Loading...
Minutes 12-08-97MINUTES OF THE JOINT CITY COMMISSION, PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD AND CHAMBER OF COMMERCE WORKSHOP MEETING HELD IN CONFERENCE ROOM "C", WEST WING, CITY HALL, ON MONDAY, DECEMBER 8, 1997, AT 6:00 P.M. PRESENT Gerald "Jerry" Taylor, Mayor Jamie Titcomb, Vice Mayor Matt Bradley, Commissioner Shirley Jaskiewicz, Commissioner Henderson Tillman, Commissioner Planning & Development Board Members Lee Wische, Chairman Jos~ Aguila Mike Friedland Maurice Rosenstock Steve Myott, Alternate James Reed, Alternate Kerry Willis, City Manager Sue Kruse, City Clerk Bulent Kastarlak, Director of Development Tambri Heyden, Planning & Zoning Director Jerzy Lewicki, Asst. Planner Scott Blasie, Code Compliance Administrator Chamber of Commerce Members Kathy Shabotynskyj CALL TO ORDER Tambri Heyden, Planning & Zoning Director, called the meeting to order at 6:12 p.m. She explained that the Planning & Development Board, as well as the City Commission, requested this meeting. The di-scussion issues were enumerated and are listed below. In addition, Ms. Heyden explained that a new agenda set up was prepared for this meeting that allots specific amounts of time for discussion of each item. (A copy of this agenda is attached.) Ms. Heyden listed the ground rules for the meeting as follows: 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Disagree agreeably. Respect one another's ideas. Address the issue - not the person. Honor time limits. Everyone participates - No one dominates. Slide show is to be used as an education tool. The meeting began with a slide presentation. Ms. Heyden thanked Mr. James Reed, Planning & Development Board alternate member, for his assistance in putting together the slide presentation. The presentation included slides of sites within the City depicting examples of good and poor design emphasis on entrances, service areas, landscaping, lighting and signage. Following the presentation, Ms. Heyden solicited input from those present in an effort to identity areas where there is a lack of consensus between the board and the City Commission. MEETING MINUTES JOI'NT MEETING OF CITY COMMISSION, PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD AND CHAMBER OF COMMERCE BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA DECEMBER 8, 1997 , Issue#l: Lack of consensus regarding application of community design and enforcement of the existing Community Design Plan Desired Outcomes: *An understanding of the existing Community Design Plan. *Agreement on the 3-5 key causes of the lack of consensus *A list of solutions (Code revisions) that can be refined by staff and prepared for adoption of an Ordinance After viewing the slide presentation, Vice Mayor Titcomb expressed his opinion that it appeared that many of the old businesses might have been attractive buildings at one time, but have not been properly maintained. Some of the problems appear to be code enforcement issues. Further, it is his opinion that design is subjective especially when dealing with components of a building. With these remarks in mind, Ms. Heyden began compiling a list of items the group would later prioritize. The itemized list included lack of code enforcement, subjectivity with respect to shades of colors, offering a broader palette of designs, lack of upgrading standards for properties, viewing the development parcel as a whole rather than piecemeal, setting fundamental ground rules, too many variances, and unification of design. With respect to dumpster enclosures, Commissioner Jaskiewicz explained that a Code revision is required to allow presently grandfathered properties an opportunity to bring their properties up to current Codes. Mr. Reed explained that even some of the newest buildings have recycling dumpsters outside the enclosure. We need to make a determination regarding how the dumpster' enclosure should look since most are not capable of holding what is required of them. It was Mr. Rosenstock's opinion that hard and fast rules must be set by this City to eliminate subjectivity and the need for variances. Commissioner Bradley pointed out that there has been a movement to make the City more development friendly, and in that effort, perhaps good, sound decision making has been affected. What Mr. Aguila noticed from the slide presentation was that every good development project was developed within the last three to five years. He feels this is the result of the City's focus on requiring quality development. A good design is one that fits in harmony with the surroundings. This is something that cannot be codified. Developers do not create good designs by selecting items from a plan. He is opposed to returning to the former method of providing a "menu" for developers. The City now relies on an educated Planning & Development Board comprised of members with diversified backgrounds. Mr. Aguila feels the board has the right to look at what developers propose and either approve or deny that proposal based on whether or not it complies with our standards. You cannot make the Code so rigid by regulating everything. The developers will find that much too restrictive. Mr. Aguila sees this problem as a staff problem because staff is attempting to lead the developer in anticipation of the board and Commission reactions. According to Mark Wallace, representative for Mobil, when developers are limited to exact items, they look for loopholes. He feels this is a very difficult Code to write. Vice Mayor Titcomb reminded everyone that the main issue is continuity. One Commission and one board can make a decision