Loading...
Agenda 02-17-15The City of Boynton Beach City Commission Agenda Tuesday, February 17, 2015, 6:30 AM City Hall in Commission Chambers Chambers 100 E. Boynton Beach Blvd., Boynton Beach, FL 33435 Regular City Commission Meeting Boynton Beach City Commission Mayor Jerry Taylor (At Large) Vice Mayor Joe Casello (District IV) Commissioner David T. Merker (District 1) Commissioner Mack McCray (District 11) Commissioner Michael M. Fitzpatrick (District III) Lori LaVerriere, City Manager James Cherof, City Attorney Janet M. Prainito, City Clerk *MISSION* To create a sustainable community by providing exceptional municipal services, in a financially responsible manner. 1"!`�wFVi't � Y www.boynton - beach.org Page 1 of 350 WELCOME Thank you for attending the City Commission Meeting GENERAL RULES & PROCEDURES FOR PUBLIC PARTICIPATION AT CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH COMMISSION MEETINGS THE AGENDA: There is an official agenda for every meeting of the City Commissioners, which determines the order of business conducted at the meeting. The City Commission will not take action upon any matter, proposal, or item of business, which is not listed upon the official agenda, unless a majority of the Commission has first consented to the presentation for consideration and action. • Consent Agenda Items: These are items which the Commission does not need to discuss individually and which are voted on as a group. • Regular Agenda Items: These are items which the Commission will discuss individually in the order listed on the agenda. • Voice Vote: A voice vote by the Commission indicates approval of the agenda item. This can be by either a regular voice vote with "Ayes & Nays" or by a roll call vote. SPEAKING AT COMMISSION MEETINGS: The public is encouraged to offer comment to the Commission at their meetings during Public Hearings, Public Audience, and on any regular agenda item, as hereinafter described. City Commission meetings are business meetings and, as such, the Commission retains the right to impose time limits on the discussion on an issue. • Public Hearings: Any citizen may speak on an official agenda item under the section entitled 'Public Hearings." • Public Audience: Any citizen may be heard concerning any matter within the scope of the jurisdiction of the Commission - Time Limit - Three (3) Minutes • Regular Agenda Items: Any citizen may speak on any official agenda item(s) listed on the agenda after a motion has been made and properly seconded, with the exception of Consent Agenda Items that have not been pulled for separate vote, reports, presentations and first reading of Ordinances - Time Limit - Three (3) minutes ADDRESSING THE COMMISSION: When addressing the Commission, please step up to either podium and state, for the record, your name and address. DECORUM: Any person who disputes the meeting while addressing the Commission may be ordered by the presiding officer to cease further comments and /or to step down from the podium. Failure to discontinue comments or step down when so ordered shall be treated as a continuing disruption of the public meeting. An order by the presiding officer issued to control the decorum of the meeting is binding, unless over -ruled by the majority vote of the Commission members present. Please turn off all pagers and cellular phones in the City Commission Chambers while the City Commission Meeting is in session. City Commission meetings are held in the Boynton Beach City Commission Chambers, 100 East Boynton Beach Boulevard, Boynton Beach. All regular meetings are held typically on the first and third Tuesdays of every month, starting at 6:30 p.m. (Please check the Agenda Schedule - some meetings have been moved due to Holidays /Election Day). Page 2 of 350 1. OPENINGS A. Call to Order - Mayor Jerry Taylor Invocation Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag led by Commissioner Merker Agenda Approval: 1. Additions, Deletions, Corrections 2. Adoption 2. OTHER A. Informational items by Members of the City Commission 3. ANNOUNCEMENTS, COMMUNITY & SPECIAL EVENTS & PRESENTATIONS A. The first City Commission meeting in March will be held on Monday, March 2, 2015 to accommodate the City Commissioners who will be attending Palm Beach County Days in Tallahassee. B. Consider areas of study for the Financial Advisory Committee (FAC) for the upcoming year. C. Boynton Beach Police Department will host the 2015 South Florida K9 Competition on Saturday, March 7, 2015 at the Boynton Beach High School, 4975 Park Ridge Blvd. The event runs from 2:00pm - 8:00pm. D. Proclaim March 2015 as Florida Bicycle Month. ! -141:elr_ll1111=1► Is] =1 INDIVIDUAL SPEAKERS WILL BE LIMITED TO 3 MINUTE PRESENTATIONS (at the discretion of the Chair, this 3 minute allowance may need to be adjusted depending on the level of business coming before the City Commission) 41_111 Lh I I Ll16111:7_11I U/ 4 A. Appoint eligible members of the community to serve in vacant positions on City advisory boards. The following Regular (Reg) and Alternate (Alt) Student (Stu) and Nonvoting Stu (N/V Stu) openings exist: Arts Commission: 2 Alts Building Board of Adjustments and Appeals: 2 Alts Cemetery Board: 1 Reg and 1 Alt. Education and Youth Advisory Board: , 1 Stu, 1 N/V Stu Employees Pension Trustees: 1 Reg Financial Advisory Commission: 4 Regs and 2 Alts Golf Course Advisory Committee: 1 Alt Historic Resource Preservation Board: 2 Alts Library Board: 1 Reg and 1 Alt Planning & Development Board: 1 Alt Recreation and Parks Board: 1 Alt Senior Advisory Board: 1 Reg and 2 Alts Veterans Advisory Commission: 1 Alt 6. CONSENT AGENDA Matters in this section of the Agenda are proposed and recommended by the City Manager for "Consent Agenda" approval of the action indicated in each item, with all of the accompanying material to become a part of the Public Record and subject to staff comments Page 3 of 350 A. PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO. R15 -018 - Approve and authorize the City Manager to execute an Agreement with Government Services Group, Inc. to assist the City of Boynton Beach to continue the Fire Assessment Program for the FY 2015 -2016 budget with the scope of professional services and specialized assistance in the amount of $17,500. B. PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO. R15 -019 - Approve acceptance of Lake Ida Deed from Palm Beach County. C. PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO. R15 -020 - Establish Administrative and Procurement procedures related to "Public- Private Partnerships consistent with Section 287.05712, Florida Statutes and establishing procedures for processing unsolicited proposals. D. Approve the minutes from the Special and Regular City Commission meetings held on February 3, 2015 E. Approve the extensions for RFPs /Bids and/ or piggy -backs for the procurement of services and /or commodities as described in the written report for February 17, 2015 - "Request for Extensions and /or Piggybacks ". F. Request cancellation of RFP #002 - 2411 -15 /JMA, "Interactive Voice Response System for the Development Department" and staff will re- advertise. G. Approve issuance of purchase order in the amount of $29,854.95 to Allied Aluminum and Railing for the purpose of repair and modification to fencing at Hester Center based on three (3) written quotes. H. Approve issuance of purchase order to Premier Printing Solutions of Coral Gables, FL for the printing and mailing of the City's annual report and calendar for an amount not to exceed $30,750.00. The award is based on three (3) written quotes. 7. BIDS AND PURCHASES OVER $100,000 A. Approve award for the "ANNUAL SUPPLY OF SODIUM HYDROXIDE (LIQUID CAUSTIC SODA) Bid No. 025 - 2821 -15 /JMA to Brenntag Mid -South Inc. of Orlando, FL as the lowest, most responsive bidder meeting all specifications. Estimated annual expenditure is $165,000. This product will be ordered on an "As Needed" basis. [: X010] 1]= We]► h1»/_1►[ s3=11111777TM14Xr1_1III&I=k0 14=1►h1=1►k &MLl - 9. PUBLIC HEARING 7 P.M. OR AS SOON THEREAFTER AS THE AGENDA PERMITS The City Commission will conduct these public hearings in its dual capacity as Local Planning Agency and City Commission. A. Approve Major Site Plan Modification request (MSPM 15 -001) to construct a four (4) story, 24,000 square foot mixed use building with medical use on the first two (2) floors and four (4) dwelling units on each of the next two (2) floors, and related site improvements. Applicant: James Comparato, Compson Associates Group, Inc. B. Approve Master Plan Modification request to Boynton Village & Town Center (MPMD 15 -001) to amend a 0.42 -acre portion of SMU Parcel #5 from 16 townhomes to a four (4) story, 24,000 square foot mixed use building with medical use on the first two (2) floors and four (4) dwelling units on each of the next two (2) floors. Applicant: James Comparato, Compson Associates Group, Inc. C. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 15 -003 - FIRST READING - PUBLIC HEARING - Approve amendments to the Mobile Vending Unit regulations of the Land Development Regulations, Part III - Chapter 1, Article II; Chapter 2, Article II; Chapter 3, Article V; Table 2 -1 Applications by City Departments; and Table 3 -28 Use Matrix 10. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT- None 11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS -None 12. NEW BUSINESS - None Page 4 of 350 13. LEGAL A. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 15-002 -SECOND READING - PUBLIC HEARING - Approve amendments to the Land Development Regulations, including amendments to the Definitions, Zoning Use Matrix, and corresponding Use Matrix Notes to establish a new use titled Medical Care or Testing (In- Patient) to allow medical uses that provide 24 -hour services or treatment. B. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 15 -004 - FIRST READING - Approve amendments to the Land Development Regulations to decrease parking standards for hotels to more closely match actual demand, which minimizes construction of unnecessary parking areas, reduces impervious surfaces, and lowers project costs. C. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 15 -005 - FIRST READING - Approve amendments to the Land Development Regulations to allow sign standards to be based on the commercial use within the M- 1 Zoning District, and to increase flexibility for modifying a non - conforming sign at a shopping center to promote economic development and aesthetics. D. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 15 -006 - FIRST READING - Approve amendments to the Land Development Regulations to support the continued implementation of the Downtown Transit Oriented Development (TOD) overlay standards, including provisions for a 25% density bonus for selected future land use classifications. E. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 15 -007 - FIRST READING - Approve Ordinance creating Boynton Beach's Civil Rights Act. F. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 15 -008 - FIRST READING: 1) Amend Section 18 -55 - Definition of Annual Earnings to clarify the exclusions of pay per Florida Statutes 112.66(11); and 2) Amend Section 18 -82 - Re- Employment to allow for the purchase of prior city service on a full actuarial basis after one year of reemployment by the city. G. Consider options for future administration and maintenance of the Quantum Park Overlay Dependent District including the following: 1. Continue current operations whereby future administrative actions and vision of the District are overseen by the existing Board of Supervisors and their elected successors. 2. Remove and reappoint the Board of Supervisors thus injecting new leadership and vision. 3. Dissolve the Quantum Park Overlay Dependent District and assume all debt and common ground maintenance. (STAFF REQUESTS ITEM TO BE TABLED UNTIL MARCH 2, 2015) 14. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS A. Update from Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council on options for Town Square project - 3/2/15 15. ADJOURNMENT NOTICE IF A PERSON DECIDES TO APPEAL ANY DECISION MADE BY THE CITY COMMISSION WITH RESPECT TO ANY MATTER CONSIDERED AT THIS MEETING, HE /SHE WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS AND, FOR SUCH PURPOSE, HE /SHE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDING IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. (F.S. 286.0105) THE CITY SHALL FURNISH APPROPRIATE AUXILIARY AIDS AND SERVICES WHERE NECESSARY TO AFFORD AN INDIVIDUAL WITH A DISABILITY AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY TO PARTICIPATE IN AND ENJOY THE BENEFITS OF A SERVICE, PROGRAM, OR ACTIVITY CONDUCTED BY THE CITY. PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE (561) 742 -6060 AT LEAST TWENTY -FOUR HOURS PRIOR TO THE PROGRAM OR ACTIVITY IN ORDER FOR THE CITY TO REASONABLY ACCOMMODATE YOUR REQUEST. ADDITIONAL AGENDA ITEMS MAY BE ADDED SUBSEQUENT TO THE PUBLICATION OF THE AGENDA ON THE CITY'S WEB SITE. INFORMATION REGARDING ITEMS ADDED TO THE AGENDA AFTER IT IS PUBLISHED ON THE CITY'S WEB SITE CAN BE OBTAINED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK. Page 5 of 350 3.A. ANNOUNCEMENTS, COMMUNITY & SPECIAL EVENTS & PRESENTATIONS 2/17/2015 CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH AGENDA ITEM REQUEST FORM •T•]► ail► hI&1111 Eel ►►hl=1 =k Il► Eel .7_rIf►ahIFIKIZN� REQUESTED ACTION BY COMMISSION: The first City Commission meeting in March will be held on Monday, March 2, 2015 to accommodate the City Commissioners who will be attending Palm Beach County Days in Tallahassee. EXPLANATION OF REQUEST: Three of the five City Commissioners will be traveling to Tallahassee for Palm Beach County Days which will be held March 3 -5. HOW WILL THIS AFFECT CITY PROGRAMS OR SERVICES? N/A FISCAL IMPACT: N/A ALTERNATIVES: Since a quorum of the Commission will not be available, the meeting must be rescheduled or cancelled. STRATEGIC PLAN: STRATEGIC PLAN APPLICATION: CLIMATE ACTION: No CLIMATE ACTION DISCUSSION: Is this a grant? No Grant Amount: REVIEWERS: Department City Clerk Reviewer Action Date Pyle, Judith Approved 2/4/2015 - 2:31 PM Page 6 of 350 REQUESTED ACTION BY COMMISSION: Consider areas of study for the Financial Advisory Committee (FAC) for the upcoming year. EXPLANATION OF REQUEST: The City Commission passed Ordinance NO. 10 -009 on May 4, 2010, that established the Financial Advisory Committee (copy attached). The Financial Advisory Committee acts in a purely advisory capacity to the City Commission. The Committee is submitting a list of study areas for the upcoming year for the Commission's consideration. The Commission may assign a specific topic /area for the FAC to review /research. The Committee's Chair is Steven Grant and currently has four (4) members. The committee has three (3) vacant member positions and two (2) vacant alternate positions. At their January 26, 2015 meeting the members put together a list of study areas for the FY 2015 -16 budget year to submit to the Commission for discussion. Since the January 26, 2015 committee meeting there has been the resignation of one (1) of the members. The current status of the Committee is that it has three (3) members, four (4) vacant member positions and two (2) vacant alternate positions. As a result currently the Committee will be unable to meet due to lack of a quorum until there is another appointment. HOW WILL THIS AFFECT CITY PROGRAMS OR SERVICES? To be determined FISCAL IMPACT: Non - budgeted To be determined ALTERNATIVES: Review list of study topics and either add, delete or modify to determine what items the Financial Advisory Committee will review for the upcoming FY 2015 -16 budget year. STRATEGIC PLAN: STRATEGIC PLAN APPLICATION: CLIMATE ACTION: No CLIMATE ACTION DISCUSSION: Is this a grant? No Grant Amount: ATTACHMENTS: Type Description Page 7 of 350 Attachment Other REVIEWERS: Department F inance F inance City t anager Ord 10 -009 Proposed FAte work topics Reviewer Action Howard, Tim Approved 6- coward, Tim Approved LaVerriere, Lori Approved Date 211012015- 8:17AIM 211012015 - 12:09 PY 211112015 - 11:06 Ai Page 8 of 350 ORDINANCE NO. 10- 009 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 191 211 221 E AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA AMENDING PART II, CHAPTER TWO ENTITLED "ADMINISTRATION," OF THE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH CODE OF ORDINANCES TO CREATE A NEW ARTICLE XVIII; PROVIDING FOR THE CREATION OF THE FINANCIAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE; PROVIDING FOR THE PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF DUTIES OF THE FINANCIAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE; PROVIDING FOR FORMATION, APPOINTMENT AND ORGANIZATION OF THE COMMITTEE; PROVIDING FOR APPOINTMENT OF THE CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR OF THE COMMITTEE; PROVIDING FOR CLARIFICATION OF POWERS DELEGATED AND RESERVATION OF POWERS BY THE CITY COMMISSION; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS, SEVERABILITY, CODIFICATION AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Boynton Beach, Florida desires to establish a Finance Advisory Committee consisting of nine 9 members (seven (7) regular and two (2) alternate members) to review the impact of legislative and administrative decisions on the City budget, revenue sources and operational expenditures and make recommendations that may favorably impact the City budget and overall financial condition; and WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Boynton Beach, acting in the E t1 interest of the citizens and taxpayers of the City amends the Code of Ordinances, Part II, Chapter 2, to provide for a creation of a Financial Advisory Committee. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA, THAT: Section 1. The foregoing whereas clauses are true and correct and are now ratified and confirmed by the City Commission. Section 2 . That Part II, Chapter 2, of the Boynton Beach Code of Ordinances is SXA \Ordinances \Ordinance - Financial Advisory Board v3.doc Page 9 of 350 !i 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 hereby amended by creating Article XVIII, entitled "Financial Advisory Committee" to read as follows: ARTICLE XVIII: FINANCIAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE Sec. 2 -240 Creation of Committee The City Commission hereby creates and establishes the Financial Advisory Committee. Sec. 2 -241 Purpose and Duties That Financial Advisory Committee shall have the general responsibility of reviewing the impact of existing or proposed legislative and administrative decisions on the City budget, revenue sources, and operational expenditures and make recommendations that may favorably impact the City budget and overall financial condition of the Cif By way of example, but not limitation the Financial Advisory Committee will be responsible for reviewing and making recommendations on: 1. The City's proposed annual operating and capital budget. 2. Budget development systems and procedures. 3. Analyzing and recommending sources of revenues 4. Employee salaries and benefits. 5. Pension and retirement benefits for City mployees 6. Operating expenses and controls. 7. Reducing or controlling debt service expenses 8. Intra -fund transfers and loans. The foregoing examples are not intended to limit the scope of financial review that the City Commission may assign to the Committee from time to time Specific tasks shall S: \CA \Ordinances \Ordinance - Financial Advisory Board v3.doc ►a Page 10 of be delineated b the City Commission by majority vote. See. 2-242 Organization The Financial Advisory Committee shall consist of a total of seven (7) regular members and two (2) alternate members each appointed by majority vote of the City Commission. Sec 2 -243 Committee Appointment and Membership (a) All members shall be residents of or own property in the City own a business within the City or be an officer director or manager of a business located within the City. No member of the Committee shall serve on any other City Boa or loll Committee. (b) At least five 5 of the regular members on the Committee shall have one IN 13 14 15 18 19 20 21 22 23 1 of the following qualifications 1. Certified Public Accountant 2. Accounting Professional 3. Finance Professional 4. Certified Financial Planner 5. Investment Advisor 6 Insurance Professional (property /casualty or health 7. Business Owner /Manager 8 MBA or MPA degree (with high levels of accountability /responsibilities with budget and organizational oversight) The remaining four (4) members may be at large. (c) Staggered Terms for Committee Membership. The initial regular members appointed will serve as follows: three (3) members shall be for a term of three (3) years two (2) members shall be for a term of two (2) years, and two (2) members shall be for a term of one (1) year. Their successors shall be appointed for a s: \CA \Ordinances \Ordinance - Financial Advisory Board v3.doc Page 11 of 350 1 term of three (3) years. (d) Reqppointment Removal Vacancy. All members may be reappointed, without limitation as to the number of terms served Members may, at the disc retion of the City Commission be removed with or without cause. A member shall be removed without action of the City Commission for missing more than four (4) meetings per year. Members that have been removed for cause may not be reappointed for a period of thirty six (36) months If there is a vacancy in the membership, the City Commission shall qppoint a new member to fill the vacancy. to 12 13 14 15 16 17 20 21 23 (e) Privileges Duties and Responsibilities. (i) Privileges Members will have voting_ privileges as set forth here Members shall create and implement rules policies and procedures necessary to carry out the Financial Advisory Committee's purpose in conformance with the provisions of the City's Code of Ordinances and State Law. (ii) The City Commission shall vote to appoint a Chair, who shall preside over the meetings of the Financial Advisory Committee and also vote to aqppoint a Vice -Chair who shall serve in the absence of the Chair. (f) Alternate Members Pursuant the City of Boynton Beach Code of Ordinances the City Commission shall appoint two alternate members. Alternate members will serve to fill a temporary vacancy or permanent removal in the Financial Advisory Committee Alternate members shall be appointed in the same manner as regular members and shall meet the qualifications set forth for regular members. When serving in their capacity as a alternate member, alternate members shall have the same privileges duties and responsibilities as a regular member, with the exception that S: \CA \Ordinances \Ordinance - Financial Advisory Board v3.doc Page 12 of 350 no alternate member may serve in a capacity as Chair or Vice -Chair, nor may any alternate member be moved to a regular member unless appointed by the City Commission pursuant to the procedure set forth herein. The alternate member's term of membership shall run only through the term of the vacancy they have filled. See. 2-244 Meetings The Financial Advisory Committee shall arrange for an appropriate time and pl ace for meetings. Sec 2 -245 Procedure for enactment and voting. All actions subject to a vote shall be enacted as set forth below. (a) Quorum The Financial Advisory Committee may not take any action unless a quorum is present A quorum shall consist of the physical presence of no less than four (4) voting members of the Financial Advisory Committee. (b) Voting. affirmative vote of a majority of the voting members present shall be required in order for the Financial Advisory Committee to take any official action No voting by proxy is allowed On final passage the vote of each member of the Financial Advisory Committee shall be entered on the official record kept for the meeting. Sec. 2-246 Powers Nothing in this article shall be construed as restricting curtailing any of the powers of the City Commission or the Charter powers of the City Manager, or as a delegation to the Financial Advisory Committee of any of the authority or express or discretionary powers vested and imposed by law in the City Commission. The City Commission declares that the public interest convenience and welfare required by the S: \CA \Ordinances \Ordinance - Financial Advisory Board v3.doc Page 13 of 350 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 appointment of the Financial Advisory Committee to act in a purely advisory capacity to the City Commission for the purposes set forth in this article. Any power delegate here to the Financial Advisory Committee to adopt rules and regulations shall not be construed as a delegation of legislative authority, but purely a delegation of administrative authority. Section 3. All laws and ordinances applying to the City of Boynton Beach in conflict with any provision of this ordinance are hereby repealed. Section 4. Should any section or provision of this Ordinance or any portion thereof be declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the remainder of this Ordinance. Section 5. Authority is hereby given to codify this Ordinance. Section 6. This Ordinance shall become effective immediately. {REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK) S:\CA \Ordinances \Ordinance - Financial Advisory Board v3.doc 6 Page 14 of 350 FIRST READING this day of �-' , 2010. