Loading...
Minutes 05-23-17MINUTES OF THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD MEETING HELD IN COMMISSION CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, 100 E. BOYNTON BEACH BOULEVARD, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA ON TUESDAY, MAY 23, 2017, AT 6:30 P.M. PRESENT: David Katz, Chair Stephen Palermo, Alternate Andrew Podray Trevor Rosecrans Nicholas Skarecki, Alternate Ryan Wheeler Floyd Zonenstein ABSENT: Kevin Fischer, Vice Chair James Brake STAFF: Mike Rumpf, Planning & Zoning Director James Cherof, City Attorney Ed Breese, Principal Planner Andrev., Mack, Director of Development Joseph Casello, Commissioner Mona Laventure, Prototype, Recorder Chair Katz called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. 1. Pledge of Allegiance The members recited the Pledge of Allegiance. 2. Roll Call Roll was called and it was determined a quorum was present. 3. Agenda Approval Chair Katz asked to make a brief comment prior to approval of the agenda, and for a moment of silence for those killed and injured in the Manchester, England, bombing. Motion made by Mr. Podray, seconded by Mr. Wheeler, to approve the Agenda. In a voice vote, the motion passed unanimously (7-0). 4. Approval of Minutes from March 28, 2017, meeting Motion made by Mr. Palermo, seconded by Mr. Wheeler, to approve the March 28, 2017, minutes. In a voice vote, the motion passed unanimously (7-0). Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Boynton Beach, Florida May 23, 2016 5. Communications and Announcements: Report from Staff Mr. Rumpf briefly reported that the Commission's May 2nd Agenda included the adoption and approval of the land use amendment and site plan for the Nurse 1 Office Project. 6. Old Business — None 7. New Business Attorney Cherof swore in those wishing to testify on the items below. A. Mignano Tree Care (COUS 17-001) — Approve Conditional Use request for the stockpiling of landscape debris, located on the vacant parcel north of 301 SE 10th Avenue in the M-1 (Industrial) zoning district. Applicant: Joe Mignano, Mignano Tree Care. Chair Katz read the item, then recused himself, having Mr. Wheeler proceed. Applicant Joseph Mignano gave an overview of his company and a PowerPoint presentation of how business is conducted and the use for the above -listed property. Mr. Rosecrans asked if the fire department is okay with just the sprinkler or if the chips have to be turned over. Mr. Mignano said the pile is turned at least once a day and irrigation covers the property. Mr. Wheeler open the floor to public comments: Susan Oyer stated the Mignanos have done an amazing job and hopes the Board will support this business and others that make good choices in the City. Mr. Wheeler closed the public hearing. Motion made by Mr. Podray, seconded by Mr. Palermo, to approve COUS 17-001. In a voice vote, the motion passed unanimously (6-0), with Chair Katz abstaining. B.1. Boynton Village & Town Center (MPMD 17-003) — Approve request for Master Plan Modification to the Boynton Village & Town Center development to amend the previous approvals for the vacant tracts within Boynton Village & Town Center from 643 condominiums, 350 apartments and 115 single-family homes to 668 apartments and 115 single-family homes, on 106.499 -acres located at the NE corner of Congress Avenue and Old Boynton Road. Applicant: Jeffrey Bartel, Berger Singerman LLP. Mr. Bartel appeared on behalf of items B.1. and B.2, asking for and receiving permission to give a presentation to cover both items which will be voted upon separately. 2 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Boynton each, Florida May 23, 2016 Mr. Bartel gave a PowerPoint presentation, with background on the original master plan from 2004 which has since been modified a number of times. The current plan is to reduce density by decreasing the 993 condominium and apartment units to 668, eliminating entirely the condominium units. Specifically addressed are 318 apartment units located within the total project. Staff's recommendations for B.1. and B.2. are ones with conditions which are acceptable to the applicant. Two outstanding items, traffic report from the County and concurrency report from the School Board, should note that the condominiums are being eliminated, reducing the impact. Notice was given to 2,500 property owners located within the prescribed area. Chair Katz read B.2. into the record, then opened the floor for public comment: • Susan Oyer wondered about the height limit. Mr. Bartel said it is as prescribed by Code, and there are no changes at all. As to the number of stories, Mr. Rumpf said the applicant is proposing five -story buildings on the Alta site, just under 55 feet and the Code allows 75 feet through a conditional use application. Previously approved condos were 71 feet. Ms. Oyer was concerned about "driveability" and if roundabouts are being considered to keep the traffic flowing. Discussion followed concerning Congress Avenue and Renaissance Common, with background on recent improvements to Gateway and Old Boynton Road. Beatrice Hernandez, City Architects, clarified the traffic questions regarding the project. • Audrey Dance Gerger, owns a historical house on NW 1St, currently working with DOT on her property, stated traffic is slow because construction isn't finished. Has no problem with traffic due to the new stop light. Cutting back on number of apartments is a plus. Hearing no further comments