EAR - December 2006 (7.5MB, 123 pgs)City of Boynton Beach Comprehensive Plan Evaluation and Appraisal Report Revised December 5, 2006 City of Boynton Beach 100 East Boynton Beach Boulevard Boynton Beach, Florida 33425
?u?T?t??????????????????????????????????????????????
???????
Gerald Taylor, Mayor City Commissioners Bob Ensler, Vice Mayor Carl McKoy Mack McCray Jose Rodriguez Kurt Bressner, City Manager Quintus Greene, Development Director Michael Rumpf, Planning
and Zoning Director
City of Boynton Beach i Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Table of Contents Table of Contents ..........................................................................................
......... i Map Appendix ........................................................................................................iii List of Tables....................................................
.....................................................iv Chapter 1 – INTRODUCTION AND IDENTIFICATION OF MAJOR ISSUES 1. Introduction....................................................................
.....................1-1 2. Public Participation Process .................................................................... 1-2 3. Identification of Major Issues ...................................
............................ 1-3 Chapter 2 – CONSISTENCY WITH STATE AND REGIONAL PLANS 1. Consistency requirements ......................................................................
2-1 2. State Comprehensive Plan...................................................................... 2-1 3. Treasure Coast Strategic Regional Policy Plan ..........................................
2-2 4. Chapter 163, F.S. and Rule 9J-5, F.A.C.................................................... 2-2 Chapter 3 – LAND USE AND POPULATION ANALYSIS 1. Population Analysis..............................
................................................. 3-1 2. Land Use Analysis ................................................................................. 3-4 Chapter 4 – Assessment
of Plan Elements 1. Future Land Use Element ....................................................................... 4-1 2. Transportation Element .....................................................
................... 4-7 3. Utilities Element .................................................................................. 4-12 Sanitary Sewer Sub-Element .......................................
................... 4-12 Stormwater Sub-Element ................................................................ 4-14 Potable Water Sub-Element .......................................................
.... 4-15 Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Sub-Element......................... 4-16 Solid Waste Sub-Element ................................................................ 4-16
Conservation Element.............................................................................. 4-17 Recreation and Open Space Element ........................................................
4-19 Housing Element..................................................................................... 4-21 Coastal Management Element .............................................................
.... 4-25 Intergovernmental Coordination Element .................................................. 4-29 Capital Improvements Element.................................................................
4-34 Public School Facilities Element ................................................................ 4-41 Chapter 5 – SPECIAL TOPICS 1. Demands of Growth: Concurrency Management and
Financial Feasibility of Providing Needed Infrastructure.......................................... 5-1 2. Long-Term Water Supply and Comprehensive Plan ................................
5-12 3. Redevelopment in High Hazard Coastal Areas ........................................ 5-14
City of Boynton Beach ii Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 4. School Concurrency and Planning. ........................................................ 5-15 5. Implementation
of TCEA...................................................................... 5-15 6. Traffic Impact Methodology ................................................................. 5-15
City of Boynton Beach iii Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 APPENDIX 1. MAP A: Future Land Use Map with TCEA 2. MAP B: Vacant Parcels 3. MAP C: Residential and Mixed Use
Projects Approved on Sites Intended for Industrial Uses 4. MAP D: Development and Redevelopment Activity Along US-1 Corridor
City of Boynton Beach iv Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 List of Tables Table 1 Changes to Chapter 163, F.S., 1997-2005 .......................................... 2-3
Table 2 Changes to Rule 9J-5, F.A.C............................................................ 2-27 Table 3 Average Annual Growth Rates, 1960-2005, with chart .........................
3-1 Table 4 Population Growth, 2000 Census and 2001-2005 Estimates, with chart. 3-1 Table 5 Residential Permit Activity 1991-2005, with chart................................ 3-2 Table
6 Population Projections vs. Revised Estimates, with chart...................... 3-3 Table 7 Existing Land Uses on Developed Parcels ........................................... 3-5 Table
8 Vacant Developable Land by Land Use Category, 2005........................ 3-6
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION AND IDENTIFICATION OF MAJOR ISSUES
City of Boynton Beach 1-1 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Introduction and Identification of Major Issues 1. INTRODUCTION The City of Boynton Beach is located in southern
Palm Beach County, with the Town of Hypoluxo to the north, the City of Delray Beach to the south and the towns of Ocean Ridge and Briny Breezes to the east. Lands to the west of the
City are in unincorporated Palm Beach County. It is the third largest city in Palm Beach County and has a number of location advantages which contribute significantly to its overall
economic potential. • The city is located approximately 45 miles north of Miami and 15 miles south of West Palm Beach. This puts it in the heart of southeast Florida’s rapidly growing
tri-county Dade/Broward/Palm Beach metropolitan areas. • The city has direct access to the Intracoastal Waterway and both Interstate 95 and the Florida Turnpike. It also has a market
of over 6.5 million people within a 100 mile radius of the city and ready access to three international international airports, three major seaports, two major rail lines as well as
the Tri-Rail commuter rail system. The original plan for the City was recorded on September 3, 1898, and contained 160 acres, although the town was not incorporated until 1920. Today
the land area of the incorporated City is approximately 16.4 square miles; the city Utilities Department, however, provides water and sewer services to an additional land area of approximately
33,000 acres. The City’s 2004 population is estimated at 65,208 permanent residents, with a seasonal population estimated at 5,299 persons. The City was traditionally considered a low-density,
low-rise community; however, in recent years Boynton Beach has focused on encouraging the redevelopment of the City’s coastal area and in the Community Redevelopment Area. Mixed use
regulations drafted to implement the City’s vision, which began with the 20/20 Redevelopment Master Plan in 1998, have dramatically increased the allowable densities and intensities
of development in these areas. In addition, the City has provided similar incentives to encourage mixed use development and redevelopment in more suburban areas of the City, to offset
the patterns of sprawl that had been previously embraced. The City of Boynton Beach adopted its first Comprehensive Plan in 1962. Updated Comprehensive Plans were adopted in 1972, 1977.
In 1986, the City prepared an Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) of the 1977 Plan, pursuant to the State of Florida Local Government Comprehensive Planning act of 1975 as amended.
The 1989 City of Boynton Beach Comprehensive Plan was adopted partly in response to the 1986 EAR and also to meet the State’s minimum criteria for comprehensive plans found in Rule 9J-5
F.A.C. as adopted in 1986. Pursuant to the requirements of the same Rule, as amended, the previous Evaluation and Appraisal Report of the 1989 Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 1996
and updating amendments to the Comprehensive Plan resulting from that report were adopted in 2000.
City of Boynton Beach 1-2 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Introduction and Identification of Major Issues The Evaluation and Appraisal Report of the 2000 Comprehensive
Plan was adopted in December of 2005 and subsequently submitted to the Department of Community Affairs for sufficiency review. On February, 2006, the City received the preliminary Sufficiency
Determination letter from the Department, concluding that its EAR report is insufficient. Final Sufficiency Determination letter was received on March 14, 2006. This EAR report has been
revised and addresses the indicated deficiencies. It has been prepared to meet the requirements of Section 163.3191, F.S., that were adopted “to ensure the comprehensive plan is modified
to reflect changes in the law, to respond to unanticipated problems and opportunities within . . .(the) . . . community and to address any major issues recognized by . . . citizens and
government officials.” 2. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROCESS In accordance with Section 163,3191(2)(j), F.S., the City of Boynton Beach was required to submit a summary of the public participation
activities involved in the preparation of the Evaluation and Appraisal Report. The table on the following page outlines the workshops and public hearings that were involved in the identification
of the major issue and the preparation of the EAR. TABLE 1. Public Participation Process Date Activity Notice June 1, 2004 Planning staff “scoping” meeting In-house meeting June 14,
2004 Staff meeting (including department directors) on preliminary list of major issues In-house meeting June 17, 2004 Public Workshop including Community Redevelopment Agency Board
and Planning and Development Board: identification of major issues Advertised in local section of newspaper August 9, 2004 Public Workshop including City Commission and both advisory
boards (CRA and P&D): identification of major issues Advertised in local section of newspaper November 22, 2005 Planning and Development Board public hearing on draft EAR Meeting notice
posted November 29, 2005 Community Redevelopment Agency Board public hearing on draft EAR Meeting notice posted December 9, 2005 City Commission adoption public hearing on EAR Advertised
in local section of newspaper No scoping meeting with state, regional or local agencies were held.
City of Boynton Beach 1-3 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Introduction and Identification of Major Issues 3. IDENTIFICATION OF MAJOR ISSUES ISSUE I: Wastewater Treatment
Capacity Issue Framework The City of Boynton Beach owns, operates and maintains a wastewater collection and conveyance system to serve its customers. Wastewater treatment is a joint
effort carried out under an interlocal agreement with the City of Delray Beach with each city sharing equally in treatment capacity and costs of operation. Forecast population increases
within the City’s service area will result in increased capacity demands, beyond the City’s allocation of the treatment capacity. A portion of this increased capacity demand is caused
by groundwater infiltration and inflow into the collection and conveyance system as evidenced by the fact that the City’s peak monthly flow to the plant was during September 2004 when
there were 2 hurricane occurrences in our area and the rainfall for the month was 25 inches. Short-and Long-Term Implications of This Issue The Regional Wastewater Treatment Facility
has ¼ its total capacity available to meet the demands of both the City of Boynton Beach and the City of Delray Beach for the 10-year planning horizon, but this may not be sufficient
for buildout. Sufficient land is available within the existing site to expand the treatment facility, which may be necessary to meet the capacity demands at buildout. Alternatives to
Address the Issue Increased demands for wastewater system capacity may be addressed by the City of Boynton Beach through a combination of reducing groundwater infiltration and inflow
into the gravity sewer component of the system and securing an increase in treatment capacity from the South Central Regional Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Facility. The Boynton
Beach Utilities Department is prepared to proceed with a sanitary sewer rehabilitation program in the near future that will address that component of ground water infiltration and inflow
determined to be cost-cost-effective to eliminate. Upon determining the ultimate additional capacity made available as a result of implementing the sanitary sewer rehabilitation program,
an estimate of additional treatment capacity needed from the South Central Facility may be determined and secured. This additional treatment capacity will be determined as a result of
population projections provided by the City’s Planning and Zoning Department.
City of Boynton Beach 1-4 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Introduction and Identification of Major Issues ISSUE II: Workforce Housing Issue Framework Until fairly recently,
the City of Boynton Beach housing market offered all types of units at prices significantly lower than those of many Palm Beach County municipalities. Market rents in apartment developments
were affordable to middle class and the rental stock continued to grow. In fact, EAR scoping meetings that took place in 2004 failed to recognize workforce housing shortage as a “major
issue” for the city. The 2004 existing home sales data for the city shows a $200,000 median price for a single family home; the median prices were $163,000 and $113,000 for townhomes
and condominiums, respectively. These numbers still indicated median price increases of over 100%, while the wages in the area remained largely flat. Moreover, condo conversions depleted
the city’s rental stock. The prices of existing homes rose sharply, again, in 2005. The The new units are priced significantly higher than the existing homes, and some 7,000 units are
approved or under construction as of April of 2006. Although the market turndown is already affecting pricing, there are no expectations of significant and lasting price decreases. In
December 2005 the city’s Community Redevelopment Agency Board voted to hire a consultant for a housing needs assessment study, which ultimately included the entire city. The draft report
submitted in April of 2006 shows varying affordability gaps for selected markets and concludes that the demand for workforce housing will necessitate provision of about 7,293 affordable
units by the year 2025, averaging about 107 units per year. Short-and Long-Term Implications of This Issue Short term implications are unclear. However, if the issue is not addressed
in the long term framework, negative impacts will start to accumulate. First, the traffic will be affected, as people who get jobs in the City but cannot afford housing close to their
workplace are forced to commute long distances. Additional and longer trips will exacerbate the traffic situation, steadily worsening as redevelopment proceeds and densities in many
locations increase. Second, affordable housing shortage will affect the city’s future business mix, since some businesses will choose to open facilities in alternative locations where
their workforce can find more attainable housing. Finally, failure to address the issue now will mean lost opportunities, as vacant land is no longer available and the number of potential
redevelopment sites declines.
City of Boynton Beach 1-5 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Introduction and Identification of Major Issues Alternative Strategies to Address the Issue The City has pursued
its affordable housing goals through the state’s SHIP program (purchase and rehabilitation of units) and the allocation of the CDBG grants (for rehabilitation only). There are no programs
which would facilitate provision of rental housing, or provide funding for rehabilitation of rental units. The demand for available funds far exceeds supply, and the dramatic price increases
have significantly increased the average purchase assistance. During the 2004/2005 fiscal year, 10 families received purchase assistance averaging $20,686, while the assistance for 10
families in 2005/2006 fiscal year averaged $43,170. For consistency with the county’s program, the city set the maximum affordable housing threshold at $280,462 for purchases of both
new and existing units. In addition to the above program, the City must meet affordable housing conditions as part of its TCEA and CRALLS programs. ?? The TCEA requires that 5% of new
or rehabilitated housing within the TCEA area (encompassing the majority of the CRA area) is available for occupancy by very low, low and moderate income households. In addition, CRA
has an “affordable access” component in its Direct Incentive Program, which is currently under review. Affordable housing program may necessitate creation of the Real Estate Trust. ??
CRALLS program requires that developers of proposed redevelopment sites along or in the proximity to the Congress Avenue corridor to set aside 10% of their residential units for very
low, low and moderate income households, or pay a fee in-lieu. The City is currently reviewing the Housing Needs Assessment study. The programs that may be chosen to address the issue
include mandatory inclusionary zoning or density bonus for developers who voluntarily set aside some units within the affordable pricing range. In preparation for these program, the
City is processing Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment (currently under DCA review) to allow Special High Density land use classification, currently allowed only within the coastal area,
to be applied city-wide. The City has also created a new revenue source through (pending) implementation of the share equity program, whereby the beneficiaries of the SHIP program will
be required to pay a percentage of the property appreciation amount at the time of resale, if the resale occurs prior to the 30 year mortgage repayment period.
City of Boynton Beach 1-6 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Introduction and Identification of Major Issues Other Issues Concerning the Plan The following are the most
pertinent issues concerning the current Comprehensive Plan: ?? The objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan do not have clearly stated short-term or long-term planning horizon,
in cases when it is appropriate. ?? Capital Improvement Element has been amended twice since 1989; however, the requirement of the Policy 9E.1.2 obligating the city to monitor and evaluate
the CIE on an annual basis has not been fully met. Moreover, the City has not complied with the requirement to submit the adopted annual update of the Five Year Capital Improvement Schedule
to the Department of Community Affairs. ?? The comprehensive plan currently does not determine intensity standards for the Public & Private Governmental/Institutional (PPG), Recreational
(R) and Conservation (CON) land uses. These shortcomings need to be addressed in the EAR-based plan amendments. Thereafter, the City will carry out annual updates of the CIS and annual
evaluations of CIE.
CHAPTER 2 CONSISTENCY WITH STATE AND REGIONAL PLANS
City of Boynton Beach 2-1 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Consistency with State and Regional Plans 1. CONSISTENCY REQUIREMENTS Chapter 163.3191 (2)(f) F. S. requires
that the Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) contain an evaluation and assessment of relevant changes to the state comprehensive plan (187.201, F.S.), Chapter 163, F.S. Rule 9J-5 and
the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council’s Strategic Regional Policy Plan, since adoption of the last EAR update amendments. This analysis was conducted utilizing all of the changes
that have occurred to these documents since 1996, when the City of Boynton Beach adopted its most recent EAR. When an inconsistency was identified, such as a requirement not currently
addressed in the City of Boynton Beach Comprehensive Plan, the appropriate element is identified for update. The sections containing the assessment of changes to Chapter 163, F.S. and
Rule 9J-5, F.A.C. are presented in Tables 2 and 3. 2. STATE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The State Comprehensive Plan was amended in 1999 by Chapter 99-378 to include policies related to urban
policy in the State Comprehensive Plan. Goal 17 identified as Downtown Revitalization was amended and entitled Urban and Downtown Revitalization. The goal was modified to state that
“In recognition of the importance of Florida’s vital urban centers and of the need to develop and redevelop downtowns to the state’s ability to use…” The following policies were added:
?? Promote and encourage communities to engage in a redesign step to include public participation of members of the community in envisioning redevelopment goals and design of the community
core before redevelopment. ?? Ensure that local governments have adequate flexibility to determine and address their urban priorities within the state urban policy. ?? Enhance the linkages
between land use, water use, and transportation planning in state, regional, and local plans for current and future designated urban areas. ?? Develop concurrency requirements that do
not compromise public health and safety for urban areas that promote redevelopment efforts. ?? Promote processes for the state, general purpose local governments, school boards and local
community colleges to coordinate and cooperate regarding education facilities in urban areas, including planning functions, the development of joint facilities and the reuse of existing
buildings. ?? Encourage the development of mass transit systems for urban centers, including multimodal transportation feeder systems, as a priority of local, metropolitan, regional
and state transportation planning. ?? Locate appropriate public facilities within urban centers to demonstrate public commitment to the centers and to encourage the private sector development.
City of Boynton Beach 2-2 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Consistency with State and Regional Plans ?? Integrate state programs that have been developed to promote economic
development and neighborhood revitalization through incentives to promote the development of designated urban infill areas. ?? Promote infill development and redevelopment as an important
mechanism to revitalize and sustain urban centers. Although the Comprehensive Plan was not revised to address these provisions, they are already addressed through existing adopted provisions,
which emphasize urban infill and redevelopment and the promotion of transit to the extent possible. The Boynton Beach Comprehensive Plan is consistent with State Comprehensive Plan in
Chapter 187.F.S. The EAR based amendments may include some refinements to the goals, objectives, and policies of the City’s Comprehensive Plan that further its consistency with these
added state Comprehensive Plan policies. 3. TREASURE COAST STRATEGIC REGIONAL POLICY PLAN Chapter 186, F.S. governs the adoption and revision of the Strategic Regional Policy Plans (SRPP)
by Regional Planning Councils. Based on the 1996 Evaluation and Appraisal Report, the City of Boynton Beach’s Comprehensive Plan remains consistent with the Treasure Coast Strategic
Regional Policy Plan (TCSRPP), which was adopted on December 15, 1995 and was reviewed during the TCRPC EAR process in 2000. After final adoption of the TCSRPP update in 2007, the City
of Boynton Beach will evaluate the consistency of the Comprehensive Plan and address inconsistencies in the City’s EAR-based amendments. 4. CHAPTER 163, F.S. AND RULE 9J-5, F.A.C Tables
2 and 3 provide analyses of all the changes made to Chapter 163, F.S. and Rule 9J-5, F.A.C, since the time of adoption of the City of Boynton Beach’s previous EAR (1996). The changes
are summarized by year and include the corresponding citations. The tables, which provide a determination of consistency with the Boynton Beach Comprehensive Plan, indicate which of
the new citations have been addressed in the Plan, which will require future comprehensive plan amendments and which are not applicable.
TABLE 1. CHANGES TO CHAPTER 163, F.S., 1997-2005 Changes 163, F.S. Citations Addressed in Comprehensive Plan EAR-based Plan Amendment Needed 1997 Amended the definition of de minimis
impact as it pertains to concurrency requirements. 163.3180(6) No amendment needed Established that no plan or plan amendment in an area of critical state concern is effective until
found in compliance by a final order. 163.3184(14) No amendment needed Amended the criteria for the annual effect of Duval County small scale amendments to a maximum of 120 acres. 163.3187(1)(c)1.a.I
I N/A Prohibited amendments in areas of critical state concern from becoming effective if not in compliance. 163.3189(2)(b) No amendment needed 1998 Exempted brownfield area amendments
from the twice-a-year limitation. 163.3187(1)(g) No amendment needed Required that the capital improvements element set forth standards for the management of debt. 163.3177(3)(a)4. C.I.E.
Policies 9E.4.1, 9E.4.2, and 9E.5.3 No amendment needed Required inclusion of at least two planning periods – at least 5 years and at least 10 years. 163.3177(5)(a) Amendment needed
Allowed multiple individual plan amendments to be considered together as one amendment cycle. 163.3184(3)(d) No amendment needed Defined “optional sector plan” and created Section 163.3245
allowing local governments to address DRI issues within certain identified geographic areas. 163.3164(31) and 163.3245 No amendment needed Established the requirements for a public school
facilities element. 163.3177(12) Public School Facilities Element, Goal 10.4 No amendment needed City of Boynton Beach 2-3 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Consistency
with State and Regional Plans
TABLE 1. CHANGES TO CHAPTER 163, F.S., 1997-2005 Changes 163, F.S. Citations Addressed in Comprehensive Plan EAR-based Plan Amendment Needed Established the minimum requirements for
imposing school concurrency. 163.3180(12) [Now: Section (13)] No amendment needed Required DCA adopt minimum criteria for the compliance determination of a public school facilities element
imposing school concurrency. 163.3180(13) [Now: Section14)] No amendment needed Required that evaluation and appraisal reports address coordination of the comp plan with existing public
schools and the school district’s 5-year work program. 163.3191(2)(i) [Now: 163.3191(2)(k)] No amendment needed Amended the definition of “in compliance” to include consistency with
Sections 163.3180 and 163.3245. 163.3184(1)(b) No amendment needed Required DCA to maintain a file with all documents received or generated by DCA relating to plan amendments and identify;
limited DCA’s review of proposed plan amendments to written comments, and required DCA to identify and list all written communications received within 30 days after transmittal of a
proposed plan amendment. 163.3184(2), (4), and (6) No amendment needed Allowed a local government to amend its plan for a period of up to one year after the initial determination of
sufficiency of an adopted EAR even if the EAR is insufficient. 163.3187(6)(b) No amendment needed Substantially reworded Section 163.3191, F.S., related to evaluation and appraisal reports.
