Loading...
Minutes 05-27-08 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD MEETING HELD ON TUESDAY, MAY 27,2008 AT 6:30 P.M. IN COMMISSION CHAMBERS, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA PRESENT: Shirley Jaskiewicz, Chair Roger Saberson, Vice Chair Matthew Barnes Sharon Grcevic Candace Killian Jeff Lis Amber Barritt, Alternate William Poznak, Alternate Mike Rumpf, Planning Director Jamila Alexander, Assistant City Attorney Absent: Steve Myott Chair Jaskiewicz called the meeting to order at 6:31 p.m. 1. Pledge of Allegiance. The members recited the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag, led by Ms. Grcevic. The Chair invited Board Alternate, Amber Barritt, to sit on the dais, since Mr. Myott was not able to attend. 2. Introduction of the Board. Chair Jaskiewicz introduced the members of the board. 3. Agenda Approval. Motion Ms. Barritt moved to approve the agenda as presented. Vice Chair Saberson seconded the motion that unanimously passed. 4. Approval of Minutes. Motion Mr. Barnes moved approval of the minutes as presented. Mr. Lis seconded the motion that unanimously passed. 1 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Boynton Beach, Florida May 27, 2008 5. Communications and Announcements. A. Planning and Zoning Report 1. Final disposition of the April 22, 2008 Planning and Development Board meeting Agenda items. Mike Rumpf, Planning and Zoning Director, announced the text amendment to the Planned Industrial District (PID) to omit density restrictions for hotels was approved at the May 6,2008 City Commission meeting. The following items were heard at the May 20, 2008 City Commission meeting: · The Safe and Secure request for Major Site Plan Modification and the Community Design Plan Appeal was approved. · The 947 Isle Road, front yard setback variance was approved. · Boynton Vistas II, Major Site Plan Modification for seven additional multi-family residential unit apartments was approved. 6. Old Business. None Jamila Alexander, Assistant City Attorney, explained the procedures and administered the oath to all who would be testifying. 7. New Business. A. City Towing Land Use Plan AmendmentlRezoninQ 1. PROJECT: AGENT: OWNER: LOCATION: DESCRIPTION: City Towing (LUAR 07-003) Dave Beasley Charles S. Cook and Alice Snow 506 and 510 NE 3rd Street Request to amend the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map from General Commercial (GC) to Industrial (I); and Request to rezone from C-4, General Commercial District to M-1 Industrial. 2 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Boynton Beach, Florida May 27, 2008 There was agreement to hear items one and two together and then vote on them separately. Gabriel Wuebben, Planner, presented the request to reclassify property from General Commercial to Industrial, and rezone property from C-4 General Commercial to M-1 Industrial. The request involved lots 47 and 48 of Arden Park. Since the request was small, it qualified as a "small scale" amendment which required adoption prior to forwarding to the Florida Department of Community Affairs. The amendment is not reviewed for compliance with State, regional and local comprehensive plans prior to adoption. Staff considered the state of industrial lands within the City in reference to the Comprehensive Plan, the Heart of Boynton Redevelopment Plan and an additional study, all of which called for the preservation and expansion of industrial lands, preferably east of 1-95. The additional study referenced included a Resolution adopted by the City authorizing a Notice of Intent (NOI) to create a temporary moratorium, and allow staff to review and revise zoning regulations for properties in the M-1 zoning district. The recommendations of the study were to: · Preserve existing industrial zoning; · Expand opportunities for additional industrial type uses, including changing land uses and zonings to industrial types of uses on residential properties contiguous to FEC and other industrial land; and · Address compatibility issues ensuring industrial edges were compatible with the residential uses as well as enhancing them when adjacent to arterial roadways. Mr. Wuebben explained there were policies within the Comprehensive Plan that supported the request. Staff reviewed the project for compatibility with roadways and utilities and found them to be compatible with the existing capacities. No negative effects on surrounding property owners or property values were discovered. The request was consistent with the provisos of the Comprehensive Plan and, as such, staff recommended the request be approved. City Towing Abandonment 2. PROJECT: AGENT: OWNER: LOCATION: DESCRIPTION: City Towing (ABAN 07-002) Dave Beasley City of Boynton Beach Alley north of 510 NE 3rd Street Request for abandonment of a 1 O-foot wide alley lying between and adjacent to lots 46 and 47 of the Arden Park Addition to Boynton. 