The URL can be used to link to this page

Agenda 02-23-21 CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH 4 PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD MEETING AGENDA DATE: Tuesday, February 23, 2021 TIME: 6:30 PM PLACE: Zoom Online Meeting IMPORTANT NOTICE: This public hearing will be conducted using means of communication media technology. If you wish to join the meeting using a computer or smart phone you only need to register prior to noon on February 23rd. Register by sending an e-mail to pz mailbox@ bbfl.us, indicating whether you desire to speak on an item (indicate which item(s)), or if you only plan to listen to and/or view the meeting provide your name and phone number so you may be contacted if needed. The agenda, electronic link for the meeting and access instructions will be available at the City's web site within two days of the meeting. If you cannot join the meeting, written comments can be e-mailed to the above e-mail address which will be read into the record by City staff. 1. Pledge of Allegiance 2. Roll Call 3. Agenda Approval 4. Approval of Minutes 4.A. Approve board minutes from the 10/27/2020 Planning & Development board meeting. 5. Communications and Announcements: Report from Staff 6. Old Business 7. New Business 7.A. REQUEST: Approve Ocean Palm Plaza (aka Yachtman's Plaza) Future Land Use Map Amendment from Special High Density Residential (SHDR) to Local Retail Commercial (LRC). City-initiated. REQUEST: Approve Ocean Palm Plaza (aka Yachtman's Plaza) Rezoning from I PUD, Infill Planned Unit Development to C-3, Community Commercial. City-initiated. 7.B. REQUEST: Approve Lawrence Road Future Land Use Map Amendment from Medium Density Residential (MEDR) to Low Density Residential (LDR). City-initiated. REQUEST: Approve Lawrence Road Rezoning from PUD, Planned Unit Development to R-1A, Single-Family Residential. City-initiated. 7.C. REQUEST: Approve Knuth Road Future Land Use Map Amendment from Local Retail Commercial (LRC) to Mixed Use Low(MXL). City-initiated. REQUEST: Approve Knuth Road Rezoning from PCD, Planned Commercial Development to SMU, Suburban Mixed Use. City-initiated. 7.D. Approve revisions to the Workforce Housing Program (CDRV 21-001) - Amending the LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, Chapter 1. General Administration, Article 11. Definitions, and Page 1 of 73 Article V. Housing I nitiatives, Section 2. Workforce Housing Program. Applicant: City-initiated. 7.E. Recommend selection of Board Chair and Vice-Chair to City Commission in compliance with the Code of Ordinances, Part 11, Section 27-2(b) Board or committee member selection. 8. Other 9. Comments by members 10. Adjournment The Board may only conduct public business after a quorum has been established. If no quorum is established within twenty minutes of the noticed start time of the meeting, the City Clerk or her designee will so note the failure to establish a quorum and the meeting shall be concluded. Board members may not participate further even when purportedly acting in an informal capacity. Notice Any person who decides to appeal any decision of the planning and development board with respect to any matter considered at this meeting will need a record of the proceedings and for such purpose may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceeding is made, which record includes the testimony, and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. (f. S. 286.0105) The city shall furnish appropriate auxiliary aids and services where necessary to afford an individual with a disability an equal opportunity to participate in and enjoy the benefits of a service, program, or activity conducted by the city. Please contact the City Clerk's office, (561) 742-6060, at least forty-eight (48) hours prior to the program or activity in order for the city to reasonably accommodate your request. Page 2 of 73 4.4.A. Approval of Minutes 2/23/2021 CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH AGENDA ITEM REQUEST FORM PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT MEETING DATE: 2/23/2021 REQUESTED ACTION BY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD: Approve board minutes from the 10/27/2020 Planning & Development board meeting. EXPLANATION OF REQUEST: HOW WILL THIS AFFECT CITY PROGRAMS OR SERVICES? FISCAL IMPACT: ALTERNATIVES: STRATEGIC PLAN: STRATEGIC PLAN APPLICATION: CLIMATE ACTION APPLICATION: Is this a grant? Grant Amount: ATTACHMENTS: Type Description D Minutes 10®27®2020 Minutes Page 3of73 DRAFT MINUTES PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD ZOOM ONLINE MEETING 100 E. OCEAN AVENUE, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA TUESDAY, OCTOBER 27, 2020, 6:30 P.M. PRESENT: STAFF: Dr. James DeVoursney, Chair Mike Rumpf, Director of Development Trevor Rosecrans, Vice Chair James Cherof, City Attorney Darren Allen Danielle Schwabe, Assistant City Attorney Butch Buoni Amanda Radigan, Planner II Tim Litsch Luis Bencosme, Planner I Susan Oyer Hanna Matras, Planner Chris Simon Colin Groff, Assistant City Manager,Public Services Jay Sobel, Alternate Adam Temple, Community Standards Director Lyman Phillips, Alternate Brigitte Chiappetta, Prototype, Inc. GUESTS: Brian Herbert, Gallo Herbert Architects Elizabeth Roque, Wells Landing Apartments Margaret and Zach Schaffer, Landowners Doris Jones, Tax Accountant Chair DeVoursney called the meeting to order at 6:37 p.m. The meeting is being conducted online via Zoom so as to help mitigate the spread of Covid-19 within the community. 1. Pledge of Allegiance 2. Roll Call Roll was called and it was determined a quorum was present. 3. Agenda Approval Motion made by Mr. Buoni, seconded by Ms. Oyer, to approve the agenda. In a voice vote, the agenda was unanimously approved (7-0). 4. Approval of Minutes —September 22, 2020 Motion made by Mr. Litsch, seconded by Mr. Buoni,to approve the September 22, 2020, minutes. In a voice vote, the minutes were unanimously approved (7-0). 5. Communications and Announcements: Report from Staff Page 4 of 73 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 2 October 27, 2020 Ms. Radigan stated the last project heard before the Board,Legacy of Boynton Beach, GCI, has been tabled by the City Commission and no further action has been made at this time. 6. Old Business —None 7. New Business The next three items will be heard as one with motions taken at the end of the presentation. Chair DeVoursney read the following into the record: 7.A. Approve Wells Landing North Future Land Use Map Amendment from Local Retail Commercial(LRC) and Medium Density Residential(MEDR)to Mixed Use Low(MXL), and Rezoning from C-2,Neighborhood Commercial and R-2, Single- and Two-Family Residential to MU-1, Mixed-Use 1, with a master plan for 24 multi-family units and 8,530 square feet of commercial. Applicant: Elisabeth Roque/Wells Landing Apartments LLC. 7.B. Approve Wells Landing North (NWSP 20-004) for a mixed-use development consisting of a three (3)-story building with 24 affordable housing dwelling units, 8,530 square feet of commercial space, associated parking and related site improvements on a 1.23-acre site. Applicant: Elizabeth Roque, Wells Landing Apartments LLC. 7.C. 1) Request for abandonment of a portion of the unimproved 30 foot wide right-of- way of NE 1st Street running north and south from NE 11th Avenue south approximately 150 feet (ABAN 21- 002); and 2) Request for abandonment of a portion of an unimproved five(5)foot wide alley running east to west from Seacrest Boulevard east to approximately 43 6.5 feet(ABAN 21-001). Before the presentation got underway, Assistant City Counsel, James Cherof, swore in all consultants and those wishing to speak in this quasi-judicial proceeding. They will be sworn in by trust and, when speaking, are to identify themselves as having taken the oath. Brian Herbert, Gallo Herbert Architects, 1311 Newport Center Drive, Deerfield Beach, Florida, gave a PowerPoint presentation (see attached), introducing Elizabeth Roque, Paul Bilton, and members of the design team. Highlights included: • North parcel just north of Martin Luther King Boulevard. • Proposing to go to MU1 mixed use zoning (20 units per acres), south part needs no rezoning. • Land use map amendment required to accomplish rezoning, changing medium density residential portion and local retail commercial to a combined mixed use low residential land use. • Next are abandonments: o Five foot utility easement along of all of these properties. o A portion of NE 4t' Street not being utilized. Page 5of73 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 3 October 27, 2020 • New site plan review for approval: o Three-story mixed use building with 8,350 square feet of commercial on the first floor and 24 dwelling units above. o Site plans configured for main access off Martin Luther King Boulevard and another off of Northeast 1 lt' Street. o Push building to frontage of Martin Luther Kind Boulevard to create vibrant pedestrian atmosphere. o Created courtyard for outdoor seating, art displays to create community feeling. o Parking toward back, on-street parking along Martin Luther King as well. o Sustainable development standards incorporate native plants, energy efficient fixtures, charging stations. • Overall development landscape plan: o L-2 for this proposal (northern site). o Northern parcel has met all landscape requirement, shade trees enhancing pedestrian plaza and courtyard. o Parking screened from Martin Luther King Boulevard. o Floridian theme with Caribbean flair. Balcony railings,brackets. Courtyard with gazebo along with commercial uses. o Soft but vibrant palette of colors. o Second and third floors will be residential uses; first floor commercial. • Artist's rendition from Martin Luther King Boulevard shown. Chair DeVoursney opened the floor to public comment. • Chenita Mosley, 132 NE 11 Avenue, asked how close the parking lot will be to her property. There is a private fence, but will a soundproof wall be put there? Mr. Herbert said yes, and referred to the slide showing the concrete privacy wall six feet tall anywhere the property abuts a residential property. Ms. Mosley next asked about security cameras to which Mr. Herbert said there would be some. Chair DeVoursney closed the floor to public comment. Board Comments: Ms. Oyer had several questions: • This project is stunningly beautiful, loves the colors. Is the name going to be Wells Landing and has the neighborhood agreed. Ms. Roque said the name is being changed, this is just a working title. • Suggested perhaps the railings could be black instead of white for more of a Louisiana feel. • Noticed there are 455 podocarpus at the south end and 435 at the north end; suggested coco plums which are native, green and red together and put out white flowers with a nice little white fruit; attracts bees, butterflies, and birds. Supports the urban orchard movement. Page 6 of 73 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 4 October 27, 2020 • What is the status on artwork? Ms. Roque said they would be happy to put in the coco plums to their plans. And that they want to participate in Art in Public Spaces. Ms. Oyer added that Boynton Beach is a kinetic city with the largest kinetic art event in the world, perhaps a piece of kinetic art could be installed in the front of the plaza. Also,the Vice Mayor is looking to start a mural project(using clear paint that becomes visible when it rains). Ms. Roque noted there an art wall on the northwest side has already been planned. Ms. Radigan added that this project is a tax credit product and they are formally exempt from the art program, so developers can provide whatever art they like but won't be going through the Art in Public Places program. Mr. Simon likes the colors and treatments of architectural elevations;had several questions: • Is the abandonment of the east/west five foot easement all or nothing, not just a portion of the block. Ms. Roque said technically it can be abandon any portion the City sees fit. However, if there is no public need for that easement, the proposal is to abandon from Seacrest all the way east through to this project. Mr. Simon noted if residential properties west of this wanted to have input, they would have been in attendance (Ms. Roque said notices were sent out for the abandonments; each neighbor will get 2.5 feet to the north and south of the easement.) • Agrees with Ms. Oyer that something else would be preferable to the podocarpus. Suggested a grouping of palms every third plant in a taller height to enhance the Caribbean theme; Ms. Roque stated they are happy to work out whatever this community/neighborhood would like to see, explaining that the oaks are already at a good height(18 feet). They will defer to Staff on what plantings are allowed. • Conditions of approval: o Items 1 and 2, adjustments City Staff requires, does it allow maintaining paving or parking layout as presented? Mr. Herbert said Items 1 and 2 are the 25 foot radius off Southwest 11th;after some discussion on right-of-way, it was agreed that there may be a need to further address the parking and that some of the charging stations may need to be relocated. • Breezeway is undercover and is fine. • Regarding parking, there seem to be concentrated handicap spaces on northwest portion of western building;perhaps spaces can be added to east portion of the site. Mr. Herbert noted more commercial parking is to the western side. • Regarding handicap spaces and elevators, Mr. Herbert said there are two handicap spaces near the south entranceway to the residential elevator. Mr. Litsch had two questions: • Of the 85 total parking spaces provided, are they going to be assigned? Mr. Herbert said they will be assigned with designations of unit numbers or for commercial. • What are the rents for this building? Ms. Roque said there are 60% and some 30%; one bedrooms are around $950 per month. • Excellent looking site, great design. Page 7 of 73 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 5 October 27, 2020 Mr. Litsch asked of Ms. Radigan about the abandonments, does it all go to Wells Landing and none to the church? Ms. Radigan said the abandonment is 25 wide, half will be dedicated to the Wells Landing Project, half will be dedicated to the church. Mr. Buoni echoed Ms. Oyer and previous members' comments, it is an outstanding design. Also commended the Staff on the conditions of approval. Mr. Allen agreed with the aesthetically beautiful project and presentation. One question: what will be in the small