163.3191 No amendment needed Changed the population requirements for municipalities and counties which are required to submit otherwise optional elements. 163.3177(6)(i) No amendment
needed 1999 Required that ports and local governments in the coastal 163.3178(7) No amendment City of Boynton Beach 2-4 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Consistency with
State and Regional Plans
TABLE 1. CHANGES TO CHAPTER 163, F.S., 1997-2005 Changes 163, F.S. Citations Addressed in Comprehensive Plan EAR-based Plan Amendment Needed area, which has spoil disposal responsibilities,
identify dredge disposal sites in the comp plan. needed Exempted from the twice-per-year limitation certain port related amendments for port transportation facilities and projects eligible
for funding by the Florida Seaport Transportation and Economic Development
Council. 163.3187(1)(h) N/A Required rural counties to base their future land use plans and the amount of land designated industrial on data regarding the need for job creation, capital
investment, and economic development and the need to strengthen and diversity local economies. 163.3177(6)(a) N/A Added the Growth Policy Act to Ch. 163, Part II to promote urban infill
and redevelopment. 163.2511,163.25,14,163. 2517,163.2520,163.2523 , and 163.2526 No amendment needed Required that all comp plans comply with the school siting requirements by October
1, 1999. 163.3177(6)(a) F.L.U.E. Policy 1.19.8 a through i No amendment needed Made transportation facilities subject to concurrency. 163.3180(1)(a) T.E. Obj. 2.1 and related policies
No amendment needed Required use of professionally accepted techniques for measuring level of service for cars, trucks, transit, bikes and pedestrians. 163.3180(1)(b) No amendment needed
Excludes public transit facilities from concurrency requirements. 163.3180(4)(b) No amendment needed Allowed multiuse DRIs to satisfy the transportation concurrency requirements when
authorized by a local comprehensive plan under limited circumstances. 163.3180(12) No amendment needed Allowed multimodal transportation districts in areas 163.3180(15) No amendment
City of Boynton Beach 2-5 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Consistency with State and Regional Plans
TABLE 1. CHANGES TO CHAPTER 163, F.S., 1997-2005 Changes 163, F.S. Citations Addressed in Comprehensive Plan EAR-based Plan Amendment Needed where priorities for the pedestrian environment
are assigned by the plan. needed Exempted amendments for urban infill and redevelopment areas, public school concurrency from the twice-per-year limitation. 163.31879(1)(h) and (i) [Now:
(i) and (j)] No amendment needed Defined brownfield designation and added the assurance that a developer may proceed with development upon receipt of a brownfield designation. [Also
see Section 163.3221(1) for “brownfield” definition.] 163.3220(2) No amendment needed 2000 Repealed Section 163.3184(11)(c), F.S., that required funds from sanction for non-compliant
plans go into the Growth Management Trust Fund. 163.3184(11)(c) [Now: Repealed] N/A Repealed Section 163.3187(7), F.S. that required consideration of an increase in the annual total
acreage threshold for small scale plan amendments and a report by DCA. 163.3187(7) [Now: Repealed] No amendment needed Repealed Sections 163.3191(13) and (15), F.S. 163.3191(13) and
(15) [Now: Repealed] No amendment needed Allowed small scale amendments in areas of critical state concern to be exempt from the twice-per-year limitation only if they are for affordable
housing. 163.3187(1)(c)1.e No amendment needed Added exemption of sales from local option surtax imposed under Section 212.054, F.S., as examples of incentives for new development within
urban infill and redevelopment areas. 163.2517(3)(j)2. No amendment needed 2001 City of Boynton Beach 2-6 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Consistency with State and
Regional Plans
TABLE 1. CHANGES TO CHAPTER 163, F.S., 1997-2005 Changes 163, F.S. Citations Addressed in Comprehensive Plan EAR-based Plan Amendment Needed Created the rural land stewardship area program.
163.3177(11)(d) N/A 2002 Required that all agencies that review comprehensive plan amendments and rezoning include a nonvoting representative of the district school board. 163.3174 No
amendment needed Required coordination of local comprehensive plan with the regional water supply plan. 163.3177(4)(a) Amendment needed Plan amendments for school-siting maps are exempt
from s. 163.3187(1)’s limitation on frequency. 163.3177(6)(a) No amendment needed Required that by adoption of the EAR, the sanitary sewer, solid waste, drainage, potable water and natural
groundwater aquifer recharge element consider the regional water supply plan and include a 10-year work plan to build the identified water supply facilities. 163.3177(6)(c) Amendment
needed Required consideration of the regional water supply plan in the preparation of the conservation element. 163.3177(6)(d) Amendment needed Required that the intergovernmental coordination
element (ICE) include relationships, principles and guidelines to be used in coordinating comp plan with regional water supply plans. 163.3177(6)(h) I.C.E. Policy 8.17.1 No amendment
needed Required the local governments adopting a public educational facilities element execute an inter-local agreement with the district school board, the county, and non-exempting
municipalities. 163.3177(6)(h)4. Public School Facilities Element, Policy 10B.2.1 No amendment needed Required that counties larger than 100,000 population and their municipalities submit
a inter-local service delivery agreements (existing and proposed, deficits or duplication 163.3177(6)(h)6., 7., & 8. No amendment needed City of Boynton Beach 2-7 Evaluation and Appraisal
Report December 5, 2006 Consistency with State and Regional Plans
TABLE 1. CHANGES TO CHAPTER 163, F.S., 1997-2005 Changes 163, F.S. Citations Addressed in Comprehensive Plan EAR-based Plan Amendment Needed in the provisions of service) report to DCA
by January 1, 2004. Each local government is required to update its ICE based on the findings of the report. DCA will meet with affected parties to discuss and id strategies to remedy
any deficiencies or duplications. Required local governments and special districts to provide recommendations for statutory changes for annexation to the Legislature by February 1, 2003.
163.3177(6)(h)9. No amendment needed Added a new Section 163.31776 that allows a county, to adopt an optional public educational facilities element in cooperation with the applicable
school board. 163.31776 Complied by adoption of P.S.F.E. No amendment needed Added a new Section 163.31777 that requires local governments and school boards to enter into an inter-local
agreement that addresses school siting, enrollment forecasting, school capacity, infrastructure and safety needs of schools, schools as emergency shelters, and sharing of facilities.
163.31777 PSFE Policies 10B.2.1, 10B.2.3, 10B.2.4, 10B.2.7 No amendment needed Added a provision that the concurrency requirement for transportation facilities may be waived by plan
amendment for urban infill and redevelopment areas. 163.3180(4)(c) T.E. Policy 2.1.6 and related No amendment needed Expanded the definition of “affected persons” to include property
owners who own land abutting a change to a future land use map. 163.3184(1)(a) No amendment needed Expanded the definition of “in compliance” to include consistency with Section 163.31776
(public educational facilities element). 163.3184(1)(b) Addressed by adoption of Public School Facilities Element No amendment needed Streamlined the timing of comprehensive plan 163.3184(3),
(4), (6), No amendment City of Boynton Beach 2-8 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Consistency with State and Regional Plans
TABLE 1. CHANGES TO CHAPTER 163, F.S., 1997-2005 Changes 163, F.S. Citations Addressed in Comprehensive Plan EAR-based Plan Amendment Needed amendment review. (7), and (8) needed Required
that local governments provide a sign-in form at the transmittal hearing and at the adoption hearing for persons to provide their names and addresses. 163.3184(15)(c) No amendment needed
Exempted amendments related to providing transportation improvements to enhance life safety on “controlled access major arterial highways” from the limitation on the frequency of plan
amendments contained in s.163.3187(1). 163.3187(1)(k) No amendment needed Required EARs to include (1) consideration of the appropriate regional water supply plan, and (2) an evaluation
of whether past reductions in land use densities in coastal high hazard areas have impaired property rights of current residents where redevelopment occurs. 163-3191(2)(1) No amendment
needed Allowed local governments to establish a special master process to assist the local governments with challenges to local development orders for consistency with the comprehensive
plan. 163.3215 No amendment needed Created the Local Government Comprehensive Planning Certification Program to allow less state and regional oversight of comprehensive plan process
if the local government meets certain criteria. 163.3246 No amendment needed Added a provision to Section 380.06(24), Statutory Exemptions, that exempts from the requirements for developments
of regional impact, any water port or marina development if the relevant local government has adopted a “boating facility siting plan or policy” (which includes certain 163.3187(1) No
amendment needed City of Boynton Beach 2-9 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Consistency with State and Regional Plans
TABLE 1. CHANGES TO CHAPTER 163, F.S., 1997-2005 Changes 163, F.S. Citations Addressed in Comprehensive Plan EAR-based Plan Amendment Needed specified criteria) as part of the coastal
management element or future land use element of its comprehensive plan. The adoption of the boating facility siting plan or policy is exempt from the limitation on the frequency of
plan amendments contained in s.163.3187(1). Prohibited a local government, under certain conditions, from denying an application for development approval for a requested land use for
certain proposed solid waste management facilities. 163.3194(6) No amendment needed 2003 Creates the Agricultural Lands and Practices Act. (2): Provides legislative findings and purpose
with respect to agricultural activities and duplicative regulation. (3): Defines the terms “farm,” “farm operation,” and “farm product” for purposes of the act. (4): Prohibits a county
from adopting any ordinance, resolution, regulation, rule, or policy to prohibit or otherwise limit a bona fide farm operation on land that is classified as agricultural land. (4)(a):
Provides that the act does not limit the powers of a county under certain circumstances. (4)(b): Clarifies that a farm operation may not expand its 163.3162 N/A City of Boynton Beach
2-10 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Consistency with State and Regional Plans
TABLE 1. CHANGES TO CHAPTER 163, F.S., 1997-2005 Changes 163, F.S. Citations Addressed in Comprehensive Plan EAR-based Plan Amendment Needed operations under certain circumstances. (4)(c):
Provides that the act does not limit the powers of certain counties. (4)(d): Provides that certain county ordinances are not deemed to be a duplication of regulation. Changes “State
Comptroller” references to “Chief Financial Officer.” 163.3167(6) Provides for certain airports to abandon DRI orders. 163.3177(6)(k) No amendment needed Amended to conform to the repeal
of s. 235.185 and the enactment of similar material in s. 1013.35. 163.31776(1)(b)(2)-(3) No amendment needed Amended to conform to the repeal of ch. 235 and the enactment of similar
material in ch. 1013. 163.37111(1)(c), (2)(e)-(f), (3)(c), (4), (6)(b) No amendment needed 2004 (10): Amended to conform to the repeal of the Florida High-Speed Rail Transportation Act,
and the creation of the Florida High-Speed Rail Authority Act. (13): Created to require local governments to identify adequate water supply sources to meet future demand. (14): Created
to limit the effect of judicial determinations issued subsequent to certain development orders pursuant to adopted land development regulations. 163.3167 Amendment needed to address
the identification of adequate water supply sources only (1): Provides legislative findings on the compatibility of Creates 163.3175. No amendment City of Boynton Beach 2-11 Evaluation
and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Consistency with State and Regional Plans
TABLE 1. CHANGES TO CHAPTER 163, F.S., 1997-2005 Changes 163, F.S. Citations Addressed in Comprehensive Plan EAR-based Plan Amendment Needed development with military installations.
(2): Provides for the exchange of information relating to proposed land use decisions between counties and local governments and military installations. (3): Provides for responsive
comments by the commanding officer or his/her designee. (4): Provides for the county or affected local government to take such comments into consideration. (5): Requires the representative
of the military installation to be an ex-officio, nonvoting member of the county’s or local government’s land planning or zoning board. (6): Encourages the commanding officer to provide
information on community planning assistance grants. needed (6)(a): • Changed to require local governments to amend the future land use element by June 30, 2006 to include criteria to
achieve compatibility with military installations. • Changed to specifically encourage rural land stewardship area designation as an overlay on the future land use map. (6)(c): Extended
the deadline adoption of the water supply facilities work plan amendment until December 163.3177 Amendment to Utilities Element needed for water supply facilities plan City of Boynton
Beach 2-12 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Consistency with State and Regional Plans
TABLE 1. CHANGES TO CHAPTER 163, F.S., 1997-2005 Changes 163, F.S. Citations Addressed in Comprehensive Plan EAR-based Plan Amendment Needed 1, 2006; provided for updating the work plan
every five years; and exempts such amendment from the limitation on frequency of adoption of amendments. (10)(l): Provides for the coordination by the state land planning agency and
the Department of Defense on compatibility issues for military installations. (11)(d)1.: Requires DCA, in cooperation with other specified state agencies, to provide assistance to local
governments in implementing provisions relating to rural land stewardship areas. (11)(d)2.: Provides for multicounty rural land stewardship areas. (11)(d)3.-4: Revises requirements,
including the acreage threshold for designating a rural land stewardship area. (11)(d)6.j.: Provides that transferable rural land use credits may be assigned at different ratios according
to the natural resource or other beneficial use characteristics of the land. (11)(e): Provides legislative findings regarding mixed-use, high-density urban infill and redevelopment projects;
requires DCA to provide technical assistance to local City of Boynton Beach 2-13 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Consistency with State and Regional Plans
TABLE 1. CHANGES TO CHAPTER 163, F.S., 1997-2005 Changes 163, F.S. Citations Addressed in Comprehensive Plan EAR-based Plan Amendment Needed governments. (11)(f): Provides legislative
findings regarding a program for the transfer of development rights and urban infill and redevelopment; requires DCA to provide technical assistance to local governments. (1): Provides
legislative findings with respect to the shortage of affordable rentals in the state. (2): Provides definitions. (3): Authorizes local governments to permit accessory dwelling units
in areas zoned for single family residential use based upon certain findings. (4) An application for a building permit to construct an accessory dwelling unit must include an affidavit
from the applicant which attests that the unit will be rented at an affordable rate to a very-low-income, low-income, or moderate-income person or persons. (5): Provides for certain
accessory dwelling units to apply towards satisfying the affordable housing component of the housing element in a local government’s comprehensive plan. (6): Requires the DCA to report
to the Legislature. Creates 163.31771 Amendment possible, depending on policy decision by local government City of Boynton Beach 2-14 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006
Consistency with State and Regional Plans
TABLE 1. CHANGES TO CHAPTER 163, F.S., 1997-2005 Changes 163, F.S. Citations Addressed in Comprehensive Plan EAR-based Plan Amendment Needed Amends the definition of “in compliance”
to add language referring to the Wekiva Parkway and Protection Act. 163.3184(1)(b) N/A (1)(m): Created to provide that amendments to address criteria or compatibility of land uses adjacent
to or in close proximity to military installations do not count toward the limitation on frequency of amending comprehensive plans. (1)(n): Created to provide that amendments to establish
or implement a rural land stewardship area do not count toward the limitation on frequency of amending comprehensive plans. 163.3187 N/A Created to provide that evaluation and appraisal
reports evaluate whether criteria in the land use element were successful in achieving land use compatibility with military installations. 163.3191(2)(n) N/A 2005 Added the definition
of “financial feasibility.” Creates ss. 163.3164(32) (2): Required comprehensive plans to be ““financially” rather than “economically” feasible. (3)(a)5.: Required the comprehensive
plan to include a 5-year schedule of capital improvements. Outside funding (i.e., from developer, other government or funding pursuant to referendum) of these capital improvements must
be guaranteed in the form of a development 163.3177 Public School Facilities Element adopted Amendments needed to CIE, UE, LUE, R&OSE City of Boynton Beach 2-15 Evaluation and Appraisal
Report December 5, 2006 Consistency with State and Regional Plans
TABLE 1. CHANGES TO CHAPTER 163, F.S., 1997-2005 Changes 163, F.S. Citations Addressed in Comprehensive Plan EAR-based Plan Amendment Needed agreement or interlocal agreement. (3)(a)6.b.1.:
Required plan amendment for the annual update of the schedule of capital improvements. Deleted provision allowing updates and change in the date of construction to be accomplished by
ordinance. (3)(a)6.c.: Added oversight and penalty provision for failure to adhere to this section’s capital improvements requirements. (3)(a)6.d.: Required a long-term capital improvement
schedule if the local government has adopted a long-term concurrency management system. (6)(a): Deleted date (October 1, 1999) by which school sitting requirements must be adopted. (6)(a):
Add requirement that future land use element of coastal counties must encourage the preservation of working waterfronts, as defined in s.342.07, F.S. (6)(c): Required the potable water
element to be updated within 18 months of an updated regional water supply plan to incorporate the alternative water supply projects selected by the local government to meet its water
supply needs. City of Boynton Beach 2-16 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Consistency with State and Regional Plans
TABLE 1. CHANGES TO CHAPTER 163, F.S., 1997-2005 Changes 163, F.S. Citations Addressed in Comprehensive Plan EAR-based Plan Amendment Needed (6)(e): Added waterways to the system of
sites addressed by the recreation and open space element. (11)(d)4.c.: Required rural land stewardship areas to address affordable housing. (11)(d)5.: Required a listed species survey
be performed on rural land stewardship receiving area. If any listed species present, must ensure adequate provisions to protect them. (11)(d)6.: Must enact an ordinance establishing
a methodology for creation, conveyance, and use of stewardship credits within a rural land stewardship area. (11)(d)6.j.: Revised to allow open space and agricultural land to be just
as important as environmentally sensitive land when assigning stewardship credits. (12): Must adopt public school facilities element. (12)(a) and (b): A waiver from providing this element
will be allowed under certain circumstances. (12)(g): Expanded list of items to be to include colocation, City of Boynton Beach 2-17 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006
Consistency with State and Regional Plans
TABLE 1. CHANGES TO CHAPTER 163, F.S., 1997-2005 Changes 163, F.S. Citations Addressed in Comprehensive Plan EAR-based Plan Amendment Needed location of schools proximate to residential
areas, and use of schools as emergency shelters. (12)(h): Required local governments to provide maps depicting the general location of new schools and school improvements within future
conditions maps. (12)(i): Required DCA to establish a schedule for adoption of the public school facilities element. (12)(j): Established penalty for failure to adopt a public school
facility element. (13): (New section) Encourages local governments to develop a “community vision,” which provides for sustainable growth, recognizes its fiscal constraints, and protects
its natural resources. (14): (New section) Encourages local governments to develop a “urban service boundary,” which ensures the area is served (or will be served) with adequate public
facilities and services over the next 10 years. See s. 163.3184(17). 163.31776 is repealed 163.31776 [Now: Repealed] (2): Required the public schools interlocal agreement (if applicable)
to address requirements for school 163.31777 Amendment needed City of Boynton Beach 2-18 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Consistency with State and Regional Plans
TABLE 1. CHANGES TO CHAPTER 163, F.S., 1997-2005 Changes 163, F.S. Citations Addressed in Comprehensive Plan EAR-based Plan Amendment Needed concurrency. The opt-out provision at the
end of Subsection (2) is deleted. (5): Required Palm Beach County to identify, as part of its EAR, changes needed in its public school element necessary to conform to the new 2005 public
school facilities element requirements. (7): Provided that counties exempted from public school facilities element shall undergo re-evaluation as part of its EAR to determine if they
continue to meet exemption criteria. (2)(g): Expands requirement of coastal element to include strategies that will be used to preserve recreational and commercial working waterfronts,
as defined in s.342.07, F.S. 163.3178 Amendment needed (1)(a): Added “schools” as a required concurrency item. (2)(a): Required consultation with water supplier prior to issuing building
permit to ensure “adequate water supplies” to serve new development is available by the date of issuance of a certificate of occupancy. (2)(c): Required all transportation facilities
to be in place or under construction within 3 years (rather than 5 years) after approval of building permit. 163.3180 ?? 1(a): P.S.F.E. Policy 10A.1.4 ?? 5 (e) – (g): T.E. Objective
2.4 and related policies ?? 13: see 1(a) ?? 13(c)–(g): all addressed in P.S.F.E. Amendments needed to T.E., P.S.F.E., U.E (Potable Water); need for amendments for 5(e) and (16) is currently
under DCA review. City of Boynton Beach 2-19 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Consistency with State and Regional Plans
TABLE 1. CHANGES TO CHAPTER 163, F.S., 1997-2005 Changes 163, F.S. Citations Addressed in Comprehensive Plan EAR-based Plan Amendment Needed (4)(c): Allowed concurrency requirement for
public schools to be waived within urban infill and redevelopment areas (163.2517). (5)(d): Required guidelines for granting concurrency exceptions to be included in the comprehensive
plan. (5)(e) – (g): If local government has established transportation exceptions, the guidelines for implementing the exceptions must be “consistent with and support a comprehensive
strategy, and promote the purpose of the exceptions.” Exception areas must include mobility strategies, such as alternate modes of transportation, supported by data and analysis. FDOT
must be consulted prior to designating a transportation concurrency exception area. Transportation concurrency exception areas existing prior to July 1, 2005 must meet these requirements
by July 1, 2006, or when the EAR-based amendment is adopted, whichever occurs last. (6): Required local government to maintain records to determine whether 110% de minimis transportation
impact threshold is reached. A summary of these records must be submitted with the annual capital improvements element update. Exceeding the 110% threshold dissolves the de minimis exceptions.
City of Boynton Beach 2-20 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Consistency with State and Regional Plans
TABLE 1. CHANGES TO CHAPTER 163, F.S., 1997-2005 Changes 163, F.S. Citations Addressed in Comprehensive Plan EAR-based Plan Amendment Needed (7): Required consultation with the Department
of Transportation prior to designating a transportation concurrency management area (to promote infill development) to ensure adequate level-of-service standards are in place. The local
government and the DOT should work together to mitigate any impacts to the Strategic Intermodal System. (9)(a): Allowed adoption of a long-term concurrency management system for schools.
(9)(c): (New section) Allowed local governments to issue approvals to commence construction notwithstanding s. 163.3180 in areas subject to a long-term concurrency management system.
(9)(d): (New section) Required evaluation in EAR of progress in improving levels of service.. (10): Added requirement that level of service standard for roadway facilities on the Strategic
Intermodal System must be consistent with FDOT standards. Standards must consider compatibility with adjacent jurisdictions. (13): Required school concurrency (not optional). (13)(c)1.:
Requires school concurrency after five years to be City of Boynton Beach 2-21 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Consistency with State and Regional Plans
City of Boynton Beach 2-22 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Consistency with State and Regional Plans TABLE 1. CHANGES TO CHAPTER 163, F.S., 1997-2005 Changes 163, F.S.
Citations Addressed in Comprehensive Plan EAR-based Plan Amendment Needed applied on a “less than districtwide basis” (i.e., by using school attendance zones, etc). (13)(c)2.: Eliminated
exemption from plan amendment adoption limitation for changes to service area boundaries. (13)(c)3.: No application for development approval may be denied if a less-than-districtwide
measurement of school concurrency is used; however the development impacts must to shifted to contiguous service areas with school capacity. (13)(e): Allowed school concurrency to be
satisfied if a developer executes a legally binding commitment to provide mitigation proportionate to the demand. (13)(e)1.: Enumerated mitigation options for achieving proportionate-share
mitigation. (13)(e)2.: If educational facilities funded in one of the two following ways, the local government must credit this amount toward any impact fee or exaction imposed on the
community: • contribution of land • construction, expansion, or payment for land acquisition (13)(g)2.: (Section deleted) – It is no longer required that a local government and school
board base their plans
TABLE 1. CHANGES TO CHAPTER 163, F.S., 1997-2005 Changes 163, F.S. Citations Addressed in Comprehensive Plan EAR-based Plan Amendment Needed on consistent population projection and share
information regarding planned public school facilities, development and redevelopment and infrastructure needs of public school facilities. However, see (13)(g)6.a. for similar requirement.
(13)(g)6.a.: [Formerly (13)(g)7.a.] Local governments must establish a uniform procedure for determining if development applications are in compliance with school concurrency. (13)(g)7.
[Formerly (13)(g)8.] Deleted language that allowed local government to terminate or suspend an interlocal agreement with the school board. (13)(h): (New 2005 provision) The fact that
school concurrency has not yet been implemented by a local government should not be the basis for either an approval or denial of a development permit. (15): Prior to adopting Multimodal
Transportation Districts, FDOT must be consulted to assess the impact on level of service service standards. If impacts are found, the local government and the FDOT must work together
to mitigate those impacts. Multimodal districts established prior to July 1, 2005 must meet this requirement by July 1, 2006 or at the time of the EAR-base amendment, whichever occurs
last. City of Boynton Beach 2-23 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Consistency with State and Regional Plans
TABLE 1. CHANGES TO CHAPTER 163, F.S., 1997-2005 Changes 163, F.S. Citations Addressed in Comprehensive Plan EAR-based Plan Amendment Needed (16): (New 2005 section) Required local governments
to adopt by December 1, 2006 a method for assessing proportionate fair-share mitigation options. FDOT will develop a model ordinance by December 1, 2005. (17): (New 2005 section) If
local government has adopted a community vision and urban service boundary, state and regional agency review is eliminated for plan amendments affecting property within the urban service
boundary. Such amendments are exempt from the
limitation on the frequency of plan amendments. (18): (New 2005 section) If a municipality has adopted an urban infill and redevelopment area, state and regional agency review is eliminated
for plan amendments affecting property within the urban service boundary. Such amendments are exempt from the limitation on the frequency of plan amendments. 163.3184 No amendment needed
(1)(c)1.f.: Allowed approval of residential land use as a small-scale development amendment when the proposed density is equal to or less than the existing future land use category.