to go in one direction. However, when a new Commission and board takes over, that direction may change. Mr. Kastarlak believes legislating design is a very dangerous area. Design discipline is key to this issue, and it takes a lifetime of visual training to appreciate colors and harmony. What is considered appropriate MEETING MINUTES JOINT MEETING OF CITY COMMISSION, PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD AND CHAMBER OF COMMERCE BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA DECEMBER 8, 1997 today may have been extravagant 30 years ago. Good design can be prized at all times. He urged everyone present to understand that we cannot regulate everything. City' Manager Willis suggested that the City do proactive planning with respect to what we would like to see in our City for the future. She also recommends focussing on goals and objectives throughout the City. This issue will be clarified at a future workshop meeting. Mayor Taylor feels the new projects are being carefully scrutinized, and the board and City Commission are .reaching consensus on many issues. He feels the driving forces behind this entire discussion of community design are the "monsters". Mr. Wische pointed out that there is no need for the Planning & Development Board to see all of the permit-related conditions associated with a proposal. The Planning & Development Board should not have to review the comments that are subject to Code. Those comments should be excluded from the Conditions of Approval. Mr. Myott feels staff must continue to comment on the issues that are not in compliance with Code. Mr. Aguila agreed that these conditions should be forwarded to the applicant; however, not to the Planning & Development Board. Commissioner Tillman explained that during Visions 20/20, there were recommendations for changes. As the operations change, different functions change and things overlap. It is important to prioritize and look at manpower through assessments. He questioned whether our professional manpower level is appropriate. With respect to the issue of having grandfathered properties bring their properties up to Code, Mr. Aguila explained that Delray Beach required practical items to be brought into compliance. A survey of every property was made, and everyone was given an assessment and a time frame for compliance. This system worked very well. Mr. Aguila suggested that this City begin requiring developers to build dumpster enclosures that will hold the recycling dumpsters. Ms. Heyden advised that staff has printed out the entire corridor of Boynton Beach Boulevard and Federal Highway and a portion of Woolbright Road with respect to upgrading. This topic will be discussed in more detail at the next workshop meeting in January. At the conclusion of the discussion on this issue, it was agreed that the Community Design Plan will continue to be utilized and it will be reviewed on a regular basis (perhaps every two years). In addition, the following issues were identified: Set Fundamental Ground Rules Design Discipline Proactive Planning Issue #2: Lack of a specific Code requirement regarding exterior lighting to prevent glare and over-illumination, especially for gas stations/convenience stores · Desired Outcome: *Agreement on a minimum, maximum and average illumination level and or light fixture shielding standards that staff can incorporate into an Ordinance for adoption Ms. Heyden explained that lighting became an issue recently when a Mobil station was razed for the purpose of building another service station/convenience store. The property is on an intersection and abuts residential. A condition was placed on the applicant with regard to glare. There was a MEETING MINUTES JOINT MEETING OF CITY COMMISSION, PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD AND CHAMBER OF COMMERCE BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA DECEMBER 8, 1997 recommendation that staff look at lighting. Light meter readings were recorded at properties throughout the City in an effort to set standards based on the criteria, or deal with this issue by screening the fixture or recessing it into the pump island canopy. Mr. Aguila advised that there are so many reasons why a site is perceived as being bright. Much of this has to do with lighting as well as the surrounding surfaces that reflect the light. Mr. Aguila inquired as to the reason why we are not using the lES recommendations that break down every possible consideration. They have a Iow of 20-foot candles and a high of 30-foot candles. He questions why we are attempting to invent a system that has been developed by professionals and is already established and based on safety and other criteria. He recommended that we adopt the lES standards. Commissioner Bradley agreed with Mr. Aguila's suggestion that we should review the industry standards, especially if they are conservative. Mark Wallace recommended that consideration be given for safety and to permit observation from the store. This will provide a feeling of safety for the customers using the site. Mr. Myott pointed out that there are no industry standards for cut-off type fixtures and how they relate to other properties. He feels we must set the standards for lighting fixture cut off and type and effect on adjacent properties. Mayor Taylor agreed that our thrust is to adopt a standard outline (industry standards or other) in a document. The City can decide on how the measurements are to be made. Issue #3: Procedure regarding Commission consent agenda ratification of Planning & Development Board actions. Desired outcomes: *Agreement on whether to ratify or approve all, some or no Planning and Development Board actions *Agreement on the procedure and time frame to ratify Board actions (if applicable, depending on first outcome). Ms. Heyden explained that this issue has been brought forward because the current Ordinance requires an applicant to lobby a Commissioner to pull an item off the agenda. If that is not done, the item will go forward on the Consent Agenda. Ms. Heyden said some applicants feel they should be able to discuss an item at the Commission meeting regardless of whether or not the Commission wants to pull the item. Commissioner Titcomb questioned whether there is any legal justification for an applicant to have the right to discuss a project at the final level. City Manager Willis did not believe the applicant has that absolute right. She suggested that the Commissioners request the City Clerk to seek a written legal opinion on this issue. Commissioner Bradley recalled the City Attorney approving this procedure as long as everyone is aware that it is part of the process that the Planning & Development Board is the place for an applicant to make his/her case. The Commission then ratifies the Planning & Development Board decisions unless a Commissioner is willing to pull an item. Mr. Aguila questioned whether or not it is necessary for board actions to be ratified. In Delray Beach, the process ends at the board level. If the applicant is unhappy, he can request to be heard by the Commission. 4 MEETING MINUTES JOINT MEETING OF CITY COMMISSION, PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD AND CHAMBER OF COMMERCE BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA DECEMBER 8, 1997 Commissioner Bradley felt the Commission did not want to give the Planning & Development Board that much power. He explained that the applicant's recourse is through the courts if the Commission does not pull the item. Mr. Reed pointed out that if a Consent Agenda item is tabled, there is no way for the public to know when it is going to come back up again. Ms. Heyden advised that an item that is pulled off the agenda cannot be discussed at that meeting. It must be postponed until the next meeting to allow for proper notification. This extends the process by two weeks. City Manager Willis believes this was done as a consideration of notice. She is not certain this is legally required. Commissioner Bradley explained that the time frame has backed up the Commission agenda. He suggested reaching a middle ground on this issue. Mayor Taylor suggested that a notice be placed on Planning & Development Board agendas announcing that all decisions of the Planning & Development Board are subject to ratification by the Commission at the next City Commission meeting. He recommended rewording the Ordinance to this effect, and recommended that the chairman of the board make the announcement at the beginning of each meeting to ensure notification. There was agreement of the group to move forward with Mayor Taylor's recommendation and continue with the Consent Agenda procedure. · Issue #4: Nonconforming signs and grandfathering or removal of them Desired Outcomes: *Understanding of current nonconforming sign criteria/definition (size, height, setback and type) *Agreement on whether to grandfather all, some or no nonconforming signs based on the above criteria *Agreement on nonconforming sign removal date (if applicable, depending on second outcome above). With the most-recent Sign Code change in January, if the sign is nonconforming with respect to only one issue, then the sign is "nonconforming". In addition, the City has allowed some leniency with regard to the criteria. For example, at present, the height limit is 20'. However, a sign will not be considered nonconforming if it is 24'. In addition, the size of the sign area will be allowed at 25% above of what is required in the Code. There is no leniency on setbacks. The amortization date is December 31, 1999. Since this Code change, Code Compliance has not done an inventory regarding the number of signs involved. It is important to begin identifying and notifying property owners that their signs are nonconforming. This will give them an opportunity to come into compliance. Vice Mayor Titcomb questioned whether the City notified property owners several years ago with regard to potential nonconforming signs. The response was negative. Commissioner Bradley added that the Commission was not willing to get the word out. Mayor Taylor and Ms. Heyden agreed that the City would have to start over again. In response to Mr. Aguila, Ms. Heyden said no exceptions have been made. Mr. Aguila recalls Bethesda Hospital being very vocal about their sign program a number of years ago. They felt it was necessary for them to maintain the size and locations of their signs for safety reasons. 