CORRESPONDENCE
Nov 06 aD 09:02a
MLPC
(561)272-1042
to. 1
MILLER
LAND
PLANNING
CONSULTANTS, INC.
295 Pineo :JJ)le Grove Way
Delmy Beach, ~L 33444
f'h~ne 5611212.00B2
Fax 5011272-1042
FAX TRANSMITTAL
Date:
Time:
11/3JOO
3:48:28 PM
Recipient:
Dick Hudson
Fax Number-:
7tfZ- (p~e;1
~
Company:
CITY OF BOYNTON - PLANNING
Voice NUr1ber:
375-6264
Sem By:
Bradley D. Miller, AICP
Pages:
2 ,:ncluding this cover sheet
Subject:
Villa del Sol
Message:
My client for Villa del Sol is finalizing a financing package. Since there is a discrepancy in
maximum density between the Special High Residential land use designation (20 uIa) and
the R-3 zoning (1 0.8 ufa), we need you to confirm that the project is approved for the full 20
units per acre. They have a deadline on Monday so please have Mike sign the attached
letter and fax ~ back as quickly as possible. Thanks!
.....,-: ,
j fAt- ~') It)'
(r1# !tpV3)
Nov 06 00 OS:02a
MLPC
(561)272-1042
p.2
MILLER
LAND
PLANNING
CONSULTANTS, INC.
298 Pl~EAPPLE GROVE WAY
DElilA)' BfACH. ~LOR1DA 33444
PhONE.561/272-0082
F.A.x .561/272-1042
November 3, 2000
Michoe: Rumpf
CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH
PLANNINC 8. ZONING DEPARTMENT
100 E. Boynton Beach Soulevard
Boynton Beach. Fl 33425-0310
Re: Villa del Sol
Dear Mike:
For my den"s financing purposes, this letter requests your writter; confirmation of the maxim:.Jm
allowable densi-y for the above referenced property.
It is our understanding t~at the density for this project :s 20 units per gross acre based on the recent
land 1..;5e amendment to Specie! High De..,sity Residential (Ordinance No. 000-21). We also
understord that this density supersedes the stcndard 10.8 unit per acre density of the R-3 zoning
district as indicated ir the Lend Development Code.
Please confirm the above by signing wr-ere provided below and returning a copy as quickly as
possible. Thank you for your assist:lnce.
Sincerely,
MILLER LAND PLANNING CONSULT ,ANiS, INC.
Brodley D. MWer, Alep
cc;
Mora S. Modes
~ t. ' 1L .~ ;;J / / -&(>c
Michael ~~~f~ ~ 1'(-----
P!ann;ng & Zoning Director
CIty of Boynton Beach
C .\"".l PC,PRGJi:C':'S\VU,) dei S\)I i80ynlcn 15)Vurn~f: l03.w~-:j
.
treQlure
co~t
:j;. regional
planniQg
council
September 22, 2000
Mr. Michael W. Rumpf
Director of Planning and Zoning
City of Boynton Beach
Post Office Box 310
Boynton Beach, FL 33435
Subject: City of Boynton Beach Comprehensive Plan
Adopted Amendments - DCA Reference No. OO-lER
Dear Mr. Rumpf:
Pursuant to the Council's contract with the Department of Community Affairs, Council is
to make an overall finding of consistency or inconsistency of local plan amendments with
the Strategic Regional Policy Plan (SRPP). This finding is to be made following the local
government's adoption of the amendments and by formal action of the Council.
In brief, Council found the above-referenced comprehensive plan amendments to be
CONSISTENT with the SRPP. Attached is a copy of the complete report as approved by
the Council at its regular meeting on September 22, 2000.
If you need additional information or have any questions, please do not hesitate to call.
Sincerely,
I ffh-/
T~Hess, AICP
Planning Director
TLH/wh
Attachment
301 east ocean boulevard
suite 300
stuart, florida 34994
phone (561) 221-4060
sc 269-4060 fax (561) 221-4067
TREASURE COAST REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL
MEMORANDUM
To:
Council Members
AGENDA ITEM 7D
From: Staff
Date: September 22, 2000 Council Meeting
Subject: Local Government Comprehensive Plan Review
Adopted Amendments to the City of Boynton Beach Comprehensive Plan
DCA Reference No. 00-IER
Introduction
Pursuant to the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council's contract with the Department
of Community Affairs (DCA), the Council must review comprehensive plan amendments
after their adoption. Council's review of the information provided is to focus on the
consistency of the adopted amendments with the Strategic Regional Policy Plan (SRPP).
A written report containing a determination of consistency with the SRPP is to be
provided to DCA within 30 calendar days of receipt of the amendments
Background
The City of Boynton Beach has adopted four Future Land Use Map (FLUM)
amendments based on its Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR), one non EAR-based
FLUM amendment, and a related text amendment to the Future Land Use Element of its
comprehensive plan. Council reviewed the proposed amendments at its February 18,
2000 meeting (see Exhibit A) and had two comments on the proposed amendments.
Evaluation
The DCA Objections, Recommendations, and Comments (ORC) Report was issued on
March 30, 2000. The ORC Report contained four objections. The following summarizes
the DCA objections and the City's response.
1. DCA Objection-The Transportation Element does not include future transportation
maps identifying the major public transit trip generators and attractors based upon the
future land use map and the projected peak hour levels of service for transportation
facilities for which level of service standards are established.
City Response-The 2020 thoroughfare system and 2020 pedestrian facilities maps
generated by the Palm Beach County Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) are
included as support documents. The Public Transit System Map indicates the
location of major public transit trip generators and attractors at various terminals.
The map has been expanded, however, to indicate the trip generators and attractors
based on the FLUM. Current available peak hour traffic data and average daily trips
are shown in Figure 12 of the Transportation Element. The projected peak hour level
of service is based on the EAR Map 2.9 and is further delineated in Table 2-3.
2. DCA Objection-The Transportation Element support documentation indicates that
the transit market share for Tri-County Rail and Palm- Tran, as well as pedestrian and
bicycle facilities, would have to increase in the City through Transportation Demand
Management (TDM) strategies in order to modify peak-hour travel demand.
However, the City did not include a policy in this element establishing TDM
programs.
City Response-New TDM oriented policies 2.7.3 and 2.7.4 have been added to
establish a transportation demand management organization as an implementing
vehicle for the TDM.
3. DCA Objection-The City has provided an inventory of existing intermodal facilities
but not an analysis of the deficiencies or projected needs. These data and analysis
will assist the City in addressing the need for additional terminals, connections, high
occupancy vehicle lanes, pedestrian, bicycle, park and ride, and other facilities based
on land use projections to facilitate effective implementation of proposed Objective
2.4.
City Response-The analysis presented within the EAR is adequate and is
incorporated in the text and maps of the support documents by reference.
Additionally, transportation concurrency management map(s) have been expanded to
address the DCA's concerns.
4. DCA Objection-Proposed FLUM amendment LUAR #99-005 is inconsistent with
Policy 1.12.1 of the City's Future Land Use Element which requires the City to obtain
written approvals from Palm Beach County and the City's Risk Management Officer
prior to approving any increase in residential densities in the Hurricane Evacuation
Zone if the proposed density increase would result in an increase of 50 or more
dwelling units. The City has not demonstrated the consistency of the proposed
FLUM amendment with Objective 7.6 of the Coastal Management Element of its
comprehensive plan regarding the City's commitment to maintain or reduce current
estimated hurricane evacuation times if development increases in the coastal high-
hazard area of the City. The City did not provide analysis of the projected impact of
anticipated population density of the proposed additional 148 dwelling units and
potential evacuation needs of the population on hurricane evacuation planning.
City Response-The subject parcel is located west of US 1, and therefore is not
within the Hurricane High Hazard area as defined in Rule 9J-5.003(17), Florida
Administrative Code as "the evacuation zone for a Category 1 hurricane as
')
established in the regional hurricane evacuation study applicable to the local
government." Although the property is not located in the Hurricane High Hazard
area, the City requested that the Palm Beach County Emergency Management
Division review the amendment and provide comments. The response indicates that
the site is not designated as an evacuation area in the event of a Category 1 storm.
Following are Council's comments and the City's responses.
1. Council Comment-Implementation and consistency with recommendations of the
City of Boynton Beach 20/20 Redevelopment Master Plan is cited throughout the
EAR-based amendments. This document is not provided as part of the proposed
amendment package. This document should be provided as part of the data and
analysis to support the goals, objectives, and policies of the City's comprehensive
plan.
City's Response-The City provided Council with a copy of their 20120
Redevelopment Master Plan.
2. Council Comment-Council commends the City for the commitment to implement
strategies to facilitate alternate forms of transportation and mass transit, prevent urban
sprawl, and promote urban design standards. These efforts are consistent with goals
and policies of the SRPP.
City's Response-No response required.
Conclusion
Based on the information received by Council the adopted amendments are considered
CONSISTENT with the goals and policies of the SRPP.
Recommendation
Council should adopt the above comments and approve their transmittal to the
Department of Community Affairs.
Attachment
i
EXHIBIT
A
TREASURE COAST REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL
MEMORANDUM
To:
Council Members
AGENDA ITEM 6B
From:
Staff
Date:
February 18, 2000 Council Meeting
Subject:
Local Government Comprehensive Plan Review
Draft Amendments to the City of Boynton Beach Comprehensive Plan
DCA Reference No. 00-IER
Introduction
The Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act,
Chapter 163, Florida Statutes, requires that the Council review local government
comprehensive plan amendments prior to their adoption. Under the provisions of this
law, the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) prepares Objections,
Recommendations, and Comments (ORC) Report on a proposed amendment only if
requested to do so by the local government, the regional planning council, or an affected
person or if an ORC Report is otherwise deemed necessary by the DCA. If the local
government requests DCA to prepare an ORC Report, then the Council must provide
DCA with its own objections, recommendations for modification, and comments on the
proposed amendment within 30 days of its receipt.
Background
The City of Boynton Beach has transmitted revised elements of its comprehensive plan
based on the City's Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR). The local government's
EAR is required to address changes in local conditions, Chapter 163, Florida Statutes,
Chapter 9J-5, Florida Administrative Code, the State Comprehensive Plan, the
appropriate Strategic Regional Policy Plan (SRPP), and potential impacts of these
changes on the adopted local government comprehensive plan. The City has also
transmitted one Future Land Use Map (FLUM) amendment and a related text
amendment. The City has requested that the amendments be formally reviewed.
The Council's principle role in the EAR process is to review EAR-based comprehensive
plan amendments for their consistency with the SRPP. In reviewing EAR-based
amendments, Council will examine EAR recommendations and use the SRPP to
determine how local governments have addressed regional goals and policies. Council
understands how challenging it will be for all communities to make dramatic progress in
moving towards consistency with the SRPP in the short term. Council is looking,
however, for local governments to make a reasonable effort to move in that direction. In
order to place this review in the larger context of the intent of the SRPP, an overview of
the regional plan is offered in the following section.
Overview of the SRPP
The SRPP embodies a vision for a healthier and more sustainable region in the future.
This "vision for the future of the region" addresses large-scale elements such as the
growth and formation of towns, cities, and villages; maintenance of the natural
environment and countryside; the layout of regional roads and spatial relationships
between work place and household; the formation of suitable public institutions for a
neighborhood and community; and the kinds of public space required to support these
institutions. The SRPP describes preferred forms and patterns of development that are
considered the most effective means for fulfilling this vision. In taking this proactive
approach, the plan follows a long-standing tradition of leadership by the Council. The
Treasure Coast Region has led the state in implementing such innovative growth
management tools and techniques such as infrastructure concurrency, wetland and upland
protection, and impact fees.
The Treasure Coast Region possesses many inherent qualities that will continue to attract
growth, but a number of issues must be confronted as growth occurs. These include past
failures to manage growth wisely, land speculation and inefficient development patterns,
unbalanced demographic growth, inadequate provision of infrastructure and services
concurrent with need, parochial attitudes towards regional issues, and the absence of a
well-defined land ethic. As the Region grows, choices must be made and some patterns
of development that have occurred in the past should be avoided in the future. The mix,
balance, and organization of residential types, work places, and services can have a
profound effect on how often and far we drive, how much energy we use, how much
pollution we generate, how much land we use, how much time we are able to spend with
our families, how successful we are at protecting regional natural systems intact, and may
other important concerns.
There is still time to plan for a future that enhances the natural environment and quality
of life that makes the Treasure Coast Region special if planning efforts focus on the form
and location of future growth. Future development should address preservation of the
natural environment and countryside, revitalization of existing urban areas, and the
creation of new towns. Future development should not sprawl because it is expensive,
and it degrades the quality of life of the region.
The SRPP will be implemented largely through local government comprehensive plans
and land development regulations. Local governments can implement preferred
development forms by delineating where development should or should not occur,
applying and expanding preferred development concepts, encouraging redevelopment
and revitalization, devising public investment programs favoring preferred development
forms and patterns, and sending constructive economic signals to investors.
2
Overview of the Community
The City of Boynton Beach is located in southeastern Palm Beach County. It has
common boundaries with The City of Delray Beach to the south, unincorporated Palm
Beach County to the west, and the Town of Lantana to the north. The City's fifteen
square miles supports a population of approximately 55,000 residents. The City can be
characterized as a low-density, low-rise community that is in the latter stages of transition
from being primarily a residential community to a full-service city. A new proposed
redevelopment plan for the City envisions a new town center, redevelopment of the
waterfront and the revitalization of existing neighborhoods.
Evaluation
A. EAR-Based Amendments
The City proposes amendments to many of the elements of its comprehensive plan. The
former Traffic Circulation Element is now the Transportation Element as required by
Chapter 163, Florida Statutes. A brief summary and analysis of the most consequential
amendments follows:
Future Land Use -A number of new and revised objectives and policies are proposed.
They address the City 20/20 Redevelopment Master Plan, CRA expansion, development
of the Ocean District, residential redevelopment, financing strategies, downtown urban
design standards, sign regulations, and land use accommodations for the siting of new
schools. Also, there are four proposed EAR-based future land use map amendments to
reClassify four sites to reflect the correct land use for those sites.
Transportation -A number of new and revised policies are proposed to deal with modes
of transportation that are alternatives to the automobile, consistency with the City 20/20
Redevelopment Master Plan and emphasis on level of service (LOS) standards.
Utility -A number of revised objectives and polices are proposed to reflect current
information regarding sewer/water capacity and changes to levels of service.
Housing -A number of revised objectives and policies are proposed regarding housing
funding strategies with an emphasis on rehabilitation as a priority program.
Coastal Management -There are a number of new objectives and policies proposed to
address stormwater quality, support of the Lake Worth Lagoon Ecosystem Management
Area Study, emergency preparedness, hazard mitigation, and post-disaster
redevelopment.
Conservation - There are a number of new objectives and policies proposed to address
such issues as: hazardous waste; stormwater quality and quantity, water conservation, and
implementation of the Lake Worth Lagoon Estuary Study.
3
Recreation and Open Space -A number of revised objectives and policies are proposed
related to park land acquisition and adopted standards for recreation facilities and
neighborhood parks.
Intergovernmental Coordination -A number of new and revised objectives and policies
are proposed related to inter-local agreements for provision of water and sewer services
with adjacent municipalities and the unincorporated area, coordination with the Palm
Beach County Division of Emergency Management on hurricane evacuation and other
emergency management issues, annexation issues, participation in the IP ARC process, a
voluntary dispute resolution process to facilitate intergovernmental coordination, and
school siting.
Capital Improvements -A number of revised objectives and policies are proposed related
to provision of adequate public facilities and prevention of urban sprawl, recreation
facilities, preservation of natural areas, and level of service standards for public facilities,
B. Non Ear-Based Future Land Use Map and Text Amendment
The FLUM amendment is shown on the attached maps and summarized in Table 1.
TABLE 1
CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT
DCA REFERENCE 00-1 ER
Amendment Acreage CurrentFLUM'" Proposedl.'L~ ,,' '.. Location"'.
No. or Name Designation '. "'.+" "
, , DesIgnation'", ",,',', "', .,.;;;",
LUAR #99- 16.0 Local Retail Special High ,Northwest
005 Commercial Density corner of
Residential (20 Federal Hwy.
du/acre) (US1) and
Old Dixie
Hwy, south of
23rd Street
and East of
the FEC
Railroad
This amendment involves the redesignation of 16.0 acres located on the northwest corner
of Federal Hwy and Old Dixie Highway from Local Retail Commercial to Special High
Density Residential. Property to the east has a FLUM designation of High Density
Residential and the current use is for residential condominiums. Directly to the west is
the FEC Railroad and farther west is land with a FLUM designation of Medium Density
Residential that is currently used for a mango farm. Land to the north is designated Local
Retail and High Density Residential and is currently used for residential purposes. Land
4
to the south is designated Local Retail and Medium Density Residential and the current
land uses include a gas station/shopping center and single family residential development.
The FLUM amendment and associated text amendments apply to planning area l.p. of
the City's comprehensive plan. The comprehensive plan states that due to the limited
demand for commercial floor space along this segment of US 1, these parcels should be
assigned a different land use category. However, because the City had approved a site
plan and construction drawing for a shopping center on this site, the City Commission
decided to keep this parcel in the Local Retail Commercial land use category. The
shopping center has not been developed and the site plan and construction plan approvals
have expired. Therefore, the designation on this parcel is to be changed from Local
Retail Commercial to Special High Density Residential to encourage development and
revitilization of this area of the City. The proposed FLUM amendment and associated
text amendments further the goals and policies of the SRPP.
Extrajurisdictional Impacts
These amendments were not processed through the Palm Beach County
Intergovernmental Plan Review Committee. However, analysis of the proposed
amendments indicates that they would not have any significant adverse impacts on
neighboring jurisdictions.
Effects on Significant Regional Resources or Facilities
An analysis of the proposed amendments indicates that they should not have adverse
effects on significant regional resources or facilities. However, the revisions suggested in
the following comments call for improvements that would make the City Plan more
consistent with the SRPP.
Objections, Recommendations for Modification, and Comments
A. Objections
I. None
B. Comments
1. Implementation and consistency with recommendations of the City of Boynton Beach
20/20 Redevelopment Master Plan is sited throughout the EAR-based amendments.
This document is not provided as part of the proposed amendment package. This
document should be provided a part of the data and analysis to support the goals,
objectives and policies of the City's comprehensive plan.
2. Council commends the City for the commitment to implement strategies to facilitate
alternate forms of transportation and mass transit, prevent urban sprawl and promote
5
urban design standards. These efforts are consistent with the go~s and policies of the
SRPP.
Recommendation
I
Council should adopt the above comments and approve their transmittal to the
i
Department of Community Affairs.
Attachments
6
General Location Map
804
.Pomclann Place
'0
a:::
o
...,
6th
M laleuca La
" I
~'~
812
~~~:;: l:(-:;::='
~p
T 1:
1"
Hy oluxo''vjlage
. " ,
d
,
/'
NW 22nd Ave
U\
Lake Ida d
I
;
'"C
a:::
...
Gl
1::
as
(..)
I
j
a:t
(
Deiray Gardens
. I
_e/~c;'~~~~lft;~;
. :: ,-~.<;; ~~,. ,:'.: ~:.';" ; ."' .' - ,- '-.. .. -. .
..-;li~I~~~t;~!: ." ..
. '-;~::-~~' :1~l~1i~11{i.;~1
. C untry Club Acres
Linton Blvd
Linton'BI
!.
City of Boynton Beach
Palm Beach County
Omi
2
3
4
7
City of Boynton Beach
I
Future Land Use l\tIap Amendment
Location Map
Woolbright Road
Golf Road/SE 23rd Ave.
~
ta
o
.~..
ta:
1%:
u:
LU:
~:
:a..
ta
:t
.c
oS'
%:
.!!!
.!!
o
J2
o
-
:..
fa
~
...
.B
fa
;:
-
J!
&II
fa
o
U
fa
...
-
c:
....,
/.....,''-...,
'--- .c --...>.
-
..
o
:z:
8
Department of Public Safety
Emergency Management
20 S. Military Trail
West Palm Beach. FL 33415-3130
(561) 712-6400
FAX: (561) 712-6464
www.co.palm-beach.fl.us
.
Palm Beach County
Board of County
Commissioners
Maude Ford Lee, Chair
Warren H. Newell, Vice Chairman
Karen T. Marcus
Carol A. Roberts
Mary McCarty
Burt Aaronson
Tony Masilotti
County Administrator
Robert Weisman
"An Equal Opportuniry
Affirmative Action Employer"
@ printed on recycled paper
y - -"<YIW!I; ....,.....:I-J 11-'
I~ rn @ I'":j n n r,: f"'
~ I? 1.1 '.' I.,. ".'
'J 1..:: . ' I, I , '", ~,
. Doc' l'~'"_._":~_.'. .'-'=.-';:.
