Loading...
Minutes 03-25-96 MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COMMISSION MEETING AND JOINT CITY COMMISSION/PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD WORKSHOP HELD IN COMMISSION CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA, ON MONDAY, MARCH 25, 1996, AT 7:00 P.M. PRESENT Gerald "Jerry" Taylor, Mayor Shirley Jaskiewicz, Vice Mayor Matthew Bradley, Commissioner Henderson Tillman, Commissioner Jamie Titcomb, Commissioner Planning and Development Board: Stan :DubS, Chairman Dave Beasley Robert Eisner Maurice Rosenstock Lee Wische William Burton Carrie Parker, City Manager James Cherof, City Attorney Sue Kruse, City Clerk CALL TO ORDER Mayor Taylor called the meeting to order at 7:15 p.m. SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT RE: MEADOWS 300 PROPERTY City Attorney Cherof reminded the Commission that this settlement agreement was previously addressed at a public meeting. However, the property owners and residents were not comfortable with the language in paragraphs 5A and 5B on page 2 of the agreement. They were concerned that we were not going to construct the road between Congress Avenue and Lawrence Road. Subsequent to the public meeting, City Attorney Cherof met with Chip Carlson, the attorney for the 300 Properties, and Larry Portnoy, the representative of the developer, and achieved some language that gave Mr. Carlson the degree of comfort that he felt his clients would need. That was the addition of subparagraph 5B which said that part of our responsibility, if we want to build that road, would be to go to court and demonstrate that there is a public need for a through street, in addition to other elements. We did that because the current traffic study indicates that there is no current need for a through street. There are some other elements of this agreement that are still under discussion that are not substantive in MINUTES - SPECIAL CITY COMMISSION/PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MARCH 25, 1996 nature. For example, in paragraph 4, it says that the developer will submit an amended site plan with some references on it. City Attorney Cherof said they have already done that in reliance upon the tentative agreement. Additionally, in paragraph 14, there needs to be some clarification that the public hearing is a public hearing that is open for everybody, although the affected parties (the parties who would be impacted by the construction of the road or by the parks) have special standing to come and be heard. Additionally, there is some other language that is just cleanup in nature. City Attorney Cherof felt that a tentative agreement was reached on this at the meeting last week. However, Mr. Carlson is out of town. The document was faxed to him on Friday, but City Attorney Cherof has not had any response from him yet. City Attorney Cherof requested the Commission's approval to finalize the settlement agreement based upon these negotiated changes, and to authorize the Mayor to execute it if and when we work out that final language. He reiterated that the last bits of language would not be substantive. It will be clarification and cleanup. Otherwise, the agreement would be exactly as it appears in front of the Commission. Motion Commissioner Titcomb moved to approve the settlement agreement, subject to minor modifications. Commissioner Tillman seconded the motion, which carried 5-0. City Attorney Cherof advised that the document will be changed based upon whatever discussions we have. It will come back to the Commission one more time for a public hearing because part of the lawsuit that was pending was an attack on the consistency with the Comprehensive Plan. Any settlement of that type of lawsuit requires a public hearing. Therefore, the Commission will see this document one more time, possibly already signed for ratification. FINALIZATION OF CONTRACT EXTENSION WITH EDWARD S. GARClA/OCEAN BREEZE FESTIVAL PARK, INC. RE; MARINA PROPERTY City Manager Parker advised that the Commission does not have any paperwork in front Pf them because she and Mr. Garcia's staff did not finish negotiating this until 5:30 this evening and it has not been retyped to include their language. She said she had questioned the City Attorney about whether or not we need to reconvene the City Commission at some later date, and he has informed her that this may not be necessary. 2 MINUTES - SPECIAL CITY COMMISSION/PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MARCIt 25, 1996 City Attorney Cherof advised that contract extensions are not unusual in real estate transactions, and he felt that the negotiation and execution of a contract extension would be consistent with the Commission's original approval of the transaction. There are some concessions that the City will be making to obtain the additional extension of time. They are consistent with previous concessions that previous Commissions had indicated, which were in the nature of waiver of building permits and the like. Unless the Commission feels that there is some necessity to do a formal approval of the contract extension, it is his opinion that the administration should be authorized by motion to proceed