breezeway/pass-through? Benches? Glass walls to retail spaces on either side? Mr. Herbert said there will be storefronts on the front half of it and there will be a gazebo-type structure in the middle. Mr. Rosecrans had no questions and agreed that the project"Looks great, can't wait to see it." Chair DeVoursney also echoed the other Board Members, it looks aesthetically pleasing, and is thrilled that there is a developer that was able to take care of tax credit, the City has been trying for so long to get this property developed. Motion made by Ms. Oyer, seconded by Mr. Buoni, to approve Wells Landing North Future Land Use Map Amendment from Local Retail Commercial (LRC) and Medium Density Residential (MEDR)to Mixed Use Low (MXL), and Rezoning from C- 2, Neighborhood Commercial and R- 2, Single-and Two-Family Residential to MU-1, Mixed-Use 1, with a master plan for 24 multi- family units and 8,530 square feet of commercial. In a roll call vote, the motion passed unanimously (7-0). Motion made by Ms. Oyer, seconded by Mr. Buoni, to approve Wells Landing North(NWSP 20- 004) for a mixed-use development consisting of a three (3)-story building with 24 affordable housing dwelling units, 8,530 square feet of commercial space, associated parking and related site improvements on a 1.23-acre site. In a roll call vote, the motion passed unanimously (7-0). Motion made by Ms. Oyer, seconded by Mr. Buoni, to approve 1) Request for abandonment of a portion of the unimproved 30 foot wide right-of-way of NE 1st Street running north and south from NE 11th Avenue south approximately 150 feet (ABAN 21- 002); and 2) Request for abandonment of a portion of an unimproved five (5) foot wide alley running east to west from Seacrest Boulevard east to approximately 436.5 feet (ABAN 21-001). In a roll call vote, the motion passed unanimously (7-0). Chair DeVoursney read the following into the record: 7.D. Approve Wells Landing South (NWSP 20-005) New Site Plan for a multi-family residential development consisting of two (2), four-story buildings with a total of 100 affordable housing dwelling units, associated parking and related site improvements on a 2.69-acre site. Applicant: Elizabeth Roque, Wells Landing Apartments LLC Page 8of73 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 6 October 27, 2020 Mr. Herbert continued as previously, but with a new PowerPoint Presentation for the Southern Parcel, south of Martin Luther King Boulevard (see attached). Highlights are as follows: • This proposal is simpler than the north one, this is only a new site plan. • The parcel essentially wraps around an existing grocery store. • The proposed buildings are four-stories, 100 residential units. Parking situated to back of the property (none of the parking is visible from Martin Luther King). • With buildings pushed toward Martin Luther King Boulevard, a pedestrian plaza is created in front of buildings. • The leasing office, fitness area, and common areas create a quasi-commercial use look along Martin Luther King. • For the eastern building,which runs parallel to MLK, has first floor units and given them all little porches, creating a neighborhood atmosphere to make it more vibrant and pedestrian-friendly. • More green space; decorative concrete wall; outdoor functions/play area. • Sustainability elements are as in the presentation above. • Landscape plan mirrors the elements on the north side of Martin Luther King. • Elevation drawings and artist's rendering were described, Old Florida flair, same color palette, metal roofs. Chair DeVoursney opened the floor to public comment; seeing none, the floor was closed. Ms. Oyer had several comments: • On the color palette,this looks like a pink tone or pale gray? Mr. Herbert said it is more gray or off-white; Ms. Oyer suggested there should be some pink. • Regarding greenspace on the southeast corner, perhaps should explore using Florida slash pines rather than having to enrich the sandy soil. • Will the north and south developments have separate names? Ms. Roque said it will be one whole name. Ms. Oyer gave a brief story from the Historic Preservation Board on names of that part of the City, e.g., The Club Continental. Mr. Simon comments included: • Confirmation that the buildings on the south are residential top to bottom; Mr. Herbert explain the goal was to create a pedestrian atmosphere, so the residential development would have the common areas, leasing office/common spaces/fitness gym, in the first floor of the western building. Ms. Roque added the multi-purpose rooms would be similar to the clubhouse at Ocean Breeze. • On landscaping, especially, the lawns not surviving in the shade so should be planted out from the beginning. And again,break up the tree lines with palms while the oaks grow in. • Four-story building does feel like a vertical wall; an interesting treatment might be varying the roof heights in that section even at the risk of losing some residences. Page 9of73 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 7 October 27, 2020 Mr. Litsch commented this looks great, does what it is supposed to, looks like a comfortable way to be in town, and the front porches at street level are a good idea. Mr. Buoni thanked the developers for a well-thought out, outstanding design. Mr. Allen had no questions. Mr. Rosecrans asked about permeable pavers on the north, but not on the south. Mr. Herbert said the same pavers will be on the south as well. Chair DeVoursney wondered if there is access to the units on the north side of the building that faces Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard and to the porches themselves. The answer was yes to both questions, similar to the recently developed townhomes along US 1. Chair DeVoursney continued, asking for a description of the residence abutting on east side of the north-faced building facing Martin Luther King. Ms. Radigan said it is multi-family, a duplex in a one-story structure and it meets the compatibility requirement for the set-back with the City. Pretty much all of the structure will be concrete block. General discussion followed on various aspects of the over-all design, landscaping/greenspace, and artwork; the sides of the buildings are articulated as much as the fronts, in anticipation of maturity of and future developments. Motion made by Ms. Oyer, seconded by Mr. Buoni, to approve Wells Landing South(NWSP 20- 005) New Site Plan for a multi-family residential development consisting of two (2), four-story buildings with a total of 100 affordable housing dwelling units, associated parking and related site improvements on a 2.69-acre site. In a roll call vote, the motion passed unanimously (7-0). 7.E. Approval of abandonment request to vacate a portion of the SW 6th Street right-of- way (ABAN 20-010) consisting of a portion of the unimproved Swale abutting the east lot line of the subject property located at 704 SW 25th Avenue. Applicant: Zachary Schaffer Margaret and Zach Schaffer, 4807 NW 16 Terrace, Boca Raton, gave a PowerPoint presentation and spoke as landowners of 704 Southwest 25th Ave., who want to make Boynton Beach their home. In order to build a house big enough for their family of six, more land is needed so they are petitioning for abandonment of a 25 foot right-of-way as described on northeast corner of the lot. Will work with Richard Jones Architecture to build a single family home reminiscent of Boynton Beach's historic roots and profile of neighborhood. This will not impact any of the neighbors solely adjacent to the property, nor will it displace any utilities or easements. Chair DeVoursney opened the floor to public comment; seeing none, the floor was closed. Ms. Oyer said she drove by to check out the site and thinks this house would be a perfect addition to the neighborhood. Page 10 of 73 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 8 October 27, 2020 Mr. Simon wondered when abandoning this portion of the City's property, how are the set- back lines affected? Ms. Radigan stated all setbacks are taken from property lines, so if City abandons this portion of the road,which is between the right-of-way and the property owners, so the City deeds a portion of the right-of-way to the neighboring property owner. Setbacks will be taken from the new property lines. Discussion followed for clarity. Mr. Litsch had no comment, sees no problem. Mr. Allen had no comment, thinks the renderings are beautiful. Mr. Buoni said it looks very comfortable; Staff's background report explains it well. Mr. Rosecrans had encouraging comments as a family of six that has outgrown their home. Chair DeVoursney had no further comments; thanked applicant for their presentation. Motion made by Mr. Buoni, seconded by Mr. Simon, to approve Approval of abandonment request to vacate a portion of the SW 6th Street right-of-way (ABAN 20-010) consisting of a portion of the unimproved Swale abutting the east lot line of the subject property located at 704 SW 25th Avenue. In a roll call vote,the motion passed unanimously (7-0). 7.17. Approve amending the LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, Chapter 3. Zoning, Article III. Zoning Districts and Overlays, Section 8.E. Downtown Transit- Oriented Development District (DTODD) Overlay, to add a density provision in support of workforce housing in MU-2, MU-3, MU-4 and MU-C zoning districts. Applicant: City-initiated Ms. Oyer recused herself as she owns property with her siblings in the DTODD (see attached Form 8-13). Ms. Oyer muted herself from the proceedings and Chair DeVoursney selected Mr. Phillips to sit in as alternate. Ms. Radigan,Principal Planner, gave a PowerPoint presentation(see attached)on the Code Amendment and how to calculate density in the TOD area. The reasoning behind the amendment is that it has to do with affordable housing being that if a surplus or more units is allowed in the lower affordability range of a given building, supply will be added to a lower range of income. Also it would increase the overall supply of housing in the TOD and encourages higher population closer to public transit. It supports the vision of the CRA Plan and the City's vision for a downtown. Chair DeVoursney opened the floor to public comment; seeing none, the floor was closed. Mr. Simon had several comments calculating parking spaces. Ms.Radigan said this amendment does not affect any parking standards in effect; every unit built would have to meet current standards. It does vary by zoning district,but the ratio does not change. Discussion followed; Mr. Simon is concerned that this could create a very urban feel in a small space, could be a strain on Page 11 of 73 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 9 October 27, 2020 downtown infrastructure;scale is key. Ms.Radigan said this is Part I of a bigger study;a workforce housing workshop is planned to further discuss revisions to encourage workforce housing. Mr. Litsch was not sure he had a full understanding;it looks like half units will be counted,but not as total density of a building. Ms. Radigan that is incorrect, and explained the changes in calculating: If maximum is 60 units per acre,and five are proposed as efficiencies or one-bedroom, those five units can count as half a unit, which could count as 10 of the smaller sized units; again, this is only for density calculation. Parking and impact fees are still counted as 1:1. Mr.Rosecrans asked what kind of stress does this put on the already stressed infrastructure in these density locations. Ms.Radigan said there are two sets of density and this is still within the land use density; all of the "stress"has already been factored into land use. This will not go above land use density. As regards impact on green space and permeability, Ms.Radigan said while it sounds like more units, the"buildable envelope"is not changing of any of these sites. Changes pertain to what can go inside the building, the cap on land use can not exceed Code. Further examples were given; this is not classifying anything, rather adding to the supply of more affordable units in any given building. Mr.Phillips and Mr. Allen had no questions. Mr. Buoni spoke from personal experience; in Sterling Village they have exceed the density in the lower southeast quadrant, of 43 acres there are 840 units. It has not been a problem and they have very affordable housing; most of their units are 750 square feet or less. Chair DeVoursney clarified MU High would correlated to MU4 and MU Core; MU Medium is MU3 and MU2; there is a MU Low but it is not included in this amendment. Further clarification was that MU4 and MUC can increase by 25%, or up to 80 per acre,but another 20 cannot be added on top of that. Ms. Radigan stated there are a couple of small pockets where MU Low is allowed, but those parcels are very small. Mr. Simon had more questions on the pay-in-lieu-of fees, which Ms. Radigan said was more to do with another workforce housing program which is under review for revisions and updates. This amendment is solely to increase the supply of smaller and thereby more affordable units in buildings being built downtown; these units are not in any way income capped or dedicated workforce housing units, rather simply a way to supply for affordable units by caping the size. More examples of the difference between the two programs were explained. Broward, Sarasota, and Martin Counties have such programs as being proposed. To date, there have been no permits or building that is built has taken advantage of the pay-in-lieu-of programs. Discussion continued. Motion made by Mr. Simon, seconded by Mr. Buoni, to approve amending the LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, Chapter 3. Zoning, Article III. Zoning Districts and Overlays, Section 8.E. Downtown Transit-Oriented Development District (DTODD) Overlay, to add a density provision in support of workforce housing in MU-2, MU-3, MU-4 and MU-C zoning districts. In a roll call vote, the motion failed (1-6), with Mr. Allen, Mr. Phillips, Mr. Rosecrans, Mr. Simon, Mr. Litsch, and Chair DeVoursney dissenting. Ms. Oyer reclaimed her seat on the Board; Mr. Phillips stood down. Page 12 of 73 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 10 October 27, 2020 8. Other—None Ms. Radigan stated there is an item to be scheduled at the November 24 meeting. As this is close to Thanksgiving, if anyone does not expect to be present, please let Staff know ahead of time. The meeting can be rescheduled if no quorum is expected; but since it has to be advertised ahead of time, advanced notice is needed. It would be a virtual meeting and at present,only one item is scheduled;nothing is currently scheduled for the December meeting. Discussion ensued. Consensus was that the November 24 virtual meeting will remain scheduled. 