I., In 11 MIlV." ~I: 2 "..-~.~
iIJUl__:'.:'
g - .
May 9, 2000
Dick Hudson, Senior Planner
Divison of Planning & Zoning
City of Boynton Beach
PO Box 310
Boynton Beach, FL 33425-0310
Dear Mr. Hudson:
This letter is in response to your correspondence of April 12, 2000
relative to the proposed change in land use designation for the 16 acre
Villa del Sol site to "Special High Density Residential. "
The Division of Emergency Management has not established or
documented a formal policy on development in designated evacuation
zones. Typically, we defer to the judgment of appropriate Zoning and
Planning officials to establish and enforce such policies.
Palm Beach County's Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
does not contain specific wording relative to the prohibition or
discouragement of development in evacuation areas.
However, page 4-13 of the Palm Beach County's "Unified Local
Mitigation Strategy," states that the County, through its Coastal
Management Element, has established the public policy of not
subsidizing new and expanded development in coastal areas. It further
states that it is the County's position that population concentrations be
directed away from known or predicted coastal high hazard areas, and it
discourages increases in population densities that negatively impact
hurricane evacuation times.
We are not aware of any designation of the proposed site as a high
hazard coastal area, nor do we have any specific information on what
impacts the proposed population densities would have on evacuation
clearance times.
We would clearly not favor any residential development in surge areas
that would present a threat to public safety or lead to repetitive property
loss claims. As best we can determine from the maps provided, it
appears the eastern half of the subject site is in, or borders on, a
Category 5 storm surge zone. The eastern most portion of the site
appears to be in a Category 3 surge zone.
Dick Hudson - Page 2 of 2
Should approval of the land use designation change be granted, we would hope that
developers, property managers, and/or residents would take appropriate steps to mitigate the
risks of hurricane force winds and surge associated with near coastal locations.
I hope these comments are of some assistance in your decision process.
Respectfully,
/.h~ /: .~
Wmfa~~irector
Palm Beach County Emergency Management
,,--'
s=-
o
.......
s=-
~
~
.......
~
s:
~
<
':1
::= ", ~~
rT\~~-
:.-h.- ~,,--
I' \._ . ~/2= -~'
lb-C - ,- - -- '" '.,,--' - ~
=~/-< \ - r-' '- ' , ,-~~ ::~-
jvilS~ ~~ ~,~ ~~C c:::~,:-
~""=--'! ~ -- ~~ . ~ -,~-= ~-' -:'"
~ Ilr <--------- \ '::..~ -- . ~""-.::::--~ ~ - --: ~ ;::: -'
- ~-~.. -~~~~ y\-=:::=::' "
_-r--..JL~ - ~ =----d ~-._ _ ..1:\ ~ ' ~ ~ '- . -r ~.
>~/ ~. ~r~'~
t;- .- ::::=-:-:=:..:: ;-'c~,~ 4~:- .,~ '. '
, " .j:.---'-' :(\\--::;:::"I"/--;'-;'~~_"~~' -~'----..::.~
/~,-.+. _.\--,,-1"'. ,.",,~~~' ,,:,~,~\'~;"'~~'" -~'
- --_.-.~', ~ .-' ~'/. . ~_.-- "" ~ .
( , /_ ~\ ..~..:Q~ =",' .vo~ ',r.--'~-' - - - '.
__ ....~../- . L~\.-~;---:Ac"J-j "-e;:::--i:;-"r\~-\ ,~-=--=
-:;~_'_. .,'._ . ,/. v'- ,-",,'='- :::::0-, '.' -:-~- c~ ,-0" S : ~':<f $, 3~WO:l \ /"-.~
.~ II ----- ~. -~ ~-', ,-- l ~,- 'OV ,.- i -' ",,> ,-. -'
. c, . ,.^""'~ .- '= - ~.. "C'>-' -
~ ,;. Z 3^" SS,."'''~~ ~ ,'...-.. ''--..... ~
. , ~': O'-~ " _.,~ . ,,(=' ,=-" .~" \~~'-
r .1' __ ...-\-r ,.' --/. - ----. ::<- I. .' /.'
";; ~..; , ' ,.- ' _-~. 0 "." ' , " ..- --' ';:" --.,,-~=,,=--
~ ~ " \.- - ~. -.-' . . ...' ~ ,I.~ . , ~ -~.-
~..... ~,j\..-' ~..., :;0;:-' - ~~ --- ' '~'. ~, './ () ::::: ~
< ~ \ ~ ___ ~ 0 'J ,I,', -- ~
1..,--1' ~ \ C=:' \ _'~ -/ - ,...-.=' co.' = --- .
T"T"" ,: \ \~L. ~ ' ;0" -=' -~' d~~-C' --' .-'
,'"'" "" '~, "'_ 0" ,./ - v' ~,f . .~
~ ~ .:-;', \ ~'''\''i, :c\ ' _--,-J"" '. ./__/ .'/ ""~-- ^ ~;:'. /~ C' ~ --
-:: _ r-' ::T\\:\~.-..J __I , ____ /' ~.,,- -"'-'-~ :'v~ . ,- ' " -~ ,,/- -'
~ ,.>--1 D-d' _ _- r' "",0<. <0 ., ./' '\ " 1-- ~
c .iJ'" '\ ':l . ,", ..' " 0 .i'J - "
~'~ -'-I -:::.\ \' ~~~\,,' \ ~ ~-:- i I "'Oi3:>N3~MV1 . ~' ~ ;\" G '. -."". /J'"
oJ.. , ,.~' - . .. .' <% .. ,>.
\ \ l -- : -' -- -~,- -.------:' :::: ,,,' <-,,;: --
'\CO,.'/? ' \. ,.. ' 2:'.:,. r; .:i- ~ '~:.." $ ::... .,::.:::--/-:... /~
'>"0 il \ ~ \~~~\-=--+J~,:3;-~. ~, ~~~. ("f: \- \,
~ \ _ _ ~_ \ . __' ~_ ___ ~ ~~.,~.:..-'",~, ~,-'-'i.~:~.
" " ~~ ::_" \ _. =-~:; "':,'.~~' '~--,' 0 ,,= ~., -~
_ _ \>.. 'i ~ -\' ~ ~ ~ ~, \ \:-, '::....J:,~,":\' "',.-:'
'i ~ ..", ~:.:: -:: ~ = c. . '- .- ,~ .::, \ >--,--='
: l"- \ ~' ,- \':\ /' " \ .' . ~' ~.!- ^~"l\1\W ,~,
~, .. ~ ,',.' ,"< '" ~ . I
\-- ,,-,...-I}'., I '_: '- \ .' '\\,'\ . -,' '. ~ ~ "
\'-~'~I\_\' ,- .','it -, ...,~ ' :=0-=' ," "~-~~
~/..",....' /'. ~--=,-wr" . -- ~., " , ---+ ----, ' -- ,
~\'~', . _ ~',\ L...--J \ I _ y' ..~.~~~=c.------ ' " ",.' .-
~~~ !("\ \ \,~ ___' ___ \~,~ \~ ~, - \ ~. I ~ -!/
..' \~. ,~ ~ v ,- ,,~. ,', -- . , - .
, --'r --; ,.L-- .. -'C, ' '0 -< -- " ' '
......\ ~'~I' \ .~I,~' .,1, -.<' "cO'
.. \ . .! ,'F~" 1\ __ _ ~.."" co" I--?':::-:=
.' " . \. ,~. . ~.. ~ --' ... --', -<-.; -,""
: ) \,'f'Z.'-....".."'-' ~,.' \ ::;~, ~\_. .~i~~' ..' '_~- ~,- - ,:~r,~
V ,''... '\ _ -' " --- ' \ \' ~----- i -'" ~ \,', -.:....~- ~~:' --- . \ \ ; .
\ n l"" ' ,J ,/_:J:\ ' ...,' .. '
/\, L"'-' \' I \ /..J.!' ,-c, _c, \ ' . .
\ i 1\ / I ' ~'" =-"", " .. \ "'::.
( d, .L- , ~ ,,!~\I~\ \ ~ ~~ ~'. '. ' . - ,~ ....----'
~ \. . ~ \.- \ \ -----. \ .--' "
~ / \D'~' -r'/ z. \
"- . " \ . \ ( . 0\ \ r-- \
! ~\ \ \. , \ /~\: 1
--::
-
""'
---
..~--
,--
941-334-E384 LA@JE PL~1HHING ;. 1'1GT
...,.-, ,no-> 1'= : 05
039 P01/16 ~Av ~~ ~
f'"
I
I
I
I
I
i
LaRue Planning & Management Services, Inc.
1375 Jackson Street, Suite 206
Fort Myen, Florida 3390 1
Phone: (941) 334-3366 . Fax: (941) 334-6384
e-maU: Jlaruel1 OS@aoLcom
--' .n _ -' .no -' -'- I
I
I
r;z;,t'J7m/~
Name:
Date:
From:
Dick Hudson
Fax:
Subject:
Pages:
561-742.6259
ORC Report
May 2.2000
Jim LaRue
16, including ~over !iheet
eomm~J1fr:
The attached has been sent to Rogt.>r' Wilburn, DCA. Please caJl if you have any Questions or
comments.
If you e.xp~i&f':ce problems With this tran6lTl143ion, kindly "':My OUT off,:;. upcn receipt.
~. ." - .-- - j
941-334-E384 LAguE PLANNING & MGT
0~9 P02/16 ~AY a2 '0e 15:05
Response to Objections, Recommendations And Comments Report
Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment
City of Boynton Beach
Amendment 00-1 ER
I. CODsilten(y with Chapter 163, F.8., and Rule 9J-5 & 9-11, F.A.C.
The City of Boynton Beach, in Palm Beach County, has proposed a
Comprehensive Plan Amendment, based on the City's Evaluation and Appraisal
Report (EAR) adopted on April I, 1997. The proposed Amendment consists of
updating an of the Elements of the City's Comprehensive Plan as anticipated in
the EAR. The proposed EAR~b8Sed Amendment includes four Future Land Use
Maps (FLUM) changes. Tlte City has alsc proposed a non~EAR related PLUM
change. The City proposed to adopt this Amendment in May of June of 2000. The
Department has identified the following objections to the proposed Amendment:
A. EAR-based Amendment
Transportation Element
Objection I. The Transportation Element does not include future transportation
maps identifying the major public transit trip generators and attractors
based upon the future hmd use map; and the projected peak hour levels of
service for transportation facilities for which level of service standards are
established.
Response: The MPO generated 2020 throughfare system and 2020 pedestrian
facilities are included as support documents. The Public Transit System
Map implicitly indicates the location of major public transit trip generators
and attractors at various terminals. The map will be expanded, however. to
explicitly indicate the trip generators and attractors based on the Future
Land Use Map. The projected peak hour level of service is contained in
the Evaluation and Appraisal Report as Map 2.9.
Objection 2. The Transportation Element support documentation indicated that
transit market share for Tri-County Rail and Palm-Tran, as well as
pedestrian and bicycle facilities, would have to increase in the City
through transportation demand management (TOM) strategies in order to
modify peak-hour travel demand. However, the City did not include a
policy in this Element establishing TDM programs.
RespoDse: An explicit TOM oriented policy to establish a transportation
management organization as an implementing vehicle for the TOM will be
added above and beyond what is implicitly indicated in Objective 2.7 and
2.8, pending the City's concurrence with the costs and Staff implication of
a TDM publiC/private partnership and responsibilities.
City of Boynton Beach. Florida
Rellponse to Objections. Recommendations, & Commenta Report
Amendment 00-1 ER
Date: May 2, 2000
Page 1 of S
941-334-E384 LAow~ PLHNHfHG &. MGT
o~g P03/16 ~HV 32 'oe 1=:06
Objection 3. Proposed Objective 2.4 of the Transportation Element states: The
City shall develop and maintain a safe, convenient. and energy efficient
muli'~modal transportation sySTem which 'rt-ilI meeT future as well as
curre.nl frans needs. The City has provided an inventory of existing
intennodal facilities. but not an analysis of the deficiencies or projected
needs. These data and analysis will assist the City in addressing the need
for additional terminals, connections, high occupancy vehicle lanes; and
pedestrian, bicycle, park-and-ride and other facilities based on land use
projections to facilitate effective implementation of this objective.
Response: The analysis presented within the ~AR is adequate and it will be
incorporated in the text and maps of the support documents by reference.
Additionally, transportation concurrency management map(s) will be
expanded to address the Department's concerns.
Comment. The transportation map series do not include the appropriate titles,
legend, map scale and the preparation or revision date. The inclusion of
this information will improve the usefulness of these maps in the City's
planning efforts and enhance citizen's understanding of these maps,
because the maps can be prop~ly referenced.
Response: The map series were intended to update and/or augment the maps
already in the EAR and not necessarily to substitute them. The maps
presented however, did and do contain appropriate titles and legends. Th,,"Y
will be expanded and imprllved upon, however, to adequately address the
Department's concerns.
Planning Timeframe
Comment. The City projected its population and public facility capacities and
needs to 2015 in the EAR. The proposed Comprehensive Plan EAR-based
Amendment and support data and analysis have been based on the 2015
timefrarne. However, the City did not include in the plan or on the FLUM
any planning timen-arne, either short-tenn, medium-term, or long-tenn, tOe
support the proposed goals, objectives and policies in the Comprehensive
Plan. We recommend the City should include at least two planning periods
in the Comprehensive Plan. one fo:- at least the first five-year period and
one for at least an overall ten-year period.
Response: The Transportation Element addresses appropriate planning
timeframes (Policy 2.2.1) for transportation improvements.
City of Boynton Beach, Florida
R~sponse to ObjecliolU, Recommendations, &. Conunents Report
Amendment 00- : ER
Date: May 2, 2000
Pag" 2 ofS
941-334-E384 L~~IE PLANNING & MGT
~~g P04/16 VAV 02 '0C lS:C6
B. ~on EAR-based Amendment
Future Land Use Map (FLt:M) Amendment (LUAR A199-005: Villa Del Sol)
Objection. The Amendment does not restrict development activities where such
activities do not protect human life by directing population concentrations
awa}' from known or predicted coastal high hazard areas. Additionally, the
proposed Amendment is internally inconsistent with Policy 1.21.1 of the
Future Land Use Element of the City's Comprehensive Plan which
requires the City to obtain written approvals from the Palm Beach County
Oh;ision of Emergency Management and the City of Boynton Beach Risk
Management Officer, "prior to approving any increase in residential
densities in the Hurricane Evacuation lone...if the proposed density
increase would result in an increase of 50 or more dwellings.1t The City
has not supported the proposed FLUM Amendment with such written
approvals. Moreover, the City has not demonstrated the consistency of the
proposed FLUM Amendment with Objective 7.6 of the Coastal
Management Element of its Comprehensive Plan, regarding the City's
commitment to maintain or reduce CWTent estimated hurricane evacuation
times if development increases in the coastal high-hazard area of the City.
The City did not provide analysis of the projected impact o-f anticipated
population density of the proposed additional 148 dwelling units and
potential evacuation needs of the population on hunicane evacuation
planning.
Response.: City staff made two errors in it::l review comments on the application
for amendment. The first was to reference the location of the amendment
as being a part of Map location #16 in Table 24 of the Coastal
Management Element. The referenced map location is on the east of U. s.
Highway I, while the subject parcel is on the west of that thoroughtare. In
an early draft of support documents for the Coastal Management Element,
the subject property was identitled as Map location # 17 and corresponding
policy directlOn in Table 24 provided setback requirements for
development of the site under 8 Special High Density Residential
designation. The map and policy references were removed from the final
version of the support documents when it was decided to recognize the
development order in place for the property in 1989 and maintain the
commercial land use designation on the site.
Staffs second error was to recommend that the proposed amendment
would be forwarded to the County EMD for review. This is required
when a site is located within the Hurricane High Hazard Zone and impacts
of the increased density reach thresholds established in the Land Cse
Element of the Comprehensive Plan. While the parcel is within the City's
adopted Coastal Planning Area. it is west of the line delineating the
Hurricane High Hazard Zone. It is staff's understanding that under Rule
9)-5.003(18), F.A.C., the coastal planning area does. not need to be
Cit)' of 80)11ton B each. Florida
Re~pon5e to Objecti<Jns, Recommendallon~. & Comments Report
Amendment 00..1 ER
Date: May 2. 2000
Page 3 of5
941-334-E384 L~JE PLANNING & MGT
n3g P05/16 MAv a2 '00 1~:07
cotenninous with the Coastal High Hazard Area so long as all of the
Coastal High Hazard Area is included within the planning area.
Emergency Support Function J 8 - PUBLIC SAFETY of the Palm Beach
County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan details the
geographic areas contained within each Trame Evacuation Zone for
hurricane evacuation. The boundaries for each zone are repeated from the
Treasure Coast Regional Hurricane Evacuation Study. Zones II, 12 and
13 encompass areas of the City of Bo)nton Beach; however, the zone in
closest proximity to the subject parcel is Zone 13. Its boundaries arc
described as, >48outh of Ocean Avenue, east of L'. 8. I. north of Gulf
Stream Golf Course. west of Atlantic Ocean." Evacuation Zone 13 is
classified as the Stonn Surge Vulnerable Zone tor all hurricanes. (See
Attachment A)
The subject parcel is located west of U.S. Highway 1, and therefore is not
within the Hurricane High Hazard area, defined in Rule 9J-5.003(17),
F.A.C. as "the evacuation zone for a Category 1 hurricane as established
in the regional hurricane evacuation study applicable to the local
government. "
The subject property is within Traffic Evacuati(ln Zone 43 which is not
listed even as a Stonn Surge Vulnerable Zone for Categories 4 and 5
hurricanes. It is presumed, therefore. t!'lat development of the parcel will
not impact the eVilcuation times or potential evacuation needs of the
population; nor will it impact the demand for hurricane shelter space in the
event of a Category 1 hurricane.
II. Consiitency with the State Comprehensive Plan
The proposed Amendment does not adequately address and further the following
goals and policies of the State Comprehensive Plan. Chapter 187, F.S.:
1. Goal (7) Public Safety. Policy 25. regarding local governments adopting
plans and policies to protect public and private property and human lives
from the effects of natural disasters.
Response: Evacuation routes, as shown. addresses the concerns contained with
this Goal as it relates to transportation.
2. Goal (20) Transportation. Policies 10 & 15, regarding promotion of ride
sharing by public and private sector employees; and promotion of
effective coordination among various modes of transportation in urban
areas to assist urban development and redevelopment efforts.
Response: An explkit TDM oriented policy to establish a transport2tion
management organization as an implementing vehicle tor the TDM will be
added above and beyond what is implicitly indicated in Objective 2.7 and
City of80)'l1ton Beach, Florida
Re!lponse to Objectionii. Recommendations, &. Comments Report
Amendment 00-1 ER
Date: May 2. 2000
Page 4 of5
'341-334-6384 Lp;::lIlE PLANNING 8. MGT
039 P06/16 "jAY iJ2 '00 15:08
2.8, pending the City's concurrence with the costs and Staff implication of
a TD~ public/private partnership and responsibilities.
City of Boynton Beach. Florida
Response to Objectionll, Recommendations, & Comments Report
Amendment 00-1 ER
Date: May 2, 2000
Page 5 of 5
941- 334-638..\ ~P JE PLAt~N 1 t1G ;. 1'1GT
r~3 P07/16 ~AY 32 '0C 15:08
---...
'.. .
tf1POLUXll RP
'I :'
t ,
V i~i
I~j
r~-J if I
~_..J1
tol
-1 i!
I i
. I
!..
AtTACHMENT A
\
\
l~ \ J
1811
l~ .
)~ l \ I
I 'e l
. I It I
~I
. 1$ .
I I
1 .
. '1 I
(, 1
. \ I
I /
I II ~
. 1 ~
I /1 c.."
~
/1\ ~
. \ ~
II ~
I I \ ~
'. . I ....
.~.._~~ J i"
.:~ I
."" ,:,' I I
~~ . i . I
/! ~ I II
'I ~ i
I! I
j f {
I' '
, : I
~ I '
J f I
I
I
J.,
i---- I
---~ ~
i I:
II
I
,
h
.
I
,
'"
~
~
w
~
... 1ti0000~l;;1(, AD
- ~
/ -/1
I~
at
. ~,..--
~
~
2!l "'If.
,
L..._.. -,
I
,
,
;J
I5DYllTlIll ID 1
~-,
Im"OH: ! ~
8L~
n A~..
--~
il-...---------J
a
I! I'
lilt
!Il
~ L--....._..__.....'"'!..~_.
:. f v E "t l:
i
\~~
I N. r.s.