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 2l 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 SECOND, FINAL READING AND PASSAGE this �-( day of 9 2010. CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA Mayor, 73 L. Hay Commis ' er —William Orlove Commissioner — Stev n Hol_ Vice Mayor — Marlene Ross .ATTEST: M. Prainito, MMC Clerk 7 Page 15 of 350 0 CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH Financial Advisory Committee - Study and Assignment Areas FY 2015 -16 IIe1. Item Issue Assignment 1 City Services Surve 2 Review possibility of establishing rant fund to offer grant opportunities to non-profit agencies 3 Review Vacant lots of the CRA and make recommendations to Commission to pass along to CRA board 4 analyze and prioritize unfunded existing city programs to consider for re-fundin 5 evaluate funding for existing small business & environmental conservation incentives & programs 6 explore and evaluate the fiscal impact of new small business and environmental conservation incentives & programs 7 Green energy replacement systems 8 Discuss with City Manager, Dept Directors and City Commission about potential areas of cost s 9 Review comments received on 2014 survey and confirm the most commonly stated comments for possible recommendations 10 Review and evaluate possibility of employee surve 11 S: \Finance \Financial Advisory Committee \Work Area Topics - Assignments\ / Proposed FAC Topics for FY 2015 -16 Budget (02 -17 -15 Agenda) / Revised 1 -27 -15 Page 16 Of 350 REQUESTED ACTION BY COMMISSION: Boynton Beach Police Department will host the 2015 South Florida K9 Competition on Saturday, March 7, 2015 at the Boynton Beach High School, 4975 Park Ridge Blvd. The event runs from 2:00pm - 8:00pm. EXPLANATION OF REQUEST: Admission is free for this event, which runs from 2 p.m. to 8 p.m. on the field of the high school at 4975 Park Ridge Blvd. Pets are not allowed. There will be tons of activities for the kids, including a rock climbing wall, bounce house, the SWAT team's interactive obstacle course, and Boynton Beach Fire Rescue's simulated smoke maze. Food, drinks, cotton candy and popcorn, and competition T- shirts will be available for purchase. The opening ceremony begins at 2 p.m. with a presentation of colors by the Boynton Beach Police Department Honor Guard. Taylor McNevin, daughter of Sgt. Richard McNevin, will sing the National Anthem. There will then be a special presentation made to St. John's County Sheriff's Deputy Farrah Ashe in honor of her late partner, K9 Baron, who was drowned in the line of duty while apprehending a suspect wanted for felony narcotics distribution on Oct. 7, 2014. The K9 teams will take the field at 3 p.m. for the obstacle /criminal apprehension portion of the competition. The hardest /fastest dog competition will begin at 6 p.m., followed by an awards presentation HOW WILL THIS AFFECT CITY PROGRAMS OR SERVICES? FISCAL IMPACT: N/A 0NI=1:7► Fill IU / *3■►1/_1 STRATEGIC PLAN: STRATEGIC PLAN APPLICATION: CLIMATE ACTION: No CLIMATE ACTION DISCUSSION: Is this a grant? No Grant Amount: Page 17 of 350 ATTACHMENTS: Type Other REVIEWERS: Department F inance F inance City manager Reviewer Howard, Tim 6- coward, Tim LaVerriere, Lori Description 0 Competition Flyer Action Approved Approved Approved Date 211012015- 0:13AIM 211012015- 0:13AIM 211112015 - 10:00 Ai Page 18 of 350 100 East Boynton Beach Blvd. Boynton Beach, FL 33425 Phone (561) 742 -6191 Fax(561)742 -6185 Stephanie Slater Public Information Officer SLATERS @BBFL. US (561) 436 -4806 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Feb. 9, 2015 BBPD hosts 2015 South Florida Police K9 Competition When BBPD K9 Bako takes the field at Boynton Beach High School next month, he'll have to run the fastest and hit the hardest to take home a trophy. His competition is fierce — BBPD K9 Filip and K9 Daxxx are in it to win it too. They will join more than 30 law enforcement officers and their K9 partners from across the state competing for the coveted title of top dog in the 2015 South Florida Police K9 Competition. In addition to the hardest /fastest competition, they'll jump over fences, crawl through barrels, climb walls and apprehend a few fake bad guys during a timed obstacle course. Admission is free for this event, which runs from 2 p.m. to 8 p.m. on the field of the high school at 4975 Park Ridge Blvd. Pets are not allowed. There will be tons of activities for the kids, including a rock climbing wall, bounce house, the SWAT team's interactive obstacle course, and Boynton Beach Fire Rescue's simulated smoke maze. Food, drinks, cotton candy and popcorn, and competition T- shirts will be available for purchase. The opening ceremony begins at 2 p.m. with a presentation of colors by the Boynton Beach Police Department Honor Guard. Taylor McNevin, daughter of Sgt. Richard McNevin, will sing the National Anthem. Page 19 of 350 There will then be a special presentation made to St. John's County Sheriff's Deputy Farrah Ashe in honor of her late partner, K9 Baron, who was drowned in the line of duty while apprehending a suspect wanted for felony narcotics distribution on Oct. 7, 2014. The K9 teams will take the field at 3 p.m. for the obstacle /criminal apprehension portion of the competition. The hardest /fastest dog competition will begin at 6 p.m., followed by an awards presentation. All proceeds from the event benefit the Boynton Beach Police Department K9 Unit. For more information, visit www.sfIpoI ice k9competition or call PIO Stephanie Slater at 561 - 742 -6191. Page 20 of 350 3.D. ANNOUNCEMENTS, COMMUNITY & SPECIAL EVENTS & PRESENTATIONS 2/17/2015 CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH ° AGENDA ITEM REQUEST FORM F COMMISSION MEETING DATE: 2/17/2015 REQUESTED ACTION BY COMMISSION: Proclaim March 2015 as Florida Bicycle Month. EXPLANATION OF REQUEST: The State of Florida recognizes March officially as Bicycle Month and Palm Beach County supports efforts to make bicycling a safer and more widely chosen mode of transportation. Considering the efforts of the City of Boynton Beach to create a local non - motorized transportation mapping system that will connect regionally with other facilities, the City of Boynton Beach also recognizes March as Bicycle Month. HOW WILL THIS AFFECT CITY PROGRAMS OR SERVICES? The recognition of Florida Bicycle Month will raise awareness of bicycling and ultimately promote physical activity and healthy lifestyles by elevating bicycling as a more widely accepted choice of transportation. FISCAL IMPACT: Non - budgeted None ALTERNATIVES: Not allow proclamation STRATEGIC PLAN: Positive and Exciting Boynton Beach Image: "Curb appeal" to Reputation STRATEGIC PLAN APPLICATION: This proclamation brings attention to Strategic Plan Action Item 5.2: Greenways, Blueways and Trails Master Plan Mapping Project and the important benefits that bicycling brings to the community. CLIMATE ACTION: No CLIMATE ACTION DISCUSSION: Is this a grant? Grant Amount: ATTACHMENTS: Type Description D Proclamation Proclamation for Florida Bicycle Month REVIEWERS: Department Reviewer Action Date Assistant City Manager Lejeune, Carisse Approved 2/10/2015 - 12:51 PM Finance Howard, Tim Approved 2/10/2015 - 12:54 PM City Manager Laerriere, Lori Approved 2/11/2015 - 11:09 AM Page 21 of 350 PROCLAMATION DECLARING MARCH 2015 AS FLORIDA BICYCLE MONTH WHEREAS, the City of Boynton Beach residents and visitors engage in bicycling as a viable and environmentally sound form of transportation and an excellent form of physical activity and recreation; and WHEREAS, the State of Florida recognizes March officially as Bicycle Month and Palm Beach County will recognize it locally; and WHEREAS, Palm Beach County supports efforts to make bicycling a safer and more widely chosen mode of transportation; and WHEREAS, Florida Bicycle Month features a number of fitness opportunities and events for riders of all ages to enjoy throughout the month at various parks and locations through Palm Beach County; and WHEREAS, the Palm Beach Metropolitan Planning Organization (PBMPO) plans and recommends projects to make bicycling more accessible as well as develops comprehensive public information and community education efforts aimed at improving bicycle safety for all ages; and WHEREAS, through these efforts Palm Beach County and its municipalities have more than 145 miles of designated bicycle lanes and 27 miles of shared -use pathways, with many additional miles planned, and WHEREAS, the development of additional bicycle facilities and innovative solutions will make the bicycling experience, at any age level, more inviting, comfortable, and safe; and WHEREAS, the recognition of Florida Bicycle Month will raise awareness of bicycling and ultimately promote physical activity and healthy lifestyles by elevating bicycling as a more widely accepted choice of transportation; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED BY THE [INSERT MUNICIPALITY], assembled in regular session this [INSERT DATE] day of March 2015, that the month of March 2015, in the City of Boynton Beach, is hereby proclaimed Florida Bicycle Month BE IT FURTHER PROCLAIMED BY THE City of Boynton Beach, that this proclamation is duly sealed, ribboned and executed by the members of this Commission. The foregoing proclamation was sponsored by Honorable Mayor Jerry Taylor and upon unanimous consent of the Commission, the Mayor declared the proclamation duly enacted. Page 22 of 350 5.A. ADMINISTRATIVE 2/17/2015 CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH "• - AGENDA ITEM REQUEST FORM COMMISSION MEETING DATE: 2/17/2015 REQUESTED ACTION BY COMMISSION: Appoint eligible members of the community to serve in vacant positions on City advisory boards Regular (Reg) and Alternate (Alt) Student (Stu) and Nonvoting Stu (N/V Stu) openings exist: Arts Commission: 2 Alts Building Board of Adjustments and Appeals: 2 Alts Cemetery Board: 1 Reg and 1 Alt. Education and Youth Advisory Board: , 1 Stu, 1 N/V Stu Employees Pension Trustees: 1 Reg Financial Advisory Commission: 4 Regs and 2 Alts Golf Course Advisory Committee: 1 Alt Historic Resource Preservation Board: 2 Alts Library Board: 1 Reg and 1 Alt Planning & Development Board: 1 Alt Recreation and Parks Board: 1 Alt Senior Advisory Board: 1 Reg and 2 Alts Veterans Advisory Commission: 1 Alt The following EXPLANATION OF REQUEST: The attached list contains the names of those who have applied for vacancies on the various Advisory Boards. A list of vacancies is provided with the designated Commission members having responsibility for the appointment to fill each vacancy. HOW WILL THIS AFFECT CITY PROGRAMS OR SERVICES? Appointments are necessary to keep our Advisory Board full and operating as effectively as possible. FISCAL IMPACT: Non - budgeted None ALTERNATIVES: Allow vacancies to remain unfilled. STRATEGIC PLAN: STRATEGIC PLAN APPLICATION: CLIMATE ACTION: No CLIMATE ACTION DISCUSSION: Is this a grant? No Grant Amount: REVIEWERS: Department Reviewer Action Date City Clerk Pyle, Judith Approved 2/4/2015 - 12:14 PM Page 23 of 350 6.A. CONSENT AGENDA 2/17/2015 REQUESTED ACTION BY COMMISSION: PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO. R15 -018 - Approve and authorize the City Manager to execute an Agreement with Government Services Group, Inc. to assist the City of Boynton Beach to continue the Fire Assessment Program for the FY 2015 -2016 budget with the scope of professional services and specialized assistance in the amount of $17,500. EXPLANATION OF REQUEST: This request is not to make budgetary or Fire Assessment rate decisions. Instead, the request is only for contracting with Government Services Group, Inc. (GSG) to assist the City with the City's Fire Assessment Program for FY 2015 -2016. The City does not maintain the technical staff to obtain the property files from the County Property Appraiser's Office, to provide the required specialized analysis, or to upload the property files with the assessment rates back to the Appraiser's Office. This is the major need for which the City contracts for these external professional services. The City originally initiated a seven year Fire Assessment Program in FY 2001 -2002 through FY 2007 -2008 with a sunset provision in FY 2008 -2009 unless continued. At that time, in order to continue the program, it was required to implement a new Fire Assessment Program beginning in FY 2008 -2009. The Commission also approved the Program for FY 2009 -2010 through the current FY 2014 -2015. GSG established the initial methodology and provided assistance to the City for the first seven (7) years of the Fire Assessment Program. When the Program was planned for extension beyond those years, we solicited Requests for Proposals to assist the City with the new Fire Assessment Program. We selected GSG to continue with their service due to their familiarity with the City, proven methodology that stood legal tests and lower cost to the City. GSG's scope of professional services and specialized assistance in the amount of $17,500 has been held consistent under the current Continuing Services Proposal for the last six (6) years. The range of potential additional services primarily relates to mailing first class letters to (a) newly affected property owners ($338) and (b) all property owners should the rates be raised for the coming year ($42,930). For Fiscal Year 2014 -15, the estimated gross Fire Assessment was $6,542,093 reduced to a net realized assessment of $5,644,884 after excluding tax exempt properties. The Fire Rescue Assessments assessed and apportioned among benefitted property parcels follow. FY 14/15 Rates: Property Use Category Residential Non - Residential Property t Categories Commercial I ndustrial/Warehouse Institutional Nursing Home ( *)There is a maximum of 77,001 Rate Per Dwelling Unit $100.00 se Rate Per Square Foot ( *) $0.23 $0.05 $0.25 $0.25 square foot cap on non - residential buildings Page 24 of 350 The above rates for FY 14/15 only assessed less than 49% of the eligible Fire Rescue costs after excluding EMS costs of the Fire Department. If they were assessed at 100% of the eligible costs, the rates would be $202.00 per dwelling unit and approximately twice the square footage rates for commercial property. HOW WILL THIS AFFECT CITY PROGRAMS OR SERVICES? What Is The Fire Assessment? It is a non -ad valorem special assessment included on the annual tax notice that equitably allocates less than 50% of the cost of the City's eligible fire rescue services among all residential and non - residential property in the City that the Fire Rescue Department protects. All such properties are found to be specially benefited by the provision of the fire rescue services. The Fire Assessment can only be developed to cover costs of the Fire Rescue portion of the total Fire Department. Therefore, the cost determination must exclude Emergency Medical Service (EMS) expenditures of the Fire Department to determine the assessable costs. In turn, the assessable costs must then be allocated to property types (residential, commercial, industrial /warehouse, institutional, and nursing homes) obtained from the County Property Appraiser based on the percentage of calls to each property type. FISCAL IMPACT: Budgeted Funds were budgeted for this in the Fire department's FY14/15 budget underline item 001 - 2210- 522- 49 -17. ALTERNATIVES: Because of the inability to complete the tasks in -house as previously explained, a specialized consultant is needed to implement the Fire Assessment for the FY 2015 -2016. GSG was selected under the new Fire Assessment Program through a competitive selection process. Because GSG performed all services pursuant to their agreement, and given that the their rates have remained consistent for the last six (6) years, it is not anticipated that a selection process this year would result in any more favorable terms for the same services. However, if the City Commission does not approve the GSG proposal, the alternative which would permit the special assessment to proceed towards implementation for FY 2015 -2016 would be a new selection process STRATEGIC PLAN: STRATEGIC PLAN APPLICATION: CLIMATE ACTION: No CLIMATE ACTION DISCUSSION: Is this a grant? No Grant Amount: CONTRACTS VENDOR NAME: Government Services Group, Inc START DATE: 2/18/2015 END DATE: 2/17/2016 CONTRACT VALUE: 17,500 Page 25 of 350 MINORITY OWNED CONTRACTOR ?: No EXTENSION AVAILABLE?: EXTENSION EXPLANATION: ATTACHMENTS: Type D Resolution D Agreement REVIEWERS: Department F inance F inance Legal City Manager Description Resolution approving GSG Contract for 2015 -1 GSG Proposal Reviewer Action Howard, Tim Approved Howard, Tim Approved Swanson, Lynn Approved LaVerriere, Lori Approved Page 26 of 350 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 RESOLUTION NO. R15- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA, APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE PROPOSAL OF SERVICES (APPENDIX A) WITH GOVERNMENT SERVICES GROUP, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $17,500, TO ASSIST WITH THE CONTINUATION OF THE FIRE ASSESSMENT PROGRAM FOR FISCAL YEAR 2015/2016 AND THE POTENTIAL ADDITIONAL SERVICES (APPENDIX B) IN AN AMOUNT UP TO $42,930.00; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, Government Services Group, Inc., (GSG) established the initial methodology and provided assistance to the City with the Fire Assessment Program since 2001; and WHEREAS, GSG was selected to continue with their service when the Fire Assessment was extended due to their familiarity with the City, proven methodology that stood legal tests and offered at a lower cost to the City; and WHEREAS, contracting with GSG will preserve the progress that has been made to- date in the data collection /maintenance of this program. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA, THAT: Section 1. The foregoing "Whereas" clauses are hereby ratified and confirmed as being true and correct and are hereby made a specific part of this Resolution upon adoption hereof. Section 2. The City Commission of the City of Boynton Beach, Florida does hereby approve and authorize the City Manager to execute the proposal of services with Government Services Group, Inc., in the amount of $17,500.00 to assist the City with the CAProgram Files ( x86 ) \neevia.com \docConverterPro\ temp\ NVDC \9914D700- CAB2- 459D- B342- C3E7E1 D80AFF \Boynton Beach.825.1.Reso_ = Fire_ Assessment_ GSG_Scope_of_Services_15- 16.doc Page 27 of 350 1 Fire Assessment Program for 2015/2016 and the potential additional services in an amount 2 not to exceed $42,930.00, a copy of the proposed Scope of services is attached hereto as 3 Exhibit "A ". 4 5 6 Section 3. This Resolution shall become effective immediately upon passage. PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of February, 2015. 