5 MEETING MINUTES JOINT MEETING OF CITY COMMISSION, PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD AND CHAMBER OF COMMERCE BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA DECEMBER 8, 1997 Mayor Taylor recommended that staff attempt to individually notify all sign owners of the compliance date. In addition, staff should find a method of public notification that is defensible. Mayor Taylor suggested conducting a workshop meeting to deal with the Sign Code Ordinance. Commissioner Bradley agrees that this issue should be workshopped by itself. He further suggested that legal advice is needed with respect to setting a time period for the moratorium. Vice Mayor Titcomb feels a system must be developed to inventory what currently exists in the City in order to determine whether or not the signs conform. Mr. Blasie explained that many of the signs have a permit history. However, some signs have no permit history or that history is vague. He reminded everyone that setback issues must also be considered. Vice Mayor Titcomb is of the opinion that if the City does not have a thoroughness of inventory of the signs, there will be property owners who will compare themselves to others with respect to nonconformance. City Manager Willis feels that burden is on the property owners. Once the goals and objectives are set and the standards are codified and applied, the highest priority items should be set. It will be very difficult to blanket the City for an inventory. She suggests beginning with the most important cases. Commissioner Tillman would like to see a cross-section of three or four major thoroughfares for the purpose of providing examples. City Manager Willis offered to provide a bus tour for the purpose of viewing examples, or staff can develop a slide presentation. Mr. Blasie said the use of the word "nonconforming" in the Ordinance is very confusing. He recommended that simple language be used. Commissioner Jaskiewicz questioned whether the size of the parcel is taken into consideration with respect to the size of a sign. Ms. Heyden responded affirmatively. Mr. Rosenstock requested that the presentation depict conforming signs compared to moderate to extremely nonconforming signs. This will show what is acceptable with respect to size and color. Setbacks can be shown on a map. Mr. Myott suggested securing sign codes from other cities that have restrictions that exist with respect to letter type, colors and size of signs. Mayor Taylor recommended that staff not get too involved in the slide presentation because we will probably rewrite the sign Ordinance. We will have to define an acceptable sign. City Manager Willis suggested beginning with the top ten sign Code violations that exist. In addition, the number of signs at one establishment will also be provided. In conclusion, the next workshop date was set for Monday, January 26, 1998, at 6:30 p.m. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to discuss, the meeting properly adjourned at 9:00 p.m. 6 Joint City Commission, Planning and Development Board, and Chamber of Commerce Workshop Monday, December 8, 1997 6:00 p.m. - 8:15 p.m. City Hall, West Wing, Conference Room C (2nd floor) Issue #1' Desired Outcomes: Issue #2: Desired Outcome: Issue #3: Desired Outcomes: Issue ~4: Desired Outcomes: Lack of consensus regarding application of community design and enforcement of the existing Community Design Plan. - An understanding ~of the existing Community Design Plan. Agreement on the 3-5 key causes of the lack of consensus. - A list of solutions (code revisions) that can be refined by staff and prepared for adoption of an ordinance. Lack of a specific code requirement regarding exterior lighting to prevent glare and over-illumination, especially for gas stations/ convenience stores. Agreement on a minimum, maximum and average illumination level and/or light fixture shielding standards that staff can incorporate into an ordinance for adoption. Procedure regarding Commission consent agenda ratification of Planning and Development Board actions. - Agreement on whether to ratify or approve all, some or no Planning and Development Board actions. - Agreement on the procedure and time frame to ratify Board actions (if applicable, depending on first outcome). Nonconforming signs and grandfathering or removal of'them. - Understanding of current nonconforming sign criteria/ definition (size, height, setback and type) Agreement on whether to grandfather all, some or no nonconforming signs based on the above criteria. - Agreement on nonconforming sign removal date (if applicable, depending on second outcome above). Page 2 Joint City Workshop Agenda AGENDA WHAT HOW WHO TIME Roles, Desired - Present Outcomes, Agenda, - Clarify Facilitative Leader 5 minutes Ground Rules, Decision - Check for agreement (Tambri Heyden) Making Existing Community Facilitative Leader Design Plan and Slide show (Tambri Heyden and 15 minutes Community Appearance Jerzy Lewicki) Code Lack of Consensus List Facilitative Leader, Causes Clarify Recorder (staff or 10 minutes Prioritize (N/3) volunteer) and Attendees Solutions - In groups, brainstormAttendees 20 minutes - List 10 minutes - Clarify and Combine 5 minutes Similar Ideas Facilitative Leader, - Negative Poll Recorder, Attendees 5 minutes - Build up/Eliminate 5 minutes and Both/And Existing Lighting - Present chart Facilitative Leader 2 minutes Standards - Brainstorm and 5 minutes Clarify Facilitative Leader, - Prioritize/Rank OrderRecorder, Attendees 3 minutes Board Action Ratification - Present Facilitative Leader 5 minutes Procedure Whether to ratify - Discuss, Agree Facilitative Leader, 10 minutes Recorder, Attendees Alternative - Brainstorm and 5 minutes proced u re/time frame clarify Facilitative Leader, - Prioritize and Recorder, Attendees 5 minutes Negative vote Nonconforming signs Present Facilitative Leader 5 minutes Grandfather all, some or Brainstorm and 10 minutes no signs Clarify Facilitative Leader, Prioritize Recorder, Attendees 20 minutes Negative vote 5 minutes Amortization date Discuss, agree Facilitative Leader, 5 minutes Recorder, Attendees J:\SHRDATA\Planning\SHARED\WP\SPECPROJ~Joint City Workshop - Agenda.doc MINUTES OF THE JOIN'r CITY COMMISSION, PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD AND CHAMBER OF COMMERCE WORKSHOP MEETING HELD IN