Loading...
Minutes 08-27-19 MINUTES a PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD COMMISSION CHAMBERS, CITY HALL INTRACOASTAL PARK CLUBHOUSE, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MONDAY, AUGUST 27, 2019, 6:30 P.M. PRESENT: STAFF: David Katz, Chair Ed Breese, Principal & Zoning Administrator Trevor Rosecrans, Vice Chair Colin Groff, Assistant City Management Butch Buoni Ian Singer, City Attorney Will Hatcher Hanna Matras, Planner Floyd Zonenstein Amanda Bassiely, Planner II Golene Gordon, Alternate Jennifer Johnson, Prototype, Inc. Tim Litsch, Alternate ABSENT: Malcolm Gropper Chris Simon Chair Katz called the meeting to order at 6:31 p.m. 1. Pledge of Allegiance 2. Roll Call Roll was called, and it was determined a quorum was present. It was noted that Mr. Vogel is no longer an alternate; and Tim Litsch introduced himself as the new alternate. 3. Agenda Approval Upon motion duly made and seconded, the agenda was approved. 4. Approval of Minutes —None 5. Communications and Announcements: Report from Staff Mr. Breese referred to information before the Board on the Fourth Annual Planning Officials Training Workshop. Any interested Board members should email Mr. Breese so funding can be secured for attendance. Chair Katz, Mr. Hatcher, and Ms. Gordon volunteered to attend. Chair Katz asked Staff on the status of the Dalmater [phonetic]project;Mr. Breese said no permits have been submitted thus far; there have been meetings with various interested parties to redesign the project somewhat; and extensions have been granted by the State through April 25, 2022. The Ocean 1 project also does not have any permit applications on file, Phase 2 is being considered before Phase 1, and extension for a valid vested projected is through March 2, 2023. Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 2 August 27, 2019 Chair Katz asked, in regards to the meeting in June on the Sustainability Ordinance, if this will have any effect on the Mall Project. The City Attorney said at the hearing for the Sustainability Guidelines that no; Mall applications were in in advance of the adoption of the Ordinance and would not be subject to it. However, Staff will work with the applicant to get as much of the sustainability guidelines worked into the project as possible. 6. Old Business —None 7. New Business 7.A. Approve request for abandonment of a portion of the unimproved NE 3rd Street right-of-way, north of NE 9th Avenue, in connection with the dedication of property from the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) and realignment, and extension of NE 3rd Street from NE 9th Avenue to Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard (ABAN 19-001). Applicant: Michael Simon, CRA Executive Director. Mr. Breese provided the PowerPoint presentation (see attached). Staff has reviewed the matter and is in support,utility companies have no objections. Staff recommends approval of the request. Chair Katz opened the floor for public comments, there being none, continued with comments from the Board. Mr. Simon as about plans for development on the street; Mr. Breese said the CRA intends to construct a two-way street with sidewalk and on-street parking on both sides, if the design allows. Motion made by Mr. Simon, seconded by Mr. Buoni, to approve request for abandonment of a portion of the unimproved NE 3rd Street right-of-way,north of NE 9th Avenue, in connection with the dedication of property from the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) and realignment, and extension of NE 3rd Street from NE 9th Avenue to Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard(ABAN 19-001). In a voice vote, the motion passed unanimously (7-0). 7.13. Approve MLK Overlay and Use Matrix Revisions Part I (CDRV 19-006) -- Amending the LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS: (1) Chapter 1. General Administration, Article IL Definitions; (2) Chapter 2. Land Development Process, Article IL Planning and Zoning Division Services; (3) Chapter 3. Zoning, Article III. Zoning Districts and Overlays, and Article IV. Use Regulations; and (4) Chapter 4. Site Development Standards, Article V. Minimum off-Street Parking Requirements, to implement modifications to MLK Overlay, modifications to rezoning-master plan application process, corrections pertaining to Mixed-Use zoning districts and revisions to Use Matrix, Residential and Lodging category. Applicant: City-initiated. Ms. Bassiely stated this item is another amendment to the LDR Code to help align the Land Use Regulations with the CRA Plan and accomplish other clean-ups. Ms. Bassiely explained the Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 3 August 27, 2019 following: (1) Clean-up of revisions and mistakes in previous versions; (2) Update of the MLK Overlay; (3) First of a series of provisions that will come before the Board; (4) Update of the definitions related to previous cleanups. Chair Katz opened the floor to public comment: • Susan Oyer, 140 SE 27th Way, had some questions: o Does this allow for hotels, are any expected? Ms. Bassiely said the revisions aren't specific to MLK, it is for all zoning districts across the board. o Will the trees be shade trees or the small Cathedral Oaks as shown in illustrations? Ms. Bassiely said canopy trees will be required unless there are limitations, e.g., overhead wires, etc. Ms. Oyer had additional questions on how trees would be utilized on MLK to discuss with Ms. Bassiely. o Exclusion of single family detached housing, citing the use of such housing in neighboring areas. Ms. Bassiely said in a specific boundary, they would not be allowed. The CRA plan actual underlying zoning district wouldn't allow them either because the land use is mixed-use and some areas are local retail commercial. Chair Katz added that the CRA is looking for density in this area which single- family homes would not provide; perhaps the CRA would be well-served if they looked to acquire the 35 or so Palm Beach County Housing Authority lots that are in the HOB to build single-family homes on those, to which Ms. Oyer agreed. Ms. Bassiely noted that existing single-family homes are not rendered non-conforming and are permitted to stay. This language is for redevelopment. o Would existing homes be allowed to add detached home or convert a garage into a living space? Ms. Bassiely said, no, not in a single-family zone, adding there is a staff group meeting on affordable housing issues and these items are being discussed. Chair Katz closed the floor to public