---- ern i.l,(lTS
~ "'~!CAI4!O EVACUATION ZCHC:
BOYNTON BEACH COASTAL MANAGEMENT ELEMENT
~lGjAE 19 - HJA~ICANF. EV~CU~TICN ZCNE
MAlTEA lH. KELLER JR.. INC.
c()/1$uJtirJ OIlinerrs i I'JlYVlrs
(V4) STrin9$. FJarill4
--'- --~---- .----.-.--
- ___________ ___ ____--------- _0-_- ____~~_
941-334-6384 L~!E PLANNING ~ MGT
~9 P08/16 ~AY 02'02 1=:09
Goal 1
Objective 2.1
Polil.")' 2. t.l
Policy 2.1.2
City of Boynton Beach
Traffic Cir~ul8ti6n Transportation Element
Goal~ Objectives, and Policies
To develop and maintain a .fame eireuJetiafl transportation system which will
serve the transportation needs of all sectors of the City of Boynton Beach in a
safe, efficient, cost effective, and aesthetically pleasing manner.
S..h,eqlleftt to plan ftdoptien tTbe City sball continue to provide a
transportation network based on the following minimum level of sen:ice
standards:
.
Level of Servil:e "C" or better under dail)' and peak hour conditions
on all unspecified City and collector highway facUlties.
.
Level of Service ~~C" for average daily and Level 9 of S~ "0" for
daily peak season and year-round peak bour conditions on all non.
specified arterial facilities.
.
Ltwel of Senke "D" for year:round daily and peak hour conditions
on Seac:rest Boulevard south of SE 23rd Avenu~ US I between
Boynton Beach Boulevard and Woolbright Road, 1-95 through the
City, BoyntOD Beach Boulevard from Old Boynton Road to (.95, NW
22nd Avenue between Congress Avenue and 1-95, Congress Avenue
between Boynton Beach Boulevard and NW 22nd Avenue and
Boynton Beach Boule\'ard east of 1.95.
.
Level of Service "Maintain" for all (adUties where Level ef Serviee
st.adereU 1-95 from Boynton Beach Boulevard to W Gotbright Road,
Boynton Beach Boulevard from Old 80)"ntoo Road to 1-95, Congress
Avenue from Boynton Beach Boulevard to the south City limits and
Hypoluxo Road' ealt of 1-95 h......e beea exceeded.
T"e City shell adept the LOS stftftdafEls set ffirtfl eheve fer thoretlghteres in
tfte..city. lfte3e !tanElar83 3"&11 be evaluated aftet- 1992. bttt prier ta 1995, with
regara to their e6ntifttlM t:l1te or fftooifieatiaR thrat:lgA the yeM' 2999. The City
shall ensure. thrOUGh the implementation of the adopted Concurrencv
Management Ordinance. that development orders shall only be approved
concurrent with provisions of public transDOrtation facilities needed to
maintain the minimum level of service adopted by the City.
The City shall coordinate with Florida Department of G_ Transportation, the
Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council, and Palm Beach County regarding
the designation of "Special Transportation Areas" for those roads with
operational standards less than Level ofGService "D".
2-1
Revise: May 2,2000
'fMftie Ciretllati6fl ~I.:tA!i.!m.Elemcnt
City of Boynton Beach
EAR-bc1SCd Comprehensive Plan
Amendments
941 - 334-E384 U:= iE PLANi'1 I NG 2- t'lGT
~g P09/16 ~HY 82 'OC 1=:09
Policy 2. \.3
Peiiey 2.1.4
Policy 2.1.~
Policy 2.1.6~
Objective 2.2
Policy 2.2.1
Policy 2.2.2.
Polity ~.2.3.
The City shall continue to annually identify Backlogged and Constrained
facilities and roadways operating below their adopted Level of Service.
Through the continued monitoring of area-wide traffic conditions, and
requirements for development project traffic studies, highway improvements
and phased traffic impacts, the City shall only approve additional development
projects which would "Maintain" operating conditions on Backlogged and
Constrained facilities and not cause adopted level of service standards to be
exeeeded deteriorate on other roadwavs.
-
The City shall adept the Urban Tfllft3p6rtati6ft Plennittg System (UTPE) dail,.
ftftell'eak n6\:Jp' 3efYiee .elWMs b~oo on Ii 9Q(, peak "GltT. If ifteElftsiskfteiCl3
betv, een the eit" and Ceunty adopted L~'el of Serviee stwuiW'ds arise,
de....elepm!l'It deei3l~ns will be meet': in eoft3t1heii~l'I with Count)" PIOflniftg and
Engifteering staff.
8tthS6qtteftt te rIM adeptioft. tlhe City shall petition Palm Beach County for
the necessary exceptions to the Palm Beach Countywide Traffic Performunce
Standards Ordinance (as adopted on June 16. 1992 and <\$ revised in August
1995), as soon as it becomes p()ssible/necess~ to request such exceptions.
The City shall continue the enforcement of the ac!Qpted Bttb3equent te the
lldel'tieft af the County-wide Traffic Performance Standards Ordinance, and
l'tlquin; conformance to the Level of Servi~ Standards set forth in that
ordinance, except where reasonable exceptions have been approved in
accordance with that ordinance and do not exceed the Level of Service
Standards set forth in Objective 2.1.
The City sball continue to implement the future Trame Ciretllati61l
Transportalion Plan on a prlorit)' basis and shall coordinate same with
the City's Future Land Use Plan.
Measure: Development of road improvement priority Ustlng, miles of
roadway "constructed and other improvements, and
maintenance of adopted Level of GService standards.
The City shall continue to establish and maintain a."'\ updated prioritized listing
of short term (+9%2005), mid-term (2010), and long term (~2020)
transportation improvements for use by the City.
The City shall continue to lobby Palm Beach County and the County
Metropolitan Plannin~ Organization for the timely implementation of all
programmed road improvements as identified in the City's :Prattle Cireulatioft
}'ransportation Element.
roo City shall t8ke 1':11 lleee~3ftfy aetieft3, iftelttdinl dev'elopet' eofttf;e\ttiel'ls
ltfte lobbying Palm Beeefl C6'tint, llnd the CelSnty MFG, to prow/ide far the 6
2-2
Revise: May 2, 2000
+tame CiretJIllti6ft TratuiDortatii1T1_Elcment
City of Bo)'nton Beach
EAR-ba!led Comprehensive Plan
Amendments
Policy 2.2.4~
Policy 2.2.~
Poliey 2.2.6
P6lic:y 2.2.7
P61ifJY 2.2.8
Poliey 2.2.9
Objective 2.3
Policy 2.3.1
Objec:tive 2.4
941-334-E384 L~UE PLANNING 8. r'lGT
~9 Pl0V16 YAY a2 '00 15:10
hmjn~ af Congress Avel'ltte between Boyt'\tol'l Beaeh H6tllc"nm:l and NW 22nd
.\vel'lue 6] 1995.
The City shall continue to coordinate with Palm Beach County and the County
Metropolitan PlanninS!: Organization in order to attempt to secure County
and/or state funding of planned, but unprogrammed road improvements as
identified in the City's Transportation Element.
The City, lin conjunction with the annual update of the City's Capital
hnprovement Program, the Cit) shall eel'lsider continue making available
supplemental funding necessary to accele:ate unfunded or otherwise lagging
TOad improvements.
The City sftftll salieH the C611rft} '3 expenditure sf impllet fees esl1eetetf il'l. ltle
adjaeent ufliReerperetetl area 61"1 hi~..a) faeilities whieh best 6efl.efit the Oi1y
afBo)'fttsfl Deaeh.
The City sht!lI oo6J'Elrate "JJ'ith eM sttflp~rt the flerida Deparfft'\eftt 6f
Tren~erta~i6ft 88ft !:he Palm Beaes ~1etI8l'alitan Pltmniftg Orgftftizt\tioft Oft
implcft'lClnt'il'l.g the extCftsis!'l of Boyntoft Beaeh B6tlle.ard aerOS3 tke
(ffirae6a91al \\'atel'way.
The City shall eeoperate wif:h ana 31:tppert efforts fa implemeflt the
eenstrueti6ft of the NW 22f\ft Annt:le 18teKhat\~e ..ith I 95.
The City snell ooererate witt Delre)' Heee}, Mia Stlpperl effart3 to extend 8.
36th /..Cftlll" (Odlfstream Batde'laffi) bet'Nttn g'",;il"lterl Avenue ftfld 8eaereat
BeuieYllr6.
Within three years of Plan adoption, neighborhood circulation patterns
$hall be eefttiBtieusly monitored to assess local operating conditions and
address the need Cor any capacity or traffic calmlDetsafety-related road
improvements on an as Deeded basis.
Measure: Num~r of ease studies performed; Number of safety related
improvements implemented.
The City shall eeveiep perfonn a traffic count prell"ttm erientoo to and special
traffic studies for local streets and collector roadways t6 augment County and
regienal progt'ftft'lson an as needed basis.
The Cit). !haU pr8l'ide for I slk, eOBvenieat and cffidtllt metsMe8 allft
nOll l'Ilsterilie&l tran.portatieft system.
2-3
Reviije: May 2, 2000
'rt'fla1.e1 Cil~ltlllfi6" Tl'lIlIllDortation Elemenl
City of Boynton Be3.::h
EAR-based Comprehensive Plan
Allleodmentll
Polioy 2.4.1
Po-tiey 2.4.2
Policy 2.4.31
Policy 2.4.4~
Policy 2.4.5J
Policy 2.4.64
Policy 2.4.:;'~
Policy 2.4.82
941- 334-E384 LA-.~E PlAH~j I NG 8. MGT
039 Pit.d6 MAV 02 '012 1::: 18
Measure--#; &f aui.denttlll tltt tit).The City shall develop and maintain 8
safe. convenient. and enerey efficient multi-modal transportation system
whicb will meet future as well as current transportation needs.
Measure: Number of SOV auto trips converted to transit trips as
estimated bv peak hour load factor.
Measure: Number of crashes alolla tarweted corridors involvine
automobiles. pedestrians. and bicycles.
The Cit) 's petiee aepartment shall e6ftti8ue {lie high profile enfereemefit of all
vchieulttr attd "6ft ',..ehiettlflf an v ing la\'l3.
The Cj.I~B pettee department ,:,kalll',utintain tl date ba3e 6f area tead'.vay Md
aeeiaeat e6ooiti6ns.
The City's engineering and police department shall continue to investigate
local high eeeiseftt crash locations to identify potential methods of minimizing
or eliminating future problems (through Palm Beach County's CommWlity
Traffic Safety Team),
The City shall continue to support the construction of sidewalks andlor
designated roadside bikeways in all land development r~lations and road
imprG\iement projects which shall include ample signage and pedestrian
signalization provisions to designate and promote routes.
The City shall continue to require unobstructed sight lines and non-obtrusive
landscape plantings along medians and at development driveway/street
locations. Planting within and alonl:{ roadway rights-otway should emphasize
the use of native vegetation.
At a minil'ftll:l'!'\. t!he City. at a minimum, shall continue to program and
budget funds for roadway maintenance of fet-City maintained roads ~
fltnd5-at least at the existing levels.
Sueseqtlent te P!ftft a6eptien, ffleeify tfte lane develepmeftt The City shalll QY
the year 2002, modify and enforce regulations to include access manaSo!;ement
criteria such as establishing minimum spacing between ef.driveways (acce:;s
points) and median ooenings. as well as, requirements for exclusive turn lanes
and intersection signalization (warrants per the Manual of Uniform Traffic
Control Devices).
J The City shall implement the recommended bikeway classification system
(bike lanes. bike paths. and bike routes) within the City, as stated in the
Trame Cireulatian Ele't1'\entPalm Beach Count v Bikeway Plan. aud assess the
adequacv of the svstem components in meeting the City's demands and needs.
City ofBoyntoll Beach
EAR-biised Comprehensive Plan
Amendments
2-4
Reville:; May 2, 2000
TfUfhll Cif~\Illttiefl Transoort8tion Element
941-334-6384 LA2UE PLANNING ~ MGT
~9 P12/16 ~AY a2 '0e 15::1
Objective 2.5
Policy 2.5.1
Policy 2.5.2
Policy 2.5.3
Policy 2.5 4
Objective 2.6
Policy 2.6.1
Exp.lore aU lelaUJI defensible alternatives foJ' protection of public riaht-
of-wav W",'hen reviewing development proposals, provide for tbe
protection of existing and future right-of-way from building
encrolchment._, ..lprovlde for minima! negative impacts associated with
driveway locations, and provide for safe and efficient on-site traffic
circulation and parkingt including provisions for shared driveways.
shared pBrkinw. and handicapped users,
Measure: Number of development projects permitted subsequent to
performance review; '''Imber of handie.pped ,_kinK IIpaea
pr~n illell,
The City shall continue: to support State a.nd/or County requirements, or more
restrictive local criteria, for minimum access point spacing, cross access
casements or other access controls associated with engineering and
development review procedures.
8ubseqtleftf fa riM a66pti6ft, (!:he City shall continue to require in the land
devt:lopment re~latio!ls the provision of handicapped parking facilities when
reviewing development proposals.
SOOSeE(Ne:ftt to Plan atleptiea. "'-edify the hma 6ef.ole-pmeftt The City shall
modifv and enforce regulations to require the conveyance of right-of-way or
easements consistent with the City's.. Tmffie Ciretlleti6fl Elel'nem, the Palm
Beach County Thoroughtares Plan and with the pla.11S of the Florida
Department ofTranspol1ation and/or Palm Beach County when corridor right-
of-way maps are filed with the Palm Beach COLU1ty Official Records Division.
Sl:lbsequeftt to PIM adoptiafl. review the lime ae". d6pment repletions an.d
",atiit; if fleee938l) to J'f6~de safe Ma effieieet eft 3ite eiraulatien Itfta
5t!ftieient 61'1 3ite perkin!; fer motorized llfld ftOft metor1zea vehieles.The City
shall review and modify regulations to provide safe and efficient on-site
circulation and parking for all vehicles if subsequent analvsis determines that
on-site desi~l produces unsafe conditions~~
The City shan provide for prIvate sector responsibility to implement
project related transportation improvements.
Measure: Amount of private sedor hJghway improvements,
S1:l~seqOCftt to Pian adol'tioft, The: City shall continue to modify and e.!1force
the land de'/elvpmfftl regulations te ~6ftfiftue to require a tratlic impact
analysis for any development project anticipated to generate 3,000 200_or
more additional vehicle trips per day or 250 trips in the AM Ot PM peak hour.
2-5
Revise: May 2,2000
T~ Ciretllatiefl Transportation Element
City of Boynton Beach
EAR-based Comprehensive: Plan
Amendments
Policy 2.6.2
~li",.i 2.6.3
Objective 2.7
Policy 2.7. I
Polley 2.7.2
Po!iQ2.7.3:
Polky 2.iA
941 - ::34-(::384 L;::@..!E PLm IN I NG ~< ~IGT
839 P13/16 ~AV a2'0e 1=::2
SttMeqtlCftt to rIM aitoplioft, tIhe City shall continue to require improvement
of roadways to mitigate the impacts of development as a condition of
development approval. The City shall, wherever feasible, require the
construction of transportation impw,,'ements in lieu of impact fee
contributions.
8ub~eqttent lei Plan adeptiefl, ~e City shaH eefttifttl6 ta feql:lire fe3ef\ atiOft
and/or eOlwt::lftftee {'If right of way e6ft~j3tet\t with tht: City's Tl'Rffie
~ulatie" PI8fl. 61 the Cottat)' Thof'6t1ghfIl!'e3 Phm as a part of the review of
de..elepmeftt plans.
In order to maximize highway system performance, the City sball support
alternative Transportation S="'fltm~ Demand Mauagement (TSM)
strategies wherever feasible bt lieu of, or in ~onJunc:tion with, more
expensive supply ride capital improvements.
Mea~ure: Number of local =JSM-TransportatioJl Demand Manaaement
Improvements.
The City shall promote local, or county and state (Florida 90epartment Gof
:J:Transportation, Palm_Beach County) fundmg for traffic operations
improvements with particular emphasis on develop~ roadways s~ch as US I.
or pt()jected overcapacity ar!eri~l Or col!ectc.r roadways such as Congress
Avenue and arteriel ur collector segments adjacent to 1-95. as well a~
acqu:sition of Florida East Coast Rail~ol:lCl for use as commuter rail and rail
with trail faciliti~9.
If JlJeOC38ftry, ((he City shaH. if necessary. consider capacity improvements to
US l and Boynton Beach Boulevard through restriping of the existing
pavement: this effort shali be predicated ml a finding of minimal negative
impacts regardir.g the loss of on.street parking-either through lack of demand
or by replacement with off-street parking in other areas.
Transportation Demand Mana~ement: The City shall suPport the
establishment of a Transportatior. Demand Management program by 2003 as ,
part of a congestion avoidance strategy to reduce the nuplber of single
occupant vehicJ~s during pe~ traffic periods. either by trip reductions or by
~ccommodating existinill trir~ in fewer vehicles (e.~. trip reclection ordinance),
0:" by moving $('me trips before or after the most congested periods.
The City shall promote Transportation Demand ~1aJ}aaement strate2ies such
as car pooling. transit.... and parking priorities to alleviate peak hour and/or peak
season traffic congestion through public/private partnerships (e.g.
Transportation Management Associations a.1d/oT Parking Management
Associ a tions ).
Cny cfBoymon B~ach
EAR.balled Comprehensive Plan
Amc:1drnent~
2-6
Rev\se: May 2, 20CO
Tfilt'fi8 Ctlllllllllien ll:AJ!~..!1~Elemenf.
ObJecth.e 2.8
Policy 2.8.1
Policy 2.8.2
Polic....y 2.8.3
Policy 2.8.4
Objective 2.9
Policy 2.9.1
Policy 2.9.2
Policy 2.9.3
Policy 2.9.4
941-334-E384 LA9UE PlANNING & MGT
939 P14/16 ~AY 32 'oe 1=::2
The City shall strive to reduce overaJl energy consumption due to
transportadon via re~)atory measures such liS trip reduction ordinances
and incentives.
Measures:Decrease In average vehicle delay on City roadways; Increase
in auto occupaac)' or car pool users.
Suhseqt:.leftt to Plan a6aptiml, tIhe City shall continue to coordinate with
Florida Department eof Transportation and Palm Beach County regarding
computerized signalization and -optimal signal timing 8.lld progression.
Saeseql:leftt te Plafl adoption. tIhe City shall continually support local
promotion and coordination in implementing Countywide ridesharing etTorts.
The City shall continue to support the Tl'i C.5tt.nty C6lftPfttlter rail 1ri-Rail
project and the local rail stop adjacent to NW 22 Avenue and 1-95. and
support the resolution and/or expansion of the Tn-Rail to Florida East Coast
Railroad upon feasibility of such.
The City shall continue to support the high speed rail transportation concept
and participate in the 6fl1oirt3 review of rail proposals as these relate to local
comprehensive planning effo11s and land use or envirorunental impact!
(des,pite the state's rec~t q~cision to not fund this program),
The City shall ~ontinue to provide toea} transportation facUlties that are
visually and functionally pleasing and that conform to City guidelines.
Measure-Increase in facilities which meet the criteria below.
Stle3ectu~ftt to Plan a60ptioll, tIhe City shall continue to institute
transportation facility design standards, such as roadway signage and lighting,
fur the entire City or designated subdistricts.
The City. lin conjunction with the recommendations from the Boynton Beach
Beuh:vard eemeer eceirn study 20/20 Redevelopment Master Plan, the eity
shall develop "gateway" treatments at major cross street locations and facility
entrances to the City, as well as. older neiiZhborhoods.
Sttblltqtte1\t to PIIIP1 e6ep!1on, tIhe City shall continue to program and budget i
funds for streetscape beautification in public rights-of-way. Plantings within
and along roadway rights-of-way should emphasize the use of native
vegetation.
Sueseq,uet\t to Plan a86l'tieR. tIhe City shall continue to support or. where
appropriate. require funding for landscaping and irrigation in transportation
projects and for perimeter masonry and/or vegetation screening along all
2-7
Revi~e: May 2, 2000
Trame ClftlldatioB TranSDortation Element
City of Boynton Beach
EAR-based Comprehensive Phm
Amendments
'341-334-E384 L~E PLA~~NING 3. MGT
a39 P15/16 ~Av 02 '08 15::3
plivate circulation anc parking areas. Plantings within and along roadway
rights-of-way should emphasize the use of native vegetation.
Policy 2.9.5 The City shall continue to enforce local and state laws prohibiting dumping or
littering in public ri8ht-of~way.
Policy 2.9.6 The City shaH implement recommendations related to the roadway
improvements and beautification as recomP.1ended pursu~'1t to the Boynton
Beach 20/20 Redevelppment Master Plan.
Objective 2.10 The Ci.,. ,dutY eeordinate with the pl.. alia pro\VaBlJ afthe Palm Bueh
C8t11lt)1 MckepeUtaft Plaltltillg Orga"iEali81l (MPO), Palm Bellell County
lInel the Flerida BeJl8rtMtllt of Tr8l1iiperttltien's Fh<c Year
TrallJp&rt8UOD Platt. The Ci~ shall continue to participate in tbe Palm
Beach County MetropoJJtaQ. Plan.inK Oreanization'5 lone rllD2e nlanllina
pr~els and utilize the relu'tine plans to update the City's
TransportatioD Element as avproprfate.
