Agenda 04-11-22 CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH
HISTORIC RESOURCES PRESERVATION BOARD
MEETING AGENDA
K
4^,Y,
DATE: Monday, April 11, 2022 TIME: 6:30 P.M.
PLACE: Commission Chambers, 100 E. Ocean Avenue
1. Call to Order
2. Agenda Approval
3. Approval of Minutes— March 14, 2021
4. Communications and Announcements
5. Old Business:
A. Local Registry of Historic Sites — Overview of properties to be reviewed for addition to the
City's Local Historic Registry.
B. Amendments to LDRs and Historic Preservation Program — Review of proposed
amendments to the Land Development Regulations and Historic Preservation Ordinance
intended to increase incentives for historic preservation and remove possible impediments to
preserving local historic assets.
C. Historic Preservation Programming and the local Ordinance — The Board will be offered
the opportunity to continue any discussions regarding desired preservation activities and
programming, in conjunction with staff providing an overview of the principal components of
the City's preservation ordinance.
6. New Business:
None
7. Other
8. Comments by members
9. Public comments relative to historic preservation
10.Announce date of next meeting — May 9, 2022
11.Adjournment
The Board may only conduct public business after a quorum has been established. If no quorum is
established within 15 minutes of the noticed start time of the meeting the City Clerk or 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
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 OR(TTY) 1-800-955-8771,
AT LEAST 48 HOURS PRIOR TO THE PROGRAM OR ACTIVITY IN ORDER FOR THE CITY TO REASONABLY ACCOMMODATE
YOUR REQUEST.
Historic Resources Preservation Board Special Meeting Page 2
Agenda June 14, 2021
ADDITIONAL AGENDA ITEMS MAY BE ADDED SUBSEQUENT TO THE PUBLICATION OF THE AGENDA ON THE CITY'S WEB
SITE. INFORMATION REGARDING ITEMS ADDED TO THE AGENDA AFTER IT IS PUBLISHED ON THE CITY'S WEB SITE CAN BE
OBTAINED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK.
DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT
TO: Chair and Members,
Historic Resources Preservation Board
FROM: Michael Rumpf,
Planning & Zoning Administrator
Board Liaison
DATE: April 8, 2022
RE: Historic Resources Preservation Board
Regular meeting of April 11, 2022
Staff Report
This report and accompanying exhibits represent the combined back-up for the subject agenda.
Item 5.A. Local Registry of Historic Sites — Staff has completed the procurement process to
enable the use of contracted services for assistance with program tasks starting with the
review of sites for local designation and review of requests for Certificates of
Appropriateness. At the March meeting staff reported that 3 properties were being scheduled
for designation review, including 413 NE 12th Avenue, 330 NW 1St Avenue, and 419 SE 4th
Street (Board-initiated). On April 2nd the consultant conducted an initial site visit at 330 NW 1St
Avenue and assisted the property owner with the completion of the designation application.
The application was filed on Wednesday, April 6th. Staff and our consultant plan to complete
the review and forward the item to the Board at the May 9th meeting. Recall that this property
owner is in the design phase for property improvements, including an expansion onto the rear
of the house and addition of a swimming pool. Given the size of the subject parcel, and the
desired design concept, conflicts with minimum site standards in the Zoning Regulations are
anticipated. The proposed amendments currently drafted should address the possible
conflicts, which include maximum lot coverage and/or minimum setbacks.
Item 5.B. Amendments to LDRs and Historic Preservation Regulations —At the last
meeting of the Board Staff presented a collection of proposed amendments to the Historic
Preservation Program procedures and the City's Zoning Regulations intended to increase
awareness of preservation opportunities, add incentives for the preservation of historic sites,
as well as to identify possible impediments to preservation. Staff identified three target areas
for possible amendments to recognize and support preservation objectives which are; 1)
exemptions from, or reductions in certain zoning and lot standards for existing and planned
property improvements; 2) possible conflicting initiatives within redevelopment plans and
preservation objectives; 3) regulations on non-conforming uses; and 4) responses to requests
for the demolition of historic properties.
Staff still intends to consider the potential for adaptive reuse (commercial conversion) or joint
(residential/commercial) use of designated properties along selected collector roadways to
support the designation and maintenance of designated or eligible sites. These proposed
amendments may need to follow on a separate schedule if there is not sufficient time to
process them along with those described above. Staff does seek a position on this concept in
the event that the amendments are inserted between this Board meeting and the Planning &
Development Board meeting.
In preparing this next draft of the proposed amendments staff considered input from a small
staff team of planners in the Division to vet and fine-tune the text for optimal incorporation
and formatting into the Code. An update on the proposed amendments that were previously
presented is as follows-
1)
ollows:1) Exemptions from or reductions in Zoning Standards — The intended standards have
been placed in a "Modified Building Standards" table within the Preservation chapter,
to match the existing format of the Zoning Regulations. Also, the provision proposed
for 2nd floor improvements has been changed, from the quantifiable standard of 20% to
a more general requirement for a case-by-case review for compatibility with adjacent
properties.
2) Addressing conflict with redevelopment plan initiatives — The proposed amendment to
the footnote in Table 3-4 was "word-smithed" to use current urban design principals
and terms, as well as to limit application to a select group of non-designated but
eligible sites rather than to all "eligible" sites.
3) Exceptions for non-conforming uses — The proposed wording that would exempt
designated sites from the Nonconforming Use regulations of the Code remains
unchanged. This is intended to allow in a conforming status the existence of two- or
more family dwelling units within any residential district. Otherwise, such regulations
could place a limit on the value of maintenance or other improvements allowed to the
designated site, as well as desired expansions or improvements.
4) Review of demolition requests — Staff further considered the significance of what was
originally proposed and offers two alternatives. As originally proposed, the amendment
would require the halting of demolition of any property that was "eligible" for
designation. Given the magnitude of properties that this would include (all properties
included in the 1996 Survey, and considering the possible time required to conclude
current "eligibility", staff anticipates that this amendment would be difficult to justify to
the elected officials and public. Instead, staff recommends the following two
alternatives for consideration: 1) the Board limit this requirement to a select list of
priority sites identified from the original inventory; or 2) leave the amendment to the
entire list of eligible sites as listed in the 1996 History Site Survey, but limit the action
taken to simply involve communication and education of the historic value of the
property and preservation program to the property owner, over a very short time
period. The amendment could also include a quick review of the status of the property
to determine if"eligibility" is unlikely due to deteriorated or altered condition. Although
what could be a challenging task, staff does recommend that the Board consider this
task of identifying the priority sites. Such a list could also be used in other initiatives
such as public outreach, inventory updating and for historic district consideration.
Staff also suggests for consideration the addition of another amendment that would allow
a designated property to contain one or more accessory dwelling units. If supported by the
-2-
Board, this amendment would be drafted and included with the others when forwarding to
the Planning & Development as part of the protocol of adopting amendments to the Land
Development Regulations. As part of this review, staff will consider whether the
amendment regarding non-conforming uses would also include a property with an existing
accessory dwelling unit.
The amendments as described above are been made to the respective code sections and will
be distributed at the Board meeting.
Item 5.C. Historic Preservation Programming and the local Ordinance — The Board will
be offered the opportunity to continue any discussions regarding desired preservation
activities and programming, in conjunction with staff providing an overview of the principal
components of the City's preservation ordinance. This would include the discussion of
reviewing the site inventory for a priority list of properties, as explained above Items #2 and
#4.
- 3 -