3 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Boynton Beach, Florida May 27, 2008 Mr. Wuebben explained this request was reviewed by various City departments and there were no objections to the request. There were public utility companies expressing an interest; however, FPL and Florida Public Utilities approved of the abandonment, and BellSouth and Comcast expressed a conflict. As a condition of approval, the applicant would be required to work out the difficulties with the companies before moving forward with the abandonment. Staff explained the alleyway no longer served a public purpose and other alleyway segments in the immediate area had already been abandoned. Accordingly, staff recommended approval of the abandonment subject to the comments included in the Conditions of Approval. The property to the north had an abandoned home and to the south was a towing/auto related use. Dave Beasley, 2385 SW 13th Terrace, and Agent for the property, explained the two parcels were being rezoned for two separate owners. Alice Snow currently owns the land on which City Towing was situated and which currently was a non-conforming use in the C- 4 District. This property would be rezoned to M-1. Charles Cook, the new owner of City Towing, was leasing the southern parcel owned by Alice Snow, and he purchased the property to the north, which would be incorporated into City Towing and operated as City Towing. Both parcels were being rezoned to M-1, making them conforming lots. In reference to the abandonment, Mr. Beasley explained the owner would be returning for site plan approval, and they were aware they would leave an easement for FPL. He explained under a normal side yard setback, they would not be able to build there anyway. Additionally, Mr. Wuebben advised a member of the Engineering Department visited the site and saw no conflict with Comcast. Mr. Beasley agreed to the conditions of approval and acknowledged with the rezoning, they would need to comply with current Community Appearance Codes. He advised there would be some upgrading but did not know what it was at this time. Chair Jaskiewicz opened the Public Hearing. William Poznak, Board Alternate, had viewed the property and inquired about the condition of the property. He explained there were cars on the premises that appeared to be there for a long time. Mr. Beasley responded that situation occurs in the towing business, and he was unaware if the cars would be sold or junked. He knew there was a process that was in place, but he did not know what it was. Mr. Rumpf suggested contacting Code Compliance. Chair Jaskiewicz thought there were screening provisions. It was noted it may be difficult to 4 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Boynton Beach, Florida May 27, 2008 restrict this type of improvement due to the nature of the towing business. Mr. Beasley explained this was just the first step. There were no further comments from the public. Chair Jaskiewicz closed the Public Hearing. The first motion pertained to Item 7.A.1. Motion Ms. Grcevic moved to reclassify property from General Commercial (GC) to Industrial (I) and rezone from C-4 General Commercial, to M-1 Industrial. Ms. Killian seconded the motion that unanimously passed. The second motion pertained to Item 7.A.2. Motion Ms. Killian moved to abandon a portion of the 1 O-foot wide alley between and adjacent to Lots 46 and 47, Plat 2, Page 96, Arden Park Addition to Boynton, subject to the conditions of BellSouth and the cable company as noted. Mr. Barnes seconded the motion that unanimously passed. B. Water Supply Plan Comprehensive Plan Amendments 1. PROJECT: Water Supply Plan Comprehensive Plan Amendments C ity-i n itiated Request for amendments to Comprehensive Plan to incorporate State required 1 O-year water supply Facility Work Plan and related amendments to four elements. AGENT: DESCRIPTION: Chair Jaskiewicz complimented Hanna Matras, Senior Planner, on the amendment. She expressed it was a fantastic plan regarding water issues. Ms. Matras explained this amendment was being brought to the board prior to the Transmittal Hearing on June 17,2008. Water has been an issue because ofthe long-term possibility that the City would not have enough water at the current rate of growth. The amendment is a State requirement and the City is required to look at alternate water sources and stricter comprehensive water policies. The projects included in the plan were not new; they had been worked on for quite a long time. The projects were included in the Capital Improvement Element schedule approved by the City Commission in December, 2007, and sent to, and approved by the Florida 5 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Boynton Beach, Florida May 27, 2008 Department of Community Affairs. The plan put the projects in a context of growth management. The deadline for the adoption of the plan was August, and the City was delayed in its presentation due to discussions with the County regarding population projections. Boynton supplies water to other municipalities and they must coordinate the population projections with other jurisdictions. It was noted the projections were reduced from last year. The conservation policies were listed in the plan, and per State requirement, additional policies for land use, conservation facilities and intergovernmental elements were added. The concurrency issues were also in several of the elements. The South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) reviewed the plan and the City responded to their recommendations. It was anticipated the plan would be approved by the City Commission for transmittal to the DCA for approval. Chair Jaskiewicz commented the City was anticipating connecting the East and West Water Treatment Plants with two different methods of purification; one used a lime softener, and the other used reverse osmosis. She inquired how that would be coordinated. Ms. Matras explained the Utilities Department was retrofitting the West Water Treatment Plant (WWTP) to treat the brackish water from the Upper Floridan Aquifer. There would be some changes in the treatment methodologies. Amber Barritt disclosed she is employed by the firm retained by the Utilities Department to obtain the Water Use Permit. The City's plan was to use the existing western wellfields to draw water, treat it, and pipe it to the East Water Treatment Plant, (EWTP). There, they would use a lime softener