7 8 CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA 9 10 11 12 Mayor — Jerry Taylor 13 14 Vice Mayor — Joe Casello 15 16 Commissioner — David T. Merker 17 18 Commissioner — Mack McCray 19 20 Commissioner — Michael M. Fitzpatrick 21 22 23 VOTE 24 25 ATTEST: 26 27 28 29 Janet M. Prainito, MMC 30 City Clerk 31 32 33 34 (Corporate Seal) 35 W YES NO CAProgram Files ( x86 ) \neevia.com \docConverterPro\ temp\ NVDC \9914D700- CAB2- 459D- B342- C3E7E1 D80AFF \Boynton Beach.825.1.Reso_ = Fire_ Assessment_ GSG_Scope_of_Services_15- 16.doc Page 28 of 350 Gavernment Services a► October 29, 2014 Via Electronic Mail Tim Howard, Finance Director City of Boynton Beach 100 E. Boynton Beach Blvd. Boynton Beach, FL 33425 -0310 Re: City of Boynton Beach - Fire Rescue Services Assessment Program: Continuing Services Proposal Dear Mr. Howard, As you know, Government Services Group, Inc. (GSG) originally assisted the City of Boynton Beach (City) in successfully implementing a fire rescue assessment program in 2001, and since its initial year, we have assisted in the maintenance of the annual assessment program on behalf of the City. However, when the assessment program was initiated in 2001 -02, the City made the decision to "sunset" the assessment program effective Fiscal Year 2008 -09. Therefore, in order for the City to continue to use the annual recurring revenue source, it was required to implement a new fire rescue assessment program for Fiscal Year 2008 -09. GSG is pleased to have assisted the City in developing and successfully implementing this recurring revenue source in Fiscal Year 2008 -09 and has continued to assist in the maintenance of the annual assessment program. As such, we believe that the City would benefit from a continuation of our services. In order to continue this relationship and the achievements realized thus far, attached as Appendix A is our proposed scope of services, fees, project deliverables and payment schedule to assist the City in the annual maintenance of the fire rescue assessment program for Fiscal Year 2015 -16. We recognize the extremely difficult financial situation facing local governments at this time; therefore, we have decided not to increase our fees for professional services for the sixth consecutive year for existing clients even though our costs to provide these services, like yours, have continued to increase. Please review the attached scope of services and upon review and satisfactory determination, please sign where indicated on Appendix A to acknowledge acceptance of the scope of services and to serve as proper notice to proceed. Upon execution, please provide us with a signed copy for our files. CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS: 1500 Mahan Drive, Suite 250, Tallahassee, Florida 32308 1 T 850 -681 -3717 1 F 850 - 224 -7206 LONGWOOD OFFICE: 280 Wekiva Springs Road, Protegrity Plaza, Suite 2000, Longwood, Florida 32779 1 T 407 - 629 -6900 1 F 407 - 629 -6963 Page 29 of 350 October 29, 2014 Page 2 If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. We look forward to working with the City of Boynton Beach again this year. Sincerely, .a Sandi Melgarejo Project Coordinator cc: Lori LaVerriere, City Manager Mike Cirullo, Esq. Page 30 of 350 Appendix A CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH FIRE RESCUE ASSESSMENT PROGRAM ANNUAL MAINTENANCE FISCAL YEAR 2015 -16 Page 31 of 350 �Ti I =_1 MAINTENANCE OF FIRE SERVICES ASSESSMENT PROGRAM Task 1: Base Retainer Services for Current Fiscal Year Assessment Program Upon notice to proceed, GSG will be retained to administer the current fiscal year assessment program and maintain the assessment roll database. Such retainer services will include GSG's availability to respond to requests for information or assistance from City staff regarding all aspects of the current assessment program. In addition, GSG will prepare the critical events schedule for the upcoming fiscal year to ensure adherence to statutory deadlines and will maintain the current fiscal year database in a manner that ensures data availability to specific requests. Task 2: Update the Preliminary Assessment Roll GSG will import updated Property Appraiser data to construct the preliminary annual assessment roll for the assessment program. Corrections from the City will be applied to the updated data. GSG will then create the assessment roll by programmatically applying the business rules to the data and extending the rates to the affected tax parcels according to the methodology. Task 3: Pro -Forma Rate Scenarios As requested by the City, GSG will provide rate - scenarios to assist in budget analyses and assessment program planning. Task 4: Final Rates GSG will calculate /confirm the proforma schedule of rates based on the apportionment methodology and revenue requirements for the Fiscal Year 2015 -16 assessment program. Task 5: Preliminary and Annual Assessment Resolutions GSG will advise and assist the City's legal counsel in drafting the implementing assessment resolutions that conform to the existing fire rescue assessment ordinance and the City's policy decisions. Task 6: Implementation Advise and assist with the requirements for the adoption of the annual assessment rate resolution and certification of the assessment roll in accordance with Section 197.3632, Florida Statutes, including: (a) Produce Notice Roll and Data Exports After verification of final rates for the assessment program, GSG will create the notice roll by applying the rates to the assessment roll. GSG will then produce the data exports needed for the production of TRIM notices. Data exports for TRIM notices will be transmitted as necessary to the Property Appraiser's office, per their specifications. (b) Development and Distribution of First Class Notice Assist the City in developing the first class notice and its distribution to any affected property owners. Task 7: Create Final Assessment Roll GSG will update the assessment roll with any corrections and updates received from the City. Final rates will be verified and extended to the updated data in order to create the final assessment roll. The final roll will be provided to the City. Task 8: Certify, Export and Transmit the Final Assessment Roll in Conformance with Uniform Method Using the final assessment roll, GSG will prepare export files on compatible electronic medium capable of merger with the ad valorem tax roll files and will transmit the file to the Tax Collector in the prescribed format. Government Services Group, Inc. I A -1 Page 32 of 350 FEES AND COSTS For the professional services and specialized assistance described in the proposed Scope of Services, GSG's fee for professional services will be $17,500. Except as noted below, the fee includes reimbursement for all out -of- pocket expenses. The fee for professional services does not include any on -site visits by GSG staff to the City. Any on -site meetings may be arranged at our standard hourly rates provided below. All expenses related to on -site meetings will be billed in accordance with section 112.061, Florida Statutes. If necessary, in lieu of on -site visits, periodic telephone conference calls may be scheduled to discuss project status. The standard hourly rates for GSG are as follows: GOVERNMENT SERVICES GROUP, INC. Chief Executive Officer ............................................... ............................... $225 Senior Vice President ................................................. ............................... $175 VicePresident ............................................................. ............................... $160 Senior Project Manager /Consultant /Project Coordinator ...................... $160 Consultant /Database Analyst /Technical Services ... ............................... $130 Administrative Support ............................................... ............................... $ 50 The lump sum fee does not include the costs of producing and mailing the statutorily required first class notices. Mailing and production costs depend on the number of assessable parcels of property within the assessment program area, but average approximately $1.35 per parcel. Payment of mailing and production costs is due at the time of adoption of the initial assessment resolution or like document. For non - domestic notices, mailing charges will include the actual amount of postage beyond the domestic rate and if U.S. postage rates increase prior to mailing (currently $0.49), the additional postage per notice will be charged. The City is responsible for any and all newspaper publications, including, but not limited to, making arrangements for publications and any costs associated therewith. The City is also responsible for any costs incurred to obtain information from the property appraiser or other public official that is necessary for the assessment program. Please note that GSG works with the premise of developing and implementing assessment programs with an eye on potential legal challenges in an attempt to maximize both the efficiency and the effectiveness of any defense. Nonetheless, the fees outlined above for professional services do not include any provision for litigation defense. Accordingly, in the event there is a legal challenge, GSG would be available, on an hourly basis, to assist the City in its defense. Government Services Group, Inc. I A -2 Page 33 of 350 PAYMENT SCHEDULE The lump sum fee for professional services and specialized assistance will be due and payable, based on the following schedule and assuming that notice to proceed is received in December 2014. If notice to proceed occurs after this date, the payment schedule will be condensed over the anticipated number of months remaining to complete the project. Schedule March 2015 May 2015 July 2015 September 2015 DELIVERABLES SCHEDULE Payment 25% of professional fee -- $4,375 25% of professional fee -- $4,375 25% of professional fee -- $4,375 25% of professional fee -- $4,375 Deliverable Schedule Notice to Proceed December 2014 Ongoing Retainer Services As Needed Develop Preliminary Assessment Roll May - June 2015 Calculate Rates May - June 2015 Preliminary Rate Resolution June 2015 Prepare Assessment Roll June - July 2015 TRIM /First Class Notices July - August 2015 Published Notice July - August 2015 Annual Rate Resolution August- September 2015 Certify Fiscal Year 2015 -16 Assessment Roll by September 15, 2015 ACCEPTED AND AGREED TO APPENDIX A By: City of Boynton Beach Date Government Services Group, Inc. I A -3 Page 34 of 350 HOURS AND FEES MATRIX Task Total Hours Total Fees Task 1- Base Retainer Services for Current Fiscal Year Assessment Program Senior Vice President Senior Project Manager /Consultant /Project Coordinator Consultant /Database Analyst /Technical Services 4 18 8 $640 $2,880 $1,280 Task 1 Total 30 $4,800 Task 2 - Update Preliminary Assessment Roll Chief Executive Officer Senior Vice President Vice President Senior Project Manager /Consultant /Project Coordinator Consultant /Database Analyst /Technical Services Administrative Support 0 0 0 4 32 0 $0 $0 $0 $640 $5,120 $0 Task 2 Totals 36 $5,760 Task 3 - Pro -Forma Rate Scenarios Senior Project Manager /Consultant /Project Coordinator Consultant /Database Analyst /Technical Services 4 4 $640 $640 Task 3 Total 8 $1,280 Task 4 - Final Rates Senior Project Manager /Consultant /Project Coordinator Consultant /Database Analyst /Technical Services 4 2 $640 $320 Task 4 Totals 6 $960 Task 5 - Preliminary and Annual Assessment Resolutions Senior Project Manager /Consultant /Project Coordinator Consultant /Database Analyst/Technical Services 4 0 $640 $0 Task 5 Totals 4 $640 Task 6 - Implementation Senior Project Manager /Consultant /Project Coordinator Consultant /Database Analyst /Technical Services 4 8 $640 $1,280 Task 6 Totals 12 $1,920 Task 7 - Create Final Assessment Roll Senior Project Manager /Consultant /Project Coordinator Consultant /Database Analyst /Technical Services 2 6 $320 $960 Task 7 Totals 8 $1,280 Task 8 - Certify, Export and Transmit the Final Assessment Roll in Conformance with Uniform Method Consultant /Database Analyst /Technical Services Task 8 Total 4 4 $640 $640 Total Professional Fees 108 $17,280 Expenses $220 Grand Total $17,500 Government Services Group, Inc. A -4 Page 35 of 350 CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH ADDITIONAL SERVICES Page 36 of 350 IM11119 mil I! tiyaaW- ON -SITE VISITS Any on -site meetings may be arranged at our standard hourly rates provided below. All expenses related to on -site meetings will be billed in accordance with section 112.061, Florida Statutes. If necessary, in lieu of on -site visits, periodic telephone conference calls may be scheduled to discuss project status. GSG's estimated fee for professional services and travel related expenses for one (1) on -site visit to the City is $1,500. MAILING OF FIRST CLASS NOTICES In previous years, the City was required to use the Truth- in- Millage (TRIM) notice to provide notice of special assessments pursuant to a special act that pertained to Palm Beach County. The amendment to this special act provides that use of the TRIM notice satisfies the mailed notice requirement of section 197.3632, Florida Statutes unless the assessment is levied for the first time, the boundaries change, the purpose changes or the rate exceeds the maximum rate. Because of this amendment and based on prior discussions with the Palm Beach County Property Appraiser's office, it was recommended that the City provide additional first class mailed notice to property owners regardingthe proposed fire special assessment in past years. Should the City be required to mail first class notices to affected property owners for FY 2015 -16, GSG will assist the City as follows: • Assist the City in developing the first class notice; • Merging the pertinent assessment roll information into the notices; • Print and prepare the notices to be mailed; and • Mail the notices by first class mail. Mailing and production costs depend on the number of assessable parcels of property within the assessment program area. GSG's fee for this service is $1.35 per mailed first class notice, which includes all out -of- pocket expenses such as postage, envelopes, copy charges, etc. For non - domestic notices, mailing charges will include the actual amount of postage beyond the domestic rate and if U.S. postage rates increase prior to mailing (currently $0.49), the additional postage per notice will be charged. Payment of mailing and production costs is due at the time of adoption of the initial assessment resolution or like document. Government Services Group, Inc. I B -1 Page 37 of 350 NO RATE INCREASE Should the City not increase the fire assessment rates for FY 2015 -16, first class notices will only need to be mailed to newly affected property owners. Based on FY 2013 -14 information, the amount of new parcels that would need to be noticed would be in the 100 to 250 range. GSG's fee for mailing 250 first class notices would be approximately $338. RATEINCREASE Should the City increase the fire assessment rates for FY 2015 -16 above the maximum rates noticed in August 2014, the City would be required to re- notice all property owners. Based on the FY 2014 -15 fire assessment roll, the City would be required to mail approximately 31,800 first class notices. GSG's fee for mailing 31,800 first class notices would be approximately $42,930. ACCEPTED AND AGREED TO APPENDIX B By: City of Boynton Beach Date Government Services Group, Inc. I B -2 Page 38 of 350 6.B. CONSENT AGENDA 2/17/2015 REQUESTED ACTION BY COMMISSION: PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO. R15 -019 - Approve acceptance of Lake Ida Deed from Palm Beach County. EXPLANATION OF REQUEST: Palm Beach County approved transfer of a parcel of land on Lake Ida to the City of Boynton Beach for $100,000. To complete the conveyance the County has submitted a draft Deed, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit "A ". The City proposes a few amendments to the draft Deed, attached as Exhibit "B" which would: 1. More accurately describe future use of the parcel as a Greenway /Bikeway nature area rather than a neighborhood park. 2. Allow ten (10) years rather than five (5) years to complete ingress and egress to the property and to fully develop the Greenway /Bikeway nature area. 3. Grant the County a right of first refusal if the City intends to convey the property. HOW WILL THIS AFFECT CITY PROGRAMS OR SERVICES? Acquisition of this parcel will limit a more intense development of the property and will create a Greenway /Bikeway path system while preserving the natural state of this lakeside parcel. FISCAL IMPACT: Budgeted Expenditure of $100,000 - the funding is budgeted in FY 14/15 Park Impact Fee fund. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Not accept the conveyance 2. Accept the conveyance on the County's original terms; 3. Accept the conveyance under other terms to be negotiated. STRATEGIC PLAN: STRATEGIC PLAN APPLICATION: CLIMATE ACTION: No CLIMATE ACTION DISCUSSION: Is this a grant? No Grant Amount: ATTACHMENTS: Page 39 of 350 Type Resolution Other Other D Other Reviewer Action M ajors, Wally Approved Howard, Tim Approved LaVerriere, Lori Approved Date 211112015 - 0:41 AY 211112015 - 0:42 AY 211112015 - 10:32 AY Page 40 of 350 1 RESOLUTION NO. R15- 2 3 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH 4 APPROVING ACCEPTANCE OF THE LAKE IDA DEED 5 FROM PALM BEACH COUNTY; AND PROVIDING FOR 6 AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 7 8 WHEREAS, Palm Beach County approved transfer of a parcel of land on Lake Ida to 9 the City of Boynton Beach; and 10 WHEREAS, the City will pay to the County of sum of $100,000.00; and 11 WHEREAS, the City's revisions to the Deed will more accurately describe future use 12 of the parcel as a GreenwayBikeway nature area rather than a neighborhood park; allow 10 13 years to complete ingress and egress to the property and to fully develop the 14 GreenwayBikeway nature area; and Grant the County right of first refusal of the City intends 15 to convey the property in the future; and 16 WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Boynton Beach, Florida deems it to 17 be in the best interests of the citizens and residents of the City of Boynton Beach to approve 18 acceptance of the Lake Ida Deed from Palm Beach County as revised by City staff. 19 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF 20 THE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA: 21 Section 1: The foregoing "WHEREAS" clauses are hereby ratified and confirmed 22 as being true and correct, and are incorporated herein by this reference. 23 Section 2: That the City Commission hereby approves and accepts the Lake Ida 24 Deed from Palm Beach County as revised by City staff, a copy of which is attached hereto as 25 Exhibit "A ". 26 Section 3 : This resolution shall become effective upon its passage and adoption by the 27 City Commission. 1 Page 41 of 350 1 PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of , 2015. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA YES NO Mayor — Jerry Taylor Vice Mayor — Joe Casello Commissioner — David T. Merker Commissioner — Mack McCray Commissioner — Michael M. Fitzpatrick VOTE ATTEST: Janet M. Prainito, MMC City Clerk (Corporate Seal) 2 Page 42 of 350 PREPARED BY AND RETURN TO Peter Banting, Real Estate Specialist PALM BEACH COUNTY PROPERTY & REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT DIVISION 2633 Vista Parkway West Palm Beach, FL 33411 -5605 PCN: 00- 43- 46- 05 -00- 000 -5080 (a portion oO; 12- 43- 46- 08 -00- 000 -7070 (a portion oO COUNTY DEED This COUNTY DEED, made I by PALM BEACH COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, whose legal mailing address is 301 North Olive Avenue, West Palm Beach, Florida, 33401 -4791, "County ", and The City of Boynton Beach, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, whose legal mailing address is 100 E. Boynton Beach Blvd., Boynton Beach, FL 33425 -0310, "City ". WITNESSETH: That County, for and in consideration of the sum of one hundred thousand and 00 /100 Dollars ($100,000) to it in hand paid by City, the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, has granted, bargained and sold to City, the following described land lying and being in Palm Beach County, Florida: See Exhibit "A -1" attached hereto and made a part hereof (the "Property ") Reserving, however, unto County, its successors and assigns, an undivided three - fourths ( interest in, and title in and to an undivided three- fourths ( interest in, all the phosphate, minerals, and metals that are or may be in, on, or under the said land and an undivided one -half (' /z) interest in all petroleum that is or may be in, on, or under said land. The aforementioned reservation of phosphate, mineral, metals and petroleum rights shall not include and County hereby expressly releases any and all rights of entry and rights of exploration relating to such phosphate, mineral, metals and petroleum rights. This County Deed is being granted upon the express condition that the Property be developed and used exclusively as a neighborhood park open to the public without charge as part of a greenway /pathway system. City shall exercise best efforts to obtain unrestricted access to the Property by public road or private easement providing a minimum fifty (50) foot wide right of legal access, ingress and egress to the Property (Access "). In the event that the City fails to obtain Access to the Property and to develop a neighborhood park on the Property within five (5) years of the date hereof, then upon demand by the County, the Property shall revert to the County. After the time of such reversion, County shall refund to the City the $100,000 purchase price paid to County by City for the Property when, and only if, County is successfully able to sell the Property to another party for more than said amount. {00054797.1 306 - 9001821) 1 Page 43 of 350 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, County has caused these presents to be executed in its name by its Board of County Commissioners acting by the Mayor or Vice Mayor of said Board, the day and year aforesaid. ATTEST: SHARON R. BOCK CLERK & COMPTROLLER By: Deputy Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL SUFFICIENCY By: Assistant County Attorney PALM BEACH COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida In Shelley Vana, Mayor (OFFICIAL SEAL) {00054797.1 306 - 9001821) G Page 44 of 350 Exhibit "A" {00054797.1 306 - 9001821 } J Page 45 of 350 PREPARED BY AND RETURN TO Peter Banting, Real Estate Specialist PALM BEACH COUNTY PROPERTY & REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT DIVISION 2633 Vista Parkway West Palm Beach, FL 33411 -5605 PCN: 00- 43- 46- 05 -00- 000 -5080 (a portion oO; 12- 43- 46- 08 -00- 000 -7070 (a portion oO COUNTY DEED This COUNTY DEED, made I by PALM BEACH COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, whose legal mailing address is 301 North Olive Avenue, West Palm Beach, Florida, 33401 -4791, "County ", and The City of Boynton Beach, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, whose legal mailing address is 100 E. Boynton Beach Blvd., Boynton Beach, FL 33425 -0310, "City ". WITNESSETH: That County, for and in consideration of the sum of one hundred thousand and 00 /100 Dollars ($100,000) to it in hand paid by City, the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, has granted, bargained and sold to City, the following described land lying and being in Palm Beach County, Florida: See Exhibit "A -I" attached hereto and made a part hereof (the "Property ") Reserving, however, unto County, its successors and assigns, an undivided three - fourths ( interest in, and title in and to an undivided three- fourths ( interest in, all the phosphate, minerals, and metals that are or may be in, on, or under the said land and an undivided one -half (' /z) interest in all petroleum that is or may be in, on, or under said land. The aforementioned reservation of phosphate, mineral, metals and petroleum rights shall not include and County hereby expressly releases any and all rights of entry and rights of exploration relating to such phosphate, mineral, metals and petroleum rights. This County Deed is being granted upon the express condition that the Property be developed and used exclusively as a Grc,c 2kym - ikckyaN Nall1ral Arta, I open to the public without charge as part of a greenway /pathway system. City shall exercise best efforts to obtain unrestricted access to the Property by public road or private easement providing (50) foot wide right of legal access, ingress and egress to the Property (Access "). In the event that the City fails to obtain any Access to the Property and to develop a - QikckyaN Nalgral Arta, I on the Property within ) tcl (10 y ears of the date hereof, then upon demand by the County, the Property shall revert to the County. If 1I1c i ilk' stllisc gp�er1 v sells 1I1c 1 g .ra;rt Ella; Comily w ill lI<1 ve <€ rr 1i1 Of first rar[ilsal and if 111c, ri5111 is 1101 0111 Irci eld, 1111 -; i otinh kxill lea.; ) ,fid am f'tinds in excess of the $100.000.00 1laid bN the 01" In <rnnira�r tIic 1 v. After the time of such reversion, County shall refund to the City the $100,000 purchase price paid to County by City for the Property_;1r1. i a�i1l iC'. �I 1- {00054797.4 306 - 9001821) 1 Page 46 of 350 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, County has caused these presents to be executed in its name by its Board of County Commissioners acting by the Mayor or Vice Mayor of said Board, the day and year aforesaid. ATTEST: SHARON R. BOCK CLERK & COMPTROLLER By: Deputy Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL SUFFICIENCY By: Assistant County Attorney PALM BEACH COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida In Shelley Vana, Mayor (OFFICIAL SEAL) {00054797.4 306 - 9001821) G Page 47 of 350 Exhibit "A" {00054797.4306- 9001821 } J Page 48 of 350 Preliminary projected costs for improvements to the potential Lake Ida Bikeway /Greenway Natural Area Estimate by Mike Fitzpatrick 12FEB2015 Lake Ida Bikeway /Greenway Natural Area Improvements 4.85 acres of lakefront land 5 space Parking lot (A site plan condition of approval) Shoreline littoral zone creation (A site plan condition of approval) 19,500 square feet of sidewalk (A site plan condition of approval) Open roof gazebo Kayak launching beach approach sidewalk Informational kiosk 1 -95 facing "Welcome to Boynton Beach" sign Ped /bike bridge across the L -30 canal To County owned 189 acre Lake Ida Park (Will meet criteria for funding by the Metropolitan Planning Organization) Underpass of bridges over L -30 canal for 1 -95 and CSX railroad (Will meet criteria For funding by Florida DOT) Removal of exotic plants and re- planting Area appropriate native plant (volunteer labor) Tota I Total Paid by others Cost to City $500,000 $400,000 $100,000 $50,000 $50,000 $0 $100,000 $100,000 $0 $117,000 $88,000 $29,000 $25,000 $0 $25,000 $5,000 $0 $5,000 $15,000 $0 $15,000 $6,000 $0 $6,000 $500,000 $500,000 $0 $500,000 $500,000 $0 $60,000 $45,000 $15,000 $1,878,000 $1,683,000 $195,000 Note: The amounts for the littoral zone improvement, ped /bike bridge, and 1 -95 underpass are estimates based on short conversations with planners and are ball park figures. As the City will most likely not be paying for these improvements, different prices will not impact future City budgets. I have requested from District 4 of the FDOT the actual bid amount awarded for the El Rio Trail/ Yamato Road underpasses and may have that hard number by the Feb. 17 meeting. Over the years this estimate is the City will only end up paying about 10% of the cost of the improvements. Page 49 of 350 EMAIL Thread about the Lake Ida parcel between Nick Uhren, Director of the Palm Beach County Metropolitan Planning Organization and Mike Fitzpatrick Nick Uhren <NUhren @palmbeachmpo.org> Thu 1/29/2015 11:44 AM To: Fitzpatrick, Mike; Cc: Livergood, Jeffrey; You replied on 1/29/2015 12:34 PM. Commissioner, See below. Any status update on the city's intentions? Nick From: Eric McClellan Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 11:22 AM To: Nick Uhren; Franchesca Taylor Cc: Peter Banting Subject: Lake Ida Park 4` `! f� i ii • • Lake Ida Park — voted against a motion to sell five acres of vacant land adjacent to Lake Ida Park to a developer for private home development. The BCC directed staff to pursue conveying the land to the City of Boynton Beach for the creation of a city park. -- - - - - -- Original message -- - - - - -- From: "Fitzpatrick, Mike" Date:01/29/2015 12:34 PM (GMT- 05:00) To: Nick Uhren Cc: "Livergood, Jeffrey" , "LaVerriere, Lori" , "Majors, Wally" ,'Jim Cherof Subject: RE: Lake Ida Park Fitzpatrick, Mike Thu 1/29/2015 12:34 PM Sent Items To: Nick Uhren <NUhren @palmbeachmpo.org >; Page 50 of 350 Cc: Livergood, Jeffrey; LaVerriere, Lori; Majors, Wally; 'Jim Cherof <JCherof @cityatty.com >; Hi Nick, I have discussed the conveyance with Jim Cheroff, the City Attorney and he has made two changes: 1) Increasing the time limit to get full access from the owner to the north from 5 years to 10 years. 