Loading...
Minutes 10-22-13 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD MEETING HELD ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 22, 2013, 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 Director Ryan Wheeler, Vice Chair Ed Breese, Principal Planner James Blake Stacey Weinger, Assistant City Attorney Sharon Grcevic David Katz Stephen Palermo ABSENT: Brian Miller 1. Pledge of Allegiance Chair Saberson called the meeting to order at 6:34 p.m. Mr Wheeler led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag 2. Introduction of the Board Chair Saberson introduced all Board members who were present. 3. Agenda Approval Motion Mr. Katz moved to approve the agenda. Ms. Grcevic seconded the motion that unanimously passed. 4. Minutes Approval of the August 27, 2013 Meeting Motion Mr. Katz moved to approve the minutes Ms Weinger seconded the motion that unanimously passed. Mr. Katz wanted to compliment Catherine Cherry, Minutes Specialist. She got the flavor of the last meeting and they were to the point. 1 MEETING MINUTES PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FL. OCTOBER 22, 2013 Mr Breese wanted to second what was said about the quality of the minutes. There were two minor changes to the August 27, 2013 minutes. On page 13, third paragraph, last line, "there was already hedge material along the property line taller than the property owners "; this should have read; "there was already very tall hedge material along the property line ". The second correction was at the last paragraph on page 13, the line reads; "The parking lot has lighting spaced 25 -feet apart" This should have read: "The parking lot has lighting 25 -feet in height ". Motion Mr. Katz moved to accept the minutes as amended. Mr. Palermo seconded the motion that unanimously passed. 5. Communications and Announcements: Report from Staff Michael Rumpf, Planning and Zoning Director, reported on the items previously reviewed and their outcome before the City Commission beginning October 01, 2013. The agenda which included the second reading and approval of the mobile vending unit (MVU) code amendment. The second amendment to the Land Development Regulations which addressed regulations applicable to tasting rooms for manufacturing beverage uses and parking requirement changes was approved On the same agenda was the first reading on the betterment of the utility easement at Renaissance Commons which was approved. There were several modifications and time extensions in the October 15, 2013 agenda which were all approved including the Cross Creek Center. Conditional use approval of the modifications for the additional outbuilding as well as fagade improvements and site changes corresponding with those improvements were approved. A major modification for the veterinary clinic proposed at 222 Boynton Beach Boulevard was approved. The new site plan for the construction of a four -story hotel with 92 guest rooms at 201 West Ocean Drive was approved. The 18 -month time extension for the site plan known as Tuscan Villas was approved. Mr. Rumpf discussed the holiday seasons that are approaching and the need to have advanced planning because of possible meeting cancellations, travel plans and possible lack of presence of Board members. Staff does not currently have any scheduled items 2 MEETING MINUTES PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FL. OCTOBER 22, 2013 in the application review cycle for November or December. However, something can come up for review; a rush item and there may be a need for an agenda or a meeting. Mr Rumpf asked the Board members if any of them knew their travel plans for the holidays at this time. Chair Saberson responded Board members would get back to Mr. Rumpf with any plans they may have for the upcoming holidays. Ms. Grcevic commented she had no plans for Thanksgiving and Chair Saberson also stated he has no plans for Thanksgiving either. Mr Rumpf stated Board member Brian Miller contacted him to let him know he was not feeling well and would not be attending this evenings meeting. Mr. Rumpf will contact Mr. Miller about his plans for the holidays Assistant City Attorney Stacey Weinger, administered an oath to those intending to testify. 6. New Business A. NE 4 th Avenue Abandonment (ARAN 13 -004) — Approve request to abandon a portion of NE 4 th Avenue between Federal Highway and NE 4th Street in the CBD (Central Business District). Applicant: City- initiated. Bradley Miller, Miller Land Planning Consultants, 508 East Boynton Beach Boulevard, agent for the appicant, began his presentation requesting an abandonment of a portion of NE 4 th Avenue. The location of the property is off Boynton Beach Boulevard on the south side, 3 rd Avenue and 4 Avenue on the north side of Casa Costa and 5 th Avenue running north and south. The area in question is the access leading to the back area of Cuthill's Backyard Restaurant. It is a 25 -foot wide right -of- way which was currently improved with a roadway. With the right -of -way being 25 -feet wide and the pavement 18 -19 feet wide, it is very narrow for two -way traffic. There have been some adjustments to our proposal, to Exhibit C and to the conditions that were part of the initial package. Mr. Miller explained he would discuss those changes later in his presentation. Chair Saberson asked if the applicant was in agreement with the revised conditions of approval and Mr. Miller responded affirmatively. The applicant is the City with it being a public right -of -way. The purpose of this proposal is the exiting traffic on 4 Avenue coming out to Federal Highway. There is on- street parking to the left of the driveway. Looking through the parked cars makes it difficult to see oncoming traffic and creates a dangerous situation. 