Loading...
Minutes 06-24-08 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD MEETING HELD ON TUESDAY, JUNE 24, 2008, AT 6:30 P.M. IN COMMISSION CHAMBERS, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA PRESENT: Shirley Jaskiewicz, Chair Roger Saberson, Vice Chair Matthew Barnes Sharon Grcevic (arrived at 646: p.rn.) Candace Killian Steve Myott William Poznak, Alternate Mike Rumpf, Planning Director James Cherof, City Attorney ABSENT: Jeff Lis Amber Barritt, Alternate Chair Jaskiewicz called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. She welcomed Mayor and Mrs. Taylor, who were seated in the audience. 1. Pledge of Allegiance. The members recited the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag, led by Vice Chair Saberson. Chair Jaskiewicz invited Mr. Poznak, board alternate, to sit at the dais, as Mr. Lis was not able to attend. 2. Introduction of the Board. Chair Jaskiewicz introduced the members of the board. 3. Agenda Approval. · Remove Gulfstream Gardens, which was postponed until the next meeting. · Chair Jaskiewicz requested Item F, Annual Capital Improvements Update, be moved up to the beginning of the agenda, as the City staff member providing the report would be leaving shortly. · Chair Jaskiewicz requested language be added under Old Business indicating a Utilities staff member would be present at the next meeting. Motion Mr. Poznak moved to accept the agenda as amended. Mr. Barnes seconded the motion that passed unanimously. Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Boynton Beach, Florida June 24, 2008 4. Approval of Minutes. Motion Mr. Saberson moved approval of the minutes as presented. Mr. Poznak seconded the motion that passed unanimously. s. 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, noted the following items were heard at the June 17, 2008 City Commission meeting: . City Towing request to amend the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map and abandonment of the alley with respect thereto were approved. . Comprehensive Plan text amendments involving a Water Supply Facility Work Plan were approved for forwarding to the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) for review. . Land Development Regulations Rewrite, Group 5 of the in-house project, was approved. Mr. Rumpf noted he was contacted by Mr. Lis, indicating he had a work-related conflict and could not attend the meeting. Mr. Lis requested this be relayed to the board. 6. Old Business Chair Jaskiewicz noted questions had arisen regarding the potential for an additional water supply for the City of Boynton Beach. She inquired whether the board members would be interested in having an expert from the Utilities Department appear at the next meeting to provide insight and answer questions. The board indicated their interest, and Chair Jaskiewicz advised she would extend an invitation to the staff member. 7. New Business Palm Bach Memorial Park (ANEX 08-001) Palm Bach Memorial Park (LUAR 08-002) 2 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Boynton Beach, Florida June 24, 2008 These two items have been withdrawn per the applicant's request. F. Annual CaDitallmDrovements UDdate (taken out of order) 1. PROJECT: AGENT: DESCRIPTION: Annual Capital Improvements Update City Initiated Request to transmit the 2008 update of the Capital Improvement Element of the Comprehensive Plan (Large Scale Amendments, second round of 2008). Hanna Matras, Senior Planner, noted this item was presented to the board for recommendation to the City Commission, even though the board had not participated in the process. In the past, the capital improvements schedule was not a part of the capital improvements element, but was included as a support document. Pursuant to new requirements set forth in F.S., Chapter 163, it was now required to be included in the Comprehensive Plan and updated annually. The City's Code required the board to participate in the Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments review and recommendation process to the City Commission. Since the 2007 update was adopted in 2008, the DCA requested the City's 2008 update be transmitted in the second round of the 2008 Comprehensive Plan Amendments. The City's capital improvement schedule was in preliminary form and would probably be submitted to the City Commission in October. Any changes directed by the City Commission would be made at that time. Chair Jaskiewicz expressed concern with regard to the Boundless Park project, which did not appear to be included in the capital improvement schedule. Ms. Matras replied the Boundless Park project would be financed from grants and fundraising. Per Chapter 163, the DCA required that for the first three years of the capital improvement schedule, revenues were assured for any anticipated expenditures. Ms. Matras would clarify Chair Jaskiewicz's