to finish the treatment. She explained there was extra capacity at the EWTP that was not being used because of the salt water intrusion. The plan would be to draw water from the west, pipe it to the east, then develop new Floridan Aquifer wells, and replace the old membranes with more advanced membrane systems to treat the saltier water. It was noted the City's Plan for Reclaimed Water was more aggressive than what the SFWMD was requiring. The City planned to have the plan implemented by 2013. Ms. Barritt expressed concerns with the schedule and she did not want the City to be placed in a position to complete the changes by those dates, if it is not what the SFWMD was requiring. Chair Jaskiewicz explained the City's water reuse program was in compliance with State regulations. Ms. Matras also responded the water plan was produced by Brown and Caldwell who established the schedule. She explained the consultant worked with the Utilities Department for the dates and reiterated the consultant has been working closely with the Utility Department. Ms. Matras explained she would convey Ms. Barritt's concerns at the 6 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Boynton Beach, Florida May 27, 2008 City Commission meeting. There was a question regarding Policy 3C.1.1. The Level of Service for water was established at 200 gallons per capita per day (GPD), which would be reduced to 175 (GPD). Ms. Matras explained these were for peak flows at peak populations. In the plan, the long term demand projections were done on a per capita average daily use basis. It was explained the Utilities Department used projections. It was suggested other individuals were dictating how much water the City would have, when the amount of water would dictate the number of people who could live in the City. It was strongly encouraged that alternative water sources be reviewed. Ms. Matras responded the plan does address alternative water sources, and explained the Floridan Aquifer wells were still in the engineering and design stages. Water could not be drawn from the surficial aquifer and that was why they were drawing from the Floridan Aquifer. It was noted the treatment of brackish water was very expensive and new technologies were being developed. The plan was just the beginning and it was suggested the issues should be addressed proactively. Currently, the City Commission approved five new Floridan Aquifers wells. The board members discussed they did not see other cities trying to address the issue, and acknowledged there were other options available that were beginning to be used. Several members expressed they were aware of water systems that took the water out of the air and converted it to potable water as well as others, such as the use of cisterns. Ms. Matras explained the plan was reviewed by the Utilities Department and the SFWMD in reference to the timetables. The schedule was approved by Utilities who worked with the consultant. She expressed she would convey the concerns to Pete Mazella about the dates. Specifically, Ms. Matras was requested to confirm the 2013 date for reclaimed water and the WWTP. Ms. Matras explained the dates were confirmed prior to sending the plan to the Department of Community Affairs for courtesy review. Motion Ms. Barritt moved to transmit the Amendment of Comprehensive Plan based on the 10 Year Water Supply Facilities Work Plan to the Commission. Mr. Barnes seconded the motion that passed 6-1 (Mr. Lis dissenting.) Chair Jaskiewicz noted Commissioner Hay was present in the audience. There was brief discussion about private wells. It was noted wells were used for irrigation and not potable water. Mr. Rumpf explained the use of the City's system for irrigation was discouraged. Sometimes if there was intrusion, a well could be permitted. There was a question about property, or a small community being annexed into the City that was served by a well or a dilapidated system. Mr. Rumpf explained those properties could be annexed 7 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Boynton Beach, Florida May 27, 2008 and if a system was in need of rehabilitation, the cost would be considered. This coincided with the County Health Department policies having to do with hookups to municipal systems, and also having to do with distance and proximity. C. Land Development Regulation - Rewrite Group 5 Code Review 1. PROJECT: Land Development Regulation - Rewrite Group 5 (CDRV 07-004) City-initiated A portion of Group 5 deliverable, pursuant to the LDR Rewrite Work Schedule, which includes Chapter 3, Article 5. Supplemental Regulations, Chapter 4, Article III, Section 3.F.3 Donation Bins, and Chapter 4, Article III, Section 5.B. Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED). AGENT: DESCRIPTION: This proposed section will ultimately replace and enhance portions of the current LDR Part III, Chapter 2 (Zoning), Sections 4,6, 11, 13, 14, 17, and 19; and Chapter 6, Article IV, Section 8 (Seawalls, Bulkheads, Piers, and Docks). Eric Johnson, Planner II, explained this was an eight part process. There were two changes made to a previously reviewed item. He clarified they were adding new text to the Supplemental Regulations and the Exterior Building and Site Design section would be placed in Chapter 4, Article III as opposed to the Supplemental Regulations. The Supplemental Regulations would be in new Chapter 3, Article V and the entire Land Development Regulations would be in four chapters. Article V, Zoning would be in the Supplemental Regulations. Chapters 2, 6 and 10 of the Land Development Regulations would have certain sections relocated to the Supplemental Regulations, which would now have 