9. Comments by Members Ms. Oyer noted: • November 12, 5:00 p.m., will be the workshop on Workforce Housing. The Workshop will be virtual; Ms. Radigan will send out the information for joining. • Sustainability Survey is on the City's website. Please fill out and share; right now it is number one in the County for responses. Mr. Buoni encouraged downloading the MyBoyntonBeach app. You will get responses within 24 hours, it has all the departments, everything that is needed, and it is free to use. 10. Adjournment Motion to adjourn was duly made and seconded. The meeting was adjourned at 9:08 p.m. Attachments: PowerPoint Presentation for Wells Landing Development PowerPoint Presentation for Wells Landing South PowerPoint Presentation for Schaffer Proposal PowerPoint Presentation for Amending LDR Chapter 3, Article III Form 8-13 for Susan Oyer Recusal [Minutes prepared by M. Moore,Prototype,Inc.] Page 13 of 73 7.7.A. New Business 2/23/2021 CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH AGENDA ITEM REQUEST FORM PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT MEETING DATE: 2/23/2021 REQUESTED ACTION BY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD: REQUEST: Approve Ocean Palm Plaza (aka Yachtman's Plaza) Future Land Use Map Amendment from Special High Density Residential (SHDR) to Local Retail Commercial (LRC). City-initiated. REQUEST: Approve Ocean Palm Plaza (aka Yachtman's Plaza) Rezoning from IPUD, Infill Planned Unit Development to C-3, Community Commercial. City-initiated. EXPLANATION OF REQUEST: The Ocean Palm Plaza—a strip shopping center—consists of two (2) parcels, separated by the right-of-way of Northeast 15th Place. The commercial structures, built in 1982 and 1983, total 32,022 square feet. In March of 2006, the parcels were reclassified from Local Retail Commercial (LRC) to Special High Density Residential (SHDR), and rezoned from C-3, Community Commercial to IPUD, Infill Planned Unit Development. The concurrent approvals included a site plan for 61 townhomes under the name of Yachtsman's Cove, and an abandonment of a portion of Northeast 15th Place, to be integrated into the project. The timing of the approvals turned out to coincide with the collapse of the housing market and ensuing economic decline known as a Great Recession. The project was never built, but the properties remained under the 2006 FLU and zoning designations, with their existing commercial use non-conforming under the I PUD zoning. The subject requests processed by staff falls into a category usually referred to as "house cleaning." It constitutes a reversal of amendments approved in 2006: the two (2) properties would revert to their former designations of Local Retail Commercial future land use and C-3 Community Commercial zoning. While minor improvements to the properties were implemented recently, it appears that there is no interest in redevelopment of the Plaza consistent with its current FLU classification and zoning. Note that the CRA Community Redevelopment Plan's future land use recommendation for both properties is Mixed Use Low (MXL) and a companion zoning of MU-1, which would allow a mix of residential and commercial uses as well as a residential use only. Staff anticipates that any future redevelopment of the Plaza would follow the CRA Plan recommendation; however, until such time that it does, staff recommends returning the properties to their original commercial designations to address the non-conforming status of the existing commercial uses. This action would also remove the limits on the annual value of improvements allowed to a non-conforming property, to allow proper maintenance or upgrading the property to maximize its use under the corresponding zoning district. HOW WILL THIS AFFECT CITY PROGRAMS OR SERVICES? No change in City programs or services FISCAL IMPACT: No impact ALTERNATIVES: None recommended Page 14 of 73 STRATEGIC PLAN: STRATEGIC PLAN APPLICATION: N/A CLIMATE ACTION APPLICATION: N/A Is this a grant? Grant Amount: ATTACHMENTS: Type Description D Staff Report Staff Report D Exhibit ExhibitA. Location Map D Exhibit Exhibit B. Existing FLU D Exhibit Exhibit Bl. Proposed FLU D Exhibit Exhibit C. Existing Zoning D Exhibit Exhibit Cl. Proposed Zoning Page 15 of 73 DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PLANNING AND ZONING DIVISION MEMORANDUM NO. PZ 21-005 STAFF REPORT TO: Chair and Members Planning and Development Board THRU: Ed Breese Planning and Zoning Administrator FROM: Hanna Matras, Senior Planner DATE: February 16, 2021 PROJECT: Ocean Palm Plaza (aka Yachtsman's Plaza) LUAR 21-001 REQUEST: Approve Ocean Palm Plaza (aka Yachtman's Plaza) Future Land Use Map Amendment from Special High Density Residential (SHDR) to Local Retail Commercial (LRC), and Rezoning from IPUD, Infill Planned Unit Development to C-3, Community Commercial. City-initiated. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Property Owner: Yachtsman's Properties LLC Applicant: City-initiated Location: 1550 and 1600 North Federal Highway (southern parcel between Ocean Inlet Drive and Northeast 15th Place; northern parcel north of NE 15th Place; see Exhibit A) Existing Land Use/ Zoning: Special High Density Residential (SHDR)/Infill Planned Unit Development (IPUD) Proposed Land Use/Zoning: Local Retail Commercial (LRC)/C-3 Community Commercial Proposed Use: No change in use proposed (developed commercial plaza) Acreage: 3.17 acres (two parcels) Adjacent Uses: Page 16 of 73 Page 2 Ocean Palm Plaza LUAR 21-001 North: Developed residential community (Seaview Park Club), classified Special High Density Residential (SHDR) and zoned IPUD, Infill Planned Unit Development; South: Right-of-way of Ocean Inlet Drive, farther south developed residential community (Murano Bay), classified Special High Density Residential and Zoned IPUD, Infill Planned Unit Development; East: Developed Single-family residential lots, classified Low Density Residential (LDR) and zoned R-1-AA; and West: Right-of-way of Federal Highway, and farther west, right-of-way for the Florida East Coast (FEC) railroad. BACKGROUND The Ocean Palm Plaza—a strip shopping center—consists of two (2) parcels, separated by the right-of-way of Northeast 15th Place. The commercial structures, built in 1982 and 1983, total 32,022 square feet. In March of 2006, the parcels were reclassified from Local Retail Commercial (LRC) to Special High Density Residential (SHDR), and rezoned from C-3, Community Commercial to IPUD, Infill Planned Unit Development. The concurrent approvals included a site plan for 61 townhomes under the name of Yachtsman's Cove, and an abandonment of a portion of Northeast 15th Place, to be integrated into the project. The timing of the approvals turned out to coincide with the collapse of the housing market and ensuing economic decline known as a Great Recession. The project was never built, but the properties remained under the 2006 FLU and zoning designations, with their existing commercial use non-conforming under the IPUD zoning. EXPLANATION The proposed action falls into a category usually referred to by staff as "house cleaning." It constitutes a reversal of amendments approved in 2006: the two (2) properties would revert to their former designations of Local Retail Commercial future land use and C-3 Community Commercial zoning. While minor improvements to the properties were implemented recently, it appears that there is no interest in redevelopment of the Plaza consistent with its current FLU classification and zoning. Note that the CRA Community Redevelopment Plan's future land use recommendation for both properties is Mixed Use Low (MXL) and a companion zoning of MU-1, which would allow a mix of residential and commercial uses as well as a residential use only. Staff anticipates the future redevelopment of the Plaza to follow the CRA Plan recommendation but, until such time that it does, recommends returning 2 Page 17 of 73 Page 3 Ocean Palm Plaza LUAR 21-001 the properties to their original commercial designations to address the non-conforming status of the existing commercial uses. This action would also remove the limits on the value of the improvements that can be made to a non-conforming property on an annual basis. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the subject requests be approved. 3 Page 18 of 73 EXHIBIT A OCEAN PALM PLAZA LOCATION MAP t.s. fitw4v, rtr IE f. k- �� 1 \1 f� f 1 D h y�f A tip 1 � 4 i11 _ F m . n 0 45 90 180 270 Feet Page 19 of 73 EXHIBIT B OCEAN PALM PLAZA: CURRENT FLU z Legend LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL(LDR);7.5 D.U./Acre 0 MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL(MEDR); 11 D.U./Acre MER SPECIAL HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL(SHDR); 20 D.U./Acre LOCAL RETAIL COMMERCIAL(LRC) 16 1 11 Manatee Ba - Y Rd S k a \_ t' !I 0 45 90 180 270 Feet Page 20 of 73 EXHIBIT B1 OCEAN PALM PLAZA: PROPOSED FLU Legend LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL(LDR);7.5 D.U./Acre 0 MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL(MEDR); 11 D.U./Acre SPECIAL HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL(SHDR); 20 D.U./Acre LOCAL RETAIL COMMERCIAL(LRC) # Manatee Y Rd F ILDR. et r- 0 45 90 180 270 Feet Page 21 of 73 EXHIBIT C OCEAN PALM PLAZA: CURRENT ZONING Legend R1AA Single Family, 5.5 du/ac R3 Multi Family, 11 du/ac IPUD Infill Planned Unit Development C2 Neighborhood Commercial C3 Community Commercial SIX I 'M C-2 ?t�,��j��1�11141�`�sl��ll f3')��Ii��1 l) �� I��IIII{ ��1jl�ll � II (I Ili��ll�(4��;`4i�`4(`Il�t 2 R -AA \� 41',1„I� � ��1llllllll�l�`�� 1n1WL LOB �\ � 31.4,tiIS�lll��l�lllllll I��(� �l�i, 1i I i�1141'I'111�� ills. � £1�4111111 1'S);��1 s1)' 1��111 Milt�� R.1-AA N -t: L 0 45 90 180 270 Feet Page 22 of 73 EXHIBIT C1 OCEAN PALM PLAZA: PROPOSED ZONING Legend f R1AA Single Family, 5.5 du/ac t R3 Multi Family, 11 du/ac IPUD Infill Planned Unit Development f tr `. 0 C2 Neighborhood Commercial C3 Community Commercial `l rl .,'_, )- )1 i 4! R11 -AA \ ) ) , \ f IIV 17 ,7 1 � ii (\111111 I 111 it} �I�l}111i1�4 I lllllllll� 's3��,'l�l��,i�llsl�l I��t,IIII 1'1'11 111 11��V)s I�1�l11 0 45 90 180 270 Feet Page 23 of 73 7.7.B. New Business 2/23/2021 CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH AGENDA ITEM REQUEST FORM PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT MEETING DATE: 2/23/2021 REQUESTED ACTION BY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD: REQUEST: Approve Lawrence Road Future Land Use Map Amendment from Medium Density Residential (MEDR) to Low Density Residential (LDR). City-initiated. REQUEST: Approve Lawrence Road Rezoning from PUD, Planned Unit Development to R-1A, Single- Family Residential. City-initiated. EXPLANATION OF REQUEST: The subject properties were annexed to the City in May of 2006. Concurrently, the project—named Parc Central—obtained approvals for Future Land Use reclassification, from County Medium Residential (MR-5) to the City's Medium Density Residential (MEDR) classification, and for rezoning, from County Agriculture Residential (AR) to the City's PUD, Planned Unit Development District. The master plan/site plan included, in part, approval for 90 townhomes. Parc Central was never built. As was the case of several other projects in the City, the timing of the approvals turned out to coincide with the collapse of the housing market and ensuing economic decline known as a Great Recession. Since the site plan for the Parc Central project expired, there has been no interest in redevelopment of the properties under the current PUD zoning, partly due to the multiple interests involved. Staff has been contacted by the owners and/or potential purchasers of some of the six individual properties that comprised the Parc Central project, and they have expressed dismay that all of the parcels along 71St Avenue South are linked by the PUD zoning district, which limits their individual use/development. As the land was annexed from Palm Beach County, it cannot be reverted to the pre-annexation land use and zoninig designations. The proposed future land use and zoning is appropriate for the current use of the properties and consistent with the area land use patterns. Prior to annexation, the properties were under the County's AR zoning which allows up to 5 dwelling units per acre; the proposed R-1-A zoning district has a comparable density cap of 6 units per acre. (Note that staff recommended denial of the 2006 reclassification of the Parc Central based on incompatibility of the project's density and massing with the land use patterns of adjacent areas.) HOW WILL THIS AFFECT CITY PROGRAMS OR SERVICES? No impact on programs or services FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact ALTERNATIVES: None recommended STRATEGIC PLAN: STRATEGIC PLAN APPLICATION: Page 24 of 73 CLIMATE ACTION APPLICATION: Is this a grant? Grant Amount: ATTACHMENTS: Type Description D Staff Report Staff Report D Location Map ExhibitA. Location Map D Exhibit Exhibit B. Existing FLU D Exhibit Exhibit Bl. Proposed FLU D Exhibit Exhibit C. Existing Zoning D Exhibit Exhibit Cl. Proposed Zoning Page 25 of 73 DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PLANNING AND ZONING DIVISION MEMORANDUM NO. PZ 21-006 STAFF REPORT TO: Chair and Members Planning and Development Board THRU: Ed Breese Planning and Zoning Administrator FROM: Hanna Matras, Senior Planner DATE: February 16, 2021 PROJECTS: Lawrence Road Future Land Use and Rezoning LUAR 21-002 REQUEST: Approve Lawrence Road Future Land Use Map Amendment from Medium Density Residential (MEDR) to Low Density Residential (LDR), and Rezoning from PUD, Planned Unit Development to R- 1A, Single-Family Residential. City-initiated. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Property Owner: Multiple owners Applicant: City-initiated Location: Six (6) properties along the north side of 71 st Avenue South, east of Lawrence Road, approximately 350 feet south of Hypoluxo Road (Exhibit B) Existing Land Use/ Zoning: Medium Density Residential (MEDR) / Planned Unit Development (PUD) Proposed Land Use/Zoning: Low Density Residential (LDR) / R-1A Single-Family Residential Use: Developed single-family homes (on five parcels); no change in use Acreage: 9.34 acres (six parcels) Page 26 of 73 Page 2 Lawrence Road LUAR 21-002 Adjacent Uses: North: Developed commercial properties classified Local Retail Commercial (LRC) and zoned C-3, community commercial; farther north, right-of-way for Hypoluxo Road; South: Developed single-family residential lots (Jonathan's Grove), classified Low Density Residential (LDR) and zoned R-1A, then farther south developed residential community (Aspen Glen), classified Low Density Residential (LDR) and zoned PUD, Planned Unit Development; East: Developed single-family residential lots (Nautica Sound PUD), classified Low Density Residential (LDR) and zoned PUD, Planned Unit Development; and West: Right-of-way of Lawrence Road, and farther west, developed residential community (Palmyra 1) in the unincorporated Palm Beach County, classified Medium Density (MR-5, 5 units per acre) and zoned PUD, Planned Unit Development. BACKGROUND The properties were annexed to the City in May of 2006. Concurrently, the project— named Parc Central—obtained approvals for FLU reclassification, from the Palm Beach County Medium Residential (MR-5) to the City's Medium Density Residential (MEDR), for rezoning, from the County's Agriculture Residential (AR) to the City's PUD, Planned Unit Development, and for a site plan for 90 townhomes. Parc Central was never built. As was the case of several other projects in the City, the timing of the approvals turned out to coincide with the collapse of the housing market and ensuing economic decline known as a Great Recession. It appears that there is currently no consensus among the owners of the PUD to market the properties for a more intense redevelopment. REVIEW BASED ON CRITERIA The criteria used to review Comprehensive Plan amendments and rezonings are listed in the Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2, Article 11, Section 2.13 and Section 2.D.3. These criteria are required to be part of a staff analysis when the proposed change includes an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map (FLUM) or a rezoning. a. Demonstration of Need. A demonstration of need may be based upon changing conditions that represent a demand for the proposed land use classification and 2 Page 27 of 73 Page 3 Lawrence Road LUAR 21-002 zoning district. Appropriate data and analysis that adequately substantiates the need for the proposed land use amendment and rezoning must be provided within the application. Since the site plan for the Parc Central project expired, there has been no interest in redevelopment of the properties under the current PUD zoning, partly due to the multiple interests involved. Staff has been contacted by some of the property owners and potential purchasers of individual properties about the development potential of their parcels, and they have expressed dismay that all of the parcels along 71St Avenue South are linked, thereby limiting their individual use/development. As the land was annexed from the Palm Beach County, it cannot be reverted to the previous land use and zoninig designations. The proposed future land use and zoning is appropriate for the current use of the properties and consistent with the area land use patterns. Prior to annexation, the properties were under the County's AR zoning which allows up to 5 dwelling units per acre; the proposed R-1A has a comparable density cap of 6 units per acre. (Note that staff recommended denial of the 2006 reclassification of the Parc Central based on incompatibility of the project's density and massing with the land use patterns of adjacent areas.) b. Consistency. Whether the proposed Future Land Use Map amendment (FLUM) and rezoning would be consistent with the purpose and intent of, and promote, the applicable Comprehensive Plan policies, Redevelopment Plans, and Land Development Regulations. See response to Criterion "a." Moreover, the properties carry a planned zoning designation of a PUD with the expired master/site plan. The proposed rezoning is appropriate for their current use and consistent with the Land Development Regulations. c. Land Use Pattern. Whether the proposed Future Land Use Map amendment (FLUM) and rezoning would be contrary to the established land use pattern, or would create an isolated zoning district or an isolated land use classification unrelated to adjacent and nearby classifications, or would constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual property owner as contrasted with the protection of the public welfare. This factor is not intended to exclude FLUM reclassifications and rezonings that would result in more desirable and sustainable growth for the community. See response to Criterion "a." The proposed future land use and rezoning is consistent with the established land use pattern. The Low Density Residential (LDR) future land use is prevalent in the surrounding areas, and while the majority are under the PUD zoning designation, the Jonathan Grove community adjoining to the south has the same R-1A zoning as requested for the subject site. d. Sustainability. Whether the proposed Future Land Use Map amendment (FLUM) and rezoning would support the integration of a mix of land uses consistent with the 3 Page 28 of 73 Page 4 Lawrence Road LUAR 21-002 Smart Growth or sustainability initiatives, with an emphasis on 1) complementary land uses; 2) access to alternative modes of transportation, and 3) interconnectivity within the project and between adjacent properties. This criterion does not apply. e. Availability of Public Services /Infrastructure. All requests for Future Land Use Map amendments shall be reviewed for long-term capacity availability at the maximum intensity permitted under the requested land use classification. In 2006, the site was reviewed for long-term capacity availability as part of annexation and the future land use map amendment, and subsequently approved for a considerably more intensive development than its current use. f. Compatibility. The application shall consider the following factors to determine compatibility.- (1) ompatibility.(1) Whether the proposed Future Land Use Map amendment (FLUM) and rezoning would be compatible with the current and future use of adjacent and nearby properties, or would negatively affect the property values of adjacent and nearby properties; and (2) Whether the proposed Future Land Use Map amendment (FLUM) and rezoning is of a scale which is reasonably related to the needs of the neighborhood and the City as a whole. See response to Criterion "C." The proposed Future Land Use Map amendment and rezoning would be compatible with the current and future use of adjacent and nearby properties, and will not negatively affect local property values. g. Direct Economic Development Benefits. For rezoning/FLUM amendments involving rezoning to a planned zoning district, the review shall consider the economic benefits of the proposed amendment, specifically, whether the proposal would.- (1) ould.(1) Further implementation of the Economic Development (ED) Program,- (2) rogram,(2) Contribute to the enhancement and diversification of the City's tax base,- (3) ase,(3) Respond to the current market demand or community needs or provide services or retail choices not locally available,- (4) vailable,(4) Create new employment opportunities for the residents, with pay at or above the county average hourly wage,- (5) age,(5) Represent innovative methods/technologies, especially those promoting sustainability; (6) Be complementary to existing uses, thus fostering synergy effects, and (7) Alleviate blight/economic obsolescence of the subject area. 4 Page 29 of 73 Page 5 Lawrence Road LUAR 21-002 Generally, there are no direct economic benefits of the proposed FLUM amendment and rezoning. However, g(3) may be considered applicable, as the demand for single- family homes on the market is much higher than the demand for townhomes, should another attempt be made to redevelop the properties into a PUD project similar to Parc Central. h. Commercial and Industrial Land Supply, The review shall consider whether the proposed rezoning/FLUM amendment would reduce the amount of land available for commercial/industrial development. If such determination is made, the approval can be recommended under the following conditions.- (1) onditions.(1) The size, shape, and/or location of the property makes it unsuitable for commercial/industrial development; or (2) The proposed rezoning/FLUM amendment provides substantiated evidence of satisfying at least four of the Direct Economic Development Benefits listed in subparagraph "g"above, and (3) The proposed rezoning/FLUM amendment would result in comparable or higher employment numbers, building size and valuation than the potential of existing land use designation and/or rezoning. The proposed rezoning/FLUM amendment would not reduce the amount of land available for commercial/industrial development. L Alternative Sites. Whether there are adequate sites elsewhere in the City for the proposed use in zoning districts where such use is already allowed. This criterion is not applicable. j. Master Plan and Site Plan Compliance with Land Development Regulations. When master plan and site plan review are required pursuant to Section 2.D.1.e above, both shall comply with the requirements of the respective zoning district regulations of Chapter 3, Article 111 and the site development standards of Chapter 4. This criterion is not applicable. There is no use change. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the subject requests be approved. 5 Page 30 of 73 EXHIBIT A LOCATION MAP e� t �:� a� Hypoluxo Rd r � - 2 t i�. r� � s d i �� on ay� n 3 : at ans - � n 71stL.nS 1 t � r F, t G" NautiC.a Sound Bw 0 62.5125 250 375 Feet Page 31 of 73 EXHIBIT B LAWRENCE ROAD: CURRENT FLU Ll'__�Hypoluxo-Rd Sl E rr �I 3 � � J 71 st Ave S y MCI Jonathans Way v womm 71stLinS Legend ❑ " u ® CityBoundary_2019 LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (LDR); 7.5 D.U./Acre7 0 MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (MEDR); 11 D.U./Acre idence Ric LOCAL RETAIL COMMERCIAL (LRC) 0 62.5125 250 375 Feet Page 32 of 73 EXHIBIT 131 LAWRENCE ROAD: PROPOSED FLU L,--�Hypoluxo-Rd LI T E PRO OSED: L R 3 J 71 st Ave S s Jonathans Way 71stLinS El Legend " " ' ® CityBoundary_2019 1� LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (LDR); 7.5 D.U./Acre rovidence Ric LOCAL RETAIL COMMERCIAL (LRC) 0 62.5125 250 375 Feet Page 33 of 73 EXHIBIT C LAWRENCE ROAD: CURRENT ZONING Ll'--�Hypoluxa-Rd L [ • �� .( �� . F�'r N ' 11 MEN- W r l r � r � t l fy � ✓ r t� � t' t � r t I � � t £ z t I f £ t t _f t � t � ` f 1 1 s i t. r `t t r t �, �t t � � £+t s 5t �,., � Thr 1 bi � � t y 4 � i st i £ £ { v r JonathansWa-y lis . Ln S 1 .... Legend R1A Single Family, 6 du/ac Blvd PUD Planned Unit Development t i ! ,r ,�. C3 Community Commercial " s% , ProV�dence 'RC - City Boundary 0 62.5125 250 375 Feet Page 34 of 73 EXHIBIT C1 LAWRENCE ROAD: PROPOSED ZONING Ll'--�Hypoluxa-Rd t �T EE i �s i1 E roposed R-1A c� I � t, car J 1st �1 7Ave S �t £ t�F r Jonathans- y a- � t _1A 71stLnS 1 t s Legend Ai R1A Single Family, 6 du/ac Blvd <�: PUD Planned Unit Development C3 Community Commercial " {% , Providence 'Rt �u■u■ AN, - City Boundary 0 62.5125 250 375 Feet Page 35 of 73 7.7.C. New Business 2/23/2021 CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH AGENDA ITEM REQUEST FORM PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT MEETING DATE: 2/23/2021 REQUESTED ACTION BY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD: REQUEST: Approve Knuth Road Future Land Use Map Amendment from Local Retail Commercial (LRC) to Mixed Use Low(MXL). City-initiated. REQUEST: Approve Knuth Road Rezoning from PCD, Planned Commercial Development to SMU, Suburban Mixed Use. City-initiated. EXPLANATION OF REQUEST: The 12.52 acre parcel is one of the few remaining large vacant parcels in the City. It was annexed to the City on December 18, 1990 and concurrently approved for the City's Future Land Use classification of Local Retail Commercial (LRC) and City's zoning designation of PCD, Planned Commercial Development (Ordinances 090-61, 091-69 and 090-70). The approvals covered 13.65 acres, including 1.13-acre outparcel on the southwest corner of West Boynton Beach Boulevard and Knuth Road. The masterplan was approved for 120,000 square feet of commercial space, including 35,000 square feet for a major department store. On May 21, 1996 the city approved a site plan for a convenience store and a gasoline station on the above mentioned outparcel. The remaining part of the property—the subject of the city-initiated Future Land Use Map (FLUM)Amendment and rezoning— is currently vested consistent with the approved master plan. There are two major factors contributing to the need for the proposed amendment: The probability of construction of a large commercial development on the subject property per the approved 1990 master plan is extremely low. The market support for such development has been steadily decreasing, replaced by mixed use projects with residential components. The trend accelerated within the last few years. The PCD zoning district does not allow residential uses; arguably, at this point the district can be considered obsolete. Future redevelopment of several existing PCDs and areas with C-3, Community Commercial Zoning west of I-95 are would likely occur under Mixed Use Low(MXL)future land use and SMU, Suburban Mixed Use zoning. Over the years, the property attracted attention of numerous investors, but the existence of the gasoline station on the outparcel has consistently thwarted attempts to develop the property. The use is nonconforming because of its location— gasoline stations are only allowed on properties located at three- way or four-way intersections involving arterial and collector roads as designated by the Comprehensive Plan, and Knuth road does not have a collector designation. Moreover, gasoline stations are not allowed in SMU zoning districts. To facilitate development of the property by addressing the above issues, the city is proposing this FLUM amendment and rezoning for the subject lot, reclassifying it from Local Retail Commercial (LRC) to Mixed- Use Low(MXL), and rezoning from PCD, Planned Commercial Development to SMU, Suburban Mixed Use. HOW WILL THIS AFFECT CITY PROGRAMS OR SERVICES? No impact at this time. FISCAL IMPACT: No impact at this time Page 36 of 73 ALTERNATIVES: None recommended STRATEGIC PLAN: STRATEGIC PLAN APPLICATION: N/A CLIMATE ACTION APPLICATION: N/A Is this a grant? Grant Amount: ATTACHMENTS: Type Description D Staff Report Staff Report D Location Map ExhibitA. Location Map D Exhibit Exhibit B. Existing FLU D Exhibit Exhibit Bl. Proposed FLU D Exhibit Exhibit C. Existing Zoning D Exhibit Exhibit Cl. Proposed Zoning Page 37 of 73 DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PLANNING AND ZONING DIVISION MEMORANDUM NO. PZ 21-007 STAFF REPORT TO: Chair and Members Planning and Development Board THRU: Ed Breese Planning and Zoning Administrator FROM: Hanna Matras, Senior Planner DATE: February 16, 2021 PROJECT: Knuth Road LUAR 21-003 REQUEST: Approve Knuth Road Future Land Use Map Amendment from Local Retail Commercial (LRC) to Mixed Use Low (MXL), and Rezoning from PCD, Planned Commercial Development to SMU, Suburban Mixed Use. City-initiated. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Property Owner: Knuth Rd Trust & Knuth Gas & Oil Inc. Applicant: City-initiated Location: Southwest corner of Knuth Road and West Boynton Beach Boulevard Existing Land Use/ Zoning: Local Retail Commercial (LRC) / PCD, Planned Commercial Development Proposed Land Use/ Zoning: Mixed-Use Low (MXL) / SMU, Suburban Mixed-Use Proposed Use: No use proposed at this time Acreage: 12.52 acres Page 38 of 73 Page 2 Knuth Road LUAR 21-003 Adjacent Uses: North: On the northwest, right-of-way of West Boynton Beach Boulevard, then developed commercial properties in unincorporated Palm Beach County, classified Commercial High with an underlying HR- 8 and zoned CN Neighborhood Commercial and CS, Commercial Specialized; on the northeast, developed commercial property (gasoline station), classified Local Retail Commercial and zoned PCD, Planned Commercial Development; further north, right-of- way for West Boynton Beach Boulevard and then developed commercial property in the City, classified Local Retail Commercial and zoned C-3, Community Commercial; South: Developed residential community of Quail Ridge Country Club in Palm Beach County, classified Low Residential and zoned AR, Agricultural Residential; East: Right-of-way of Knuth Road; farther northeast, developed commercial retail property (Aldi Grocery), classified Local Retail Commercial (LRC) and zoned C-3, Community Commercial; further south, developed office property, classified Office Commercial (OC) and zoned C-1, Office Professional and then developed residential community of Stonehaven, classified Low Density Residential (LDR) and zoned PUD, Planned Unit Development; and West: Developed residential community of Quail Ridge Country Club in Palm Beach County, clasified Low Residential and zoned AR, Agricultural Residential. BACKGROUND The 12.52 acre parcel is one of the few remaining large vacant parcels in the City. It was annexed to the City on December 18, 1990 and concurrently approved for the City's Future Land Use classification of Local Retail Commercial (LRC) and City's zoning designation of PCD, Planned Commercial Development (Ordinances 090-61, 091-69 and 090-70). The approvals covered 13.65 acres, including 1.13-acre outparcel on the southwest corner of West Boynton Beach Boulevard and Knuth Road. The masterplan was approved for 120,000 square feet of commercial space, including 35,000 square feet for a major department store. On May 21, 1996 the city approved a site plan for a convenience store and a gasoline station on the above mentioned outparcel. The remaining part of the property—the subject of the city-initiated Future Land Use Map (FLUM) Amendment and rezoning— is currently vested consistent with the approved master plan. 2 Page 39 of 73 Page 3 Knuth Road LUAR 21-003 PROCESS Since the size of the property under consideration exceeds ten acres, the proposed Future Land Use Map amendment is subject to the Expedited State Review Process per provisions of Chapter 163.3184(3) and (5), Florida Statutes. If the City Commission approves the proposed amendments, they will be transmitted for review to the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity (DEO), the state land planning agency. The final adoption by the City Commission is tentatively planned for April 2021. REVIEW BASED ON CRITERIA The criteria used to review Comprehensive Plan amendments and rezonings are listed in the Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2, Article 11, Section 2.13 and Section 2.D.3. These criteria are required to be part of a staff analysis when the proposed change includes an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map (FLUM) or a rezoning. a. Demonstration of Need. A demonstration of need may be based upon changing conditions that represent a demand for the proposed land use classification and zoning district. Appropriate data and analysis that adequately substantiates the need for the proposed land use amendment and rezoning must be provided within the application. There are two major factors contributing to the need for the proposed amendment: • The probability of construction of a large commercial development on the subject property per the approved 1990 master plan is extremely low. The market support for such development has been steadily decreasing, replaced by mixed use projects with residential components. The trend accelerated within the last few years. The PCD zoning district does not allow residential uses; arguably, at this point the district can be considered obsolete. Future redevelopment of several existing PCDs and areas with C-3 Community Commercial Zoning west of 1-95 are likely to use Mixed Use Low (MXL) future land use and SMU, Suburban Mixed Use zoning. • Over the years, the property attracted attention of numerous investors, but the existence of the gasoline station on the outparcel has consistently thwarted attempts to develop the property. The use is nonconforming because of its location— gasoline stations are only allowed on properties located at three-way or four-way intersections involving arterial and collector roads as designated by the Comprehensive Plan, and Knuth road does not have a collector designation. Moreover, gasoline stations are not allowed in SMU zoning districts. To facilitate development of the property by addressing the above issues, the city is initiating FLUM amendment and rezoning for the vacant 12.52 acre lot, reclassifying it from Local Retail Commercial (LRC) to Mixed-Use Low (MXL), and rezoning from PCD, Planned Commercial Development to SMU, Suburban Mixed Use. 3 Page 40 of 73 Page 4 Knuth Road LUAR 21-003 b. Consistency. Whether the proposed Future Land Use Map amendment (FLUM) and rezoning would be consistent with the purpose and intent of, and promote, the applicable Comprehensive Plan policies, Redevelopment Plans, and Land Development Regulations. The proposed FLUM amendment is consistent with the intent of several Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Element policies, including: Policy 1.3.1 d Mixed Use category shall provide for the vertical or horizontal mixing of land uses within a single site in order to allow development and redevelopment in specific geographic areas of the City that take maximum advantage of existing utility systems and services, and promote compact development, safe and pedestrian-friendly streets, and provide transportation choices. Policy 1.8.2 The City shall discourage urban sprawl by; A. Continuing to promote compact developments within the City's utility service areas, while requiring the maximization of all public services for each development in the most cost effective manner possible, and B. Requiring, in all future development and redevelopment in the City, land use patterns that are non-strip in nature and demonstrate the ability to attract and encourage a functional mix of uses. In 2018, staff initiated work on a comprehensive redevelopment plan for the Congress Avenue Corridor. The plan has yet to be completed, but the preliminary future land use recommendation for development and redevelopment of areas along or nearby Congress Avenue is the Mixed Use Low (MXL), with a corresponding SMU zoning. The subject requests do not include master plan/site plan. If approved, the amendments should renew the market's interest in the property and support a mix-use master plan consistent with the City's vision for the property. Any future master plan for the site will require City Commission review and approval after public hearings are conducted. c. Land Use Pattern. Whether the proposed Future Land Use Map amendment (FLUM) and rezoning would be contrary to the established land use pattern, or would create an isolated zoning district or an isolated land use classification unrelated to adjacent and nearby classifications, or would constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual property owner as contrasted with the protection of the public welfare. This factor is not intended to exclude FLUM reclassifications and rezonings that would result in more desirable and sustainable growth for the community. 4 Page 41 of 73 Page 5 Knuth Road LUAR 21-003 See response to criterion "a." Moreover, the land use pattern in adjacent and nearby areas is eclectic: it incorporates commercial uses of office and retail as well as single- family residential uses. The proposed FLU category and zoning district will allow for both residential and commercial uses but, given the market trends, staff is anticipating a future master plan to consist mostly of multifamily dwellings, with some street-fronting commercial uses as required by the Land Development Regulations. Any possible negative impacts of incompatibility between the potential height and bulk of multifamily buildings and adjacent single-family homes, particularly those in Quail Ridge Country Club to the west and south of the subject parcel, will be specifically mitigated through the master plan's design features. The parcel does not directly abut any residential structures within Quail Ridge, only the golf course itself. d. Sustainability. Whether the proposed Future Land Use Map amendment (FLUM) and rezoning would support the integration of a mix of land uses consistent with the Smart Growth or sustainability initiatives, with an emphasis on 1) complementary land uses; 2) access to alternative modes of transportation, and 3) interconnectivity within the project and between adjacent properties. The proposed FLU and zoning designations support a sustainable integration of a mix of uses. As noted earlier in this report, the master plan is not included in the subject request but when submitted, it will be reviewed for sustainability per the City's Sustainable Development Standards ordinance. The ordinance requires all projects to incorporate specific required design features (i.e., white roof, warm outdoor lighting, butterfly attracting landscape material, and electric vehicle charging stations). Beyond that, new developments must meet a specified point total by selecting a number of design options. e. Availability of Public Services /Infrastructure. All requests for Future Land Use Map amendments shall be reviewed for long-term capacity availability at the maximum intensity permitted under the requested land use classification. Water and Sewer. Long-term capacity availability for potable water and sewer for the subject request has been confirmed by the Utilities Department. Both potable water and sewer mains are available adjacent to the site, but, depending on the master plan, the mains and /or force main piping may require upsizing. Solid Waste. The Palm Beach County Solid Waste Authority determined that sufficient disposal capacity will be available at the existing landfill through approximately the year 2046. Drainage. Drainage will be reviewed in detail as part of the site plan, land development, and building permit review processes. Traffic. The traffic impact analysis will be submitted to the Palm Beach County Traffic Division at the time of master plan application. 5 Page 42 of 73 Page 6 Knuth Road LUAR 21-003 Schools. The School Capacity Availability Determination application will be submitted to the School District of Palm Beach County at the time of master plan application. f. Compatibility. The application shall consider the following factors to determine compatibility.- (1) ompatibility.(1) Whether the proposed Future Land Use Map amendment (FLUM) and rezoning would be compatible with the current and future use of adjacent and nearby properties, or would negatively affect the property values of adjacent and nearby properties; and (2) Whether the proposed Future Land Use Map amendment (FLUM) and rezoning is of a scale which is reasonably related to the needs of the neighborhood and the City as a whole. See the responses to criteria "a", "b" and "c". The property will be difficult to develop under the current commercial-only PCD zoning. As noted before in this report, staff initiated work on a comprehensive redevelopment plan for the Congress Avenue Corridor. The plan has yet to be completed, but staff's preliminary future land use recommendation for development and redevelopment of areas along or nearby Congress Avenue is the Mixed Use Low (MXL) with a SMU zoning, same as FLU and zoning designations requested for the subject property. Note also that the potential traffic impact of a project supported by the proposed amendment would be considerably lower than than the impact generated by a large commercial development. Finally, the future master plan will require features designed to mitigate any potential negative impacts of the project's height and scale on the adjacent low-rise residential properties. The proposed amendments are related to the needs of the neighborhood and the City as a whole. A future mixed-use project will meet a stringent design standards, generate demand for commercial uses located along Congress Avenue corridor, and encourage further modernization of older developments. g. Direct Economic Development Benefits. For rezoning / FLUM amendments involving rezoning to a planned zoning district, the review shall consider the economic benefits of the proposed amendment, specifically, whether the proposal would.- (1) ould.(1) Further implementation of the Economic Development (ED) Program,- (2) rogram,(2) Contribute to the enhancement and diversification of the City's tax base,- (3) ase,(3) Respond to the current market demand or community needs or provide services or retail choices not locally available,- (4) vailable,(4) Create new employment opportunities for the residents, with pay at or above the county average hourly wage,- (5) age,(5) Represent innovative methods/technologies, especially those promoting sustainability; 6 Page 43 of 73 Page 7 Knuth Road LUAR 21-003 (6) Be complementary to existing uses, thus fostering synergy effects, and (7) Alleviate blight/economic obsolescence of the subject area. The proposed amendment would encourage development of the site and thus contribute to the enhancement of the City tax base, as a demand for multifamily dwellings appear to continue unabated. A required commercial component will also create jobs. h. Commercial and Industrial Land Supply. The review shall consider whether the proposed rezoning/FLUM amendment would reduce the amount of land available for commercial/industrial development. If such determination is made, the approval can be recommended under the following conditions.