2) Adding a provision that if the City wants to "flip" the property, the County gets first refusal for the $100,000 and if it declines, the County gets any sales money over the $100,000 returned to the County. This was a provision I promised to several County Commissioners. A third change in the works to the conveyance is substituting for "neighborhood park" a term such as fig reenway /blueway ". The City has specific definitions for different open space usage. This probably should be added as an addendum. Over time with a changing of County staff, I am optimistic a bike/ pedestrian bridge across the L -30 canal to the County Lake Ida Park may be politically possible. Based on our few, brief, side bar conversations about this, I am telling people the MPO is mainly orientated to improving transportation. And if there was a direct link from the bridge to the Delray Tri -Rail station with bike and pedestrian sidewalks to the north funneling Chapel Hill and other Boynton Residents to the bridge, this is the kind of small local project the MPO is starting to fund. Secondly I am saying based on another conversation with you, Boca Raton got the underpass under the CSX railroad and Yamato Road to connect the two sections of the El Rio Trail funded 100% by FDOT because it was piggy backed on the overall $66 million interchange to park cars at FAU's empty stadium. Therefore FDOT funding a similar underpass for I -95 at the Lake Ida property is possible ... if we wait til they are doing major reconstruction in that area. That could be decades, but it is a funding source. The City Manager is putting voting for the property on the Tuesday, February 17th Agenda. Thanks for your update. Mike Fitzpatrick Lake Ida Park Nick Uhren <NUhren @palmbeachmpo.org> Thu 1/29/2015 12:40 PM Great news and solid summary. I think all yourpoints are right on. Thanks for the update. Nick Page 51 of 350 Support of the purchase of the Lake Ida parcel by the Mayor of Delray Beach The Honorable Gerald Taylor, Mayor of Boynton Beach and Members of Boynton Beach City Commission City of Boynton Beach, City Hall 100 E, Boynton Beach Blvd. Boynton Beach, Florida 33435-3838 Dear Mayor Taylor and Members of the City Commission: Delray Beach recognizes the importance of bicycle and pedestrian transportation as a key component of our City's economic growth and quality of life, In that regard, are enhancing our Bike-Ped Master Plan to make biking and walking more available, safer, and attractive. One major element of our Plan is to extend a Greenway from the El Rio Trail in Boca Raton to our northern boundary on Lake Ida, providing miles of hiking trails and bicycle paths for our citizens. We envision our Greenway running up to the Grimes Park acquisition you are considering. Such an infrastructure investment would benefit both our communities. 11 Best reg,. ds, Cary D. Glickstein Mayor CDG/dr c: Delray Beach City Commission John Morgan, Sustainability Officer Suzanne Davis, Director of Parks & Recreation Jinn Chard, Human Powered Delray Page 52 of 350 Minutes of the August 17,2004 City Commission meeting approving the concept of the Greenway/Bikeway Plan I aragm V F Commissioner MicCray inquired tf there was a date certain When the Commission would 1, recelve the p, Ilan. Mr, Wildner anticipates recellving the report from UIRS around ;?eptembler to approve this ftern because staff Mayor Taylor reported, that the Commission need's iias applied for several grants. 13 Page 53 of 350 Meeting Minutes I Or Reglul City Commission Meeting Boynton Beach, FWda August 117, 2004 Commissioner Ensler moved for approval. TIo4ion, seconded and unanimously carrie(d. Page 54 of 350 Minutes of the January 21, 2014 City Commission Meeting approving the Commission's request Palm Beach County Board of Commissioners sell us the Lake Ida 4.85 parcel B Evaluate potential property acquisition from Palm Beach County near Lake Ida R? rk Commissioner Fitzpatrick recalled in 2004 there was a greenways plan for the City Boynton Beach that has been dormant, The proposed acquisiti on is a portion of t plan that could be easily implemented If purchased, the property would provic 12 AlEETING MINUTES January 21, 20 "hat would link Lake Ida Park and the Dog Park with Caloosa Park and ultimate t pro aCoess to the Dog Park to; Hunters Run, GoNjew Harbor and Chapel HO Another option would be to sell the four acres to private development that woull increase the revenue from property taxes however, services would have to be provided Commissioner Fitzpatrick asserted acquisition would increase the property values of over 1,000 homes without additional services Ift tilt" I MALMO 0 Commissioner Merker interjected that he had suggested the millage rate be increased to 7 9 and it was an the record- Page 55 of 350 Vice Mayor Hay did not object to the acquisdian of the property, but was concerned with the access to the property- He had visited the site and could not gain access. Th.-, other question related to the maintenance costs, In regard to maintenance, there had been contact with the Environment Resour- - Management: Director,, Ray Rob and the size prohibited their involvement with t property,, Mr Robins would help find the expertise and funding to re-contour the sho to make a more natural lake and plant native species, that would be less expensii maintenance. Vice Mayor Hay understood the 111 Oth increase in the mitlage rate would be placed reserves, but not necessarily to purchase this pariicular piece of Jand- Ms- LaVerrie;_;� I reported there was discussion at the budget workshop and Commissioner Fitzpatria 13 MEETING MINUTES January 21, 2014 had, expressed lri�s proposal for the use of the funds, as did the other Cornmissioners., The ultimate motion was to [ncrease! the nnillage, but the funding was not appropriateii io any specific project. It would, by default,, go into the fund balance, It c beluses" ould at the direction of the Commission, Page 56 of 350 Vice Mayor Hay echoed Mayor Taylor and Commissioner Casello's remarks on the 3xlensive materials submitted. It was an outstanding job, Vice Mayor Hay added it was i°« need, rather an opportunity to control future development. Mayor Taylor suggested there may be funding from Rec reation and Park impact fees that could be utilized rather than reserve funds, Commission Merker asked for the recommendation of the Recreat,ton and Parks employees or any other department Commissioner Casello offered it may be premature since the purchase price has not been established- Commissioner Merker argued it was not © moot point: and the opinion of employees involved in parks should be considered 14 Page 57 0 350 MEETING MINUTES LYN t January 21, 2014 Vice Mayor Hay pointed out input from ail sources would be reviewed. The Commissi, remains the elected officials who make the final decision, not staff , Commission Merker agreed, if all, the information was considered, before the negotiations we undertaken blindly. Commissioner Fitzpatrick asked the City Attorney if access to the site could be made condition -of approval of any development plans. Attorney Cherof advised there we, r legal ways to achieve access to land4ocked property. The specific facts would cont 11 the use of a specific property. It is, probably doable. Commissioner Fitzpatrick f confident there; were other strategies that could be used to gain access- Commissioner Fitzpatrick was, surprised by Commissioner MerIker's lack of support the purchase, since it had been fully discussed when both were candidates for offic Commissioner Merker disagreed and noted he simply listened and never committed the purchase He was not against the purchase at this point, but wanted more ino from staff I Commissioner Filtzpatrick wanted direction from the Commission to instruct staff to negotiate with the County to purchase the property, Comm iissicner Casello reinforced, Commissioner Fitzpatrick's efforts to negotiate wil the County and come back with a final price and return to the Commission for a fin decision. Commissioner Fitzpatrick seconded the motion- Commissioner Merker inquired who would negotiate; the purchase since it did not appear It was within Commissioner Fitzpatrick's expertise and a professional should be present- Commissioner Fitzpatrick took offense to the statement, He offered the City Attorney should be instructed to draft a resolution and confinue discussions staff-to- staff, Commissioner Casello seconded the direction- The motion passed 4-1 (Commir's ion r Merker dis-seating). Page 58 of 350 Minutes from the September 3, 2014 City Commission Meeting ensuring the $100,000 for the Lake Ida Property was in the 2014 -15 budget A Page 59 of 350 3 4 51 6 7 8: 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16' 17 is 1, ,91 2D 21 22 23 241, Z5� 1 Z6 2 r 2 8 3Q 31 32 w RESOLUTION NO, 14-0 A.Ri;,so OFTHE CITY (70 Of THE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACIL FLORIDA AUTHORIZfNG CITY COMMIS MICHAE1, FITZPATRICK TO ENTER INTO NEGOTIATIONS WITH PALM BEACH COUN I'Y TO A('QUIRE FOR THE CITY 4.8,5 ACRVS Ol L.ANDLOCKED COUNTY-OWNED, URPLUS LAND AT THE IN',OI'll fi',N]) OF LAKE IDA. PARK; URGINC THE BOARD OF COUN�l'YCOM"NESS'IONIC "Il,'Z , '["()SOPPO,W,r']'RANSFBI OF THE LAND'I"OTHE CITY OF 1 OYNT05N REACH FOR N'0MINA1, VALUE NOT TO EXCEF-D $100,000; AND PIZOVIDINC AN EFFEC11VE, DATE,, WHEREAS, Bqyntonlkach City Commissioner Michael Fitz; trick has promoted the acquisition of land within Ow City of Boynton Beach Le cxp&-qd the City's open space and, greenway plans; ajid WHEREAS, ori janualy X 1 20H, the City Commission ol dv� C ity ofBoynion Beach appToved Comnii.ssic=),nei:,(°'it2 ooncvptual plan maid authorized C0#1111151"SS FUZ'palrick to rlegofir.Ac with Palm Beach Coujiqy and tO.TeAkArn bo the City Ccinimis w1kh a spccifitc proposmi - w'hiuli would facilitate, die Iransftr of tfze land from Counly to City ownership and wowd; and WHEREAS, theCity Comminion ofthe City of"Boymton Beach finds thatthe acclunsiti.w., of properly rct reuued. in this Re%olutiol[ advances the interest of the ciwer)s of Palm Beach County and, the City of'Boywwn Ruach regardless of . place of residency by prt�ening and i;xpanding public parks- NOW, THEIU4" ORE, UV, ITRESOLVED BY TIIF CITY COMMISSION OF THE CFFY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS-, svdion 1 . ® ref�mn,ce- The "Whereas dauses get fi fth. horeinaly.)ve an Incorporated herein by Soction 2: (or n-rnissioner 1 40wcl 1 i,S fflftbori.-wed. nq% of Palm Beach Counly el °ouuux the traivsferor4,85 acren of Page 60 of 350 5 6 7' 81 9 10 11 12 1.3 14 is '16 17 18 19 20, 21 22: 231 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 - `A�,AW a - vac.l,j-A 1,9.nLilc)� kc�(,ICOUTIIY-rJm!ncd surplus land at die north �'nd of Lake Ida flak and depicted on anached Exbi bi k ar Following no - gotiations" Cornmi5sioner Fl!lzll)aTJvk, wilb the assinance of the City Adrninimati,art am! City Attorney shall reluni a speeirkc wi proposal to the City Cojiu for firul aj.)provol, See tion I J . he Boud. of County is w tcj support the Cltv s proposal to acqwn� tfic -1,85,acres reference d. abow for nonillital value mmt to exceed $100,000. Svdion 4; This Resid ution shal utkc effed immediately urw)n passacTe PASSED AND AD (lti� 21 sl dav of January. 2014- OFBOYNTON BF.AO I Oorrvilaylor maims F I I M L P ri — NfC (lerk Cornmismoner -- kli chac]. Co Jot Casello 2 Page 61 of 350 Public Information drawings for the El Rio Trail /Yamato Road underpasses provided by the Page 62 of 350 FDOT. Completion date scheduled for 2017. Fully funded by MOT 6.C. CONSENT AGENDA 2/17/2015 REQUESTED ACTION BY COMMISSION: PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO. R15 -020 - Establish Administrative and Procurement procedures related to "Public- Private Partnerships consistent with Section 287.05712, Florida Statutes and establishing procedures for processing unsolicited proposals. EXPLANATION OF REQUEST: The Florida Legislature recently found that procuring public - private partnerships and unsolicited proposals serve a public purpose if such procurements facilitate the timely development or operation of a qualifying project as defined in Section 287.05712, F.S. The Florida Legislature also found that there is a public need for the construction or upgrade of facilities that are used predominantly for public purposes and that it is in the public's interest to provide for the construction or upgrade of such facilities. There is a public need for timely and cost - effective acquisition, design, construction, improvement, renovation, expansion, equipping, maintenance, operation, implementation, or installation of projects that serve a public purpose, including, but not limited to, educational facilities, transportation facilities, water or wastewater management facilities and infrastructure, technology infrastructure, roads, highways, bridges, and other public infrastructure and government facilities within the state which serve a public need and purpose, and that such public need may not be wholly satisfied by existing procurement methods. The purpose of this Resolution is to define the procurement procedures to be used by the City to administer unsolicited public - private proposals in a manner consistent with Section 287.05712, F.S.; HOW WILL THIS AFFECT CITY PROGRAMS OR SERVICES? FISCAL IMPACT: Non - budgeted ALTERNATIVES: 1. Not establish administrative and procurement procedures related to Public- Private Partnerships; or 2. Revise the Administrative and Procurement Procedures suggested. STRATEGIC PLAN: STRATEGIC PLAN APPLICATION: CLIMATE ACTION: No CLIMATE ACTION DISCUSSION: Is this a grant? No Grant Amount: ATTACHMENTS: Type Description Page 63 of 350 Resolution Resolution Establishing Public - Private partnerhsip procedures Reviewer Action Pyle, Judith Approved Byrne, Fancy Approved Howard, Tim Approved LaVerriere, Lori Approved Date 211312015 -2:51 PI 211112015 - 2:05 PI 211012015 - 5:04 PI 211112015 - 11:07 AIM Page 64 of 350 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 RESOLUTION NO. R15- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH ESTABLISHING ADMINISTRATIVE AND PROCUREMENT PROCEDURES RELATED TO "PUBLIC- PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS" CONSISTENT WITH SECTION 287.05712, FLORIDA STATUTES; ESTABLISHING PROCEDURES FOR PROCESSING "UNSOLICITED PROPOSALS "; ESTABLISHING FEES FOR UNSOLICITED PROPOSALS; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, as codified in Section 287.05712, Florida Statutes, entitled "Public- Private Partnerships ", the Florida Legislature found that there is a public need for the construction or upgrade of facilities that are used predominantly for public purposes and that it is in the public's interest to provide for the construction or upgrade of such facilities; and WHEREAS, the Florida Legislature found that there is a public need for timely and 17 cost - effective acquisition, design, construction, improvement, renovation, expansion, 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 equipping, maintenance, operation, implementation, or installation of projects that serve a public purpose, including, but not limited to, educational facilities, transportation facilities, water or wastewater management facilities and infrastructure, technology infrastructure, roads, highways, bridges, and other public infrastructure and government facilities within the state which serve a public need and purpose, and that such public need may not be wholly satisfied by existing procurement methods; and WHEREAS, the Florida Legislature found that there are inadequate resources to develop new educational facilities, transportation facilities, water or wastewater management facilities and infrastructure, technology infrastructure, roads, highways, bridges, and other public infrastructure and government facilities for the benefit of residents of this state, and that a public - private partnership has demonstrated that it can meet the needs by improving the schedule for delivery, lowering the cost, and providing other benefits to the public; and {00058142.4 306-90018211 Page 65 of 350 30 WHEREAS, the Florida Legislature recently found that procuring public - private 31 partnerships and unsolicited proposals serve a public purpose if such procurements facilitate 32 the timely development or operation of a qualifying project as defined in Section 287.05712, 33 F. S.; and 34 WHEREAS, the purpose of this Resolution is to define the procurement procedures to 35 be used by the City to administer unsolicited public - private proposals in a manner consistent 36 with Section 287.05712, F.S.; and 37 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COMMISSION OF THE 38 CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA: 39 Section 1. The recitals and findings contained in the Preamble to this Resolution are 40 adopted and incorporated as if fully set forth in this Section. 41 Section 2. The following rules and procedures will govern the process for 42 administering unsolicited proposals for the City to participate in a "Public Private 43 Partnership" (commonly abbreviated as "P3 ") 44 (a) The City hereby adopts and incorporates the provisions of §287.05712, Florida 45 Statutes "Public- Private Partnerships ", as that statute may be modified from time to time. 46 (b) Definitions. For purposes of this Resolution, the definition of terms all have the 47 same meanings as those terms are defined in F.S. § 287.05712(1), as those definitions may be 48 amended from time to time. 49 (c) The City may receive unsolicited proposals for a qualifying project and may 50 thereafter enter into an agreement with a private entity, or a consortium of private entities, for 51 a qualifying project', subject to the procedures and conditions set forth herein. Any 52 unsolicited proposal shall include sufficient detail and information for the City to evaluate the " See definition of "qualifying project" § 287.0571(1)(i) F.S. {00058142.4 306-90018211 Page 66 of 350 53 proposal in an objective and timely manner. An unsolicited proposal must, at a minimum, 54 meet the submittal requirements outlined in §287.05712(5), Florida Statutes. The term 55 "unsolicited proposals ", for the City purpose of distinguishing it from a solicited proposal, 56 means any proposal not made in response to a City announced and published Request for 57 Proposal (RFP) or Request for Qualifications (RFQ) or Invitation to Bid (ITB). Preliminary 58 inquires or discussions regarding project interest from a prospective proposer to the City or 59 from the City to a prospective proposer are not prohibited and such communications are to not 60 be construed to mean that the City has issued a Request for Proposal (RFP) or Request for 61 Qualifications (RFQ) or Invitation to Bid (ITB) nor do those communications prevent an 62 unsolicited proposal from subsequently being made. 63 (d) Application fee. Any private entity or consortium of private entities desiring to 64 submit an unsolicited proposal for a qualifying project shall submit to the City an application 65 fee of twenty thousand dollars ($20,000.00) payable to the City in the form of a money order 66 or cashier's check at the time of unsolicited proposal submittal. If the City's cost of evaluating 67 the unsolicited proposal exceeds twenty thousand dollars ($20,000.00) the application fee 68 shall be increased to an additional application fee to pay the costs of evaluating the unsolicited 69 proposal. The proposer will be notified and will promptly pay the additional application fee 70 needed to pay the costs of evaluating the unsolicited proposal. Failure to pay the additional 71 fee within ten (10) days of delivery of notice will result in discontinuance the evaluation 72 process and rejection of the unsolicited proposal. As provided for in F.S. § 287.05712(4)(a), 73 the purpose of this application fee is to pay the costs of evaluating the unsolicited proposal. 74 The City may need to engage the services of a private consultant to assist in the evaluation of 75 the unsolicited proposal and the application fee or additional application fee may be used to {00058142.4 306-90018211 Page 67 of 350 76 pay the consultant. The City will keep records of its direct evaluation cost and shall refund 77 any portion of the initial application fee or additional fee paid in excess of its direct costs 78 associated with evaluating the proposal. Refunds will be made within sixty (60) days of award 79 or rejection of the proposal(s). 80 (e) Public notice. If the City receives an unsolicited proposal for a qualifying project 81 pursuant to this section and the City has interest in pursuing the proposed project, the City 82 shall first notify the Commission of the receipt of said unsolicited proposal by placement of a 83 discussion item on the next available Commission Meeting Agenda. Following review, the 84 City Commission's disposition will be by a "motion to proceed ". 