3 MEETING MINUTES PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FL. OCTOBER 22, 2013 Initially, the request was to take the pavement out and turn it into pedestrian access; however, people in the area are accustomed to using this as ingress. There was a suggestion to leave it the same way, but use it as an ingress only driveway. The conceptual plan shows the property to the south which has been approved for a restaurant/bar and the building to the north is being considered for a breakfast restaurant. There is a parking area for the approved plan. The existing pedestrian crossing coming from Casa Costa on the east side of Federal Highway would be improved to create a pedestrian connection to the future restaurant area that would lead back to Cuthill's Backyard and the uses in that area. This would be an entrance only coming from Federal and would lead to both sides of the parking area. There is a "peanut" in the street which is a directional island allowing left turn movement as cars are going south to go back east. However, people coming out of the driveway go across illegally and use the peanut to go north on Federal Highway. Safety is another reason to convert this into a one -way driveway. Landscape would be added narrowing the pavement down to a one -way width of 14 feet as reflected in the conditions of approval. There would still be access out to NE 0 Street from the parking lot and the circulation through the area remains the same. Chair Saberson asked if the abandoned area would be available for ingress off of Federal Highway by vehicle and if this was in the revised conditions of approval. Mr. Miller responded this would be ingress only for vehicles The original plan was to convert the entire thing into a pedestrian area but this would allow ingress only. The pedestrian connection would still be made along the southern edge. The right -of -way area would be enhanced with landscaping on the north side adjacent to the other building and then another area to stub it out with parking. Mr. Katz asked if cars can go in that way, what would prevent them from coming back out the same way? Mr. Miller responded signage is the quick answer. Perhaps physical barriers which would allow incoming traffic only could be discussed. Mr. Katz inquired why this was not left the way it was with pedestrians only and if it was totally necessary. Mr. Miller responded some of the reaction once this began was the location of the entrance to get to 4 th Street and to Cuthills Backyard. Mr. Katz opined if people want to get to the Backyard they would find a way to get in. Ms. Grcevic wanted clarification from Mr. Miller the access would be cut down to be narrower than it currently is, so there would be no misunderstanding it is a one way entrance and exit Mr. Miller said this was correct Ms. Grcevic said it would be a visual to let drivers know it is one way just by the width. Mr. Palermo asked where cars would exit once they go into the parking lot. Mr. Miller explained. One driveway would connect to 4 th Street and another would come out to Federal Highway. Neither of these two exits would have the issues of visibility because 4 MEETING MINUTES PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FL. OCTOBER 22, 2013 of parked cars. Mr. Palermo also asked about a large drainage grate and whether or not it would support heavy loads. Mr. Miller said it is holding heavy loads now and would not change. There is a water main and a drainage pipe that would remain as it is with an easement over it. Mr. Palermo asked Mr. Miller if the access would be wide enough for emergency vehicles such as a fire truck to get through. Mr Miller said it would be with the one way direction. Staff spoke with the Fire Department about this idea and they agreed. Mr Katz reiterated there is a concern about people getting in but not about people getting out. Mr. Miller reiterated they are concerned about people getting out which was the premise of the proposal. People are having problems coming out of there because of the location of the building and the on- street parking. This improves the situation and still allows for the ingress to get into the parking and creates the circulation pattern. Vehicles will still have the ability to get to 4 Street up through the parking area and also on the north side to get back out to Federal Highway. Mr. Katz continued if there is a way for vehicles to go out on 4 ", there is a way for them to get. It should be for pedestrians only. Mr. Miller said the original proposal was to close it off However, closing it off and going to FDOT would take a large effort and doing it this way would allow the project to continue. Another issue to consider would be how to prevent vehicles leaving late at night from going out the wrong