from the floor or Staff, public comment closed. Mr. Podray wondered if it was a City Ordinance to develop as close as possible to the roads as a trend appears to be developing that as long as there are enough parking spaces on a particular parcel, the project gets green -lighted without any long-term consideration for actual proximity to apartments. Ms. Hernandez explained there is nothing in the Code with regards to minimum distance a parking stall needs to be to the entrance of a unit, and that the current Code is somewhat high. There is also parking beneath the building, so feels confident the site plan is adequate and convenient. Motion made by Mr. Wheeler, seconded by Mr. Palermo, to approve MPMD 17-003. In a voice vote, the motion passed unanimously (7-0). B.2. Alta at Cortina (MSPM 17-004) — Approve request to construct 318 apartments and related site improvements on SMU Parcel 3 of the Boynton Village & Town Center master planned development, located on a 10.246 -acre vacant tract on the west side of Renaissance Commons 3 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Boynton each, Florida May 23, 2016 Boulevard, immediately south of the Boynton (C-16) Canal, in the SMU (Suburban Mixed Use) zoning district. Applicant: Jeffrey Bartel, Berger Singerman LLP. Motion made by Mr. Wheeler, seconded by Mr. Palermo, to approve MSPM 17-004. In a voice vote, the motion passed unanimously (7-0). C. Quantum Park & Village South — Retail Bldg. 1 (MPMD 17-002) — Approve request for Master Site Plan Modification for Retail Building 1 of the Quantum Park & Village South Mixed Use Pod, including request for PID (Planned Industrial Development) district waiver to reduce the side setback along the west side of Retail Building 1 from 15 feet to 5 feet, on 14.27 acres located at 1080 Gateway Boulevard, in the PID (Planned Industrial Development) zoning district. Applicant: Dale Lyon, Olen Development Corp. Mr. Lyon gave a PowerPoint presentation on Quantum Town Center. In previously approved site plan for a 4,000 -square foot building, Applicant is asking for 4,025 square feet, with a second request for a waiver on the set back along the lake on the west end to create outdoor dining area with covered patio. Until the request is approved, Applicant cannot enter into any discussions with interested restaurants. Proposed is approximately 753 square feet of covered patio, 1900+ open patio, and a pedestrian pier carrying out into the lake. Public Comments: • Irwin Cineus wondered if there is any conversation about a CVA Community Benefits Agreement so that folks in community can get jobs in construction as well as employment when project is finished. Mr. Lyon said they are always looking for tenants who hire from within the community, and would like to get familiar with the CVA program to recommend it to tenants. Chair Katz stated that it is not within the purview of this Board to try to extract from a developer a community benefits agreement, rather that would be with the City Commission. • Susan Oyer had questions about traffic lights, trees, insect control, and lighting for evenings. Mr. Lyon said there are three existing traffic lights, extensive landscape plan has been reviewed by Staff, the lake is already aerated for insect control, and building plans have up -lighting for building accents as well as patio lighting. Hearing no further comments from the floor or Staff, public comment closed. Mr. Wheeler had some questions about several fine points of the reduced easement in site plan, all of which were answered satisfactorily by Mr. Lyon. 10 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Boynton Beach, Florida May 23, 2016 Chair Katz noted the applicant had mentioned two items, but sees only one. Mr. Rumpf clarified that in the Staff Report, the site plan revision includes the waiver, and is not a separate action item. Mr. Podray had a question about the two signs on the east face of the building, if that was ordinance and, if so, can other businesses put two signs on one face of a building. Mr. Rumpf said if it's all the same tenant space, more than one sign is allowed within a certain square footage, which can be broken down to two signs, if desired. Motion made by Mr. Podray, seconded by Mr. Palermo, to approve MPMD 17-002. In a voice vote, the motion passed unanimously (7-0). D. Cultural District Overlay Zone (CDRV 17-001) — Approve amendments to the LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, Chapters 2, 3 and 4 to continue the implementation of the Community Redevelopment Plan with the establishment of the new Cultural District Overlay Zone regulating site development standards, uses, and urban design. Applicant: City -initiated. Mr. Rumpf gave a slide presentation overview on a new concept for LDR for two districts, the Cultural District and the Boynton Beach Blvd. District, which are subject to pending development approvals. Contents consist of purpose and intent sections, preamble, justifications, and documentation that supports such regulations. In addition to implementing this area plan, the Overlay Regulations tailor uses, design standards, and implement the vision of the CRA Plans, as well as addressing the public realm (public space between buildings and streets). Mr. Rumpf summarized the uses before moving on to the regulations. The LDR consists of a tree zone, an eight -foot sidewalk, and an eight -foot activity area that are not overlapping and go to the building