14 different sections. He explained they did not have the Wireless Communication Facilities language as they were waiting for feedback from the industry. Article V. Section 2. Walls and Fences. Mr. Johnson explained the City would now permit an eight-foot tall fence along the rear property line, the side interior property line. Along the side corner, or front yard lines, the fence height allowed for a four foot maximum. If a hedge would be installed, an eight-foot fence could be installed along the side corner property line if the fence was set back two feet from the property line. The hedge however, could not be taller than half the height of the fence. Graphics were incorporated into the 8 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Boynton Beach, Florida May 27, 2008 Code for ease of use. This change was predicated on a number of homeowners expressing a desire to have an eight-foot tall fence on the side corner yard and the City wanted to accommodate them on a case-by-case basis. The side corner allowance with the hedges was only allowed on certain yards when oriented in the same manner as other homes on the street. More exact language and graphics were included in the Code. The cross visibility and safe site language, as well as the design offences and walls, and fence materials are included in the Code. Attachments to fences and walls were included in the Code as was language for easements and buffer walls. Inquiries were made by homeowners wanting a gate within their driveway that would extend beyond the six foot height limitation. The Code would allow them to extend up to 10 feet as long as no more than 80% of the gate would extend beyond six feet. Article V. Section 3. Accessory Structures. Screen-roof enclosures were allowed in the rear and side yards, and their setback requirements were reduced from eight feet to six feet. A further setback reduction could be used if certain criteria were met. Other amenities were allowed such as rock gardens and fish ponds. These were permitted in any yard provided they were no deeper than 18 inches. Private pump housing was allowed in certain areas of the yard if they did not exceed three feet in height. Graphics for trellises and arbors were included. Fountains were regulated to prohibit them encompassing more than 100 square feet in area, no more than nine feet in height and no more than 10 feet from the front property line. Trellises would be permitted along the property line provided it connected with a pedestrian path. Other provisos regarding the trellis overhang not extending beyond the property line and the width and the height of them were being clarified and enhanced. Swimming pools and spas were addressed as were flags and flagpoles. Flagpoles were required to have a 10-foot setback and be installed in a certain manner. There was brief discussion of the text and the assumption with flagpoles and flags were to define "flag" as meaning the American Flag. No commercial flags would be allowed, however the type of flag could not be regulated due to free speech. Mr. Johnson explained the Federal Code has requirements regarding American Flags. Further discussion ensued about adding a requirement that an American Flag must fly above any other flag. It was thought perhaps that should be added. Mr. Johnson noted the members comments in this regard. Sheds and storage were clarified not to exceed 100 square feet in area or extend higher than nine feet. The structures must meet the same setbacks as the principal structure. Sheds were also defined as non-habitable space. The height, width and depth of mobile and temporary storage container units, otherwise known as PODs, were regulated as was the time they were allowed to remain on the property. Staff determined a time period of 45 days was suitable for the unit to remain on the property; however, the board members thought it was quite liberal. Sheds and storage structures must be placed behind the rear property line and behind the side corner building setback line. 9 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Boynton Beach, Florida May 27, 2008 Building appurtenances and architectural features were addressed and graphics were included. Storage under certain types of building structures, such as stairwells was allowed. If the stairwell was unenclosed, it could not encroach more than four feet into the setback. Site improvements such as seawalls, bulkheads and docks were reviewed. Docks cannot extend more than a quarter width of the canal right-of-way. There were no changes to unenclosed decks, terraces or slabs. Unenclosed stoops and steps could not exceed three feet in height. If greater than three feet, it must meet the required five-foot setback. Power outages were addressed, and language requiring permanent generators and fuel tanks in rear and side interior yards were included. In addition to setback requirements, language was included regarding screening these items from rights-of-way and the testing and noise from the tanks and generators. It was suggested the location of dolphin poles in canals be addressed. If a dolphin pole was located inappropriately, it would impede the rights of other boaters and the waterways could not be navigated properly. While the dolphin poles were used for mooring, they could be restrictive to other boaters. It was suggested this be reviewed as to proximity. Mr. Johnson noted the concerns. Article V. Section 4. Sale of Used Merchandise. Business cannot dedicate more than 25% of their gross floor area for used merchandise. Article V. Section 5. Exterior Display of Merchandise. This provision regulated the types of merchandise to be displayed in the