85 Upon the Commission's approval to proceed with said unsolicited proposal project, the 86 City shall publish public notice in a newspaper of general circulation at least once a week for 87 two (2) weeks stating that the City has received an unsolicited proposal and that the City will 88 accept other proposals (hereinafter "response proposals ") for the same qualifying project. The 89 notice shall contain a date certain time frame for response proposals to be filed. The 90 timeframe for allowing response proposals shall be no fewer than 21 days but no more than 91 120 days after the initial date of publication. A copy of the notice must be mailed to each 92 special district in which all or a portion of the qualifying project is located. 93 If the City Commission does not pass its "motion to proceed ", the proposer shall be 94 notified and the application fee refunded. 95 The City shall set forth in each such request for response proposals the criteria to be 96 evaluated indicating the criteria to be reviewed and the weight of each criteria as it related to 97 an over -all score or purposes of ranking the proposals (unsolicited and response proposals). {00058142.4 306-90018211 Page 68 of 350 98 The criteria may include, but is not limited to: professional qualifications, general business 99 terms, innovative design techniques or cost reduction terms, and financial plans. 100 The entity submitting the original unsolicited proposal may submit, without another 101 initial application fee, a more detailed proposal responding to the City's stated criteria for 102 review in response to the City's notice. 103 Any private entity or consortium of private entities desiring to submit a response 104 proposal in response to the City's notice shall submit to the City an application fee of twenty 105 thousand dollars ($20,000.00) payable to the City in the form of a money order or cashier's 106 check at the time of response proposal submittal. If the cost of evaluating the response 107 proposal exceeds twenty thousand dollars ($20,000.00) the application fee shall be increased 108 to a reasonable fee to pay the costs of evaluating the response proposal. The proposer will be 109 notified and will promptly pay the balance of the application fee needed to pay the costs of 110 evaluating the response proposal. Failure to pay the additional fee will result in elimination of 111 the response proposal from the evaluation process. Tracking of City direct costs and the 112 refund of any unused fee will be made in the same manner described above for the initial 113 unsolicited proposal. 114 (f) Receipt of response proposals. Sealed response proposals must be received by the 115 City Clerk no later than the time and date specified for submission in the publication. The 116 name of each proposer shall be recorded by the City Clerk or its designee, and the record and 117 each response proposal, to the extent consistent with applicable state law, shall be open to 118 public inspection. 119 (g) In the event there are no response proposals after the submittal deadline, the 120 evaluation committee may proceed with the evaluation unless the City Manager {00058142.4 306-90018211 Page 69 of 350 121 determines that the unsolicited proposal is not in the best interests of the City. In such 122 case, the proposer of the unsolicited proposal will be notified and any unused portion of 123 the initial fee refunded. 124 (h) During all phases of review, Members of the City Commission may 125 communicate with representatives or lobbyists of any proposer provided: 126 i. The communication takes place at a meeting coordinated through the City 127 Manager's Office; 128 ii. The City Manager or her designee(s) are in attendance; 129 iii. A record of the time, place and attendees is made and filed with the City Clerk; 130 and 131 iv. Prior to any Commission consideration of the proposals, a disclosure of the 132 meeting and the general substance of the discussions that occurred at the 133 meeting is made by the Member of the Commission who participated in the 134 meeting. 135 (i) Proposal evaluation. An evaluation committee shall be appointed by the City 136 Manager for the purpose of evaluating and ranking all proposals for based upon factors that 137 include, but are not limited to: professional qualifications and experience, general business 138 terms, innovative design techniques or cost - reduction terms, and finance plans. Proposers may 139 be invited to make oral presentations regarding their proposals. Oral presentations shall be 140 scored but shall not have a weight of more than ten percent (10 %) of the combined value of 141 the other criteria. Each factor used by the evaluation committee shall be assigned a weighted 142 value such that the total of values will equal 100 points. In the case when oral presentations 143 are made, the total value will be 110 points. The recommendations of the evaluation {00058142.4 306-90018211 Page 70 of 350 144 committee shall be submitted to the City Manager. The committee meetings and 145 communication between committee members are subject to Florida Sunshine Law. 146 0) After reviewing the evaluation committee's recommendation, the City 147 Manager will review the recommendation of the evaluation committee. 148 (k) The City Manager may: 149 (i) reject the evaluation committee's recommendation if irregularities 150 in the scoring process are evident and instruct the evaluation committee to re- evaluate 151 and make further recommendations. 152 (ii) Reject all proposals; or 153 (iii) Recommend that the City Commission reject all proposals. 154 (iv) Schedule the recommendations for a public hearing before the City 155 Commission. 156 (1) When the City Manager has advanced proposals to the City Commission, the 157 City Commission shall conduct a public hearing to review the proposals and the 158 recommendation of the evaluation committee. The City Commission may request that 159 presentations be made to the City Commission by each proposer. In such cases, an additional 160 maximum ten (10) points may be added committee's total scores prior to determining the 161 ranking of proposers. The Commission presentation additional points shall be determined by 162 averaging the presentation points award by each Member of the City Commission to each 163 proposer; with each Member of the Commission scoring each presenter 1 -10 points. 164 (m) After public hearing, oral presentation when requested, and review of the 165 evaluation committee's recommendation, the City Commission shall: {00058142.4 306-90018211 Page 71 of 350 166 i. Rank the proposals and authorize negotiations of a Comprehensive 167 Agreement with the first ranked proposer; or 168 ii. Reject all proposals; 169 (n) The decision of the City Commission regarding ranking of the proposals is 170 final but the Comprehensive Agreement shall be returned to the Commission for approval and 171 is not final until such approved by the City Commission. 172 (o) A Comprehensive Agreements and are subject to approval as to legal form by 173 the City Attorney. 174 (p) The Finance Director or his designee shall review all finance plans and 175 documents related to the private entity's performance, payment of subcontractors and similar 176 responsibilities. 177 (q) The Director of Risk Management shall review all insurance and related 178 requirements. 179 Section 3. If any section, part of a section, paragraph, clause, phrase or word of this 180 Resolution is declared invalid, the remaining provisions of this Resolution shall not be 181 affected. 182 Section 4 . This resolution shall become effective upon its passage and adoption by the 183 City Commission. 184 If the City is not satisfied with the results of the negotiations, the City may terminate negotiations with the proposer and negotiate with the second - ranked or subsequent- ranked firms, in the order consistent with this procedure. {00058142.4 306-90018211 Page 72 of 350 185 PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of , 2015. 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA YES NO Mayor — Jerry Taylor Vice Mayor — Joe Casello Commissioner — David T. Merker Commissioner — Mack McCray Commissioner — Michael M. Fitzpatrick ATTEST: VOTE Janet M. Prainito, MMC City Clerk (Corporate Seal) {00058142.4 306-90018211 Page 73 of 350 6.D. CONSENT AGENDA 2/17/2015 CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH AGENDA ITEM REQUEST FORM •T•]► ail► hI&1111 Eel ►►hl=1 =11 Il► Eel .7_rIf►ahIFIKIZN� REQUESTED ACTION BY COMMISSION: Approve the minutes from the Special and Regular City Commission meetings held on February 3, 2015 EXPLANATION OF REQUEST: The City Commission met on February 3, 2015 and minutes were prepared from the notes taken at the meetings. The Florida Statutes provide that minutes of all Commission meetings be prepared, approved and maintained in the records of the City of Boynton Beach HOW WILL THIS AFFECT CITY PROGRAMS OR SERVICES? A record of the actions taken by the City Commission will be maintained as a permanent record. FISCAL IMPACT: Non - budgeted N/A ALTERNATIVES: N/A STRATEGIC PLAN: High Performing City Organization STRATEGIC PLAN APPLICATION: CLIMATE ACTION: No CLIMATE ACTION DISCUSSION: Is this a grant? No Grant Amount: ATTACHMENTS: Type D Minutes D Minutes REVIEWERS: Department City Clerk Description Minutes 02 -03 -15 Spl Mtg Minutes 02 -03 -15 Reviewer Action Date Pyle, ,Judith Approved 2/4/2015 - 2:27 PM Page 74 of 350 MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COMMISSION MEETING HELD IN COMMISSION CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, 100 EAST BOYNTON BEACH BOULEVARD, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA, ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 3, 2015, AT 5:00 P.M. PRESENT Jerry Taylor, Mayor David T. Merker, Commissioner Mack McCray, Commissioner Michael M. Fitzpatrick, Commissioner Lori LaVerriere, City Manager James Cherof, City Attorney Janet M. Prainito, City Clerk ABSENT Joseph Casello, Vice Mayor 1. OPENINGS A. Call to Order - Mayor Jerry Taylor Invocation Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag led by Commissioner Merker Mayor Taylor called the meeting to order at 5:01 p.m Casello was absent. Roll call revealed Vice Mayor Agenda Approval: 1. Additions, Deletions, Corrections 2. Adoption 2. OTHER A. Hold a closed -door session of the City Commission at 5:00 p.m. on February 3, 2015, to discuss pending litigation in the case of Jeffery Passman, Donna Check William Dean, Jesus Poli, Steven Holtz, et al, Plaintiffs vs. State of Florida, City of Tallahassee, City of Apopka, City of Aventura, City of Boca Raton, City of Boynton Beach, et al., Defendants -- United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida, Tallahassee Division, Case No. 14- CV- 00578- RH -CAS Attorney Cherof explained the closed -door session had been requested in November, 2014. It related to a case in the US District Court. In attendance would be himself, Assistant City Attorney Shana Bridgeman, City Manager LaVerriere and the Mayor and Page 75 of 350 Commission. The session would last 30 to 40 minutes and be followed by labor negotiation discussions. Mayor Taylor recessed the Special City Commission meeting at 5:03 p.m. for the closed -door session. 3. ANNOUNCEMENTS, COMMUNITY & SPECIAL EVENTS & PRESENTATIONS 4. PUBLIC AUDIENCE INDIVIDUAL SPEAKERS WILL BE LIMITED TO 3 MINUTE PRESENTATIONS (at the discretion of the Chair, this 3 minute allowance may need to be adjusted depending on the level of business coming before the City Commission) 5. ADMINISTRATIVE 1►= 6. CONSENT AGENDA Matters in this section of the Agenda are proposed and recommended by the City Manager for "Consent Agenda" approval of the action indicated in each item, with all of the accompanying material to become a part of the Public Record and subject to staff comments None 7. BIDS AND PURCHASES OVER $100,000 -None 8. CODE COMPLIANCE and LEGAL SETTLEMENTS - None 9. PUBLIC HEARING 7 P.M. OR AS SOON THEREAFTER AS THE AGENDA PERMITS The City Commission will conduct these public hearings in its dual capacity as Local Planning Agency and City Commission. ►= 10. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT - None 11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS - None 12. NEW BUSINESS - None 13. LEGAL - None Page 76 of 350 14. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS - None 15. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Taylor reopened the Special City Commission Meeting at 6:30 p.m. Motion Commissioner McCray moved to adjourn the Special City Commission meeting. Vice Mayor Casello seconded the motion. Vote The motion passed unanimously and Mayor Taylor properly adjourned the Special City Commission meeting at 6:31 p.m. CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH Jerry Taylor, Mayor Joe Casello, Vice Mayor David T. Merker, Commissioner Mack McCray, Commissioner Michael M. Fitzpatrick, Commissioner ATTEST: Janet M. Prainito, MMC City Clerk Judith A. Pyle, CMC Deputy City Clerk Page 77 of 350 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING HELD IN COMMISSION CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, 100 EAST BOYNTON BEACH BOULEVARD, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 3, 2015 AT 6:30 P.M. PRESENT Jerry Taylor, Mayor Joseph Casello, Vice Mayor David T. Merker, Commissioner Mack McCray, Commissioner Michael M. Fitzpatrick, Commissioner Lori LaVerriere, City Manager James Cherof, City Attorney Janet M. Prainito, City Clerk 1. OPENINGS A. Call to Order - Mayor Jerry Taylor Invocation by Rev. Georgia Hillesland of Boynton Beach Congregational Church Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag led by Mayor Taylor Mayor Taylor called the meeting to order at 6:31 p.m. Roll call revealed all were present. An Invocation was given by Reverend Hillesland followed by the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag led by Mayor Taylor. Agenda Approval: 1. Additions, Deletions, Corrections Staff had requested that Item 6.F be removed from the agenda. Motion Vice Mayor Casello moved to remove Item 6.F from the agenda. McCray seconded the motion. Vote The motion passed unanimously. Vice Mayor Casello pulled Item 6.0 for discussion. 2. Adoption 1 Commissioner Page 78 of 350 MEETING MINUTES REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FL FEBRUARY 3, 2015 Motion Commissioner McCray moved to approve the agenda as amended. Vice Mayor Casello seconded the motion. Vote The motion passed unanimously. 2. OTHER A. Informational items by Members of the City Commission Commissioner Fitzpatrick had participated in the following events: • Galaxy Elementary Education initiative announcement with Governor Scott • MPO (Metropolitan Planning Organization) Rolling Retreat • Great Gatsby Event • Dr. Martin Luther King Banquet and March • Implicit Bias training • Four Chaplains Veteran Ceremony Vice Mayor Casello disclosed he had spoken with Attorney Peter Sachs and Attorney Marty Perry. He had gone to the Four Chaplains Ceremony. The 2015 City of Boynton Beach Annual Financial Report and calendar were ready for distribution, thanks to the efforts of Eleanor Krusell, Communication Manager. Commissioner Merker disclosed he had met with Attorney Martin Perry. Commissioner McCray had attended the announcement at Galaxy Elementary by Governor Scott, the MLK Banquet and the Armenian Genocide performance at FAU (Florida Atlantic University). Mayor Taylor disclosed he had spoken with Peter Sachs by phone and met with several residents from the area of the Casa Del Mar project. The City Manager and Mayor had gone to Tallahassee and met with nine representatives to discuss issues pertaining to Boynton Beach, including sober homes, business taxes and monies available for special projects. It was a very productive trip. Mayor Taylor chaired the Employees' Pension Board meeting and attended the Four Chaplains event. There was also a formal luncheon at the Woman's Club that he attended. 3. ANNOUNCEMENTS, COMMUNITY & SPECIAL EVENTS & PRESENTATIONS PJ Page 79 of 350 MEETING MINUTES REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FL FEBRUARY 3, 2015 A. Presentation of a plaque by the Mayor to Boynton Beach High School student /athlete Lamar Jackson. Lamar, a senior, is the first football player from Boynton Beach to win the Lou Groza High School Player of the Year Award, capping off an outstanding career. The Lou Groza Award is Palm Beach County's top honor for high school football players, and has been presented annually since 1992. Lamar Jackson was given a plaque in recognition of his achievement of being selected as Player of the Year for his excellent performance during the football season. The award is the top honor for football players in Palm Beach County. He was honored with a standing ovation. He is the first Boynton Beach player to receive the award. Mr. Jackson thanked the City of Boynton Beach and Commission for the recognition and thanked his teammates for their assistance in his attaining the award. He thanked his Mom, the Principal and Coach Wayne. Vice Mayor Casello added Mr. Jackson was a great athlete and had a future in professional football based on his high school performance. B. The first City Commission meeting in March will be held on Monday, March 2, 2015 to accommodate the City Commissioners who will be attending Palm Beach County Days in Tallahassee. A change in the date for the first City Commission meeting in March was announced. The meeting would be held on Monday, March 2nd C. Beginning February 17, the Denson Pool will be closed so that it can be resurfaced. The pool will remain closed for a maximum of 45 days. Mayor Taylor announced the closing of Denson Pool for resurfacing starting on February 17 ". Commissioner McCray inquired about the status of the lifeguards during the 45 days of closure. Wally Majors, Director of Recreation and Parks, responded the County had been contacted to maintain the practices for the swim team that would involve some of the lifeguards. The supervisor of the pool and lifeguards had been directed to contact Human Resources to determine the types of work the lifeguards could be assigned on a temporary basis. It was hoped they could be utilized in the after school program. Commissioner McCray wanted informed on the plan and status of the lifeguards. D. Update by Commissioner Fitzpatrick on the Lake Ida property The 2004 Greenway /Bike Master Plan was the basis for Commissioner Fitzpatrick's idea of utilizing the Lake Ida property. The bridge to Lake Ida Park was outlined and the underpass below 1 -95. The Commission in 2004 approved the Master Plan with three votes. First, to provide $60,000 for the civil engineering study that included holding 3 Page 80 of 350 MEETING MINUTES REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FL FEBRUARY 3, 2015 charrettes and talking with stakeholders. The second vote accepted the concept and the third vote was to include the Greenway Plan into the City's Comprehensive Plan as Policy 5.2.8. A map of the exact location was displayed. The parcel is landlocked. Commissioner Fitzpatrick referred to the 2007 proposed Lakeside Trail, 20 -house development for the 23 acres north of the site. There are lots in the area to trade for access. If docks are included with the five or six proposed homes, they will need permission to cross City land for their access. To better understand the concept of the Greenway /Bikeway, Commissioner Fitzpatrick reviewed the plans of Boca Raton for their portion of the Greenway /Bikeway. Their route includes underpasses to connect the sections for bikers and walkers and runs near the Tri Rail tracks with twelve -foot sidewalks. It is a trail complex totaling six miles that is unfinished at this time. Commissioner Fitzpatrick envisioned three phases. First, there would be mitigation after the purchase to change the plants along the route. Volunteers could be used to clean up the area and replant. It could take up to five years with an annual cost of perhaps $5,000 to cover supplies, tools and $2,000 a year for native plants. Phase two would include actual development. Mr. Kalra owns the access property and advises he has no immediate plans. Development would start when the property is sold to a developer or partner with a developer. The developer and City would have to agree to concessions for access and to pay for many of the improvements. There would be expenses for a wider sidewalk, creation of a littoral zone and establishment of a parking lot and further improvements in the future. Phase three encompasses the connectivity issues with a bike /pedestrian bridge across the L30 canal that would have to be done after phase two. There would be no public access to the park during phase one and phase two. The City would have no cost for the bridge because the Palm Beach County Metropolitan Planning Organization would absorb the expense if it involves a link to the Tri Rail station in Delray and would be a local project. The underpass under 1 -95 can be fully funded by the Florida Department of Transportation as a local option. Data shows property values increase by 2% in a half mile radius of a greenway /bikeway. In the long run, if Girl Scout Park, the FP &L property and a small area owned by Bethesda Hospital could be utilized to connect the areas, it will improve the quality of life for thousands of houses. The County gave a conveyance to be voted on by the City Commission on February 17 ". It included a provision that the property had to have access within five years and if not, the property would revert to the County for $100,000. The City is asking that be :l Page 81 of 350 MEETING MINUTES REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FL FEBRUARY 3, 2015 changed to 10 years. The second change was the additional provision for the County to have the right of first refusal for $100,000 and if the property was sold, the County would receive the profit. The third change was the designation as a greenway /bikeway natural area rather than a park. Commissioner McCray recalled he had previously voted for the study and not for the project. Commissioner Fitzpatrick pointed out there was a vote to include the greenway /bikeway in the Master Plan. Mayor Taylor announced Ms. Krusell, Communications Manager, had created a calendar that outlines activities, meetings, future plans, and the annual report of the City. It was an excellent job to share a tremendous amount of information. Mayor Taylor commented David Katz had been elected as Chair of the Planning and Development Board. 