face. Chair Katz noted that ADA rules are not being enforced on Atlantic Avenue and City Place with restaurants encroaching on sidewalks with outdoor seating. Mr. Rumpf said that tables cannot be placed on the right-of-way itself, but must be kept on private property unless in possession of a sidewalk cafe permit, and that the process is reviewed to accommodate both uses. Some discussion ensued of ordinances vs. actual practice. The remainder of the presentation addressed scale of buildings, heights and building mass, which depends on street class and selected roadways. The purpose of an overlay is to institute design standard use regulations which may cross zoning boundaries, which trump the individual respective boundaries themselves. This standardizes form along the street over time. There has been a recommendation for a certain architectural theme of the coastal village/Key West, the Town Square project is sizeable and ultimate design may contrast with the coastal village, which will be addressed in upcoming meetings yet this year. The presentation paused for questions from the floor and the Board: 5 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Boynton Beach, Florida May 23, 2016 • Peter Guillaume asked if the CRA is involved, does this plan address slum and blight issues, and how has it been titled as a cultural district. Mr. Rumpf said the CRA plan has recently been adopted to include the Town Square project (City Hall complex, library, civic campus) is within this area, in addition to the Boynton Beach Blvd. District to the north. The City is holding back on some of the standards of the overlay awaiting the outcome of the public meetings that will take place to contribute towards the Town Square Project, giving Mr. Guillaume and other residents an opportunity to contribute to that design. • Susan Oyer asked to clarify if the sidewalks will be 18.5 feet from the edge of building to the street. Mr. Rumpf said that applies to certain, but not all, roadways, and does apply to Ocean Avenue. Some discussion followed on architectural themes throughout the City. Chair Katz asked if 500 Ocean is being held to the standard of the coastal village. Mr. Rumpf said no, as the project had come in many months before the City had gone in that direction with development of the CRA Plan. Mr. Podray gave examples of history with the County coming in controlling what could and could not be built in the Ag Reserve, which resulted in a lot of lawsuits. Mr. Podray preferred to get City Attorney's opinion on this matter before heading down the wrong road. The City believes the commercial will take off, believes that people will like the coastal theme and designs, which creates an artificial supply by taking free market capitalism out of the equation, creating a supply that may or may not meet the demand.. Mr. Podray strongly suggested this item be tabled. • Mr. Guillaume added to what Mr. Podray said, that in terms of culture and district—and Boynton Beach has a long history that is not being identified through some of the building plans—there could be a lot of challenges that come from the community. There are mixed cultures in the area, not just one perception of a culture. This should be kept in mind, especially this area that is not really blighted or of poor people, and is a vibrant community. • Irwin Cineus added opinions on the CRA's methods of addressing slum and blight, that they have two methods, top-down or bottom-up. The bottom-up method does not work in areas that aren't blighted. Planning & Zoning needs to look at what is being done and how, making sure the people in the area are involved in the process. Motion made by Mr. Podray, seconded by Mr. Palermo, to table CDRV 17-001 and CDRV 17-002 until Counsel can fully vet the situation with City Staff. Mr. Cherof stated the direction of this motion is not appropriate. The City Attorney's office works with the Development Staff throughout the entire process of drafting these regulations, and how they evolve through the Planning and Development Board as they 0 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Boynton Beach, Florida May 23, 2016 get to the City Commission and public hearings are conducted. The process being sought is already in place on these items and will continue as the process is refined. Mr. Cherof recommended that the Board continue to move the items forward to the City Commission, stating that the motion is out of order. The motion was removed. Motion made by Mr. Rosecrans, seconded by Mr. Zonenstein, to approve CDRV 17- 001. In a roll call vote, the motion passed 4-3, with Mr. Podray, Mr. Skarecki, and Mr. Palermo dissenting. E. Boynton Beach Boulevard Overlay Zone (CDRV 17-002) — Approve amendments to the LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, Chapters 2, 3 and 4 to continue the implementation of the Community Redevelopment Plan with the establishment of the new Boynton Beach Boulevard Overlay Zone regulating site development standards, uses, and urban design. Applicant: City -initiated. Mr. Rumpf stated this is the second district being covered by these overlay proposal regulations, and is the first time the corridor itself has had the specific CRA redevelopment plan applied to it. It represents current day vision for the corridor, given the smaller size of the parcels along Boynton Beach Blvd., to assemble the full block depth in accordance with mixed use regulations. This has evolved over a year and