Minutes 02-04-21 MINUTES OF THE CRAADVISORY BOARD MEETING
WEBEX ONLINE MEETING
100 E. OCEAN AVENUE
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA 33435
HELD ON THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 4, 2021, AT 6:30 P.M.
PRESENT: STAFF:
Anthony Barber, Chair Michael Simon, CRA Executive Director
Allan Hendricks, Vice Chair Bonnie Nicklien, CRA Grants & Project Mngr
Angela Cruz Crysta Parkinson, Prototype, Inc.
Golene Gordon
ALSO PRESENT:
Sergeant Henry Diehl
ABSENT:
Thomas Devlin
Sharon Grcevic
1. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order by Chair Barber at 6:49 p.m.
2. Roll Call
Roll was called, and it was determined a quorum was present.
3. Agenda Approval
A. Additions, Deletions, Corrections to the Agenda
B. Adoption of Agenda
Motion was made by Ms. Gordon, seconded by Ms. Cruz, to adopt the agenda. In a
voice vote, the motion passed unanimously (4-0).
4. Information Only -- None
5. Public Comment -- None
6. Consent
A. Approval of CRAAdvisory Board Meeting Minutes — January 7, 2021
Motion made by Ms. Gordon, seconded by Mr. Hendricks, to approve the January 7,
2021, minutes. In a voice vote, the motion passed unanimously (4-0).
7. Assignments
A. Pending Assignments
Meeting Minutes CRA Advisory Board
Boynton Beach, Florida February 4, 2021
i. Review of Commercial Properties within Boynton Beach Boulevard
Corridor within CRAArea
Chair Barber confirmed that there is nothing further to add to the packet and
continued to ascertain that the Board's assignment is to make a recommendation
on this item. Mr. Simon said yes, and that the Board can look at it as a holistic
analysis of the corridor itself, if it is felt that there are properties to keep "on the
radar." Again, the CRA Board did not allot any funding to this project; only a task
to select a couple of properties that could be of interest in next year's budget.
Or the Board can be really general and simply state the Boynton Beach
Boulevard Corridor is worthy of attention for certain acquisitions.
Mr. Hendricks wondered if any of the Board Members had sent back a Word
document about their section with not necessarily recommendations but
summaries or maybe an inventory of what they had found. Some discussion
followed on who has done what so far and Mr. Hendricks volunteered to do an
overall summary to provide a "big picture."
Chair Barber suggested that this project needs more guidance, perhaps a dollar
amount attached, looking at something to possibly purchase in five years. He
noted he is not a fan of busy work. Perhaps a motion to table this and seek out
a little more specificity from the CRA Board regarding parameters for more
concrete results. In the event no guidelines are forthcoming, then this Board
may kick it back and move not to make a recommendation on any of these.
Ms. Cruz and Mr. Hendricks agreed. The initial work has been done but the
focus for the report is still undefined. Ms. Gordon added that she did not think
any recommendations were expected, it was more of a scouting exercise, what
is suitable and affordable in that corridor.
Motion made by Ms. Cruz, seconded by Mr. Hendricks, to seek clarification regarding
what the CRA Board is looking for or if they want a recommendation based on these final
four properties. In a voice vote, the motion passed unanimously (4-0).
B. New Assignments
i. Discussion and Consideration of Survey Questions for Community Input
for the CRA Project Located at 115 N. Federal Highway
Chair Barber stated there is a lot to this assignment. First question to Mr. Simon
is are any of these proposed developers of 115 North Federal hinging their
development on the Brightline station actually coming to town. When Mr. Simon
said no, Chair Barber then asked what is the task?
Mr. Simon explained this item has been before the CRA Board since August
2020. As of the January 2021 meeting, the CRA Board has begun talking about
doing an RFP, but has not settled on any of these proposals in the Agenda
2
Meeting Minutes CRA Advisory Board
Boynton Beach, Florida February 4, 2021
Packet. Having decided to go out for an RFP, what are some of the things the
development community should consider important to the CRA in their
responses. After much discussion, it was decided community input should be
gathered, including a dialog with the newly-formed Downtown Business Coalition
(approximately 20 business). Also seeking input from a bigger cross-section of
people throughout the City, perhaps a SurveyMonkey.
This Board's task is to review questions that Staff has drafted as survey
questions as to what should be done with the property. Questions or points of
desire can be added or edited to ask the public what should be sought in the
RFP. A brief summary of the project (aerial image of project site and what is
owned by CRA was shown).
• 115 N. Federal Highway
• The building is gone and is now a large parking lot.
• Can be zoned Mixed Use High, it is in the core so carries a density
of 80 units per acre
• If workforce housing is approved it would be up to 100 units.
• Options to ask for:
o Workforce housing
o More commercial than normal
o No commercial
o Public parking
o Single-family homeownership, detached/attached
• This would be a similar exercise to Cottage District RFP.
Survey Questions:
1 . Would you like to see a future redevelopment project incorporate a mix
of uses, such as commercial and residential?
2. Would you like to see a full-service grocery store (12,000 up to 20,000
square feet) as a commercial component incorporated into a future
project?
3. Would you like to see a hotel incorporated into a future project?
4. Would you like to see Workforce Housing as a component of a future
project?
5. Would you like to see larger than required public open space(s)
incorporated into the design of a future project?
6. Would you like to see additional public parking spaces incorporated
into a future project?
7. Would you like to see accommodations for mass transit or ride sharing
amenities (such as bus stops, ride sharing pickup/drop off locations,
incorporated into a future project?