Commercial and Mixed-Use Districts. On-site location information pertaining to easements, parking spaces and off-street parking spaces, hours of operation and other miscellaneous regulations were also provided. Article V. Section 6. Special Temporary Sales Event. This language formalized an informal process. The events would be permitted in the Mixed-Use Districts provided a permit was obtained. The types of merchandise that could be sold were addressed, and language for on-site locations was added as was the length of the event, which was 14 days. Under certain criteria, the event could continue for up to sixty days. Article V. Section 7, Seasonal Sales Event. These events were limited to the sale of Christmas trees, pumpkins and fireworks and were allowed in all zoning districts. Schools, churches and other organizations could hold sales events for no longer than 45 days. Article V. Section 8. Permanent Exterior Storaoe. This would be allowed in the C-3, C-4, PID and M-1 zoning districts. The storage would have to be behind the front or side corner building line, and if located within parking areas, only in the parking spaces that were in excess of the Code. In the C-3 District, outside storage was restricted to 1 % of the gross floor area, and 15% of the gross floor area would be permitted in the PID districts. 10 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Boynton Beach, Florida May 27, 2008 Article V. Section 9. Sidewalk Cafes. This section included language that would only allow cafes in the right-of-way within the CRA area. It was clarified there may be cafes outside the CRA district, but generally cafes would be located on private property. This provision was intended for the cafes located within the City right-of-way. Article V, Section 10. Mobile Vendor Reaulations. This section had language removed in reference to the handling of food. Previously it contained duplicate language from the State Code. Mobile Vendor Units, (MVU) would be permitted in the C-2, C-3, C-4, CBD and all Mixed-Use zoning districts. The definitions were retained and a permit was required. The use must be compatible with the surrounding property, and the location criterion was enhanced. If on public property or rights-of-way, the mobile vendor unit could be no larger than 72 square feet, no more than 4.5' by 8' in dimension and no more than seven feet in height. They also would be restricted to sidewalks. The Code was liberal in allowing a mobile vending unit on private property. The text classified the units into Class "A", which was seven feet in height or less and 72 square feet in area or less. The units could be located on paved surfaces, including parking spaces in excess of the Code. Class "B" units are those units greater than seven feet in height or 72 square feet and they must meet the principal setbacks of the zoning district. There was no change in text regarding the removal ofthe MVU, the maintenance and separation between the units and the selected land use. There was also no change to the language regarding the display of MVUs, emergencies, prohibitions and fees. Section V. Section 11. Non-conformina Reaulations. There were minor changes to the Code. A Certificate of Conformity would be created and the section contained language that addressed properties which were made non-conforming due to eminent domain. If that situation occurred, the City would review the criteria and issue the certificate. Section V. Section 12. Satellite Earth Stations. Language for this section was forthcoming. Section V. Section 13. Wireless Communication Facilities. Language for this section was forthcoming pending industry review. Section V. Section 14, Miscellaneous. This section would regulate amusement rides, donation bins, helicopter pads and newsracks. It was noted many hospitals had helipads. There was a question about sidewalk cafes, the recovery of unpaid fines and whether the provision expanded the responsibilities of the Code Compliance Board. Mr. Johnson explained the language was included in the current Code which addressed existing violations as a whole. Chapter 4. Article III. Section 3.F.3. This article was previously reviewed and pertained to donation bins. Language regarding the number of bins, their location, maintenance, appearance, what advertising may occur on them and what sponsoring agencies are eligible to have them was included. 11 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Boynton Beach, Florida May 27, 2008 Chapter 4. Article 3. Section 5B. Crime Prevention (CPTED). Staff worked with the City Police Department and developed a listing of items the Police Department routinely looked for when reviewing plans These would be incorporated into the Code as a guideline, and encompassed lighting, numerical address, building design, understory parking, and miscellaneous provisions such as mailboxes, crosswalks, bike racks, and A TM machines. Mr. Johnson explained the members would be given a complete document after the final rewrites were adopted. The next rewrite to be brought forward would address signage. Motion Mr. Lis moved to recommend the rewrite as presented. Ms. Grcevic seconded the motion. The comments about the dolphin poles and the American Flag were noted. A vote was taken and the motion unanimously passed. 8. Other Chair Jaskiewicz distributed Certificates of Appreciation that she received at the Board Appreciation Dinner to the members. 9. Comments by members None. 10. Adjournment Motion Mr. Barnes moved to adjourn. Ms. Grcevic seconded the motion that unanimously passed. The meeting adjourned at 8:04 p.m. I) ClldvIul tC. (~I..tJVLl) Catherine Cherry 0 Recording Secretary 053008 12