Under certain circumstances affordable housing units are exempt from this limitation. (1)(c)4.: (New 2005 provision) If the small-scale development amendment involves a rural area of
critical economic concern, a 20-acre limit applies. 163.3187 No amendment needed City of Boynton Beach 2-24 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Consistency with State and
Regional Plans
TABLE 1. CHANGES TO CHAPTER 163, F.S., 1997-2005 Changes 163, F.S. Citations Addressed in Comprehensive Plan EAR-based Plan Amendment Needed (1)(o): (New 2005 provision) An amendment
to a rural area of critical economic concern may be approved without regard to the statutory limit on comprehensive plan amendments. (2)(k): Required local governments that do not have
either a school interlocal agreement or a public school facilities element, to determine in the EAR whether the local government continues to meet the exemption criteria in s.163.3177(12).
(2)(l): The EAR must determine whether the local government has met its various water supply requirements, including development of alternative water supply projects. (2)(o): (New 2005
provision) The EAR must evaluate whether its Multimodal Transportation District has achieved the purpose for which it was created. (2)(p): (New 2005 provision) The EAR must assess methodology
for impacts on transportation facilities. (10): The EAR-based amendment must be adopted within a single amendment cycle. Failure to adopt within this cycle results in penalties. Once
updated, the comprehensive plan must be submitted to the DCA. 163.3191 No amendment needed City of Boynton Beach 2-25 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Consistency with
State and Regional Plans
TABLE 1. CHANGES TO CHAPTER 163, F.S., 1997-2005 Changes 163, F.S. Citations Addressed in Comprehensive Plan EAR-based Plan Amendment Needed (10) New section designating Freeport as
a certified community. (11) New section exempting proposed DRIs within Freeport from review under s.380.06, F.S., unless review is requested by the local government. 163.3246 N/A City
of Boynton Beach 2-26 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Consistency with State and Regional Plans
TABLE 2. CHANGES TO RULE 9J-5, F.A.C. Changes 9J-5, F.A.C. Citations Addressed in Comprehensive Plan EAR-based Plan Amendment Needed 1998 Established requirements for the Public School
Facilities Element for Public School Concurrency for local governments that adopt school concurrency. 9J-5.025 Public School Facilities Element adopted No amendment needed 1999 Defined
public transit and stormwater management facilities 9J-5.003 No amendment needed Revised the definitions of affordable housing, coastal planning area, port facility, and wetlands. 9J-5.003
No amendment needed Repeal the definitions of adjusted for family size, adjusted gross income, development, high recharge area or prime recharge area, mass transit, paratransit, public
facilities, very lowincome family. 9J-5.003 No amendment needed Revised provisions relating to adoption by reference into the local comprehensive plan. 9J-5.005(2)(g) and (8)(j) No amendment
needed Repealed transmittal requirements for proposed evaluation and appraisal reports, reports, submittal requirements for adopted evaluation and appraisal reports, criteria for determining
the sufficiency of adopted evaluation and appraisal reports, procedures for adoption of evaluation and appraisal reports. Note: transmittal requirements for proposed evaluation and appraisal
reports and submittal 9J-5.0053(2) through (5) No amendment needed City of Boynton Beach 2-27 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Consistency with State and Regional Plans
TABLE 2. CHANGES TO RULE 9J-5, F.A.C. Changes 9J-5, F.A.C. Citations Addressed in Comprehensive Plan EAR-based Plan Amendment Needed requirements for adopted evaluation and appraisal
reports were incorporated Rule Chapter 9J-11, F.A.C. Repealed conditions for de minimis impact and referenced conditions in subsection 163.3180(6), F.S. 9J-5.0055(3)6 No amendment needed
Required the future land use map to show the transportation concurrency exception area boundaries of such areas have been designated and areas for possible future municipal incorporation.
9J-5.006(4) Amendment to FLUM needed Required objectives of the Sanitary Sewer, Solid Waste, Stormwater Management, Potable Water and Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Element to
address protection of high recharge and prime recharge areas. 9J-5.011(2) U.E. Objective 3D.1 and related policies No amendment needed Repealed the Intergovernmental Coordination Element
process to determine if development proposals would have significant impacts on other local governments or state or regional resources or facilities, and provisions relating to resolution
of disputes, modification of development orders, and the rendering of development orders to the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) 9J-5.015(4) No amendment needed Clarified that local
governments not located within the urban area of a Metropolitan Planning Organization are required to adopt a Traffic Circulation Element and that local 9J-5.019(1) Transportation Element
adopted No amendment needed City of Boynton Beach 2-28 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Consistency with State and Regional Plans
TABLE 2. CHANGES TO RULE 9J-5, F.A.C. Changes 9J-5, F.A.C. Citations Addressed in Comprehensive Plan EAR-based Plan Amendment Needed governments with a population of 50,000 or less are
not required to prepare Mass Transit and Ports, Aviation and Related Facilities Elements. Required objectives of the Transportation Element to: • Coordination the siting of new, or expansion
of existing ports, airports, or related facilities with the Future Land Use, Coastal Management, and Conservation Elements; N/A • Coordination surface transportation access to ports,
airports, and related facilities with the traffic circulation system; N/A • Coordination ports, airports, and related facilities plans with plans of other transportation providers; and
N/A • Ensure that access routes to ports, airports and related facilities are properly integrated with other modes of transportation. 9J-5.019(4)(b) N/A Required policies of the Transportation
Element to: N/A • Provide for safe and convenient onsite traffic flow; 9J-5.019(4)(c) c) T.E. Policy 2.4.5 No amendment needed City of Boynton Beach 2-29 Evaluation and Appraisal Report
December 5, 2006 Consistency with State and Regional Plans
TABLE 2. CHANGES TO RULE 9J-5, F.A.C. Changes 9J-5, F.A.C. Citations Addressed in Comprehensive Plan EAR-based Plan Amendment Needed • Establish measures for the acquisition and preservation
of public transit rights-of-way and corridors; T.E. Policy 2.5.3 No amendment needed • Promote ports, airports and related facilities development and expansion; N/A • Mitigate adverse
structural and nonstructural impacts from ports, airports and related facilities; N/A • Protect and conserve natural resources within ports, airports and related facilities; N/A • Coordinate
intermodal management of surface and water transportation within ports, airports and related facilities; and N/A • Protect ports, airports and related facilities from encroachment of
incompatible land uses. N/A Added standards for the review of land development regulations by the Department. 9J-5.022 No amendments needed Added criteria for determining consistency
of land development regulations with the comprehensive plan. 9J-5.023 No amendments needed needed 2001 Defined general lanes 9J-5.003 No amendment needed Revised the definition of “marine
wetlands.” 9J-5.003 No amendment needed City of Boynton Beach 2-30 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Consistency with State and Regional Plans
TABLE 2. CHANGES TO RULE 9J-5, F.A.C. Changes 9J-5, F.A.C. Citations Addressed in Comprehensive Plan EAR-based Plan Amendment Needed Repeal the definition of “public facilities and services.”
9J-5.003 No amendment needed Revised procedures for monitoring, evaluating and appraising implementation of local comprehensive plans. 9J-5.005(7) No amendment needed Repealed requirements
for evaluation and appraisal reports and evaluation and appraisal amendments. 9J-5.0053 No amendment needed Revised concurrency management system requirements to include provisions for
establishment of public school concurrency. 9J-5.005(1) and (2) P.S.F.E. adopted No amendment needed Authorized local governments to establish multimodal transportation level of service
standards and established requirements for multimodal transportation districts. 9J-5.0055(2)(b) and (3)(c) No amendments needed Authorized local governments to establish level of service
standards for general lanes of the Florida Intrastate Highway System within urbanized areas, with the concurrence of the Department of Transportation. 9J-5.0055(2)(c) No amendment needed
Provide that public transit facilities are not subject to concurrency requirements. 9J-5.0055(8) No amendment needed Authorized local comprehensive plans to permit multi-use developments
of regional impact to satisfy the transportation concurrency requirements by payment of a proportionate share contribution. 9J-5.0055(9) No amendment needed Required the future land
use map to show multimodal transportation district 9J-5.006(4) No amendment needed City of Boynton Beach 2-31 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Consistency with State
and Regional Plans
TABLE 2. CHANGES TO RULE 9J-5, F.A.C. Changes 9J-5, F.A.C. Citations Addressed in Comprehensive Plan EAR-based Plan Amendment Needed boundaries, if established. Authorized local governments
to establish multimodal transportation districts and, if established, required local governments to establish design standards for such districts. 9J-5.006(6) No amendment needed Required
data for the Housing Element include a description of substandard dwelling units and repealed the requirement that the housing inventory include a locally determined definition of standard
and substandard housing conditions. 9J-5.010(1)(c) Amendment needed Authorized local governments to supplement the affordable housing needs assessment with locally generated data and
repealed the authorization for local governments to conduct their own assessment. 9J-5.10(2)(b) No amendment needed Required the Intergovernmental Coordination Element to include objectives
that ensure adoption of interlocal agreements within one year of adoption of the amended Intergovernmental Coordination Element and ensure intergovernmental coordination between all
affected local governments and the school board for the purpose of establishing requirements for public school concurrency. 9J-5.015(3)(b) No amendment needed Required the Intergovernmental
Coordination Element to include: 9J-5.015(3)(c) City of Boynton Beach 2-32 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Consistency with State and Regional Plans
TABLE 2. CHANGES TO RULE 9J-5, F.A.C. Changes 9J-5, F.A.C. Citations Addressed in Comprehensive Plan EAR-based Plan Amendment Needed • Policies that provide procedures to identify and
implement joint planning areas for purposes of annexation, municipal incorporation and joint infrastructure service areas; I.C.E Policies 8.10.6, 8.10.7 No amendment needed • Recognize
campus master plan and provide procedures for coordination of the campus master development agreement; No amendment needed • Establish joint processes for collaborative planning and
decisionmaking with other units of local government; I.C.E. Policy 8.22.5 No amendment needed • Establish joint processes for collaborative planning and decision making with the school
board on population projections and siting of public school facilities; I.C.E. Objective 8.22, Policies 8.22.1, 8.22.2, Amendment needed re population projections • Establish joint processes
for the siting of facilities with county-wide significance; and I.C.E. Policy 8.22.5 No amendment needed • Adoption of an interlocal agreement for school concurrency. Adopted No amendment
needed Required the Capital Improvements Element to include implementation measures that provide a five-year financially feasible public school facilities program that demonstrates the
adopted level of service standards will be achieved and maintained and a schedule of 9J-5.016(4)(a) C.I.E. Objective 9D.1 and policies No amendment needed City of Boynton Beach 2-33
Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Consistency with State and Regional Plans
TABLE 2. CHANGES TO RULE 9J-5, F.A.C. Changes 9J-5, F.A.C. Citations Addressed in Comprehensive Plan EAR-based Plan Amendment Needed capital improvements for multimodal transportation
districts, if locally established. Required the Transportation Element analysis for multimodal transportation districts to demonstrate that community design elements will reduce vehicle
miles of travel and support an integrated, multi-modal transportation system. 9J-5.019(3) No amendment needed Required Transportation Element objectives for multimodal transportation
districts to address provision of a safe, comfortable and attractive pedestrian environment with convenient access to public transportation. 9J-5.019(4) No amendment needed Authorized
local governments to establish level of service standards for general lanes of the Florida Intrastate Highway System within urbanized areas, with the concurrence of the Department of
Transportation. 9J-5.019(4)(c) No amendment needed City of Boynton Beach 2-34 Evaluation and Appraisal Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Consistency with State and Regional Plans
CHAPTER 3 LAND USE AND POPULATION ANALYSIS
1. POPULATION ANALYSIS Permanent Population Growth Boynton Beach is the third largest city in Palm Beach County, with the estimated 2004 population of 65,208. After a very high growth
period between 1960 and 1980, when the average annual growth was 6.3% and the city’s population more than tripled, Boynton’s population continued to increase at a still high 2.7% annually
until the year 2000. During the last four years (2000-2005), the growth rate tapered off to about 1.7% per year. 0.00% 2.00% 4.00% 6.00% 8.00% TABLE 3. AVERAGE ANNUAL GROWTH RATES 1960-2005
Boynton Beach 5.64% 7.00% 2.65% 2.70% 1.67% Palm Beach County 4.34% 5.15% 4.12% 2.74% 2.27% 1960/70 1970/80 1980/90 1990/00 2000/05 56,000 58,000 60,000 62,000 64,000 66,000 TABLE 4.
Boynton Beach Population Growth, 2000 Census and 2001-2005 Estimates Population 60,389 61,816 62,847 64,593 65,208 65,601 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Source: US Census and University
of Florida Bureau of Economic and Business Analysis (BEBR). Both the authors of the 1996 EAR EAR report and BEBR greatly underestimated the projected population growth rate for the 1990-2000
decade; the actual growth rate City of Boynton Beach 3-1 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Land Use and Population Analysis
during the 1995-2000 period was probably at least twice the 1.9% assumed in the report. The 2000 Census showed the city’s population to be 60,389, as opposed to the EAR projection of
53,994 and BEBR projection of 56,619. The EAR projection for 2005 was 59,393 persons; since the BEBR estimate for 2004 was 65,208 persons, the 2005 estimate will likely exceed that projection
by at least 11%. The fast growth in the mid-and late 1990’s was fueled by the long lasting economic oom. Recovered b from the prolonged impact of the early 1990’s recession, the development
activities in the city surged, as demonstrated by the following residential permit activity table: 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400TABLE 5. RESIDENTIAL PERMIT ACTIVITY 1991-2005 Permits
Issued 634 325 201 131 751 750 426 634 563 283 1047 417 325 1217 1294 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Source: City of Boynton Beach Building
Department e permitted since 1995. Although the recession of 001-2002 had some temporary negative impact on residential permit activity, there are An average of 770 units per year wer
2other factors that have helped to sustain high levels of residential development in recent years, including low mortgage rates and a steady influx of population into South Florida.
The residential development boom in the city mirrored the market conditions across the region; moreover, Boynton Beach lagged behind neighboring municipalities in redevelopment and real
estate inflation, and offered attractive opportunities to developers. These opportunities still exists, even though a sharp market downturn has already affected the city. There have
been considerable delays of construction starts for already approved projects. City of Boynton Beach 3-2 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Land Use and Population Analysis
Population Projections Boynton Beach’s supply of vacant land designated for residential development has windled. While d small scattered vacant residential lots exist throughout the
city, practically no larger parcels (2 acres or more) remain. As a result, the City has witnessed two trends: 1) the conversion of vacant land designated for other uses to residential
use; 2) the redevelopment of previously developed property that may also include a conversion in use or an increase in residential density and, to a lesser extent, 3) the annexation
of property, either developed or undeveloped, for residential development. TABLE 6. BOYNTON BEACH POPULATION PROJECTIONS VS. REVISED ESTIMATES 50,000 55,000 60,000 65,000 70,000 75,000
80,000 85,000 90,000 Palm Beach County's Projections 2001 60,389 64,296 66,952 70,509 72,918 73,590 County's Revised Estimates 2004 60,389 65,999 70,649 75,025 80,113 85,138 County's
Revisions 2005 60,389 66,138 73,835 81,517 1989 Boynton Beach Comprehensive Plan 63,373 70,802 78,232 1996 1996 EAR report 53,994 59,393 65,332 71,865 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 As
the chart above demonstrates, these trends add a challenge to population rojections. The 2001 forecast produced by Palm Beach County in collaboration with p City of Boynton Beach 3-3
Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Land Use and Population Analysis
BEBR was revised upwards in 2004, and again in 2005; further upwards revisions are likely. The 2005 revisions have been extended only to the year 2016, when the population is projected
to reach 83,115. Recent projections for the City produced by the Florida International University Metropolitan Center show a 2015 medium scenario estimate at 84.084. The chart also shows
that the initial 1989 Comprehensive Plan population projections ere more in tune with actual trends than the subsequent sharply decreased eeds the 2001 forecast by about 16%. Future
revisions ill be fuelled largely by population growth downtown; the City in collaboration with the 0 brought only a slight increase in the number of housing units sed for seasonal and
recreational purpose, from 2,762 units in 1990 to 2,944 in 2000; he increasing stock of new, upscale housing units, priced on the verage twice as high as the existing units, will contain
a larger percentage of second wprojections of the EAR Report. The revised 2025 estimate exc wCommunity Redevelopment Agency has embarked on the implementation of the redevelopment plan
for the downtown and surrounding areas located east of Interstate 95. The recent market downturn will probably level the population growth over the next few years, but it is unlikely
to affect long term projections. Seasonal Population The decade of 1990-200 utheir share of total housing stock dropped from 10.8% to 9.6%. Assuming the average seasonal household size
of 1.8 persons (the average for the city is 2.26), seasonal population for the city in 2000 was 5,299 persons. The 1996 EAR report projected that number to be 9,213, basing its forecast
on the original assumptions of the 1989 Comprehensive Plan and presumably anticipating the relative increase in the second homes in the total number of units. Two other factors contributed
to the disparity of these numbers: the 1996 EAR seasonal population projections included visitors in hotels/motels (not incorporated into this report’s estimate), and the calculations
were based on the overestimated household size for seasonal households, which generally tend to be smaller. It is possible that t ahomes. However, the affluent buyers may also be making
investment in rental properties. 2. LAND USE ANALYSIS ntly encompasses 16.4 square miles, about 1.2 square ile more than shown in 1989 Comprehensive Plan land use table, based on 1987
data. The City of Boynton Beach curre m City of Boynton Beach 3-4 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Land Use and Population Analysis
Changes in Land Area: Annexations he 1996 EAR report correctly anticipated a reduction in annexations for the remainder xisting Land Uses, 2005 hen the 1989 Comprehensive Plan was adopted,
the Support Documents for the s that Table 7. Existing Land Uses* on Developed Parcels s he total acreage for the City is currently 10,518, 40% of which is occupied by built-out Residential
4,160 Single Family 2,593 Multi-Family 1,460 Mobil Homes 107 Commercial 772 Industrial 388 Institutional 452 Recreation 920 Utility/Transportation 62 TOTAL 6,754 Tof the decade. Since
1995, only 84 acres of land were annexed into the City, about 9 acres per year. The pace of annexation slowed down considerably -between 1990 and 1995 over 356 acres were annexed, averaging
about 59 acres per year. The annexations were consistent with the Comprehensive Plan’s Intergovernmental Coordination Element Policies 8.10.4 and 8.10.5, eliminating enclaves and eliminating
or reducing pockets or other undesirable land configurations. Currently, there there are 19 enclaves/pockets left, for a total of about 360 acres. E WFuture Land Use Element (Table 1)
provided a table of land use distribution; however, the Mixed Use (MX) land use category was not recognized, even though the adopted Future Land Use Map showed an area of land designated
Mixed Use. The EAR, completed in 1996, also did not acknowledge the Mixed Use land use category. It has been determined that the Mixed Use land area was converted from land were designated
Low Density Residential (LDR), High Density Residential (HDR) and Local Retail Commercial (LRC) prior to 1989. The table has now been updated to show the Future Land Use Distribution
based on this information (see also the Future Land Uses on Map A in APPENDIX). Existing Land Use Acreage * Excludes all vacant parcels, conservation areas, water bodies and right-of-way
Tresidential uses. City of Boynton Beach 3-5 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Land Use and Population Analysis
The Extent of Vacant and Developable Land ap B in the appendix shows remaining vacant parcels in Boynton Beach. The high Table 8. Vacant* Developable Land by Land Use Category, 2005
oaching build-out. evelopment Patterns since 2000 evelopment and redevelopment activities since the year 2000 were driven by the ?? The City’s largest Planned Industrial Development,
Quantum Park, has at under 2 acres 2 acres & over TOTAL under 2 acres 2 acres & over TOTAL Residential 346 5 351 72 82 154 Commercial 87 6 93 30 34 64 Industrial 10 3 13 11 32 42 Mixed
Use 0 1 1 0 15 15 TOTAL 443 15 458 113 163 275 Land Use Mgrowth rates that the City experienced over the last two decades caused a rapid decline of the vacant land use inventory. The
1987 Comprehensive Plan land use table shows 2,472 acres of vacant land; the EAR report (1995) -1,659 acres; the current inventory is 275 acres. The latter figure includes only vacant
developable land; excluded are parcels under conservation land use or conservation overlay, and those not not developable because of shape, access or other problems. Number of parcels
Area in acres *Excludes vacant parcels with development orders and those in approval process. The above numbers suggest that Boynton Beach is fast appr D Dmost extensive real estate
boom in decades. Generally, availability of urban services was not a factor for development patterns, since the services are provided throughout the city. However, an especially strong
market demand for residential uses throughout the period under consideration caused a significant number of unanticipated conversions from the industrial and commercial to residential
land use designations, or allowed residential uses in the Planned Industrial Development (see Map C in APPENDIX). Map B illustrates these unanticipated development patterns: present
about 1,000 residential units (most of them completed) as well as a considerable square footage of retail commercial uses as part of two mixed use developments. Residential and mixed
use sections in Quantum Park Park still carry industrial land use designation. City of Boynton Beach 3-6 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Land Use and Population Analysis
?? An 87 acre industrial parcel previously owned by Motorola has been reclassified to DRI (a new land use category adopted in 2004). The mixed use development approved for the property
includes 1,691 residential units. ?? Two large industrial parcels in the south-west quadrant of the city were reclassified from industrial to high density residential and approved for
472 residential units. Another unanticipated change in response to market trends was the establishment of the suburban mixed use land category. The above mentioned 87-acre parcel was
reclassified to suburban mixed use, as was an 82-acre section of the parcel immediately south of the above. The mixed use project approved for the latter property includes 1,120 residential
units. The remaining development patterns generally conformed to FLU designations and vacant parcel distribution. In particular, significant amount of development and redevelopment -as
anticipated -occurred along the US 1 corridor (see Map D in APPENDIX). The 2000 EAR-based amendments directed the city to implement the Boynton Beach 20/20 Redevelopment Masterplan;
the city subsequently established Target Areas for future studies, of which The Federal Highway Corridor Community Redevelopment Plan was the first. The study included proposed locations
for both mixed use land use designations (Mixed Use and Mixed Use Core). Developments shown on Map B followed these recommendations. City of Boynton Beach 3-7 Evaluation and Appraisal
Report December 5, 2006 Land Use and Population Analysis
CHAPTER 4 ASSESSMENT OF PLAN ELEMENTS
1. FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT Element Overview The Future Land Use Element forms the nucleus of the City’s Comprehensive Plan and provides the framework for the management of the future
growth and development of the City. Nevertheless, the Comprehensive Plan can only function at its optimum level when all of the individual elements are considered in concert. Future
Land Use Element Assessment Listed below are objectives of the Land Use Element which either (i) have been (or continue to be) most successfully implemented and have had significant
impact on development; or (ii) have not been implemented, or contain policies that have not been applied, for reason(s) that are subsequently explained. Objectives successfully implemented
with the greatest impacts: Objective 1.9 The City shall eliminate blighted residential neighborhoods and business districts through the adoption and implementation of Community Redevelopment
Plans including the Boynton Beach 20/20 Redevelopment Master Plan and the Coastal Management Element to guide development and redevelopment along the Boynton Beach Boulevard and Ocean
Avenue corridors, within the commercial and residential Community Redevelopment Areas, and within the vicinity of U.S. 1 and Martin Luther King Boulevard. Objective 1.15 The City shall
encourage planned development projects which are sensitive to characteristics of the site and to surrounding land uses, and mixed-use projects in locations which are appropriate, and
utilize other innovative methods of regulating land development. Objective 1.22 In keeping with the “New Urbanism” principles established as guidelines
for development, the City shall incorporate the following policies in its redevelopment and neighborhood planning activities in keeping with the Visions 20/20 recommendations. In 1996,
when the previous EAR was developed, the City of Boynton Beach still had 1,659 acres of land vacant for development. As discussed earlier, the City is rapidly reaching the point that
all vacant lands will have been developed to some extent, thereby shifting emphasis to redevelopment of previously developed and underutilized lands in the City. City of Boynton Beach
4-1 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Assessment of Plan Elements
The redevelopment efforts are focused on neighborhoods located east of Interstate I-95, particularly in the “downtown” area. Historically, the city did not develop a “downtown” in its
core, defined as an area of highest commercial and pedestrian activity usually centered around the main street. Therefore, a new downtown will be created, different in character from
the suburban mall and big box retail area located along Congress Avenue. The first plan which explicitly addressed the community desire to create one was the Boynton Beach Vision 20/20
Redevelopment Plan. The City adopted the Boynton Beach 20/20 Redevelopment Master Plan (20/20 Plan) in 1998, following the completion of the previous EAR and prior to adoption of the
subsequent Comprehensive Plan amendment in 2000. The 20/20 Plan was intended as an update of Community Redevelopment Plans for portions of the Coastal area of the City that were adopted
in 1982 and 1987 and had basically been dormant since their adoption. The EAR-based amendments did acknowledge the 20/20 plan in Objective 1.9 and its related policies. The 20/20 Plan
also proposed future study areas and those were addressed as “primary target areas” in Policy 1.16.1. The subsequent development of studies, as required under the cited policy has formed
the basis for redevelopment activities in this area. These studies include: “The Federal Highway Corridor Community Redevelopment Plan”, “The Heart of Boynton Neighborhood Redevelopment
Plan”, and the “Boynton Beach Boulevard Corridor Plan“. These plans are currently being combined into a unified redevelopment plan and a companion study providing Urban Design Guidelines
will be prepared under the auspices of the City’s Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA). As shown by Map “B”, a large number of new developments have been approved along US 1, a majority
of these following recommendations of the first of the studies. The implementation of the two latter plans should commence shortly. The City has also taken other steps to encourage the
development of a true urban core in the traditional “downtown”, lying along Federal Highway between NE 6th Avenue and SE 2nd Avenue. This area was established in the Future Land Use
Element as an “Urban Central Business District”, pursuant to Section 380.06(2)(c), Florida Statutes. This act increases the Development of Regional Impact (DRI) guidelines and standards,
thereby allowing higher densities and intensities of uses without entering the DRI review process. Implementing recommendations from the three above listed objectives, the city developed
two mixed-use zoning districts. Currently, the areas eligible for the mixed – use districts are being expanded and the district regulations amended to accommodate market trends as well
as to strengthen the urban environment downtown and continue to protect residential neighborhoods abutting mixed use districts. Objective 1.15 acknowledged two types of mixed-use developments,
those combining Commercial and Residential uses and those combining Industrial and Commercial uses; however, the related policies did not actively encourage their use. The EAR-based
City of Boynton Beach 4-2 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Assessment of Plan Elements
amendment to this objective should accommodate new market trends underpinned by the upcoming arrival of the Scripps Institute. The arrival of the Scripps spin-offs will require a review
of the use mix in industrial and commercial land uses. New land use categories have been added to the Future Land Use Map and are defined in Policy 1.16.1. These include: “Conservation
(CON)”, “Mixed Use Core (MXC)”, “Suburban Mixed Use (MXS)”, and “Development of Regional Impact (DRI)”. Objectives with implementation issues: Objective 1.10 The City, by the Year 2002,
shall complete a study of all nonconforming uses to determine magnitude, type, and value for the City Commission to review and to take action to eliminate nonconforming commercial and
industrial uses which are located in residential zoning districts, and all uses which create a significant nuisance or risk of fire, explosion, toxic, or other hazard to existing or
future dwellings located in residential land use categories on the Future Land Use Map. The study has never been completed. Increased emphasis on private property rights in recent years
makes elimination of such legal nonconforming uses very difficult. However, increased attention is being paid to protection of residential neighborhoods in redevelopment plans and in
the city code. As a part of this effort, a M-1 Industrial District zoning study has been completed in February of 2006 and includes recommendations that address, among other issues,
compatibility with adjacent residential neighborhoods and non-conforming site characteristics. The City subsequently issued a RFP for consultants interested in preparing the code amendments
as recommended in the study and proposals are being reviewed. The similar issue arose with Objective 1.21 regarding non-conforming signs and billboards. The amortization program for
signs was never implemented due to the issues related to impact on businesses and legal defensibility. However, the City, following the recent hurricanes, identified the non-conforming
signs damaged beyond the limit set by the City’s regulations and notified the owners accordingly. Objective 1.11 Land development and future land uses shall include provisions for the
protection of native habitat, preservation of existing trees (other than undesirable exotic vegetation), minimizing surface and groundwater pollution, minimizing air pollution, preserving
of wetlands, and preserving archaeological resources and historic buildings through implementation of the policies below. The historic building inventory has been created, but the city
does not have historic preservation ordinance. There is potentially a lack of interest from the community to support the ordinance and its subsequent implementation. Traditionally, historical
City of Boynton Beach 4-3 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Assessment of Plan Elements
societies or other civic organizations interested in preservation take the lead in such actions. Objective 1.12 Coastal area population densities shall not be increased above the number
that can be accommodated by streets and roads in the event that hurricane evacuation is necessary and shall be limited to those areas that are planned to accommodate such development
through the provision of adequate public facilities and services. Such development must meet minimum standards for High Velocity Hurricane Zones as required by the Florida Building Code.