Policy 2.10 I Subsequent t6 rIM 8d~tia", The City shall develop procedures to annually
provide the Palm Beach County Metropolitan Planning OrlZanization with a
priori:ized listing of needed roadway and intersection improvements for
inclusion into the Metropolitan Planning Organization Five:-Year
Transportation Improvement Program.
Pobc)' 2.10.2 Subsequt'flt te Plan adeptien, The Citv shall continue to participate in the
Palm Beach County Technical Coordinating Committee.
Policy 2.10.3 Th~ Citv shall continue to Mmaintain active and po~itive relationships with
the Florida Department of Transportation, Palm Beach County, adjacent
municipalities, and other relevant public and private entities in order to
support and engage in cooperative funding of transpor.ation improvements.
Objective 2.11 S.h8e~llf)ftt te Plan a.plioll, The City shan concluue to asailt CeTrall
Palm Tran in providing efficient maSi transit services balled on existing
and future trip gellerators and attraetors and also provide lotal mass
transit road and terminal areas which are safe for tran8it users.
Policy 2.11.1 The City shall S~upport the transit shelter and terminal development programs
of CeTranPalm Tran. the proposed High Speed Rail Project and of the ffi-
Cetlflty CommutCf Tn-Rail Authority.
PoJ:cy 2.11.2 SHesaJHent to Pl8fl a66I'tian, The Cit) shall continue to modify and enforce
1MB de'.cleprner!t regulations to encourage the provision of transit related
shelters in major land development projects.
City of Boynton Beach
EAR.ba~ed Comprehensive Piau
Amendment8
2-8
ReVISe May 2.2000
T mffie Cil clilllli"ft Tr:mspcrtation Element
'341- 334-6384 LA51UE PLA!'lN I NG 8. MGT
039 P16/16 MAY 02 '00 15:13
Policy 2.11.3
TIle Plltftftiftg De,artlne!\t will esta~lisk preeedtifes Stibseqtleftt te Pla:rt
aaeptiell thet fletify the CaTr8J\ ef fte'W de~;e16l'"\efit5 in the City that ere
majel' trip geftel'6tef3 Iln6 attfaeters.Reserved.
Policy 2.11.4
The City will continue to assist Canan Palm Tran in route selection and
publicity by reviewing and commenting on proposed route revisions and
providing space at City offices for esTral! Palm Tr8Jl schedule information.
City ofBoyntCl6 Beach
EAR-based Comprehensive Plan
Amendments
2-9
Revtse: May 2. 2000
Tflltfie CireulMieft Iaollp.ortation Element
Facsimile
TRANSMITTAL
CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH
100 E. BOYNTON BEACH BOULEVARD
P.O. BOX 310
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA 33425-0310
FAX: (561) 742-6259
PLANNING AND ZONING DIVISION
to:
fax #:
date:
from:
re:
Bradlev Miller, AICP
./
561-272-1042
April 19, 2000
Dick Hudson
Villa del Sol
pages:
.2.-, including cover sheet.
Attached you "vill find 6 pages from the FAC Rule governing plan amendments. In
essence, the City has 120 days, from receipt of the ORC report to adopt its EAR
amendments, and 10 working days to forward those amendments to DCA. Upon
receipt of the complete amendment package, DCA has 45 calendar days to issue its
Compliance/Non-compliance finding. Any challenge to the decision must be filed
within 21 days after the finding, or the amendment is final.
Planning and Zoning Division
City of Boynton Beach
Boynton Beach. Florida 33425
742-6260
Fax: 742-6259
9J11.011 Florida Administrative Code
Page 1 of3
9J-l1.011 Local Government Adoption of the Comprehensive Plan or Plan Amendment and
Submittal for the Compliance Review.
(1) In the case of a compliance agreement comprehensive plan amendment the procedures in Rule 9J-
11.0131, Florida Administrative Code, shall be followed.
(2) In the case of a small scale development plan amendment the local government may follow the
procedures in Rule 9J-l1.015, Florida Administrative Code.
(3) In the case of a comprehensive plan submitted pursuant to Subsection 163.3167(2), Florida
~ Statutes, the local government shall have 120 calendar days to adopt, or adopt with changes, the
proposed comprehensive plan after the receipt ofthe objections, recommendations and comments
report from the Department pursuant to Subsection 163.3184(7), Florida Statutes. In the case ofa
proposed amendment submitted pursuant to Section 163.3187, Florida Statutes, the local government
has 60 calendar days to adopt, adopt with changes, or not adopt the proposed amendment after receipt
of the objections, recommendations and comments report from the Department pursuant to
Subsection 163.3184(7), Florida Statutes. In the case of a plan amendment submitted pursuant to
Section 163.3191, Florida Statutes, the local government shall have 120 calendar days to adopt, adopt
with changes, or not adopt the proposed amendment after receipt of the objections, recommendations
and comments report from the Department pursuant to Subsection 163.3184(7), Florida Statutes.
(4) Public hearings for adoption of plan amendments related to developments of regional impact or a
proposed change to a development of regional impact may not be held sooner than 30 days from
receipt of the response from the Department pursuant to Subsection 380.06(6)(b)5., Florida Statutes.
The local government must consider adoption of a plan amendment related to developments of
regional impact and applications for developments of regional impacts at the same hearing; however,
the local government must take action separately on the application for development approval or the
proposed change to the development of regional impact and on the plan amendments.
.> (5) Within ten working days after adoption, the local government shall submit a transmittal letter
signed by the chief elected official or the person designated by the local government, which
designates the newspaper, meeting the size and circulation requirements of Subsection 163.3184(15)
(c), Florida Statutes, in which the Department should publish the required Notice of Intent pursuant
to Subsection 163 .3184(8)(b), Florida Statutes, and enclose three copies of the adopted
comprehensive plan and the data and analysis or in the case of adopted amendment(s), three copies of
the adopted amendment(s) and the data and analysis in strike through and underline format or similar
easily identifiable format identifying the new text that has been adopted, indicating the adoption
ordinance number, effective date and plan amendment number on each page, and in the case of a
future land use map plan amendment, three copies of the adopted future land use map reflecting the
changes made when adopted, and a copy of the executed ordinance adopting the comprehensive plan
or amendment(s) to the Department. Each adopted plan amendment must be supported by data and
analysis in accordance with Rule 9J-5.005(2), Florida Administrative Code. Ifthe original plan data
and analysis or the data and analysis of a previous amendment or data and analysis submitted with
the material transmitted pursuant to Rules 9J-l1.004(2)(c), 9J-11.006(1)(b) or 9J-l1.007, Florida
Administrative Code, support the amendment, no additional data and analysis is required to be
submitted to the Department unless the previously submitted data is no longer the best available
existing data. The newly submitted data and analysis must reflect the best data available at the time
the adopted amendment is submitted to the Department. If a local government relies on original plan
data and analysis or the data and analysis of a previous amendment to support an amendment, it shall
provide to the Department, at the time of the adopted submittal, a reference to the specific portions of
the previously submitted data and analysis on which the local government relies to support the
amendment. This material shall be sent directly to the Florida Department of Community Affairs,
Division of Resource Planning and Management, Plan Processing Team. In addition, the local
governing body shall transmit a copy of the adopted amendment and the data and analysis or
reference the existing data and analysis to the appropriate regional planning council. The local
government shall also transmit this material to review agencies listed in Rule 9J-l1.009(8), Florida
http://www.dca.state.fl.us/fdcp/DCP/Resources/Legislation/9Jll/9jll_0ll.htm
04/1912000
9111.011 Florida Administrative Code
Page 2 of3
Administrative Code, and local governments or any other interested parties that have filed a written
request with the governing body for a copy of the plan or amendment. The local government must
ensure that the review agencies copy of the adopted plan remain complete by also transmitting
copies of each subsequently adopted amendment and related documents to the review agencies at the
time of each adoption. The transmittal letter to the Department shall certify that the adopted
amendment, including the data and analysis have been sent to each of the above entities, as
appropriate. In addition the following items shall be submitted with the adopted comprehensive plan
or amendment:
(a) A listing of additional changes made in the adopted plan or amendment which were not
previously reviewed by the Department. This listing shall include the identification of the specific
portions that were changed with reference to appropriate pages. If possible, new text in the plan
should be underlined and items deleted should be struck through.
(b) A listing of findings ofthe local governing body, if any, which were not included in the ordinance
and which provided the basis of the adoption of a proposed plan or plan amendment or the
determination not to adopt the proposed plan amendment.
(c) A statement indicating the relationship of the additional changes not previously reviewed by the
Department to the objections, recommendations, and comments report from the Department.
(d) A listing of proposed amendments previously reviewed by the Department in the current cycle of
amendments which were not adopted by the local government.
(e) The local government shall submit copies ofthe comprehensive plan pages that contain the newly
adopted comprehensive plan amendments and are to replace the existing comprehensive plan pages in
a manner that will update the plan and incorporates all plan amendments. To avoid reprinting all
pages in the plan, it is permissible to number pages that contain additions or deletions to be inserted
in the plan with the appropriate page number followed by decimals or some other equivalent
subnumbering system. These pages shall include the amendment ordinance number and adoption
date.
(f) A new cumulative table of contents that includes all comprehensive plan amendments shall be
submitted with each plan amendment package, and it shall indicate the revision date and ordinance
numbers. The table of contents page(s) shall include the most recent amendment date.
(g) Map amendments shall be submitted on maps that indicate the ordinance number and date of each
amendment update. Also it is not mandatory that completely reprinted future conditions maps be
provided unless major, jurisdiction-wide changes are made. Appropriately labeled and cross-
referenced insert maps may be acceptable.
(6) In the case of a comprehensive plan or amendment submitted pursuant to Subsection 163.3167(3),
Florida Statutes, the provisions of Section 163.3181, Florida Statutes, shall apply to the regional
planning council as if it were the local governing body, except that the regional planning council
shall submit a copy of the rule adopting the comprehensive plan, element or amendment.
(7) In the case where the local government makes the determination not to adopt a proposed plan
amendment, a letter must be sent to the Department within five working days to inform the
Department of this decision. This letter shall be sent to the Florida Department of Community
Affairs, Division of Resource Planning and Management, Plan Processing Team.
(8) In the case where the local government adopts corrections, updates and modifications of the
capital improvements element concerning costs, revenue sources, acceptance of facilities or facility
construction dates pursuant to Subsection 163.3177(3)(b), Florida Statutes, a copy ofthe executed
ordinance shall be submitted to the Department within ten working days after adoption. If a local
government adopts corrections, updates, or modifications of current costs in other elements which
were set out as part of the comprehensive plan, a copy of the executed ordinance shall be submitted to
http://www.dca.state.fl.us/fdcpIDCP/Resources/Legislation/9111/9jI1_0l1.htm
04/19/2000
9 J 11. 0 11 Florida Administrative Code
Page 3 of3
the Department within ten working days after adoption. Copies of the referenced executed ordinances
in this section of Rule 9J-l1.0 11, Florida Administrative Code, shall be sent to the Florida
Department of Community Affairs, Division of Resource Planning and Management, Plan Processing
Team and will not be subject to a compliance review.
:> (9) Adopted plan amendments to plans which have been found to be "in compliance," as that term is
defined in Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes, shall not become effective until the Department issues
a final order determining the adopted amendment to be "in compliance," or until the Administration
Commission issues a final order determining the adopted amendment to be in compliance in
accordance with Subsection 163 .3184( I 0), Florida Statutes. The Department's notice of intent to find
an amendment in compliance shall become an issued final order determining the adopted amendment
to be in compliance if no petition challenging the amendment is filed with the Department within 21
days of the date of publication of the notice of intent.
(10) Local governments with a plan in compliance are bound by the effective date provisions of
Section 163.3189, Florida Statutes. They shall include the following language in the adoption
ordinance for plan amendments other than small scale amendments:
The effective date of this plan amendment shall be the date a final order is issued by the Department
of Community Affairs or Administration Commission finding the amendment in compliance in
accordance with Section 163.3184(1)(b), Florida Statutes, whichever occurs earlier. No development
orders, development permits, or land uses dependent on this amendment may be issued or commence
before it has become effective. If a final order of noncompliance is issued by the Administration
Commission, this amendment may nevertheless be made effective by adoption of a resolution
affirming its effective status, a copy of which resolution shall be sent to the Florida Department of
Community Affairs, Division of Resource Planning and Management, Plan Processing Team.
An adopted amendment whose effective date is delayed by law shall be considered part of the
adopted plan until determined to be not in compliance by final order of the Administration
Commission. Then, it shall no longer be part of the adopted plan unless the local government adopts
a resolution affirming its effectiveness in the manner provided by law.
Specific Authority 163.3177(9) FS.
Law Implemented 163.3167(3), 163.3177(9), 163.3184(1)(b), (2), (6), (7), (15), (16), 163.3187(1),
163.3189, 163.3191,380.06(6) FS.
History--New 9-22-87, Amended 10-11-88, 11-10-93, 11-6-96.
http://www.dca.state.fl.us/fdcp/DCPlResources/Legislation/9J11/9j11_011.htm
04/1912000
9111.012 Florida Administrative C0~
Page 1 of3
9J-l1.012 Compliance Review and Notice of Intent.
(1) Upon receipt of the adopted plan or amendment, the Department shall send a letter
acknowledging receipt and requesting any missing documentation. Upon receipt of the complete plan
or amendment package pursuant to Rule 9J-11.011(5), Florida Administrative Code, the Department
shall review the plan or amendment to determine compliance and shall issue a Notice of Intent to find
.> the plan or amendment in compliance or not in compliance within 45 calendar days, unless the
amendment is the result of a compliance agreement entered into pursuant to Section 163.3184(16),
Florida Statutes, in which case the time period for review and determination is 30 days. The review
period shall run from the receipt of all documentation. If the Department did not, and was not,
requested to review the proposed plan or plan amendment, the Department's review must be based
solely on the adopted plan or plan amendment.
(2) The Department will publish a Notice ofIntent in a newspaper of general circulation in the local
government's jurisdiction from which the plan or element originates in the manner required by
Subsection 163.3184(8)(b), Florida Statutes, and will include but not be limited to the following
information:
(a) Name of local government;
(b) Identification ofthe comprehensive plan or plan amendment(s) to which the notice refers;
(c) Whether the plan or amendment is in compliance or not in compliance;
(d) Location where plan or plan amendments, together with the Department's comments, objections,
and recommendations, are available for public inspection; and
(e) Rights of affected person( s).
(3) A copy ofthe Notice ofIntent will be mailed to the local government, the review agencies listed
in Rule 9J-11.009(8), Florida Administrative Code, and to persons who request a copy of the notice.
Requests for a copy of a Notice ofIntent shall be in writing and shall be sent directly to the Florida
Department of Community Affairs, Division of Resource Planning and Management, Plan Processing
Team and shall specify the plan or amendment by the name of the local government and by ordinance
number or other formal designation.
(4) The Notice ofIntent shall be issued by the Director of the Division of Resource Planning and
Management, Department of Community Affairs or authorized designee.
(5) The Department may combine notices of intent to find plans or plan amendments for more than
one local government in a single advertisement.
(6) If a Notice of Intent is issued to find the adopted plan or amendment not in compliance, the
Department will forward a copy of the Notice of Intent to the Division of Administrative Hearings,
Department of Management Services, requesting a hearing. During the review period provided in
Rule 9J-11.012(1), Florida Administrative Code, the Department shall issue a written Statement of
Intent describing how each portion of a comprehensive plan or plan amendment alleged to be not in
compliance is not consistent with one or more provisions of Sections 163.3177, 163.3178, 163.3191,
Florida Statutes, the state comprehensive plan, the appropriate strategic regional policy plan, or
Chapter 9J-5, Florida Administrative Code, and a statement of remedial actions that the local
government may complete in order to bring the plan into compliance. A copy of the Statement of
Intent shall be mailed to the local government and to persons who requested a copy of the Notice of
Intent. The Department shall file a petition requesting an administrative hearing and relief with the
Division of Administrative Hearings. The petition shall incorporate the issues contained in the
Statement ofIntent, and the Statement ofIntent and the Notice ofIntent shall be filed with the
http://www.dca.state.fl.us/fdcp/DCP/Resources/Legislation/911119j11_012.htm
04/19/2000
9111.012 Florida Administrative C~e
Page 2 of3
petition. The hearing officer shall submit the recommended order to the Administration Commission
for final agency action.
.7 (7) If a Notice ofIntent is issued to find the adopted plan or amendment in compliance, any affected
person, within 21 calendar days after the publication of notice pursuant to Rule 9J-I1.012(4), Florida
Administrative Code, may file a petition challenging the determination of compliance with the
Department pursuant to Section 120.57, Florida Statutes. Subsequent to the Notice ofIntent and after
the matter has been forwarded to the Division of Administrative Hearings pursuant to Subsections
163.3184(8) or (10), Florida Statutes, the local government proposing the amendment, or any party to
the proceeding may demand informal mediation or expeditious resolution of the amendment
proceeding by serving written notice on all parties to the proceeding and the assigned hearing officer.
(a) The petition shall be filed with the Agency Clerk, Department of Community Affairs. Each
petition shall be typewritten or otherwise duplicated in legible form on white paper of standard letter
size. Unless printed, the impression shall be on one side of the paper only and lines shall be double-
spaced and indented. Each petition shall contain the following:
1. The Department docket number, if known;
2. The name of party on whose behalf the petition is filed;
3. The name, address, and telephone number of the person filing the petition;
4. The signature of the person filing the petition;
5. A statement of facts sufficient to show that petitioner is an affected person, as defined in
Subsection 163.3184(1), Florida Statutes, including the date(s) and method by which the petitioner
submitted objections during the local government review and adoption proceedings;
6. A statement identifying the comprehensive plan or plan amendment(s) which is challenged,
including the name ofthe local government, date of adoption, ordinance number(s) or other specific
formal designation( s);
7. A statement describing how each portion of a comprehensive plan or plan amendment alleged to be
not in compliance is not consistent with one or more provisions of Sections 163.3177, 163.3178,
163.3191, Florida Statutes, the state comprehensive plan, the appropriate strategic regional policy
plan, or Chapter 9J-5, Florida Administrative Code; and
8. A demand for relief to which the petitioner deems himself entitled.
9. A certificate of service certifying that a copy of the petition has been served on the local
government and any known owner of the property.
(b) If the Department determines that the petition filed by an affected person is sufficient, the
Department shall forward the petition to the Division of Administrative Hearings, Department of
Management Services, within 15 days of the receipt of the petition for further proceedings. A copy of
the transmittal letter shall be sent to the petitioner, the local government, and any identified owner of
the property.
(c) Failure to file a timely petition within the 21 calendar days after the publication of the Notice of
Intent pursuant to Rule 9J-11.012( 4), Florida Administrative Code, shall constitute a waiver of any
right to request an administrative proceeding under Section 120.57, Florida Statutes.
(d) If a petition is filed that does not substantially comply with the requirements of Rule 9J-l1.012(7)
(a), Florida Administrative Code, the Department shall issue an order dismissing the petition with
leave to file an amended petition complying with the requirements of this rule within 15 days of
service of the order. If an amended petition complying with this rule is not filed within 15 days of
http://www.dca.state.fl.us/fdcp/DCP/Resources/Legislation/911119j11_012.htm
04/19/2000
9111.012 Florida Administrative CL'tie
Page 3 of3
service ofthe order, the petitioner's right to a proceeding under Section 120.57, Florida Statutes, is
waived.
(e) Uno petition complying with the requirements of this rule is filed, the Notice of Intent shall
become final agency action.
(t) After the hearing pursuant to Subsection 163.3184(9), Florida Statutes, the hearing officer shall
mail the Recommended Order to the Agency Clerk, Department of Community Affairs.
(g) Within ten days from the date of receipt of the Recommended Order by the Agency Clerk of the
Department, parties to the proceeding may file written Exceptions to the Recommended Order with
the Agency Clerk of the Department, with service of copies on all parties. Exceptions not filed with
the Agency Clerk within the ten days shall be rejected. Exceptions shall state, with particularity, the
basis for asserting that the hearing officer erred in making or omitting specific findings of fact,
conclusions of law, or a recommendation. Any party may serve a Response to Exceptions within ten
(10) days of service ofthe Exceptions. The Department shall issue a final order within 30 days after
receipt of the Recommended Order by the Agency Clerk ifthe Department determines that the plan
or plan amendment is in compliance. If the Department determines that the plan or plan amendment
is not in compliance, the Department shall submit, within 30 days after receipt, the Recommended
Order to the Administration Commission for final agency action.
Specific Authority 163.3177(9) FS.
