Loading...
Minutes 05-25-10 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD MEETING HELD ON TUESDAY, MAY 25, 2010, AT 6:30 P.M. IN COMMISSION CHAMBERS, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA PRESENT: Roger Saberson, Chair Matthew Barnes, Vice Chair Sharon Grcevic Shirley Jaskiewicz Candace Killian Warren Timm Leah Foertsch, Alternate Michael Rumpf, Planning and Zoning Director Jamila Alexander, Assistant City Attorney ABSENT: Steve Myott 1. Pledge of Allegiance Chair Saberson called the meeting to order at 6:34 p.m. Ms. Jaskiewicz led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. 2. Introduction of the Board Chair Saberson introduced the members of the Board. 3. Agenda Approval Motion Ms. Jaskiewicz moved to approve. Vice Chair Barnes seconded the motion that passed unanimously. 4. Approval of Minutes Motion Vice Chair Barnes moved to approve. Ms. Killian seconded the motion that passed unanimously. 1 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Boynton Beach, FL May 25, 2010 5. Communications and Announcements. Report from Planning and Zoning Director Michael Rumpf, Planning and Zoning Director, reported on the outcome of the items as reviewed by the City Commission subsequent to the Board's review. The following items were approved: . Amusement Arcade incorporating an Adult Arcade use into the C-2 Zoning District, and treating them similar to Amusement Arcades used by youth, was approved on second reading. . Timeless Life Care including a rezoning at 623 S. Federal Highway for a mixed-use project, consisting of an adult living facility was approved on first reading. The zoning code variance for parking and the conditional use and site plan items were tabled so that approval of all actions could be made concurrently on second reading. . Indoor Athletic Instruction and Training was a City-initiated Code cleanup item primarily affecting the M-1 and PID zoning districts was approved. . City-initiated Code Item regarding Windmills for aeration was approved on second reading. 6. Old Business None. 7. New Business Attorney Alexander administered the oath to anyone intending to testify. A.1. 3416 South Lake Drive (Jaffe), (ZNCV 10-006), Variance, located at 3416 South Lake Drive. Request relief from City of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2, Zoning, Section 5.B.2.a., requiring: (1) a minimum front yard setback of 25 feet, to allow a variance of 18 feet and a front yard setback of 7 feet; and (2) a minimum rear yard setback of 20 feet, to allow a variance of 20 feet and a rear yard setback of 0 feet, for a proposed carport accessory to a single- family residence within the R-1-AAB Single-family Residential zoning district. Applicant: Dr. Steven D. Jaffe Kathleen Zeitler, Planner, explained the applicant requested the item be tabled. The applicant had not provided the notification to the surrounding property owners and did not have a contractor for the proposed carport. Therefore, he had no specifications for the project. Staff suggested the item be tabled to the next meeting to avoid having to re- 2 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Boynton Beach, FL May 25, 2010 advertise the project. Motion Ms. Jaskiewicz moved to table the item, 3416 South Lake Drive (Jaffe) variance, until the next regular meeting of the Planning Board. Vice Chair Barnes seconded the motion that passed unanimously. Ms. Jaskiewicz inquired about the empty lot next to the subject property. It was explained the property towards the bridge being referenced was not an empty lot, It was part of the Lake Worth Drainage District right-of-way. Leah Foertsch, Board Alternate, was seated at the dias in Mr. Myott's stead at 6:42 p.m. B.1. AT&T Wireless, Renaissance Commons Phase VI, (COUS 10-002), Conditional Use, located at 1500 Gateway Boulevard, Compson Place Condo. Request approval for conditional use to allow stealth telecommunications facilities consisting of rooftop antennas and related equipment housed within four (4), concealment structures 16 feet in height, approximately 13 feet by 25 feet. Applicant: Gary Kissel, SBA Network Services, Inc. Ms. Zeitler, Planner, presented the request and explained the request for conditional use approval to allow stealth rooftop antennas and related telecommunications equipment atop an existing commercial building known as Compson Place in Renaissance Commons. She located the property and surrounding buildings and uses. The City's tower regulations intended to minimize visibility of communication towers/antennas through various techniques such as design location, camouflaging techniques and landscape screenings. As an alternative to additional towers, the use of accessory rooftops towers could be used when necessary to improve service coverage in an area. It encouraged co-location to reduce the number of towers needed. When properly sited and screened, they had minimal impact. Building rooftop antennas are only permitted on buildings at least 45 feet tall. Communication facilities, when located in the SMU zoning district, require conditional use approval and must have stealth camouflage design. There would be four self-enclosures. AT&T Mobility would locate their antennas and equipment in the top right of the four enclosures and the other three enclosures would be available for co-location for future carriers. Building elevations would mimic the architectural tower features throughout the building design to provide greater visual interest to the roofline. The enclosures would be proportional to the height and mass of the building and would allow future carriers to co-locate there. They would be architecturally integrated with the same elements and would not exceed the maximum building height of 75 feet. The stealth facilities would be recessed from the edge of the roof. Enclosures one and two were most visible from the east elevation at a distance of 237 feet. 3 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Boynton Beach, FL May 25, 2010 The equipment plan and elevation reflected each of the stealth enclosures would have a steel platform five-feet high with steps and the platform would be concealed by the roof. The related equipment cabinets would be on top of the platform and enclosed with fiberglass concealment panels and foam trim to match the existing architecture of the buildings. Each facility would be about 13' by 25', having 325 square