comment. Mr. Simon asked about depth of sidewalk issues. Ms. Bassiely said the purpose of the overlays is to be assured of a consistent streetscape, which wouldn't matter whether it is mixed use or local retail commercial. Mr. Simon next wondered what would fall under the purview for outdoor dining; Ms. Bassiely said this has been a recent topic for consideration, stating the five foot allowance is a minimum, and a new restaurant going in can go deeper, to a maximum of fifteen feet. A discussion on previously built, mixed use development ensued. Motion made by Mr. Rosecrans, seconded by Mr. Hatcher, to approve MLK Overlay and Use Matrix Revisions Part I (CDRV 19-006) -- Amending the LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS: (1) Chapter 1. General Administration, Article IL Definitions; (2) Chapter 2. Land Development Process, Article IL Planning and Zoning Division Services; (3) Chapter 3. Zoning, Article III. Zoning Districts and Overlays, and Article IV. Use Regulations; and (4) Chapter 4. Site Development Standards, Article V. Minimum off-Street Parking Requirements, to implement modifications to MLK Overlay, modifications to rezoning-master plan application process, corrections pertaining to Mixed-Use zoning districts and revisions to Use Matrix, Residential and Lodging category. In a voice vote, the motion passed unanimously (7-0). Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 4 August 27, 2019 7.C. Approve efficiency improvements to the Site Plan Review Process (CDRV 19- 007) --Amending the LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS Chapter 2.Land Development Process, Article IL Planning and Zoning Division Services, Section 2. F. Site Plan, Including Time Extension and Modifications that begin implementing staff recommendations from the internal review of the City's development review process. Applicant: City-initiated. Ms. Bassiely stated this is an exciting and bigger project that the entire Department is working on. A new process called Development Process Review where all processes in four major categories will be streamlined for more efficient accessibility. In a PowerPoint presentation, the five parts of the first process, Site Plan Review, were explained. Chair Katz opened the floor to public comment: • Susan Oyer, 140 SE 27th Way, had some questions: o Objected to extensions for developers to have countless opportunities to continue indefinitely. Why does this continue to be allowed, holding up development? Mr. Breese first talked about the site plan time extensions, that a demonstration in good faith be given to move the project along that warrants a time extension. The City is preempted by the Governor's act which basically says any time an emergency is declared, more time can be added to permits, projects, etc., that could have been affected by the time extension. A discussion ensued on various exceptions and disagreements with the Governor's edict. Chair Katz closed the floor to public comment. Mr. Simon had questions on example of the two-story to four-story building, if only the third floor is being added, would it not require review? Ms. Bassiely said it would go through a different process, but must be in compliance with the Land Development Regulations. Mr. Rosecrans wondered if there was a contentious proposal and the developer decided to add another story, would the public be able to air their grievances. Ms. Bassiely said if the zoning regulations were met and had no adverse effect. A discussion followed on "work-around" exceptions on concepts, but height exceptions would require Commission approval. Mr. Breese said if there was any kind of approval originally associated with the plans, other than a straight site plan, it would need to go back through the process. A few hypotheticals were discussed to test the statement. Mr. Groff said this question has been looked at in order to anticipate someone trying to take shortcuts. Two things that would affect this, first, if it was a contentious project going through and it received a site plan, that means it has a potential for adverse effects. The Staff would put it back through the process. Second, if it is controversial, it would only be allowed to go through one time and the particulars for avoiding such loopholes were explained. Either way, it would have to go back through the process. An additional discussion on hypotheticals ensued. Chair Katz did disclose that he has had discussions with Staff on some of these items. Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 5 August 27, 2019 Mr. Buoni asked about site plan modifications, specifically,who has the deciding factor on adverse effect on nearby property? What input does the public have? Ms. Bassiely said Staff would make that determination. Mr. Groff added it would be City Staff, and proceeded to explain the criteria Staff would follow in making said decisions; Staff does not do this in a vacuum, accepts input from the public, and would not want to approve something that is controversial. More discussion followed on hypothetical examples, with Ms. Bassiely giving specific answers on existing zoning ordinances, noting that some of these conversations are already happening in first part of the Development Process Review and falls under transparency and education. Motion made by Mr. Simon, seconded by Mr. Buoni, to approve efficiency improvements to the Site Plan Review Process (CDRV 19-007) -- Amending the LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS Chapter 2. Land Development Process, Article IL Planning and Zoning Division Services, Section 2. F. Site Plan, Including Time Extension and Modifications that begin implementing staff recommendations from the internal review of the City's development review process as described with a note to the City to seek solutions for public input or notification within the process of the applications. In a voice vote, the motion passed unanimously (7-0). 8. Other—None 9. Comments by Members Chair Katz wanted to reiterate that attendance at the City Planning Officials Training would be a good idea, citing past trainings as really helpful. 10. Adjournment Motion to adjourn was made by Mr. Buoni and seconded by Mr. Simon. The meeting was adjourned at 7:29 p.m. Attachments: Fourth Annual Planning Officials Training Workshop PowerPoint presentation NE 3rd Street Connection Realignment PowerPoint presentation on MLK Overlay and Use Matrix Revisions PowerPoint presentation Site Plan Review Process [Minutes prepared by M. Moore,Prototype,Inc.]