to formalize that document and then have the Mayor execute it. City Manager Parker stated that the concessions would only become effective if we cannot reach agreement with Jack Simons. It is a 30 day contract extension to May 1st. If we reach an agreement with Mr. Simons, then we can close on the property on May 1 st. If not, then Mr. Garcia wants the opportunity to try to develop the property as he previously submitted a year and a half ago. Mr. Garcia is willing to give us a 30 day extension at no cost to the City. City Attorney Cherof asked for a motion stating the matter does not need to come back before the Commission, and that the administration and the Mayor are authorized to finalize and execute the document of extension. Motion Commissioner Bradley moved that the Commission direct staff and the Mayor to negotiate for an additional 30 days as necessary. Vice Mayor Jaskiewicz seconded the motion, which carried 5-0. Vice Mayor Jaskiewicz asked if this is relative to the cleanup. City Manager Parker answered affirmatively. She stated that we have not finalized the development order between the City and Mr. Simons. Therefore, we cannot close on the property and assign him that property until we do so. Otherwise, the City has no assurance what will be built on that property. The second issue is the cleanup of the site. EVALUATION AND APPRAISAL REPORT (EAR) FOR THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN City Manager Parker introduced Chris Papandreas of Berryman & Henigar, a consulting firm from Tampa. Ms. Papandreas has been working on the EAR. MINUTES - SPECIAL CITY COMMISSION/PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MARCH 25, 1996 Ms. Papandreas talked about the comprehensive planning cycle. She stated that the Comprehensive Planning Act was passed by the State in the mid 1980s. Communities were required, within several years time, to develop and adopt their own comprehensive plans. Boynton Beach's plan was adopted in 1989 and was finalized through settlement agreements in 1990. At the time the plan was adopted, the best overall population information that was available was the 1980 Census. Therefore, Boynton Beach's plan, as opposed to the other plans that were adopted in the late 1980s, was out of date when it was adopted. There was new information coming on line in the 1990 Census. Aisc, there were a number of other studies and documents and reporting processes underway that were generating new and better information, such as information on the Lake Worth Lagoon Estuary, manatee habitats, seagrass beds, fish populations, and water quality sampling. This information was not available when the last plan was adopted. Therefore, we have a great deal of new information to incorporate into Boynton Beach's Comprehensive Plan. The Metropolitan Planning Organization has a long range plan adopted which has just been updated. The West Boynton study, which addresses the annexation area and unincorporated areas, has been prepared and brings up issues for the City Commission to address. There have been several new development studies prepared for the areas north of the downtown, including the Community Design Study for the downtown area, as well as the utility study that is currently being done by CH2M Hill. We will be incorporating and reviewing all that new data in the framework of the adopted Comprehensive Plan. The EAR which we are preparing now is going to be the first opportunity that the community has to step back and take a look at the whole plan, not just an isolated amendment here and there. Ms. Papandreas asked the Commission not to make a decision this evening, but to begin thinking where the plan takes us, where we want to go, and how we want to revise it over the next 18 months so that it is a more appropriate blueprint for the community to use. In the immediate term, a draft will be prepared in the next few weeks for the Commission's approval and transmittal to the Department of Community Affairs. The DCA will review it and send it back to the City within 90 days for adoption. Therefore, this gives us 90 days to reflect on it and take into consideration the results of the Visioning Conference. Ms. Papandreas advised that Boynton Beach may receive the housing needs assessment from the DCA, which is pending. New information will be brought into the 4 MINUTES - SPECIAL CITY COMMISSION/PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MARCH 25, 1996 process throughout the next 90 days and throughout the year, between the time the evaluation report is adopted and the time that the plan amendments have to be adopted. In summary, Ms. Papandreas stated that we are about to embark with the City on a reflective process and we hope to work with the community to meet the externally imposed requirements of the DCA; but more importantly, in this go-round, to make a plan for the City of Boynton Beach that is more meaningful to the Community. Mayor Taylor asked when the 90 day period begins. Ms. Papandreas stated that the 90 days will start from the time we transmit the draft of the EAR to Tallahassee, which is approximately May 1st. The City will be asked to adopt it 90 days after