Law Implemented 163.3177(9), 163.3184(8), (9), (10) FS.
History--New 9-22-87, Amended 10-11-88,11-10-93, 11-6-96,7-21-97.
Library References: Bryant, Local Government Comprehensive Plans and the Administrative
Procedure Act, 62 Fla. Bar J. 41 (October 1988).
http://www.dca.state.fl.us/fdcp/DCPlResources/Legislation/911119jll_012.htm
04/19/2000
~~..~ ~ n W ffi ill
STATE OF FLORIDA ~ ~ ~ n
D E PAR T MEN T 0 F COM M U NIT Y F F A I '~2~1O U
"Dedicated to making Florida a better place to c me"
JEB BUSH
Governor
Pi8B IBERT
March 31, 2000
,.6;
'yyJL !3tuyr#
/'. ._~'tc.~'
~ f-t-c1d
The Honorable Gerald Broening
Mayor, City of Boynton Beach
100 E. Boynton Beach Boulevard
Boynton Beach, Florida 33425-0310
Dear Mayor Broening:
The Department has completed its review of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment
for the City of Boynton Beach (DCA No. 00-lER), which was received on January 26, 2000. Copies of
the proposed amendment have been distributed to appropriate state, regional and local agencies for their
review, and their comments are enclosed.
I am enclosing the Department's Objections, Recommendations and Comments (ORC) Report,
issued pursuant to Rule 9J-ll.0 10, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.). The issues identified in this
ORC Report include future transportation maps identifying public transit trip generator and attractors,
and projected peak hour level of service; policies for transportation demand management strategies;
projected intermodal facilities; increased density in a coastal high-hazard area, hurricane evacuation
times and comprehensive plan internal inconsistency. It is very important that the adopted plan
amendment address these issues, and all of the objections in the Department's ORC Report.
Upon receipt of this letter, the City of Boynton Beach has 120 days in which to adopt, adopt
with changes, or determine that the City will not adopt the proposed amendment. The process for
adoption of local government comprehensive plan amendments is outlined in Section 163.3184, F .S.,
and Rule 9J-11.011, F.A.C. The City must ensure that all ordinances adopting comprehensive plan
amendment are consistent with the provisions of Section 163.3189(2)(a), F.S.
Within ten working days of the date of adoption, the City of Boynton Beach must submit the
following to the Department:
Three copies of the adopted comprehensive plan amendments;
A copy of the adoption ordinance;
A listing of additional changes not previously reviewed;
2555 SHUMARD OAK BOULEVARD. TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA 32399-2100
Phone: 850.488.8466/Suncom 278.8466 FAX: 850.921.0781/Suncom 291.0781
Internet address: http://www.dca.state.fl.us
CRITICAL STATE CONCERN FIELD OFFICE
2796 Overseas Highway, Suite 212
Marathon, FL 33050-2227
(305) 289-2402
COMMUNITY PLANNING
2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard
Tallahassee, FL 32399-2100
(850) 488-2356
EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard
Tallahassee, FL 32399-2100
(850) 413-9969
HOUSING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard
Tallahassee, FL 32399-2100
(850) 488-7956
The Honorable Gerald Broening
March 31, 2000
Page Two
A listing of findings by the local governing body, if any, which were not included in the
ordinance; and
A statement indicating the relationship of the additional changes to the Department's ORC
Report.
The above amendment and documentation are required for the Department to conduct a
compliance review, make a compliance determination and issue the appropriate notice of intent.
In order to expedite the regional planning council's review of the amendments, and pursuant to
Rule 9J-l1.011(5), F.A.C., please provide a copy of the adopted amendment directly to the Executive
Director of the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council.
Please contact Joseph Addae-Mensa, Planner IV, at (850) 487-4545 if we can be of assistance as
you formulate your response to this Report.
Sincerely yours,
Ch~~~~
Charles Gauthier, AICP
Chief, Bureau of Local Planning
CG/jam
Enclosures:
Objections, Recommendations and Comments Report
Review Agency Comments
cc: Mr. Michael W. Rumph, Planning Director, City of Boynton Beach
Mr. Michael J. Busha, AICP, Executive Director, Treasure Coast Regional
Planning Council
~~~p~d-
t- "rl~ ~ 'F
~-t -'tPtJ
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS
THE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH
Amendment OO-lER
March 30. 2000
Division of Community Planning
Bureau of Local Planning
This report is prepared pursuant to Rule 91-11.010
INTRODUCTION
The following objections, recommendations and comments are based upon the
Department's review of the City of Boynton Beach's proposed 00-IER amendment to its
comprehensive plan pursuant to Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes (P.S.).
Objections relate to specific requirements of relevant portions of Chapter 9J-5, Florida
Administrative Codes (F.A.C.), and Chapter 163, Part II, F.S. Each objection includes a
recommendation of one approach that might be taken to address the cited objection. Other
approaches may be more suitable in specific situations. Some of these objections may have
initially been raised by one of the other external review agencies. If there is a difference
between the Department's objection and the external agency advisory objection or comment,
the Department's objection would take precedence.
The local government should address each of these objections when the amendment is
resubmitted for our compliance review. Objections which are not addressed may result in a
determination that the amendment is not in compliance. The Department may have raised an
objection regarding missing data and analysis items which the local government considers not
applicable to its amendment. If that is the case, a statement justifying its non-applicability
pursuant to Rule 9J-5.002(2), F.A.C., must be submitted. The Department will make a
determination on the non-applicability of the requirement, and if the justification is sufficient,
the objection will be considered addressed.
The comments which follow the objections and recommendations are advisory in
nature. Comments will not form bases of a determination of non-compliance. They are
included to call attention to items raised by our reviewers. The comments can be substantive,
concerning planning principles, methodology or logic, as well as editorial in nature dealing
with grammar, organization, mapping, and reader comprehension.
Appended to the back of the Department's report are the comment letters from the other
state review agencies and other agencies, organizations and individuals. These comments are
advisory to the Department and may not form bases of Departmental objections unless they
appear under the "Objections" heading in this report.
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS REPORT
PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT
CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH
AMENDMENT 00-IER
I. CONSISTENCY WITH CHAPTER 163, F.S., AND RULE 9J-5 & 9J-ll, F.A.C.
The City of Boynton Beach, in Palm Beach County, has proposed a comprehensive plan
amendment, based on the City's Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) adopted on April 1,
1997. The proposed amendment consists of updating all of the elements of the City's
comprehensive plan as anticipated in the EAR. The proposed EAR-based amendment includes
four Future Land Use Map (FLUM) changes. The City has also proposed a non-EAR related
FLUM change. The City proposes to adopt this amendment in Mayor June of2000. The
Department has identified the following objections to the proposed amendment:
A. EAR-Based Amendment
Transportation Element
Objection 1. The Transportation Element does not include future transportation maps
identifying the major public transit trip generators and attractors based upon the future land use
map; and the projected peak hour levels of service for transportation facilities for which level of
service standards are established. [Rule 9J-5.019(5)(b), F.A.C.]
Recommendation. Include future transportation maps to identify the major public transit
trip generators and attractors based upon the future land use map; and the projected peak hour
levels of service for transportation facilities for which level of service standards are established.
Objection 2. The Transportation Element support documentation indicated that transit
market share for Tri-County Rail and Palm- Tran, as well as pedestrian and bicycle facilities,
would have to increase in the City through transportation demand management(TDM) strategies
in order to modify peak-hour travel demand. However, the City did not include a policy in this
Element establishing TDM programs. [9J-5.019(4)(c)6. & 7., F.A.C.]
Recommendation. Include a policy in the comprehensive plan establishing TDM
programs to modify peak hour travel demand, reduce the number of vehicle miles traveled per
capita within the City, improve system efficiency and enhance safety.
Objection 3. Proposed Objective 2.4 ofthe Transportation Element states: The City shall
develop and maintain a safe. convenient. and energy efficient multi-modal transportation system
which will meet future as well as current transportation needs. The City has provided an
inventory of existing intermodal facilities, but not an analysis of the deficiencies or projected
needs. These data and analysis will assist the City in addressing the need for additional
terminals, connections, high occupancy vehicle lanes; and pedestrian, bicycle, park-and-ride and
other facilities based on land use projections to facilitate effective implementation of this
objective [Rules 9J-5.005(2)(a), & 9J-5.019(3)(e), F.A.C.]
Recommendation. Provide data and analysis of the deficiencies or projected needs of
intermodal transportation facilities in support of Objective 2.4 of the Transportation Element,
based on land use projections. On the basis of these data and analysis, include policies in the
comprehensive plan addressing the need for additional terminals, connections, high occupancy
vehicle lanes; and pedestrian, bicycle, park-and-ride and other facilities.
Comment. The transportation map series do not include the appropriate titles, legend,
map scale and the preparation or revision date. The inclusion of this information will improve
the usefulness of these maps in the City's planning efforts and enhance citizen's understanding of
these maps, because the maps can be properly referenced.
Planning Timeframe
Comment. The City projected its population and public facility capacities and needs to
2015 in the EAR. The proposed comprehensive plan EAR-based amendment and support data
and analysis have been based on the 2015 timeframe. However, the City did not include in the
plan or on the FLUM any planning time frame, either short-term, medium-term or long-term, to
support the proposed goals, objectives and policies in the comprehensive plan. We recommend
the City should include at least two planning periods in the comprehensive plan, one for at least
the first five-year period and one for at least an overall ten-year period.
B. NonEAR-Based Amendment
Future Land Use Map (FLUM) Amendment (LUAR #99-005: Villa Del Sol)
Objection. The amendment does not restrict development activities where such activities
do not protect human life by directing population concentrations away from known or predicted
coastal high hazard areas. Additionally, the proposed amendment is internally inconsistent with
Policy 1.12.1 of the Future Land Use Element of the City's comprehensive plan which requires
the City to obtain written approvals from the Palm Beach County Division of Emergency
Management and the City of Boynton Beach Risk Management Officer, "prior to approving any
increase in residential densities in the Hurricane Evacuation Zone....ifthe proposed density
increase would result in an increase of 50 or more dwellings." The City has not supported the
proposed FLUM amendment with such written approvals. Moreover, the City has not
demonstrated the consistency of the proposed FLUM amendment with Objective 7.6 of the
Coastal Management Element of its comprehensive plan, regarding the City's commitment to
maintain or reduce current estimated hurricane evacuation times if development increases in the
coastal high-hazard area of the City. The City did not provide analysis of the projected impact of
objective [Rules 9J-5.005(2)(a), & 9J-5.019(3)(e), F.A.C.]
Recommendation. Provide data and analysis of the deficiencies or projected needs of
intermodal transportation facilities in support of Objective 2.4 of the Transportation Element,
based on land use projections. On the basis ofthese data and analysis, include policies in the
comprehensive plan addressing the need for additional terminals, connections, high occupancy
vehicle lanes; and pedestrian, bicycle, park-and-ride and other facilities.
Comment. The transportation map series do not include the appropriate titles, legend,
map scale and the preparation or revision date. The inclusion of this information will improve
the usefulness of these maps in the City's planning efforts and enhance citizen's understanding of
these maps, because the maps can be properly referenced.
Planning Timeframe
Comment. The City projected its population and public facility capacities and needs to
2015 in the EAR. The proposed comprehensive plan EAR-based amendment and support data
and analysis have been based on the 2015 timeframe. However, the City did not include in the
plan or on the FLUM any planning timeframe, either short-term, medium-term or long-term, to
support the proposed goals, objectives and policies in the comprehensive plan. We recommend
the City should include at least two planning periods in the comprehensive plan, one for at least
the first five-year period and one for at least an overall ten-year period.
B. NonEAR-Based Amendment
Future Land Use Map (FLUM) Amendment (LUAR #99-005: Villa Del Sol)
Objection. The amendment does not restrict development activities where such activities
do not protect human life by directing population concentrations away from known or predicted
coastal high hazard areas. Additionally, the proposed amendment is internally inconsistent with
Policy 1.12.1 of the Future Land Use Element of the City's comprehensive plan which requires
the City to obtain \.vritten approvals from the Palm Beach County Division of Emergency
Management and the City of Boynton Beach Risk Management Officer, "prior to approving any
increase in residential densities in the Hurricane Evacuation Zone....ifthe proposed density
increase would result in an increase of 50 or more dwellings." The City has not supported the
proposed FLUM amendment with such written approvals. Moreover, the City has not
demonstrated the consistency of the proposed FLUM amendment with Objective 7.6 of the
Coastal Management Element of its comprehensive plan, regarding the City's commitment to
maintain or reduce current estimated hurricane evacuation times if development increases in the
coastal high-hazard area of the City. The City did not provide analysis of the projected impact of
. I treQfure
"~~il~mo"'''<'''',""""",,,,",,,, co~t I
--iliifiia". .~,..".,.r,...,. ..,.."....,......""'j,....,....."..,....,,.. '~nlon^
,,''''ll':J!:r.tn. n:r:~c'~}~?:;t1'~..'~'\\~f~{;~\"~:~.:ffii;~ ~ ~~ ~ . ~~
'pJanniQ9 .
councd
.P;'"
\;;,.
/i.j
::'A
; ~I
-;;1
'~
'; ~
:':1 . .".
, 1'~~
1 ~:l
. .~ 1'r"~
'11' ~j
~ . ~~~3
j :;,;~j
.....j .:~
.':;1 j-:'~
I
)
,1
;1
)
,;1
~;]
~f.l
.- '1
'11 :"
, ::'W
" ,;~'
I "~
1 [-;.
1 1,'
'j~)
d' f.~:l'
~;~
; .d
j~l
j :'1
I t;;."j':
., ~;:;
.-:~~
J f-~~l
1 ?:;,l
B,
(18)
_..~
~Lo
~
,j
~ ",
U.~ l,.,J: ..~I Vi ~-, Gf '/
~ I ill f
, 11. .
l1/ J 2J~ -." ! i'1,'
~'0
PU"'" R~"1t<:; '._1; I
Iv,..ROl-r,. , ,. _.
~:.-__ ./ l ~v
'-~
Febmary 18, 2000
Mr. Charles Gauthier
Chief
Bureau of Local Planning
Department of Community Affairs
2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard
Tallahassee, FL 32399-2100
Subject: City of Boynton Beach Comprehensive Plan
Draft Amendments - DCA Reference No. OO-IER
Dear Mr. Gauthier:
Council has reviewed the above-referenced amendments in accordance with the
requirements of Chapter 163, Florida Statutes, and the Council's adopted plans, policies,
and review procedures. Enclosed is a copy of our report as approved by the Council at its
regular meeting on Febmary 18, 2000 pursuant to Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes.
If YOll need additional information or have any questions, please feel free to call.
Sincerely,
rJ::S ~Yder
DRJ Coordinator
JTS/wh
Attachment
.-
,',
"
.=
.(:
!:r.,
";~-
..~
~~.
301 east oceCln bouievorcl
suite 300
stuart, f10rida 34994
phone (561) 221.4060
--~.-!~~'~.o 6 0_ fa~~~_!2 2 21 .~~6 7____ ,
-..-~~~ ,\. ~ .....;...'l..~.,
TREASURE COAST REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL
MEMORANDUM
To:
Council Members
AGENDA ITEM 6B
From:
Staff
Date:
February 18, 2000 Council Meeting
Subject:
Local Government Comprehensive Plan Review
Draft Amendments to the City of Boynton Beach Comprehensive Plan
DCA Reference No. 00-lER
Introduction
The Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act,
Chapter 163, Florida Statutes, requires that the Council review local government
comprehensive plan amendments prior to their adoption. Under the provisions of this
law, the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) prepares Objections,
Recommendations, and Comments (ORC) Report on a proposed amendment only if
requested to do so by the local government, the regional planning council, or an affected
person or if an aRC Report is otherwise deemed necessary by the DCA. If the local
government requests DCA to prepare an aRC Report, then the Council must provide
DCA with its own objections, recommendations for modification, and comments on the
proposed amendment within 30 days of its receipt.
Background
The City of Boynton Beach has transmitted revised elements of its comprehensive plan
based on the City's Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR). The local government's
EAR is required to address changes in local conditions, Chapter 163, Florida Statutes.
Chapter 91-5, Florida Administrative Code, the State Comprehensive Plan, the
appropriate Strategic Regional Policy Plan (SRPP), and potential impacts of these
changes on the adopted local government comprehensive plan. The City has also
transmitted one Future Land Use Map CFLUM) amendment and a related text
amendment. The City has requested that the amendments be formally reviewed.
The Council's principle role in the EAR process is to review EAR-based comprehensive
plan amendments for their consistency with the SRPP. In reviewing EAR-based
amendments, Council will examine EAR recommendations and use the SRPP to
determine how local governments have addressed regional goals and policies. Council
understands how challenging it will be for all communities to make dramatic progress in
..,
.,
moving towards consistency with the SRPP in the short term. Council is looking,
however, for local governments to make a reasonable effort to move in that direction. In
order to place this review in the larger context of the intent of the SRPP, an overview of
the regional plan is offered in the following section.
Overview of the SRPP
The SRPP embodies a vision for a healthier and more sustainable region in the future.
This "vision for the future of the region" addresses large-scale elements such as the
growth and formation of towns, cities, and villages; maintenance of the natural
environment and countryside; the layout of regional roads and spatial relationships
between work place and household; the formation of suitable public institutions for a
neighborhood and community; and the kinds of public space required to support these
institutions. The SRPP describes preferred forms and patterns of development that are
considered the most effective means for fulfilling this vision. In taking this proactive
approach, the plan follows a long-standing tradition of leadership by the Council. The
Treasure Coast Region has led the state in implementing such innovative growth
management tools and techniques such as infrastructure concurrency, wetland and upland
protection, and impact fees.
The Treasure Coast Region possesses many inherent qualities that will continue to attract
growth, but a number of issues must be confronted as growth occurs. These include past
failures to manage growth wisely, land speculation and inefficient development patterns,
unbalanced demographic growth, inadequate provision of infrastructure and services
concurrent with need, parochial attitudes towards regional issues, and the absence of a
well-defined land ethic. As the Region grows, choices must be made and some patterns
of development that have occurred in the past should be avoided in the future. The mix,
balance, and organization of residential types, work places, and services can have a
profound effect on how often and far we drive, how much energy we use, how much
pollution we generate, how much land we use, how much time we are able to spend with
our families, how successful we are at protecting regional natural systems intact, and may
other important concerns.
There is still time to plan for a future that enhances the natural environment and quality
of life that makes the Treasure Coast Region special if planning efforts focus on the form
and location of future growth. Future development should address preservation of the
natural environment and countryside, revitalization of existing urban areas, and the
creation of new towns. Future development should not sprawl because it is expensive,
and it degrades the quality of life of the region.
The SRPP will be implemented largely through local government comprehensive plans
and land development regulations. Local governments can implement preferred
development forms by delineating where development should or should not occur,
applying and expanding preferred development concepts, encouraging redevelopment
and revitalization, devising public investment programs favoring preferred development
forms and patterns, and sending constructive economic signals to investors.
2
Overview of the Community
The City of Boynton Beach is located in southeastern Palm Beach County. It has
common boundaries with The City of Delray Beach to the south, unincorporated Palm
Beach County to the west, and the Town of Lantana to the north. The City's fifteen
square miles supports a population of approximately 55,000 residents. The City can be
charaCterized as a low-density, low-rise community that is in the latter stages of transition
from being primarily a residential community to a full-service city. A new proposed
redevelopment plan for the City envisions a new town center, redevelopment of the
waterfront and the revitalization of existing neighborhoods.
Evaluation
A. EAR-Based Amendments
The City proposes amendments to many of the elements of its comprehensive plan. The
former Traffic Circulation Element is now the Transportation Element as required by
Chapter 163, Florida Statutes. A brief summary and analysis of the most consequential
amendments follows:
Future Land Use -A number of new and revised objectives and policies are proposed.
They address the City 20/20 Redevelopment Master Plan, CRA expansion, development
of the Ocean District, residential redevelopment, financing strategies, downtown urban
design standards, sign regulations, and land use accommodations for the siting of new
schools. Also, there are four proposed EAR-based future land use map amendments to
reclassify four sites to reflect the correct land use for those sites.
Transportation -A number of new and revised policies are proposed to deal with modes
of transportation that are alternatives to the automobile, consistency with the City 20/20
Redevelopment Master Plan and emphasis on level of service (LOS) standards.
Utility -A number of revised objectives and polices are proposed to reflect current
information regarding sewer/water capacity and changes to levels of service.
Housing -A number of revised objectives and policies are proposed regarding housing
funding strategies with an emphasis on rehabilitation as a priority program.
Coastal Management -There are a number of new objectives and policies proposed to
address stormwater quality, support of the Lake Worth Lagoon Ecosystem Management
Area Study, emergency preparedness, hazard mitigation, and post-disaster
redevelopment.