concern with the appropriate department. James Cherof, City Attorney, administered the oath to all who would be testifying. A. Gulfstream Gardens Master Plan Modification (Postponed to next meeting) 1. PROJECT: AGENT: OWNER: LOCATION: DESCRIPTION: Gulfstream Gardens (MPMD 08-002) Bradley Miller, Miller Land Planning Consultants, Inc. Jeffrey B. Meehan, Gulfstream Gardens, LLC West side of Federal Highway, approximately % mile north of Gulfstream Boulevard. Request for Master Plan modification to update the proposed unit type from townhouse units 3 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Boynton Beach, Florida June 24, 2008 to rental units; to eliminate one (1) access driveway; and to revise layout, project circulation, and associated parking areas. Gulfstream Gardens Maior Site Plan Modification (Postponed to next meeting) 2. PROJECT: AGENT: OWNER: LOCATION: DESCRIPTION: B. Boynton Lofts Site Plan Time Extension 1. PROJECT: AGENT: OWNER: LOCATION: DESCRIPTION: Gulfstream Gardens (MSPM 08-004) Bradley Miller, Miller Planning Consultants, Inc. Jeffrey B. Meehan, Gulfstream Gardens, LLC West side of Federal Highway, approximately % mile north of Gulfstream Boulevard. Request for Major Site Plan modification to revise the type of housing approved from 308 townhouse units to 308 multi-family rental units; to eliminate one (1) access driveway; to unify and expand recreational amenities; and to modify layout and design of buildings and associated parking areas. Boynton Lofts (SPTE 08-004) Bradley Miller, Miller Planning Consultants, Inc. James A. Seifert, Addison Properties of South Florida, Inc. 623 South Federal Highway Request for a third one-year site plan time extension (NWSP 05-008 and HTEX 05-001) for a mixed-use project consisting of 48 condominium units and 3,096 square feet of retail space on 1.21 acres approved on April 19, 2005, thereby further extending the second site plan and height exception approvals from April 19, 2008 to April 19, 2009. Ed Breese, Principal Planner, reviewed the request. The site plan time extension and height exception for the project were approved by the City Commission in April 2005 and modified in a minor site plan modification in 2007. The original site plan staff report indicated the project was approved with 48 condominium units, office and retail space. The modification to the plan reduced the site by one floor, reduced the retail space, and eliminated the office space. The 40 condominium uses were retained. Mr. 4 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Boynton Beach, Florida June 24, 2008 Miller noted in his request that the downturn in the residential market had slowed the project. He was exploring other avenues which might make the project feasible, including reducing the square footage of the units, seeking incentive funding from the CRA and considering a workforce housing component to the project. Criterion for reviewing site plan time extensions required compliance with concurrency regulations. The applicant would need to submit a new traffic concurrency letter, as the current letter indicated the project build-out date was at the end of 2008, and that could not be accomplished. The utility reservation fee on the project was due, and without this fee the City could not guarantee the capacity would be available at the time the project was ready to move forward. Major alterations in the City's zoning regulations had occurred since the site plan was originally approved, and was originally adopted concurrent with a rezoning to Mixed Use-Low (MU-L). MU-L has now become MU-Ll, MU-L2 and MU-L3. The area in which this project would be built was designated for MU-L2 and as such, would comply with height requirements. The density, however, would not be in compliance with the MU- L2 and would have 12 more units than allowed. The project would have been subject to the sky exposure plane regulations which were adopted shortly after the project was approved. While the building did not meet this objective totally, it did have some step- ins and pop-outs in the building, and staff believed the design would be in close compliance with the sky exposure plane. Staff acknowledged inconsistencies with the project with the new MU-L2 zoning, but recommended approval for the site plan time extension, the new site plan as modified by the minor site plan in 2007, and the height exception. Bradley Miller, Miller Planning Consultants, Inc., explained the initial revisions of the minor modification previously approved were an attempt by the developer to obtain funding, which was based on percentages of sales. The owner had researched various ways of marketing the project. Mr. Miller had no objection to the three conditions of approval. A question arose as to the City's rationale for locating the property in a non-conforming zoning district. Mr. Breese explained the MU-L zonings had not been revoked and the project could still be built as approved. Additionally, the MU-2L would decrease the height from 75 feet to 65 feet. The density was a bit less than what it would have been in MU-L3; however, staff believed this was compatible with MU-2 zoning projects. If only minor modifications were made to the project, Mr. Breese believed the applicant could retain the 12 units; however, the property would be rezoned to MU-L2 and all regulations would be enforced. 