way. Mr. Brake asked Mr. Miller about the pedestrian only section and whether or not it is made so an emergency vehicle can drive straight through. Mr. Miller responded this was discussed and perhaps the idea of having bollards that can be removed would be an option Mr. Palermo asked if there will be a pedestrian sidewalk. Mr. Miller said yes it connects from the crosswalk across Federal then runs along the edge of the property. Mr. Palermo asked if this already exists and Mr. Miller responded it does not currently exist but would be part of the proposal and a condition of approval. Mr. Wheeler commented the signage is going to be absolutely key to this project. He was also concerned about the exit on the north side. The turning radius looks tight and may result in clipping a car parked in the last spot. Mr. Miller replied the parking area follows Central Business District requirements and there are more parking spaces than needed However from a practical standpoint there is less than needed. Mr. Brake asked if there were additional parking spaces along the other building and Mr. Miller indicated there were. Chair Saberson asked Mr. Miller to show the revised conditions indicating it will be ingress but not going out for vehicular use. The condition states that, "public access generally depicted on Exhibit C shall be maintained for pedestrian connectivity purposes" but does not say anything about vehicles. Mr. Miller replied the approval is 5 MEETING MINUTES PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FL. OCTOBER 22, 2013 based on Exhibit C which was attached and shows an entrance only. Chair Saberson asked if it was labeled as an entrance because the arrow on the map indicated it was consistent with it being pedestrian only. Mr. Breese clarified the arrow is pointing one - way which is the intent. Mr. Breese also commented in regards to Mr. Wheeler's earlier comment about signage and pavement markings being critical on the final plan approval. Mr. Miller replied perhaps as a suggestion to condition number two; "pedestrian connectivity purposes and one -way vehicular access or one -way ingress" should be included Ms. Grcevic commented cars will not drive straight through. They will either have to go left and then right to get out onto 4 th or just make a right to go east onto Federal. Ms. Grcevic wondered if it will be tight. If cars come in from Federal they will have to stop and either go left or right, then go around cars Mr. Miller said it would stop traffic at one point and hopefully they are not coming in too fast. This is a problem happening now in addition to the exiting problem. Narrowing it down, adding landscaping and adding signage would make a big difference. Ms. Grcevic also said cars would not be able to come from 4 th and go straight out. The traffic would actually be slower. Jason Evans, 511 SE 5 th Avenue, Fort Lauderdale, FL. 33301, represented the owner of 425 NE 4 th Street, Chow Hut, LLC Chow Hut is the property situated at the southwest corner of where the right -of -way ends. There is currently a tenant there, Bill's Automotive Services. If this right -of -way is going to be abandoned, it will destroy the business of the owner and the tenant as well. Mr. Katz asked Mr. Evans if he was talking about the building to the left of Cuthills. Mr. Evans said this was correct. Mr Evans asked if anyone on the Board or staff had any fiduciary relationship with any of the owners abutting the right -of -way in case there are any questions. Mr. Katz responded it would have had to be acknowledged at the beginning of the meeting. Mr. Evans did not define fiduciary for the Board Chair Saberson replied it would have been more appropriate to ask if anyone had spoken to any of the property owners and if so, what the content of their discussions were. Mr Evans then asked if anyone on the Board spoke to any property owner concerning this application. Chair Saberson asked Board members who all responded no Mr. Evans asked who the applicant was and Mr. Miller replied the City. Mr. Evans wanted to know who initiated the abandonment project. Mr. Breese clarified the City is the applicant and Mr. Miller is the City's agent. Chair Saberson said the City, itself, initiated this. Mr. Evans then asked if the City contacted the owner of the property on Federal Highway about furthering the plan. Mr. Breese replied the applicant came to the City to ask if they were aware of the unsafe nature of the location in regards to cars exiting. Mr. Breese said the owners of several properties in that area were concerned about the traffic flow. The staff indicated they were looking into the redevelopment potential for that entire area. Mr. Evans wanted to know which business owners were 6 MEETING MINUTES PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FL. OCTOBER 22, 2013 • contacted because the owner at 425 NE 4th Street was not aware or asked about it. Mr. Breese said the property owners on both sides of the right-of-way approached the City about the unsafe conditions. Mr. Katz asked Mr. Breese if the property owners around a certain amount of feet, such as the 400 feet property limit, needed to be notified of anything like this happening. Mr. Breese said yes, and they were. Mr. Evans commented Chow Hut is