Conservation - There are a number of new objectives and policies proposed to address
such issues as: hazardous waste; stormwater quality and quantity, water conservation, and
implementation of the Lake Worth Lagoon Estuary Study.
3
~
."
Recreation and Open Space -A number of revised objectives and policies are proposed
related to park land acquisition and adopted standards for recreation facilities and
neighborhood parks.
Intergovernmental Coordination -A number of new and revised objectives and policies
are proposed related to inter-local agreements for provision of water and sewer services
with 'adjacent municipalities and the unincorporated area, coordination with the Palm
Beach County Division of Emergency Management on hurricane evacuation and other
emergency management issues, annexation issues, participation in the IP ARC process, a
voluntary dispute resolution process to facilitate intergovernmental coordination, and
school siting.
Capital Improvements -A number of revised objectives and policies are proposed related
to provision of adequate public facilities and prevention of urban sprawl, recreation
facilities, preservation of natural areas, and level of service standards for public facilities,
B. Non Ear-Based Future Land Use Map and Text Amendment
The FLUM amendment is shown on the attached maps and summarized in Table I.
TABLE 1
CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT
DCA REFERENCE 00-IER
" An,1e~~~~t;~;'I;
<NOXorName~:~;r
-. .. .. .
LUAR #99-
005
:"~~l!i~~d '
Special High
Density
Residential (20
du/acre)
Northwest
comer of
Federal Hwy.
(USI) and
Old Dixie
Hwy, south of
23rd Street
and East of
the FEC
Railroad
This amendment involves the redesignation of 16.0 acres located on the northwest corner
of Federal Hwy and Old Dixie Highway from Local Retail Commercial to Special High
Density Residential. Property to the east has a FLUM designation of High Density
Residential and the current use is for residential condominiums. Directly to the west is
the FEC Railroad and farther west is land with a FLUM designation of Medium Density
Residential that is currently used for a mango farm. Land to the north is designated Local
Retail and High Density Residential and is currently used for residential purposes. Land
4
to the south is designated Local Retail and Medium Density Residential and the current
land uses include a gas station/shopping center and single family residential development.
The FLUM amendment and associated text amendments apply to planning area l.p. of
the City's comprehensive plan. The comprehensive plan states that due to the limited
demand for commercial floor space along this segment of US I, these parcels should be
assigned a different land use category. However, because the City had approved a site
plan and construction drawing for a shopping center on this site, the City Commission
decided to keep this parcel in the Local Retail Commercial land use category. The
shopping center has not been developed and the site plan and construction plan approvals
have expired. Therefore, the designation on this parcel is to be changed from Local
Retail Commercial to Special High Density Residential to encourage development and
revitilization of this area of the City. The proposed FLUM amendment and associated
text amendments further the goals and policies of the SRPP.
Extrajurisdictional Impacts
These amendments were not processed through the Palm Beach County
Intergovernmental Plan Review Committee. However, analysis of the proposed
amendments indicates that they would not have any significant adverse impacts on
neighboring jurisdictions.
Effects on Significant Regional Resources or Facilities
An analysis of the proposed amendments indicates that they should not have adverse
effects on significant regional resources or facilities. However, the revisions suggested in
the following comments call for improvements that would make the City Plan more
consistent with the SRPP.
Objections, Recommendations for Modification, and Comments
A. Objections
1. None
B. Comments
1. Implementation and consistency with recommendations of the City of Boynton Beach
20/20 Redevelopment Master Plan is sited throughout the EAR-based amendments.
This document is not provided as part of the proposed amendment package. This
document should be provided a part of the data and analysis to support the goals,
objectives and policies of the City's comprehensive plan.
2. Council commends the City for the commitment to implement strategies to facilitate
alternate forms of transportation and mass transit, prevent urban sprawl and promote
5
~
..,
urban design standards. These efforts are consistent with the goals and policies of the
SRPP.
Recommendation
Council should adopt the above comments and approve their transmittal to the
Department of Community Affairs.
Attachments
6
t
General Location Map
.Poinciann Place
812
M laleuca La i'~:;:;~i
;~'~:rFj
..."
~;
J-.'
Hy 01;;,1",
. b. ;'
"C
0:::
o
-,
;
L
"
.De ray Gardens
Linton Blvd
."C
0::
....
CI.l
~)..
City of Boynton Beach
Palm Beach County
Omi
2
3
4
7
-~------ .---------
..."
....
City <Jf "BOynton )>eacn
'Future 'Land Use ~la"p i\1J\endIlleut
Location "Niall
'IN oo\br\ght Road
i
Golf !'toad/51:: 7.3rd ,....e.
i~
H SITe,/
1'-'"
. : ~
. '
:: i
"O\~
~:
0:
.....
-'
"to 1
c:x:~
U:
u.J:
u-j
>-
~
:::
.t::.
9
::J:
!}!.
~
o
:g
o
':.-
>-
.to
~.
a- .
.B
."to
~
.to
~
U\
to
o
u
to.
.t:;
c'
-
/;>
....
-
c
~
---
8
~
Florida Department of Transportation
JtJ.IV'^-
JEB BUSH
GOVERNOR
3400 WEST COMMERCIAL BOULEVARD
FORT LAUDERDALE, FLORIDA 33309-3421
TELEPHONE: (954) 777-4593; FAX: (954) 777-4197
THOMAS F. BARRY, JR.
SECRETARY
DIVISION OF
PLANNING AND PROGRAMS
March 3,2000
Mr. Ray Eubanks, Planning Manager
Department of Community Affairs
Bureau of State Planning
2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard
Tallahassee, FL 32399-2100
~~
~Y(j
~
Dear Mr. Eubanks:
SUBJECT: Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendments
Local Government: City of Boynton Beach
DCA Amendment # OO-lER
The Department has reviewed the proposed Evaluation and Appraisal Review (EAR) and non-
EAR based amendments to the City of Boynton Beach's Comprehensive Plan. Enclosed are the
Department's objections, recommendations and comments for the proposed amendments.
Thank you for the opportunity to participate in the review process. If you have any comments or
questions about this letter, please contact me at (954) 777-4601.
JMY:tas
....~-----
o
Enclosures
cc: B. Romig, FDOT Central Office
R. Wilburn, DCA
G. Schmidt, FDOT 4
L. Hymowitz, FDOT 4
File: 4270.03
www.dot.state.fl.us
<!) RECYCLED PAPER
DISTRICT 4, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS & COMMENTS
RESPONSIBLE DIVISIONIBUREAU:
NAME OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT:
DATE PLAN RECEIVED FROM LOCAL GOVERNMENT:
DATE MEMORANDUM RECEIVED FROM DCA:
REQUIRED RETURN DATE FOR COMMENTS:
Planning Department
City of Boynton Beach
1/03/00
1/31/00
3/02/00
ELEMENT:
Non-EAR based Site Specific Amendment
Future Land Use Element
DCA Amendment # 00-IER
RULE DEFICIENCY:
9J-5.012(2)(e)
9J-5.019(3)(c)
OBJECTION: The City did not include an analysis to determine consistency of the
proposed non-EAR based site specific FLUM amendment (northwest corner of US-1 and Old
Dixie Hwy) with amended Coastal Management Element Objective 7.6, which states, "The City
shall maintain or reduce current estimated hurricane evacuation times if deyelopment increases."
The projected impact of anticipated population density (an additional 148 dwelling units) and
the potential special evacuation needs of this population on hurricane evacuation planning, to ~
which Coastal Management Policy 7.6.5 addresses, is not provided.
The Transportation Element does not address adequacy of existing and projected transportation
system to evacuate the existing and projected coastal population.
RECOMMENDATION: The City should provide the required data and analysis to evaluate
the impact of the proposed 320 dwelling units on the estimated hurricane evacuation times. The
City should demonstrate consistency of the FLUM amendment with Objective 7.6 of the Coastal
Management Element and with the data and analysis requirements for the Transportation
.Element contained in 9J-5.019(3)(c).
REVIEWED BY:
Terry Scheckwitz. AICP
PHONE: 954-777-4601
REVIEWED BY:
Larry Hymowitz. AICP
PHONE: 954-777-4601
REVIEWED BY:
Gus Schmidt. PE
PHONE: 954-777-4601
1
DISTRICT 4, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS & COMMENTS
RESPONSIBLE DIVISIONIBUREAU:
NAME OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT:
DATE PLAN RECEIVED FROM LOCAL GOVERNMENT:
DATE MEMORANDUM RECEIVED FROM DCA:
REQUIRED RETURN DATE FOR COMMENTS:
Planning Department
City of Boynton Beach
1/03/00
1/31/00
3/02/00
ELEMENT:
General Requirements
Maps
DCA Amendment # 00-1 ER
RULE DEFICIENCY:
9J-5.0050 )(e)
9J-5.019(5)(a)
9J-5.0 19(5)(b)
COMMENT: The Transportation Element Maps do not include important information,
which makes it difficult to review for consistency. The information does not include:
o The City's boundary line;
o The legend, when present, does not include the date;
o The Roadway Functional Classification Map does not provide a key in the legend identifying the
meaning of the symbols used to differentiate road functional classifications. The identification of these
symbols are needed to determine which of these roadways function as local, collector, arterial, or limited-
or controlled-access facilities;
o The Roadway Functional Class, the Public Transit System Map that identifies transit routes by route
number, the Intermodal TerminalslRail and Port Facilities Map, Public Transit Corridors, Evacuation
Routes, Maintenance Responsibility, and the Bike Facilities and Pedestrian Facilities Maps do not
identify whether they represent existing conditions, future conditions or both; and
o The Future Conditions Maps do not identify major public transit trip generators and attractors or
projected peak hour levels of service for all transportation facilities with adopted level of service.
The City should include the City boundary on all comprehensive plan maps; add the preparation/revision
date to all maps; add a legend to the Roadway Functional Classification Map; and revise map titles to
discern whether the map depicts existing conditions, future conditions or both. Two maps should be
added to the future transportation map series: one map to depict major public transit trip generators and
attractors based on the future land use map or map series and the other to identify the projected peak hour
levels of service for all transportation facilities for which an LOS has been adopted. The Department
recommends that additional maps be provided to identify future conditions, as needed.
REVIEWED BY:
Terry Scheckwitz. AICP
PHONE: 954-777-4601
REVIEWED BY:
Larry Hymowitz. AICP
PHONE: 954-777-4601
REVIEWED BY:
Gus Schmidt. PE
PHONE: 954-777-4601
2
DISTRICT 4, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS & COMMENTS
RESPONSIBLE DIVISIONIBUREAU:
NAME OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT:
DATE PLAN RECEIVED FROM LOCAL GOVERNMENT:
DATE MEMORANDUM RECEIVED FROM DCA:
REQUIRED RETURN DATE FOR COMMENTS:
Planning Department
City of Boynton Beach
1/03/00
1/31/00
3/02/00
ELEMENT:
Transportation and Capital Improv.ement Elements
Data & Analysis
DCA Amendment # 00-1 ER
RULE DEFICIENCY:
COMMENT: TE Objective 1.3, TE Policy 1.3.1 and CIE Policy 9D.2.6 reference the
Traffic Circulation Element. The City should review and revise these references to read
"Transportation Element".
.
REVIEWED BY:
Terry Scheckwitz. AICP
PHONE: 954-777-4601
REVIEWED BY:
Larry Hymowitz. AICP
PHONE: 954-777-4601
REVIEWED BY:
Gus Schmidt. PE
PHONE: 954-777-4601
3
DISTRICT 4, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS & COMMENTS
RESPONSIBLE DIVISIONIBUREAU:
NAME OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT:
DATE PLAN RECEIVED FROM LOCAL GOVERNMENT:
DATE MEMORANDUM RECEIVED FROM DCA:
REQUIRED RETURN DATE FOR COMMENTS:
Planning Department
City of Boynton Beach
1/03/00
1/31100
3/02/00
ELEMENT:
Transportation Element
Data & Analysis
DCA Amendment # 00-1 ER
RULE DEFICIENCY:
9J-5.0 19(2)(a) 10.
9J-5.0 19(2)(b)
9J-5.019(3)(a) and (b)
OBJECTION:
Data and analysis regarding existing transportation does not include:
o The level of service (LOS) at which City roads and road segments operate is not
provided;
o Graphical location information for the four intersections operating at LOS F and the
five "problem corridors", which are identified by name but without segment limits;
o The general location of the major public transit trip generators and attractors;
o The analysis does not include an assessment of the existing transportation system LOS,
system needs for mass transit facilities, corridors or routes, and the LOS for transit facilities;
o It is unclear if the latent demand for capacity is on 1-95 or the listed LOS F intersections.
RECOMMENDATION: It is important for the City to provide an assessment of the existing
transportation system. This assessment should incorporate in its analysis corridors, routes, levels
of service, vehicle and passenger trips, and system needs for roadway and mass transit facilities.
(Continued)
4
DISTRICT 4, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS & COl\'IMENTS
RESPONSIBLE DIVISIONIBUREAU:
NAME OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT:
DATE PLAN RECEIVED FROM LOCAL GOVERNMENT:
DATE MEMORANDUM RECEIVED FROM DCA:
REQUIRED RETURN DATE FOR COMMENTS:
Planning Department
City of Bovnton Beach
1/03/00
1/31/00
3/02/00
ELEMENT:
Transportation Element
Data & Analysis
DCA Amendment # 00-1 ER
RULE DEFICIENCY:
9J-5.0 19(2)(aHO.
9J-5.0 19(2)(b)
9J-5.019(3)(a) and (b)
RECOMMENDATION: (continued)
Data and analysis for roadways should include annualized average daily, peak-hour and peak-
direction. Other indicators include existing roadway design and intersection capacities; modal
split and vehicle occupancy rates; public transit facilities including ridership by route, peak hour
capacities and headways; population characteristics, including persons who are transportation
disadvantaged; and major trip generators and attractors within the community. The City should
provide a graphic representation that depicts the locations of the overcapacity intersections and
the level of service for roads. The general location of the major public transit trip generators and
attractors based on the existing land use map or map series should be included, possibly in
comparison with the transit routes (existing and proposed).
The City should include the data and analysis to substantiate the stated expectation regarding
existing and projected deficiencies that the planned improvements to 1-95 will meet the latent
demand for capacity.
REVIEWED BY:
Terry Scheckwitz. AICP
PHONE: 954-777-4601
REVIEWED BY:
Larry Hymowitz. AICP
PHONE: 954-777-4601
REVIEWED BY:
Gus Schmidt. PE
PHONE: 954-777-4601
5
DISTRICT 4, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS & COMMENTS
RESPONSIBLE DIVISIONIBUREAU:
NAME OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT:
DATE PLAN RECEIVED FROM LOCAL GOVERNMENT:
DATE MEMORANDUM RECEIVED FROM DCA:
REQUIRED RETURN DATE FOR COMMENTS:
Planning Department
City of Boynton Beach
1/03/00
1/31/00
3/02/00
ELEMENT:
Transportation Element
Data & Analysis
DCA Amendment # 00-1 ER
RULE DEFICIENCY:
9J-5.019(2)(b)
9J-5.019(4)(c)3.
OBJECTION: The Transportation Element does not include a policy establishing parking
strategies that promote transportation goals for efficient mass transit service. The data &
analysis provided is insufficient to determine if knowledge of the capacity of significant parking
facilities and parking duration limits are necessary to implement strategies employed by the City
to maintain and improve mobility. The existing transportation map or map series does not
identify the capacity of said facilities or parking duration limits (long- or short-term).
RECOMMENDATION: The City should add a policy establishing parking strategies,
identified through coordination with PalmTran, which promote efficient mass transit services.
Expand the data and analysis to identify if an inventory of the capacity for significant parking
facilities and parking duration limits is necessary to implement strategies to maintain and
improve mobility. Ifa parking facilities inventory is necessary, the Department recommends
that the City add a map to the existing transportation map series identifying the necessary
parking facilities inventory.
REVIEWED BY:
Terry Scheckwitz, AICP
PHONE: 954-777-4601
REVIEWED BY:
Larry Hymowitz. AICP
PHONE: 954-777-4601
REVIEWED BY:
Gus Schmidt, PE
PHONE: 954-777-4601
6
DISTRICT 4, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS & COMMENTS
RESPONSIBLE DIVISIONIBUREAU:
NAME OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT:
DATE PLAN RECEIVED FROM LOCAL GOVERNMENT:
DATE MEMORANDUM RECEIVED FROM DCA:
REQUIRED RETURN DATE FOR COMMENTS:
Planning Department
City of Bovnton Beach
1/03/00
1/31/00
3/02/00
ELEMENT:
Transportation Element
Data & Analysis
DCA Amendment # OO-IER
RULE DEFICIENCY:
9J-5~019(3)(c)
9J-5.019.(3)(f)
OBJECTION: The Transportation Element does not include an analysis to determine the
ability of the existing and projected transportation system to evacuate the coastal population
prior to an impending disaster. The City has not provided an analysis of the effect the Coastal
Residential Exception to Concurrency, which is applicable through the Palm Beach County
Traffic Performance Standards, has on coastal evacuation.
RECOMMENDATION: The City should include an analysis of the adequacy of the existing
and projected transportation system to evacuate the coastal population based on existing, vested
and future land uses. The Department also recommends analyzing what effect the concurrency
exception, granted by Palm Beach County to promote infill development, has on coastal
evacuation.
REVIEWED BY:
Terry Scheckwitz, AICP
PHONE: 954-777-4601
REVIEWED BY:
Larry Hymowitz. AICP
PHONE: 954-777-4601
REVIEWED BY:
Gus Schmidt, PE
PHONE: 954-777-4601
7
DISTRICT 4, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS & COMMENTS
RESPONSIBLE DIVISIONIBUREAU:
NAME OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT:
DATE PLAN RECEIVED FROM LOCAL GOVERNMENT:
DATE MEMORANDUM RECEIVED FROM DCA:
REQUIRED RETURN DATE FOR COMMENTS:
Planning Department
City of Boynton Beach
1/03/00
1/31/00
3/02/00
ELEMENT:
Transportation Element
Data & Analysis
DCA Amendment # 00-IER
RULE DEFICIENCY:
9J-5.0 19(3)( d)
OBJECTION: The Transportation Element does not include an analysis of the growth
trends, travel patterns and interactions between land use and transportation, and compatibility
between the future land use and transportation elements.
RECOMMENDATION: The Department recommends that the City provide an analysis of
the growth trends, travel patterns, the interactions between land use and transportation, and
compatibility between the future land use and transportation elements.
REVIEWED BY:
Terry Scheckwitz. AICP
PHONE: 954-777-4601
REVIEWED BY:
Larry Hymowitz. AICP
PHONE: 954-777-4601
REVIEWED BY:
Gus Schmidt. PE
PHONE: 954-777-4601
8
DISTRICT 4, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS & COMMENTS
RESPONSIBLE DIVISIONIBUREAU:
NAME OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT:
DATE PLAN RECEIVED FROM LOCAL GOVERNMENT:
DATE MEMORANDUM RECEIVED FROM DCA:
REQUIRED RETURN DATE FOR COMMENTS:
Planning Department
City of Boynton Beach
1/03/00
1/31/00
3/02/00
ELEMENT:
Transportation Element
Data & Analysis
DCA Amendment # OO-lER
RULE DEFICIENCY:
9J-5.019(3)(e)
OBJECTION: The Transportation Element does not include an analysis of the existing
and projected intermodal deficiencies and needs. The City has provided an inventory of existing
intermodal facilities, but not an analysis of the deficiencies or projected needs.
RECOMMENDATION: The Department recommends that the City analyze its sufficiency
in meeting the needs of the existing transportation network and provide a projection of future
need, based on vested and future land uses. This data and analysis will assist the City in
addressing the need for additional terminals, connections, high occupancy vehicle lanes; and
bicycle, pedestrian, park-and-ride and other facilities based on the land use projections.
REVIEWED BY:
Terry Scheckwitz. AICP
PHONE: 954-777-4601
REVIEWED BY:
Larry Hymowitz. AICP
PHONE: 954-777-4601
REVIEWED BY:
Gus Schmidt. PE
PHONE: 954-777-4601
9
DISTRICT 4, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS & COMMENTS
RESPONSIBLE DIVISIONIBUREAU:
NAME OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT:
DATE PLAN RECEIVED FROM LOCAL GOVERNMENT:
DATE MEMORANDUM RECEIVED FROM DCA:
REQUIRED RETURN DATE FOR COMMENTS:
Planning Department
City of Boynton Beach
1/03/00
1/31/00
3/02/00
ELEMENT:
Transportation Element
Data & Analysis
DCA Amendment # 00-IER
RULE DEFICIENCY:
9J-5.019(3)(t)
9J-5.019(5)(a) and (b)
OBJECTION: The Transportation Element does not include an analysis of the projected
transportation system levels of service based on the future land use categories and the projected
integrated transportation system. The City did not include a level of service analysis to support
the map of the 2020 Thoroughfare System. A summary of the methodology used in the analysis
is not provided. In addition, the analysis does not address the impact of the Coastal Residential
Exception to concurrency applicable through the Palm Beach County Traffic Performance
Standards (LDR).