multiple public meetings and public hearings. These are advertised amendments that have gone into the local newspaper as notices to the public. The purpose and intent is to address parking, pedestrian zone, building space, parking, signs, exterior lighting standards, etc. A few errors and corrections were pointed out as the document moves forward to the Commission. Chair Katz opened the floor to public comment: • Susan Oyer had questions about historic buildings in the north area. Mr. Rumpf said the City is aware of them. City Planners have been coordinating with them and has been involved in the CRA Plan. Fortunately, they are somewhat clustered on one block, so they may be an anomaly. Ideas about preservation, registry and even relocation, have been suggested, but cannot be mandated. Mr. Palermo wondered what percentage is recommended commercial vs. residential. Mr. Rumpf said the plan is visionary with a long range of uses from retail to commercial for mixed use or single use projects along the corridor. They have not been allocated parcel by parcel. This corridor is different from Ocean Avenue, and listed examples of vibrant uses envisioned. • Ms. Oyer continued with questions on heights and compatibility with existing use, and various other issues. Mr. Rumpf said such discussion occurred during the development of the CRA Plan, and the Mixed Use Low -1 (45 feet) is INA Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Boynton Beach, Florida May 23, 2016 recommended for this section of the corridor. These regulations do not address lighting in a public space, but does address tree spacing as per sub -section 5. Ms. Oyer ended with questions about FDOT coming through. Mr. Rumpf said that the closer the properties are to 1-95, they will be impacted by the interchange project over the next 15-20 years, explaining how standards arise and are implemented during development. The goal is to get the City's vision in place before FDOT's plans are, so that FDOT can be influenced by the City's Plans. • Audrey Dance Gerger stated that the DOT wants to take property right up to Seacrest. DOT sent plans to these neighbors saying the land would be used for pond drainage. Not all the land on Boynton Beach Blvd. is being taken, only sections of it for ponds. DOT says the road won't be worked on until 2027, but will be buying property as of 2019, and maybe buying hers sooner. Mr. Wheeler wondered what FDOT's ultimate goal is for Boynton Beach Blvd. Mr. Mack has looked at the plans and most of the widening is to the south, which is where the encroachments would go into the adjacent properties. The correspondence going out now is looking at potential properties for storm water retention areas to offset the increased impervious areas. • Vivian Brooks spoke about the frontage requirement on Boynton Beach Blvd., which has many owners compared to other areas under this overlay. Feels less constraints should be put on the properties and allow the market to come in and do its thing, agreeing with Mr. Podray's earlier assessment of the issue, and recommends the 150 feet be reduced to 100 feet, consistent with Ocean Avenue. Mr. Rumpf said the parcels are larger on Boynton Beach Blvd. than the ones on Ocean Avenue, with a different scale and vision of projects. The 150 feet was what Staff decided upon for this project, and it wasn't totally arbitrary. Chair Katz shared some ideas about creating a linear park down to Seacrest with landscaping or a wall and hopefully increase the value of properties south of that. Mr. Rumpf said that what was just described, but at a smaller scale, is specifically recommended by the CRA Plan, providing an aesthetic area between the single family and mixed-use districts. Mr. Podray noted on page 122 under prohibited uses, if the intent is to social engineer the plan, to be very careful about including a church, sharing a personal experience of another community disallowing churches inside commercial centers, which would typically have been allowed. The Department of Justice got involved, threatened to sue that city, the city manager and director of planning and development were fired over the ordinance. Mr. Podray cautioned again that this item be fully vetted, and that the easier way would be to up the zoning and allow the private sector to take care of the rest. Mr. Cherof stated for the record that he did not say the items under question were fully vetted, but explained the process from start to finish that the City Attorney's office 0 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Boynton Beach, Florida May 23, 2016 engages in working with Staff, the public, the members of the Commission, and this Board as well. That process is ongoing until the ordinance is finally adopted. Chair Katz said no IOP was listed, though group homes are. Mr. Rumpf said that the zoning matrix—compared to an older set of regulations which had permitted uses, conditioned uses, and prohibited uses—clearly states if the use is not listed in it, it essentially is a prohibited use. The author felt it necessary to emphasize, in helping to define the theme of active uses, that they also specific these, but just because a use is not on the permitted list does not mean it is necessarily permitted. Asking for a motion and hearing none, Chair Katz passed the gavel. Motion made by Mr. Katz, seconded by Mr. Wheeler, to approve CDRV 17-002. In a roll call vote, the motion failed 3-4 with Mr. Palermo, Mr. Podray, Mr. Rosecrans, and