within the 400 foot radius which is why they got a notice and why he was representing Chow Hut at this meeting. Mr. Evans continued asking questions about ingress and egress to 425 SE 4th Street saying diverting traffic would destroy the value of the property. If this had been contemplated by the Board there was no indication of how it would impact the property to the west and south. Chair Saberson asked Attorney Weinger if this was part of the criteria in the Ordinance and Attorney Weinger replied she was not sure. Chair Saberson stated there is certain criteria applied which is what the Board should be doing. Staff's report recognizes the close proximity of NE 3rd and NE 5th to this location. The limited number of property owners back on NE 4th would not be adversely impacted with having those two means of ingress and egress within close proximity. Chair Saberson commented staff disagreed this would destroy the business. Mr. Katz asked if the automotive repair shop is currently occupying the building. Mr. Evans responded the tenant is Bill's Automotive. Mr. Katz asked if that is what is known as a legally non-conforming use at this time. Mr. Rumpf commented according to current regulations, automobile repair is a permitted use in the C-4 zoning district. Automobile sales would be a legal non-conforming use had it been grandfathered. It is not allowed. Mr. Brake asked Mr. Evans if Bill's Automotive is a going concern because it does not seem to be open. Mr. Evans responded it is still doing business. Mr. Evans explained he was trying to get some answers because this was the first forum his client had to see where the City was getting its basis from and if there is any precedent for abandoning a right-of-way that could possibly benefit one property owner while becoming a detriment to another. Chair Saberson replied every application is judged on its own merits that exist for that particular application. The Board does not have the necessary paperwork to go through precedents that have happened in the City over the years. Mr. Evans said he wanted to ask these questions now so they can be addressed at the next hearing. Chair Saberson responded for those kinds of questions, Mr. Evans should meet with staff. Ms. Grcevic also commented one of the Board's issues is safety. There are numerous cars going through that ingress every day and it would actually hurt Cuthill's Backyard because people would have to figure out how to get in and around. It would be safer for 7 MEETING MINUTES PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FL. OCTOBER 22, 2013 everyone Chair Saberson said it was unfair of Mr. Evans to keep characterizing things in order to portray it in a way most favorable to his client. Safety is definitely an issue that has been raised and one of the things considered by staff to formulate their recommendation Mr. Brake asked Mr. Evans when his client was notified of this project. Mr. Evans replied it was about two weeks ago. Mr. Brake inquired why he did not call staff and Mr. Evans replied he was dust recently retained. Mr Brake suggested most of Mr Evans's questions could have been addressed prior to the meeting. Mr. Evans said he thought this forum would be the place to get a better understanding and perhaps get some answers. Mr. Evans wanted to know who would own the property if it is abandoned. Would the easement go to the property owners to the north and south? Chair Saberson commented this was beyond the scope of the Board. Who ends up owning it is a matter of real property law. Mr. Evans indicated it might be an issue for future conveyances. The issue could ultimately be presented to City Commission. Mr Evans continued that he wanted clarification there already exists a walkway from the north point of the right -away that wraps around the building traveling north on Federal Highway Mr. Breese showed there are pavers close to the building that do not necessarily constitute a walkway. Mr. Brake asked where the property actually begins and Mr Breese replied the right -of- way touches the building and in a certain spot the building encroaches into the right -of- way. There is a 25 foot right -of -way for two -way traffic. Ms. Grcevic thought it might have been grass at one time. It did not look like a traditional pedestrian walkway. Mr. Breese said it certainly would not meet the City's definition of a sidewalk. Mr. Evans asked if the Board determines abandoning the right -of -way diminishes the value of the property of 425 SE 4 th Street, how that would weigh into the Board's decision? Chair Saberson replied the Board is not in a position to evaluate the economic impact on that property; nor has the Board heard any evidence other than simple conclusions Mr. Evans asked when there would be a hearing to establish the outcome. Chair Saberson said he could discuss that with the City Attorney's office. Ms. Grcevic commented, since it is an alleyway, the City can just take it away and there would be no egress or ingress at all Mr. Breese advised it is actually a right -of -way and it needs to be abandoned if the City wants to terminate it as a right -of -way Ms Grcevic commented one of the buildings will not be landlocked because there will still be three more ways to get to it Mr. Breese said there would be a right -of -way to the north and to the south. Ms. Grcevic commented she sometimes goes through CVS or Bud's Chicken. Mr. Katz noted the only thing being affected is how cars get away from 4 th Street, not how they get in. The way they enter will not be affected. 