- (1) onditions.(1) The size, shape, and/or location of the property makes it unsuitable for commercial/industrial development; or (2) The proposed rezoning/FLUM amendment provides substantiated evidence of satisfying at least four of the Direct Economic Development Benefits listed in subparagraph "g"above, and (3) The proposed rezoning/FLUM amendment would result in comparable or higher employment numbers, building size and valuation than the potential of existing land use designation and/or rezoning. See criterion "a." The request reduces the amount of land available for commercial-only development since it would reclassify most of the subject site currently under the Local Retail Commercial (LRC) FLU category into the Mixed-Use Low (MXL) category. Even though the future project will likely be predominantly multifamily residential, it will require a commercial component. Moreover, apartment residents will create demand for commercial uses throughout the Congress Avenue Corridor area. Ultimately, an increase of City tax revenue will be considerable. L Alternative Sites. Whether there are adequate sites elsewhere in the City for the proposed use in zoning districts where such use is already allowed. There are not comparable sites (this is a site looking for a development option, rather than a use looking for a site). See criterion "a." j. Master Plan and Site Plan Compliance with Land Development Regulations. When master plan and site plan review are required pursuant to Section 2.D.1.e above, both shall comply with the requirements of the respective zoning district regulations of Chapter 3, Article 111 and the site development standards of Chapter 4. The future master plan/site plan shall comply with the requirements of the SMU zoning district. 7 Page 44 of 73 Page 8 Knuth Road LUAR 21-003 RECOMMENDATION This is a City-initiated FLU amendment and rezoning, therefore staff recommends that the request be approved. S:\Planning\SHARED\WP\PROJECTS\Knuth Road\Knuth Rd LUAR 21-003\Knuth Road LUAR 21-003 Staff Report.doc g Page 45 of 73 LOCATION MAP EXHIBIT A �� at 1 y s+ � 3 n 1 i )St I N•� 5; 44� i, 4 f 1� s 4 f 1 k 0 75 150 300 450 Feet Page 46 of 73 EXHIBIT B KNUTH ROAD: CURRENT FLU Immm = I mi! H m� ( mxi MEoc LT t 1. - - t � � oc T� - 3 R t } Legend _�_- LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL(LDR); 7.5 D.U./Acre MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL(MEDR); 11 D.U./Acre OFFICE COMMERCIAL(OC) - f LOCAL RETAIL COMMERCIAL(LRC) MIXED USE LOW(MXL); 20 D.U./Acre 0 115 230 460 690 Feet Page 47 of 73 EXHIBIT B1 KNUTH ROAD: PROPOSED FLU MXL MEoc LT t Ll1. SITE �r � t } oc proposed � MXL R t ,; Legend _�_- LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL(LDR); 7.5 D.U./Acre MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL(MEDR); 11 D.U./Acre OFFICE COMMERCIAL(OC) - f LOCAL RETAIL COMMERCIAL(LRC) MIXED USE LOW(MXL); 20 D.U./Acre 0 115 230 460 690 Feet Page 48 of 73 EXHIBIT C KNUTH ROAD: CURRENT ZONING (SMU C-1 k s vs Legend s 0011 R3 Multi Family, 11 du/acs MPUD Planned Unit Development C3 Community Commercial " 0 C1 Office Professional PCD Planned Commercial Development s M1 Light Industrial SMU Suburban Mixed Use, 20 du/ac } t. t i � t S t � 0 95 190 380 570 Feet Page 49 of 73 EXHIBIT C1 KNUTH ROAD: PROPOSED ZONING (SMU C-1 k s vs Legend s 0011 R3 Multi Family, 11 du/acs MPUD Planned Unit Development C3 Community Commercial " 0 C1 Office Professional PCD Planned Commercial Development s M1 Light Industrial SMU Suburban Mixed Use, 20 du/ac } SITE G.1 proposed SMU �i s I S t � 0 95 190 380 570 Feet Page 50 of 73 7.7.D. New Business 2/23/2021 CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH AGENDA ITEM REQUEST FORM PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT MEETING DATE: 2/23/2021 REQUESTED ACTION BY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD: Approve revisions to the Workforce Housing Program (CDRV 21-001) -Amending the LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, Chapter 1. General Administration, Article 11. Definitions, and Article V. Housing I nitiatives, Section 2. Workforce Housing Program. Applicant: City-initiated. EXPLANATION OF REQUEST: BACKGROUND The present version of the Workforce Housing Program was approved on December 17, 2019. The 2019 amendments included two key changes to the program's applicability. The first change was the expansion of its geographic applicability from the Downtown Transit-Oriented Development District (DTODD) only to citywide, for projects with the future land use (FLU) classifications of Mixed Use High, Medium, Low, and Special High Density Residential. The second pertinent change was to extend eligibility for the 25% density bonus—also citywide—to developments implementing affordable housing programs with 100% affordable units in all FLU except Low Density Residential. Additionally, the 2019 amendments included the increase of the fee-in lieu amounts for both for-sale and for rent units. The higher fees were intended to encourage construction of units. To further incentivize construction, the amendment also included an increase in the percentage of set-aside workforce housing as a base for in-lieu fee if the payment option was selected. EXPLANATION The feedback on the current W H Program from the private sector indicated that further revisions are needed to achieve both the Program's goal to provide attainable units and make it feasible for developers. The main issue was a dramatic rise of land prices in recent years, resulting in very high development costs, especially for projects in the City's downtown and adjacent areas. Expensive multi-level structured parking, required in the highest density projects, made them financially unfeasible, notwithstanding application of the density bonus. The proposed amendments aim at making the program more usable and attractive to the private sector, and therefore support redevelopment projects of strategic importance to the City. The amendments: Separate income eligibility criteria and provisions relating to construction on-site for "workforce" and "affordable" categories, while creating a uniform payment option (fee-in-lieu)for both categories; Set a 30-year term of restrictive covenant for affordable units (versus a 15- year term for workforce housing); and Change the source of income data for the Program from the current Area Median Income (AMI) for Palm Beach County as provided by HUD, to the Boynton Beach Median Household Income (MHI) as taken from the US Census American Community Survey. No change is proposed to the amount of the fee-in-lieu. Page 51 of 73 CONCLUSION / RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the subject code amendments to increase the development community's interest in participation in the Workforce Housing Program. HOW WILL THIS AFFECT CITY PROGRAMS OR SERVICES? The proposed amendment will revise the City's current Workforce Housing Program. FISCAL IMPACT: Non-budgeted The amendments will have no direct fiscal impact. However, once the program is utilized it may allow for a greater number of units to be built that ultimately contribute to the tax base. ALTERNATIVES: None recommended. STRATEGIC PLAN: Great Neighborhoods: Safe, Affordable and Livable STRATEGIC PLAN APPLICATION: The subject code amendment aims to increase the development community's interest in participation in the Workforce Housing Program and ultimately add attainable housing options to the City's housing stock. CLIMATE ACTION APPLICATION: Is this a grant? Grant Amount: ATTACHMENTS: Type Description D Staff Report Staff Report D Amendment Exhibit A-Amendment D Other Presentation Page 52 of 73 ' DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT PLANNING AND ZONING Memorandum PZ 21-008 TO: Chair and Members Planning & Development Board FROM: Hanna Matras Senior Planner THROUGH: Ed Breese Planning and Zoning Administrator DATE: February 16, 2021 RE: Approve revisions to the Workforce Housing Program (CDRV 21-001) - Amending the LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, Chapter 1. General Administration, Article II. Definitions, and Article V. Housing Initiatives, Section 2. Workforce Housing Program. Applicant: City-initiated. BACKGROUND The present version of the Workforce Housing Program was approved on December 17, 2019. The 2019 amendments included two key changes to the program's applicability. The first change was the expansion of its geographic applicability from the Downtown Transit- Oriented Development District (DTODD) only to citywide, for projects with the future land use (FLU) classifications of Mixed Use High, Medium, Low, and Special High Density Residential. The second pertinent change was to extend eligibility for the 25% density bonus—also citywide—to developments implementing affordable housing programs with 100% affordable units in all FLU except Low Density Residential. Additionally, the 2019 amendments included the increase of the fee-in lieu amounts for both for-sale and for rent units. The higher fees were intended to encourage construction of units. To further incentivize construction, the amendment increased the percentage of set-aside workforce housing as a base for in-lieu fee if the payment option was selected. EXPLANATION The feedback on the current WH Program from the private sector indicated that further revisions are needed to achieve both the Program's goal to provide attainable units and make it work for developers. The main issue was a dramatic rise of land prices in recent years, resulting in very high development costs, especially for projects in the City's downtown and adjacent areas. Expensive multi-level structured parking, required in the highest density projects, made them financially unfeasible, notwithstanding a density bonus. Page 53 of 73 WHP revisions (CDRV 21-001) Memo PZ No. 21-008 The proposed amendments aim at making the program more usable and attractive to private sector, and therefore support redevelopment projects of strategic importance to the City. The amendments: • Separate income eligibility criteria and provisions relating to construction on-site for "workforce" and "affordable" categories, while creating a uniform payment option (fee-in- lieu) for both categories; and • Set a 30-year term of restrictive covenant for affordable units (versus a 15- year term for workforce housing). • Change the source of income data for the Program from the current Area Median Income (AMI) for the Palm Beach County provided by the Department of Housing and Urban Development to the Boynton Beach Median Household Income (MHI) provided by the US Census American Community Survey No change is proposed to the amount of the fee-in-lieu. CONCLUSION / RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the subject code amendments to increase the development community's interest in participation in the Workforce Housing Program. S:\Planning\SHARED\WP\SPECPROJ\CODE REVIEW\CDRV 19-008 WHP Update\CDRV 19-008 WH Program Update Staff Report.docx -2 - Page 54 of 73 PART III LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS CHAPTER 1. GENERAL ADMINISTRATION ARTICLE 11. DEFINITIONS AFFORDABILITY CONTROLS - Restrictions placed on affordable and workforce housing units by which the price of such units and/or the income of the purchaser or lessee will be restricted in order to ensure that the units remain affordable to low and moderate income households. AFFORDABLE 110(-"SING (-"Nl'l' - A j 1CM11 'Nal'ficd in Nvh'ch the rentorlLCTLU -PLIVinento clu.-ding., cj in fnsurance L---)----C-- ------i--------------i---------------j---------------------------------------j- 'in _pL�li j ...j�E�� ................................ and hoi,neowner association fees) does not exceed thirty fr Lb.,�_jg�-, �icoi ross ' ,neofhotischolds -------------------------------- --------f--------------------------------- that are classified as AFFORDABILITY TERM - The time an affordable or-workforce housing unit is required to remain affordable to income qualified buyers or renters. BOYNTON BEACH HOUSING TRUST- A trust created as a depository for in-lieu of payments, donated land, or housing units for the purpose of providing affordable and workforce housing units. DEED RESTRICTION - All for sale workforce housing units created under the A ttai liable Wefkfe� Housing Program shall be deed restricted for fifteen (15)years,recurring. All rental workforce units created under the program shall be deed restricted for fifteen (15)years,non-recurring. A 11 for sale aff'ordable housin<F un.its created under the Attainable Flousin<F Pro<,rajni shall be deed restricted for thirty L.I�L_ycars, recurring. All rental affordable h Oils i n-f ts--cre a-te du_n_d_c_rth_c _,-.h.,all be deed ----------------------- restricted for thirty (30)years., nn-. Irecurr no.,.,The deed restriction shall be recorded and serve to restrict . ........................o.........................