5 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Boynton Beach, Florida June 24, 2008 It was suggested the board be provided with another opportunity to view the elevations, and if there was any activity on the project, staff could encourage the applicant to provide the project with greater style to counter its current "boxy" appearance. Added glass or contemporary design features could also be considered to trigger a loft look. It was suggested "minor" modifications be removed from condition #1. Mr. Rumpf indicated staff might tweak this condition in its recommendation to the City Commission. Motion Mr. Myott moved to extend the site plan approval, subject to all staff comments and to add an additional comment that the exterior design elements would be improved prior to submitting for building permits. Mr. Barnes seconded the motion that passed unanimously. c. Holiday Inn Express Maior Site Plan Modification Mr. Breese requested both items be consolidated for the presentation, with individual motions to be made for each item. The board had no objection. 1. PROJECT: AGENT: OWNER: LOCATION: DESCRIPTION: Holiday Inn Express HeiGht ExceDtion 2. PROJECT: AGENT: OWNER: LOCATION: DESCRIPTION: Holiday Inn Express (MSPM 08-003) John Garra, Square One Architecture, Inc. Victoria Richman, University Holdings 480 West Boynton Beach Boulevard Request for major site plan modification approval to alter the facade of the existing hotel with exterior enhancements of the existing structure with a decorative parapet and roof features. Holiday Inn Express (HTEX 08-001) John Garra, Square One Architecture, Inc. Victoria Richman, University Holdings 480 West Boynton Beach Boulevard Request for height exception to allow screening of roof-top equipment (designed as a decorative tower) with a mean roof height of 52 feet, a distance of 7 feet above 6 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Boynton Beach, Florida June 24, 2008 the 45 foot maximum height allowed in the C-3 zoning district. Mr. Breese explained University Holdings proposed to alter the exterior facade of the Holiday Inn Express at 1-95 and Boynton Beach Boulevard by removing the mansard roof and replacing it with a parapet and decorative cornice, placing gable roofs over every other column of windows and putting a decorative tower on the roof to screen the mechanical equipment at the east end of the building. The alterations were defined as major as a result of the height of the tower structure, and would require a 7 foot height exception. The building would remain four stories tall. The parapet would be 38 feet, 3 inches. The gable roofs would be 40 feet, 7 inches. The proposed decorative tower would not appear to cause any difficulty with the existing land uses or proposed land uses in the area. Additionally, the hotel was surrounded on three sides by a right-of-way and did not have immediate adjoining properties. The tower itself constituted 2% of the hotel roof and would not be a detriment to light or air to any adjoining properties. The applicant had indicated the building colors and stone veneer would remain the same. The changes were outlined earlier with the roof line. The gable roof and hip roof over the top of the decorative tower were proposed as a standing seam metal roof, with a galvalume (natural aluminum) finish. Staff had concerns regarding the finish on the roofs, as the porte cochere roof and tower on the east building currently were currently blue. The applicant indicated the owner was not in a financial position to change all the roofs to the galvalume finish and requested they be given a few years to accomplish this. Staff placed a condition of approval that the roofs all match at the conclusion of the project. The applicant also proposed to utilize a new signage concept, placing the signs on the north and west building elevations on the new parapet. They also proposed to replace the Holiday Inn sign on the easternmost wall along the porte cochere with a cabinet sign. In the conditions of approval, staff also recommended the cabinet sign be changed to individual channel letters to produce the appearance of a smaller sign. Staff recommended approval of the height exception, as well as the major site plan modification, with the conditions as noted in Exhibit C, Conditions of Approval. John Garra, Square One Architecture, agreed with the recommendations except for the roof color. He would prefer the galvalume or metal roof in order to remove the corporate branding colors from the building. Additionally, the long-term plan was to apply the metal color to all the roofs in approximately four years as a result of budgetary constraints. 