CONFERENCE ROOM "C", WEST WING, CITY HALL, ON MONDAY, DECEMBER 8, 1997, AT 6:00 P.M. PRESENT Gerald "Jerry" Taylor, Mayor Jamie Titcomb, Vice Mayor Matt Bradley, Commissioner Shirley Jaskiewicz, Commissioner Henderson Tillman, Commissioner Planning & Development Board Members Lee Wische, Chairman Jos6 Aguila Mike Friedland Maurice Rosenstock Steve Myott, Alternate James Reed, Alternate Kerry Willis, City Manager Sue Kruse, City Clerk Bulent Kastarlak, Director of Development Tambri Heyden, Planning & Zoning Director Jerzy Lewicki, Asst. Planner Scott Blasie, Code Compliance Administrator Chamber of Commerce Members Kathy Shabotynskyj CALL TO ORDER Tambri Heyden, Planning & Zoning Director, called the meeting to order at 6:12 p.m. She explained that the Planning & Development Board, as well as the City Commission, requested this meeting. The discussion issues were enumerated and are listed below. In addition, Ms. Heyden explained that a new agenda set up was prepared for this meeting that allots specific amounts of time for discussion of each item. (A copy of this agenda is attached.) Ms. Heyden listed the ground rules for the meeting as follows: 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Disagree agreeably. Respect one another's ideas. Address the issue - not the person. Honor time limits. Everyone participates - No one dominates. Slide show is to be used as an education tool. The meeting began with a slide presentation. Ms. Heyden thanked Mr. James Reed, Planning & Development Board alternate member, for his assistance in putting together the slide presentation. The presentation included slides of sites within the City depicting examples of good and poor design emphasis on entrances, service areas, landscaping, lighting and signage. Following the presentation, Ms. Heyden solicited input from those present in an effort to identify areas where there is a lack of consensus between the board and the City Commission. MEETING MINUTES JOI'NT MEETING OF CITY COMMISSION, PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD AND CHAMBER OF COMMERCE BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA DECEMBER 8, 1997 , Issue#l: Lack of consensus regarding application of community design and enforcement of the existing Community Design Plan · Desired Outcomes: *An understanding of the existing Community Design Plan. *Agreement on the 3-5 key causes of the lack of consensus *A list of solutions (Code revisions) that can be refined by staff and prepared for adoption of an Ordinance After viewing the slide presentation, Vice Mayor Titcomb expressed his opinion that it appeared that many of the old businesses might have been attractive buildings at one time, but have not been properly maintained. Some of the problems appear to be code enforcement issues. Further, it is his opinion that design is subjective especially when dealing with components of a building. With these remarks in mind, Ms. Heyden began compiling a list of items the group would later prioritize. The itemized list included lack of code enforcement, subjectivity with respect to shades of colors, offering a broader palette of designs, lack of upgrading standards for properties, viewing the development parcel as a whole rather than piecemeal, setting fundamental ground rules, too many variances, and unification of design. With respect to dumpster enclosures, Commissioner Jaskiewicz explained that a Code revision is required to allow presently grandfathered properties an opportunity to bring their properties up to current Codes. Mr. Reed explained that even some of the newest buildings have recycling dumpsters outside the enclosure. We need to make a determination regarding how the dumpster' enclosure should look since most are not capable of holding what is required of them. It was Mr. Rosenstock's opinion that hard and fast rules must be set by this City to eliminate subjectivity and the need for variances. Commissioner Bradley pointed out that there has been a movement to make the City more development friendly, and in that effort, perhaps good, sound decision making has been affected. What Mr. Aguila noticed from the slide presentation was that every good development project was developed within the last three to five years. He feels this is the result of the City's focus on requiring quality development. A good design is one that fits in harmony with the surroundings. This is something that cannot be codified. Developers do not create good designs by selecting items from a plan. He is opposed to returning to the former method of providing a "menu" for developers. The City now relies on an educated Planning & Development Board comprised of members with diversified backgrounds. Mr. Aguila feels the board has the right to look at what developers propose and either approve or deny that proposal based on whether or not it complies with our standards. You cannot make the Code so rigid by regulating everything. The developers will find that much too restrictive. Mr. Aguila sees this problem as a staff problem because staff is attempting to lead the developer in anticipation of the board and Commission reactions. According to Mark Wallace, representative for Mobil, when developers are limited to exact items, they look for loopholes. He feels this is a very difficult Code to write. Vice Mayor Titcomb reminded everyone that the main issue is continuity. One Commission and one board can make a decision to go in one direction. However, when a new Commission and board takes over, that direction may change. Mr. Kastarlak believes legislating design is a very dangerous