RECOMl\1ENDATION: The Department recommends that the City provide an analysis of the
projected level of service on the transportation system (all modes) based on the future land use
categories and the projected transportation system. The City could include the associated level
of service for each road segment on the 2020 Thoroughfare Map or provide an additional map
depicting the results of the analysis. The projected level of service for the other modes within
the future transportation system should be depicted on an adopted future conditions map.
Analysis of the impact of future land uses should include discussion of whether the historical
. trend can be anticipated to continue, and if not, what factors are anticipated to change the trend.
REVIEWED BY:
Terry Scheckwitz. AICP
PHONE: 954-777-4601
REVIEWED BY:
Larry Hymowitz. AICP
PHONE: 954-777-4601
REVIEWED BY:
Gus Schmidt, PE
PHONE: 954-777-4601
10
DISTRICT 4, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS & COMMENTS
RESPONSIBLE DIVISIONIBUREAU:
NAME OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT:
DATE PLAN RECEIVED FROM LOCAL GOVERNMENT:
DATE MEMORANDUM RECEIVED FROM DCA:
REQUIRED RETURN DATE FOR COMMENTS:
Planning Department
City of Boynton Beach
1/03/00
1/31/00
3/02/00
ELEMENT:
Transportation Element
Data & Analysis
DCA Amendment # 00-lER
RULE DEFICIENCY:
9J-5.019(3)(h)
OBJECTION: The Transportation Element does not adopt a level of service for transit
facilities within its jurisdiction and does not identify how the level of service standard advances
the purpose of Rule 9J-5.019 and the goals, objectives and policies of the Future Land Use
Element and other elements of the plan. In addition, the Transportation Element identifies that
the majority of major roads, all arterials and most collectors in the City, are under State or
County jurisdictions. All roads identified as operating less than LOS D are under State or
County maintenance responsibility as are the intersections identified as LOS F. The data in the
Transportation Element does not identify how the adopted range of level of service standards for
roadways reflect and advance the purpose of Rule 9J-5.019, FAC and the City's goals, objectives
and policies in the future land use element and other elements of the comprehensive plan.
RECOMMENDATION: The City should adopt a level of service standard for transit
facilities and address how the adopted level of service standard for roadways and transit support
the City's objectives for urban infill, hurricane evacuation and redevelopment identified in the
Future Land Use Element.
REVIEWED BY:
Terry Scheckwitz, AICP
PHONE: 954-777-4601
REVIEWED BY:
Larry Hymowitz, AICP
PHONE: 954-777-4601
REVIEWED BY:
Gus Schmidt. PE
PHONE: 954-777-4601
11
DISTRICT 4, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS & COMMENTS
RESPONSIBLE DIVISIONIBUREAU:
NAME OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT:
DATE PLAN RECEIVED FROM LOCAL GOVERNMENT:
DATE MEMORANDUM RECEIVED FROM DCA:
REQUIRED RETURN DATE FOR COMMENTS:
Plannin~ Department
City of Boynton Beach
1/03/00
1/31/00
3/02/00
ELEMENT:
Transportation Element
Data & Analysis
DCA Amendment # 00-1 ER
RULE DEFICIENCY:
9J-5.0 19(3)(i)
OBJECTION: The analysis does not clearly address and document the internal consistency of
the plan, especially in regards to land use, transportation and availability of facilities and
services.
RECOMMENDATION: To improve the internal consistency ofthe plan, the Department
recommends that the City explicitly identify land use and transportation policies in the
Transportation and Future Land Use Elements that operate to advance the overall goals of the
plan.
REVIEWED BY:
Terry Scheckwitz. AICP
PHONE: 954-777-4601
REVIEWED BY:
Larry Hymowitz. AICP
PHONE: 954-777-4601
REVIEWED BY:
Gus Schmidt. PE
PHONE: 954-777-4601
12
DISTRICT 4, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS & COMMENTS
RESPONSIBLE DIVISIONIBUREAU:
NAME OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT:
DATE PLAN RECEIVED FROM LOCAL GOVERNMENT:
DATE MEMORANDUM RECEIVED FROM DCA:
REQUIRED RETURN DATE FOR COMMENTS:
Planning Department
City of Bovnton Beach
1/03/00
1/31/00
3/02/00
ELEMENT:
Transportation Element
Data & Analysis
DCA Amendment # 00-IER
RULE DEFICIENCY:
9J-5.0 19(3)(i)
9J-5.019(4)(c)9 and 12
OBJECTION: The Transportation Element does not include a coordinated policy with
the Future Land Use ElemeOnt that encourages land uses that promote public transportation in
designated transportation corridors. Additionally, the Transportation Element does not include
analysis that identifies land uses and transportation programs necessary to promote and support
public transportation systems in designated transportation corridors.
RECOMMENDATION: The City should include in its analysis identification ofland uses
and of transportation management programs necessary to promote and support public
transportation systems. The City should add a policy that is coordinated and consistent with the
Future Land Use Element and encourages land uses (intensity and density, mixes, etc.) that will
promote public transportation in designated public transportation corridors.
Policies in the Transportation Element identify a Boynton Beach 20/20 Redevelopment Master
Plan that could include the appropriate land uses and strategies the City could utilize to promote
public transportation. The City may wish to add a policy identifying its commitment to land use
strategies for public transit.
REVIEWED BY:
Terry Scheckwitz. AICP
PHONE: 954-777-4601
REVIEWED BY:
Larry Hymowitz. AICP
PHONE: 954-777-4601
REVIEWED BY:
Gus Schmidt. PE
PHONE: 954-777-4601
13
DISTRICT 4, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS & COMMENTS
RESPONSIBLE DIVISIONIBUREAU:
NAME OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT:
DATE PLAN RECEIVED FROM LOCAL GOVERNMENT:
DATE MEMORANDUM RECEIVED FROM DCA:
REQUIRED RETURN DATE FOR COMMENTS:
Planning Department
City of Boynton Beach
1/03/00
1/31/00
3/02/00
ELEMENT:
Transportation Element
GOPs
DCA Amendment # OO-lER
RULE DEFICIENCY:
9J-5.019(4)(b)3.
OBJECTION: The Transportation Element does not include an objective that provides
for the coordination of the transportation system with the Florida Transportation Plan, the FDOT
Five Year Work Program, or plans and programs of the Palm Beach County Metropolitan
Planning Organization.
RECOMMENDATION: The Department recommends that the City revise Objective 2.10 to
provide for coordination of the transportation system with the Florida Transportation Plan, the
FDOT Five Year Work Program and the plans and programs of the Palm Beach County MPO.
REVIEWED BY:
Terry Scheckwitz. AICP
PHONE: 954-777-4601
REVIEWED BY:
Larry Hymowitz. AICP
PHONE: 954-777-4601
REVIEWED BY:
Gus Schmidt. PE
PHONE: 954-777-4601
14
DISTRICT 4, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS & COMMENTS
RESPONSIBLE DIVISIONIBUREAU:
NAME OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT:
DATE PLAN RECEIVED FROM LOCAL GOVERNMENT:
DATE MEMORANDUM RECEIVED FROM DCA:
REQUIRED RETURN DATE FOR COMMENTS:
Planning Deoartment
City of Boynton Beach
1/03/00
1/31/00
3/02/00
ELEMENT:
Transportation Element
GOPs
DCA Amendment # 00-1ER
RULE DEFICIENCY:
9J-S.019(3)(a)
9J-S.019(4)(c)6.
OBJECTION: The Transportation Element indicates that transit market share would have
to increase through TDM strategies in order to modify peak-hour travel demand. The Element
does not include a policy establishing Transportation Demand Management programs.
RECOMMENDATION: The City should add a policy establishing Transportation Demand
Management programs to modify peak-hour travel demand. Data and analysis on population
characteristics, modal split, and on the existing characteristics for major trip generators and
attractors need to be included to provide a basis in identifying strategies to modify peak-hour
travel demand.
REVIEWED BY:
Terry Scheckwitz. AICP
PHONE: 954-777-4601
REVIEWED BY:
Larry Hymowitz. AICP
PHONE: 954-777-4601
REVIEWED BY:
Gus Schmidt. PE
PHONE: 954-777-4601
IS
DISTRICT 4, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS & COMMENTS
RESPONSIBLE DIVISIONIBUREAU:
NAME OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT:
DATE PLAN RECEIVED FROM LOCAL GOVERNMENT:
DATE MEMORANDUM RECEIVED FROM DCA:
REQUIRED RETURN DATE FOR COMMENTS:
Planning Department
City of Boynton Beach
1/03/00
1/31/00
3/02/00
ELEMENT:
Transportation Element
GOPs
DCA Amendment # 00-lER
RULE DEFICIENCY:
9J-5.0 19(4)( c)(lO)
OBJECTION: The Transportation Element does not include numerical indicators for use
in measuring the level of achievement of mobility goals of the community.
RECOMMENDATION: The City should establish numerical standards for mode split,
annual transit trips per capita, or auto occupancy rates as well as other measures, against which
the community can measure its achievement of mobility goals.
REVIEWED BY:
Terry Scheckwitz. AICP
PHONE: 954-777-4601
REVIEWED BY:
LaITY Hymowitz. AICP
PHONE: 954-777-4601
REVIEWED BY:
Gus Schmidt. PE
PHONE: 954-777-4601
16
DISTRICT 4, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS & COMMENTS
RESPONSIBLE DIVISIONIBUREAU:
NAME OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT:
DATE PLAN RECEIVED FROM LOCAL GOVERNMENT:
DATE MEMORANDUM RECEIVED FROM DCA:
REQUIRED RETURN DATE FOR COMMENTS:
Planning Department
City of Boynton Beach
1/03/00
1/31/00
3/02/00
ELEMENT:
Transportation Element
GOPs
DCA Amendment # 00-1 ER
RULE DEFICIENCY:
9J-5.019(4)(c)13.
OBJECTION: The Transportation Element does not include a policy establishing
strategies that promote the use of alternatives to the Florida Intrastate Highway System (FIHS)
by local traffic.
RECOMMENDATION: The City should add a policy that identifies strategies to promote
alternatives to the use of the FIHS by local traffic.
REVIEWED BY:
Terry Scheckwitz. AICP
PHONE: 954-777-4601
REVIEWED BY:
Larry Hymowitz. AICP
PHONE: 954-777-4601
REVIEWED BY:
Gus Schmidt. PE
PHONE: 954-777-4601
17
Department of Planning,
Zoning &. Building
100 Australian Avenue
West Palm Beach, FL 33406
(561) 233-5000
Planning Division 233-5300
Zoning Division 233-5200
Building Division 233-5100
Code Enforcement 233-5500
Contractor's Certification 233.5525
Administration Office 233-5005
Executive Office 233.5003
www.co.palm-beach.f1.us
.
Palm Beach County
Board of County
Commissioners
Maude Ford Lee. Chair
Warren H. Newell. Vice Chairman
Karen T. Marcus
Carol A. Roberts
Mary McCarty
Burt Aaronson
Tony Masilotti
County Administrator
Robert Weisman
"An Equal Opportunity
Affirmative Action Employer"
@ printed on recycled paper
~
~
~~ "/0
>?
rn ~ ~; i::-7-'" .-.:.-.
Ei.n .2._~.. .
P J~. -'. ~,
RPM sSP .
PLAN P1:0CESSli'iG W."
March 2, 2000
Ray Eubanks
Community Program Administrator
Department of Community Affairs
2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard
Tallahassee, FL 32399-2100
RE: Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendments - City of
Boynton Beach
Dear Mr. Eubanks:
We have reviewed the comprehensive plan amendments for the
City of Boynton Beach. Staff does not object to any of the
amendments but offers the following comments for your
consideration.
1) Objective 2.1: The County has recently adopted Level of
Service (LOS) 0 and E traffic volumes consistent with latest
volumes established by the Florida Department of Transportation
(FOOT). The volumes identified in the City's LOS tables 2-1 and 2-
2, differ from the volumes established in County's LOS tables TE 1
and TE 2 (attached). Though, the volumes are different, the
County does not consider this to be inconsistent with its Plan.
2) The City's 2020 Thoroughfare System shows Gateway
Boulevard east of Seacrest Boulevard as a 4 lane facility. The
MPO's 2020 Plan shows it as a 2 lane facility. The County's
proposed 2020 roadway network (currently being processed as part
of Amendment Round 00-1) will also show 2 lanes. The purpose of
this comment is to bring this difference to the City's attention; this
item does not represent an inconsistency from the County's
perspective because the County's proposed cross-section for this
roadway segment will be accommodated by the City's proposed
cross-section.
Mr. Ray Eubanks
March 2, 2000
Page 2
Thank you for providing us with an opportunity to review these .
proposed municipal amendments. If you have any questions, please
contact Richard Morley at 561-233-5311.
pc: Dominic Sims, Executive Director
Michael Rumpf. Planning Director. City of Boynton Beach
Michael Busha, TCRPC
T:\PLANNING\INTERGOV\letter ORC review Boynlon.wpd
TABLE TE 1
TEST ONE LEVEL OF SERVICE 0
AL TERNA TE TEST ONE
FACILITY TYPE ADT PK HOUR Signals per mile Signals per mile
0.00 TO 1.99 2.00 TO 4.50
2 lanes undivided 2L 14,900 1,390 880 790
2 lanes one-way 2LO 19,500 1,810 2,220 2,050
3 lanes wo-way 3L 15,600 1 ,460 920 830
3 lanes one-way 3LO 29,300 2,730 3,340 3,100
4 lanes undivided 4L 24,400 2,270 1,390 1,280
4 lanes divided 4LD 32,500 3,020 1,850 1,710
5 lanes wo-way 5L 32,500 3,020 1,850 1,710
6 lanes divided 6LD 48,900 4,550 2,780 2,580
8 lanes divided 8LD 60,100 5,590 3,400 3,180
4 lanes expressway 4LX 66,200 5,800 3,310
6 lanes expressway 6LX 101,600 8,900 5,080
8 lanes expressway 8LX 138,600 12,200 6,930
10 lanes exoresswav 10LX 173 200 15.200 &860' e,660
TABLE TE 2
TEST ONE LEVEL OF SERVICE E
AL TERNA TE TEST ONE
FACILITY TYPE ADT PK HOUR Signals per mile Signals per mile
0.00 TO 1.99 2.00 TO 4.50
2 lanes undivided 2L 16,200 1,500 880 850
2 lanes one-way 2LO 20,600 1,910 2,220 2,170
3 lanes wo-way 3L 17,000 1,580 920 890
3 lanes one-way 3LO 31 ,000 2,890 3,340 3,280
4 lanes undivided 4L 25,700 2,390 1,390 1,360
4 lanes divided 4LD 34,300 3,190 1,850 1,810
5 lanes wo-way 5L 34,300 3,190 1,850 1,810
6 lanes divided 6LD 51,700 4,810 2,780 2,730
8 lanes divided 8LD 63,400 5,900 3,400 3,350
4 lanes expressway 4LX 81 0700 7,200 4,090
6 lanes expressway 6LX 125,400 11 ,000 6.270
8 lanes expressway 8LX 171,100 15,100 8.550
10 lanes exoresswav 10LX 213,800 18,800 10,690
Palm Beach County
Revised 12/13/99 & 12/21/99
Page 7 - TE
1989 Comprehensive Plan
Ordinance 99-57 to 99-63, & 76
SOUTH FWRlDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT
3301 Gun Club Road, West Palm Beach, Florida 33406 . (561) 686-8800 . FL W ATS 1-800-432-2043 . TOD (561) (,97-2574
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 24680, West Palm Beach, FL 33416-4680 . www.sfwmd.gov
~fl'~
(~
'-V ~CV
/)
GOV 08-28
March 13,2000
Ray Eubanks, Planning Manager
Plan Review and DR! Processing Team
Department of Community Affairs
2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard
Tallahassee, FL 32399-2100
Dear Mr. Eubanks:
Subject:
Proposed. Amendment Comments
City of Boynton Beach, DCA# 00-1 ER
0(\
\ .~;/
('<':\ % ~ \-Y. '
_.. "\ ~ \-1
. '\ ., \.-
'\'0 ~\., /.. .
\\ \\\\ ..4 /_".
.... \ ... .....- (". ... r> ... --" ~
~,\ , .. \ \ /....:;:.':'\ \)...~\~\\::.-.. >
.~~~) "'\/./,,? <;~~(:,;{~;: ~;~--
\ ,~<~>.
\ /'/'
The South Florida Water Management District has reviewed the subject document and
we have no water resource related comments. If you have any questions or require
additional information, please call me at (561) 682-6779.
Sincerely,
P.~-
Lead Planner
Palm Beach County Service Center
Government Affairs and Communications Department
'-
PKS/mh
c:
Michael Busha, TCRPC
Michael Rumpf, Boynton Beach
Roger Wilburn, DCA
GoVERNING BOARD
EXECUTIVE OFFICE
Frank R. Finch, P.E.. Executive Director
James E. Blount, Olief of Sft7f!
Michael Collins, Chainnan
Michael D. Minton, Vice OIainnan
Mitchell W. Berger
Vera M. Carter
Gerardo B. Fernandez
Patrick J. Gleason
Nicolas J. Gutierrez, Jr.
Harkley R. Thornton
Trudi K. Williams
.... ~~;O~S~t:RORlDADEPARTMENTOF STAn
'. -
Office of the Secrdaty
Office of Intemational Relations
Division of Elections
Division of Corporations
Division of Cultural AffaiJs
Division of Historical Resources
Division of Ubrary and Information Services
Division of Ucensing
Division of Administrative Services
MEMBER OF TIlE FLORIDA CABINF:I'
Mr. Ray Eubanks
Department of Community Affairs
Bureau of State Planning
2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2100
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Katherine Harris
Secretary of State
DMSION OF HISTORICAL RESOURCES
~
%1€)
State Board of Education
Trustees of the In~ Improvement Trust FWId
Administration Commission
Florida Und and Water Adjudicalory Commission
Siting Board
Division of Bond Fmance
Department of Revenue
Department of Law EnIorcement
Department of Highway Safety and Motor VelUdes
Department of Veterans" Affain
February 16,2000
L.- .----
r ; t I -.. .
. _.~-
Re: Historic Preservation Review of the City of Boynton Beach (OO-IER) Comprehensive Plan
Amendment Request
Dear Mr. Eubanks:
According to this agency's responsibilities under sections 163.3177 and 163.3178, Florida
Statutes, and Chapter 9J-5, Florida Administrative Code, we have revie\ved the above document
to decide if data regarding historic resources have been given sufficient consideration in the
request to amend the Boynton Beach Comprehensive Plan.
We have reviewed Evaluation and Appraisal Report based amendments to the Boynton Beach
Comprehensive Plan along with the Future Land Use Map Amendment for the Villa Del Sol tract
to consider the potential effects of these actions on historic resources. Our comments are as
follows.
For the Future Land Use Element, our comments are basically the same as they were for our
1989 review of this element in the initial plan. We still recommend that historical and natural
resource protection be separated into two different objectives. Furthermore, the city needs to be
more specific as to how historic resources are to be protected and state this in a measurable
,-~bjective. For Policy 1.11.9, it is rare, if ever, that a developer contacts this agency if fortuitous
~archaeological remains are encountered. Archaeological resources should be investigated prior
to any construction related land clearing or ground disturbances. In addition, this agency is
incorrectly referred to as the Division of Archives, History and Records Management. This
agency changed to the Division of Historical Resources in the mid-1980s. Policy 1.11.10 should
also mention that the city contact the Florida Master Site File annually to determine if any
additional sites have been added to our files. Policy 1.11.1 is a good policy and the city should
implement it as soon as possible, as preservation and protection of significant historic resources
can best be accomplished by the adoption of a local historic preservation ordinance.
R.A. Gray Building · 500 South Bronaugh Street · Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0250 · http:j /www.flheritage.com
o Director's Office 0 Archaeological Research ltV"Historic Preservation 0 Historical Museums
(850) 488-1480 . FAX: 488-3355 (850) 487-2299 . FAX: 414-2207 (850) 487-2333 . FAX: 922-0496 (850) 488-1484 . FAX: 921-2503
o Historic Pensacola Preservation Board 0 Palm Beach Regional Office 0 SI. Augustine Regional.office 0 Tampa Regional Office
(850) 595-5985 . FAX: 595-5989 (561) 279-1475 . FAX: 279-1476 (904) 825-5045 . FAX: 825-5Q.l4 (813) 272-3843 . FAX: 272-llW
';:'~
/~~::~:- .:~;~.x - ~\
.~, "-., . " -- - .-.
.:'~;) -- {;-:'~. . . .'. -
_ ~ :f-.;Y' .;
- ~'.~..