that. Ms. Papandreas distributed a condensed version cf the objectives of the Boynton Beach Comprehensive Plan. Since her firm was hired to work with us, she has been going through our plan and its objectives in great detail and has come up with a number of conclusions that have led her to extract an abbreviated set of objectives from the overall objectives that are adopted in the Comprehensive Plan. Like most Communities in FlOrida, Boynton Beach was not unique. Most of the objectives in the plan that was adopted in 1989 did not meet their needs. Most of them were procedural objectives that were meant to satisfy the DCA's requirements and had very little relevance to the community. Approximately half of the objectives on the excerpted pages are objectives that appear to relate more to the community's initiatives. She stated that there is one objective relating to redevelopment. However, since the plan was adopted, almost all of our planning efforts have been directed to redevelopment. As a community, we focused on that in great detail. In trying to evaluate our plan, there are three redeyelopment plans to look at. As we go through this process, she encouraged the Com~nission and Planning and Development Board to help refine those redevelopment plan~ into meaningful goals and objectives to put in the Comprehensive Plan to follow (to extract the things they want to enforce and that are important to the community as part Of the overall adopted land use element). Ms. Papandreas advised that one of the preliminary findings is that our plan has some very important implications for neighborhoods in both the Land Use Element and in the Recrbation and Open Space Element. However, the presentation and the priority that was (.liven to those neighborhood issues is relatively subordinate. It appears from the discu ~sions that she had with staff that neighborhood issues are an important priority for th .~ community, and she recommended restructuring the plan to bring those neigh borhood objectives out and reformat the plan to make them a centerpiece. 5 MINUTES - SPECIAL CITY COMMISSION/PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MARCH 25, 1996 She noted that the annexation rate has been relatively slow. The City has annexed 400 acres since the plan was adopted, at a rate of approximately 80 acres per year. This has led to reduced population estimates and reduced population projections for the future. If the community desires to reach the higher population projections that were initially included in the plan, then, among other things, the rate of annexation would likely have to increase to accomplish that. Commissioner Bradley asked how much of the anticipated population for the year 2020 had to do with annexation and how much had to do with buildout. He asked what the popu!ation projection would be at buildout if we did not annex anymore. Ms. Papandreas advised that it was not broken out that way. As she recalls, 10 to 15 percent of the land was vacant. Mike Rumpf, Senior Planner, stated that 75 percent or greater was assumed to be in the City because there was an unofficial policy that annexation would be limited to Lawrence Road. That changed very quickly after the plan Was adopted. Therefore, annexation was assumed to really only include those proPerties around the perimeter. Shortly after the plan was adopted, we basically eliminated that limit. Ms. Papandreas stated that our plan had projected that by 1990, the resident population would be 48,514, but it turned out to be 46,237. By 1995, we had projected that we would grow to 55,943, but the 1995 estimate was 49,085. Therefore, the gap appears to be widening between what was projected and what has been accomplished. Currently, there are some issues going on with the Census Department that may mean that the current estimate is too Iow. But right now, the estimate we have to deal with says ~hat the City of Boynton Beach had 49,000 people in 1995, whereas the previous plan had projected 55,900. Commissioner Bradley spoke of the importance of an organizational structure in neighborhoods. He advised that we are in the midst of hiring a neighborhood association staff person. He asked Ms. Papandreas if this is the sort of thing that she would suggest we put into the Comprehensive Plan. Ms. Papandreas adviSed that from the slandpoint of land use and from the standpoint of housing, she thinks the kinds of things that the Comprehensive Plan can do to reinforce the integrity of the neiglTborhoods and the long term preservation of the housing stock are very important for a ~)uilt out community. Whether we want to make them measurable objectives or policies in support of measurable objectives is something we will determine down the road.! However, getting ideas like that out on the table and into the process is very important. 