8. Are you a resident or business owner in Boynton Beach?
3
Meeting Minutes CRA Advisory Board
Boynton Beach, Florida February 4, 2021
Before discussing the individual survey questions, general discussion began,
including the possibility of upscale restaurants rather than "sporty" kinds, but
mostly discussing the limitations of the Mixed Use High zoning. It is important
that the public is given background information and understands just what
can happen and cannot, such as there will not be any parks. A frank
discussion on upscale restaurants and Workforce housing in the same
building, for instance, seems mutually exclusive.
Chair Barber asked about the purpose of the survey, who initiated it. Mr.
Simon said it was initiated by the CRA Board Chair. Mr. Hendricks added
that if there is not a survey, people are going to claim nobody asked them
about the redevelopment; to which Ms. Cruz agreed the public should be
involved.
Mr. Simon noted that the CRA is a public agency that owns the property and
continued to explain the reasoning behind the survey and how such projects
have been conducted in the past. It's a forgone conclusion that this is going
to be a mixed used project; however if the Board does not want mixed-use,
or if the survey came back with 200 residents saying, no, they don't want
mixed use, the plan would be rewritten and the zoning changed.
As to the grocery, Mr. Simon noted one of the letters of interest, an
independent grocer, is interested in opening a grocery store there (has had a
grocery store in Boca for 35 years). The store would most likely be 10,000-
15,000 square feet and would employ neighborhood people and may include
something unique incorporating neighborhood gardening. This is a viable
letter of interest different from the others.
The purpose of releasing the RFP with suggestions is to direct the developer,
it doesn't mean all those suggestions can or will be met. Rather than CRA
releasing set questions for the survey, they have come to CRAAB to get input
on what it feels are important before going to the general public.
Ms. Gordon proposed the need for affordable office space as so many new
spaces are sitting empty now because of the price. Mr. Hendricks said he
had heard this mentioned before. Mr. Simon thought perhaps some language
early on that a certain percentage of office space could be offered at below-
market value and subsidizing could be sought to make it happen. Ms. Cruz
added that with the trend of working at home since Covid-19, perhaps office
space is not the best use of available space; perhaps more restaurants/
apartments/housing. Mr. Simon suggested perhaps the developer should
provide wi-fi, not only to the individual units but to the plaza of commercial
users. Such "smart technology" would not only include wi-fi but even the
City's new cooling energy plant, as the building codes now are pretty strict,
pushing toward green/sustainability.
4
Meeting Minutes CRA Advisory Board
Boynton Beach, Florida February 4, 2021
Chair Barber proposed the following recommendations to the survey
questions:
Q1. Should have a clearer explanation of mixed use within the question?
Q2. Example of the type of grocery store that is within that size scope
Q4. Example of home prices for workforce housing.
Q5. Example of what a public open space is.
Q7. Examples of Ride Sharing.
Discussion continued predominantly on the criteria behind the meaning of
Workforce Housing, the style and what the developer wants to build, and the
resulting prices of everything related to the project. The discussion included
tax credits for Workforce Housing, there may or may not be an advantage to
the developer, remembering the Workforce and Affordable Housing are two
different things (Workforce is not much of a difference to standard market
value). Mr. Simon said the community is likely aware of the cost of housing
in Boynton Beach and that affordable housing would be great, elected
officials support it, and there definitely is a hole in the market. A survey
question on this would be one way to let the community tell us they agree
with us. The goal is to get reassurance from the community that things are
on the right track.
The next discussion was on rentals/condos/residential. It is difficult to tell the
market what to build. A survey question on what the public wants, rental or
ownership, could be added. Ms. Gordon noted there are more rental
properties right now in Boynton and from what she has seen, they are not
that affordable. One thing to consider is that ownership brings in taxes; there
are still so many buildings (all rentals) coming up on Old Boynton and more
are coming.
Going forward, each question was discussed, with the remaining language
given as a recommendation to the CRA Board-
1 .
oard:1 . Would you like to see a future redevelopment project incorporate a mix
of uses, such as commercial and residential? [as is]
2. Would you like to see a grocery store as a commercial component
incorporated into a future project? [as modified]
3. Would you like to see a hotel incorporated into a future project?
[split on even keeping this question in the survey.]
4. Would you like to see Workforce Housing as a component of a future
project? [as is]
5. Would you like to see larger than required public open space(s)
incorporated into the design of a future project? [confusing, clarify the
language]
6. Would you like to see additional public parking spaces incorporated
into a future project? [as is]
5
Meeting Minutes CRA Advisory Board
Boynton Beach, Florida February 4, 2021
7. Would you like to see accommodations for mass transit or ride sharing
amenities (such as bus stops, ride sharing pickup/drop off locations)
incorporated into a future project?
8. [new question] Would you like to see smart technology (such as public
wifi, energy efficiency) incorporated into a future project?
9. Are you a resident or business owner in Boynton Beach? [as is]
The Board would like to see some language included in Question 1 about
affordable office space; Mr. Simon said "commercial, office, residential" could
be added. Some discussion ensued.
Motion made by Ms. Gordon, seconded by Ms. Cruz, to forward the CRA Board the above
recommendations to the proposed survey. In a voice vote, the motion passed
unanimously (4-0).
8. Adjournment
Upon motion duly made and seconded, in a voice vote, the motion passed unanimously
(4-0) and the meeting was adjourned at 8:12 p.m.
Attachments: Draft BBCRA Survey Questions
[Minutes transcribed by M. Moore, Prototype, Inc.]
6