Mr. Skarecki dissenting. Chair Katz called for a break, 8:20-8:25. F. Group Homes and Minimum Off-street Parking Standards (CDRV 17- 005) – Approve amendments to the CODE OF ORDINANCES, Chapter 13. Licensing, and the LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, Chapter 1. Article II. Definitions, Chapter 3. Article IV. Use Regulations, and Chapter 4. Article V. Minimum Off -Street Parking Requirements that provide necessary updates, new standards, and justifications for the accommodation and regulation of group homes and parking requirements for single- and two-family dwelling units. Applicant: City -initiated. Mr. Rumpf said the proposed changes were not in the Board package, but handed out at the meeting, and stated that Staff was up against the moratorium period and wanted to complete the work within that period without extending the moratorium. Mr. Rumpf introduced John Lehman, CEO and Chair of Florida Association of Recovery Residences (FARR), before proceeding with a PowerPoint presentation. An overview was given, citing the magnitude of the issue involving drug overdoses in the area (up 314% within five years in Palm Beach County alone), followed by the meat of the proposed amendments. Chair Katz wondered about the apparently opposing standards of increased parking requirements while limiting impervious areas in front yards. Mr. Rumpf explained the reasoning behind the language and some discussion ensued regarding a combination of standards and enforcement. Continuing with featured points on the amendments, Mr. Rumpf described the partnership with FARR to standardize regulations and certifications for group homes. In closing, the moratorium will expire before these regulations make it to final hearing or 9 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Boynton acFlorida, 2016 second reading of the Ordinance. An extension is not proposed or recommended, continuing to move on and adopt them timely. The second meeting at the Commission level for first reading is on July 18 for adoption. Mr. Rumpf handed out several documents to Board Members and explained them: • Terms as defined by the State or the industry itself • Revised pages to the sets in the Board package (changes in red) • Matrix was not changed and remains valid • Type of homes o Type 1 smallest group home and by zoning district o Type 2 larger, limited to R3 and other multi -family districts o Type 3 large facility and greater range of types of group homes depending on range of care and services ® Oxford House Model, defended in Court up to 12-14 people Last of all, increase in parking standards is a sliding scale. Instead of flat rate for single family home (two spaces are required per unit, or one per bedroom, whichever is greater), it increases to 1.5 per bedroom for homes with five or more bedrooms. Chair Katz opened the floor to public comments: • Cindy Falco deCorrado [phonetic] related information she had gotten from a police officer that many people do not make it known that their home is a sober home, so wondered how to mandate the use as a sober home. Also learned there are only four police officers per district, so feels less protected than those who are in these homes. • Audrey Dance Gerger wondered about sanitation in homes of up to 14 people, more than about parking. Mr. Rumpf clarified that a 14 -people house is restricted to multi -family zoning districts, so could be a multi -family building and not just a single-family house, further explaining the types of homes and the related zoning districts. Ms. Gerger was also alarmed by the proximity of these homes to school districts and children should be protected. Mr. Rumpf noted for the record that what the speaker had just indicated is in direct violation of the Federal Acts that the City is attempting to align with: the City cannot place a rule of separation on a group home against a school that would not be applied to any other single- family home in the City. • Roxanne Alang [phonetic] shared the same concerns as the other speakers, but noted she is also in recovery and knew from her own experience that drugs are not allowed inside sober homes. These homes are there to help people in recovery with an environment that is safe and away from drugs and alcohol. Ms. Alang is here to support the expiration of the moratorium and to encourage the Board to consider having an oversight and having these facilities be FARR certified. Drug addictions and overdoses do not happen inside these group homes, they happen outside. Chair Katz congratulated the speaker for the journey she is on. That said, while drugs and alcohol are not allowed in these 10 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Boyntono: •2016 homes, that's the goal but there have been some bad operators and those problems are the ones that everyone hangs onto. Ms. Alang agreed, unfortunately they get a lot of attention from the media, but there are many good operators that no only provide a safe place to live but other living skills. Public comments closed. Mr. Rosecrans asked if it was 50 group homes or sober homes? Mr. Rumpf said those are group homes processed as adult living facility with care, which means some type of medical attention or personal attention. The treatment homes do not require that and are not registered that way in the licensing process. Mr. Rosecrans asked how many are certified FARR, to which Mr. Lehman answered there are seven certified recovery