6 MINUTES - SPECIAL CITY COMMISSION/PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MARCH 25, 1996 She stated that at the staff meeting this afternoon, one of the issues that came up was connectivity of neighborhoods. Where some of the law enforcement uniform services support greater connections between neighborhoods, some of the other services discourage it. She said it may be too ambitious right now to think that we could reach a consensus on that for the overall Comprehensive Plan, but nonetheless, it is the sort of issue that the comprehensive planning process can address. Ms. Papandreas distributed a checklist of the changes to the State rules that govern comprehensive planning since our last plan was adopted. Some of changes are very minor wording issues, and some of them are very major. She addressed a few of the issues that will affect the City of Boynton Beach. Under the Future Land Use category, the DCA has finally defined urban sprawl. For about the past seven or eight years, they have been telling us not to do it. Now they finally defined and put into code what it is that we are not supposed to do. It is not a major issue for the City of Boynton Beach becaQse Boynton Beach is not the sort of jurisdiction that has to deal with urban sprawl. However, she mentioned this because it may turn up as an objective later, and it would help to know where it came from. Something more important to the City of Boynton Beach is increased coordination with the S~hool Board. The Comprehensive Plan is going to be required to indicate future land use categories in which schools can be placed and to create a presumption that schools may go in there without undue local review. Increased coordination will be mandated for the School Board to join with the City in finding and implementing Iocatigns for schools. A third issue is that we will need to designate dredge spoil disposal sites on the Comprehensive Plan on the Future Land Use Element. There is currently one in the navigation site that is used as a park. In order to continue to show it as a park, we may need to confirm that this will not be needed during the course of the plan for dredge spoil disposal. She stated that it will take a little coordination to confirm with F.I.N.D., who ewns it and has not given Boynton Beach an agreement that will outlast the duration of the plan, that we can continue to show it as a park rather than a future dredge spoil disposal. Right now, she is in the process of raising issues that are going to have to be settled ultimately. We have some major opportunities in the area of transportation. We have been mandated to broaden the scope of the old Traffic Circulation Element to include mass trans!t and rapid transit (Palm Tran and Tri-Rail), bicycle circulation, pedestrian circula, tion, airports, and seaports. There are no airports or seaports in Boynton Beach, 7 MINUTES - SPECIAL CITY COMMISSION/PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MARCH 25, 1996 so we will have to put in a disclaimer that this is not applicable. In regard to the bicycle and pedestrian circulation issues, Boynton Beach has some exciting opportunities. One of the recommendations in one of our redevelopment plans was for beautification, to go along with the rebuilt bridge across the Intracoastal on Ocean Avenue. We can put that into the Transportation Element of the plan if that is what the community wants. When the bridge is built, we want those City beautification issues carried out in the design. Therefore, we have some opportunities to make connections between what the community has been doing all along in its ongoing development projects, and to wrap those into the Comprehensive Planning Process and make it a much stronger document. The requirements under the Housing Element have been broadened. However, this does not mean that every single aspect of housing needs will have to be accommodated in the City of Boynton Beach. For example, if the community feels that housing the homeless is best accommodated on a regional basis, there may be a recommendation to participate in a consortium to find multi-jurisdictional solutions for housing issues. We will be given a housing needs assessment from the DCA. We will be required to respond to it in revising a Comprehensive Plan. In summary, those are the major areas of State law revision. City Manager Parker asked how we are going to develop policies to address each of these points. She asked Ms. Papandreas if she is going to make recommendations for the Commission to consider or if the Commission is supposed to generate their own thoughts. Ms. Papandreas advised that the procedure for adopting the EAR, which is ultimately going to lead to revising the Comprehensive Plan, is very iterative. For instance, there will be a notation in the EAR that says the City must adopt policies for additional dredge disposal sites. That will get put into the EAR document as basically just a suggested recommendation. There can be as much initiative as the City Commission and Planning and Development Board want to institute at this time. If the Commission and community feel strongly enough that they know what they want those policies to say, it can be as specific as the Commission wishes, or it can be general and we could say that we will address it sometime over the next year when we revise the plan. The end product is going to be the revision of the Comprehensive Plan, and that wilt take place within one year after adoption of the EAR. Therefore, where the actual wording comes in is going