The is no regionally endorsed methodology to assess the impact of population increase on hurricane evacuation time and overall efficiency. Both policies under Objective 1.12 have been
amended to require residential developments in the Hurricane Evacuation Zone to provide hurricane evacuation information or formulate hurricane preparedness plan (depending on a number
of units). These policies will be reviewed and likely amended to require that hurricane evacuation information be distributed to residents of all developments of 50 or more units. Objective
1.19 The City shall evaluate and allow a range of land uses for which the area, location, and intensity of these uses provide a full range of housing choices, commercial uses to ultimately
increase tax base, employment opportunities, recreation and open space opportunities, and public uses including school sites for both existing and projected populations, provided that
all other comprehensive plan policies are complied with. The provision for affordable housing for very low, low-and moderate income households has been limited by the unprecedented rise
of housing prices in recent years. It is one of the two major issues facing the city. The situation has been confounded by numerous apartment-to-condo conversions and redevelopment of
mobil home parks, whereby affordable mobil homes were replaced by high-end townhomes and condos. The “appropriate” amount of the commercial and industrial land has been determined by
the demand projected in 1989. Since the projections are clearly outdated, and the city is nearing buildout, this objective needs to undergo major revision. The 2003 amendments to one
of its policies allowed land designated “Industrial” on the Future Land Use Map to convert to commercial or residential designations under certain conditions. Since adoption of these
amendments, 137 acres of industrially-designated land have been converted to residential uses and 85 acres to other uses, including mixed use. City of Boynton Beach 4-4 Evaluation and
Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Assessment of Plan Elements
These numbers include the city’s largest PID, The Quantum Park DRI (see Map A). The Park has always been shown on the Future Land Use Map with an “Industrial” designation. Until 2000,
this was not problematic, since most of the permitted uses were allowed under the “Industrial” designation; however, in 2000, the City allowed the conversion of a portion of the Park
to residential uses following the building of the Boynton Beach High School on a portion of the Park’s lands. Additionally, retail commercial uses have also been allowed. In an effort
to give a truer picture of land use distribution, a separate map is being developed for Quantum Park. Ultimately, the Future Land Use Map should be amended to reflect a more accurate
picture of the uses allowed in the Park. Impacts of Issues on the Future Land Use Element An assessment of the Element’s objectives has been completed to determine whether their achievement
or failure relates or may relate in the future to the identified major issues. ISSUE I: Wastewater Wastewater Treatment Capacity Objective 1.5 Land development and future land uses shall
be coordinated with the provision of sanitary sewer facilities in order to ensure that the levels of service established in the Sanitary Sewer Sub-Element are met. It is clear that any
shortfalls in the wastewater treatment capacity would impact future development and thus would also affect a number of other objectives. While it is anticipated that the wastewater treatment
facility capacity is not an issue for the 10-year planning horizon, particularly in light of the measures the City has proposed to address the issue, the City’s ongoing monitoring program
will indicate whether increases to the facility’s overall capacity are necessary. ISSUE II: Workforce Housing The issue is linked to the unsuccessful implementation of Policy 1.19.1
of Objective 1.19. Policy 1.19.1 The City shall continue efforts to encourage a full range of housing choices, by allowing densities which can accommodate the approximate number and
type of dwellings for which the demand has been projected in the Housing and Future Land Use Elements, including the provision of adequate sites for housing very-low, low-, and moderate
income households and for mobile homes. City of Boynton Beach 4-5 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Assessment of Plan Elements
The city is currently processing an amendment to the Land Use Element’s Objective 1.16 which contains definitions; the amendment would allow the “Special High Density Residential” land
use classification, currently constrained to specific areas east of Interstate I-95, to be applied throughout the city for developments that provide affordable housing. Further amendments
facilitating the affordable housing density bonus may be considered. At present, TCEA and CRALLS programs have affordable housing components. TCEA requires that 5% of new or rehabilitated
housing within TCEA-designated area is affordable; CRALLS requires that affordable housing be built or fee-in-lieu paid in by future developers of properties which are allowed to use
additional capacity as determined by CRALLS. Conclusions and Recommendations The Land Use Element has been successful in guiding development and redevelopment within the city. The following
changes should be made to the element as part of the EAR-based Plan amendments: ?? Introduction of intensity standards for the Public & Private Governmental/Institutional (PPG), Recreational
(R) and Conservation (CON) land uses as required by state statutes. ?? Reclassification of Quantum Planned Industrial Park from Industrial to DRI land use, in a manner consistent with
Renaissance Commons (fka Motorola). The reclassification should also be applied to the Boynton Mall, in anticipation of its future redevelopment. This will require a policy addition
to Objective 1.24, which requires all Developments of Regional Impact to be governed by specific policies. ?? Elimination of Objective 1.15. Its goals have been reached, and its policies
superseded by others. ?? Changes to Definitions contained in Objective 1.16: o Elimination of the “Agriculture” land use. There are no longer properties with this land use designation,
and no opportunities within the city for agricultural uses in the future. o Addition of “DRI” to definitions. The description of the Renaissance Commons DRI is currently contained in
in Objective 1.24. o Review of uses permitted in Industrial and General Commercial classifications. City of Boynton Beach 4-6 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Assessment
of Plan Elements
2. TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Element Overview: Originally adopted as the “Traffic Circulation Element”, the element included objectives and policies addressing mass transit and bikeways
in addition to objectives and policies concerned with the roadway network. The element was updated and renamed the “Transportation Element” with the adoption of the EAR-based amendments
in 2000. In 2005, the element was rewritten and expanded to support the adoption of a Transportation Concurrency Exception Area (TCEA) for a portion of the Community Redevelopment Area
(CRA) and to make provisions for the future designation of any constrained roadways at lower levels of service (CRALLS). These most recent amendments added a number of objectives and
policies to recognize the increased significance of multimodal transportation options, such as walking, bicycling, and transit in relationship to the single-occupant motor vehicle. Transportation
Element Assessment: This section evaluates the objectives of the element. Since a number of objectives were either added or rewritten as a part of the TCEA amendment and thus have been
in effect for only about a year and a half, in many instances there has not been sufficient time to implement them or evaluate the outcomes of their policies. This applies, in particular,
to the TCEA-related objectives because, although a large number of projects have been approved within the TCEA area, none have been completed. Objective 2.l The City shall continue to
provide a motor vehicle transportation network based on the following minimum level of service standards, except within the transportation concurrency exception area (TCEA) and designated
constrained roadways at a lower level of service (CRALLS): ?? Level of Service “D” or better and peak hour conditions on all unspecified City and collector highway facilities. ?? Level
of Service “D” for peak season peak hour conditions on all unspecified arterial facilities. ?? Level of Service “D” for I-95 through the City, Boynton Beach Boulevard from Old Boynton
Road to I-95, NW 22nd Avenue between Congress Avenue and I-95, Congress Avenue between Boynton Beach Boulevard and NW 22nd Avenue and Boynton Beach Boulevard east of I-95. City of Boynton
Beach 4-7 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Assessment of Plan Elements
The City of Boynton Beach operates under the Palm Beach County Traffic Performance Standards Ordinance. The County’s responsibility for countywide transportation concurrency is mandated
through its Charter. All development orders require traffic study or a traffic statement to be reviewed for concurrency by County’s staff. Therefore, there is a continuous monitoring
of the LOS levels for the roadways impacted by development and redevelopment activities. The City’s cooperation with the County has been very successful. Two “Special Transportation
Areas” were established during the period under consideration: Transportation Concurrency Exception Area (TCEA) and Constrained Roadways at a Lower Level of Service (CRALLS), both in
2005. The TCEA encompasses the major focus of the City’s Community Redevelopment Area and includes the traditional Central Business District as well as commercial and residential portions
of the City’s historic African-American neighborhood. The TCEA allowed a number of mixeduse redevelopment projects to be approved in the downtown area; none are yet completed. CRALLS
accommodated the mixed use development of a 100 acre parcel along the Congress Avenue corridor. Objective 2.2 The City shall continue to implement the future Transportation Plan on a
priority basis and shall coordinate same with the City’s Future Land Use Plan, Housing Element, and Coastal Management Element. The City’s has no major roadway improvement plan. Rather,
all roadway work is for surface maintenance only. The transportation-related capital improvements in the Capital Improvement Plan are traffic signals and sidewalk construction; funds
are allocated to resurfacing on an “as needed” basis. The City continues to coordinate with the County and the Florida Department of Transportation for improvements that are coincidental
to specific projects, trying to secure county’s funds and negotiating developer-funded improvements. The recent examples are developer-funded widening of Gateway Boulevard and a bridge
on Old Boynton Road, for which county’s money is sought. Furthermore, staff coordinated traffic safety improvements on Boynton Beach Boulevard west of Federal Highway, as part of a FDOT
project. The City is also coordinating transportation-related improvement projects with its CRA. The CRA-funded extension to Boynton Beach Boulevard has recently been completed. Objective
2.3 Within three years of Plan adoption, neighborhood circulation patterns shall be monitored to assess local operating conditions and address them for any capacity or traffic calming/safety-related
road improvements on an as needed basis. City of Boynton Beach 4-8 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Assessment of Plan Elements
This objective has not been implemented: its only policy recommends those studies on an “as needed” basis. All studies performed by the City are speed, rather than volume related. The
City does receive occasional public complaints about excessive traffic volume on streets maintained by the City, but no need for traffic calming/safety related road improvements has
been established based on the City’s traffic engineering analysis. Such studies and improvements may be needed in the future, when many approved projects are completed. Objective 2.4
The City shall develop and maintain a safe, convenient, multi-modal transportation system, including walking, bicycling, and public transit, which will meet future as well as current
transportation needs, particularly within the TCEA and the CRA. Most of the policies included under this element have been successfully implemented. The City continues to support the
construction of sidewalks, particularly around elementary schools (as indicated by new applicable development regulations, adopted in this review period); the sidewalk inventory has
been completed and placed in the Geographic Information System (GIS). The City Code and the CRA-generated Urban Design Guidelines emphasize pedestrian-oriented project design and transit
enhancement. The public transit system includes Shopper Hopper bus (operated by the City) and a trolley, introduced in 2005 by the CRA. The two lines currently operating are the Cross
Town route which runs from Ocean Avenue to Congress Avenue and the Ocean route which runs from Ocean Avenue to the City Oceanfront Park. The CRA is currently planning to add a route
for Federal Highway in fiscal year 06/07. Current ridership is approximately 5,968 passengers per month. Moreover, the City is cooperating with the South Florida Regional Planning Council
on the potential Transit Oriented Development (TOD) to be located at the vicinity of the Gateway Boulevard Tri-Rail Station. On the other hand, the bikeway classification system consistent
with the Palm Beach County Bikeway Plan has not been implemented (Policy 2.4.6). Objectives 2.5 and 2.6 have been implemented. The requirements included in Objective 2.5 regarding protection
of public right-of-way, driveway locations, traffic circulation and parking have been codified and constitute a part of a standard development review process. As specified in Objective
2.6, the City encourages private sector contributions towards transportation improvements. Objective 2.7 In order to maximize highway system performance, the City shall support alternative
Transportation Demand Management strategies wherever feasible in lieu of, or in conjunction with, more expensive supply side capital improvements. City of Boynton Beach 4-9 Evaluation
and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Assessment of Plan Elements
Objective 2.8 The City shall strive to reduce overall energy consumption due to transportation via regulatory measures such as trip reduction ordinances and incentives. Generally, objectives
2.7 and 2.8 have not been implemented. No TMI (Transportation Management Initiative) has been created to mitigate peak hour impacts though policy measures such as flexible work hours,
car pooling, ride sharing etc. and no publicprivate partnership have been pursued for this purpose. There are no code requirements addressing these issues. The City may introduce such
mitigation measures as projects are completed and begin to significantly impact peak hour traffic. The City does, however, cooperate with the County and the FDOT on projects improving
highway system performance (Policies 2.7.1, 2.7.2, and 2.8.1). FDOT is currently repaving Boynton Beach Boulevard between Federal Highway and 8th Street and, with the City’s support,
will close a number of median openings to enhance safety and improve capacity. It is also modifying traffic signal construction on Boynton Beach Boulevard and 8th Street to accommodate
additional lanes on the north approach in the future. Similar design work is also underway on Federal Highway north of the C-16 Canal. Objective 2.9 The City shall continue to provide
local transportation facilities that are visually and functionally pleasing and that conform to City guidelines. The objective is being implemented. The City is in its 1st year of a
4-year program of replacing old street markers with a new, attractive design. Gateway treatments at the entrances to the City have been installed, and the Neighborhood Assistance Program
provides funding for such facilities at the entrances to neighborhoods (about 10 installed). The CRA is providing street designs for selected roadways; the designs will be implemented
mostly by the private sector as redevelopment proceeds. Objective 2.10 The City shall continue to participate in the Palm Beach County Metropolitan Planning Organization’s long range
planning process and utilize the resulting plans to update the City’s Transportation Element as appropriate. The City has been working closely with the MPO staff to provide data for
the long range transportation model. It also participates in the MPO’s monthly Technical Advisory Committee meetings providing input into the MPO’s Five-Year Transportation Improvement
Program. City of Boynton Beach 4-10 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Assessment of Plan Elements
Objective 2.11 The City shall continue to assist Palm Tran in providing efficient public transit services based on existing and future trip generators and attractors and also provide
local public transit road and terminal areas which are safe for transit users. Several policies were added to this objective concurrent with TCEA amendments. The city has not work previously
with Palm Tran; however, City’s staff is participating on the steering committee for the 2006-2016 Palm Tran Transit Development Plan. Further involvement should increase as several
large approved projects are completed. These projects will be significant trip generators as well as attractors, and may require realignments in bus routes and schedules in the future.
At that point, the City and CRA may embark on the evaluation of the transit services as recommended by Policy 2.11.5. The City supports transit shelters and has been working with vendors;
funds for installation come from the private sector which uses shelters for advertising. It also encourages private developers to provide bus shelter at new projects. Objective 2.12
Promote a pedestrian-and bicycle-friendly environment by providing adequate facilities, such as wider sidewalks, buffers from travel lanes, shade trees, shorter crossing distances, lighting,
refuges in large intersections, bike lanes, and bicycle parking, for pedestrians and bicyclists. This is an objective added as part of the TCEA amendment. All of the above recommendations
have been incorporated either in the City Code or in the Urban Design Guidelines, or both. As stated earlier, the CRA is providing street designs for selected roadways; the designs will
be implemented mostly by the private sector as redevelopment proceeds. Presently, marked bike lanes exist on US 1 and on a small segment of E. Ocean Blvd, between US 1 and the Intracoastal
Bridge. In 2004, Greenway and Bikeway Master Plan was developed and subsequently incorporated into the 10-year Parks and Recreation Strategic Plan for the City. There are no funds for
the Master Plan implementation over the first five years of the Strategic Plan. Moreover, staff is currently reviewing its recommendations. Impacts of Issues on the Transportation Element:
An assessment of the Element’s objectives has been completed to determine whether their achievement relates to the identified major issues and whether there are any unanticipated changes
in circumstances or problems and opportunities regarding the issues. There are no identified correlations between the issue of the wastewater treatment capacity and objectives in the
element. However, if the shortage of affordable housing (identified as Major Issue II) persists, it certainly could, over the long period, impact several objectives of the Transportation
Element. People who will City of Boynton Beach 4-11 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Assessment of Plan Elements
work in the City but will not be able to afford to live here will be forced to commute long distances, possibly contributing to the increase of the peak hour traffic on several already
strained roadways and intersections and making it more difficult to maintain LOS of these facilities. Some of these trips would not be generated at all if dwellings close to the workplace
were readily available. Future transit routes may have to be reconsidered to accommodate changing commuting patterns. 3. UTILITIES ELEMENT Element Overview: The Utilities Element, as
adopted, contains five sub-elements: Sanitary Sewer, Stormwater Management, Potable Water, Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge, and Solid Waste, as required by §163.3177 F.S. Four of
the sub-elements contain adopted level of service standards, with the Aquifer Recharge sub-element being the exception. Utilities Element Assessment by Sub-Elements: Sanitary Sewer Sub-Element
The City of Boynton Beach is served by the South Central Regional Wastewater Treatment Facility, of which it is co-owner with the City of Delray Beach. The total plant capacity is 24
million gallons per day (MGD) annual average daily flow, which is apportioned as needed to the two cities. Wastewater treatment capacity has been determined to be a Major Issue for the
city. The issue may arise
at build out if the population projections at a high-level scenario are realized and generate demands beyond the city’s allocation of the treatment capacity. Objective 3A.1 Adequate
Treatment and Disposal Capacity. Under the auspices of the interlocal agreement, the City of Boynton Beach will seek to secure reserve capacity at the South Central Regional Wastewater
Treatment and Disposal Facilities that is adequate to eliminate existing deficiencies and to serve the City’s needs through build out. Build-out flows are estimated to be 16.8 million
gallons per day, measured on a MMDF basis. Currently, the South Central Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Facility is functioning sufficiently. The City is maintaining maintaining adopted
Levels of Service and there are no deficiencies. However, the City will use the recently reviewed population projection to adjust the estimates of build-out flows. The upward adjustment
of the build-out flows will likely mean that the facility will need to be expanded before build out unless the City of Boynton Beach 4-12 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5,
2006 Assessment of Plan Elements
City of Delray Beach makes a downward adjustment of its the capacity demand at build-out. Policy 3A.1.2 requires continued coordination and renegotiation of the existing agreement with
the South Central Regional Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Board to secure wastewater treatment and disposal capacity equal to the flows estimated in the City’s wastewater master plan
every 5 years, or as often as necessary, providing a mechanism to increase the City’s share of treatment capacity, should it become necessary. The City’s flow to the plant has only approached
its maximum share of usage once, and that was because of unusually heavy rains resulting from two hurricane events in September 2004 and infiltration attending those storms. Objective
3A.3 Minimize Wastewater Influent and the Disposal of Effluent. The City of Boynton Beach Will Minimize Wastewater influent resulting from infiltration and inflow; and will conserve
potable water by utilizing effluent where possible. The City has yet to implement a system of of reducing the amount of potable water used for irrigation and other unnecessary purposes
through the use of treated wastewater effluent. Such efforts are currently in the planning stages. The Phase I area study now in progress could replace approximately 0.5 MGD of potable
water usage with treated wastewater effluent, if constructed. The City has determined that infiltration resulting from the two storms events in 2004 caused the increased peak monthly
flow to the treatment facility, and is currently prepared to proceed with a rehabilitation program that will address that component of groundwater infiltration and inflow determined
to be cost effective. Objective 3A.4 Financing of System Improvements and Operations. The City of Boynton Beach will fund sanitary sewer system capital improvements, replacement and
rehabilitation, and operation and maintenance costs such that these costs are borne by customers of the system on the basis of the cost-of-service. Currently, the costs associated with
sanitary sewer sewer system maintenance and operations are borne by the customers of the system on the basis of the cost-of-service. However, the rate-schedule for sanitary sewer service
(unaltered since 1998) is not adequate to meet current capital improvement demands. Capital expenditures are currently funded through the Department of Utilities cash reserves. Moreover,
depleting reserves means that the Policy 3A.4.3, calling for the reserve fund to be maintained at a level equal to 120% of the previous year’s expenditures or the level required by bond
covenants, is not being implemented. A rate review will be conducted during the latter part of 2006. City of Boynton Beach 4-13 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Assessment
of Plan Elements
Objective 3A.6 The program to eliminate existing deficiencies according to the schedule presented in the Capital Improvements Element shall be maintained. The CIP delineates funding
for pipes, pump stations, and other infrastructure, but is not adequately funded to achieve these goals. Currently, only 1 year of expenditures are funded. Stormwater Sub-Element Objective
3B.1 Adequate Facilities. The City of Boynton Beach will continue to require and enforce standards of the South Florida Water Management District and the Lake Worth Drainage District
such that sufficient stormwater drainage facilities to address existing deficiencies, minimize damage to public and private property, protect surface and groundwater quality and quantity,
and meet future needs are constructed and maintained in the City limits. The City continues to employ the water quality treatment methods required by the South Florida Water Management
District on all new construction projects, and also on projects which re-develop existing areas. In addition, the City has improved several of its outfall structures with devices that
will remove particulate matter or oils and greases prior to discharge into the receiving surface waters. The City has also constructed two entirely new regional drainage systems in the
past 5 years, and is currently constructing a third such system, all of which are designed to improve the quality of the final discharge to surface waters. However, the City is not able
to completely address deficiencies in stormwater drainage facilities, which are lacking in some areas. Policy 3B.1.4 The City shall continue to maintain a drainage master plan to identify
and prioritize needs for expansion, replacement, and improvement to the stormwater drainage system in the City. A copy of the drainage master plan will be forwarded to the Lake Worth
Drainage District, the South Florida Water Management District, and the Palm Beach County Department of Engineering and Public Works to coordinate inter-jurisdictional stormwater planning
and management issues. Policy 3B.1.10 The City shall consider priorities for replacement, correcting existing deficiencies, and providing for future needs according to need. The need
shall be determined by the City through a drainage master planning process. The priorities shall be reflected in the Capital Improvements Element such that the improvements of highest
priority shall be implemented first, in order to provide for City of Boynton Beach 4-14 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Assessment of Plan Elements
public health and safety, the adopted level of service, and operational efficiency. There are implementation issues for both policies. The drainage master plan to identify and prioritize
needs for expansion, replacement, and improvement to the stormwater drainage system has not been updated in approximately five years. This master plan also has not recently been forwarded
to the Lake Worth Drainage District, the South Florida Water Management District, nor the Palm Beach County Department of Engineering and Public Works, as mandated by policy 3B.1.4.