—. _ the sales or rental price and/or the income of the purchaser or renter. ELIGIBLE OCCUPANT- Relative to the Wa �Attainablc Housing Program contained in these Regulations, it is a person who meets income requirements of the program. Priority will be given to persons who have lived or worked within the city limits of Boynton Beach continually for one (1)year immediately prior to the date of application for a workforce housing unit. INCOME QUALIFIED HOUSEHOLD -Under the w-or �Attat�in�aiLbilic�rH-il+ousing 'program provisions of these Regulations, it is a household whose income is verified to be either low income or moderate income. LOW INCOME HOUSEHOLD -Under the Weg4e+�Attainablc Housing Program provisions of these regulations, it is a household with a gross, combined income between sixty percent(60%) and eighty percent(80%) of the Lk)yr L 2.jjac Median Household Incoi,ne as defk1ed by qhs tJ S --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- y ------ Census Ai'nerIcan Coi'mnunitv Surrey. Ar-effMediffff iiieeffie I A A ,—4111 Pabii Beffek Gettiil'yl E A,-A aflatially by the Depar-tMellf Of 14ati5ing and Urban MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME (MHI) -Under the wer�A tta'nable H4+ous' g,2program �unablc H in provisions of these regulations, it is the City of Boynton Beach Median Household Income as defined by. the 5--vear t.jS Census American Commun1tv Survev, Page 55 of 73 MICROWAVE DISH ANTENNA - A dish-like antenna used to link personal wireless service sites together by wireless transmission of voice or data. MIDDLE INCOME 1111' E1101., ,- IJnd r the Attainable 1-lotisrn<=.1'ro<Frafn pro isions of these Esjg Lm, ti c r _it is a hotischol_cl_w th_ �_Fmrc� �c fr�i��r��clmr:�_�c fire i��a��:�_c r�m�_h��_clmr�mcl��a��iv �rcent (1'(fit/- d one hnndred forty mrc nt H'40%)of the Boynton Bach Median 1-lotisehold lncorne as defined l� y the v-ear t.J C-ensiis inerzoan C"oininlinzty urvev- MODERATE INCOME HOUSEHOLD -Under the Wa� Attain.ahlc Housing Program provisions of these regulations, it is a household with a gross, combined income between eighty percent (80%) and one hundred twenty percent(120%) of the Boynton Beach Median Hotisehold 1nco1'nC.Aea nor :.,.. T.,,.,,,,, IA1, � � ,.,, R n i as clezznecl bv the 5 �f �rtJ Census Ar � z��r� C" nntin ztj lrsj. RESTRICTIVE COVENANT AND AGREEMENT - The covenants that govern the initial sale and rental and subsequent resale and releasing of affordable or workforce housing units created under the AA..ttarnabb11cW& &Fee Housing Program. for afford ahlc h.otisin<F linJts the--te nn--o-f the estrrc tk-c-coven.-al l i1 Cl a<Fr� ("n�nt Is th�rt 0) gars r sl�rrin<, 6or sale t8i'its and thin (30) gars for rental tinits non- ----------------- .............. ..................a...................................� _......LY................................................................................................--- rs ctim.n.g. dor workforce honsi.ng t:nits the tern of the restrictive covenant and agreement is fifteen (15)years,recurring, for sale units and fifteen (15)years for rental units,non-recurring. VERY LONN" INCOME 110[_'SE110LD -1Jnd r the Attarnahle 1-1otisin.<= E[goorafin arc ision1 o6 thele rsglLl, r _�_C_�m�;_a hoot sehmol_cl_w th_a Fmrc �c ft.1l1jne incofine b twe n thirty yr ni_ 3(%,) and sixty l r :sntL(1%o1 of the oynton (leach l°edian 1-1otis�h.old 1ncorn� as de ined by the 5-y�ar ZJS Cm'enstis Ai'nerrcan C'ornrnnnny St:rvey. WORKFORCE HOUSING UNIT- A dwelling to be sold or leased to an individual or family that is income qualified in which the rent or mortgage payments (including principal, interest, taxes, insurance and homeowner association fees) does not exceed thirty percent(30%)of the gross income of households that are classified ase moderate to middle income households. 2 Page 56 of 73 ARTICLE V. HOUSING INITIATIVES Sec. 2. Attainable W-&Housing Program. A. Findings. 1. Housing Cost/Wage Gap. The City Commission recognizes that there is a growing gap between housing costs and wages in the city; 2. Florida Statutes. F.S. § 166.04151 provides that a municipality may adopt and maintain any ordinance that is adopted for the purpose of increasing the supply of workforce housing using land use mechanisms not withstanding any other provision of law; 3. Public Interest. The City of Boynton Beach has a legitimate public interest in preserving the character and quality of neighborhoods that require assuring the availability of workforce housing for low and moderate income persons in the city; 4. Sense of Community. The city recognizes that the need to provide workforce housing is critical to maintaining a diversified and sustainable city having the character and sense of community where people can live and work in the same area; and 5. Housing Availability. The city is encouraging the production and availability of workforce housing and at the same time is cognizant that escalating land costs and rapidly diminishing amounts of land hinder the provision of sufficient workforce dwelling units by the private sector. B. Applicability. The program is voluntary. Developers who choose to participate may be awarded incentives outlined further in this article. The following regulations shall apply to development applications for projects with toe fallowing r o c- t�ge P1:0jeets « ixed Use High, Mixed Use Medium, Mixed Use Lowes-ad-Special High Density, -inct F1iz.�Ir Density esidential future land use classifications= Such c rol. cts are eligible for the program citywide in areas where such classifications are allowed 1J,ligible land use classifications and onin�., clistricts ('Fable 1...2). l,AnUse Hing `lassificati( nI iso: °ices Me ditini D ns1tyResidential" IZ--2, R--'-)' and lit J1� 1lislt i) t� zrlfzntzl 11Ji_) and 1_J) ia1 li ,lr I nsith P is ntial I tJID and P1JD Mixed I.Jse 1.,ow MIJ...land SMt.J N41xe l IJse N4edi m MIJ...2 and Mixed [Jse Ili > r R4[J--4 and R4[J...Core 3 Page 57 of 73 0 C. Provisions. The developer may elect to obtain a density bonus and/or a height bonus through the construction of the workforce units on-site or off-site, monetary contribution, donation of land or purchase of units to be designated as workforce, subject to the limits and requirements of this article. L Construction of workforce units on-site: 1. To be eligible for the requested density bonus through the construction of workforce units on-site, the developer must incorporate such units into the development as follows: a. Projects located within the Downtown Transit Oriented Development District(DTODD) t �use +he density bonus of up to 20�%, In addition Droiects located within Mixed Use MedIiIin or Mzxed [Jse F1 ),h ina al pis -alen e oF ii Rrc-snjtm-41--rawi t4 t4 e height bonus of Ly,,'o (2-�) additional storiesy(up to a maximum of 24. feet), .il ei �t w_1t _1n tyre DTODD-shall designate a minimum of fifteen percent(15%) of the total proposed units as workforce housing units. of 6 ii.n. eanjiinetLion wit, e bomis of+Ile he'ght bomis alone; t4e height bomis ean lbc-._ Projects located outside of DTODD with Mixed Use Medium, Mixed Use Lower Special High Density Residential,,o.r 4t4wei 1i gj� Des zt�jm eslAeRt-La.-I ft tile land use classifications are eligible for a density bonus for up to 20�%. Such projects shall designate a minimum of fifteens percent (150%) of the total proposed units as workforce housing units. Properties of three (3) or more acres are also eligible for a height bonus of one (1) additional story (up to a maximum of 12 feet). of 0 e. Fl le !an-' iise elass'Ae T e1 2 rr - 5 T) n nT TP TnT Tn --A nT TTl TT)T TTl n<.,A TIT TT® iTT I--A CRRTT RR-a R rTT s a RRTT coT ' 4 Page 58 of 73 RRTT A 4 RRTT I-- � o 0/ 0 le 2-3. Fractions. If the number of workforce housing units results in a fractional remainder greater than one-half(0.50), the number shall be rounded up. If the required number of workforce housing units results in a fractional number less than one-half(0.50), the number shall be rounded down. 14. Number of Units. The workforce housing units provided shall have the same percentage of unit types as market rate units within the development. The unit types include the category of structure (single-family detached and attached, multifamily), for rent versus for sale units, and the number of bedrooms. Relief from this provision may be granted if the intended purpose is to address particular needs of the community, substantiated by the provided data/analysis. 4�. Staff Approval. At the time of ev e1gg, ent application fa,-lard use „mea–AM.— —A projects must be reviewed and signed off by the ll_gnnim? � _ � s zt d, inistrator and Community Improvement NJain w��ID;,"�, g eszgtz��,� he y as part of the approval process for compliancetlr1it r� it� 56. Site Plan. The site plan shall clearly identify the location of workforce housing units. Additionally, tabular data must be included on the site plan showing the address or unit number, total number of units, number of bedrooms of workforce housing units and the targeted income levels. This shall be included with the market rate data. 6-7 Sale Restrictions. Workforce housing units shall;be regulated in terms of: a. Initial sales price or rent levels; and b. Subsequent resale prices or leasing rates. c. If strict compliance with a land development standard would preclude construction of a residential or mixed use development in which workforce housing units are included,pursuant to this chapter, the applicant may submit a proposal for a waiver or reduction of the development standard. The applicant shall show that the waiver or reduction of the development standard is the minimum necessary to make the workforce housing units economically feasible and that such a waiver will not compromise any of the Csity's life safety standards ersect the coim jjibilq with the abutting and acli rties or mini zze Lzt Community Desugr Standards, and/ora taina ilzty ReQL[lation he aRpj ��r�t �l��ll ,�� icle a narrative exi)laz,nz,m? the need addresszn�.n the items noted above.-and- tovide-a pr forma Clef" onstratim? that the 1)1-01 ect is not economically feasible_withoutmtlle_�mail. \Vai els are eviev,,'e l and �.?,ranted b� t� C'tv �`ommission 79. Recording the Restrictive Covenant. Prior to the issuance of any building permit, the restrictive covenant and agreement shall be recorded in the public records of Palm Beach County. The term of the restrictive covenant shall be fifteen-(15)years, recurring_for for-sale Lu nzis, —zzft n i j ars n n zn , f_jrental un ts:rtA copy of the recorded covenant and agreement shall be provided to the city prior to the issuance of the building permit. 5 Page 59 of 73 11. C(161sil-11clion o1 allb rlC hle 1f61C1�+ 0161 ile: 1. To be elIL?,Ible forthe roc ��t�cl cl�s��zt�T l� � �� tlr� ��lr tl�� s��t�t��tzc s� c z�zzc�cl�l�le nits os—site, the develc oer must zncct; orate such nits into the develc t�; ent as folk ws� a. Pr ects located within the �`ommunily Rec evelog..IL sit � �� ; ��T use a clensitT l�, o tip to 25-%-,...lr cicl aztzo-n, �,)r `ects cl ��Ioc-ateztlil-n clJ n4zxetse N4-edlti; o-; njlxe-d tJ-se. .... 1 igh fn T calso use a height bonus o two � $S Llitlr)S1al stories ��'3 t- ��Ylc`x'mu4 o 24 .. m --- -- -------� j ..--- ................- z z �r t ; z z; ; ��z t � SIt T zzv ca s t t �/ l o the total 1.............................._ .................................................__�.�.�.---_ _ �..............._......�.�.�.�.�r.----------------------.... l osed units as affotclae lj .;Lz�� units- j5 - b, Pr ects w ztl ICC/ a-ff) clabl tinits oohs-zcle o-z the Cf-; ; un-Ity . cle elr. Ment Area with Medium or Ffiz 'i Denszty Residential fUtUre land use classifications are elzLzble fo a den— zt T bonus ------------- 2. Fractions, If the number of workforce ho usim?:nits results in a fractional remainder at t tl arson half 10.50`1. the number shall be rounded t!j2. lz 1'1�E I!z ecl number o workforce lac t sim nits results in a fractional tt umber less than on, U1.11 C 'C` the number shall be rounded clown, : . Number of Units, The workforce lac t sim unm provided shall have e the �a; e 1�� ij ge r r 1- T 1- 1- T 1- 3 T ��z t�rtzt t�,.�� a�_ akt �at�units within t,l_� cl��_ Z_��; �ttt. �1�� t�rtzt t�,��c� z,s��l �c tl�� t �.._tl� :.��z �trtictti e ,�jIL6,IeLf,ifnilL detached and attached.mult'famil T x z t ttt versus for sale ��nil �rtc the number o bedrooms, belief from this pro isio t ; a�j_be �ar�t�cl zz tl�� intended �u )ose is to addresja culneeds o the coo �ttzt T �t�l��tar�tzat�cl l� T tl�� t �zc c data/�rt�lrj�i 4, Staff z � ect� must lie rev ie d arta sL�r�cl c zz l� T tlre Plartnzm & --------------------------------------------- aalt 7(tll a'.l'7 r) ala 7�� 2 ��7;Y1'.1hance the sub pct ordinance, w4 all an—fflifln,ef 61 iiM fee. Site Plan, The site elan shall clearly iden f tre location o wo;l force lrousim?, nits, Additionally, tabuladata must be ncdd on t e_szt pjg2 c11 �z m _ih ml t ttt; l tc tal ttt t l c z t rtzt sit t l ; c z l cl c ct; of workforce lac usim),nits and the to eted income levels, This shall be included with the market rate data. 6 Sale Restrictions, \Vorkforce h usim?: nits shall be eQllated n terms off a, ltiztial sales )-r-1 car rent 1eve1 ; ar-cl b, Subs i�ttt re al ;.ric o lea in rates, c, If strict compliance with a land develmmeat standard would res lcl [ltral �� mixed I E 1��)t tlt 14I llicll ��;1 I�7 c ll�� I4itI� units are in bided, 414 1 mint to thzl�alt ; tlr 1zar�t ; aTllzt t t gal zc °azoclttzc s c z tl cl plc ; ttt standard, The a.;p...�ri.lz��rashall show arta � � � waiver t reduction r ar � l � tastandardis ..... .. ....... ................ .... . ... .. .. ..... ............ ..� .............. ... .. ... .....-.-------------------------------------- the ..... ... ... . .... . ... ... ... the minimum u;" necessar T to make workforce lrousitt�� ;rtzt� �co nom'callv feasible that_such a waiver will Beit-cry; ��r�; z�� T ��tlr� �'t;Ps life safety T standards � ��tsjL T impact the co ; inimi e compliance with the r r p rrt r`ommunity l esks r Standard" and/or a taznabilztrj Ree�,ulations. 'kl e � �pjicant shall -.jE�,ide.a jnarratz e ext laininr the creed acdressi r the item noted above, and provide a tiro for; a 6 Page 60 of 73 demonstratim?, that the project is not economically feasible without the waiver, \Vaivers are. - - - - - -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Lreviev,,,ed and granted ley C'tv Commission, — ----------1--7. ecoiclzs the Rr , rr issuance of anv buildim) )ermit the Li n the estictive Covenant13 'oto the L?,,.....................�L --------------------------------------1-------------------- I............. restrictive covenant and mueement shall be recorded in the oubhc records of al Beach 'LL-----I------------------------------------------------------- Countv, The ter in of the restrictive covenant shall be thirty ('30) vears, recUrrim?, for for-sale .................. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------—---------------------------------------------------- u i r n&, for rental units, A cc) recorded covenant and nits anc qilrtv_(,Jj_y�� ---------------------�t1t , ll pELv ided to the city mor to the issuance of the building )erinit 8, Federal and State Affordable Flousim?, 13rograms, 13rojec in Federal or State Affordable Hotisin.?,--13-r-oL?,,rai,n-s--i,n-av follow the res,), crii.17. 0i2,E _iW!jqtions and ma1'nta' -PL ---------------------------- ------- ---otic-lined--wl-tl,il-n--tl,il-s--lection , 111. 13av1n_ent__In-Lieu and off-site options. 4-. 1n--1..,1eu of TO 1-He_-,H.