feet and a total of 16 feet in height measured from the existing roof height to the highest point. A sample of the fiberglass material for the enclosures was distributed to the Board. AT&T proposed to construct the first two enclosures on the east side of the building and the remaining two would be constructed for use by future carriers when their leases were finalized. There were no known future carriers at this time. Staff recommended for condition of approval #13, that all four enclosure be constructed at one time to ensure consistency and symmetry on the building. The Agent indicated condition #13 was problematic, and neither AT&T nor the property owner wanted to incur the expense of building the enclosures before future carriers were found. Staff agreed to modify the working of condition #13 as follows: "To ensure consistency, all four stealth facilities shall be required to be constructed with the same building materials per the dimensions and designs of the approved plans. Enclosures one and two located on the easternmost portion of the roof shall be required to be constructed at the same time. Enclosures three and four, located west of enclosures one and two, shall be required to be constructed at the same time after leases have been secured for future carriers. The symmetry will be provided with enclosures one and two, which will be most visible on the east building elevation." Staff evaluated the project based on the standards for conditional uses and compliance for development regulations, including the tower regulations, and documented their findings as contained in the staff report. Staff recommended approval of the request with 17 conditions and with the proviso that condition #13 would be modified and subject to compliance with the SMU District Standards with respect to the maximum building height of 75 feet. Staff recommended18 months be allowed to initiate the conditional use project. Patrick Vardone, Project Director with SBA Network Services, 5900 Broken Sound Parkway NW, Boca Raton, Gary Kissel, SBA Network Services, and Donald Pittman, AT&T RF Engineer were present. Mr. Vardone reviewed staff's presentation and agreed with it. He distributed simulations of elevations depicting the tower antennas concealed by screening walls and architectural elements. Each enclosure would be for one carrier's use. He agreed with all of the conditions of approval and condition #13 as modified. He clarified he spoke with the property owner about the conditions and he was also in agreement. The facility would provide continuous service to Boynton Beach AT&T customers. A propagation map was distributed reflecting gaps in AT&T coverage along Congress 4 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Boynton Beach, FL May 25, 2010 Avenue and Gateway. The problem occurred in December 2007, and they were working on securing a location, but the property owner was working on a development. As a result, they were delayed. Mr. Vardone thanked the Planning staff for their assistance as the project was months in the making. He also thanked the Board members for their consideration. Ms. Jaskiewicz inquired if the project would generate revenues for the City. Mr. Vardone noted Boynton Beach residents paid an E-911 tax to the City for their phone use. Aside from that, no revenues would be generated. Chair Saberson inquired if there was a trend that the telecommunication industry would have these types of facilities as opposed to large towers. Mr. Pittman explained he did not know if it was a trend. Every municipality has their own requirements. He would have preferred to build a 120' tower in the area because the taller the tower, the larger the coverage area. The idea was to receive as much benefit from this application at this location as possible. The area to be served was the primary location where they had the most usage in the area and the tower would significantly address the service issues. There was a huge population in the one-mile radius. Chair Saberson opened the floor for public hearing. No one coming forward, Chair Saberson closed the public hearing. Motion Vice Chair Barnes moved to approve the AT&T Wireless, Renaissance Commons Phase VI Conditional Use application subject to all staff conditions as revised. Ms. Grcevic seconded the motion. Vice Chair Barnes amended his motion to include, "as revised specifically on Condition 13." Ms. Grcevic agreed to the amendment. A vote was taken and passed unanimously. C.1. Security Fences, (CDRV 10-004), Code Review. Request approval of an amendment to the Land Development Regulations, code citation, to create regulations for the installation of low voltage fences within perimeter fences on properties zoned M-1 (Industrial) and PID (Planned Industrial Development). Applicant: City-initiated. Ed Breese, Principal Planner, explained staff was considering an interim amendment to the Land Development Regulations to allow for additional security for Industrial businesses to assist in theft prevention. A local business from the Industrial District, Yellow Transportation, and their fence contractor, Electric Guard Dog, requested the ability to install low-voltage fencing as a deterrent. Staff met with them several times to ensure the safety of the product, the public's safety, and had answered all of staffs questions. The fence would be placed inside a perimeter fence to avoid exposure. The Building, Police and Fire Departments reviewed the request and had no objections. The electric fence 5 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Boynton Beach, FL May 25, 2010 company received approval for installation of the fences from other municipalities such as Pompano Beach, Orlando, Coco Beach, Ft. Pierce, Lakeland and other municipalities and locations as depicted on a map included with the meeting materials. Cindy Vaughan, Business Development Director, Sentry Security Systems, Columbia, South Carolina, and Jesse Davis, Terminal Manager from the YRC Transportation Corporation were present. She commended staff, Mr. Breese and the Electrical, Fire and Building Departments for their efforts to develop a healthy and safe text amendment/Ordinance change to allow for a safe and effective product. She explained the new technology evolved from an effort to avoid using guard dogs. Ms. Vaughan offered the following information about the system. It was: · Based on a 12-volt marine battery · Solar panel charged · The fence would not plug into the City's grid · The battery deposits electricity to an energizer, which collects the power. Every 1.3 seconds it is dropped to the fence at a 7,000 volt pulsed-shock strength · The effectiveness of the system was there were warning signs placed every 40 feet. The City requested signs be printed in English, Spanish and Creole · The signs would be visible from the street and interior of the property. Intruders would be unaware that it was a pulsed-shock system. As a result, crime was deterred 95% of the time. The electric fence would be located behind a perimeter fence, which was often a 6' to 8' chain-link fence and it had to be two feet higher than the highest point of the perimeter fence. The electric fence had steel poles in the corner for support and fiberglass poles every 30 feet. Twenty strands of wire were used, 6 of them were ground wires and the remaining 14 were electrified wires. The fence was usually used after hours in industrial and/or commercial settings. When the facility using the product shut down, the fence would be on through the night If the voltage was broken for more than five seconds or dropped below 2,000 volts for more than five seconds, an alarm would sound. The reason for the five second delay was to prevent false alarms such as if an animal brushed against the fence. The system would be regulated as a burglar alarm. When the alarm was activated the information was dispatched to a terminal center or clearinghouse for alarms such as Brinks. The fence was located 4 to 12 inches behind the perimeter fence so it would not create an entrapment zone. It would not leave marks on the hands and expert studies confirmed the shocks would not be harmful. Additionally, the shocks were so short and pulsed, they would not harm individuals with heart issues. The fences were installed at no charge. The 6 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Boynton Beach, FL May 25, 2010 firm would maintain ownership and maintain liability, handle City compliance issues, maintain the fence quarterly and have trained individuals to troubleshoot if a technician was not in the area when needed. Assistance was available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. The business would only pay a monthly monitoring fee. The fences were more effective than a security guard. The firm's customer base was typically comprised of businesses who have a high volume of inventory located within a lot and could not be kept inside. The fence was cost effective at one-tenth the cost of a guard. Several neighboring cities allowed the fences for specific industries and it was agreed staff put together a good ordinance that, if followed, would provide a needed security option and a safe product. The fence was not harmful to small children and animals since electricity looks for the path of least resistance. For a small child or animal, there was a very small path for the electricity to travel through and they would receive less of a shock than an adult. Ms. Vaughan believed only a lizard may not survive the shock. She spoke with the ASPCA in Virginia about the matter and the Association was satisfied. The bottom fence wire was a ground wire so small creatures would not be harmed and the top wire was also a ground wire so birds would not be harmed. Mr. Timm noted some youth could easily climb a 6 to 8 foot fence and inquired if the fence should be higher. Many of the companies using the fence have 6' of fence with 2' of barbed wire. The perimeter fence was never electrified. To come in contact with the fence, the individual must be illegally trespassing with criminal intent. Vice Chair Barnes inquired about landscaping in the PID or M-1 zoning districts and landscaping inside the fence. Vice Chair Barnes expressed he would not want to see an electrified fence installed at the expense of removing existing landscaping. Mr. Breese explained any time landscaping was removed as the result of a permit or a type of improvement, the landscaping would be required to be replaced. The replacement could be made on the outside or elsewhere to accommodate the security fence. Staff could work with those situations. As to an entrapment zone, Ms. Vaughan explained various departments approved of the applications, but it did not fall under the National Electric Code. There was an international standard that dealt with the installation of electric security fences. Staff included these standards for safety and that was a reason for the fence to be located four to 12 inches from the perimeter fence. The idea was to make it difficult for individuals to climb. It was a flexible fence which could be tightened to look good or be moved. If a truck backed into it, or an individual fell onto it, it would touch the chain link fence and ground out. In regard to the landscaping, the firm provided the clients with all the necessary herbicides to keep the fence line between the two fences clear of vegetation that could short out the 7 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Boynton Beach, FL May 25, 2010 system. It was; however, then the business's responsibility to trim the vegetation. Ms. Jaskiewicz commended the firm on the sign design and inquired when an individual was shocked if an alarm was activated. Ms. Vaughan responded an alarm would be activated if someone touched the fence for over five seconds, but she pointed out individuals could not hold on for more than five seconds because the fence was pulsed, the muscles would be repelled and the person would let go. It an alarm was activated, the first responders were typically the terminal manager who contacted the local business manager who then would make the determination whether to contact the Police Department. There were no public comments received regarding the application. Motion Ms. Jaskiewicz moved the security fences CDRV 10-004 be submitted to the City Commission for approval to be included in the Code review. Ms. Jaskiewicz confirmed she was recommending approval of the Code to the City Commission. Ms. Grcevic seconded the motion that passed unanimously. 8. Other None. 9. Comments by members None. 10. Adjournment Motion Ms. Killian moved to adjourn. Vice Chair Barnes seconded the motion that passed unanimously. The meeting properly adjourned at 7:31 p.m. (2(liJ-i)U/~ (lh~jLY Catherine Cherry r Recording Secretary 052610 8