4. PUBLIC AUDIENCE INDIVIDUAL SPEAKERS WILL BE LIMITED TO 3 MINUTE PRESENTATIONS (at the discretion of the Chair, this 3 minute allowance may need to be adjusted depending on the level of business coming before the City Commission) David Katz, 67 Midwood Lane, in good nature and jokingly, presented the Mayor with an additional nameplate that read "Old Man River". Gary L. Fishman, Acting President of the Diane Drive Neighborhood Association, residing at 3504 Diane Drive, asked the Commission to assist the residents to keep the park out of the neighborhood. Mr. Fishman respectfully disagreed with both Commissioner Fitzpatrick and Vice Mayor Casello. His opinion was supported by hundreds along the pathway of all the connected parks. Commissioner Fitzpatrick had appeared at Mr. Fishman's home uninvited and intruded in the meeting with Francesca Taylor, Metropolitan Planning Organization Specialist. The residents felt the park and bikeways would not fit into the peaceful neighborhood. It had been stated by Commissioner Fitzpatrick that he had run for Commission because of the Greenway /Bikeway Plan. The neighbors were concerned about the traffic, crime, loitering, littering and vagrants within the residential area from having access via the connected parks. Mr. Fishman was offended by Commissioner Fitzpatrick's written comments and felt he was owed an apology. The comments were Mr. Fishman was poisoning the waters and those in attendance clarified they were speaking on their own and did not want the park. Mr. Fishman requested the Commission vote no on the park. The immediate consequence to the neighborhoods had to be recognized. Vice Mayor Casello remarked he had a packet of almost 100 signed affidavits of people who do want the park. Mr. Fishman claimed he had 134 and could get 1,000 more. 6 1 Page 82 of 350 MEETING MINUTES REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FL FEBRUARY 3, 2015 Lak Kalra, 3842 South Lake Drive, understood the City was considering a 5 acre lot for a potential park. The park has no land access and the land is bound by water on two sides, 1 -95 on the third side and his property on the fourth side. The idea of bridges, tunnels and /or floating docks was presented to the County Commission without mentioning there would have to be forcible access to the parcel. Conditions of sale were added by the County including access had to be established within five years. The proposed park was not practical. Mr. Kalra contended Commissioner Fitzpatrick was seeking forcible access. It was insinuated if Mr. Kalra wanted two docks for the new development, access would have to be given for the proposed park in exchange for additional land given to Mr. Kalra from the potential park. Mr. Kalra contended the other Commissioners were unaware of the proposed exchange for access. Most of the residents are against the park. The County had previously given the City eight acres of land that is now Girl Scout Park, only one mile away from the proposed park. Residents complained about the loud noises, drinking, sex, car racing and breakins in the area. The Park was closed many years ago and remains vacant. Mr. Kalra pointed out the City would lose money from the loss of taxes generated by 22 lakefront homes proposed to be built. He asked if the Commission would allow him to annex the property back to the County. Arlene Malloch, 3910 Lake Drive Extension, lived directly across from the vacant lot. She opposed the plan for the proposed park. The vacant land across the street has issues with kids partying, drinking, trash and racing cars on the street. The new park would only exacerbate those types of issues and safety concerns. The proposed park could deflate the value of their property. The land was scheduled for luxury homes not a park. Harry Woodworth, 684 NE 15 Place, President of INCA, highlighted outstanding events in the City. A meeting had been held with Colin Groff, Director of Utilities, and the residents of Harbor Estates to discuss the ongoing drainage project. The presentation was proactive and very informative. He thanked Commissioner McCray for meeting with the officers of INCA and helping them establish strategic plans, goals and objectives that align with the City and Community Redevelopment Agency. He thanked the City departments for their assistance. Commissioner McCray agreed staff was not always given enough credit for the work they do. Nancy Barbalaco, 3508 Diane Drive, encouraged the Commission to vote no on the green park. The reality could be much different than the presentation. She agreed with Page 83 of 350 MEETING MINUTES REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FL FEBRUARY 3, 2015 the previous speakers as did other residents. The park would devastate the area that is an older section of the City with new, young professionals and a safe and peaceful community. She contended there were many areas in the City that needed beautification rather than build another park with additional expenses for the taxpayer. The proposed new homes would generate income for the City and the construction would create jobs. The park would not be positive for the City of Boynton Beach. Jim Chard, 401 SE 4 Avenue, Chair of Human Power Delray, spoke in support of the City of Boynton Beach acquiring the Lake Ida parcel. The organization promotes biking and walking as an alternative mode of transportation, improve the safety of walking and biking, use of more human powered mobility and promote local, sustainable economic development. He hoped to integrate the plans of Delray Beach into Boynton Beach. Jack MacFadyen, 250 -C High Point Court, supported open space, greenways and a healthier way of life for generations to follow. He encouraged discussion about other advantages to the park and paths. He did not see luxury homes going into the area. He felt Commissioner Fitzpatrick's plan deserved serious consideration. Butch Buoni, 450 Horizons East #304 in Sterling Village, spoke in favor of the acquisition of the property at Lake Ida. Parks improve the quality of life and home values. Petitions have been circulated and signed without sufficient data to make a decision. He hoped the park would be considered favorably. Robert Gallik, 3724 Diane Drive, wanted there to be confirmation that Tri Rail would pay for the bridge to the parcel before a vote was taken. There needed to be clarification of the cost and the source of funding before a decision should be made. He opposed the park because it would be too close to his residence. Kay Gates, 9693 El Clair Ranch Road, and her husband supported sustainability. Hiking and biking in safe areas as opposed to the roads is wonderful for a community and the residents. She had found that property values increase with greenways as an amenity. She was an avid, international biker and hiker and described several bikeways. She encouraged the Commission to go forward with the plan. Charles Kantor, 2905 South Greenleaf Circle, liked the waterfront property and noted it was tremendously valuable. He felt the City should own the property. The bikeways would attract young, adventurous people and he strongly supported the acquisition. Ray Whitely, 5503 Wishing Star Lane, Greenacres, related the City has 32 parks and close to 65 acres of park land. Mr. Whitely compared about an area of Boynton Beach along 1 -95 North that was an eyesore to the park plan and suggested some of the funds being used to purchase the park be used to build a wall or barrier to hide the eyesore. Page 84 of 350 MEETING MINUTES REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FL FEBRUARY 3, 2015 Christine Malloch, 3910 Lake Drive Extension, explained the proposed park boundary would go right through her backyard. She was hoping she could maintain her home that had been in her family for six generations. She opposed the park. Eric Peterson, 3735 South Lake Drive, close to the entrance of the proposed park, opposed the park. Cleanup of the park would have to be done regularly at the taxpayers' expense. Single family homes would have a vested interest in the area and would maintain their property at their expense. The public who use the parks are not concerned about the cleanliness of the park. Mr. Peterson stressed the people coming forward in support of the park did not live in the area. The decision would affect the lives of the residents everyday. Sunny Garcia, 1631 NW 3rd Lane, had spoken with Chief Katz about people parking on the grass along 17 Avenue. There are "No Parking" signs that were being ignored. The broken fence continued to be used to gain access to the basketball courts. He suggested meter maids be utilized to control the illegal parking. Chris Ciasulli, 3850 South Lake Drive, expressed his opposition to the park. The traffic and other issues would create a venue for crimes and bring a bad element to the community. No one else coming forward, Mayor Taylor closed public audience. 5. ADMINISTRATIVE A. Appoint eligible members of the community to serve in vacant positions on City advisory boards. The following Regular (Reg) and Alternate (Alt) Student (Stu) and Nonvoting Stu (N/V Stu) openings exist: Arts Commission: 2 Alts Building Board of Adjustments and Appeals: 1 Reg and 2 Alts Cemetery Board: 1 Reg and 1 Alt. Education and Youth Advisory Board: , 1 Alt, 2 Stus, 1 N/V Stu Employees' Pension Trustees: 1 Reg Financial Advisory Commission: 3 Regs and 2 Alts Golf Course Advisory Committee: 1 Alt Historic Resource Preservation Board: 2 Alts Library Board: 1 Reg and 1 Alt Recreation and Parks Board: 1 Reg and 1 Alt Senior Advisory Board: 2 Alts Veterans Advisory Commission: 1 Alt E.' Page 85 of 350 MEETING MINUTES REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FL FEBRUARY 3, 2015 Motion Mayor Taylor moved to appoint Jason Handin to the Building Board of Adjustment and Appeals. Commissioner McCray seconded the motion. Vote The motion passed unanimously. Motion Vice Mayor Casello moved to appoint Lori Wilkinson as an alternate on the Education and Youth Advisory Board. Commissioner McCray seconded the motion. Vote The motion passed unanimously. Motion Mayor Taylor moved to appoint Kathleen Wilkinson as a student member of the Education and Youth Advisory Board. Commissioner McCray seconded the motion. Vote The motion passed unanimously. Motion Commissioner Merker moved to appoint Jeffrey Fromknecht as a regular member of the Recreation and Parks Board. Commissioner McCray seconded the motion. Vote The motion passed unanimously. 6. CONSENT AGENDA Matters in this section of the Agenda are proposed and recommended by the City Manager for "Consent Agenda" approval of the action indicated in each item, with all of the accompanying material to become a part of the Public Record and subject to staff comments A Page 86 of 350 MEETING MINUTES REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FL FEBRUARY 3, 2015 A. PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO. R15 -007 - Approve and authorize signing of an Agreement for Water Service outside the City limits with Kenneth B. Beneby for the property at 1086 Oleander Road, Lantana, FL B. PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO. R15 -008 - Authorize the City Manager to sign a lease agreement with Dell Financial for the purchase of a Dell Sonicwall Supermassive 9200 HA Firewall pair from vTECH io, a Dell authorized dealer, utilizing pricing from the State of Florida Miscellaneous IT Equipment Contract #250- WSCA -10- ACS. The lease is for five years with monthly payments of $1,482.53 or $17,790.36 annually with a $1.00 buy -out. C. PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO. R15 -009 - Authorize the City Manager to sign the application documents associated with the Assistance to Firefighters Grant (AFG) General Program (Part A) FY 2014 grant application on behalf of the City of Boynton Beach. Vice Mayor Casello understood the grant was approximately $1 million that would cover thermal imaging cameras and self- contained breathing apparatus. Chief Ray Carter indicated the federal grant is competitive and open to all fire rescue units across the nation. The applications are reviewed and rated. Bigger cities would get more of the money. Vice Mayor Casello questioned how long the current equipment would function before replacement would be necessary. Chief Carter advised there was some service life remaining on the current equipment. Budget constraints had halted the rotation and acquisition of new equipment. Replacement cost was being gradually integrated into the budget. Grant opportunities are the best way to make up for the lean budget years. A replacement plan would be included in the new budget. Ms. LaVerriere advised the City would have to fund at least $250,000 a year if the grant was not received for the equipment. Chief Carter pointed out there was a match requirement on the part of the City of approximately $100,000 to get $1 million worth of equipment. Mayor Taylor recalled the grant funding was not available last year. Vice Mayor Casello was concerned if the grant was not received the City would need to have $1 million budgeted for the next year for equipment. Motion Commissioner Merker moved to approve Resolution No. R15 -009. Commissioner McCray seconded the motion. Vote The motion passed unanimously. Zo Page 87 of 350 MEETING MINUTES REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FL FEBRUARY 3, 2015 D. PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO. R15 -010 - Authorize the Mayor to sign a Memorandum of Agreement with the Florida Department of Transportation authorizing construction and maintenance of a new southern entry sign in Federal Highway median just north of Gulfstream Boulevard. E. PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO. R15 -011 - Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to enter into an extension of a lease agreement with Stage Left Theatre, Inc. for the use of the City -owned Madsen Center building located at 145 S.E. 2nd Avenue. F. PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO. R15 -012 - Approve and authorize signing of an Agreement for Water Service outside the City limits with Lakeside Christian Center Assembly of God, Inc., (Pastor Johan H Van Heerden) for the property at 9613 Knuth Road, Boynton Beach, FL. G. PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO. R15 -013 - Authorize the execution of an agreement between the City and CRA that conveys property at 480 Ocean Avenue to the CRA which is currently the location for the relocated Ruth Jones Cottage aka "Little House ". H. PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO. R15 -014 - Authorize the City Manager to execute an interlocal agreement between Palm Beach County and the City of Boynton Beach for the reimbursement of three (3) Power pro Ambulance cots and accessories as per the Palm Beach County Emergency Management (PBCEM) recently awarded Emergency Medical Services FY 2014 -2015 EMS Grant. The reimbursement under this agreement shall not exceed $37,333. I. PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO. R15 -015 - Approve Amendment #1 to consulting agreement with ADAAG Consulting Services, LLC of Miami, FL., for Consulting Services for an ADA Self- Evaluation and Transition Plan of Programs, Services and Activities, and Policies and Procedures in the amount not to exceed $8,900. J. Approve the "High Ridge Landing" record plat, conditioned on the approval being the certification of the plat documents by Andrew P. Mack (Building Official /City Engineer). K. Approve the minutes from the Regular City Commission meetings held on January 20, 2015 L. Accept the Fiscal Year 2014 -2015 Budget Status Report of the General Fund and the Utilities Fund for the three (3) month period ending December 31, 2014. 7. BIDS AND PURCHASES OVER $100,000 11 Page 88 of 350 MEETING MINUTES REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FL FEBRUARY 3, 2015 A. PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO. R15 -016 - Approve the award to Forerunner Technologies, Inc. of Huntsville AL for RFP No. 068 - 1510- 14 /JMA, "Voice over Internet Protocol Telephone System ", and authorize the City Manager to sign a five year lease agreement with NEC Financial Services, LLC., in the amount of $5,892.32 per month (for a total of $353,539.20), with a One Dollar ($1.00) lease buyout for the telephone equipment. For the three years following lease end, the City will receive maintenance and support for the VoIP phone system from Forerunner for $16,897 per year. Motion Vice Mayor Casello moved to approve Proposed Resolution No. R15 -016. Commissioner Merker seconded the motion. Commissioner McCray pointed out the funding had been budgeted. Vice Mayor Casello added the phone system could be moved and incorporated in any location. It would be money well spent. Vote The motion passed unanimously. 8. CODE COMPLIANCE and LEGAL SETTLEMENTS - None 9. PUBLIC HEARING 7 P.M. OR AS SOON THEREAFTER AS THE AGENDA PERMITS The City Commission will conduct these public hearings in its dual capacity as Local Planning Agency and City Commission. A. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 14 -031 - FIRST READING - PUBLIC HEARING - Approve abandonment of a portion of North Lake Drive bounded on the south by Dimick Road and Lot 1 of the Hulls Subdivision to the north. The subject right - of -way to be abandoned is 40 feet wide and extends a distance of 135 feet; containing 5,402 square feet (0.1240 acres). Applicant: Dodi Buckmaster Glas of Gentile Glas Halloway O'Mahoney & Associates, Inc., agent for the property owner, K. Hovnanian T & C Homes at Florida, LLC (Tabled to 213115) B. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 14 -032 - FIRST READING - PUBLIC HEARING - Approve Casa Del Mar Future Land Use Map amendment (LUAR 14 -001) from Low Density Residential (LDR) to Special High Density Residential (SHDR). Applicant: Dodi Buckmaster Glas, Gentile Glas Holloway O'Mahoney and Associates, Inc. (Tabled to 213115) 12 Page 89 of 350 MEETING MINUTES REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FL FEBRUARY 3, 2015 C. Approve a New Master Plan /Site Plan (NWSP 14 -004) to allow construction of 80 fee - simple townhome units (Casa del Mar on the Intracoastal IPUD) at a density of 16.65 dwelling units per acre, a waterfront amenity area, and related site improvements on 4.8 acres located on the east side of Federal Highway, north of Dimick Road and south of the Peninsula IPUD. Agent: Dodi Buckmaster Glas with Gentile Glas Holloway O'Mahoney & Associates, Inc (2GHO) on behalf of Applicant /Owner K. Hovnanian T & C Homes at Florida LLC. (Tabled to 213115) D. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 14 -033 - FIRST READING - PUBLIC HEARING - Approve Casa Del Mar rezoning (LUAR 14 -001) from R -1 -AA (Single - Family Residential District to an IPUD (Infill Planned Unit Development) with a Master Plan for a townhouse development. (Tabled to 213115) E. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 14 -034 - FIRST READING - PUBLIC HEARING - Approve Casa Del Mar rezoning (REZN 14 -005) from an IPUD (Infill Planned Unit Development) with a Master Plan for a marina use to an IPUD with a Master Plan for a townhouse development. (Tabled to 213115) Motion Commissioner McCray moved to remove Items 9. A, B, C, D and E from the table. Vice Mayor Casello seconded the motion. Vote The motion passed unanimously. Attorney Cherof explained Items 9. A and B were legislative. Items 9. C, D and E were quasi - judicial. He inquired if the applicant would agree to consolidation of the quasi - judicial items and other two items for discussion. The applicant agreed. Attorney Cherof administered an oath to all those intending to testify regarding Items C, D and E. He read Ordinances 14 -031 and 14 -032 by title only, on first reading and announced the second reading would be at the next meeting unless otherwise tabled to a date certain. Attorney Cherof read Proposed Ordinances 14 -033 and 14 -034 by title only, on first reading. Dodi Buckmaster Glas, a Certified Land Planner, introduced the team present including representatives from K Hovnanian, an architect, marine professionals, landscape architect and legal counsel. She located the site on Federal Highway, south of the Peninsula development and north of Lakeside Gardens. Two units had been eliminated on the southern portion of the site that would require changes to the application including a decrease in density to 16.2 dwelling units per acre (du). 13 Page 90 of 350 MEETING MINUTES REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FL FEBRUARY 3, 2015 There have been several proposals for the site. The current project would have 78 units with an infill redevelopment designation through the CRA providing the Special High Density Residential that exists on the entire site, except for the waterfront lots. The height is within the district, the units below the 20 du per acre and the plans exceed the proposed guest parking by one -third and open space 25% above the Code requirement. The two additional waterfront lots to be rezoned are less than a half -acre and there is a request for a roadway abandonment. The Land Use Amendment would involve the Special High Density residential where there is currently a R -1 -AA designation. The City's Comprehensive Plan encourages infill and redevelopment. The Federal Corridor is part of the CRA Plan and the Land Use Regulations encourage this type of redevelopment. The CRA Plan for the site has a Special High Density designation associated with the 1 -A district. There would be 78 townhomes with a combination of two and three -story buildings. There would be private docks and two visitor docks. The dock is affixed at the land and floats as an amenity to the community. The market values for the homes show the waterfront lots from under $500,00 to over $800,000. The interior lots include a couple of vacant lots and homes for under $200,000 with just one home over $400,000. The proposed units would range in value from $300,000 along Federal Highway to $800,000 along the waterfront. The access would be between Dimick Road and Peninsula's entrance to the north. There would be interconnected pedestrian paths all internal to the site. The access from Dimick had been removed at the request of the residents. The water outfall running through the property would be used as a feature in the center of the project to be a bio -swale that would have decks and a boardwalk behind the units. The Art in Public Places elements would be on the Federal Highway side and along the waterfront side. There would be a cabana and pool area with landscaping. There would be three and four -story architecture with the three -story building adjacent to the homes along Dimick and the lots on the end. The four -story units would be in the north building and along the waterfront to provide good transition with a graduated height. The two buildings on the waterfront would be side facing and a large landscape buffer of 37 feet with the loss of the two units. Building -to- building separation would be approximately 49 feet. The architectural style is Mediterranean with great detail and use of neutral colors with earth tones for accent points. The colors would be blended so there is a better mix of architectural treatment. There had been a meeting with the residents and meetings with staff to understand utility plans the City has and gate access on Dimick that the residents did not want. 14 Page 91 of 350 MEETING MINUTES REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FL FEBRUARY 3, 2015 There were four meetings with the residents to discuss setbacks, elimination of units and drainage concerns. The planned drainage was altered to accommodate the plans and a new water line along Dimick connected to the hydrant that is underserved by a four inch line. The conversations with staff had been helpful. The neighbors were concerned about parking along Dimick and wanted an increase in the number of guest spaces. Stronger buffers were added with three tiered landscaping of varied heights to include lower level materials, mid -story materials and trees. There was also an agreement to bury the power lines along Dimick. The application includes the Land Use and Rezoning request to go from R -1 -AA zoning to IPUD. The first setback was 13.37 feet and it is now proposed to be 37 feet. The existing homes along the waterfront are permitted to have the 7.5 