-_-,-e construction of workforce and affordable units develoipers ms` v contribute to the Bovnton Beach Housim), Trust as follows-------- � -, +I,e ffliffitlef: of ii ;+s -I-f:whiek ............................. ----------------------------------- f 1 O/_A F�Y eollee-1 shall 'flefease 48M ten Pefeent fveflt 1 1 IZO/� ()0/ RRE1�Wefl-,Y t3efeeflt (_-/v I as fl—.ea+le ,a see+ !.a, 1- fespe6t,Wely, to f44een pefeent,1 150 � v1, P of 1, and —en-, five pef:een+ 11504- of �he t8+,al pf:epased a. The value eclilivalent of tenj,�2,g c I the --------------------------------- L 11 L__1 _pf2i___git_un'ts_when_us'n,_ 25% dens 1 tN7__b_o_nus_,_ b, The value eauivalent of fifteen riercent (I _c c �Lcs_ �t nits when n Q, _1 _15 - -------------------------------------------------------------- 'L 4 1! -------- both the 25% den sitv bonus and.the-up to when within the N41xed tis ----------------------------------------------- - ----------------------------------------------------------------- N4edlum or Mixed t.ise H10h [..,and t.ise Classifications, ---------------------------------------------- 2I-ontributions pef-ffni-t-listed in the table below shall accrue to the Boynton Beach Housing Trust to be utilized to subsidize the er-e--lieR ef-workforce and affordable housing within the city. In-lieu of fees shall be paid in full prior to the issuance of building permit. Payment In Lieu of Construction of Workforce Housing Units (per unit) For-sale unit $82,986 For rent units $36,760 Note:Payment-in-lieu amounts shall be revised every two(2)years,based on(i)median single-family home sale price for Palm Beach County provided by Realtors' Association of the Palm Beaches,and(ii)average monthly apartment rent for the Boynton Beach market provided by Reinhold P.Wolff Economic Research,Inc. 3. Donation of Land. The value of the land shall equal or exceed the total "in-lieu of fee for all workforce units or shall be of sufficient size to develop the same number of units. The value of the donated land must be verified by a MAI appraisal no more than three (3) months old. The appraisal shall be obtained by developer at developer's cost to verify the value of donated land. The land shall be deeded to the city prior to the issuance of a final certificate of occupancy for the development. 7 Page 61 of 73 4. Off-Site Construction. The workforce housing units may be built off-site,provided they are constructed within the City limits. All off-site workforce housing units shall comply with all sections of these Regulations. 5. Purchase Market Rate Units. Purchase an equivalent number of existing market rate units to be deeded to the city or sold to eligible households. Such units shall be deed restricted to comply with the Workforce Housing Ordinance. The developer may retain the title to off-site units subject to recordation of a city approved deed restriction. -D. The following requirements shall apply to built or purchased workforce or affordable units: L Rental Housing Units. 1. Recording of the Restrictive Covenant. A restrictive covenant shall be recorded in the public records specifying the income level served, rent levels, reporting requirement and all restrictions applicable to the workforce housing units. All leases on workforce housing units shall contain language incorporating the restrictive covenant applicable to the workforce housing units and shall reference the recorded restrictive covenant. The restrictive covenant shall remain in force for fifteen (15)years for worl<force lit t sin a.r-cl thirty ('30) vea s.;fo affordable l�oi si��. 2. Rental Rates. a. Affordable housing Units targeted to very I,o,w,_to-aow income households atthlrtV-s� percent(:160%) to eighty percent(80%) of the Boynton Beach Median Household Income as defined lfyj the 5_-- ear tJ Cens s American Com nit�j t� vey shall not have rental rates ne that exceed o ,,n4-e4a i.?hty percent Q 0 H %) of the UD determined fair market rent for the area. b. `orl<force Housim?, uUnits targeted to moderate to middle income households at eighty percent(80%)to the one hundred forty 4veR+y-percent(14-20%) of the Boynton Beach Nje ian Household income as defined by t(1 ar tJS Census -At erican Communit,j L gjj ANU shall not exceed one hundred percent(100%) of the HUD determined fair market rent for the area. 3. Tenant Income Qualification. Tenant income qualification records shall be maintained on-site and a yearly report shall be forwarded to the Community Improvement Division of the City of Boynton Beach for compliance determination. IL For-Sale Housing Units. 1. Restrictive Covenant. All deeds shall include the restrictive covenant applicable to workforce housing units. All sales contracts shall state that the unit is part of a workforce housing program and subject to the Land Development Regulations of the city. The restrictive covenant shall remain in force for fifteen (15)years for worl<force housing, and thirty('30) s fo affordable l ousimil recurring. The form of deed WOFk-f_ e haat,.,unit's shall be approved by the City Attorney. 2. Resale. The restrictive covenants shall state that during the affordability term, the resale of a workforce housing unit shall be subject to the following resale requirements. a. All affordable and workforce housing unit owners shall notify the city immediately that the unit is for sale. The city shall have first right of refusal to purchase the unit. Upon receipt of notice that a valid offer has been made on the unit, the city shall have fifteen (15) days to invoke its right of refusal to purchase the units. 8 Page 62 of 73 b. All workforce housing units are to be resold only tomoderateor in'ddle-income I Or MICICHe qualified households at an attainable housing cost for each targeted income range. c. All affordable housim?, units are to be resold only to very low or low into me_.,q11q!ided --------------------------------------------- Iincome a rnpe, households at an atta'nable iousing cost for each tan�,eted 3. Required Occupancy. Purchasers of affordable or workforce housing units shall be required to occupy the unit. 4. Closing Costs. No charges or fees shall be imposed by the seller on the purchaser of a workforce housing unit that is in addition to, or more than, charges imposed upon purchasers of market rate units, except for administrative fees charged by the city/CRA, or their designee. 5. Sales Price Calculations. Sales prices for workforce housing units will be calculated on the basis of: a. An available fixed-rate thirty (30)-year mortgage, consistent with a "blended rate" for Palm Beach County banks, and/or the Florida Housing Finance Authority. A lower rate may be used in calculating workforce housing prices if the developer can guarantee the availability of fixed-rate thirty (30)-year mortgage at this lower rate for all workforce housing units required for the covered project; b. A down payment of no more than ten percent(10%) (including any down payment assistance provided by SHIP or other sources) of the purchase price; c. A calculation of property taxes; and d. A calculation of homeowner insurance, mortgage insurance, homeowner association fees, property management fees and other closing costs. 6. Compliance. Prior to request for final certificate of occupancy for the development, the developer shall provide to the city's Community Improvement Department, or designee, documentation sufficient to demonstrate compliance with the workforce housing program. Such documentation shall include but is not limited to information regarding the identity and income qualification documentation for all occupants of the workforce housing units, proof of recordation of restrictive covenant in approved form. 7. Resale Requirements. To maintain the availability of workforce housing units which may be constructed or substantially rehabilitated pursuant to the requirements of this program, the following resale conditions shall be imposed on the affordable or workforce housing units and included in the deed and restrictive covenant recorded in the Public Records of Palm Beach County: a. Location of Units. All affordable and workforce housing units constructed or substantially rehabilitated under this program shall be situated within the development so as not to be in less desirable locations than market-rate units in the development and shall, on average, be no less accessible to public amenities, such as open space, as the market-rate units. b Integration. Affordable and Wworkforce housing units within a development shall be integrated with the rest of the development and shall be compatible in exterior design and appearance, construction, and contain comparable HV/AC systems as market rate units. c. Construction Phasing. The construction schedule for affordable and workforce housing units shall be consistent with or precede the construction of market rate units. All workforce 9 Page 63 of 73 housing units must be deeded to the City, deed-restricted, or receive a certificate of occupancy prior to issuance of more than eighty percent(80%) of the certificate of occupancies in the subject development. d. Lot Premiums. There shall be no lot premiums charged on affordable or workforce housing units. e. Sales Price. All required workforce housing units shall be offered for sale or rent at an attainable housing cost for each of the targeted income ranges. f. City Approval. The city, its successors and assigns may enforce the covenants. No amendments to the restrictive covenant shall be made unless by written instrument approved by the city. E. Monitoring and Compliance. 1. Qualified Buyers. Final approval conditions: Final conditions of approval shall specify that the we4g-eq-7�affordable housing units be sold to buyers whose income does not exceed �JidnY AHo 1-1111„fiafe �r fft�, percent(84-20%) of the Boynton Beach Njedlan Household lr and—one hundred cl ancl f t .1 ._.. d' � 0% � co Household Income for worl<force lrot sim?, units mmThe conditions will also specify the requirements for reporting to the city's Community Improvement Division on buyer eligibility, housing prices, as well as any applicable requirement to record the restrictive covenant or to enforce resale restrictions. 2. Surety. Developers may substitute surety as outlined in Chapter 2, Article III, Section 6, Land Development Regulations, in the amount of one hundred ten percent(110%) of the developers' obligation for workforce housing provision according to this section. The city shall, at all times, have the authority to draw upon the surety to enforce the provisions of this article should the applicant be in default of these requirements, 3. Enforcement. The city may enforce the requirements of thettainable;x'� e�� Housing Ordinance through any cause of action available at law or equity, including but not limited to seeking specific performance, injunctive relief, rescission of any unauthorized sale or lease, during the term of the restrictive covenant. 4. Annual Report. The Community Improvement Department shall submit an annual report to the City Commissioners indicating the status of the .tt malls; 'gree Housing Ordinance, including but not limited to the revenues accrued to the Housing Trust Fund,the number of units created, leased and sold. (Ord. 10-025,passed 12-7-10; Am. Ord. 11-031,passed 12-6-11; Am. Ord. 13-034,passed 12- 3-13; Am. Ord. 14-035,passed 1-6-15; Am. Ord. 15-031,passed 12-1-15) 10 Page 64 of 73 Q � OV o (Y)rl- LO(1) a o � Za Z � W 7 O mm W J m Q Z H Q t 42 iii NOk��l, , (Y) ti 4- 0 m m a� a 00 o w N � . t Q v U (A 41 U L 0I P7»kd1Yt1�� C'7 lq- L. (D C`7 . CN O ti C' (D o0 Q Cl) U-) (c) �/♦ Q OCN 0 a CD ti co R +Q. OO o (le) N CO Ln UQ O 000 CN O CO ,i CN lq- W _- � cc) LU } } CO ai SV 0 0 OCV Ot ' r 0 }' O C.� 0 Ca CO p CN!/1 + U N C o N C: N if 0 MW W 0 0 C U 2 0 O O M M co M It . 00 CO mm CO M ai P_ 00 f` 00 f` 0 It CO M O M f` It � N co � � � IT- IT- N 09- 09- 09- 0 N co m O LO co 00 f` CO M ti O ti L M ti O O (D 00 N N 00 09- Ef} (f} (f} (f} (f} (f} (f} 0 co O O O O O O O O (C) a_ O O O N M LO co co 00 N ti O O O O IT N m O V- 00 N m CIO 'IT CD CI*4 04 IT IT it co M LO CIO It co I- 60- 60- 60- 09- 09- 09- Q} Q} O O O O LO O O O O O � � � � M IT LO M co 00 N X 0 0 0 I,- V- N m O � 00 N E 04 V- co m co V- co M f` M IT (6 N N V LM LM om 0 0 o O o O O O O O Cfl 'TCfl O M O o }' O o 0 }' O o 0 o00 00 p o o p o O O o0 O O 0 o0 O O CL O E O O E 1-1 � O O 0 O O O 0 N U N C 0 U N C 0 E — U E — U O 0 O 0 O O O70 0 N N p O L. N 0 0 J 25- 2.- J C'7 07 Cfl co f` 00 f` ® m f` � � � N uj Co Or- O ti O O (D 00 00 fF} fF} ® OO O O 4-0 4-04-0 QL (Y) um 0 rn m a� O O O O 00 N O')0 LO o_ N N 0 } } ~ oN O O O O CO 6cjQ V- C� � U') CO U') O O O O 00 N cC Cfl N N iZ C`7 Cfl U uj U0-01 O O O o CO \ CN O C) lqr-- O -0-01 O +.0O \ O 0 0O 0, O O 00 O CN 0 E N o N um O O U N a) C: 0 - E U O C: N a) 0 0 o cu cn ® Q � Z 'cn Q ti 0 U) o Cl) >N 'a a� (6 a ® }' +j > 0 (n '� X a) .� }' ` J Q ) U N LL .� a) x O O Cl) 0 uj O 1 1 N N O O Q QL C: ILa) a) c/) c ■■-4�--� ■■-4�--� G1 N O T T Cfl O . � •� O O m � o 0 4-0 � o o NCO Q N N O co CY) am C/) {f} 0 O vU) N O E J >.I N m U- O C'7 O ■ T 70 W N DC m = m Q 70 _ �n z Cl) W LL X �� o � �0 >s2 Q 4-0 Cl) >- c > U) 'L- ° uj C LO Lo o ° o "- � U) N N N N •- ._ N m � � U W Cj) a) 0) xU 0 a) 70 O 0 cu w X w Om cu LL 0 06 — cn 0a � .� mU) o .O U) N Q4 L O LO O v o J O L O� N N r-- T cnO m � U O N m n L- 0 (Y) p0 }, o o CY) a� o °6 0 LLI E m .0 Q w r 7.7.E. New Business 2/23/2021 CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH AGENDA ITEM REQUEST FORM PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT MEETING DATE: 2/23/2021 REQUESTED ACTION BY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD: Recommend selection of Board Chair and Vice-Chair to City Commission in compliance with the Code of Ordinances, Part 11, Section 27-2(b) Board or committee member selection. EXPLANATION OF REQUEST: Per amendments approved by the City Commission last year, the selection of Board and Committee Chairs and Vice-Chairs. Code of Ordinances, Part 11, Section 27-2(b) Selection of chair and vice-chair, states"The chairperson and vice-chairperson for each board shall be selected by a majority vote of the City Commission. Neither the chair nor the vice-chair have fixed terms. The chair and vice-chair shall be annually reappointed. The duties of the chair shall be to preside at all board meetings. The vice-chair shall perform the duties of the chair in the chair's absence." HOW WILL THIS AFFECT CITY PROGRAMS OR SERVICES? N/A FISCAL IMPACT: N/A ALTERNATIVES: None recommended. STRATEGIC PLAN: STRATEGIC PLAN APPLICATION: CLIMATE ACTION APPLICATION: Is this a grant? Grant Amount: Page 73 of 73