residences in Boynton Beach and another eleven have applied for certification. The vast majority are not yet certified. Assuming FARR passes through the veto process successfully, they have been awarded a non-recurring proviso of $100,000 to provision infrastructure. John Bryant, Assistant Secretary of Substance Abuse at the Department of Children and Family Services has assured FARR that they will find at least another $100,000 out of their budget, at which time they will be able to handle the increased volume of certifications. Mr. Rosecrans asked if there is a requirement for employment or rent to be paid to the homes. Mr. Lehman said the requirement for the State of Florida is it is not okay for an IOP to pay for rent as it is in violation of the patient appropriate statute, and there is a crackdown on licensed behavioral healthcare providers who are violating that statute. House Bill 807, which increases the penalties for patient brokering, was passed and the governor is expected to sign it. Residences encourage employment or enrollment in higher education, preventing the treatment center to pay for rent. Mr. Wheeler asked about the difference between certified and charter. Mr. Rumpf said they are separate processes and separate entities that would provide the oversight. Mr. Lehman said FARR, in addition to being the credentialing body selected by DCFS, is an affiliate of the National Alliance for Recovery Residences. Residences are measured to 37 standards and 102 criteria, which is an annual recertification process allowing for compliance audits throughout the year on a randomized basis as well as for cause. Oxford House was founded in 1975 and now has 2,200 programs throughout the state that are democratically run, peer governed, non-profit organizations at the community level, and recognized by the Office of National Drug Control Policy, the US Department of Health, and the State of Florida. Mr. Wheeler wondered if memory care, assisted living, ACLF, etc., are the same as a sober house as far as the 300 foot setbacks and so on? Mr. Rumpf said no, the proposed standards that the separations only apply to single-family zoning districts where there is an issue of impacting the character. Nursing homes and Type 3 group homes are not subject to distance separation. Discussion of criteria followed. There are currently no Oxford Charter Houses in the State, however, presentations have been 11 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Beach,Boynton Florida May 23, 2016 made to the State Attorney's proviso group, and FARR believes Oxford House is a strategy for fixing the sober home problem at the community level. Public comments reopened: • James Rawlerson [phonetic] stated that the guidelines are so complicated on what these houses can operate at and it looks like they sneak in and don't let anybody know what's going on. It is an injustice to a resident with a private home that is not informed that this is taking place. More questions from the Board: Mr. Palermo wondered about the change of the setback from 1,000 to 300 feet. Mr. Rumpf said the purpose was to prevent clustering of a group home, regardless of who the tenants/residents/clients are, in such a way that it affects the zoning scheme (which are federal terms), and gave examples of the comingling of types of residences. Hotels do not fall under these definitions or regulations. Mr. Rosecrans wondered if a seven -story apartment complex could be a sober home. Mr. Rumpf said yes, Type 3 does not put on a maximum cap, just as the City cannot cap what a multi -family building can have in terms of residents or units, as long as parking and traffic requirements are met. Chair Katz wondered why FARR certification is voluntary rather than mandatory. Mr. Lehman said mandatory has been found to be in violation of Fair Housing. HUD and DOJ's opinion letter says that municipalities and state governments need to treat sober homes as the functional equivalent of a family unit, and went on to list the benefits of voluntary certifications. A discussion followed as to how this differs from what Mr. Rumpf had said previously about mandatory certifications. There are three options: FARR, charter, and reasonable accommodation, any one of three providing a review for certain criteria. FARR and Oxford House are acknowledged by a broad group of individuals. The proposed text simply states that existing facilities will have one year from a given benchmark (say October 1St, which is the next renewal cycle), to get approved in the proposed fashion. Mr. Rumpf said Staff does not recommend an extended moratorium. Discussion ensued by Board Members with Mr. Rumpf on various clarification points, and what was learned by the process coming out of a six months moratorium, whatever comes out of the Commission, it will be evaluated and enforced as best as possible. Neighboring cities differ in the group home field, with Boynton Beach ahead of cities that have encountered legal action early on in this process, not sensitive to ADA requirements. Motion made by Mr. Zonenstein, seconded by Mr. Rosecrans, to approve CDRV 17- 005, with the amendments in the handouts. In a voice vote, the motion passed unanimously (7-0). 