"
'+:.v:!'_.: .
.:.;.:.,
Mi. Eubanks
February 16,2000
Page 2
For the Housing Element, Objective 6.7 also needs to be more specific as to how historic housing
is to be preserved and should be written to be measurable. Policy 6.7.1 should be revised to
. reflect the. renumbered policies in the Future Land Use Element, as should Policy 6.7.2.
Furthermore, until there are specific guidelines for modifications or rehabilitation for historic
structures, The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for
Rehabilitating Historic Buildings should be referenced.
In the Coastal Management Element, historic resources are addressed in Objective 7.10. Again,
this objective should be more specific and measurable. The implementing policies are repeated
elsewhere in the plan.
Lastly, for the Future Land Use Map amendment, our cursory review suggests that the proposed
change should have no adverse effects on historic resources in the City of Boynton Beach.
Nevertheless, it is the city's responsibility to ensure that the proposed amendment will not have
an adverse effect on significant archaeological or historic resources within Boynton Beach.
In sum, it is our opinion that the amended comprehensive plan meets (although known and
potential historic resources need to be carefully considered in the planning phases of proposed
land use changes) the state of Florida's requirements as promulgated in sections 163.3177 and
163.3178, F.S., and Chapter 9J-5, F.A.C., regarding the identification of known historical
resources within their specified area of jurisdiction, and for the establishment of policies, goals
and objectives for addressing known and potentially significant historical resources in Boynton
Beach.
If you have any questions regarding our comments, please feel free to contact Susan M. Harp or
Laura Kammerer of the Division's Compliance Review staff at (850) 487-2333.
Sincerely,
~Jr-~
Janet Snyder Matthews, Ph.D., Director
Division of Historical Resources
JSM/smh
Department of
Environmental Protection
Jeb Bush
Governor
Marjory Stoneman Douglas Building
3900 Commonwealth Boulevard
Tallahassee. Florida 32399-3000
David B. Struhs
Secretary
In) rn & ~.' 0 C, I ~ I
Mr. D. Ray Eubanks .\lal MAR I 0 :mJ_J
D fC' ME" I
epartment 0 ommumty alrs "_.._-~---;-:-----c--_....
Bureau of Local Planning !.' ;
2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2100
Re: Proposed Amendment to the Boynton Beach Comprehensive Plan, DCA 00-lER
000
~
~~
Dear Mr. Eubanks:
The Office of Intergovernmental Programs of the Department of Environmental Protection
has reviewed the proposed amendment under the procedures of Chapter 163, Part II, Florida
Statutes, and Chapters 9J-5 and 9J-l1, Florida Administrative Code and offers no comments.
Please call me at (850) 487-2231 if you have questions about our response.
Sincerely, ~
~
Office of Legislative and Governmental Affairs
"Prated, Conserve and Manage Florida:S Environment and Natural Resources"
Printed on recycled paper.
THE SCHOOL DISTRICT
OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA
PLANNING & REAL ESTATE
3320 FOREST HILL BOULEVARD, C-331
WEST PALM BEACH, FL 33406-5813
~At BEACH CO~..c- (561) 434.8020 FAX (561) 434-8187
February 17,2000
Dr. H. Benjamin Marlin, Superintendent
Mr. Michael W. Rumpf
Director of Planning and Zoning
City of Boynton Beach
100 East Boynton Beach Blvd.
P.O. Box 310
Boynton Beach, FL 33425-0310
'. \ .
RE:
" .
\. ffB 2 A
\~W
Proposed Land Use Amendment at the NW Corner ofFed~rarHighway and Old
Dixie Highway
Dear Mr. Rumpf:
The School District Planning and Real Estate Department has reviewed the request for
future land use amendment for the subject 16-acre parcel. The proposed future land use
allows for a maximum of 320 units on the property. The current zoning allows for 147
units, even with the "Commercial 3" designation. The increase in students resulting from
the land use amendment will impact the public school system.
The existing schools serving the area with their membership and capacity are as follows.
Schools
Plumosa Elementary
Carver Middle School
Atlantic High School
Membership
603
1657
2710
Capacity
700
2710
1747
The development of 320 multi family units would generate a total of 118 students - 16
elementary students, 51 middle school students and 51 high school students. The
increase in students resulting from the change in future land would allow for
approximately 56 more students. The Middle and High schools are operating
overcapacity. The additional students may further overcrowd the schools in the area.
The School Board adopted Five Year Plan shows that new middle school 96BB opening
in August 2001 will provide enrollment relief to Carver Middle School and the new High
School III in Quantum Park will provide enrollment relief to Atlantic High School.
The School District recommends that the subject development post a notice of annual
boundary school assignments for students to be generated from this development. The
District will provide an 11" X 17" sign to be posted in a clear and visible location in all
sales offices and models with the follo\ving:
An Equal Education Opportunity Provider and Affirmative Action Employer
Page 2
Michael Rumpf
February 17,2000
NOTICE TO HOME BUYERS/TENANTS
"School age children may not be assigned to the public school closest to their residence.
School Board policies regarding overcrowding, racial balance or other boundary policy
decisions affect school boundaries. Please contact the Palm Beach County School
District Boundary Office at (561) 434-8100 for the most current school assignment(s)."
If this is to be a gated community, the School District will require that a bus pull
off/turnaround in compliance with School District regulation be provided in the
development before the gates to provide for the safe transportation of students from the
development.
The School District will continue to actively seek to provide the best school facilities for
all children of Palm Beach County. If there are any questions, please call me at 434-
8800.
Sincerely,
~~
Angela Usher
Planning Specialist (Educational)
c: Linda H. Hines, Palm Beach County School District
DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT
Division of Planning and Zoning
Building
Planning & Zoning
Engineering
Occupational License
Community Redevelopment
January 18,2000
Angela D. Usher
Planning Specialist
The School District of Palm Beach County, Florida
3320 Forest Hill Boulevard, C-331
West Palm Beach, FL 33406-5813
Re: NW Comer of Federal Highway and Old Dixie Highway
Dear Ms. Usher,
In accordance with Comprehensive Plan Policy 8.22.1, the city is to notify the Palm Beach County School
District of the application for a Land Use Amendment/Rezoning and Text Amendment for the above
referenced property. The current land use and zoning on this property is Local Retail Commercial (LRC)
and Community Commercial (C-3), respectively. The proposed land use designation is Special High
Density Residential, with Multi-Family Residential (R-3) zoning.
Under the Special High Density Residential designation, the 16 acre site could be developed at a
maximum density of20 units per acre. This density would permit development of320 units, with
estimated 244 residents. Under the current zoning, which also permits multifamily residential dwellings,
the maximum density is 10.8 dwellings per acre.
We respectfully request a statement which will evaluate the impact of the proposed amendment on the
public school system and verify that the educational needs of potential school-aged children living in the
project can be met through existing or planned facilities. The data submitted to this office by the applicant
indicates that both middle and high school are currently operating over their respective level of service.
Please contact me at 561-742-6263 if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
hC~t-
Michael W. Rumpf
Director of Planning and Zoning
J:\SHRDATAIPlanningISHAREDlWP'PROJECTSIPB County School Board Lelter2.doc
America's Gateway to tlte Gulfstream
100 East Boynton Beach Blvd., P.O. Box 310 Boynton Beach. Florida 33425-0310 Phone: (561) 375-6260 FAX: (561) 375-6259
.'
0.... ,.-.;
"\ '
.~~...~~
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS
"Dedicated to making Florida a better place to call homeH
IEB BUSH
Governor
STEVEN M. SEIBERT
Secretary
January 7,2000
.~--....~--
\ ~\\\
i
.
Michael W. Rumpf
Director of Planning and Zoning
City of Boynton Beach
Post Office Box 310
Boynton Beach, FL 33425
c~ \~
'\ '": \,'
. ,~_~'--1 ~
~
l.
, JJ\~\
,
..I i
gf. _.J
Dear Mr. Rumpf:
The Department received the proposed amendment to the Boynton Beach Comprehensive
Plan on January 3, 2000 as submitted with your letter dated December 30, 1999. The proposed
amendment package received by the Department is incomplete because it does not include all of
the information required by Rule 9J-II, Florida Administrative Code.
The submittal requirements for amendments to local government comprehensive plans are
prescribed in Rule 9J-11, Florida Administrative Code, "Procedural Rule for Review of Local
Government Comprehensive Plans and Amendments." The requirements for the transmittal letter
are outlined in Rule 9J-11.006(1)(a), Florida Administrative Code. Your submittal package for
the proposed amendment(s) does not include:
· Reference map amendment LUAR #99-05Nista del Sol, six copies of your future land
use map depicting the present future land use map designations of the subject property
and the abutting properties adjoining the subject area [Rule 9J-11.006(1)(b)lb].
The proposed amendment will not be processed until all the required information is
available to distribute for review, as required by Rule 9J-11.009(1)(b), Florida Administrative
Code. Ifwe may be offurther assistance, please contact Mr. Paul Conger, Planner IV, or me, at
(850) 488-4925.
< Si~r~ Q 0\Ar!-9---
~ D. Ray Eubanks D
Community Program Administrator
DRE/pcr
2555 SHUMARD OAK BOULEVARD · TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA 32399.2100
Phone: 850.488.8466/Suncom 278.8466 FAX: 850.921 .0781/Suncom 291.0781
Internet address: http://www.dca.state.fl.us
flORIDA KEYS
Area of Critical Stale Concern Field Office
2796 aver..... H;ghway. Su;te 2' 2
Marathon. Florida 3305().2227
GREEN SWAMP
Area of Critical SLate Concern Field Office
205 East Main Street, Suite 104
Bartow, Florida 33630.4b41
~" V-dlCLMr~
t ~VAfz...
DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT
Division of Planning and Zoning
Building
Planning & Zoning
Engineering
Occupational License
Community Redevelopment
December 30, 1999
Mr. Tom Beck
Bureau of Local Planning
Florida Department of Community Affairs
2555 Shumard Oak Drive
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2100
Re: City of Boynton Beach
EAR-Based and Non EAR-Based Comprehensive Plan Amendments.
Dear Mr. Beck:
We are pleased to submit the EAR-Based amendments for the City of Boynton Beach
Comprehensive Plan. Also included with this submittal is one non EAR-Based Future Land Use
Map (FLUM) amendment and the related text amendment. The City Commission / Local
Planning Agency held a properly noticed public hearing on December 21, 1999, at which time
they approved transmittal of the above referenced amendments.
Please be advised that the EAR-Based Amendments addressing siting of public school facilities
and Intergovernmental Coordination have been reviewed by the Department of Community
Affairs and are scheduled for adoption by the Boynton Beach City Commission on January 11,
2000. The site specific FLUM amendment and related text involve a change from General
Commercial to Special High Residential category for a 16 acre site.
Changes proposed in the amendments:
. are not, nor do they affect, An Area of Critical State Concern;
. are not exceptions to the twice yearly limitation for plan amendments as noted in F .S.
163.3177(h)(4);
. are not proposed to be adopted under a joint planning agreement pursuant to Chapter
163.3171, F.S.; and,
. have been submitted to Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council, South Florida Water
Management District, Florida Department of Transportation, and Florida Department of
Environmental Protection (see attached letters).
America's Gateway to the Gulfstream
100 East Boynton Beach Blvd., P.O. Box 310 Boynton Beach, Florida 33425-0310 Phone: (561) 742-6260 FAX: (561) 742-6259
Copies of the entire Comprehensive Plan have been sent to all the agencies listed in 91-11.008(9)
(a).
The contact person for information regarding the amendment is:
Michael Rumpf, Director of Planning and Zoning
City of Boynton Beach
100 E. Boynton Beach Boulevard
P.O. Box 310
Boynton Beach, Florida 33425
Telephone: (561) 742-6261
Fax: (561) 742-6259
Six copies of all documentation for the proposed amendments are provided for your review. As
stated above, separate transmittals have been sent to the other required agencies.
Should you have any questions, please call me.
Sincerely,
:J JJ
(>) Uc:5-tA e!7a-bt/ ~
Michael W. Rumpf
Director of Planning and Zoning
MWR/nl
Attachments
cc: Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council
South Florida Water Management District
Florida Department of Transportation
Florida Department of Environmental Protection
J:\SHRDA T A\Planning\SHAREDlWP\PROJECTS\DCA lEGAL NOTICE AD\EAR.doc
DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT
Division of Planning and Zoning
Building
Planning & Zoning
Engineering
Occupational License
Community Redevelopment
December 30, 1999
Joseph M. Yesbeck, P.E.,
District Director- Transportation Planning Office,
Department of Transportation, District 4
3400 West Commercial Boulevard, 3rd Floor
Ft. Lauderdale, Florida 33309-3421
Dear Mr. Yesbeck:
Attached please find the transmittal sent to the Department of Community Affairs on December
30, 1999, regarding the EAR-Based Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and non EAR-
Based Future Land Use Map amendment for the City of Boynton Beach.
Please feel free to contact me at (561) 742-6260 if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
dtA~F
Michael W. Rumpf
Director of Planning and Zoning
MWR/nl
Attachments
J:ISHRDATAIPlanningISHAREDlWPIPROJECTSIDCA Letter 12-30-99 doc
America's Gateway to the Gulfstream
100 East Boynton Beach Blvd.. P.O. Box 310 Boynton Beach, Florida 33425-0310 Phone: (561) 375-6260 FAX: (561) 375-6259
DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT
Division of Planning and Zoning
Building
Planning & Zoning
Engineering
Occupational License
Community Redevelopment
December 30, 1999
Mr. Anthony Waterhouse, P .E.
Director, Surface Water Management
South Florida Water Management District
P.O. Box 24680
West Palm Beach, Florida 33416
Dear Mr. Waterhouse:
Attached please find the transmittal sent to the Department of Community Affairs on December
30, 1999, regarding the EAR-Based Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and non EAR-
Based Future Land Use Map amendment for the City of Boynton Beach.
Please feel free to contact me at (561) 742-6260 if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
cX3~A !1devjx--
Michael W. Rumpf
Director of Planning and Zoning
MWRlnl
Attachments
J .ISHRDA T A IPlanninglSHAREDI WPIPROJECTSISFWMDTransmittalletter.doc
America's Gateway to the Gulfstream
100 East Boynton Beach Blvd., P.O. Box 310 Boynton Beach, Florida 33425-0310 Phone: (561) 375-6260 FA.X: (561) 375-6259
DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT
Division of Planning and Zoning
Building
Planning & Zoning
Engineering
Occupational License
Community Redevelopment
December 30, 1999
Ms. Lynn Griffin
Director of the Office of Intergovernmental Programs
Department of Environmental Protection
3900 Commonwealth Boulevard
Tallahassee, Florida 32303
Mail Station 47
Dear Ms. Griffin:
Attached please find the transmittal sent to the Department of Community Affairs on December
30, 1999, regarding the EAR-Based Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and non EAR-
Based Future Land Use Map amendment for the City of Boynton Beach.
Please feel free to contact me at (561) 742-6260 if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
d~A~#,-
Michael W. Rumpf
Director of Planning and Zoning
MWR/nl
Attachments
America's Gateway to the Gulfstream
100 East Boynton Beach Blvd., P.O. Box 310 Boynton Beach, Florida 33425-0310 Phone: (561) 375-6260 FA-X: (561) 375-6259
DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT
Division of Planning and Zoning
Building
Planning & Zoning
Engineering
Occupational License
Community Redevelopment
December 30, 1999
Michael J. Busha
Executive Director
Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council
301 East Ocean Boulevard, Suite 300
Stuart, Florida 34994
Dear Mr. Busha:
Attached please find the transmittal sent to the Department of Community Affairs on December
30,1999, regarding the EAR-Based Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and non EAR-
Based Future Land Use Map amendment for the City of Boynton Beach.
Please feel free to contact me at (561) 742-6260 if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
d~-" ~w p-
Michael W. Rumpf
Director of Planning and Zoning
MWRlnl
Attachments
J:\SHRDATAIPlanningISHAREDlWPIPROJECTSIDCA Letter 12-JO-99.doc
America's Gateway to the Gulfstream
100 East Boynton Beach Blvd., P.O. Box 310 Boynton Beach, Florida 33425-0310 Phone: (561) 375-6260 FAX: (561) 375-6259
treQlure
co~t
regional
planniQg
council
December 7, 1999
fJ-'! f' 0 tCl":'
t --.\..1 .,;;j I_~"~',
Mr. Michael Rumpf
Planning and Zoning Director
City of Boynton Beach
P.O. Box 310
Boynton Beach, Florida 33425-0310
Subject: Land Use Amendment/Rezoning (LUAR 99) Text Amendment (CPTA 99-002)
Dear Mr. Rumpf;
The proposed change to reclassify the above referenced subject property to Special High
Density Residential to develop a residential rental project is consistent with the Eastward
Ho! Initiative.
The proposed project meets the Eastward Ho! Initiative goal of urban revitalization by
providing infill-housing opportunities for residents of all income levels. This proposed
project may also reinforce the goal of the use of good and effective urban design
techniques and may encourage the development community to consider proximity to
mass transit and services.
Please telephone me at 561-221-4060 if you require additional information.
Sincerely,
doll1\- h~
Joan Barlow
Eastward Ho! Project Facilitator
enc
301 east ocean boulevard
suite 300
stuart, florida 34994
phone (561) 221-4060
sc 269-4060 fax (561) 221-4067
DEP ARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT
Division of Planning and Zoning
Building
Planning & Zoning
Engineering
Occupational License
Community Redevelopment
December 3, 1999
Carmela Jill Masterman
9 Colonial Club Drive #101
Boynton Beach, FL 33435
Dear Ms. Masterman:
Re: Zoning change on parcel at the corner of Dixie Highway and Federal Highway from
Commercial to Residential.
Please be informed that I have received the petition for postponement and will present it to the
Board and Commission on the advertised dates for their consideration.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
--lL~c
Michael W. Rumpf
Director of Planning & Zoning
MWR:ja
J ISHRDA T A IPLANNINGISHAREDlWPICORRESPIPETITION MASTERMAN. DOC
America's Gateway to the Gulfs/ream
100 East Boynton Beach Blvd., P.O. Box 310 Boynton Beach, Florida 33425-0310 Phone: (561) 375-6260 FAX: (561) 375-6259
"
Carmela Jill Mastem
9 Colonial Club Drive ·
Boynton Beach, Fl. 33
I
'<- _ f"-, .--; .it ~
(;....~.~ .. ____ .F'-V~'\. .ifl p. ,,~~ '~.....' \
~ !; // -... /'~ C. ,; J I \.~\--
t/.- (~::3/ )./\ f:-"/~'
,
j
11/24/99
}~J~0/\
. ~. .\"'\.
jkt}~'r"; , .
"
\,.3
City of Boynton Beach
Planning & Development Board
1 00 E. Boynton Beach Blvd.
P.O. Box 310
Boynton Beach, Fl. 33425-0310
jr;;~-1 (!. ~,~ .
v --- :ry
1/
\,
Gentlemen and Ladies of the Commission,
RE: Zoning Change on parcel at the corner of Dixie
Hwy and Federal Hwy from Commercial to
Residential.
Some of the Voting Members of Boynton Beach, from Colonial Club Condominium, Sterling
Village, Hampshire Gardens, and Los Mango's signed the enclosed petition to ask the
Commissioners to change the dates, when you will discuss and determine the above zoning
change. Those dates are now December 14th and December 21st.. Most of the residents of these
communities are senior citizens, that commute to other area's at this time to celebrate the
HOLIDAYS with their families. They are very concerned about the above zoning change and
wish to participate in the meetings but will be unable to do so unless the dates are changed. I
would hope that the commissioners would not make changes without hearing from the citizens of
our communities. Kindly change the dates of these hearings.
Yours very truly,
) . .
\) ., )/.' ~
. d~-?~ J<u!I -'llt~ -t...{--~
! I. /"j
,. . Carmela Jill ~sterman (
Enclosed: Copy of Signed Petitions
cc: Gerald Broening, Mayor of Boynton Beach.
cc Henderson Tillman, Vic Mayor
cc: Ronald Weiland Commissioner
cc Nellie Denahan, Commissioner
cc: William A. Sherman, Commissioner.
~ ~~~~' ~,/ /
':. ..~,'~~'" -,,~~,,),p,/I ~ {.?j1'
'__~~ ;2.
.,\~~~
._~.._--~,---;. .
-.. ~., .,-
. -'.
' \. ...
- ..j---'~-~~~~----~----
. - -~-}.-~,:::,-;--
;
. -'" .": '"
......... --- .
(...: - - I_..:-'._~--- ._ - - .
.. \
..-
-.2 _\~- '___
------ ---- ---..'- ~ - ~--.--...>!..---.:._.... ---
\ , "
'~.:'-~-
- \ . . ~\ "-. ',' \..
.- -- - ----- .---- -_.._-----~ -
u __' '_ --.:..~ _~ ~