7 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Boynton Beach, Florida June 24, 2008 Chair Jaskiewicz noted she was pleased with the features added. The changes to the facade softened the view from 1-95, and the tower affect provided identity and refi nement. Board discussion ensued. Suggestions included: . Correcting the roofs, ensuring coordination of the colors. . The project contained too much yellow. While design elements were added, other considerations could include accent paint colors, decorative metal work in the openings in the tower, and the addition of outriggers under the soffit. . The building, situated at a major roadway, had been in disrepair for a number of years, and the project would be worthwhile if sufficient changes were made. . The applicant's enhancement of the design and bringing it back to the board next month. . Placing a condition on the approval requiring 24 months to update the existing porte coochere cover to match the new cover on the western building. Mr. Garra noted the owner's budget had reached almost $250,000 and would be subject to the Art in Public Places requirement. As such, he believed the artwork could be integrated into the tower panels. In reviewing the conditions of approval for the major site plan modification, Mr. Garra objected to condition #3, noting this would have to be addressed by the owner. Mr. Garra was working with a landscape architect regarding condition #1, which would be a requirement of the permitting process. Discussion ensued as to the impact of the Art in Public Places requirement and the manner in which improvements could be incorporated into the project. A suggestion was to enhance the tower, which would be preferable to the placement of a metal sculpture in the yard. Another suggestion was to design a more decorative fence. Motion Mr. Poznak moved that all of the recommendations made by this board be part of the approval. The board's recommendations include the addition of decorative metal work in the tower, architectural details and/or color accents to improve the overall appearance of the project, as well as the eight conditions of approval, and any conditions required by the City Commission. Ms. Grcevik seconded the motion that passed unanimously. 8 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Boynton Beach, Florida June 24, 2008 Mr. Garra noted the changes would be implemented prior to the next City Commission meeting. Attorney Cherof asserted once the City Commission acted on the matter, and unless the City Commission sent it back before the board, the board would be unable to take further action. Chair Jaskiewicz suggested a board member attend the City Commission meeting in order to address this item. Motion Mr. Myott moved to approve the request for height exception to allow screening of roof- top equipment (designed as a decorative tower) with a mean roof height of 52 feet, a distance of 7 feet above the 45 foot maximum height allowed in the C-3 zoning district. Mr. Poznak seconded the motion that passed unanimously. D. M-1 Corridor Uses Code Review 1. PROJECT: M-1lndustrial Zoning District - Corridor Uses (CDRV 08-003) City initiated Request for amendments to the Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2. Zoning Section 8-A. M-l Industrial District, to add provisions and regulations for selected industrial and non-industrial uses of properties that front an arterial or collector roadway. AGENT: DESCRIPTION: Attorney Cherof administered the oath to all who would be testifying. Chair Jaskiewicz, Ms. Grcevik, Mr. Barnes and Mr. Myott disclosed that they met with Mr. Weiner. Mr. Saberson disclosed that he spoke to Mr. Weiner on the telephone. Mr. Rumpf explained the proposed amendment would: . Allow selected commercial and retail uses on properties zoned M-1 and located along major corridors; . Allow selected industrial and other uses with retail or commercial components along such corridors; and . Exclude heavy industrial and commercial uses from these corridors. 