Loading...
Minutes 08-28-12 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD MEETING HELD ON TUESDAY, AUGUST 28, 2012, AT 6:30 P.M. IN THE CHAMBERS, AT CITY HALL 100 E. BOYNTON BEACH BOULEVARD, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA PRESENT: Roger Saberson, Chair Mike Rumpf, Planning & Development Director Sharon Grcevic, Vice Chair Eric Johnson, Planner Corey Kravit Stacey Weinger, Board Attorney Ryan Wheeler ABSENT: James Brake Brian Miller 1. Pledge of Allegiance Chair Saberson called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. Mr. Kravit 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 Vice Chair Grcevic moved to approve the agenda. Mr. Kravit seconded the motion that unanimously passed. 4. Approval of Minutes from July 24, 2012 meeting Motion Vice Chair Grcevic moved to approve the minutes. Mr. Kravit seconded the motion that unanimously passed. 5. Communications and Announcements: Report from Staff Mike Rumpf, Planning and Development Director, reported the City Commission approved the Conditional Use approval for the cigar bar. An item not reviewed by the 1 Planning and Development Meeting Minutes Boynton Beach, FL August 28, 2012 Board was an amendment to the Land Development Regulations. There was direction from the Commission to prepare an ordinance to accommodate or allow for restaurants to allow dogs at outdoor seating areas. In order for local restaurants to do this and remain in compliance with the State Health Department requirements, there must be an ordinance which enables restaurants on a case -by -case basis to allow it, if they so choose, for patrons with dogs in outdoor seating areas. This had gone to the City Commission on the first reading and was approved; the second reading would be at the first meeting in September. One housekeeping matter Mr. Rumpf wished to discuss was the fact the Board members would be polled for a planned absence for the next meeting, which would be Yom Kippur to ensure there would be a quorum. It was known that Board member Miller would not be present and would confirm with Board member Brake. The present members indicated they would be in attendance at the September meeting. 6. New Business: Attorney Weinger administered an oath to all those intending to testify. A.1. LDR Amendments to Nonconforming Regulations, Landscaping Standards, Community Design Standards, and Historic Preservation Requirements (CDRV 12 -005) — Approve proposed amendments to the Land Development Regulations (LDR) intended to update and enhance development and design standards to promote business /economic development and increase user - friendliness. The proposed amendments include incentives to the development of industrial lots, promote more urban development through clarification of build -to -line regulations, reduce landscape requirements for non- conforming lots, update historic preservations processes, and are intended to enhance project appearance through various changes in community design regulations. Eric Johnson, Planner, presented the request as noted above. He would be covering numerous items, most notably the changes proposed to the non - conforming regulations, the landscaping standards, community design standards and historic preservation. In the staff report provided, he attempted to take the bulleted items and break them down into different categories such as business promotion, design flexibility, and green sustainable initiatives. Regarding the business promotion, it was intended to update and remove the requirement that Conditional Use applications require a sound study. Bars and nightclubs new to the City of Boynton Beach were required to submit an extensive and elaborate sound study that would be certified by an acoustical engineer, after months of discussion, that condition would be eliminated in favor of a more informal sound impact analysis The impact analysis would only be required if a live entertainment permit were to be revoked. The City was looking to go in a different direction in the sense that the noise control ordinance would be enforced. If there was a business that had 2 Planning and Development Meeting Minutes Boynton Beach, FL August 28, 2012 complaints, Code Enforcement would go on site and make an analysis. If the business was found to be non - compliant, action would be taken. With respect to the live entertainment permit, if a business was going to have any kind of live entertainment, it would require a live entertainment permit. The study would have to discuss the layout of where the speakers would be, the orientation of the speakers, the number of windows the business would have, and whether the sound would travel. Chair Saberson wondered when there was the sound analysis requirement the analysis was to be performed by a certified acoustical engineer, but now, even when required, that particular requirement was not included. If an analysis were required, why would it not be required from a professional? Mr. Johnson replied that it was an extensive undertaking especially if an establishment came to the City. It was confirmed that a study would only have to be completed if a live entertainment permit was revoked or if a bar or nightclub was within 300 feet of a residential zoning. There had not been that many issues with an applicant and the basic details and to hire an acoustical engineer would be a very expensive undertaking, as well as elaborate and untested. Mr. Rumpf noted that there are more and more outdoor activities, not those within a closed building. There was also the City's sound ordinance on the books. The business would have to comply with that either way. An expensive sound engineer would do nothing for the project if it were an outdoor bar with outdoor entertainment. This was originally put in the books when it was envisioned there were going to be larger venues, large activity centers, which have the possibility of being nuisances. In addition, that was at a time when the City was lower on the growth curve in terms of accommodating activities downtown. The experience was with a large venue within closed walls and that was what the Code originally was written for. What