to depend on when the community develops that wording. It will be no later than when the plan is amended. Mr. Rumpf stated that those changes could come by way of general recommendations that are either within the matrix which Ms. Papandreas is going to go through, or it will MINUTES - SPECIAL CITY COMMISSION/PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MARCH 25, 1996 be in separate recommendation sections. Then in the coming year, the exact language would be created. City Manager Parker asked if we have the option to decline to investigate a policy. Ms. Papandreas did not think the City has that option if they want the plan approved. She suggested that the more prudent direction would be to investigate it and have a finding that it is not appropriate. Commissioner Titcomb stated that in about a month from now, a group of over 100 people will be going into the Visions process and coming out with a blueprint document of their vision for the City. He asked how that would be woven into the Comprehensive Plan document so that it is cohesive and accurate of the community vision. Ms. Papandreas stated that the document that will come from the Vision Assembly will be created after the EAR is transmitted to the State, but before the EAR is adopted. Therefore, when those results are available, we will get busy and interpret those recommendations in the same format as the Comprehensive Plan and incorporate them as recommendations of the EAR. Mr. Rosenstock asked if there is a deadline set by the State for submittal. Ms. Papandreas advised that it is required to go to the DCA by May 1st. Mr. Rosenstock felt the findings of the Visions Assembly should first be discussed with the community and the Commission, and that this would be cutting it close. He felt we should see if we can get a time extension. Mayor Taylor pointed out that we do not have an option. We have to submit the plan by May 1st to the State. They will review it and then we will have 90 days to make revisions. During that 90 days, we will try to incorporate whatever comes out of Visions Assembly. Mr. Rosenstock questioned whetl~er this would be considered a revision or an injection of a new thought into a plan that has already been submitted. Mayor Taylor pointed out that we can make the plan broad enough so that almost anything will fit into it. Vice Mayor Jaskiewicz asked if there is any flexibility with regard to the initial submittal date. Ms. Papandreas advised that, officially, there is no flexibility. She said there are no sanctions if we do not meet the 90 day presubmittal deadline. However, she does not recommend that we do that. The only sanction that would occur if we fail to adopt the EAR on the required date, is that we will not be allowed to amend the plan until we do se. She recommended not taking anything out of it once we send it up for sufficlency, unless the community feels very strongly about it. 9 MINUTES - SPECIAL CITY COMMISSION/PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MARCH 25, 1996 In reviewing the City's goals and objectives and balancing them with what has been done, and balancing what has been done with what has been written, Ms. Papandreas said it seems that the greatest need and direction as to where the City wants to go is included in the Intergovernmental Coordination Element. This element talks about how we are going to deal with other governments, and gives the clearest picture as to what the City of Boynton Beach wants. She stated that this is unlike most of the communities that she has worked in. With regard to the new policies, Mayor Taylor asked if we have to revise our policy even if we feel we are already addressing that policy in our Comprehensive Plan. Ms. Papandreas explained the Objectives Achievement Matrix. The column titled "Objective" was taken verbatim from the plan. In most cases, the column titled "Measurable Target" was not taken verbatim from the plan because no measurable targets were included. They were interpreted generally from the policies that were listed; under the objective. "Baseline Conditions" are the conditions that existed at the time the plan was adopted, and are pretty sketchy in most cases. "Current Conditions" contains her current evaluations. They are presently being reviewed and corrected by staff. Therefore, they will be changed as she receives better information. The column titled "Objective Achieved & Recommendations" contains preliminary recommendations. In some cases, that column is not filled out because she is still gathering information. In almost all cases, it may be recommended that the wording be revised. Many of the objectives were not written clearly enough to give a good sense of what the community wanted to do. The only objectives being recommended for deletion are objectives where a milestone was achieved and they would not have to be revisited. If something was done and is an ongoing policy, the recommendation would be to revise the wording to reflect that it is an ongoing procedure. She said we are not recommending taking out a lot, but we are recommending cutting back the wording on a number of them. City Manager Parker clarified the matrix as follows: Objective: The objectives were taken from the Plan that the Commission adopted in 1989 or 1990. Measurable Target: The target method to measure whether or not the City has met the objectives. . Baseline Conditions: Where were we in 19907 10 MINUTES - SPECIAL CITY COMMISSION/PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD MEETING i~OYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MARCH 25, 1996 Current Conditions: Where are we today? Objective Achieved & Recommendations: Do we want to change the objective? Have we met the objective, or should we reword it so we have more time to meet the objective? She referred to objective 1.10 and said it was her understanding that this specifically relates to the gas plant downtown and that there was much concern in 1990 about that plant being there. Therefore, a policy was adopted to eliminate it by the year 2000. Maybe the community is still concerned about this; maybe not. We have not done anything to move that facility out of the downtown area. If it is still a priority to relocate that facility, we need to start working on this or reword it to eliminate it by the year 2010. Objective 6.4 states as follows: "...allow for adequate sites for mobile homes in all areas of the City where single family detached dwellings are permitted." City Manager Parker felt this was in conflict with how the present Commission feels and asked where this objective came from. This was the first time she has ever heard that we were trying to encourage mobile homes in the City of Boynton Beach. She asked if we still want this as a policy. She pointed out that staff has been discouraging mobile homes. If this is not something we want to do, we should delete it. Vice Mayor Jaskiewicz recalls that in 1990, a very limited amount of time was given to remove the gas complex on Federal Highway, and they were looking for a place to relocate it. Mr. Rosenstock recalled that the City was supposed to give them a deadline to move out and retake that property. Commissioner Bradley recalled that there was concern about the gas plant being there because of the Persian Gulf War. However, a study disclosed that it did not put anybody at any more of a risk than if it was someplace else. Mr. Rosenstock suggested putting this particular issue, and the mobile home issue, on a City Commission agenda in the near future. City Manager Parker advised that there will be a series of workshops to review each of these items. She asked if Ms. Papandreas would like the Commission to review each objective separately. Ms. Papandreas felt the discussion would be more meaningful if it is adCtressed in a more general fashion. MINUTES - SPECIAL CITY COMMISSION/PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MARCH 25, 1996 Mayor Taylor pointed out that he had no idea that the intent of Objective 1.10 had to do with the gas plant. This put a whole different light on how he looks at that objective. Therefore, he felt we need to look at each objective. City Manager Parker stated that that almost needs to be done on a staff level because she does not know the history of each objective. Commissioner Tillman felt fact sheets need to be developed for each objective. His recollection of Objective 1.10 was that it was generated by an accident which happened in 1976 or 1977 which nearly leveled that block. Ms: Papandreas pointed out that the time ~rame we are working under is not going to permit us much opportunity to develop fact sheets between now and the time that we have to forward the copy to the DCA for their review. She said we are going to be more concerned with compiling the information that we need to meet the deadline because we started the process a little late a~nd we are pretty much playing catchup. Commissioner Tillman felt the need to know!what generated some of the objectives. Mr. Rumpf stated that there are probably only a handful of objectives that are going to have some underlying history. City Manager Parker advised that those objectives could be identified for the Commission. Ms. Papandreas pointed out that we are not going to resolve every issue in the EAR. The EAR is kind of a weigh point toward the end result of having a new plan. On page 1-4, in the middle of the third paragraph, it states, "However, 10 structures were iidentified as being non-conforming commercial properties in residential zones." Vice Mayor Jaskiewicz asked if those 10 structures are still functioning in that zone. Ms. Papandreas did not recall having an address location for each of those non- oonfqrmities. She said that information may have been cited in a table and the speci~fics lost. Mr. Dub6 pointed out that the only thing we are really prevented from doing is changing sombthing that does not fit the Comprehensive Plan until it is approved. Ms. I~apandreas pointed out that if we do not adopt the amendments within one year after that, then our State revenue sharing will be withheld. Therefore, there is a bigger sanction at the end of the overall amendment process. Ms. Papandreas was committed to working to meet the deadlines. However, if the community feels they want morei time and want to relax those deadlines, that is their