9 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Boynton Beach, Florida June 24, 2008 The principal area affected by the proposed amendment would be South Congress Avenue, which was the only arterial roadway flanked by the M-1 zoning district, and stretched between the L-28 and L-30 canal, approximately one mile, excluding the rezoned property to the south end. Redevelopment was not anticipated, with the exception of a vacant parcel on the northern end. Mr. Rumpf identified the uses that had occupied buildings in the area, which included home improvement, self-storage and contracting. Retail stores were accommodated as a result of warehousing and wholesale components. The project had been supported by repeated findings, beginning in 1989 when the Comprehensive Plan identified the corridor and the types of businesses, which included home improvement products and services. It recommended similar businesses be accommodated and allow additional commercial or retail components, and supported aesthetic recommendations. In 2002, staff conducted the South Congress Avenue Corridor Study which preserved industrial land and considered an overlay district with design criteria and the types of uses. In 2006, the Mellgren Study was conducted which focused on preserving existing industrial land, the creation of flex space, and LDRs to address aesthetics and com pati bil ity. The 2007 draft of the LDR rewrite included the draft LDR zoning matrix and was reviewed by the board in its entirety. The draft introduced non-industrial uses and industrial-commercial uses for corridors, while prohibiting incompatible uses. Recommendations included: . Adding limited commercial-retail uses to the corridor and providing for restrictions on commercial-retail uses. . Limiting industrial uses while allowing additional commercial uses. . Increasing prohibited uses to protect the corridor appearance, enhancing commercial attributes and improving compatibility of corridor uses. . Establishing sign standards to decrease maximum heights to protect the corridor appearance. Summary points included: 10 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Boynton Beach, Florida June 24, 2008 . Minimum parking requirements for built properties could restrict commercial use of the buildings, based on first-come-first served options. Staff could break down an individual leasable space to allow for the application of different ratios. . Staff recommended a minimum space for showrooms. . Office use had been excluded in order to maintain a balance of complimentary type uses for immediate convenience and food for employees, residents and students. . The recommendation for collector roads would be removed, leaving only the arterial roadway classification. . Staff would work with the Legal Department to develop language regarding grandfathering non-conforming uses, such as car washes and self-storage businesses. Mr. Rumpf noted staff would work with the Legal Department in the preparation of the ordinance. He pointed out the existing prohibited uses would continue; however, any use not listed in the two groups would be excluded from corridor properties. The uses would require some type of open showroom area and retail space. The text amendment would require the initiative of the board, the City Commission and/or staff. The public could not file without the consent of a majority of property owners affected by the proposed amendment. Chair Jaskiewicz invited public comments. Michael Weiner, 10 SE First Avenue, Delray Beach, appeared on behalf of the owners of 320 South Congress. He was not in accord with the elimination of professional and medical offices. He reviewed an article entitled Industry Output and Employment Projections to 2014, which cited statistics in the professional and business service sectors. A copy of the article is on file in the City Clerk's office. He contended professional office space was in keeping with the market environment in the area and would not be more parking intensive than other uses proposed. He provided a copy of the yd Edition of the Institute of Transportation Parking Generation, which dealt with parking demands for medical and dental offices, as well as convenience stores and fast- food restaurants. A copy is on file in the City Clerk's office. Mr. Weiner did not believe the amendment assisted with second-floor space. He noted potential tenants were turned down for occupancy at 320 S. Congress Avenue, while the building had an occupancy rate of only 30%. He contended the corridor would not be viable without professional office and medical space included in the overlay, and the City would be causing a disincentive for investment in the area. 11 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Boynton Beach, Florida June 24, 2008 Board discussion ensued. Comments pertained to: . Preservation of land use distribution. . Increasing the use list subject to distance separations for residential uses. . Determining occupancy rates of the building. . Rezoning of industrial land and concerns relating to excess residential areas. . The current market would not support many of the proposed industrial uses, but would utilize professional offices to a greater extent. . Mixed-uses were appropriate but should also be aesthetically pleasing. . With regard to use of the second floor of the existing