foot setback. There is an emergency secondary access as provided for fire and public safety. There is no vehicular access to Dimick Road. There was concern about compatibility. The previous approval had minimal setbacks and south - facing balconies. The various changes to the plans were reviewed. The final plans substantially meet and exceed many of the Code requirements for setback and buffers at the south end. The developer is local and built several projects in the area. They listened to staff and the residents to address concerns and issues that improve the new community and the existing residential. The plans submitted were consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the Land Development Regulations. They were also consistent with CRA policy and an assortment of policies for redevelopment and infill. Design concerns, transition concerns, drainage and water concerns were all addressed to be a good neighbor. Staff recommended approval of all the petitions. Mayor Taylor opened the issue for Public Hearing. Jason Evans, counsel for Lakeside Gardens residents, located the community. He reported there had been several meetings between the developer and residents and attempts to compromise were made. The residents previously worked with developers on changes in land use, proving they can work with developers. The applicant is in the business of building townhomes. They bought the properties in the marina district and two parcels designated for single - family homes with no intention of building a marina or single - family homes. There were no entitlements or contingencies and they cannot compromise with Lakeside Gardens. The residents do not like the project because it takes away the single - family homes from the area, decreases their property values and hinders the City of Boynton Beach's upward growth. Everything is being built with the minimum Code in mind. 15 Page 92 of 350 MEETING MINUTES REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FL FEBRUARY 3, 2015 Mr. Evans pointed out the Planning and Development Board voted against the project; however, the applicant continued with the project without any compromise and without thinking of the residents. The Board did not agree with the proposed parking allotment that was approved by staff. He alleged a member of the Ballard Partners, the City's lobbyist firm, participated in the applicant's efforts to build the project. It is not known if sensitive information that Ballard Partners may have in their relationship with the City, is being used against the Lakeside residents due to their opposition. The issues of consistency and compatibility were of concern to the residents as well. There was a staff recommendation that the property values would not be affected without any data to substantiate the claim. The residents were seeking a denial of the application and ask the Commission for protection of home values, community and Boynton Beach's future. Mr. Evans did not know if the revised site plan had undergone staff review or Planning and Development Board review. Robert L. Moore, a Planning and Zoning consultant, pointed out the developer bought the property knowing the permitted uses with half the density as proposed. It was after the Planning and Development Board rejected their request based on compatibility with a single - family district and the proposed parking limitations that the density was decreased. The issue is the doubling of the density with the existing density that is not compatible. Mr. Moore suggested a lower density be considered to be consistent with the neighboring development to the south. Wayne Lewis, State Certified General Real Estate Appraiser, was present representing the DeVoursney family. He used the concept of interchangeability to explain homes were bought dependent upon the future land use designation of single - family residences to the north. If the development proceeds the DeVoursneys would have seven townhomes adjacent to their property on the north side and a single - family residence to the south. The townhome project on one side would damage the value of the DeVoursney home greater than the single - family home on the south that would be bordered by two single - family homes. Changing the designation from R -1 -AA would increase the density on the property next to the DeVoursney home by 3.44 times. The height differential from a two -story home to a three -story home creates an issue. The following individuals came forward in opposition of the project: Mike McCleary, 2600 Lake Drive North Robert Gonzalez, 636 Potter Road James DeVoursney, 2625 Lake Drive North Lillioni DeVoursney, 2625 Lake Drive North W Page 93 of 350 MEETING MINUTES REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FL FEBRUARY 3, 2015 Monica DeVoursney, 2625 Lake Drive North Susie Khattab, 640 Potter Road Chris Ciasulli, 3850 South Lake Drive Nicole Bueller, 2623 Lake Drive North John Trach, III, 2623 Lake Drive North Mike Mrotek 2624 Lake Drive North Conrad Merry, 620 Dimick Road Ramona Mrotek, 2624 Lake Drive North The reasons for the opposition included lack of symmetry with the existing neighborhood and the loss of two properties that were part of Lakeside Gardens. It was suggested the marina would have been a better future use or a smaller proposed project that would not include the two R -1 -AA zoned lots. The change in land use for the project would jeopardize the future of all properties in the City that could be harmed by changes in land use regulations for adjoining parcels. The proposed project had a flawed application and equally flawed justification for the benefit of the developer. There was concern expressed for the emergency vehicle access to the development because the parking would prohibit the equipment to navigate through the project. It was asserted the developer did not compromise as much as the residents of Lakeside Gardens were asked to concede. Staff was asking Lakeside Gardens to sacrifice 23% to 30% of the neighborhood waterfront and the road access to the properties. The economic benefits of the marina, a significant asset for the City, were also being sacrificed. The compromise in the setback of 27 extra feet along the northeast portion was unacceptable to the residents of Lakeside Gardens in lieu of all the previous compromises endured. The residents were led to believe that rezoning to a marina project was a "done deal ". It was argued the City should not sacrifice the possible benefits of the marina district including quality real estate development, concepts unique to the industry such as job growth, increased tax revenue, promotion of like- minded businesses, access to the marina district from 1 -95 via Gateway Boulevard, and proximity to the Boynton Beach Inlet with the domino effect of the marina industry along the CRA Corridor. It was suggested the Commission explain and justify the reason for denying the marina to be developed rather than the proposed project and take time to determine the feasibility of a marina and its economic impact. Staff's assertion that the marina project was not supported by the market should be challenged. The improvement of the economy ensures success of a marina in the area and brings an asset to the City. Other concerns were the closing of the end of Dimick Road that would sacrifice a play and dog park area in the community that was enjoyed by many of the children living in the area and there was no transition offered between single - family homes and 17 Page 94 of 350 MEETING MINUTES REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FL FEBRUARY 3, 2015 townhomes. Elevation variations around Lakeside Gardens over the years have created drainage problems, erosion and structural damage around the homes. The new development would compound an existing flooding issue and mosquito control monitoring. There have been mold and poor water quality in the area for 40 years. The area was being exposed to an additional threat of vandalism and crime that was ongoing and may continue if the area is not secured and the access eliminated along the north end. The assertion was made that there have been changes in the economy and lifestyles resulting in a trend for single - family homes and a decrease in multi - family units that should not be ignored. The possibility of the project becoming rentals or vacant was a major concern. Multi- family units decrease in value while single - family homes increase in value. Future widening of Dimick Road would be impossible and it would hinder the development of the neighborhood. The Code dictates that an IPUD must be compatible with and preserve the character of adjacent residential neighborhoods with adequate buffering, graduated uses and a layout that compliments adjacent developments. There is not a smooth transition from a one -story home to a towering 38 1/2 -foot building and the setbacks are not sufficient. It is the last waterfront property in the City that should be more fully utilized with high - end homes and greater opportunities for growth. It was understood there is a need for progress, but it has to be done with good sense and the wishes of the residents of the area taken into consideration. New development should not affect the existing neighborhood that is safe, clean and private. No one else coming forward, Mayor Taylor allowed the applicant to respond. Martin Perry, Counsel for the developer, remarked Lakeside Gardens is an old subdivision with small lots and six of those next to the DeVoursney property were acquired to square off the site. The subdivision is surrounded by commercial development or more intense residential development. The Peninsula has 20 dua per acre immediately to the north. The proposed project has less density. There is higher density across the street and to the south. It is a nice little pocket. The grade level is significantly lower in Lakeside Gardens except where there are new homes. The proposed project would assist in alleviating the existing flooding issue by providing an outfall. The City has determined the area is prime for redevelopment. Mr. Perry recalled a previous developer had proposed 82 units on less land with five - story buildings. The City has encouraged this type of development proposed for the site. The developer has complied with every request and made numerous compromises. Lifestyles have been changing for many years. The proposed marina would be larger and very noisy. The development went into bankruptcy. There is currently no proposal to build a marina at the site. A marina on the site would squeeze out residential and bring in more commercial development. 18 Page 95 of 350 MEETING MINUTES REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FL FEBRUARY 3, 2015 Ms. Glas clarified there have been multiple compromises and revisions to the plan. A water line was redesigned, a committed outfall was created for Dimick Road, power lines would be buried and the access on Dimick Road eliminated. Height was addressed and transition. The south property line is not a wall. It is a wall and fence detail for a total of six feet with hedging, trees and mid -story growth to be inviting. There are grass and mangrove issues that currently exist. Derrick Fenick, Division President, with K. Hovnanian, advised they would not have purchased the property if it was not anticipated to be successful and a good project for the immediate area and Boynton Beach. The market research was done and the owners believe in the project and the need for this type of development in Boynton Beach. Commissioner McCray wanted more information from staff on the parking issue. Kathleen Zeitler, Senior Planner, replied each unit requires two parking spaces that are covered with the two stall garages. Guest parking spaces are required and the project exceeds the regulations. Commissioner Merker felt part of the problem was with the City that was not investing money for improving and fixing existing areas. He would discuss the issue during budget talks. Vice Mayor Casello referred to the Planning and Development Board meeting minutes regarding the stipulation that the garages would only be used for parking. Ms. Zeitler concurred that staff was recommending as a condition of approval that the garages be limited to only parking that would be enforced by the homeowners' association. Parking on the street would be enforced by Code Enforcement. Vice Mayor Casello understood Code Enforcement could not enforce parking regulations on private streets. Ms. Zeitler conceded it would have to be the homeowners' association responsibility. Vice Mayor Casello's experience was the parking regulations were unenforceable by the homeowners' association as well. There was mention that the streets could not be widened because it would not allow a significant flow of traffic. Ms. Zeitler pointed out the streets are private and the building would be built to the limits of the street. The interior streets could not be widened and all pedestrian activity is interior. The pedestrian access was eliminated along Dimick. Commissioner Fitzpatrick referred to Proposed Ordinance 14 -031 and the staff report that advised the public right -of -way no longer serves a public purpose. Ms. Zeitler interjected that the developer indicated the garages will contain some built -in storage. Andrew Mack, Building Official and City Engineer, noted the only public purpose for the right -of -way would be to service the two adjacent single - family lots. Since the developer owns the property, the abandoned property would go to the adjoining property owners. 19 Page 96 of 350 MEETING MINUTES REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FL FEBRUARY 3, 2015 The City would retain utility easements to service utilities in the area. There would be no public purpose for future access. The abandonment would be done in conjunction with the rezoning. Commissioner Fitzpatrick inquired what had changed that the recommendations for a marina are no longer applicable. Ms. LaVerriere pointed out the rezoning and site plan cannot be considered until the abandonment is granted. Mike Rumpf, Planning and Zoning Director, stressed the marina was not an active application. The current application is the townhome project that was reviewed on its own merits. Commissioner Fitzpatrick reiterated his question why the recommendations for the marina project were no longer valid. Mr. Rumpf responded if a marina project was proposed it would be reviewed on its own criteria and it may be valid, but there was no marina project for consideration. He explained a private piece of property cannot be held to a given development approval. The current project is held to the same zoning, IPUD. Commissioner Fitzpatrick was concerned about the trend and the flexibility of staff to immediately change the rules to accommodate the current owner. He saw no consistency in staff's recommendations. Vice Mayor Casello read from the Land Development Regulations on commercial /industrial land in the staff report, as follows: "Although the requests do not propose to reclassify or rezone any commercial or industrial lands, the new residential Master Plan replaces a Master Plan for a commercial marina. Marina oriented and water dependent uses are the only commercial uses allowed in the Special High Density Residential category and only in conjunction with the Palm Beach County Manatee Protection Plan. The proposed rezoning does; therefore, represent a loss of a project that could have been a significant asset to the City." Mr. Rumpf stressed nothing has changed. It is not the project before the Commission at this time. Commissioner Merker summarized a piece of property is zoned and can be used in different ways. It depends on the owner of the property and his plans. It does not have to follow exactly a plan from the past. The previous projects are irrelevant today. If the plan meets the specifications today and is good for the City and brings in tax revenue, it should be approved. The residents do have to be considered and compromises made. The Commission makes the ultimate decision. Mayor Taylor emphasized there was no marina project before the Commission making it a moot point at this time. Mayor Taylor asked who owned the two private lots that were bought by the developer. Mery McDonald, advised the former property owner lived outside Denver, Colorado. He was a partner with John Lake. Mr. McDonald bought the property from the Ziff zo Page 97 of 350 MEETING MINUTES REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FL FEBRUARY 3, 2015 family who were trying to assemble all the residences including on the water and immediately to the south to do a multi - family development. Mr. McDonald acted on behalf of Bob Buckenberger for the sale to K. Hovnanian. Mayor Taylor clarified there are four parks in Boynton Beach that allow dogs. The area has changed and at the other end of Dimick Road there is a four -story building with a smaller setback than the proposed project. If a developer owns a piece of land and the project meets all the Codes, there is no basis to deny the request. Commissioner McCray wanted to make sure there is turning radius for emergency vehicles. Mr. Rumpf advised the project had been reviewed by the development application review team process and adequate maneuverability and circulation requirements have been met. Commissioner Fitzpatrick noted the developer was before the Commission as a land speculator. The property was bought with a zoning designation. Staff gives developers the impression the regulations can be changed. Developers are driving the future of the City rather than the plans that have been adopted by the Commission. Boynton Beach needs a good ratio between residential, commercial and industrial. This property is directly across from the Inlet and should be a viable location for a marina. Commissioner Fitzpatrick felt the residents should expect the City to maintain the residential zoning for the lots. There is no continuity, no guarantees for the citizens. Vice Mayor Casello agreed 2010 was a different time than it is now. The City has been branded as the Gateway to the Gulfstream and yet it was closing all portals. He suggested thinking outside the box for the City and think marina -- nothing is impossible. He felt it was wrong to override the marina concept for residential. The commercial use falls under the Community Redevelopment Agency Comprehensive Plan. Job creation would be significant. Commissioner Merker contended a developer is willing to invest his money to better the neighborhood. The Commission has to decide if the project is good for the City. The concern from the residents was the compromises required, but it had now evolved into childish talk. The Commission and citizens should not be foolish enough to deny the project. The development is high end and the reality is it is truly good for the City. Vice Mayor Casello read from the Land Development Regulations, Policy 1.12, "The City shall not approve any increase in hotel, motel in residential densities in the coastal high hazard area that would increase evacuation times above the 16 hour level of service for out of county hurricane evacuation for a Category 5 storm. It has been noted by staff the City has no in house capability to estimate the impact of this development on evacuation times." Approval of the project would break the City's policy. 21 Page 98 of 350 MEETING MINUTES REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FL FEBRUARY 3, 2015 Motion Commissioner Merker moved to approve Proposed Ordinance No. 14 -031. Mayor Taylor passed the gavel and seconded the motion. Vote City Clerk Prainito called the roll. The vote was 2 -3 (Vice Mayor Casello and Commissioners McCray and Fitzpatrick dissenting). Motion Commissioner Merker moved to approve Proposed Ordinance No. 14 -032. Mayor Taylor passed the gavel and seconded the motion. Vote City Clerk Prainito called the roll. The vote was 2 -3 (Vice Mayor Casello and Commissioners McCray and Fitzpatrick dissenting). Attorney Cherof advised the remaining items were conditioned on the approval of the abandonment and land use change which did not pass. The other items on the agenda relating to Casa Del Mar were moot. F. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 15 -002 - FIRST READING - Approve amendments to the Land Development Regulations, including amendments to the Definitions, Zoning Use Matrix, and corresponding Use Matrix Notes to establish a new use titled Medical Care or Testing (In- Patient) to allow medical uses that provide 24- hour services or treatment. Attorney Cherof read Proposed Ordinance No. 15 -002 by title only, on first reading. Motion Commissioner Merker moved to approve Proposed Ordinance No. 15 -002. Vice Mayor Casello seconded the motion. Vote City Clerk Prainito called the roll. The vote was 5 -0. Mayor Taylor opened the issue for public hearing. No one came forward. 22 Page 99 of 350 MEETING MINUTES REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FL FEBRUARY 3, 2015 10. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT - None 11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS - None 12. NEW BUSINESS - None 13. LEGAL A. PROPOSED ORDINANCE 15 -001 - SECOND READING - PUBLIC HEARING - Approve Ordinance amending Section 10- 51.5(1)(4) of the City of Boynton Beach's Code of Ordinances entitled Registration of Abandoned Real Property to amend the registration fee. Attorney Cherof read Proposed Ordinance 15 -001 by title only, on second reading. Motion Commissioner McCray moved to approve Proposed Ordinance No. 15 -001. Commissioner Fitzpatrick seconded the motion. Mayor Taylor opened the issue for public hearing and no one came forward Vote City Clerk Prainito called the roll. The vote was 5 -0. B. PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO. R15 -017 - Authorize the City Manager to sign an Agreement with Community Champions Corporation (CCC), f /k/a Federal Property Registration Corporation of Fort Lauderdale, FL for a one -year period for administration of the City's vacant property registration ordinance as a result of Quote Number Q020- 2111- 15 /JMA. There is the option to renew for an additional three (3), one (1) year periods. Motion Commissioner McCray moved to approve Resolution No. R15 -017. Vice Mayor Casello seconded the motion. Vote The motion passed unanimously. C. Consider options for future administration and maintenance of the Quantum Park Overlay Dependent District including the following: 23 Page 100 of 350 MEETING MINUTES REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FL FEBRUARY 3, 2015 1. Continue current operations whereby future administrative actions and vision of the District are overseen by the existing Board of Supervisors and their elected successors. 2. Remove and reappoint the Board of Supervisors thus injecting new leadership and vision. 