12 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Boynton Beach, Florida May 23, 2016 G. Medical Cannabis Dispensary (CDRV 17-003) — Approve amendments to the LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, Chapter 1, Article ll, Definitions, to add definitions that regulate the Medical Cannabis Dispensary Industry, and Chapter 3, Article IV, Use Regulations, Section 3.D, Use Matrix, Table 3-28 and Matrix Note #104 Medical Cannabis Dispensary to add the provisions and standards that regulate the Medical Cannabis Dispensary Industry. Applicant: City -initiated. Mr. Mack gave a PowerPoint presentation on the draft regulations for the Medical Cannabis Dispensaries and corresponding amendments to the Code of Ordinances. Floor was opened to public comments: • Cindy Falco deCorrado [phonetic] related story of her son's death at the age of 22 from suicide and the only drug found in his body was THC, and gave a list of reasons why this item would open a can of worms in the community. Even though the State has passed medical marijuana, she is against it in the City of Boynton Beach. Mr. Wheeler wondered if there have been any changes since the original meeting with the City Commission. Mr. Mack said it is the same ordinance, but there was some discussion as to how the application process would work, possibly as a lottery system or creating a selection criteria process. The Commission has deferred, waiting for it to come back to them at their second meeting in June, when they will further discuss it. Mr. Rosecrans asked if the security is sufficient, should there be a buzz -in required, or cameras and on-site security at all time. Mr. Mack said model ordinances from the Police Chief on down feel that the security aspect during hours of operations is sufficient, whereas the State requirements require security personnel there 24 -hours. • Susan Oyer stated she is against this item, as a teacher who had a parent addicted to pot, resulting in extreme health conditions. Feels taxes should be so high as to make the potential dispensaries miserable in the process. Let some other city be the gateway city to drugs. Mr. Rosecrans stated that there is a misrepresentation as to what is actually allowed here. There are a handful of illnesses, many of them terminal, and this is a compassionate medicine. This isn't going to be deregulation and allowing for recreational use. Mr. Palermo wondered about deliveries, reading from the ordinance about loading and unloading and all deliveries received through the rear property entrance. Mr. Mack said that the rear delivery system allows for the truck to be unloaded right into the business, 13 FloridaMeeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Boynton Beach, 2016 under security, rather than through a parking lot and the front door. Age limit is restricted by the State, so does not appear in the City's regulations. Mr. Podray asked why only C3 zoning. Anyone who has C3 will have property values go sky high, and wonders why winners and losers are always being picked. Mr. Mack said that industrial areas were considered, but the thought was that this would be more of a retail operation, better suited to a retail -type center, and security is helped by high traffic. The Commission felt that C3 was best suited for this conditional use. Mr. Podray feels this is monopolistic and will be challenged. Mr. Zonenstein wondered if there is any kind of security to know that a doctor actually wrote the prescription. Mr. Mack said that is all handled at the State level, that a licensed doctor cannot write a prescription for medical cannabis, rather a treatment plan is created that is filed with the Office of Compassionate Use, where the treatment plan is reviewed and once approved a card is issued to use at dispensaries to fill the order. Chair Katz clarified that it is a process and not just anybody can get the card. Chair Katz asked about the zoning for standard pharmacies. Mr. Rumpf said pharmacies are allowed in C1 on up, but a CVS retail store would be C2 and C3. As to the $10,000 fee for the lottery approach, Mr. Cherof said it is an open question and the City is still looking at it. Some discussion followed about growers, and Chair Katz understands that the State has already vetted the growers. Chair Katz suggested that the Commission be asked to consider all the C -zones, as this relates to the other drug stores that help people, and that there be two dispensaries and the Commission stick to the lottery. Motion made by Mr. Wheeler, seconded by Mr. Zonenstein, to approve CDRV 17-003 and that the City Commission should include two dispensaries and open to all C -zones. In a roll call vote, the motion passed 4-3, with Mr. Palermo, Mr. Podray, and Mr. Skarecki dissenting. 8. Other — None 9. Comments by Members — None 0. Adjournment Upon motion duly made and seconded, the meeting was adjourned at 10:02 p.m. [Minutes prepared by M. Moore, Prototype, Inc.] 14 FORM 8B MEMORANDUM OF TING CONFLICT FOR COUNTY, MUNICIPAL AND OTHER LOCAL PUBLIC OFFICERS LAST NAME-FIRST N b E-MIDDLE NAME NAME OF BOARD,COUN.RIL,COMMISSION,AUTHORITY,OR COMMITTEE (1Tz 11Y r PL►'}c�(o�l I cV G 1)t\( i c`Y s\7zsY (IR c! Li MAIL! ADD ESS THE BOARD,COUNCIL,COMMISSION,AUTHORITY OR COMMITTEE ON (p 9 (1 I'D\RIM b L WHICH I SERVE ISA UNIT OF: CIT COUNTY RcrrY ❑COUNTY 0 OTHER LOCALAGENCY YI" e Lcv4 f 3?