building at 320 South Congress, it was suggested an exception be made to fill the space with offices, as long as parking requirements were not exceeded. Jeffrey Douglas, 2 Barefoot Lane, Lantana, accompanied Mr. Weiner. He reviewed a list of tenants in the building, as well as those who were not permitted. He noted office space on the second floor and bottom floor would be helpful. Messrs. Weiner and Douglas would like the opportunity to fill or exceed their parking spaces and had in mind strategies if the use were approved. They currently had 59 parking spaces and could obtain another 25 spaces. They were proposing multi-uses for the complex, including professional offices. Discussion ensued regarding: . Rezoning the property or adding the office component as a conditional use within the zoning regulation. . Adding the office component as a second floor use rather than a conditional use. . Staff identified the types of uses in the various districts, and general office uses would not be in one zoning district, but rather in a commercial or office district. . Staff had come up with additional uses, some of which were the very uses denied in the past, which could now occupy the building. . The corridor was unique and many people working in the area could benefit from professional or office services. 12 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Boynton Beach, Florida June 24, 2008 There was discussion with respect to implementation of a specific use condition to assist Mr. Weiner's client in leasing the building. Attorney Cherof reminded the board that the agenda item did not call for a site specific discussion and would not be appropriate in the context of staffs presentation. Mr. Rumpf noted this project had been expedited in order to assist the property owner. Messrs. Weiner and Douglas indicated they would be amenable to the use of the first and second floors. Motion Mr. Saberson moved to approve staffs request for amendments to the Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2. Zoning Section 8-A. M-l Industrial District, to add provisions and regulations for selected industrial and non-industrial uses of properties that front an arterial or collector roadway, with the exception that professional offices be allowed on second floors in buildings along the corridors. Ms. Grcevik seconded the motion that passed unanimously. E. Administrative Adjustment Revisions Code Review 1. PROJECT: Administrative Adjustment Revisions (CDRV 08-004) City initiated Request for amendments to the LDR, Chapter 2. Zoning, Section 5, making all properties developed for single-family homes eligible for administrative setback adjustments regardless of date of platting. AGENT: DESCRIPTION: Mr. Breese advised in 2005, staff brought forward a Code amendment to allow greater flexibility in staffs ability to process home additions without individuals having to go through the variance process. At that time, staff utilized the date of the last rewrite of the LDR for matters that could be handled administratively and matters that required Commission action. The requested amendment would further previous Commission action and better accommodate the needs of residents to expand their living areas without the need for a variance. All lots within single-family residential zoning districts would be eligible for administrative adjustments for setbacks, not just those lots platted prior to 1975. Staff had received several requests from individuals who had lots platted after 1975. Staff reconsidered the necessity of utilizing this date as opposed to the standard language of "...the effective date of the adoption of this ordinance." With the removal of the 1975 requirement, there were only 415 additional lots that could currently be handled 13 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Boynton Beach, Florida June 24, 2008 through an administrative adjustment at staff level. Therefore, staff was requesting the 1975 provision be removed, with the effective date being the date of the adoption of the ordinance. Discussion ensued as to notice requirements. Mr. Breese noted the Code required a notice be sent to abutting property owners. However, staff allowed individuals to request the adjustments as long as they provided a signed consent from the abutting property owners, or proof of notice. If a neighbor objected, a decision would be made administratively, and the applicant would be required to meet the criteria of the administrative adjustment. Motion Mr. Poznak moved to approve the request. Mr. Myott seconded the motion that passed unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 9:13 p.m. 8. Other None 9. Comments by members None 10. Adjournment Motion Mr. Poznak moved to adjourn. Ms. Grcevik seconded the motion that passed unanimously. ~DI- Stephanie D. Kahn Recording Secretary 070108 14