8 MEETING MINUTES PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FL. OCTOBER 22, 2013 Mr. Wheeler commented the Board is just an advisory Board. The Board gives their recommendations to the Commission. The Commission has the final approval on any action taken. Mr. Evans concluded if the proposal went through, it would destroy the property owner who has benefited from a street that travels east and west. Chair Saberson commented there had not been any evidence to support Mr. Evan's conclusion and the Board does not reach the same conclusion. Mr. Brake questioned if Mr. Evans had been to the area recently and Mr. Evans replied he had. Mr. Brake surmised from the questions Mr. Evans was asking, that he had not been to the area. Someone in the audience requested to make a statement, but had not been sworn in. Attorney Weinger administered the oath Karen Morrow, 2611 Lake Drive North, indicated she lives in Boynton Beach and knows the owners of 425 SE 4 th Street. Chair Saberson inquired if Ms. Morrow was speaking on their behalf and she explained she was not. Ms. Morrow asked if it would be easier to eliminate the parking spots on the street so it does not block the view of people coming out of the driveway onto Federal Highway. Ms. Grcevic responded this was not something that could be done. Mr. Brake stated that Federal Highway is under State jurisdiction. Ms. Morrow is a business owner at 2626 N Federal Highway and the parking spots in front of her business had been taken away to allow for the bike path. Mr. Katz explained that was done by Florida Department of Transportation. Robert Moore, 318 Bunker Ranch Road, West Palm Beach, Consultant, explained he had been retained by the property owner at 425 SE 4 th Street Mr. Moore was a consultant and a former Director of Planning, Zoning and Building for the Town of Palm Beach for 25 years. He was active in the consulting business currently in Palm Beach County, not in Boynton Beach, but in West Palm Beach, Manalapan, Hypoluxo, Gulfstream, as well as Palm Beach. Mr. Moore said he did not understand two things in Mr. Rumpf's presentation Firstly, the original application was for complete abandonment by the City at the request of the Miller Agency. Attorney Weinger explained the applicant is the City and Mr. Miller is an agent for the City. Mr. Moore asked who would be the owner of the property with the revised application. Chair Saberson reiterated it is a matter of real property law in Florida and not something the Board can determine. Whatever happens to the property is not up to the Board once it is abandoned. The Board is not in a position to affect the results. Mr Moore acknowledged that Florida law usually allows abutting property owners of the public right -of -way which is being abandoned, to become the owners. Mr. Moore asked if there would be ingress on the revised proposal not an egress, who 9 MEETING MINUTES PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FL. OCTOBER 22, 2013 would own the ingress? Chair Saberson responded the City did not have the right to determine who gets the abandoned property. It is beyond the scope of this Board. Mr. Moore was under the impression what was going to be heard at this meeting was complete abandonment without any ingress or egress for the property to the southwest of the intersection. Mr. Moore continued if there was any possibility the offer could be put forward for ingress to be part of the condition of approval the Board may give. Chair Saberson sought clarification if the application had been revised and could the Board approve it as revised subject to that? Mr. Moore concurred and Chair Saberson replied it is not up to the Board. Attorney Weinger said this Board imposes and modifies conditions and the ultimate approval is heard and determined by the City Commission. Any conditions this Board may place on a property are only recommendations to the Commission Chair Saberson asked if anyone had any questions or comments. Mr. Breese commented the Board had the revised conditions of approval, the revised Exhibit C and explained staff's rationale for requesting the abandonment. Chair Saberson commented if a motion was made for approval, what staff suggested at the end of item 2 in the conditions; "public access generally depicted on Exhibit C shall be maintained for pedestrian connectivity purposes and for one -way vehicular ingress ", should be included. Mr. Brake remarked he would like to add to stabilize the landscape, so if a large truck, like an emergency vehicle needs access, the turns are going to be tight. The Board wanted to make sure no matter what is built there in the future, the larger ambulances and fire trucks would be able to get in, if necessary. Ms. Grcevic commented the Fire Department checked and felt they could fight any fires from NE 4 Street or from Federal Highway, whichever was appropriate, and not necessarily have to enter the right -of -way. It is 14 feet in width so they could get through, if needed. Ms. Grcevic