The City will update its 1999 drainage master plan the next year to reflect potential deficiency correction based on need and the availability of capital improvement funds. Potable Water
Sub-Element Objective 3C.1 Adequate Water Supply and Treatment. The City of Boynton Beach will secure raw water supplies and treatment capabilities sufficient to meet water demands for
existing needs and through build out. Build out needs are estimated to be 32 MGD, measured in in terms of maximum daily flow. The 2004 hydraulic model on the potable water system details
areas requiring capital improvements in new transmission mains, so as to meet year 2025 demands and increased fire flows required by high rise buildings (over 7 stories). The report
also estimated the average day and peak day demands at 5-year increments, beginning in 2010 and proceeding through 2025. According to the model, the estimated average daily demand in
year 2025 will be 23.8 MGD. Peak day is anticipated at 33.4 MGD. Objective 3C.2 Adequate and Efficient Distribution Facilities. The City of Boynton Beach will provide distribution services
to its potable water customers that are adequate to meet flow levels projected in the City’s water master plan. Policy 3C.2.1 The City will implement the capital improvements described
in the water master plan. Policy 3C.2.2 The City shall continue to develop an annual maintenance program which will identify and prioritize system needs for renewal, replacement, and
betterment. Capital improvements considered necessary to maintain the system in good working condition will be made on a timely basis. Policy 3C.2.5 By 2005, the City shall replace sub-standard
water lines in the area east of Interstate 95 and south of the Boynton Canal. City of Boynton Beach 4-15 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Assessment of Plan Elements
These policies have not been fully implemented. Specifically, the substandard water lines in the areas delineated in Policy 3C.2.5 are a significant issue that will be very costly to
address. There is inadequate funding for capital improvements of the system. Currently, there is a one-year funding commitment for capital expenditures. Objective 3C.4 Equitable Financing
of System Improvements and Operations. The City of Boynton Beach will fund potable water system capital improvements, replacement and rehabilitation, and operation and maintenance costs
such that costs are borne by system customers on the basis of the cost-of-service. Objective 3C.6 The City shall continue to implement a program to eliminate existing deficiencies according
to the schedule presented in the Capital Improvements Element. See comments above and comments to Objective 3.A.4 and 3.A.6 in the Sanitary Sewer Sub-Element. User fees cover recurrent
maintenance costs only. Capital expenditures are supported by cash reserves, depleting the the reserve fund. As a result of this shortfall, the City is failing to fulfill its reserve
obligation as set forth in policy 3C.4.3. The present rate-schedule will not sustain the system. Rate review will be conducted in the latter part of 2006. Natural Groundwater Aquifer
Recharge Sub-Element Policy 3D.1.2 The City shall continue to designate areas having the greatest recharge potential. Such areas that are undeveloped shall be designated for low impact
development or as conservation areas in the City’s future land use plan. Policy 3D.1.3 Boynton Beach shall continue to cooperate with other appropriate local governments to protect areas
with the greatest recharge potentials that extend beyond the City limits. There is currently no specific water catchment area, as all groundwater is filtered through aquifers. The policy
needs to be reviewed. Policy 3D.1.3 has not been implemented. Solid Waste Sub-Element The City of Boynton Beach provides for collection of solid waste, while the Palm Beach County Solid
Waste Authority is responsible for disposal; the two governments work in concert to ensure that the responsibilities of each mesh seamlessly. The adopted level of service standard for
generation of solid waste is 7.2 pounds per capita per day. In City of Boynton Beach 4-16 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Assessment of Plan Elements
order to maintain this standard, the City continues to emphasize recycling in order to reduce the solid waste stream. In accordance with an interlocal agreement with the Solid Waste
Authority, the City assists with providing citizens education, special recycling campaigns and continued recycling service. In addition, the City continues to streamline and enhance
collection of solid waste through mechanization wherever possible. All objectives of this element have been implemented. Impacts of Issues on the Utilities Element: An assessment of
the Element’s objectives has been completed to determine whether their achievement relates to the identified major issues and whether there are any unanticipated changes in circumstances
or problems and opportunities regarding the issues. While all objectives of the Element were assessed, only those contained within the Sanitary Sewer Sub-Element were related to the
major issue (see pertinent comments to the Sub-Element objectives and policies). 4. CONSERVATION ELEMENT Element Overview: The Conservation Element provides for the protection, use and
conservation of natural and environmental resources including, but not limited to, air, water, water recharge areas, soils, and wildlife and marine habitats. In so far as some of these
areas are specifically addressed, as required by Chapter 163, in other Comprehensive Plan elements, the consistency of this element with those other elements is essential. Conservation
Element Assessment: Generally, conservation policies have been successfully implemented. In June 2003, a land use classification for “Conservation” was added to the Future Land Use Map
with a corresponding definition adopted into the Future Land Use Element. Concurrent with the addition of the classification, the land use designation for two upland scrub properties
– Seacrest and Rosemary -were amended to “Conservation”, recognizing the joint effort by the County and the City of Boynton Beach to acquire and preserve these natural areas. The objectives
and policies listed below either have not been implemented or have not been executed as stated and will be evaluated for revision or elimination in the EARbased amendments. City of Boynton
Beach 4-17 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Assessment of Plan Elements
Objective 4.3: Through the long term planning horizon, the City shall maintain a local surface quality equal to or better than existing levels for recognized pollutants and conserve,
appropriately use and protect the quality and quantity of waters that flow into the Intracoastal Waterway. Two policies under this objective have not been implemented: Policy 4.3.2:
The City shall continue to lobby the Florida Department of Transportation to replace existing direct discharge outfalls with drainage retention ponds. This policy will be eliminated.
Land is not available near most DOT roadways to make this feasible. Policy 4.3.5: The City shall continue to investigate the financial feasibility and potential funding sources for implementing
a canal maintenance dredging program to eliminate polluted sediments, to reduce resuspension of sediments through prop dredging and to improve tidal flushing. The City does not own or
maintain any canals that experience tidal flushing other than the recently purchased marina. Additional time is needed to study the sediments and pollution potential. This policy will
be revised. Objective 4.7: The City shall continue to consider a variety of options to implement potable water conservation such as rate structure, aquifer storage and recovery, education
and reuse to reduce per capita water consumption rates by at least 10% through the next planning period. Even though some of the above measures were implemented, there has been no change
in the per capita water consumption rates since the year 2000. Reclaimed water efforts will assist in reducing per capita usage if the City focuses on replacing potable water now used
for irrigation. Impacts of Issues on the Conservation Element: An assessment of the Element’s objectives has been completed to determine whether their achievement relates to the identified
major issues and whether there are any unanticipated changes in circumstances or problems and opportunities regarding the issues. There are no identified correlations between the major
issues and objectives in the element. City of Boynton Beach 4-18 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Assessment of Plan Elements
5. RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE ELEMENT Element Overview: The Recreation and Open Space Element utilizes an inventory of public and private facilities to determine existing and projected
deficiencies in park acreage and is focused on determining ways in which opportunities for recreation can be expanded and enhanced to meet the existing and future needs of the citizens
based on adopted levels of service. Although the Recreation and Open Space element was updated in 2000, based on the 1996 EAR, staff felt that a more thorough collection and examination
of the support data should be undertaken. In May 2004, the City contracted with consultants to develop a Parks and Recreation Strategic Plan for the City of Boynton Beach and to revise
the Comprehensive Plan element based on the adopted Strategic Plan, the Conceptual Parks and Recreation System Map and narrative and Implementation Strategies. A new draft Recreation
and Open Space Element will undergo a final review as a part of the EAR-based amendment process. Recreation and Open Space Element Assessment: This section evaluates implementation of
the 2000 update of the Recreation and Open Space Element. The Element has three objectives; the last of the three, Objective 6.3, will have to undergo the most thorough amendment as
the growth of the City turns increasingly vertical. Objective 5.1 The City shall improve and increase access to parks and recreational facilities, where available space exists, by providing
adequate automobile parking, bike rack facilities, and handicap access to all existing and planned, neighborhood and district parks operated by the City by the Year 2002. The objective
has been largely implemented. All parks and recreation sites have handicap access as required by law. Some still lack bike racks, but the facilities continue to be installed. All new
parks will have bike racks. Objective 5.2 The City shall ensure additional public access to recreation sites by providing park and recreation facilities, using, in part, current population
data and projections, summary/recommendation “D” proposed park development schedule. During the last 6 years, the City developed one additional park, a 10 acre intracoastal facility.
In 2002 the city hired a consultant to carry out a recreational needs assessment. Subsequently, as explained in the Overview section above, another consultant was contracted to evaluate
provision of parks and recreational facilities within City’s boundaries, and to make recommendations through the Parks and City of Boynton Beach 4-19 Evaluation and Appraisal Report
December 5, 2006 Assessment of Plan Elements
Recreation Strategic Plan for the City of Boynton Beach. The overall conclusion was that (i) the City’s park system was adequate and met LOS standards; and (ii) the development of the
city-owned park land will meet future needs, so no additional land purchases are necessary. Objective 5.3 The City shall increase the provision of recreation facilities and open space
by public agencies and private enterprise, and specifically require that future private, as well as dedicated areas, are developed and equipped to be at minimum (e.g. size, facilities,
access) equivalent of a public neighborhood park. The city is approaching buildout; vacant land is scarce and redevelopment creates an increasingly urban environment whereby townhome
and condo projects (some as part of mixed use developments) are built on relatively small lots. In 2002, in response to these changing circumstances, the City adopted a new Park and
Recreation impact fee ordinance. Developers of projects with residential components pay an impact fee; land dedication in-lieu can occasionally be requested if feasible. There are no
specific requirements regarding provision of private recreational facilities and no credit towards the fee is given for such provision. The number and type of facilities provided are
clearly determined by the new urban scale as well as consumer preferences. Most of the incoming projects are planned developments, and staff has a lot of input regarding their overall
design, but the private sector generally responds well to market demand for specific amenities. Over the period under consideration, the City has developed a 10 acre Intracoastal Park
and improved Boat Ramp park, both with a public access to the waterfront. Two other park sites, Jaycee (also with water frontage) and the SE neighborhood park (yet unnamed) are currently
being developed. In accordance with the Policy 5.3.4, a 5 acre park site has been recently dedicated to the City concurrently with Klatt/Winchester property rezoning. The City owns approximately
140 acres of undeveloped park land, which will be developed according to the schedule delineated in the above mentioned Strategic Plan. The failure to develop the sites during the last
six years was due to limited funding. The unprecedented growth made competing claims on several service facilities (such as additional fire stations); moreover, two years of hurricane
damage required extensive capital repairs to the existing facilities. Impacts of Issues on the Recreation and Open Space Element: An assessment of the Element’s objectives has been completed
to determine whether their achievement relates to the identified major issues and whether there are any unanticipated changes in circumstances or problems and opportunities regarding
the City of Boynton Beach 4-20 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Assessment of Plan Elements
issues. There are no identified correlations between the issues and objectives in the element. 6. HOUSING ELEMENT Element Overview: The purpose of the Housing Element is to ensure that
the City of Boynton Beach has a supply of adequate housing in a range of types and prices to meet the needs of present and future residents. In order to assist the private sector in
providing new dwelling units, a variety of programs are offered by the City and the City’s Community Redevelopment Agency. Objectives contained in the element also address a variety
of housing issues, including: preservation of traditional neighborhoods and historical resources; group homes and foster care facilities; and housing the elderly, the homeless and those
with special needs. Housing Element Assessment: Affordable/workforce housing has been recognized as the City’s major issue. The effectiveness of the current policies and programs has
been significantly curtailed by dramatic housing price increases that occurred during the period under consideration. The City and the CRA co-funded a Housing Needs Assessment study
in order to acquire data that will inform future housing programs or justify changes to the existing ones. The following is the objective-by-objective assessment of the element’s achievements.
The implementation efforts of the first group of objectives have been either wholly or at least partially successful; two of the objectives have not been implemented. Objectives with
(at least some) successfully implemented policies: Objective 6.1 Assist the private sector to provide new dwelling units of various types, sizes, and costs by the year 2015, in order
to meet the housing needs of the existing and anticipated populations of the City. The residential market has been extremely active over the last 6 years, producing a large number of
new units and attributing to the conversion of non-residential zoning districts for residential use. Since the vacant land is scarce, single family detached housing stock will not expand
in the future, while townhomes and condominiums continue to be residential products in redevelopment. The City has adopted mixed use ordinance and a suburban mixed use land use to encourage
well–designed and innovative projects. However, the City lost rental units to condo-conversions (including some lower rent projects) and three mobil home parks which were replaced by
higher City of Boynton Beach 4-21 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Assessment of Plan Elements
end townhomes. The supply of affordable housing has become an issue that the City is trying to address. The City has been successful in partnering with non-profits, such as the local
banks’ Consortium for Affordable Housing and the faith-based community development organizations. Objective 6.2 By the year 2002, most substandard housing shall be eliminated. In 2004,
a large low-income Section-8 rental development was deemed unsafe and demolished. An affordable housing project was approved on a part of the property previously occupied by the development.
The City’s code enforcement staff continues to inspect properties to enforce the Community Appearance Code, adopted in 1996. The cases are reported to the Community Improvement Division
which provides rehabilitation and repair assistance to qualified home owners. Overall, the substandard housing stock has decreased. Heart of Boynton, the historically African-American
neighborhood close to the City’s downtown, contains a large percentage of the remaining substandard stock. The City and the CRA are reviewing implementation options for the Heart of
Boynton Redevelopment Plan which will address the issue. Objective 6.3 By the year 2002, the City shall continue to implement a series of housing programs aimed at providing adequate
housing and housing sites for the homeless, very-low, low and moderate-income persons to meet their housing needs. Steep housing price increases significantly limited the number of beneficiaries
of the SHIP purchase assistance program. Presently, since the vacant lots are increasingly difficult to find, the program is focused on purchases of existing homes. There are no programs
specifically targeting the homeless population. The 2004 Palm Beach County homeless survey showed no homeless problem within the City. As explained in the Issue section of this report,
the City is reviewing the recommendations of the Housing Needs Assessment report to add new programs to meet the pent-up and future demand for affordable housing. If adopted, the programs
will either mandate the private sector to provide affordable units as part of market-rate developments or provide incentives to do so. As stated earlier, the City is not involved in
any rental programs, such as rental rehabilitation or Section 8. Likewise, Policy 6.3.5 which requires the City to identify a dedicated source of income for housing remains largely unimplemented
– the only such source are Community Development Block Grants used from rehabilitation programs. City of Boynton Beach 4-22 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Assessment
of Plan Elements
No general fund monies, documentary surtax, or tax-exempt bonds have been allocated to housing. Objective 6.5 The City shall allow sites for group homes and foster care facilities in
residential land use categories to ensure adequate areas are available to meet the housing needs of individuals with special needs. The city allows sites for group homes and community
residential homes as defined by state law. Density bonuses have been offered in the past to better accommodate such uses. Objective 6.6 The City shall avoid housing programs which displace
households. However, in the event displacement occurs, benefits consistent with applicable state and federal laws will be implemented through the following policies. The city has no
housing programs that would displace households. Over the period under consideration, the city executed a demolition of the Section 8 rental property, assisted families to find alternative
housing and provided monies for security deposits. Objective 6.7 The City shall continue to preserve housing identified as being historically significant. The objective has not been
implemented. As explained in the Land Use Element assessment, the city completed the inventory of historic structures but has no historic preservation ordinance which would address issues
such as advice and assistance to owners making improvements (Policy 6.7.1). There are no educational programs focused on the historic housing (Policy 6.7.2). The city’s preservation
effort include two non-residential buildings. Recently, the City’s CRA has taken over the ownership of the old high school building located on the City Hall complex. The RFP was issued
for adaptive reuse of the building; proposals are being reviewed. The community has been very supportive of its preservation, but no local civic group volunteered to take a lead in fundraising
efforts. The adjacent original elementary school building – one of the two city buildings currently on the National Historic Preservation Registry – has been restored and houses a very
successful Children's Museum, open to the public since 2001. Objective 6.8 The City, through Code enforcement efforts, will continue to improve the quality of neighborhoods by conserving
the exiting housing
stock. City of Boynton Beach 4-23 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Assessment of Plan Elements
See evaluation of Objective 6.2. The City encourages private reinvestment in housing through workshops and technical assistance programs delivered by staff, lending institutions and
Community Development Corporations. The City co-funds selected educational and social programs for very low, low and moderate income households through its CDBG grant program (Policy
6.8.7). Objective 6.9 Adequate measures should be taken by 2005 to address the housing problems of persons with special needs. The City provides housing rehabilitation services specifically
focused on retrofitting older units to remove physical barriers which restrict accessibility by handicapped persons or other people with special needs. The City is currently partnering
with a local non profit organization (R.M. Lee CDC) by donating land, and allocating State Housing Initiative Program funds to build an affordable senior housing project. Objectives
that failed to be implemented: Objective 6.4 Subsequent to Plan adoption, allow for adequate sites for mobile homes in all areas of the City where single-family detached dwellings are
permitted. The objective has not been implemented. There are no sites for new mobil home parks; in any case, the cost of land would preclude such use. As stated earlier, three of the
city’s existing mobil homes have been redeveloped, and even though the developers complied with the state mobil home relocation regulations, these actions ultimately reduced supply of
housing for very low income people. Impacts of Issues on the Housing Element: An assessment of the Element’s objectives has been completed to determine whether their achievement relates
to the identified major issues and whether there are any unanticipated changes in circumstances or problems and opportunities regarding the issues. There are no identified correlations
between the issue of wastewater treatment capacity and objectives in the element. The issue of workforce/affordable housing shortage is obviously related to outcomes of Objectives 6.3
and 6.1. However, However, since the issue arose as a result of external circumstances out of the city’s control, it cannot be ascribed to the implementation failure of said objectives.
Tripling of the housing prices over a five year period is highly unusual and could hardly be anticipated. As explained in the Issue section, the City is reviewing new policies and programs
to address the issue. City of Boynton Beach 4-24 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Assessment of Plan Elements
7. COASTAL MANAGEMENT ELEMENT Element Overview: The Coastal Management Element is a required element of the Comprehensive Plan for all municipalities “abutting the . . . Atlantic Ocean
. . .” The purpose of the element is to plan for development in the coastal area and, where appropriate, restrict development where damage or impacts might otherwise occur to coastal
upland and marine resources; to protect human life from the ravages of tropical hurricanes and storm tides; and to limit public expenditures in locations subject to destruction by potential
natural disasters. The planning area for the Coastal Management Element includes lands between the Town of Hypoluxo on the north to Gulfstream Boulevard on the south, and from a combination
of the Florida East Coast (FEC) Railroad right-of-way and several local streets nearby and parallel to the FEC on the west to the Intracoastal Waterway and a small portion fronting on
the Atlantic Ocean on the east. The planning area includes several unincorporated pockets and enclaves, both on the south end of the City and on the barrier island, that are within the
City’s future annexation area. It also includes the traditional central business district of the City. While the Coastal Management planning area, as defined above, contains approximately
1,250 acres, the Hurricane High Hazard area (defined as the Category 1 evacuation area) is generally eastward of Federal Highway and makes up less than one-half of the planning area.
Following the previous EAR, only minor amendments were made to the Coastal Management Element, most of them acknowledging work accomplished and changes in dates for completion of other
tasks. Few of the amendments were substantive in nature. Coastal Management Element Assessment: The objectives that have been implemented are not listed, with the exception of Objective
7.9 which has been chosen as an example of success. Otherwise, the section reviews the objectives and policies that either have not been implemented or have not been executed as stated
and will be evaluated for revision or elimination in the EARbased amendments. Example of successful implementation: Objective 7.9 The City shall provide by 2002 for an increase in the
amount of water dependent and water related uses and public access to City of Boynton Beach 4-25 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Assessment of Plan Elements
beach and shoreline facilities by prioritizing shoreline uses with priority given to water dependent uses. The City and the CRA completed several projects which feature public access
to water and water-dependent uses. These projects include the development of the Intracoastal Park, the purchase and development of Jaycee Park (ongoing), the improvements of the boat
ramp park and the Promenade, an extension of the Boynton Beach Boulevard east of US 1 to the Intracoastal Waterway. Moreover, the CRA (with some county’s funding) has recently purchased
the marina adjacent to the Marina Village project. Acquisition of a small portion of the Marina Village project is currently being considered for a development of a waterfront park.