area. Design discipline is key to this issue, and it takes a lifetime of visual training to appreciate colors and harmony. What is considered appropriate 2 MEETING MINUTES JOINT MEETING OF CITY COMMISSION, PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD AND CHAMBER OF COMMERCE BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA DECEMBER 8, 1997 today may have been extravagant 30 years ago. Good design can be prized at all times. He urged everyone present to understand that we cannot regulate everything. City Manager Willis suggested that the City do proactive planning with respect to what we would like to see in our City for the future. She also recommends focussing on goals and objectives throughout the City. This issue will be clarified at a future workshop meeting. Mayor Taylor feels the new projects are being carefully scrutinized, and the board and City Commission are reaching consensus on many issues. He feels the driving forces behind this entire discussion of community design are the "monsters". Mr. Wische pointed out that there is no need for the Planning & Development Board to see all of the permit-related conditions associated with a proposal. The Planning & Development Board should not have to review the comments that are subject to Code. Those comments should be excluded from the Conditions of Approval. Mr. Myott feels staff must continue to comment on the issues that are not in compliance with Code. Mr. Aguila agreed that these conditions should be forwarded to the applicant; however, not to the Planning & Development Board. Commissioner Tillman explained that during Visions 20/20, there were recommendations for changes. As the operations change, different functions change and things overlap. It is important to prioritize and look at manpower through assessments. He questioned whether our professional manpower level is appropriate. With respect to the issue of having grandfathered properties bring their properties up to Code, Mr. Aguila explained that Delray Beach required practical items to be brought into compliance. A survey of every property was made, and everyone was given an assessment and a time frame for compliance. This system worked very well. Mr. Aguila suggested that this City begin requiring developers to build dumpster enclosures that will hold the recycling dumpsters. Ms. Heyden advised that staff has printed out the entire corridor of Boynton Beach Boulevard and Federal Highway and a portion of Woolbright Road with respect to upgrading. This topic will be discussed in more detail at the next workshop meeting in January. At the conclusion of the discussion on this issue, it was agreed that the Community Design Plan will continue to be utilized and it will be reviewed on a regular basis (perhaps every two years). In addition, the following issues were identified: Set Fundamental Ground Rules Design Discipline Proactive Planning · Issue #2: Lack of a specific Code requirement regarding exterior lighting to prevent glare and over-illumination, especially for gas stations/convenience stores · Desired Outcome: *Agreement on a minimum, maximum and average illumination level and or light fixture shielding standards that staff can incorporate into an Ordinance for adoption Ms. Heyden explained that lighting became an issue recently when a Mobil station was razed for the purpose of building another service station/convenience store. The property is on an intersection and abuts residential. ^ condition was placed on the applicant with regard to glare. There was a 3 MEETING MINUTES JOINT MEETING OF CITY COMMISSION, PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD AND CHAMBER OF COMMERCE BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA DECEMBER 8, 1997 recommendation that staff look at lighting. Light meter readings were recorded at properties throughout the City in an effort to set standards based on the criteria, or deal with this issue by screening the fixture or recessing it into the pump island canopy. Mr. Aguila advised that there are so many reasons why a site is perceived as being bright. Much of this has to do with lighting as well as the surrounding surfaces that reflect the light. Mr. Aguila inquired as to the reason why we are not using the lES recommendations that break down every possible consideration. They have a Iow of 20-foot candles and a high of 30-foot candles. He questions why we are attempting to invent a system that has been developed by professionals and is already established and based on safety and other criteria. He recommended that we adopt the lES standards. Commissioner Bradley agreed with Mr. Aguila's suggestion that we should review the industry standards, especially if they are conservative. Mark Wallace recommended that consideration be given for safety and to permit observation from the store. This will provide a feeling of safety for the customers using the site. Mr. Myott pointed out that there are no industry standards for cut-off type fixtures and how they relate to other properties. He feels we must set the standards for lighting fixture cut off and type and effect on adjacent properties. Mayor Taylor agreed that our thrust is to adopt a standard outline (industry standards or other) in a document. The City can decide on how the measurements are to be made. · Issue #3: Procedure regarding Commission consent agenda ratification of Planning & Development Board actions. Desired outcomes: *Agreement on whether to ratify or approve all, some or no Planning and Development Board actions *Agreement on the procedure and time frame to ratify Board actions (if applicable, depending on first outcome). Ms. Heyden explained that this issue has been brought forward because the current Ordinance requires an applicant to lobby a Commissioner to pull an item off the agenda. If that is not done, the item will go forward on the Consent Agenda. Ms. Heyden said some applicants feel they should be able to discuss an item at the Commission meeting regardless of whether or not the Commission wants to pull the item. Commissioner Titcomb questioned whether there is any legal justification for an applicant to have the right to discuss a project at the final level. City Manager Willis did not believe the applicant has that absolute right. She suggested that the Commissioners request the City Clerk to seek a written legal opinion on this issue. Commissioner Bradley recalled the City Attorney approving this procedure as long as everyone is aware that it is part of the process that the Planning & Development Board is the place for an applicant to make his/her case. The Commission then ratifies the Planning & Development Board decisions unless a Commissioner is willing to pull an item. Mr. Aguila questioned whether or not it is necessary for board actions to be ratified. In Delray Beach, the process ends at the board level. If the applicant is unhappy, he can request to be heard by the Commission. 4 MEETING MINUTES JOINT MEETING OF CITY COMMISSION, PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD AND CHAMBER OF COMMERCE BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA DECEMBER 8, 1997 Commissioner Bradley felt the Commission did not want to give the Planning & Development Board that much power. He explained that the applicant's recourse is through the courts if the Commission does not pull the item, Mr. Reed pointed out that if a Consent Agenda item is tabled, there is no way for the public to know when it is going to come back up again. Ms. Heyden advised that an item that is pulled off the agenda cannot be discussed at that meeting. It must be postponed until the next meeting to allow for proper notification. This extends the process by two weeks. City Manager Willis believes this was done as a consideration of notice. She is not certain this is legally required. Commissioner Bradley explained that the time frame has backed up the Commission agenda. He suggested reaching a middle ground on this issue. Mayor Taylor suggested that a notice be placed on Planning & Development Board agendas announcing that all decisions of the Planning & Development Board are subject to ratification by the Commission at the next City Commission meeting. He recommended rewording the Ordinance to this effect, and recommended that the chairman of the board make the announcement at the beginning of each meeting to ensure notification. There was agreement of the group to move forward with Mayor Taylor's recommendation and continue with the Consent Agenda procedure. · Issue #4: Nonconforming signs and grandfathering or removal of them Desired Outcomes: *Understanding of current nonconforming sign criteria/definition (size, height, setback and type) *Agreement on whether to grandfather all, some or no nonconforming signs based on the above criteria *Agreement on nonconforming sign removal date (if applicable, depending on second outcome above). With the most-recent Sign Code change in January, if the sign is nonconforming with respect to only one issue, then the sign is "nonconforming". In addition, the City has allowed some leniency with regard to the criteria. For example, at present, the height limit is 20'. However, a sign will not be considered nonconforming if it is 24'. In addition, the size of the sign area will be allowed at 25% above of what is required in the Code. There is no leniency on setbacks. The amortization date is December 31, 1999. Since this Code change, Code Compliance has not done an inventory regarding the number of signs involved. It is important to begin identifying and notifying property owners that their signs are nonconforming. This will give them an opportunity to come into compliance. Vice Mayor Titcomb questioned whether the City notified property owners several years ago with regard to potential nonconforming signs. The response was negative. Commissioner Bradley added that the Commission was not willing to get the word out. Mayor Taylor and Ms. Heyden agreed that the City would have to start over again. In response to Mr. Aguila, Ms. Heyden said no exceptions have been made. Mr. Aguila recalls Bethesda Hospital being very vocal about their sign program a number of years ago. They felt it was necessary for them to maintain the size and locations of their signs for safety reasons. 5 MEETING MINUTES JOINT MEETING OF CITY COMMISSION, PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD AND CHAMBER OF COMMERCE BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA DECEMBER 8, 1997 Mayor Taylor recommended that staff attempt to individually notify all sign owners of the compliance date. In addition, staff should find a method of public notification that is defensible. Mayor Taylor suggested conducting a workshop meeting to deal with the Sign Code Ordinance. Commissioner Bradley agrees that this issue should be workshopped by itself. He further suggested that legal advice is needed with respect to setting a time period for the moratorium. Vice Mayor Titcomb feels a system must be developed to inventory what currently exists in the City in order to determine whether or not the signs conform. Mr. Blasie explained that many of the signs have a permit history. However, some signs