84 $206,706.05 $30,096_39 Annual Totals: $236,802.84 $206,'~0~.05 $30,096.79 Running To,als: $3,078,436.92 $2,073,089.34 $1,005,347.58 14/14 05/01/15 $236,802.84 $216,524.58 $20,278.26 Annual Totals: .... $236,802,84 $216,524.58 $20,278.2~ Running Totals: $3,315,239.76 $2,289,613.92 $1,025,625.84 15/15 05/01/16 $220,379.42 $210,386.08 $9,993.34 ADnual Totals: $220r379'4~ $210,386.08 $9,993.34 Running Totals; $3,535,619.1~ $2,500,000.00 $1,035,619.18 $2,373,370.77 $2,249,303.04 $2,118,342.09 $1,983,208.00 $1,B40,600.54 $1,691,233.56 $1,534,764.31 $1,370,862.77 $1,199,175.91 $1,019,333.93 S830,949.4~ $633,616.71 $426,910.66 $0.00 Prepared Fur: Prepared By: City of ~oy~ton Beach This v~r$ioD of t~e p~ogram may bm u=led by yo~ f~ee of charge, fo= yo~ personal, noncommercial usa. D~aines~ or commercial use, a small li=~n$~ fe~ ~u~ De paid which e~Di~les ¥o~ to an ~nhanged version. This £ee has NOT be~n paid. 0§/07/2001 16:25 §61BT~6Bl~ B B FINANCE PAGE Amor~ zation Schedule Initial Loan Amount~ Initial interes~ Rate: Initial Periods: Points: Origination Date: First Payment Due: Payment Method: Compounding Method: A~lortizing Method: Rate Basis~ Points Paid: $3,000,000.00 4.7500 15 0.0000 06/01/01 05/01/02 Annually Annually Normal Ordinary At Origination 05/07/2001 16:25 5613756316 B B FINANCE PAGE 04 Annual Totals: Running Totals: 1/01 05/01/02 Annual Totals: Running Totals: 2/02 05/01/03 Annual Running Totals: 3/03 05/01/04 Allll~al Totals: R~ing Totals: 4/04 0~/0i/05 Ann~l ~ Running' 5/05 05/01/06 Annual Totals: .R~ning Totals: 6/06 05/01/07 Annu~i .To~al$; Running 7/o~ 0S/01/o~ 'Annual To=ai$~ Running To~l$: 8/08 05/01/09 Annual Totals: Running.Totals: 9/09 05/01~10 Annual Running 10/10.' 05/01/11 Annual Running Totals; 11/11 05/0i/12 Annual Totals: Running Totals: 12/12 05/01/13 Annual. Totals: Run,lng Totals: ' 13/i3 ' o5/oi/14 Annual Totals: Running Totals: 14/14 05/01/15 . Annual To~al$: Running Totals: 15/!5 05/01/16 Annual Totals: Running Am~rtization $~hedule · age: ~ Pa~e~t Prin~i~al Interest $0.~0 ~0.00 $o.oo $o.~o $~."oo $o.0o $o.~o sO.O0 $o.oo ~284,163.40 $!51,955.07 $132,Z08.33 $2,848,044.93 $284,i63.~-~ $151,9~5.07 $1~,208,33 $284,163.40 $151,955.07 $132,208.33 $284,163.40 $148,881.27 $135,282.13 $2,699,~63.66 $284,1633~b $148,881.27 $13~i282.!3 $$68,326.80 $300,836.34 $267,490.4~ $284,163.}0 $155,953.13 $128,210.27 $2,543~210.53 $284,163. 0 $155,953.i~ $128,2~0.--v2-~ $852,,490.~0 $456,789.47 $395,700.73 $28~,163.40 $163,360.90 $120,802.50 $2,379,849.63 -------~284'163'~0 $163,360.90 $120,802.50 $1,136,~3.60 $620,1~0.37 $516,503.23 $284,163.4.0 $171,120.54 $113,042.86 $2,208,729.09 $284';1163. ~0 $'l'Yi ,120.54 $'i'13,042.86 $1,420,81 7.0~0 $791,270.91 $629,546.09 $284,1.63. IOo ~179, ~48.77 si04, 9i4.63 S2,029, 48o $~'~ ~'I 63. ~'~ 79,248. 77 $104, 914.63 $!, 704,980. ~0 $970,~19. 68 $734,460. 72 $284,163.40 $187,763.09 $96,400.31 $28'~"163'4~ ~'87,763.09 $~g, 4~0.31 $i,989~143.80 81,158,282.77 $830,8~1.03 $1,841,717.23 $284,163.4i0 $2,273,307.20 $284,163.4b $$84,163.~ $2,557,470.~0 _$._~ 96, 68i. 83 $87,481.57 $1,645,035.40 $196, 681.83 $87,481.57 $1,354,964.60 $918,342.60 $206,024.22 $78,139.18 $1,439,011.18 $206,-024.22 ~'7~-iJ9.18 ,560,988.82 $996, 481.78 $284,163.4~ $215,810.37 $68,353.03 $284,~3.4~ $215,810.37 $68,353.03 $2,841,634.0~ $1,776,799.19 $1,064,834.81 $226,061.36 658,102.04 $226,05I'1'36 $5~ $2,002,860.55 $1,122,936.85 $1,223,200.81 $997,139.45 $760,340.i7 $284,163.40 $284,163.4~ $3,125,797.4~ $284,163.46 $284.163,46 $3,409,960.8b $236,799.28 $47,364.12 $236,799.28 ........ $47.364.12 $2,239,659.83 81,170,300.97 $284,163.4~ $248,047.24 $36,116.16 $512,292.93 $284,163.40~" $248,047.~ $36,116.'!-~ ' $3,654,124.2~ $2,487,707.07 $1,206,417.13 $284,163.40 $259,829.49 $24,333.91 $252,463.44 $284,2 63.--~ $259,82~.~49 $2 4 ~'~ $$,978,287.6~ $2,747,536.56 $1,230,751.04 $2'64,455.~ . $252,463.44 $11,992.01 $0.00 $264,~'55.4~ $~5£~'63.44 $I~992.0i $4,242,743.05 $3,000,000.00 j l $1,242,743.05 Prepared By: City of Boynton Beach o o co 0 0 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ o ~