The majority of the area will be maintained as a “working marina”, preserving an important part of the City’s past importance as a coastal fishing village. Objectives with implementation
issues: Objective 7.2 By 2002, the City shall develop a local water quality improvement program for the City's portion of the Intracoastal Waterway using current stormwater data. Policy
7.2.4 The City shall continue to enforce the land development regulations to require future marinas to be designed to maximize flushing of the marine basin and to provide for proper
sanitary sewer hook-ups. Policy 7.2.5 By 2002, the City will initiate discussions with the Florida Department of Transportation relative to improving the water quality of storm water
discharges. Policy 7.2.6 By 2002, the City will initiate discussions with the South Florida Water Management District relative to improving the water quality of storm water discharges
from the C-l6 (Boynton Beach) Canal. Policy 7.2.9 The City will continue to urge that the Florida Department of Transportation retrofit existing drainage outfalls from State Highways
to Lake Worth and the Intracoastal Waterway. Policy 7.2.10 The City shall by 2002, conduct a study of the feasibility of requiring marinas to provide sanitary sewer hook-ups for long-term
use, and to adopt adopt ordinances requiring boats to hook-up to the systems provided. Objective 7.2 and most of its policies (as listed) have not been implemented. The subsequent EAR-based
review will have to factor the State-mandated TMDL (Total City of Boynton Beach 4-26 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Assessment of Plan Elements
Maximum Daily Load), a framework for evaluating all possible water quality control efforts that promote closer coordination of local, state, and federal efforts to better guarantee that
the water quality goals are met. Objective 7.6 The City shall maintain or reduce current estimated hurricane evacuation times if development increases. Policy 7.6.5 The City shall undertake
efforts by 2002 to establish a County survey or informational program to identify the location and magnitude of the coastal area population requiring assistance in evacuation. The objective
as stated has not been implemented although most its policies have. The city moved its focus away from monitoring “current estimated evacuation times” to close coordination with the
County on emergency preparadness and post disaster planning. The City works directly with the County’s Division of Emergency Management and the Local Mitigation Strategy Program to address
any issues related to these areas. Policy 7.6.5 has not been implemented and will be reviewed as part of the EAR-based amendments. Objective 7.10 By 2002, the City shall protect, preserve
and/or provide for the sensitive reuse of historic properties in the Coastal Management area. The City does not have a historic preservation ordinance (see comments in evaluation of
the Land Use Element) and therefore no guidelines for development performance and reuse. Objective 7.11 To provide for the ongoing development of the coastal area in a manner which will
reduce the exposure of human life and public and private property to natural hazards by developing a Post-Disaster Redevelopment Plan. See comments to Objective 7.12. The objective has
not been implemented as the City does not currently have a Post-Disaster Redevelopment Plan. Any such plan would require re-direction of considerable staff resources. However, Palm Beach
County recently organized a post-disaster redevelopment plan meeting involving all its municipalities. The County’s Plan (which is multijurisdictional) will be submitted to DCA for for
review in August 2006. Objective 7.l2 By 2015, the City shall minimize population concentrations in the coastal high-hazard area. This is an objective that has not been and will not
be implemented; in fact, by 2015 the population concentration is likely to increase. The Coastal Management element was City of Boynton Beach 4-27 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December
5, 2006 Assessment of Plan Elements
based on minimum criteria existing in 1989. Since that time, the “Eastward Ho” initiative was developed stressing the importance of redevelopment of the coastal area. In addition, Chapter
163, FS has been amended to reflect emphasis on redevelopment of urban core areas. Furthermore, the Palm Beach County’s traffic concurrency system in place exempts from traffic review
residential units proposed in the coastal area. This emphasis creates an apparent conflict between limiting development in the Hurricane High Hazard area and redeveloping the urban core.
The shortage of vacant land and the boom in residential real estate resulted in a fast pace redevelopment activity in the coastal high-hazard areas of the City. Drawing from the Eastward-Ho
premise that creating a lively downtown requires people living downtown, and consistently with adopted redevelopment plans, the City increased densities on a number of properties along
the US 1 corridor. Some restrictions are in place; for example, the average density in the city’s mixed-use core land use area generally allowing 80 units per acre cannot exceed 40 units
per acre east of US 1. Moreover, there is an issue of older developments in the Coastal area built at densities exceeding the maximums allowed in the Comprehensive Plan (acknowledged
by analysis supporting the element). No consideration was given to the possibility of those properties being redeveloped at some future date (in the long range planning period) or how
the non-conforming status was to be handled. The developments are within the City’s defined redevelopment area, and could conceivably be redeveloped at existing or higher densities with
a land use change. In light of the more recent emphasis on individual property rights, some consideration of this issue should be included in the plan. Impacts of Issues on the Coastal
Management Element: An assessment of the Element’s objectives has been completed to determine whether their achievement relates to the identified major issues and whether there are any
unanticipated changes in circumstances or problems and opportunities regarding the issues. There are no identified correlations between the Wastewater Treatment Capacity Issue and objectives
in the element. The Affordable Housing Issue can potentially impact Objective 7.12. In preparation for the affordable/workforce housing programs, the City is currently processing a Comprehensive
Plan text amendment which would allow special high density land use classification anywhere within its boundaries if workforce units are provided as part of the development. The Special
High Density residential land use classification is currently allowed in some coastal areas; the proposed amendment will enable the developers to extend it to others, further increasing
population concentrations. City of Boynton Beach 4-28 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Assessment of Plan Elements
8. INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION ELEMENT Element Overview: The Intergovernmental Coordination Element outlines a series of objectives to increase coordination, interaction and communication
with adjacent local governments and other coordinating entities to maintain constant awareness of the plans and intentions of those entities and to address or anticipate major issues
which may involve either a single agency or numerous entities. The City relies on two major mechanisms to implement the policies contained in the element. The first of these is the use
of interlocal agreements to formally state intentions for provision of services beyond jurisdictional boundaries and include such diverse topics as joint use of school recreation facilities
to mutual aid in handling hazardous materials and establishing a county-wide computer imaging system. The second mechanism is the Palm Beach Countywide Intergovernmental Coordination
Process which provides a forum to deal with issues unique to the governments within the County. One arm of that process is the Multi-Jurisdictional Issues Coordination Forum made up
of appointed representatives from local governments and utilized as a means of collaborative planning for matters of interjurisdictional significance such as siting of facilities with
countywide significance to locally unwanted land uses. A second arm is the Intergovernmental Plan Amendment Review Committee (IPARC), made up of planning staff members from local governments
and utilized as a clearinghouse for all Comprehensive Plan amendments; as a forum for study and discussion of topics of mutual interest; and as a mechanism for conflict resolution in
instances of interjurisdictional land use incompatibilities. Both mechanisms are very successful in promoting intergovernmental coordination and communication. Intergovernmental Coordination
Element Assessment: Generally, the objectives of the Intergovernmental Coordination Element have been or are being successfully implemented. Those objectives are not listed; instead,
instead, the section reviews the objectives and policies that either have not been implemented or have not been executed as stated and will be evaluated for revision or elimination in
the EAR-based amendments. For Comments on implementation of Objectives 8.1 and 8.2, see “Impacts of Issues on the Intergovernmental Coordination Element” at the end of this section.
City of Boynton Beach 4-29 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Assessment of Plan Elements
Policies under Objective 8.4: Policy 8.4.2 The City shall maintain an updated copy of the Comprehensive Plan for the Town of Ocean Ridge in order to evaluate their plans for future beach
front recreation and explore potential future agreements that would facilitate joint use and/or provision. No potential future agreements with the Town of Ocean Ridge regarding the joint
use or provision of beach front recreation have been explored. Objective 8.5 The City shall continue to implement standards for parks and recreation facilities that are consistent with
the County's park standards. The city has its own standards for parks and does not review them for comparison with and adjustment to standards used by Palm Beach County. Policy 8.5.2
The City shall recommend to Palm Beach County that neighborhood park facilities be required as part of its review of rezonings and water service agreements in the unincorporated area.
This policy has not been implemented. Private recreation facilities are part of all residential products as the market demands. They can serve as a ‘‘neighborhood park” in suburban-type
developments or offer alternative amenities in urban projects. Objective 8.5 will likely be eliminated. Objective 8.8 The City shall coordinate through the Intergovernmental Plan Amendment
Review Committee emergency preparedness and post disaster planning, and shall use the resources of the City’s Fire Department to implement hurricane disaster plans as well to initiate
the development of other disaster plans and strategies. Neither emergency preparadness nor post disaster planning are coordinated through IPARC. The City works directly with the County’s
Division of Emergency Management and the Local Mitigation Strategy Program to address any issues related to these areas. Policy 8.8.6 The City shall adopt and enforce regulations to
require that all new traffic impact statements for residential projects of 100 dwellings units or more which are located in the Hurricane Evacuation Zone formulate an emergency hurricane
preparedness plan and shall provide the plan to all residents; this plan is subject to the approval of the City’s Emergency Management Officer. Policy 8.8.5 requires that homeowners’
associations of residential developments of more than 50 units located in the Hurricane Evacuation Zone provide information concerning City of Boynton Beach 4-30 Evaluation and Appraisal
Report December 5, 2006 Assessment of Plan Elements
hurricane evacuation to their residents. The City considers this policy to be sufficient. Policy 8.8.6 will likely be eliminated. Objective 8.9 The City shall participate in the Lake
Worth Lagoon Study, Department of Environmental Resources Management, South Florida Water Management District, and Surface Water Improvement which target the improvement of surface waters
within, and adjacent to, the City's boundary. The objective will have to be amended to account for the State-mandated TMDL (Total Maximum Daily Load), a framework for evaluating all
possible water quality control efforts that promote closer coordination of local, state, and federal efforts to better guarantee that the water quality goals are met. Policy 8.9.1 The
City shall participate in the efforts to improve the quality of the areas canals and receiving waterways, and negotiate with the Lake Worth Drainage District in addressing the same.
Policy 8.9.4 The City shall maintain an updated copy of, and promote the application of, the Operating Policies of the Lake Worth Drainage District. Policy 8.9.5 The City should provide
the Districts with the City's development requirements concerning drainage, and emphasize the need for them to adopt similar restrictions if the District's standards are less stringent.
Policy 8.9.6 The City shall continue to urge Florida Department of Transportation to retrofit existing direct drainage outfalls with drainage retention ponds from state highways to Lake
Worth and the Intercoastal Waterway. Moreover, policies 8.9.4, 8.9.5 and 8.9.6 of the objective have not been executed and will undergo a review for EAR-based amendments. The City has
not negotiated addressing the water quality with the Lake Worth Drainage District as directed in Policy 8.9.1. Direct negotiation on water quality issues has been replaced by a program
involving County-wide planning through the NPDES (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System) permitting process, including the incorporation of meeting future TMDL limitations.
Meetings are held quarterly, involving all municipalities within the County, plus FDOT and some Improvement Districts. Policies under Objective 8.10: Policy 8.10.6 The City shall pursue
interlocal agreements with local governmental/municipalities that have identified or adopted future City of Boynton Beach 4-31 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Assessment
of Plan Elements
land use designations for adjacent unincorporated areas. These agreements would establish “joint planning areas” pursuant to Chapter 163.3171, F.S. The city has no “joint planning area”
agreements and has generally not pursued long range strategies regarding its possible future annexation areas. However, the City coordinates with the county on all City’s annexations,
and reviews all land use amendments proposed by the County in the City’s annexation area. Policies under Objective 8.17: Policy 8.17.3 By 2002, the City will initiate discussions with
the Florida Department of Transportation relative to improving the water quality of storm water discharges. Policy 8.17.4 By 2002, the City will initiate discussions with the South Florida
Water Management District relative to improving the water quality of storm water discharges from the C-l6 (Boynton Beach) Canal. The three policies under Objective 8.17, which directs
the City to coordinate with South Florida Water Management District, Florida Department of Transportation, and the Lake Worth Drainage District to improve the local waterway, have not
been implemented. Direct negotiation on water quality issues has been replaced by a program involving County-wide planning through the NPDES (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System) permitting process, including the incorporation of meeting future TMDL limitations. Quarterly meetings with this planning group include FDOT. Objective 8.23 The City will inform
the Bethesda Healthcare Corporation, through establishment of coordination mechanisms with the Corporation, of the growth plans of the City, and if necessary, the major factors influencing
economic and redevelopment growth. From the coordination, the City will become aware of the Corporation's needs and concerns as it develops its master plan. The City has no ongoing coordination
mechanisms with the Bethesda Healthcare Corporation, its biggest employer. However, the City has processed four (4) applications to approve or expand the hospital campus, and assisted
Bethesda with zoning approval to adaptively reuse an old manufacturing facility as a service annex. This policy will be reviewed and possibly eliminated. City of Boynton Beach 4-32 Evaluation
and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Assessment of Plan Elements
Impacts of Issues on the Intergovernmental Coordination Element: An assessment of the Element’s objectives has been completed to determine whether their achievement relates to the identified
major issues and whether there are any unanticipated changes in circumstances or problems and opportunities regarding the issue. Major Issue I – Wastewater Treatment Capacity -is linked
to the Objective 8.19: Objective 8.19 The City, or the South Central Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Board, shall continue to coordinate with the appropriate entities in order to plan
for future treatment facility expansion. The corresponding Policy 8.19.1 requires coordination among the Cities of Boynton Beach and Delray Beach, the South Central Wastewater Treatment
and Disposal Board, and Palm Beach County, including the analysis of the buildout population projections of the service area as a basis for facility expansion. The commitment of the
two cities toward this end was formalized by interlocal agreement in 1997. Major Issue II – – Shortage of Workforce Housing – is linked to objectives 8.1. and 8.2: Objective 8.1 The
City shall continue to increase the quality and frequency of the communication and coordination mechanisms between such agencies and entities whose focus is on housing and housing improvement.
Objective 8.2 The City shall carry forth, with its Community Development Block Grant Entitlement Status, a comprehensive program to meet the City needs in affordable housing and accompanying
infrastructure. The City works closely with many housing agencies in the area. The current affordable housing crisis has Palm Beach County very focused on addressing the issue. The county-wide
Housing Needs Assessment Study has just been completed. The County has added affordable housing requirements to its TCEA and CRALLS conditions and is currently revising its residential
concurrency exception program (applicable to areas east of Interstate 95) for possible inclusion of such requirements. The coordination between the County’s municipalities and the County
regarding housing issues has proven to be difficult as the policies proposed to alleviate the situation may differ considerably. In recent years, about 30% of CDBG budget has been spent
on housing rehabilitation. CDBG monies cannot fund purchase subsidies for which, given the high housing prices, the need is the greatest. City of Boynton Beach 4-33 Evaluation and Appraisal
Report December 5, 2006 Assessment of Plan Elements
There are no identified correlations between the issues and other objectives in the element and no amendments to the Intergovernmental Coordination Element are foreseen as necessary
to address the major issues. 9. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT Element Overview: The Capital Improvements Element, as required by §163.3177(3) F. S., is designed to show the financial
feasibility of providing public facilities and the adopted levels of services, outlined in other elements of the Comprehensive Plan, as well as to provide a short-term (five-year) schedule
for the provision of those facilities and services to ensure their availability concurrent with development. The element was amended following the EAR in 2000, and again in 2001 in conjunction
with the adoption of the Public School Facilities Element. Capital Improvements Element Assessment: The Capital Improvement Schedule developed in 1989 was placed in the Element’s Support
Document but never adopted into the Comprehensive Plan, nor was it updated at the time of of the 2000 EAR-based amendments. The City adopts its Capital Improvement Plan annually as part
of the budget; however, information contained in CIP falls short of meeting all requirements as listed in §163.3177(3) F. S. The City has not been reviewing the Element and updating
the CIS annually, as required and has to update its current capital planning methodology to meet all state requirements. Additionally, there may be inconsistencies that exist between
this element and other elements of the Comprehensive Plan which may have been amended without a review of the Capital Improvements Element. For example, policies contained in Objective
9E.5 regarding the level of service for district and neighborhood parks will have to be amended for consistency with The Recreation and Open Space Element (see also comments to Objective
9C.2). All deficiencies will be addressed in the EAR-based amendments City of Boynton Beach 4-34 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Assessment of Plan Elements
Sanitary Sewer and Potable Water Goal 9.A (Sanitary Sewer) and Objective 9.B1 specify that the city shall “maintain sufficient and equitable financing measures to provide services”.
Policy 9B.1.3 in the Potable Water section reflects the similar policy in the Utilities Element: Policy 9B.1.3 Equitable Financing of System Improvements and Operations. The City of
Boynton Beach shall continue to fund potable water system capital improvements, replacement and rehabilitation, and operation and maintenance costs such that costs are borne by system
customers on the basis of the cost-of-service. Currently, the costs associated with sanitary sewer and the potable water system maintenance and operations are borne by the customers
of the system on the basis of the cost-of-service. However, the rate-schedule is inadequate to meet capital improvement demands and capital expenditures are currently funded through
the Department of Utilities cash reserves. So far, the Level of Service levels for both sewer and potable water have been maintained. However, there is no committed funding for a 5-year
improvement schedule. At present, CIP-designated funds cover one year of capital improvement expenditures. Parks Objective 9C.1 By 2002, the City shall provide adequate automobile parking
(excluding mini parks), bike rack facilities, and handicap access to all existing and planned, neighborhood and district parks operated by the City by the Year 2000, where available
space exists. The objective has been largely implemented. All parks and recreation sites have handicap access as required by law. Some still lack bike racks, but the facilities continue
to be installed.
Objective 9C.2 The City shall ensure additional public access to recreation sites by providing parks and recreation facilities using, in part, current population data and projections,
summary/recommendations “D”, proposed park development schedule, Table #2-Neighborhood Park Needs Analysis, Table #3-District Parks Needs and Analysis, and Table #4-Facility Needs Analysis.
In 2002 the city hired a consultant to carry out a recreational needs assessment. Subsequently, another consultant was contracted to evaluate provision of parks and recreational facilities
within City’s boundaries, and to make recommendations through the Parks and Recreation Strategic Plan for the City of Boynton Beach. The Plan includes proposed amendments to the Recreation
and open Space Element of the City of Boynton Beach 4-35 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Assessment of Plan Elements
Comprehensive Plan. The overall conclusion was that (i) the City’s park system was adequate and met LOS standards; and (ii) the development of the currently undeveloped city-owned park
land will meet future needs beyond a 10-year planning period. The Objective and its policies will have to be reviewed to incorporate the proposed amendments. Also, existing inconsistencies
between the Capital Improvements Element and Recreation and Open Space Element will be removed. In particular, Policy 9C.2.1 of the Capital Improvement Element, which directs the City
to adopt a Level of Service of 2.5 acres per 1,000 persons for both neighborhood and district parks is in conflict with policies of the Open Space Element, which now defines the neighborhood
LOS of 2.5 acres as advisory. Policy 9C.2.3 The City shall complete, or initiate, the development of facilities consistent with Table 2 -Neighborhood Park Needs Analysis and Table 3
-District Park Needs Analysis. During the last 6 years, the City developed one additional park, a 10 acre intracoastal facility. The tables referred to in the above policy have not been
updated in the 2000 EAR-based amendments. The results of the park needs analysis performed by the consultant will be reflected in the current EAR-based amendments. Policy 9C.2.6 By 2002,
the City shall initiate development of strategic neighborhood plans with parks as one component. See comments above. Development of strategic neighborhood plans has not been initiated.
Objective 9C.3 The City shall increase the proportion of residential developments that provide private recreation areas, and require that future private recreation areas are developed
and equipped so as to be the equivalent of a public neighborhood park. Policy 9C.3.5 The City shall continue to require a minimum of 6 acres per 1,000 population park dedication, fees
in lieu thereof equal to the value of the land to be dedicated, or a combination of fees and land. As explained in the Recreation and Open Space Element, scarcity of vacant land and
the focus on urban-style redevelopment led to the changes in the City’s Code that will be reflected in the EAR-based amendments. In 2002, in response to these changing circumstances,
the City adopted a new Park and Recreation impact fee ordinance. Developers of projects with residential components pay an impact fee; land dedication in-lieu can occasionally be requested
if feasible. There are no longer specific City of Boynton Beach 4-36 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Assessment of Plan Elements
requirements regarding provision of private recreational facilities and no credit towards the fee is given for such provision to maintain a more accurate and legally sufficient impact
fee system. Furthermore, the number and type of facilities provided are clearly determined by the new urban scale as well as consumer preferences. Most of the incoming projects are planned
developments, and staff has a lot of input regarding their overall design, but private sector generally responds well to market demand for specific amenities. Objective 9C.4 The City
shall provide public access to two native habitat sites for the purpose of providing a nature study area by the year 2002 consistent with the development schedule for Seacrest scrub.
Objective has been implemented: access is provided to Seacrest and Rosemary scrub sites. Public School Facilities Since all municipal governments in the County participating in the interlocal
agreement have adopted the same element, any amendments to the element required by changes to Chapter 163 or 9J-5, F.A.C., will be a part of the EAR-based amendments as will any amendments
caused by amendments to the school concurrency interlocal agreement or amendments proposed by the Palm Beach County School District. GENERAL: Objectives and policies under Goal 9E Goal
9E To ensure the orderly and efficient provision of all public services and facilities necessary to serve existing and future local population needs. Objective 9E.1 To develop a comprehensive
and coordinated funding strategy for the implementation of existing or anticipated capital improvement needs as identified in the adopted Capital Improvement Element, the local Comprehensive
Plan or through other local planning efforts. Policy 9E.1.5 The City shall annually update the Five Year Capital Improvements Program and accompanying Capital Budget and submit to the
Commission a finalized Capital Improvements Program budget prior to January 1st of each calendar year. Policy 9E.1.6 The Five Year Capital Improvements Program shall be consistent with
the data and analysis for the Capital Improvements which are required by the Stipulated Settlement Agreement between the City and the Department of Community Affairs. City of Boynton
Beach 4-37 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Assessment of Plan Elements
These policies have not been implemented. Pursuant to §163.3177(3)(b)1., the capital improvement element shall be reviewed on an annual basis and modified as necessary in order to maintain
a financially feasible 5-year schedule of capital improvements. The CIS must be updated annually. The Capital Improvement Program developed as part of the fiscal year Budget does not
meet all the requirements. These deficiencies will be addressed in the EAR-based amendments. Objective 9E.2 The City shall continue to require that development and redevelopment proposals
are approved conditioned upon existing service availability or the programmed provision of additional services at the adopted level of service standards and meet existing and future
facility needs. Policy 9E.2.4 The Level of Service (LOS) for capital facilities shall be (comments pertain to traffic only): Level of Service "C" or better under daily and peak hour
conditions on all unspecified City local and collector highway facilities. Level of Service "C" for average daily and Level of Service "D" for daily peak season and year-round peak hour
conditions on all non-specified arterial facilities. Level of Service "D" for year round daily and peak hour conditions on Seacrest Boulevard south of SE 23rd Avenue, US 1 between Boynton
Beach Boulevard and Woolbright Road, I-95 through the City, Boynton Beach Boulevard from Old Boynton Road to I-95, NW 22nd Avenue between Congress Avenue and I-95, Congress Avenue between
Boynton Beach Boulevard and NW 22nd Avenue and for Boynton Beach Boulevard east of I-95. Level of Service -"Maintain" for all facilities where Level of Service standards have been exceeded.