asked if an ambulance would still have clearance. Mr. Brake replied if there is the option of having stabilized land from there to NE 4th, it is preferable to have it so they can get through. There is actually a method of how they go over the grass if they need to. Motion Mr. Brake moved to approve the motion to include the conditions of approval, the one - way egress access, and stabilized land between NE 4 Street and NE 4 Avenue including the proposed ingress. Mr. Katz seconded the motion that unanimously passed. B. Reasonable Accommodation Application and Review Procedures (DCRV 13 -0070) — Approve amendments to the Land Development Regulations 10 MEETING MINUTES PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FL. OCTOBER 22, 2013 Chapter 2, Article II establishing the necessary process to consider and act upon appeals for reasonable accommodations in rules, policies, practices or services to afford eligible individuals the equal opportunity to use an enjoy housing as required by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and /or the Fair Housing Act (FHA). City- initiated. Mr. Rumpf explained staff identifies what purpose the LDR Amendment serves. The purpose of this amendment is to comply with Federal regulations. The regulations are in compliance with Federal requirements involving ADA, (Americans with Disabilities Act) and the Fair Housing Act (FHA). There have been more issues the City has been confronted with involving people with disabilities. People with disabilities under the ADA, is defined as someone with a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more of the mayor life activities of such individual Such individuals should not be discriminated against or treated differently in our policies, actions, services or requirements involving housing. The proposed regulations are being included in LDR, Chapter 2, which provides for a process that individuals who may potentially be or feel they are not given reasonable accommodations or discriminated against, can appeal the actions and have them reviewed against the State or Federal requirements. The amendment is very similarly formatted to other processes in the regulations. Mr Rumpf had the authority to review against the Federal criteria and make a determination administratively If an appeal is taken, it moves on to the Building Board of Adjustment and Appeals If that decision is appealed it would move forward in the court system. Mr. Brake inquired if this has any effect on the Silver Housing or transitional housing for people in treatment centers. Mr. Rumpf responded FHA and ADA covers all other physical and mental impairments which means coverage goes well beyond what many typically think of as handicapped. It could mean persons in wheelchairs or the blind and can include persons such as alcoholics, mentally ill, persons with learning disabilities and infirmities associated with old age. If such residents of a group home, silver house or something of that nature fall under those categories then yes, it does. Mr. Brake wondered if there was a group home within a certain amount of feet of another group home and it happens to have people in treatment, would they fall under this classification. Mr. Rumpf replied it would. Municipalities around the country are on a learning curve on this issue. Distance separations have been challenged and been found not appropriate or defensible or compliant with Federal regulations. It really pertains to the topic of housing. When the line is crossed into commercial enterprises or commercial businesses, such protection or rules and requirements do not apply. The issue is about where individuals dwell and reside. There are situations in the City where people do not live somewhere permanently, but go there for treatment Mr. Brake contended there is not a clear line between commercial and residential. The business is extended into the residential, so it is not a simple residential /commercial issue. Mr. 11 MEETING MINUTES PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOYNTON BEACH, FL. OCTOBER 22, 2013 Rumpf understood the question, but the Federal Government looks at where the person lives regardless of what happens to them during the day; whether they are mainstream, whether they are assisted with employment or whether they go to some type of counseling treatment. There is a very formalized process When they are in such residences or group homes they have probably already gone past the treatment level. Mr. Brake reported in the case he knows about, they are in treatment and the treatment facility beds them in a residential neighborhood. There is at least one company in Boynton Beach where residents are in treatment and are not kept at that facility to sleep They are actually put back into the neighborhoods and it is not a transitional housing, but indeed in treatment. Motion Mr. Katz moved to approve the motion. Mr. Wheeler seconded the motion that passed unanimously. 7. Other There was nothing to discuss under this item. 8. Comments by Members There were no comments from any of the members 9. Adjournment Mr. Katz moved to adjourn. Mr. Wheeler seconded the motion that unanimously passed. The meeting adjourned at 7:39 p.m. Gr ce Morales Recording Coordinator 10/23/13 6 hours 12