prerogative. ComCnissioner Bradley asked if we are following the time frame. Mr. Rumpf stated that we did not get started exactly when we would have liked to. 12 MINUTES - SPECIAL CITY COMMISSION/PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MARCH 25, 1996 Mayor Taylor suggested each Commissioner review the objectives and pick out the ones they have questions on. Ms. Papandreas said part of the issue is a little bit less on the retrospective parts. This is important and is something that has to be done to clean up the plan. She hoped the community will focus on what needs to be added to build up the plan. When we get the final EAR, these pages are going to constitute about a quarter of it. The summary of the current conditions is going to indicate what is going on now. Ms. Papandreas stated that we also have to consider the new information that she is going to bring us. For example, in regard to conservation, she is going to be able to show, us where the manatee habitats are and where the grass beds are, and the Commission may want to take a stand on preserving the grass beds or the manatee habitats. It will have to be determined how that new information is going to be reflected in the plan. City Manager Parker asked Ms. Papandreas when she is going to be ready to do;that. Ms. Papandreas plans to have a draft to the Project Manager in about two weeks. She has collected most of the information. She just has to compile it and write it out. Commissioner Bradley wondered if it would help for us to get an overview of each of the elements. Ms. Papandreas pointed out that there is a summary of the existing elements in the thick binder that was sent to the Commission. In addition to this written material, Commissioner Bradley was interested in staff's prospective. For example, the prospective of the road engineer who is out there working on the roads in traffic. Ms. Papandreas stated that time is of the essence and we need to get a draft to the DCA so that they can start reviewing it and let us know what was omitted. During the 90 day period between the time it is submitted to them and the time it is adopted by the Commission, workshops could be held. Commissioner Bradley added that we could bring in our experts as we need them. City Manager Parker pointed out that the Commission will have the staff comments from the departments also. Even though time is of the essence, Commissioner Titcomb felt there is a potential for the City to have egg on its face if this document is submitted to meet a deadline. He pointed out that the Visions Assembly might have an entirely different viewpoint on many of these significant issues. He would like to dovetail these two schools of thought together, even at the risk of missing the State deadline by a week or so. If the Commission feels that there is a compelling reason to delay the submittal, Ms. Bapandreas will talk to the DCA about this on an unofficial basis. She said Boyn~on Beach is not the first community that has made this decision, and the DCA 13 MINUTES - SPECIAL CITY COMMISSION/PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MARCH 25, 1996 does not seem to be taking a very hard-line view of it. She did not expect there would be any repercussions because there have not been in the past. Mayor Taylor felt Commissioner Titcomb's point was very valid. He pointed out that a June 1st deadline versus a May 1st deadline would give us time to incorporate the document from the Visions Assembly into the Comprehensive Plan. Commissioner Bradley and Vice Mayor Jaskiewicz agreed. Mr. D~ubb pointed out that this only changes the 90 days to 60 days because the August 1st deadline cannot be changed. However, Mayor Taylor said there should be a lot less to change by then. Commissioner Titcomb stated that the quality of the brain power that may come out of the Visions Assembly may address this from angles that we could not as a small group, and actually make that 60 day period less painful. Mr. Rosenstock suggested calling an ad hoc meeting between City Manager Parker, the Planning Department, and the people who were previously on the Planning Board to dig up the background of the original Comprehensive Plan. The Commission could then address those issues in coordination with what the Visions Assembly comes up with. Commissioner Bradley felt the dialogue that will occur as we review this with the planning and development experts would be sufficient. Commissioner Bradley suggested reviewing a couple of the objectives this evening. Ms. Rapandreas felt objectives 4.3, 4.4, and 4.6 were issues that reflected conscious policy decisions on the part of the City that they might want to revisit in light of progress and bbjectives to date. Objective 4.3 is to provide for the continued existence of at least 175 percent of the acreage occupied by "A" rated ecosystems sites through the long term planning horizon. Ms. Papandreas said that was supported by ten policies that lcd to such things as a density bonus program to preserve sites and formally requesting preservation funds for the "A" rated sites. City Manager Parker pointed out that Since this Plan has been adopted, the Rosemary Scrub and the Seacrest