Levels of Service in the Transportation Element have been amended concurrent with TCEA amendments in 2005. All levels of service “C” have been changed to “D”. Policy 9E.2.5 (two sections)
Capital improvements related to parks, recreational facilities, roads, drainage, and solid waste shall be based upon the assumption that all land east of Lawrence Road City of Boynton
Beach 4-38 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Assessment of Plan Elements
will eventually be annexed into the City and will be developed for urban land uses. This policy has not been implemented. At the time of the 1996 EAR adoption, the references to the
Lawrence Road as a western annexation boundary were removed from the City’s annexation plan. Annexation was to proceed case-by-case. All community redevelopment plans adopted by the
City Commission shall include an evaluation of public facilities which serve the redevelopment area to determine whether the levels of service contained in the Plan are met, and to examine
sources of funding for any necessary capital improvements related to these public facilities. This policy has not been fully implemented; however, the concurrency management system requires
concurrency review for all development orders assuring that the levels of service contained in the plan are met. Policy 9E.2.6 The City shall continue to coordinate capital improvement
projects with plans of agencies that provide public facilities within the City as follows: (Section three) State Highways (Interstate 95, Boynton Beach Boulevard, U.S. Highway 1, State
Road A1A) and the City's Future Traffic Circulation Plan (Table 20 of the Traffic Circulation Element Support Documents) shall incorporate all of the improvements to state highways which
are listed in the Palm Beach County Transportation Improvement Program, and all of the improvements listed in The Florida Department of Transportation 5-Year Transportation Improvement
Program. The City shall continue to require improvements by developers and/or payment of impact fees, in order to maintain the adopted levels of service on state highways, and shall
require the dedication of the necessary right-of-way for state highways. Furthermore, the City shall continue to lobby Palm Beach County, the County Metropolitan Planning Organization,
and the Florida Department of Transportation in order to ensure funding and construction of needed improvements to state highways. This section needs to be amended. The City reviews,
but does not incorporate the improvements listed in the Palm Beach County or the DOT programs into its City of Boynton Beach 4-39 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Assessment
of Plan Elements
Transportation Element. In the EAR-based amendments, such improvements will be included in the CIS to the extent that they are relied upon to ensure concurrency and financial feasibility
as required by §163.3177(3)6 F. S. Objective 9E.7 The City shall establish formal procedures to limit public expenditures that subsidize development in the coastal high-hazard area.
Policy 9E.7.1 The City shall continue to enforce the policy that limits subsidizing development in the coastal high hazard area defined as the barrier island and all areas within two
blocks of the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway between Northlake Boulevard and the Broward County Line by formulating a Post-Disaster Redevelopment Plan that address the extent of rebuilding
after a major storm event. The purpose of the Plan would be to identify any areas of the coastal high hazard area that would be restricted or developed in an alternative manner. The
Post-Disaster Redevelopment Plan should be completed prior to the Five Year Comprehensive Plan update. No formal procedures to limit public expenditures in the coastal high-hazard area
have been established and the City does not have the Post-Disaster Redevelopment Plan. Impacts of Issues on the Capital Improvements Element: An assessment of the Element’s objectives
has been completed to determine whether their achievement relates to the identified major issues and whether there are any unanticipated changes in circumstances or problems and opportunities
regarding the issues. ISSUE I: Wastewater Treatment capacity Three objectives are found to be linked to the issue. Objective 9A.1 Prevention of Urban Sprawl. Development and redevelopment
will be encouraged in areas presently served adequately by existing sanitary sewer facilities. The related policy requires that future development and redevelopment in the City shall
take advantage of existing sanitary sewer facilities, wherever possible. Objective 9E.2 The City shall continue to require that development and redevelopment proposals are approved conditioned
upon existing service City of Boynton Beach 4-40 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Assessment of Plan Elements
availability or the programmed provision of additional services at the adopted level of service standards and meet existing and future facility needs. Policies to achieve Objective 9E.2
include the adoption of a level of service for wastewater treatment of 90 gallons per capita per day and the statement that capital improvements related to water and sewer service shall
be based upon the assumption that all land within the utility service areas will eventually be developed for urban land uses served by central water and sewer systems. These two factors
are the basis for acknowledging that increase in treatment capacity will be necessary to serve the city’s population at buildout. Objective 9E.4 Maintain a capital program that can be
adequately accommodated by projected revenues or other financial resources. Related policies require that public facilities financed by enterprise funds, which include sanitary sewer
service are to be financed by: 1. Debt to be repaid by user fees and charges for enterprise service; 2. Current assets (i.e., reserves, surpluses, and current revenue, including transfers);
or, 3. A combination of debt and current assets. This ensures that mechanisms exist to finance required improvements to the wastewater system. It is important that capacity is monitored
so that these improvements are added to the City’s Capital Improvements Plan in a timely manner so they are available concurrent with future demand. There are no identified correlations
between the issue and other objectives in the element and no amendments to the Capital Improvements Element are foreseen at this time as necessary to address the issue. ISSUE II: Shortage
of Affordable/Workforce Housing There are no identified correlations between the issue and other objectives in the element and no amendments to the Capital Improvements Element are foreseen
at this time as necessary to address the issue. 10. PUBLIC SCHOOL FACILITIES ELEMENT Element Overview: The Public School Facilities Element was adopted into the Comprehensive Plan on
December 18, 2001. This was the culmination of two years of intergovernmental coordination, with 26 municipalities, Palm Beach County and the School district working to develop a plan,
which includes the responsibilities of each government entity as a party to an interlocal agreement. Each of the municipalities and the county has adopted a Public School Facilities
Element. City of Boynton Beach 4-41 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Assessment of Plan Elements
The Element provides for future availability of public school facilities consistent with the adopted Level of Service (LOS) standard, established under school concurrency and the maintenance
and enhancement of joint planning processes and procedures for coordination of public education facilities for planning and decision making. Palm Beach County remains the only county
in the State of Florida that adopted a school concurrency ordinance Public School Facilities Element Assessment: The implementation of this Element established school concurrency as
a growth management tool aimed at insuring that construction of classroom space keeps pace with the demands resulting from residential construction. The goal of school concurrency was
to have all schools operating at no more than 10% over capacity by 2004. The three components of the concurrency plan are: (1) Joint planning among municipalities, the County and the
School District; (2) A financially feasible five-year capital improvements plan for school construction that enables the District to catch up and keep up with growth; and (3) Regulatory
review of all new residential projects by the School District. Section 163.3177, F.S. required Palm Beach County to identify, as a part of its EAR, changes needed in its public school
element necessary to conform to the 2005 public school facilities element requirement. Since all municipal governments in the County participating in the interlocal agreement have adopted
the same element, any amendments to the element required by changes to Chapter 163 or 9J-5, F.A.C., will be a part of the EAR-based amendments as will any amendments caused by amendments
to the school concurrency interlocal agreement or amendments proposed by the Palm Beach County School District. The City has implemented all Objectives and Policies of this Element and
has been working closely with the Palm Beach County School District. The examples of this cooperation are the City’s Fire Rescue Emergency Management team’s involvement in the construction
of a hurricane evacuation shelter in the Boynton Beach High School and the cooperation between the city and school district on the recent redevelopment of the Congress Middle School.
Impacts of Issues on the Public School Facilities Element: An assessment of the Element’s objectives has been completed to determine whether their achievement relates to the identified
major issues and whether there are any unanticipated changes in circumstances or problems and opportunities regarding the issues. There are no identified correlations between the issues
and objectives in the element. City of Boynton Beach 4-42 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Assessment of Plan Elements
CHAPTER 5 SPECIAL TOPICS
1. DEMANDS OF GROWTH: CONCURRENCY MANAGEMENT AND FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY OF PROVIDING NEEDED INFRASTRUCTURE Over the last 5 years, Boynton Beach has experienced a rapid growth, with high
pace of both residential and nonresidential development and redevelopment. While growth contributes to a healthy tax base for the City, it also creates additional demand for infrastructure
and public services. This section of the EAR will discuss the financial feasibility of implementing the comprehensive plan and of providing needed infrastructure to achieve and maintain
adopted level-of-service standards and sustain concurrency management systems through the capital improvements element, as well as the ability to address infrastructure backlogs and
meet the demands of growth on public services and facilities (163.3191(2)c, F.S). CONCURRENCY MANAGEMENT Pursuant to F.S. Sec. 163.3161, et seq., The City of Boynton Beach implemented
the Concurrency Requirements Ordinance in 1990. The purpose of the Ordinance is to ensure that adequate public facilities are in place concurrent with the impact of development. Therefore,
concurrency management involves review by all the pertinent service providers to determine if services and infrastructures are adequate to serve proposed development on a subject property.
The Planning and Zoning Division serves as a coordinating center for the implementation of the Concurrency Requirements. The City of Boynton Beach Comprehensive Plan contains “level
of service standards” for infrastructure and services either provided by the City or another entity (the County or the Public School District) through an interlocal agreement. These
services include potable water, wastewater, solid waste collection, drainage, parks and recreation, roads and public schools. A discussion of the City’s ability to provide “level of
service standards” for infrastructure follows. POTABLE WATER, WASTEWATER AND STORMWATER Maintaining adequate Level of Service (LOS) standards in the provision of public facilities is
dependent upon several factors. One primary factor, especially in such a rapidly growing area, is the construction or development of adequate new facilities to keep pace with the rate
of population growth. A second factor deals with the replacement or renewal of infrastructure that can no longer assure the delivery of adequate services. Both of these factors are addressed
through the City's Capital Improvement Program (CIP) budget. That budget is funded through the imposition of Capital Facilities Charges, for the growth-related City of Boynton Beach
5-1 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Special Topics
portions, and also through transfers from the utility operating fund into either the renewal and replacement or the reserve accounts. Capital Facilities Charges have been established
by code to reimburse the City for its investment in new facilities based on a cost per gallon of installed capacity, and the anticipated demand exerted from new construction of residential,
commercial or industrial establishments. The Capital Facilities Charges are evaluated periodically so as to assure that the amount collected is in keeping with the changing cost of constructing
expanded facilities. They are being reviewed as part of a rate study now underway. Renewal and Replacement activities are funded via transfers from the utilities operating budget. Rate-funded
activities must therefore be maintained at a sufficient level to assure an adequate flow of funds into these essential activities. Whereas the operating budget is primarily concerned
with funding ongoing maintenance and upkeep of the City's facilities, the transfer to renewal and replacement (or reserves) assures that the City will be able to maintain the integrity
and reliability factors that are critical to guaranteeing the current LOS standards. In the City of Boynton Beach service area, potable water, sanitary sewer, stormwater, and solid waste
services are maintained through the collection of rates, which are billed on a monthly basis. The current rates for water, sewer and stormwater are currently set below the level necessary
to fund all projected capital improvements. Potable Water The LOS for potable water is adopted as 200 gallons per capita per day. The Utilities Department of the City of Boynton Beach
provides potable water service to approximately 95,000 people within the City, the Town of Ocean Ridge, the Town of Briney Breezes, and unincorporated areas of Palm Beach County. It
operates two distinct water treatment facilities; the West Water Plant capable of producing 10.4 million gallons per day (MGD) using a membrane softening process; and the East Water
Plant capable of treating 24 MGD using a lime softening process. At the present time, capacity at the East Plant is limited to an average of 8 MGD due to regulatory restrictions on aquifer
withdrawals. The City has a total of 29 wells (18 east and 9 west) feeding water to the treatment plants, from the surficial aquifer. Supplementing its installed treatment facilities
and surficial aquifer wells, the City also operates two Aquifer Storage and Recovery wells, which increase its capability to store excess treated water during wet seasonal weather, and
then use that water during the dry season. These wells reduce the City’s necessity for relying on surficial aquifer supplies during dry weather, in a cost-effective manner, and provide
additional peaking capacity during the dry season. City of Boynton Beach 5-2 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Special Topics
In addition to the capacity of these two treatment plants owned by the City, the City may purchase up to 5 MGD of potable water through an interlocal agreement and interconnections with
Palm Beach County Water Utilities. The firm average daily capacity now available for use by the City is 23 MGD, whereas the peak day capacity available is 27 MGD. The City’s historical
peak day pumpage is 20.26 MGD. Wastewater The City’s adopted LOS for wastewater is 90 gallons per capita per day. The City’s wastewater service area mirrors its potable water service
with a few notable changes. Through interlocal agreements, the City of Boynton Beach provides wastewater transmission and treatment to portions of the Town of Hypoluxo, and the entire
Village of Golf. These two areas receive potable water service from sources other than the City. The City owns and maintains an extensive wastewater collection and transmission system,
including 157 wastewater pumping stations. The City is also co-owner of the South Central Regional Wastewater Treatment and Reclamation Facility. That facility has a treatment capacity
of 24 MGD, with a Reclaimed Water component of 10 MGD. Its highest 3-month average daily flow for the past year is 18.533 MGD. All new construction within the incorporated area of the
City is required to connect to the wastewater collection system. Outside of the City, the minimum LOS may remain individual septic tanks in older, already established neighborhoods.
The feasibility and cost-effectiveness of retrofitting existing neighborhoods using septic tanks in the unincorporated area may require those facilities to remain in use for some time.
All new construction outside of the City is also being required to connect to a central wastewater collection system, where one is present, by the governing jurisdiction. The City also
owns a distribution pipeline for Reclaimed Water, which it intends to expand through the Capital Improvement Program for the purpose of reducing demands upon the surficial aquifer system
during dry weather. Stormwater The City owns and operates stormwater treatment and conveyance systems within City rights-of-way, and only within the City limits. The City also maintains
a number of stormwater retention areas, and two stormwater pumping stations, which were constructed through the CIP budget. The City continues to construct stormwater improvements on
an as-needed basis in conjunction with its renewal and replacement activities for other utility piping systems. City of Boynton Beach 5-3 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5,
2006 Special Topics
The adopted LOS for all new construction is based upon the criteria established by the regional water manager, the South Florida Water Management District. SOLID WASTE The City of Boynton
Beach is part of a countywide Solid Waste Management program. As such we are dependent on Palm Beach County to provide capacity for the Solid Waste generated within the Boynton Beach
city limits. Palm Beach County’s annual EAR report is as follows: The Solid Waste Authority of Palm Beach County has disposal capacity available to accommodate the solid waste generation
for the municipalities and unincorporated county for the coming year, and has sufficient capacity for both concurrency management and comprehensive planning purposes. Capacity is available
for both the coming year, and the five and ten year planning periods specified in 9J-5.005(4). As of September 30, 2003, the Authority’s North County Landfills had an estimated 39,442,993
cubic yards of landfill capacity remaining. Based upon the existing Palm Beach County population, the most recently available population growth rates published by the University of Florida
Bureau of Economic and Business Research (BEBR), and projected rates of solid waste generation, waste reduction and recycling, the Solid Waste Authority forecasts that capacity will
be available through approximately the year 2024 assuming the depletion of the Class I and Class Ill landfills are approximately balanced. The Authority continues to pursue options to
increase the life of its existing facilities and to provide for the entire County’s current and future disposal and recycling needs. As part of its responsibility, the Authority will
provide an annual statement of disposal capacity, using the most current BEBR projections available. PARKS AND RECREATION City Park LOS is established in the Comprehensive Plan and Recreation
& Open Space Element (R/OS). Park LOS is calculated by comparing City population to current inventories and then expressing the results in terms of total acres available per 1,000 population.
At present, there are 2.5 acres/1000 population LOS for district parks and an advisory 2.5 acres/1000 population LOS for neighborhood parks (there is an inconsistency in the Plan: in
the Capital Improvements Element, the latter is also construed to be adopted). The Plan also has a land dedication policy, requiring developers of residential projects to dedicate 6
acres of land for a park or pay a fee-in-lieu; this is inconsistent with City of Boynton Beach 5-4 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Special Topics
the current Land Development Regulations. In 2002, in response to the changing environment (near-depleted inventory of vacant land, redevelopment in urban areas), the City adopted a
new Park and Recreation impact fee ordinance. The impact fee replaced land dedication requirement, even though land dedication inlieu of
an impact fee can occasionally be requested if feasible. Provision of private recreation facilities no longer generates credit toward the impact fee. Payment of impact fee (or conveyance
of a real property) is made prior to the issuance of an applicable building permit. In May 2004, the Park and Recreation Department contracted with consultants to develop a Parks and
Recreation Strategic Plan for the City of Boynton Beach and to revise the Comprehensive Plan element based on the adopted Strategic Plan, the Conceptual Parks and Recreation System Map
and narrative and Implementation Strategies. A new draft Recreation and Open Space Element will undergo a final review as a part of the EAR-based amendment process. It will include a
review and consolidation of LOS figures and elimination of internal Plan inconsistencies regarding the level of service. TRANSPORTATION The Public Works Department requires each development
to submit a traffic concurrency study adhering to Palm Beach County's Traffic Performance Standards (TPS). The key objective of the concurrency system is to ensure that development orders
are not issued by the City for projects whose traffic will cause adjacent roadways to exceed the adopted level of service (LOS). Both the City's Public Works Department and the County's
Traffic Engineering Division review each concurrency study for compliance with the County's TPS requirements. Over the past 18 months, TCEA and CRALLS designations were adopted for specific
areas within the City in anticipation of traffic concurrency issues. TCEA designation was adopted to facilitate downtown revitalization and urban redevelopment; it covers the downtown
and surrounding neighborhoods. A significant number of projects has been approved within the TCEA, however, few are yet completed. TCEA defines ceilings for residential and commercial
developments within the area; current levels remain well below these thresholds. CRALLS designation was set up for two intersections on Congress Avenue (Gateway Boulevard and Old Boynton
Road) and a segment of Old Boynton Road. Additional capacity permitted under CRALLS will be used by a mixed use development on Congress Avenue currently in approval process; however,
the City has identified 6 properties with a redevelopment potential within the area which may use this additional capacity in the future. City of Boynton Beach 5-5 Evaluation and Appraisal
Report December 5, 2006 Special Topics
City Roads The City of Boynton Beach maintains only one arterial roadway that is integral to both the State and the County arterial network. This roadway, Gateway Boulevard, between
I-95 and Congress Avenue, has recently been chosen to be widened to six lanes by the City as a mitigation measure for a nearby private development that received a CRALLS designation
for required off site roadway improvements. Gateway Boulevard is the only City’s arterial roadway with 4 or more travel lanes. The City has also identified a need for future monitoring
of SW 8th Street from Woolbright Road to Boynton beach Boulevard. Although this road segment is operating well within LOS standards, it is anticipated that traffic volumes will continue
to increase, suggesting a need for capacity improvements in the future. Lastly, Old Boynton Road will be widened to 3 lanes as part of the said CRALLS designation. LOS for all city streets
and collector highway facilities is “D” for peak hour conditions; LOS for unspecified arterial facilities is “D” for peak season peak hour conditions. As stated above, the City operates
under the county’s Traffic Performance Standards and does not have a separate concurrency management ordinance for its streets. Consequently, there is no monitoring system in place and
LOS standards on certain City’s streets have not been reevaluated. County and State Roads The County and State have adopted a LOS D for all roads under their jurisdiction. Neither the
State nor the County have roadway capacity improvements planned for the next five years on streets located within the City. In 2008, the County plans to fund a study for design of improvements
to Golf Road from Military Trail to Seacrest Boulevard, and in 2010 a study for Hypoluxo Road from High Ridge Road to Seacrest Boulevard. Public Transit Palm Beach County provides fixed-route
bus service through Palm Tran. The bus system is composed of 34 routes with most routes in operation seven days per week. During weekday peak hours, up to 107 buses are utilized to provide
service. Coordination with Tri-Rail is provided by linking fixed-route bus service to Tri-Rail stations (Mangonia Park, West Palm Beach, Lake Worth, Boynton Beach, Delray Beach and Boca
Raton) in the County. Palm Tran also has shuttle service between the West Palm Beach Tri-Rail station and the downtown of West Palm Beach. There is no adopted LOS for public transit.
City of Boynton Beach 5-6 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Special Topics
PUBLIC SCHOOLS To implement school concurrency, the County has been divided into 21 geographic zones known as concurrency service areas (CSAs). When a residential development application
is filed, School District planners look first at the CSA directly affected. If there is no available capacity at the nearest school(s), they look to an adjacent CSA. If there is still
no capacity available, the developer must postpone or pay for more classroom space to be built (mitigation). For a proposed project to receive concurrency credit, a school does not have
to actually be physically standing, if it is scheduled to be built and opened within the next three years. The 26 municipalities that signed the Interlocal Concurrency Agreement were:
City of Atlantis, City of Belle Glade, City of Boca Raton, City of Boynton Beach, City of Delray Beach, City of Greenacres, Town of Haverhill, Town of Hypoluxo, Town of Juno Beach, Town
of Jupiter, Town of Lake Clarke Shores, Town of Lake Park, City of Lake Worth, Town of Lantana, Lantana, Village of North Palm Beach, City of Pahokee, Town of Palm Beach, City of Palm
Beach Gardens, Town of Palm Beach Shores, Village of Palm Springs, City of Riviera Beach, Village of Royal Palm Beach, City of South Bay, Village of Tequesta, Village of Wellington,
City of West Palm Beach. An essential factor in the Interlocal Concurrency Agreement is the Five-Year Capital Facilities Plan. To meet the demand for educational facilities the School
Board, through the funding of the Capital Facilities Plan opened seven new schools and four replacement schools in August 2002, adding 7,515 seats. Four additional new schools and seven
replacement schools opened in August 2003 with 6,686 new seats. The County and School Board have a joint process to coordinate efforts on population and student enrollment projections,
and currently, student enrollment in the County is growing in excess of 3,500 students annually. The County, the School District, and local governments also have a process of coordination
and collaboration in the planning and siting of public school facilities, which includes the integration of school facilities with land uses. There are 38 additional new schools and
modernizations included in the Five-Year Capital Facilities Plan, which are scheduled for completion between 2004 and 2006. Due to the State’s Class Size Reduction referendum, building
costs are exceeding budgeted amounts, but to date, there have been no school concurrency suspensions. The Five-Year Plan projects student population to the 2008/2009 school year, and
includes sufficient capacity to accommodate the projected population and the adopted LOS. Regarding the financial feasibility of the Plan, the costs of the school projects completed
in 2002 were within two percent of the amounts budgeted. Projected costs for the Plan’s unbuilt projects increased between the 2002 and the 2003 budgets, primarily due to the Class City
of Boynton Beach 5-7 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Special Topics
Size Reduction (CSR) referendum. Revisions in projected costs have also been the result of inflation, the addition of student stations, changes in site locations and changes in programs.