(`i i3/ f ;,ti NAME OF POLITICAL SUBDIVISION: DATE ON WHICH VOTE OCCURRED �O "`��� MY POSITION IS: 0 ELECTIVE APPOINTIVE WHO MUST FILE FORM 8B This form is for use by any person serving at the county, city, or other local level of government on an appointed or elected board, council, commission, authority,or committee. It applies to members of advisory and non-advisory bodies who are presented with a voting conflict of interest under Section 112.3143, Florida Statutes. Your responsibilities under the law when faced with voting on a measure in which you have a conflict of interest will vary greatly depending on whether you hold an elective or appointive position. For this reason, please pay close attention to the instructions on this form before completing and filing the form. • INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 112.3143, FLORIDA STATUTES A person holding elective or appointive county, municipal, or other local public office MUST ABSTAIN from voting on a measure which would inure to his or her special private gain or loss. Each elected or appointed local officer also MUST ABSTAIN from knowingly voting on a measure which would inure to the special gain or loss of a principal (other than a government agency) by whom he or she is retained (including the parent, subsidiary,or sibling organization of a principal by which he or she is retained);to the special private gain or loss of a relative;or to the special private gain or loss of a business associate.Commissioners of community redevelopment agencies(CRAs)under ' Sec. 163.356 or 163.357, F.S., and officers of independent special tax districts elected on a one-acre, one-vote basis are not prohibited from voting in that capacity. For purposes of this law, a "relative" includes only the officer's father, mother, son, daughter, husband, wife, brother, sister, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in-law, and daughter-in-law.A"business associate" means any person or entity engaged in or carrying on a business enterprise with the officer as a partner,joint venturer, coowner of property, or corporate shareholder(where the shares of the corporation are not listed on any national or regional stock exchange). * * * * * * * ELECTED OFFICERS: In addition to abstaining from voting in the situations described above,you must disclose the conflict: PRIOR TO THE VOTE BEING TAKEN by publicly stating to the assembly the nature of your interest in the measure on which you are abstaining from voting;and WITHIN 15 DAYS AFTER THE VOTE OCCURS by completing and filing this form with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the meeting,who should incorporate the form in the minutes. . * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * APPOINTED OFFICERS: Although you must abstain from voting in the situations described above, you are not prohibited by Section 112.3143 from otherwise participating in these matters. However, you must disclose the nature of the conflict before making any attempt to influence the decision, whether orally or in writing and whether made by you or at your direction. IF YOU INTEND TO MAKE ANY ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION PRIOR TO THE MEETING AT WHICH THE VOTE WILL BE TAKEN: • You must complete and file this form (before making any attempt to influence the decision)with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the meeting,who will incorporate the form in the minutes. (Continued on page 2) CE FORM 8B-EFF.11/2013 PAGE 1 Adopted by reference in Rule 34-7.010(1)(f),F.A.C. APPOINTED OFFICERS (continued) • A copy of the form must be provided immediately to the other members of the agency. • The form must be read publicly at the next meeting after the form is filed. IF YOU MAKE NO ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION EXCEPT BY DISCUSSION AT THE MEETING: • You must disclose orally the nature of your conflict in the measure before participating. • You must complete the form and file it within 15 days after the vote occurs with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the meeting,who must incorporate the form in the minutes.A copy of the form must be provided immediately to the other members of the agency, and the form must be read publicly at the next meeting after the form is filed. DISCLOSURE OF LOCAL OFFICER'S INTEREST I, )nx , hereby disclose that on On I Al g3 0 ,20 )7 (a)A measure came or will come before my agency which (check one or more) inured to my special private gai •r loss; in ed to the special gai. • loss of my business associate, inure. • the s.- ial gain or loss of my relative, inured t. - pecial gain or loss of , by who lam ret..''ed;or • ured to the special gain or loss of ,which is the parent subsidiary, or sibling organization or subsidiary of a principal which has retained me. (b)The measure before my agency and the nature of my conflicting interest in the measure is as follows: oR-►cr i N ot CZ2 / [P cC ��cv�lTic�(ftt uS -zt(vDt,V> to LZ� �zr2 1�4 m LLQ N G-C tit 7 -L D ��c r �`�( va 4. If disclosure of specific information would violate confidentiality or privilege pursuant to law or rules governing attorneys, a public officer, who is also an attorney, may comply with the disclosure requirements of this section by disclosing the nature of the interest in such a way as to provide the public with notice of the conflict. Date Filed Signature .NOTICE: UNDER PROVISIONS OF FLORIDA STATUTES §112.317, A FAILURE TO MAKE ANY REQUIRED DISCLOSURE CONSTITUTES GROUNDS FOR AND MAY BE PUNISHED BY ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING: IMPEACHMENT, REMOVAL OR SUSPENSION FROM OFFICE OR EMPLOYMENT, DEMOTION, REDUCTION IN SALARY, REPRIMAND, OR A CIVIL PENALTY NOT TO EXCEED$10,000. CE FORM 8B-EFF.11/2013 PAGE 2 Adopted by reference in Rule 34-7.010(1)(f),F.A.C.