Scrub havelboth been purchased by the County. She wondered how many more "A" rated sites ~ve have in the City, and if the purchase of those two scrubs meets the 75 percent acreage number. Commissioner Bradley assumed that two weeks from now, the staff comments would contain that information. Mr. Rumpf said that data has been colle¢ted. Commissioner Bradley asked if we could consider abolishing this objective if we de not have any "A" rated sites left. Vice Mayor Jaskiewicz wondered if we would 14 MINUTES - SPECIAL CITY COMMISSION/PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MARCH 25, 1996 keep :it and report what we have already accomplished in the "Objective Achieved & Recommendation" column. City Manager Parker referred to site number 32 on Table 4.1 (23.5 acre Mangrove; site proposed for CARL acquisition) and advised that this is the same property that we currently have under lease for the Mangrove Park that we now have preserved as the park. Aisc, the Quantum Park sites have all been set aside in preserve areas within Quantum. She asked if Ms. Papandreas is going through the objectives to see whether or not we have met them. Ms. Papandreas said the recommendation was to retain Objective 4.3, but to revise the wording of the supporting policies. City Manager Parker stated that if we have met the objective, we do not need to retain it, and this should be so noted in the "Objective Achieved & Recommendation" column. Vice Mayor Jaskiewicz pointed out that otherwise, it would look like we have not progressed in that area. City Manager Parker thought Ms. Papandreas and staff were reviewing the objectives to see if they have been met, especially the ones that are definitively measurable. She referred to Objective 4.1 (meeting air quality standards). She advised that the State is consiidering taking Palm Beach County off the air quality list because our total air quality has improved. However, we supported putting in the testing station. We have one of the two or three testing stations in the County. The Commission and the community supported that zoning and the construction of that. This is the way she would word the response to Objective 4.1. Mr. Rosenstock referred to Objective 4.6. Ms. Papandreas advised that this objective has not been met. The per capita water consumption has not been reduced. It appears that the current level of service of 200 gallons per capita per day is the level that is being provided, and that was the level contemplated at the time the plan was proposed. To reduce it by 10 percent would have meant dropping it down to 180 gallons per capita per day, and that has not happened. In fact, it appears that consumption has stayed the same. City Manager Parker pointed out five years ago, in orde¢ to meet this objective, the Commission adopted an inverse rate structure to assist in the water consumption so that the more water you use, the more expensive it is. She felt this should be listed under the "Objective Achieved & Recommendation" column to shoW what we did to support that policy objective. Commissioner Bradley asked if we are evaluating the plan or if we are evaluating what the pilan has accomplished, He thinks this is where we are getting bogged down. Until we figure out which we should do first, or how to do them if we are going to do them 15 MINUTES - SPECIAL CITY COMMISSION/PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MARCH 25, 1996 together, he felt we are going to be in trouble. He felt the plan has only been appraised and revised. He and City Manager Parker agreed that the evaluation part is totally missing. Mr. Rumpf felt not every policy lacks data, and that there are certain areas where there is sufficient information. He said he cross-referenced Objective 4.6 with the relatively equivalent policy objectives in the Utilities Element, and it references the inverted block rate structure that was adopted. Mayor Taylor felt the Commission needs more information to make an intelligent decision. Ms. Papandreas was not seeking decisions from the Commission this evening. The purpose of this meeting was to begin to address what is still a continuing community objective in the old plan and begin to surface issues for inclusion in a revised plan. Commissioner Titcomb had a concern about conflicting information. He pointed out that one document talks about a 10 percent reduction. Yet another document states that adequate volumes of water exist in the aquifer to support proposed population growth. He said it would be nice to have some professional facts that deal with those discrepancies and the types of aims that this plan has. The next joint City Commission/Planning and Development Board meeting on the EAR for the Comprehensive Plan was scheduled for Monday, April 22, at 6:30 p.m. in the Library Program ROom. 16 MINUTES - SPECIAL CITY COMMISSION/PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MARCH 25, 1996 ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the City Commission. the meeting was adjourned at 9:08 p.m. CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH ATTEST: ~ City,Clerk Recordin~ Secretary (Three Tapes) Mayor ~ommissioner Commissioner /~ssioner 17