have no permit history or that history is vague. He reminded everyone that setback issues must also be considered. Vice Mayor Titcomb is of the opinion that if the City does not have a thoroughness of inventory of the signs, there will be property owners who will compare themselves to others with respect to nonconformance. City Manager Willis feels that burden is on the property owners. Once the goals and objectives are set and the standards are codified and applied, the highest priority items should be set. It will be very difficult to blanket the City for an inventory. She suggests beginning with the most important cases. Commissioner Tillman would like to see a cross-section of three or four major thoroughfares for the purpose of providing examples. City Manager Willis offered to provide a bus tour for the purpose of viewing examples, or staff can develop a slide presentation. Mr. Blasie said the use of the word "nonconforming" in the Ordinance is very confusing. He recommended that simple language be used. Commissioner Jaskiewicz questioned whether the size of the parcel is taken into consideration with respect to the size of a sign. Ms. Heyden responded affirmatively. Mr. Rosenstock requested that the presentation depict conforming signs compared to moderate to extremely nonconforming signs. This will show what is acceptable with respect to size and color. Setbacks can be shown on a map. Mr. Myott suggested securing sign codes from other cities that have restrictions that exist with respect to letter type, colors and size of signs. Mayor Taylor recommended that staff not get too involved in the slide presentation because we will probably rewrite the sign Ordinance. We will have to define an acceptable sign. City Manager Willis suggested beginning with the top ten sign Code violations that exist. In addition, the number of signs at one establishment will also be provided. In conclusion, the next workshop date was set for Monday, January 26, 1998, at 6:30 p.m. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to discuss, the meeting properly adjourned at 9:00 p.m. Joint City Commission, Planning and Development Board, and Chamber of Commerce Workshop Monday, December 8, 1997 6:00 p.m.- 8:15 p.m. City Hall, West Wing, Conference Room C (2nd floor) Issue #1: Desired Outcomes: Issue #2: Desired Outcome: Issue #3: Desired Outcomes: Issue #4: Desired Outcomes: Lack of consensus regarding application of community design and enforcement of the existing Community Design Plan. - An understanding .of the existing Community Design Plan. - Agreement on the 3-5 key causes of the lack of consensus. - A list of solutions (code revisions) that can be refined by staff and prepared for adoption of an ordinance. Lack of a specific code requirement regarding exterior lighting to prevent glare and over-illumination, especially for gas stations/ convenience stores. Agreement on a minimum, maximum and average illumination level and/or light fixture shielding standards that staff can incorporate into an ordinance for adoption. Procedure regarding Commission consent agenda ratification of Planning and Development Board actions. Agreement on whether to ratify or approve all, some or no Planning and Development Board actions. Agreement on the procedure and time frame to ratify Board actions (if applicable, depending on first outcome). Nonconforming signs and grandfathering or removal of'them. Understanding definition (size, height, setback and type) Agreement on whether to grandfather all, some or nonconforming signs based on the above criteria. Agreement on nonconforming sign removal date applicable, depending on second outcome above). of current nonconforming sign criteria/ no (if Page 2 Joint City Workshop Agenda AGENDA WHAT HOW WHO TIME Roles, Desired - Present Outcomes, Agenda, - Clarify Facilitative Leader 5 minutes Ground Rules, Decision Check for agreement (Tambri Heyden) Making Existing Community Facilitative Leader Design Plan and - Slide show (Tambri Heyden and 15 minutes Community Appearance Jerzy Lewicki) Code Lack of Consensus - List Facilitative Leader, Causes - Clarify Recorder (staff or 10 minutes - Prioritize (N/3) volunteer) and Attendees Solutions - In groups, brainstormAttendees 20 minutes List 10 minutes Clarify and Combine 5 minutes Similar Ideas Facilitative Leader, - Negative Poll Recorder, Attendees 5 minutes - Build up/Eliminate 5 minutes and Both/And Existing Lighting - Present chart Facilitative Leader 2 minutes Standards - Brainstorm and 5 minutes Clarify Facilitative Leader, - Prioritize/Rank OrderRecorder, Attendees 3 minutes Board Action Ratification - Present Facilitative Leader 5 minutes Procedure Whether to ratify Discuss, Agree Facilitative Leader, 10 minutes Recorder, Attendees Alternative - Brainstorm and 5 minutes procedure/time frame clarify Facilitative Leader, - Prioritize and Recorder, Attendees 5 minutes Negative vote Nonconforming signs - Present Facilitative Leader 5 minutes Grandfather all, some or - Brainstorm and 10 minutes no signs Clarify Facilitative Leader, Prioritize Recorder, Attendees 20 minutes Negative vote 5 minutes Amortization date Discuss, agree Facilitative Leader, 5 minutes RecOrder, Attendees J:\SHRDATA\Planning\SHARED\WP\$PECPROJ~Joint City Workshop - Agenda.doc MEETING MINUTES JOINT MEETING OF CITY COMMISSION, PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD AND CHAMBER OF COMMERCE BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA DECEMBER 8, 1997 ATTEST: Cit~:~lerk //Deputy City Clerk ~3/Tapes) CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH Co~m~ssione~"~r 7