The plan is still considered to be financially feasible. SHORT TERM FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY The City reviews and extends its 5-year Capital Improvement Plan concurrently with the annual
budget. The CIP includes improvement schedules for all but enterprise departments (water and wastewater, sanitation and golf course). Facilities plans are expected to be financially
feasible, i.e. demonstrate the ability to finance capital improvements from existing revenue sources and funding mechanisms to correct deficiencies and meet future needs based on achieving
and maintaining the adopted LOS for each year of the five year planning period. No deficiencies have been recognized in the current Comprehensive Plan; however, the high growth rate
during the last five years put a substantial strain on the City’s service delivery system. The projections suggest that the City’s population may grow by another 12% between 2005 and
2010. Because of the sharp slowdown of the residential market, short-term population projections may have to be revisited. WATER, WASTEWATER AND STORMWATER The Department of Utilities
prepares and updates a 10-year CIP budget as a means of identifying needs, and forecasting the funding of needed infrastructure improvements. At this time, the 10-year forecast for utilities
capital improvements (related to potable water, wastewater and stormwater) is $263,346,229. For the upcoming fiscal year 2006-2007, the anticipated expenditure by category is as follows:
Table 6. Water, Wastewater and Stormwater: Planned Capital Expenditures for 2006-2007 Fiscal Year Expansion of Existing Facilities Potable Water $3,410,000 Includes new raw water and
distribution mains Wastewater System $3,703,000 Includes expansion of reclaimed water system Renewal and Replacement Potable Water $7,132,000 Includes replacement and upgrade existing
transmission mains in redevelopment areas Wastewater $5,849,250 Includes inflow and infiltration control Stormwater $260,000 Miscellaneous/multiple element projects $7,226,000 TOTAL
$27,580,250 City of Boynton Beach 5-8 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Special Topics
The total anticipated need for FY 2006-07 is therefore projected at $27,580,250. The City currently has sufficient funds on hand to cover the anticipated FY 2006-07 capital needs, but
not the needs projected for the following years. Thus, financial feasibility of a 5-year plan has not been determined. The City anticipates completing a rate analysis during the next
6-months that will identify possible funding mechanisms and/or rate adjustments that will allow it to raise the needed capital for both 5-and 10-year periods. The financially-feasible
CIE will be prepared by December 1, 2007. SOLID WASTE The capital budget of the Solid Waste Authority (SWA), approved by the Board annually as part of the budget approval process, addresses
the short-term (fiveyear) capital improvement projects. This plan and budget includes both a Renewal and Replacement component, including the development of landfill cells, and a Capital
Improvement component that addresses new or expanded facilities or equipment. The five-year plan also includes those projects funded by Bond proceeds. The SWA has issued Revenue Bonds
to construct some of its capital projects, such as the acquisition and construction of the Southwest County Transfer Station, and are included in the capital budget. The capital budget
of the SWA shows no backlogs or deficiencies in the five-year plan. PARKS AND RECREATION In 2005, concurrency was exceeded for the adopted district park LOS of 2.5. The City has a 68
acres of undeveloped park land and, given that it is nearly buildout, the inventory is unlikely to increase much beyond this number. According to the projections, by 2010 the City will
have approximately 7,000 more residents. The City’s Capital Improvement Plan shows $4,790,000 expenditures for development of about 44 acres of new parks (including 2005/2006 budget
year and projections through 2008/2009). The additional acreage would result, by 2010, in the total provision level exceeding 4.5 acres per 1000 population, the current actual level
of service for all parks within the City. In terms of source of funds, the schedule is financially feasible for the first 4 years (there are committed funds for the first 3 years, and
planned funds for the fourth year) but not for the 2009/2010 fiscal year. The inconsistencies in the Plan will be addressed and LOS levels redefined as a part of the new Recreation and
Open Space Element in the EAR-based Plan amendments. A new combined LOS for all parks will likely be considered. The deficiency in CIE also has to be addressed by December 1, 2007. City
of Boynton Beach 5-9 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Special Topics
TRANSPORTATION The City of Boynton Beach has no roadway major improvements planned over the next five years. Surface maintenance will proceed based upon condition ratings. Financial
feasibility for resurfacing is assured for the next 4 years. This deficiency in CIE will have to be addressed by December 1, 2007. LONG-TERM FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY Even though all elements
of the Comprehensive Plan include specific completion target year in some of their policies, the plan as a whole does not recognize short-and long planning terms. For the current plan,
these would be 2005 and 2010. For certain facilities, such as water and wastewater, longer periods may be considered. This deficiency will be addressed in the EAR-based amendments. The
City has not adopted a long term concurrency management system and -with the exception of Utilities Department -does not extend its CIP beyond a 5 year planning period. However, long
term financial feasibility must be considered; revenues should be adequate to fund facilities that are likely to be needed by 2015 and beyond. By then, City’s population is expected
to grow by another 10%, to about 82,000. Buildout population (or buildout completion year) cannot be determined as infill and redevelopment continues; moreover, annexations will continue
to occur. WATER AND WASTEWATER Most of the City’s growth-related expenditures are expected to occur with the next 15 years. Beyond than, capital activities will focus upon renewing aging
infrastructure, adapting to technological innovations, and maintaining the existing facilities. As much of the City’s anticipated growth between the present time and build-out will occur
via redevelopment of existing developed areas, the overall rate of growth is expected to decrease from that which was experienced over the past 20 years. Future elected officials should
periodically review rates to assure that funding for the maintenance, renewal and improvement of the utility system is made available so as to maintain the adopted LOS. As stated earlier,
the user fees at a current rate do not cover capital improvement for these facilities. Clearly, the City’s priority is to have a financially feasible 5-year plan. An ongoing rate study
will address this issue; other funding sources will also be considered. Moreover, the City will have to complete a 10-year water facilities plan pending finalization of the South Florida
Water Management District’s 10-year water use plan for the Lower East Coast. Anticipated completion date for the City’s study is Spring 2008, based upon City of Boynton Beach 5-10 Evaluation
and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Special Topics
current schedules. However, the City is also looking at a water supply strategy through the year 2025. A study focused on long-term strategic issues has just been completed (see the
next section – Long-Term Water Supply and Comprehensive Plan). Water conservation is an important part of a long term water supply strategy. The City is planning to expand its reclaimed
water distribution system, and focus on replacing irrigation using potable water with the use of reclaimed water. This potable water irrigation, which occurs primarily in the coastal
zone, is not the best and highest use of such highly treated drinking water, and causes the City to have a higher per capita consumption than is desirable from a water conservation standpoint.
Success at replacing 1-2 million gallons per day of potable water now used in irrigation will decrease the need for capital facilities expansion of the potable water system, and demonstrate
better stewardship of our natural resources. Wastewater treatment capacity has been identified as a long-term issue, beyond a 10-year planning horizon. As explained in the Major Issues
section of Chapter 1, Regional Wastewater Treatment Facility has ¼ its total capacity available to meet the demands of both the City of Boynton Beach and the City of Delray Beach for
the 10-year planning horizon. Sufficient land is available within the existing site to expand the treatment facility, which may be necessary to meet the capacity demands at buildout.
The source of funding for alternative options to address the issue have not been identified. SOLID WASTE The long-range planning for the Solid Waste Authority (SWA) is accomplished first
through an annual evaluation of remaining disposal capacity at the County’s existing landfill. The annual evaluation is titled The Landfill Depletion Model Report. The current year’s
analysis indicates that the existing site will provide disposal capacity for the county until approximately 2023. Beyond the capacity in the existing landfill, the SWA owns a 1600-acre
parcel in the western portion of the county (Everglades Agricultural Area) that can serve as a disposal site when the existing landfill is depleted. The time horizon to initiate the
development of plans for the western site is approximately ten years from now. Assuming the use of this site, there is no long-range deficiency in disposal capacity for the County. City
of Boynton Beach 5-11 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Special Topics
PARKS AND RECREATION There is no long-term (beyond 2010) capital improvement plan for park development; however, it is anticipated that the development of the remaining city-owned park
land would increase the inventory sufficiently for the LOS standards to be met every year till 2015. Generally, about one third of the longterm Parks and Recreation Department capital
improvement funding will come from developers’ impact fee fund; among other revenues, grants have been a significant source during the last five years and are expected to remain so;
borrowing option will also be considered. TRANSPORTATION The City of Boynton Beach relies on the Palm Beach County Metropolitan Planning Organization’s (MPO) model to project long-range
traffic conditions and make recommended long-range improvements. The MPO has adopted the Year 2025 Transportation System Plan. The MPO’s Cost Feasible Plan within the City of Boca Raton
addresses all modes of transportation. In addition to the MPO’s plan, the City is striving to better manage the existing transportation network through ATMS improvements utilizing CCTV
cameras, video detection, dynamic message signs, signal coordination, etc. In addition the City has adopted a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program for the downtown area, and
the City is currently modifying their land development regulations to require TDM programs along the North Federal Highway corridor. The objective of TDM is to reduce single occupancy
trips and peak hour travel. RECOMMENDATIONS The Capital Improvements Element, and particularly the five-year Capital Improvement Schedule (CIS) needs to be completely revised and updated.
The sources of funds (committed and planned) for facility improvements need to be specified as defined by Section 163.3164(32), F.S.. CIE will be submitted to DCA by December 1, 2007.
2. LONG-TERM WATER SUPPLY AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Legislation passed by the State in 2002 requires local governments to prepare a 10-year Water Supply Facilities Work Plan (Work Plan).
The intent of of the legislation is to strengthen the coordination of land use and water supply planning with the goal of ensuring adequate regional water supply for the long City of
Boynton Beach 5-12 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Special Topics
term. The Work Plan must project water facilities needs for at least a 10-year period and identify any deficiencies. As stated earlier, the City will have to complete a 10-year water
facilities plan pending finalization of the South Florida Water Management District’s 10-year water use plan for the Lower East Coast. Anticipated completion date for the City’s study
is Spring 2008, based upon current schedules. This plan will be adopted into the Utilities Element’s Potable Water section. The base of the plan will be a long-term potable water supply
strategy study recently completed for the City by a consultant. The study examines alternative sources of water and methods of treatments capable of delivering adequate capacity for
present and future uses (through 2025), and doing so costeffectively. The favored option includes two facets: 1. Constructing a new raw water pipeline to transmit water from the west
wellfield to the east water plant, where surplus capacity already exists. 2. Converting the existing West Plant from a nanofiltration plant to an LPRO facility by changing the existing
treatment units. Based on population projections for the City’s water service area (134,725), the average and peak day water demand in 2025 will be 23.8 MGD and 33.4 MGD, respectively.
The consultant recommended that the City extend its contract with the Palm Beach County Water Utilities Department for an interim period to allow construction of the selected improvements.
The construction is projected to extend to the first quarter of 2013. The total capital improvement cost for this option is expected at $63,228,000, with the 25-year net present value
at $79,055,929. The Capital Facilities Account currently contains approximately one-third of this value. The additional is anticipated from a combination of future Capital Facilities
Charges realized from growth, and also from future bonded indebtedness. The City Commission will consider bond issuance during fiscal year 2006-07. The City’s current plan is based upon
the existed Lower East Coast Water Supply strategy of the South Florida Water Management District. Future changes to that strategy, now under consideration by the District will be reflected
in the City’s 10-year Facilities Plan, due in 2008. City of Boynton Beach 5-13 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Special Topics
3. REDEVELOPMENT IN HIGH HAZARD COASTAL AREAS Reduction of Land Use Density and Property Rights As per 1994 State definition, the coastal high-hazard area is the area below the elevation
of the category 1 storm surge line as established by a Sea, Lake, and Overland Surges from Hurricanes (SLOSH) computerized storm surge model. In the City of Boynton Beach, the coastal
high-hazard area comprises properties located east of US Highway 1 along the eastern boundary of the City. A large percentage of the current land uses within the coastal high-hazard
area is residential, with densities ranging from 4.84 up to 80 dwelling units per acre. In coming years, the Mixed Use and the Mixed Use Core future land use classifications would allow
for steep density increases on a large number of properties compared to the present as-built levels. During the last planning period there have been no reductions of residential densities
in the area. However, a land use amendment currently in process would reclassify approximately 35 acres of land developed with single-family homes from the Mixed Use to Low Density Residential,
reducing the density from 40 units to 4.84 units per acre. This amendment would reverse the action taken by the City in 2000, when the area (the Inlet Cove neighborhood) was reclassified
to Mixed Use land use in anticipation of redevelopment activity, based on the analysis indicating that it was suitable for more intensive uses. Nevertheless, while the recent real estate
boom generated a large number of redevelopment project along the US 1, the City’s earlier expectations regarding the area in question were not realized. The City’s action to return the
neighborhood to its previous Low Density Residential land use was fully endorsed by residents, who increasingly opposed higher densities in adjacent neighborhoods. The issue of property
rights impairment has not been raised. However, there is an issue of several older multi-family developments in the coastal high-hazard area built at densities exceeding the maximums
allowed in the Comprehensive Plan. The built densities range from 17.9 to 40.0 du/acre, as compared to 10.8 du/acre permitted by the Plan. No consideration was given to the possibility
of those properties being redeveloped at some future date (in the long range planning period) or how the non-conforming status was to be handled. The developments are within the City’s
defined redevelopment area, and could conceivably be redeveloped at existing or higher densities with a land use change. In light of the more recent emphasis on individual property rights,
some consideration of this issue should be included in the plan. City of Boynton Beach 5-14 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Special Topics
It needs to be emphasized that future redevelopment of the said non-conforming properties would adhere to the more stringent building code regulations enacted following Hurricane Andrew,
which would make them safer for the residents than the current structures, which are between 30 and 40 years old. 4. SCHOOL CONCURRENCY AND PLANNING Issues related to coordination of
public schools with the comprehensive plan are not relevant for the City of Boynton Beach since school concurrency was implemented in Palm Beach County in 2002. Therefore, the County
and its municipalities are exempt from this section. A summary of successes related to public schools and planning, is described in the Public School Facilities Element. 5. IMPLEMENTATION
OF TCEA The Transportation Concurrency Exception Area (TCEA) for the Boynton Beach CRA became effective on April 3, 2005. It extends over a substantial portion of the City’s downtown
(see Map D in the Appendix) and covers areas included in the City’s three major redevelopment plans (US 1 and Boynton Beach Boulevard corridors and the Heart of Boynton neighborhood).
Consistently with the City’s Comprehensive Plan, all redevelopment plans foster integrated mix of land uses and encourage multi-modal transportation options, but their implementation
will nevertheless generate additional vehicular traffic impacts both within the TCEA and the adjacent areas. The intent of the TCEA establishment was to facilitate implementation of
these plans through the elimination of the concurrency requirements and concurrent mitigation of their vehicular impacts through a variety of measures adopted into the Comprehensive
Plan. The measures, addressed in several Transportation Element policies, focus on development and promotion of a safe, convenient, multi-modal transportation system, including walking,
bicycling, and public transit. For example, Policy 2.4.12 specifies desirable design features for streets within the TCEA boundaries, such as low speed turning radii; new continuous
and permanent on-street parking; pedestrian-scaled lighting; narrow travel lanes; curb extensions or bulb outs; installation of shading street trees; bus stops and other transit enhancements;
widening sidewalks; installation of bicycle lanes; and use of brick crosswalks. Designs features for streets and projects promoting pedestrian mobility and overall connectivity in the
downtown urban environment are also recommended in the recently approved “Urban Design Guidelines for the Redevelopment Area in the CRA”. City of Boynton Beach 5-15 Evaluation and Appraisal
Report December 5, 2006 Special Topics
Implementing TCEA-related Policy 2.4.10, which addresses the promotion of the mass transit and augmentation of the existing local transit system (Pam Tran), the CRA began trolley operations
in July 2005. The two lines currently being run are the Cross Town route which runs from Ocean Avenue to Congress Avenue and the Ocean route which runs from Ocean Avenue to the City
Oceanfront Park. Current ridership is approximately 5,968 passengers per month The CRA is planning to add a route for Federal Highway in
fiscal year 06/07. Before the end of 2006, the City will commission a study to develop a detailed local transit plan. The plan will help to determine the future role of the trolley
vis-à-vis the Pam Tran system. Since the adoption of the TCEA, a number of projects has been approved; none are yet completed. The program set up thresholds for residential and nonresidential
-office, industrial, hotel and other -developments, subsequently adopted into the Comprehensive Plan. Additionally, the appropriate land use use mix is addressed through the required
ratio of residential units to 1,000 square feet of non-residential space. The number of units, non-residential square footage, total daily trips and total p.m. peak hour trips remain
presently below the maximum levels. However, since only concurrency exception will allow many more redevelopment projects to be approved in TCEA locations, TCEA is achieving its purpose.
Without TCEA, the downtown and the surrounding areas could not reached densities and intensities needed to create a truly urban environment. Both the City and the Palm Beach County have
concluded that Boynton Beach TCEA is in compliance with the new requirements of 163.3180(5) F.S.. However, the formal response of the DCA has yet to be issued. If DCA deems it necessary,
the City will re-evaluate and amend TCEA-related policies as a part of EAR-based amendments. 6. TRAFFIC IMPACT METHODOLOGY The City of Boynton Beach operates under the Palm Beach County
Traffic Performance Standards Ordinance; it does not have an additional concurrency ordinance addressing the level of service on its streets. The County’s responsibility for countywide
transportation concurrency is mandated through its Charter. All development orders require traffic study or a traffic statement to be reviewed for concurrency by County’s Traffic Division
staff. Therefore, there is a continuous monitoring of the LOS levels for the roadways impacted by development and redevelopment activities, and concurrency is granted in a meaningful
and consistent manner between the county and the City. City of Boynton Beach 5-16 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Special Topics
The City’s cooperation with the County has been very successful. Two “Special Transportation Areas” were established during the period under consideration: Transportation Concurrency
Exception Area (TCEA) and Constrained Roadways at a Lower Level of Service (CRALLS), both in 2005. The City continues to coordinate with the County for improvements that are coincidental
to specific projects, trying to secure county’s funds and negotiating developer-funded improvements. The recent examples are developer-funded widening of Gateway Boulevard and a bridge
on Old Boynton Road, for which county’s money is sought. Staff reviewed the methodology and process of concurrency granting as well as other aspects of the cooperation with the County
on transportation planning. After the consultation with the County’s Traffic Division, it was concluded that the process works well and no changes are needed in concurrency responsibilities
between the County and the City. City of Boynton Beach 5-17 Evaluation and Appraisal Report December 5, 2006 Special Topics
APPENDIX
FEC Interstate I-95 Interstate I-95 N CONGRESS AVE S CONGRESS AVE S FEDERAL HWY WOOLBRIGHT RD N SEACREST BLVD GATEWAY BLVD S SEACREST BLVD HYPOLUXO RD N FEDERAL HWY BOYNTON BEACH BLVD
SW 23RD AVE MINER RD OLD BOYNTON RD KNOLLWOOD RD GOLF RD LAWRENCE RD HIGH RIDGE RD N OCEAN BLVD LAWRENCE RD GATEWAY BLVD GATEWAY BLVD Legend Land Use Categories LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
(LDR) Max. 4.84 D.U./Acre MODERATE DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (MODR) Max. 7.26 D.U./Acre MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (MEDR) Max. 9.58 D.U./Acre HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (HDR) Max. 10.8 D.U./Acre
SPECIAL HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (SHDR) OFFICE COMMERCIAL (OC) LOCAL RETAIL COMMERCIAL (LRC) GENERAL COMMERCIAL (GC) INDUSTRIAL (I) AGRICULTURE (A) RECREATIONAL (R) PUBLIC & PRIVATE
GOVERNMENTAL/INSTITUTIONAL (PPGI) MIXED USE (MX) MIXED USE CORE (MXC) MIXED USE SUBURBAN (MXS) DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT (DRI) CONSERVATION (CON) CONSERVATION OVERLAY (C/O) TCEA
Boundary CityBoundary_07-18-06 CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH FUTURE LAND USE MAP ± 0 750 1,500 3,000 4,500 6,000Feet MAP A Date of last amendment: July 18, 2006
OLD BOYNTON RD N CONGRESS AVE S CONGRESS AVE S FEDERAL HWY WOOLBRIGHT RD N SEACREST BLVD GAT EWAY BLVD S SEACREST BLVD HYPOLUXO RD N FEDERAL HWY BOYNTON BEACH BLVD SW 23RD AVE MINER
RD KNOLLWOOD RD LAWRENCE RD N OCEAN BLVD LAWRENCE RD Legend Vacant Residential Vacant Commercial Vacant Industrial REMAINING DEVELOPABLE PARCELS OF 2 OR MORE ACRES AS OF SEPTEMBER 2006
MAP B ± 0 1,125 2,250 4,500 6,750 9,000 Feet CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH -VACANT PARCELS
FEC Interstate I-95 Interstate I-95 N CONGRESS AVE S CONGRESS AVE S FEDERAL HWY WOOLBRIGHT RD N SEACREST BLVD GATEWAY BLV D S SEACREST BLVD HYPO LUXO RD N FEDERAL HWY BOYNTON B EACH
BLVD SW 23RD AVE MINER RD OLD BOYNTON RD KNOLLWOOD RD GOLF RD LAWRENCE RD N OCEAN BLVD LAWRENCE RD GATEWAY BLVD GATEWAY BLVD RESIDENTIAL AND MIXED USE PROJECTS APPROVED MAP C ON SITES
INTENDED FOR INDUSTRIAL USES ± Previous land use: industrial Approved projects: residential Residential and Mixed Use projects approved in Quantum PID Previous use: industrial (Motorola)
Approved project: mixed use 0 900 1,800 3,600 5,400 7,200 Feet
INTERSTATE 95 The Promenade Bayfront Waterside 500 E. Ocean Uptown Lofts Gulfstream Gardens East Boynton Village Heritage Club Peninsula Eastside Lofts Boynton Dixie Seaview Park Club
Edward Medical Office Estancia Neelem Office Harbor Cay Yachtsman's Cove Marina Village Tuscan Villas Palm Cove A Pink Princess (Retail) Mirabella Tuscany on Intracoastal The Harbors
Murano Bay Coastal Bay Colony Victoria's Closet (storage) HYPOLUXO RD S OCE AN BLVD N OCEAN BLVD S SEACR EST BLVD N FEDERAL HWY CONGRESS AVE GUL FSTREAM BLVD SEACREST BLVD SE 15 TH AV
E N OCEAN BLVD HYPOLUXO RD LAWRENCE RD S OCEAN BLVD BOYNTON BEACH BLVD WO OLBRI GHT RD GOLF RD N SEACREST BLVD S DIXIE HWY OLD BOYNTON RD SW 23RD AVE MINER RD S CONGRESS AVE HIGH RIDGE
RD N CONGRESS AVE GATEWAY BLVD S MILITARY TRL Development and Redevelopment Activity along US 1 Corridor 0 2,500 1,250 5,000 7,500 10,000 Feet MAP C Note: Marina Village, 500 E. Ocean,
The Promenade, Uptown Lofts, Eastside Lofts and Heritage Club are mixed use projects. Unless otherwise noted, all remaining projects are residential. Projects were approved between 2000
and May 2006. Legend CRA Area Boundary City Boundary Parcels 2005±
INTERSTATE 95 The Promenade Bayfront Waterside 500 E. Ocean Uptown Lofts Gulfstream Gardens East Boynton Village Heritage Club Peninsula Eastside Lofts Boynton Dixie Seaview Park Club
Edward Medical Office Estancia Neelem Office Harbor Cay Yachtsman's Cove Marina Village Tuscan Villas Palm Cove A Pink Princess (Retail) Mirabella Tuscany on Intracoastal The Harbors
Murano Bay Coastal Bay Colony Victoria's Closet (storage) S.Federal Highway N CONGRESS AVE S CONGRESS AVE WOO LBRIGHT RD N SEACREST BLVD GATEWAY BLVD HYPOLUXO RD BOYNTON BEACH BLVD SW
23RD AVE MINER RD OLD BOYNTON RD KNOLLWOOD RD GOLF RD LAWRENCE RD HIGH RIDGE RD NW 22ND AVE LAWRENCE RD DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY ALONG US 1 CORRIDOR0 1,150 2,300 4,600
6,900 9,200 Feet MAP D Note: Marina Village, 500 E. Ocean, The Promenade, Uptown Lofts, Eastside Lofts and Heritage Club are mixed use projects. Unless otherwise noted, all remaining
projects are residential. Projects were approved between 2000 and May 2006. Legend CRA Area Boundary ±