was being relied on was the live entertainment permit and if it got revoked due to non - compliance, it would get taken away for one year. The sound ordinance was also being relied upon. Mr. Johnson continued by explaining that for the purpose of business promotion, it was desired to update the M1 zoning district regarding non - conforming lots, particularly lot size and also to include minimum landscape requirements. Currently, if an M1 zoned property had been platted in the past and it wanted to develop, provisions were being made for that lot to be allowed to develop under the non - conforming regulations. As a compliment to it, the landscape Code was also being updated to have provisions for the alternate landscape plan. The primary purpose was to have a tree canopy along the property lines for smaller Tots. With regard to Historic Preservation, the Certificate of Appropriateness, the Historic District or Properties designation and the Historic Preservation property tax exemption application were received. The intent was to simplify the Historic Preservation public notification process for individual site designations by only requiring notification of abutting or adjacent properties, rather than those within a 400 foot radius. If designating a district, the 400 foot radius notification requirement would remain in place. In addition, it was desired to have the application process simplified for a Certificate of Economic Hardship by requiring only a written statement of their justification, rather than a formal application. The Certificate of Economic Hardship was now a component of the 3 Planning and Development Meeting Minutes Boynton Beach, FL August 28, 2012 Certificate of Appropriateness. Also desired would be to amend the guidelines for historic designation by adding the word "feeling" to the list of aspects necessary to access the integrity of the site. The list now includes seven aspects of integrity and was consistent to those listed in the National Register Guidelines. In addition, authority to initiate a designation section will be enhanced by adding site recording and architectural salvaging requirements for undesignated sites. Asterisks would now be included next to the types of land development applications that require quasi - judicial hearings. This list of applications was hidden in part two Code of Ordinances and now would be revealed in the land development regulations, thereby making it more user - friendly. Also the design standards for fences would be enhanced by requiring the finished sides of fences face adjacent properties. Chapter Four, Article Three would be reorganized by separating major topics under section headings, rather than subsection headings. One of the reasons was because it was difficult to navigate through this particular article because the standards are one section with numerous subsections, and a novice user would not find all the community design standards as easily as they could now. Any deviation from standards is not part of a variance application but part of the community design appeal process. It was desired to reorganize the entire Historic Preservation article by relocating all the process related language out of Chapter Four, Article Nine. Definitions would also be relocated so as not to duplicate information. Other changes of reorganization and relocation were noted The Community Design Appeal application would be updated to include deviations from build -to -line requirements, such as setbacks in certain zoning districts and areas of the City which would include the urban mixed -use districts, the urban commercial district overlay zone and the Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard overlay zone. Mr. Johnson explained the zero build -to -line deviation requirements. Chair Saberson wanted clarification as to why there was a build -to -line requirement, and why there were variance aspects such as mixed -use, urban or others. He did not understand why there would be a zero -side setback that would be mandatory. Mr. Johnson elaborated that Boynton Beach did not have a form based Code. In certain areas of the City, near downtown, if projects were to locate on properties that are along Federal Highway they would likely request to rezone to a mixed -use. The aim would be to go for a more urban form where there are fewer setbacks along the rights -of -way. This does not mean the elimination of sidewalks, but is a concerted effort to eliminate the design of a site where there would be a parking lot in the front and the building set back. The goal was to have the development near the property line, especially smaller sites that could be accommodated including narrow lots. Mr. Johnson explained the permitting for the live entertainment would be amended so that when someone was applying for it; their business activity would comply with the noise control ordinance by providing an affidavit. There would also be a cross reference added in the Code to the live entertainment permit. 4 Planning and Development Meeting Minutes Boynton Beach, FL August 28, 2012 With regard to sustainability and green initiatives, the methodology used when calculating the number of replacement trees was being updated. Canopy trees would be promoted and hopefully the requirements would be amended so that no more than 50% could be palm trees. Also included was limiting the maximum number of parking spaces to new projects and major modifications to existing development. These were the proposed changes this month. In the near future, parking requirements would be reviewed for possible reduction in certain areas and more cleanup of walls and fences. Chair Saberson asked for clarifications on a few items that were presented. Motion Vice Chair Grcevic moved to recommend that this proceed to the City Commission and be approved. Mr. Kravit seconded the motion that unanimously passed. 7. Other None 8. Comments by members None 9. Adjournment Motion There being no further business to discuss Ms. Grcevic moved to adjourn. Mr. Kravit seconded the motion that unanimously passed. The meeting was adjourned at 7:08 p.m. c_ tAa_c, j . Ellie Caruso Recording Secretary 091812 5