3. Dissolve the Quantum Park Overlay Dependent District and assume all debt and common ground maintenance. Attorney Cherof explained the item was initiated by one of the property owners and as a recommendation request to the City Commission that has the right to make policy on the issue. Commissioner Merker wanted more time and knowledge before voting on the issue. He wanted to table the matter. Attorney Cherof noted there was no immediate action necessary on the item. He suggested the Commission be educated on the issue and have the side requesting the relief make a presentation. Peter Sachs, 62111 Broken Sound Parkway, counsel for Olen properties, the largest property owner in Quantum, had spoken to staff about the problems in Quantum. There have been difficulties with previously approved development and with development that is not proceeding because of the Overlay District. It is a matter of public policy because the Overlay District is not a private entity, but a governmental entity created by the City under Ordinance 05 -61. Private developers in Quantum Park have to seek approval from the City of Boynton Beach, South Florida Water Management District and the Overlay District. The last entity has crippled any progress and grinds the development process to a halt. The minutes of the Overlay District meeting held on November 6, 2012 were put into the record for review. The minutes confirm the District board enacted policy to not review governmental drainage permits unless the property owner first receives the approval of the privately held Property Owners' Association. The Property Owners' Association is not an arm of the City. It is illegal delegation of governmental authority to a private entity. The Overlay District is telling private property owners they will not receive required drainage permits unless they satisfy the demands of a private entity. The District also indicates it will not fulfill the governmental requirement of receiving and processing drainage permits. The manner that the policy was approved brings up ethical concerns. The Overlay District board member who proposed the policy is also a paid employee of the Private Property Owners' Association. The District Engineer in charge of processing drainage permits is also the Private Property Owners' Association Engineer. 24 Page 101 of 350 MEETING MINUTES REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FL FEBRUARY 3, 2015 Property owners like Olen, pay large sums in assessments to maintain the water bodies that the District will not allow them to use for drainage. Olen is impacted significantly because Olen is one of the last property owners attempting to develop the undeveloped portion of Quantum Park. The development of property triggers the Overlay District's regulatory authority. There is a contemptuous relationship between Olen and the Property Owners' Association. The City is impacted because Olen has paid $750,000 in impact fees and if able to complete the project, the City would net another $800,000 in impact fees. Upon completion of the new build out, Olen would have 1,786 units in the City, not to mention 20,000 square feet of commercial space. Olen Properties was asking the City Commission to hold their Dependent Overlay District accountable and either dissolve the Board and take over or replace the Board with professional people that will treat everyone fairly. The current Board does not own property in Quantum or live in Quantum and has no connections with Quantum. Notice of the election of the Board members was not given to all the property owners. Mr. Sachs submitted to the record a handbook created by the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity that specifies that municipalities may hold dependent special districts accountable by dissolving them or removing the board members at will. Vice Mayor Casello inquired how many property owners were in the association and Mr. Sachs replied there were no residents owning property in Quantum Park that were on the Board. Commissioner Merker asked when the last election took place and if there was a chance to have candidates on the ballot. Mr. Sachs advised Olen was not notified of any election. Andre Park, legal counsel, reiterated Olen had no knowledge of the last election. It was requested from public records because there is no accessible information about the Overlay District. Commissioner Merker thought minutes should have been provided to the City that could be copied to Olen. Mr. Park added the City should have received notification of the election because it is a property owner. Martin Perry, Counsel representing the Quantum Park Overlay District advised the first notice he had received about the item being on the Commission's agenda was 5 p.m. last Wednesday. In reality there are a number of inaccurate statements in the letter submitted by Mr. Sachs. Mr. Gerlach, the District Engineer, is not the Engineer for the Property Owners' Association. Olen is not the only remaining developer or the largest property owner. 25 Page 102 of 350 MEETING MINUTES REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FL FEBRUARY 3, 2015 Mr. Perry wanted an opportunity to make a complete presentation. Apparently Mr. Parks has met with each Commissioner and City staff and there should be an opportunity to respond in detail. The District, created by the City and Statute, has performed significant functions. One of the original members of the Board was Mr. Olenicoff who is the principal of Olen Properties. He never took office and submitted his resignation because there was going to be litigation forthcoming. The District Board had an election November 4 and it was properly noticed as required by law. Olen Properties is entitled to 55 votes and they did not vote. There were 66 votes cast out of a total of 300 with over 100 owned by the District. The District owns over 100 acres. Mr. Olen made no effort to vote his shares. The District Board meets regularly with professional members who have done an outstanding job over the years. The Overlay District protects the environment and waterways in Quantum Park and Mr. Olen has intentionally violated rules and encroached on District lands. Motion Commissioner McCray moved to table the matter. Vice Mayor Casello seconded the motion. Vote The motion passed unanimously. Mr. Perry would send a notice of the next meeting to the City Manager for distribution to the Commission Vice Mayor Casello asked if the City had been notified of the election. Richard Ellington, District Manager and working for Special District Services, who has the contract to manage the Overlay District, indicated the City's Ordinance requires a public notice in a newspaper of general circulation, twice before the election. The election is held on the same general election day in the even years. The notice was published in the Palm Beach Post and all the property owners got the same method of notice. There were 63 owners represented in person or by proxy and Mr. Olen's 55 acres were not represented at the election held November 4 at 2 p.m. There are minutes of the meeting. D. Pursuant to Section 286.011(8), Florida Statutes, request is made for a private attorney - client session of the City Commission to discuss pending litigation in the following case: Vincenzo Gurrera, Plaintiff vs. Palm Beach County Sheriff's Office; Florida Department of Financial Services, Division of Insurance Fraud; State of Florida Division of Corporations; City of Boynton Beach, et al., Defendants — United States District Court, Southern District of Florida Case No. 14 -CV- 80815 - Cohn /Seltzer W . Page 103 of 350 MEETING MINUTES REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FL FEBRUARY 3, 2015 Attorney Cherof indicated no more than a half hour would be needed to discuss the case. There was consensus to meet at 5:45 p.m. on February 17 before the regularly scheduled Commission meeting. 14. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS A. Consideration of Purchase Agreement with Palm Beach County for Lake Ida land - 2/17/15 B. Consideration and discussion of Financial Advisory Committee's proposed work topics - 2/17/15 15. ADJOURNMENT There being nothing further to come before the Commission, Mayor Taylor properly adjourned the meeting at 10:33 p.m. (Continued on next page.) 27 Page 104 of 350 MEETING MINUTES REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FL FEBRUARY 3, 2015 CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH Jerry Taylor, Mayor Joe Casello, Vice Mayor David T. Merker, Commissioner Mack McCray, Commissioner Michael M. Fitzpatrick, Commissioner ATTEST: Janet M. Prainito, MMC City Clerk Judith A. Pyle, CMC Deputy City Clerk zs Page 105 of 350 6.E. CONSENT AGENDA 2/17/2015 REQUESTED ACTION BY COMMISSION: Approve the extensions for RFPs /Bids and/ or piggy -backs for the procurement of services and /or commodities as described in the written report for February 17, 2015 - "Request for Extensions and /or Piggybacks ". EXPLANATION OF REQUEST: As required, the Finance /Procurement Department submits requests for award to the Commission; requests for approval to enter into contracts and agreements as the result of bid solicitations; and to piggy -back governmental contracts. Options to extend or renew are noted in the "Agenda Request Item" presented to Commission as part of the initial approval process. Procurement seeks to provide an accurate and efficient method to keep the Commission informed of pending renewals and the anticipated expenditure by reducing the paperwork of processing each renewal and /or extension individually and summarizing the information in a monthly report (as required). V ENDOR(S) COMMODITY /SERVICE RFP /BID NUMBER RENEWAL TERM Creative Lawn Maint., Landscape Maintenance 020 - 2730- 13 /JMA March 1, 2015 to Enviroscapes Plus, Services February 29, 2016 First Genesis, BG Katz, LV Superior, Novo Arbor, Phoenix, Superior, Vincent & Sons B & J Catering, Inc. Concession Operations for 015 - 2710 -09 /JA February 18, 2014 to Oceanfront Park February 17, 2016 B & J Catering, Inc. Library Cafe Concession Resolution R10 -153 April 1, 2013 to Operations March 31, 2015 HOW WILL THIS AFFECT CITY PROGRAMS OR SERVICES? This renewal report will be used for those bids, contracts /agreements and piggy -backs that are renewed /extended with the same terms and conditions and pricing as the initial award. FISCAL IMPACT: Budgeted Funds have been budgeted under line items as noted on the attached report. ALTERNATIVES: Not approve renewals and require new bids to be issued. STRATEGIC PLAN: �g 0 :7 _ l 1 *11102:2 wi 1► I_ 1» 41 a_ l 1101 Ll A Page 106 of 350 CLIMATE ACTION: No CLIMATE ACTION DISCUSSION: Is this a grant? Grant Amount: ATTACHMENTS: Type D Other D Agreement D Agreement D Agreement REVIEWERS: Department F inance F inance Legal City Manager Reviewer Action Howard, Tim Approved 6- coward, Tim Approved Swanson, Lynn Approved LaVerriere, Lori Approved Date 21912015 - 10:24 Al 21912015 - 10:24 Al 211112015- 9:15A1 211112015 - 11:08 Al Page 107 of 350 REQUESTING DEPARTMENT. PUBLIC WORKS /PARKS AND GROUNDS DEPARTMENT CONTACT. Glenda Hall, Forestry and Grounds /Streets Manager TERM: March 1, 2015 to February 29, 2016 SOURCE FOR PURCHASE: Bid No. 020 - 2730- 131JMA — "Two Year Contract for Landscape Maintenance" ACCOUNT NUMBER: 001 - 2730 - 572 -46 -98 VENDORS: Creative Lawn Maintenance, Enviroscapes Plus, First Genesis Lawn Service, BG Katz Property Maintenance, LV Superior Landscaping, Novo Arbor, Phoenix Landscape Service, Superior Landscaping, and Vincent and Sons Landscaping. ANNUAL EXPENDITURE: $670,000.00 DESCRIPTION OF BID EXTENSION: On February 19, 2013, City Commission approved the bid award for Landscape Maintenance to nine landscape contractors for a two year bid term. The vendors perform landscaping services for the various parks, building grounds, medians and right -of -ways, lots, alley ways, the Boynton Beach Cemetery, utilities sites, the CRA, the Nuisance Abatement Program and the Median Restoration Project. This bid also included Additional Services for new areas and arborist services as needed. The bid documents allows for three (3) one -year renewal terms. All nine (9) landscape contractors have agreed to extend the bid for an additional one -year period with the same terms, conditions and pricing. REQUESTING DEPARTMENT. RECREATION AND PARKS DEPARTMENT CONTACT. Wally Majors, Director of Recreation and Parks TERM: February 18, 2014 to February 17, 2016 SOURCE FOR AWARD: RFQ No. 015- 2710 -09 1JA —"Three Year Lease for Concession Operations at Boynton Beach's Oceanfront Park" VENDOR: B & J Catering, Inc. MONTHLY RENT: $500.00 DESCRIPTION OF BID EXTENSION: City Commission approved the award for a three year lease with B & J Catering on February 17, 2009. The RFQ allowed for two (2) additional two -year lease extensions subject to vendor acceptance, satisfactory performance and determination that the renewal is in the best interest of the City. The Oceanfront Cafe provides a service for the permit holders and visitors who visit the beach year round. Staff has been satisfied with B & J Catering and has recommended that the lease be extended for an additional two years at $500.00 per month. REQUESTING DEPARTMENT. LIBRARY DEPARTMENT CONTACT. Craig Clark, Library Director TERM: April 1, 2013 to March 31, 2015 SOURCE FOR AWARD: Resolution R09 -136 and R10 -153 — "Restated Three Year Lease Agreement for Library Cafe" VENDOR: B & J Catering, Inc. MONTHLY RENT: $500.00 DESCRIPTION OF BID EXTENSION: On March 17, 2009, City Commission awarded the lease for the operations of the Library Cafe to B & J Catering, Inc. — the only respondent to this RFQ. On October 19, 2010, City Commission approved a restated lease agreement with B & J Catering to reduce the initial rent for the operation of the Library Cafe due to low traffic at the cafe. Due to continued low traffic and slow sales, the rent has been maintained at $500.00 per month. The Cafe provides a service to those people visiting the Library for personal use and /or those individuals attending meetings held in the Library's program rooms. The RFQ allowed for two (2) additional two -year lease extensions subject to vendor acceptance, satisfactory performance and determination that the renewal is in the best interest of the City. Staff recommends that the lease be extended for the second of two (2) two -year extensions. n e Ch�. y of Boynton Beach HijancelPwurement Services 100 E 8oynton Beach &xievard P.0, SOX310 _q -�. '� III ;r-aM- Teleph,wie No- (561) 742431C M. (S61) 742-6316 11 1 1 11 � � I I N ! I I T � 11, 1 1 11 1 11 1 1 ! EMwnuNMM;NCN20= B.G. KATZ PROPERTY MAINTENANCE -� *.�°' "�'"`""� NAME OF COMPANY SiGKL4rtJR— NAME OF REPRESENTATWE (please print) .01IIII d2- TITLE America's GaWway to the Cuifstream Page 110 of 350 Fin an celProcurem en t Services 100 E Boynton Beach Boulevard P. O. Box 310 Boynton Beach-, F1oridrL1U7- Telephone No: (561) 742-6310 FAX. (561) 742-6316 1: EI �-M! 1111 ! 1 ` 1111 11 11 11 1i P V Yes, I agree to extend the existing Bid under the same Terms, Conditions and pricing for an additional year. -MM 14 Z klyl I 101arCOTITMOXIMN I NAME OF R&RESENTATIVE (please print) L / DATE d 4X 9 1 America's Gateway to the Gulfstream Page 11 of 350 The City of Boynton Beach FinancelProcurement Services' 100 E. Boynton Beach Boulevar P.O. Box 310 Telephone No: (561) 742-6310 FAX. (561) 742-6316 • 1I 1�11!11 1111111111111 11 59 1 9LCJ:4 01 7" Yes, I agree to extend the existing Bid under the same Terms, Conditions and pricing for an additional year. FIRST GENESIS LAWN SERVICE INC. NAME • REPRESENTATIVE (please print) k°- DATE — AbVY\W-q Ea% �1 - nf-A E AIL blAAL TITLE America's Gateway to the Gulfstream Page 113 of 350 The City of I 30ount1 n Beach FinancelProcurement Services 100 E. Boynton Beach Bouleva P. O. Box 310 Telephone No: (561) 742 6310 1 - FAX. (561) 742-6316 7 11111111111111111M ITIONAI-A • V F • • Yes, I agree to extend the existing Bid under the same Terms, Conditions and pricing for an additional year. -M NAME OF COMPANY NAME ORA (please print) , W'Wf'A SIGNATURWE W TITLf� E-MAIL America's Gateway to the Guffstream Page 11 of 350 rV1L The City Of Younton Beach FinancelProcurement Services 100 E. Boynton Beach Bouleva 1 lri P.O. Bax310 01 Telephone No: (561) 742-6310 FAX. (561) 742-6316 ' 1:4 liall" I 1 • 1] 7-717—= #TX-93 11irsol j**YJ Z 11 &1 —4z Yes, I agree to extend the existing Bid under the same Terms, Conditions and pricing for an additional year. • I A , NAME OF REPRESENTATIVE (please print) DATE — 21 x SIGNATURE - fr - esr' j elf TITLE 5 CfQ7 ' I M I c9aej e AO VJ61HOC C01A Page 115 of 350 Finance/Procurement Services 1 B 00 E. Boynton Beach Boulevar B B P.O. Box 310 c ori a Bo =nton Bea hFlorid 3 a3 ch F., 44- 0 il � li Ill 'I'ii Fill � Y e % | a ree to extend the existing Bid und ores me Terms, Conditions and pricing for an additional year. T »« »t MJ ZINT11=41 1"N" 1 A 525/- 9 - z /5' ? (AREA CODE) TELEPHONE NUMBER CO5 00 " G tir f dD.4 6,lewkw E-MAIL V r America's Gateway to mewl _ Page 116 0 350 r� FinancelProcurement Services 100 E Boynton Beach Boulevard P.O. Box 310 Telephone No: (561) 742-6310 FAX. (561) 742-6316 7 Agreement between the CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH and SUPERIOR LANDSCAPING and LAWN SERVICE, INC.: Yes, I agree to extend the existing Bid under the same Terms, Conditions and pricing for an additional year. �111 ■ :4 ATJ 101:4 7 .7 X, 9 rei M07 M = EE 21� GIE PDT 5 NAME OF REPRESENTATIVE (please print) 5 DATE k4'WTu EMi,5j0r) j4AAjA6e,- TITLE I I To FT Wel 4 1 11: 4 1: 5 : I . rel E-MAIL America's Gateway to the Gulfstrearn Page 117 of 350 Yes, I agree to extend the existing Bid under the same Terms, Conditions and pricing for an additional year. (please print) DATE� ge'XI -- r m_A: E-MAIL 11 -1111, 01111, 1 1 '. it Page 118 of 350 I A&L f f M—Pi f 7 M67 FinancelProcurement Services 100 E Boynton Beach Boulevard P. O. Box 310 BoyrftoaA-mctjgadda r r Telephone No: (561) 742-6310 FAX. (561) 742-6316 January 12, 2015 IN 71i'll iiirq��!!!j I R7.Tr-T:"V-.Tr.Trr:Tr:7ri I : 1 7 - . . • & I , • — Yes, I agree to extend the existing lease agreement under the same Terms and Conditions a Price for an additional two-year period. Monthly Lease Payments remain at $500.00/month. i '051111175TOoM". ymp �M M B & J CATERING, INC. SIGNATURE James Gullbeault NAME OF REPRESENTATIVE TITLE (please print) DATE W-0 SV qX001 91 =11 9:4 q4N. W il, 1:4 z [11 IT, I America's Gateway to the Gulfstream Page 119 of 350 I� " f � RFPNAME: THREE YEAR LEASE AGREEMENT F1'.)R WINIGESSION OPERATI13INIS AT sowITION BEACH LIBRARY CAFt I agree to extend the existing Agreernellt under sarne Terms and GondlicIns arl lease payment. B & J LATE RINIQ I. INC NAME OF REPRESENTATIVEff Please Ptint �) /, <:--- DATE SMATU RE' TFFU gza R rUl. LItA E-MAIL ADDRESS America's Gateway to the GuM;fream Page 120 of 350 6.F. CONSENT AGENDA 2/17/2015 CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH AGENDA ITEM REQUEST FORM •T•]► ail► gil&1111 Eel ► ►hl=1 =11 Il► Eel .7_rIf►ahIFIKIZf~� REQUESTED ACTION BY COMMISSION: Request cancellation of RFP #002 - 2411 -15 /JMA, "Interactive Voice Response System for the Development Department" and staff will re- advertise. EXPLANATION OF REQUEST: The City advertised RFP #002 - 2411 -15 /JMA, "Interactive Voice Response System for the Development Department" with a closing date of October 10, 2014. Procurement received and opened one (1) response. After reviewing the proposal received it is felt that it would be in the best interest of the City to cancel the RFP and re- advertise in an attempt to receive multiple proposals. Staff will review and make any recommended changes prior to the re- advertisement. HOW WILL THIS AFFECT CITY PROGRAMS OR SERVICES? This will delay the replacement of the current IVR system in the Development Department but staff from Development, IT and Finance have discussed this issue and feels that it is appropriate to request this cancellation and re- advertise. FISCAL IMPACT: None ALTERNATIVES: Do not cancel and re -issue this RFP and proceed with current response. �� 0 0 _ ll 1 *11102:2 wi 1► F STRATEGIC PLAN APPLICATION: it 9 Is this a grant? No Grant Amount: 0=kTjIATA=1 13 Department Reviewer Action Date Finance Howard, Tim Approved 2/9/2015 - 10:24 AIM Finance Howard, Tim Approved 2/9/2015 - 10:25 AIM Legal Swanson, Lynn Approved 2/11/2015 - 9:10 AIM City Manager LaVerriere, Lori Approved 2/11/2015 - 11:09 AIM Page 121 of 350 6.G. CONSENT AGENDA 2/17/2015 REQUESTED ACTION BY COMMISSION: Approve issuance of purchase order in the amount of $29,854.95 to Allied Aluminum and Railing for the purpose of repair and modification to fencing at Hester Center based on three (3) written quotes. EXPLANATION OF REQUEST: In accordance with City's purchasing policies purchases over $25,000 require City Commission approval. Numerous locations of fence at the Hester Center have fallen into disrepair. Thus, maintenance is in order. However, staff has taken this opportunity to consider fence modifications to improve the appearance of Hester Center as well as to reduce future maintenance expenses. This goal will be accomplished by the removal of large portions of perimeter fencing and the placement of smaller sections of decorative fence. Removal of portions of the perimeter fencing as a fixed asset will impart greatly reduced maintenance expenses in future years. This proposed project consists of the following elements: 1. Remove the 8 foot tall black chain link fence adjacent to Seacrest Boulevard and NE 17th Avenue frontages as well as a small portion around the basketball court. This will significantly improve the appearance of the Hester Center from the public roadways. 2. Remove the swing gate at the entrance to Hester Center on Seacrest Boulevard. 3. Construct a new smaller swing gate at the pedestrian crosswalk leading from the playground area to the front door of the Hester Center. This new swing gate is internal to the property, not visible from Seacrest Boulevard, and is required by the County Health Department to support after school activities. 4. Construct a new 5 feet tall, black decorative aluminum, fence on the playground perimeter. This fence too is required by the Health Department to support after school activities. The aluminum fence will provide an enhancde appearance from the public roadways, particularly from the intersection focal point at Seacrest Boulevard and 17th Avenue. 5. Lastly, other remaining fence around the tennis courts, racquetball courts, and basketball courts will be repaired in place. It should also be noted that upon completion of this work, in house Public Works staff plan to upgrade the irrigation system and place new plantings at the intersection of Seacrest Boulevard and 17th Avenue. This will further transform the appearance of the Hester Center property. HOW WILL THIS AFFECT CITY PROGRAMS OR SERVICES? Removal of perimeter fencing and construction of decorative fencing will greatly improve the appearance of Hester Center. This will lend a more inviting feel to patrons. FISCAL IMPACT: Budgeted This project was budgeted in the capital improvement program in the amount of $25,000, project number RP1504, account number 302 - 4209 - 572 - 62.01. The award amount is $29,854.95 plus a 10% contingence of $2,985 leaving a net budget deficiency of $7,839.95. These funds will be transferred from other projects at year end that do not use all budgeted funds. Page 122 of 350 ALTERNATIVES: Repair only the failed fence areas. STRATEGIC PLAN: Great Neighborhoods: Safe, Affordable and Livable, Growing Jobs and Business Opportunities, Positive and Exciting Boynton Beach Image: "Curb appeal" to Reputation STRATEGIC PLAN APPLICATION: Visual enhancement of the Hester Center will present a positive image of City services to all those that pass by. Vendor is located in Boynton Beach. CLIMATE ACTION: No CLIMATE ACTION DISCUSSION: Is this a grant? No Grant Amount: fl^K ITC A P%T@ VENDOR NAME: Allied Aluminum and Railing START DATE: 2/18/2015 END DATE: 8/2/2015 CONTRACT VALUE: $32,839.95 MINORITY OWNED CONTRACTOR ?: No EXTENSION AVAILABLE?: No EXTENSION EXPLANATION: ATTACHMENTS: Type Quotes REVIEWERS: Department Public Works F inance Legal City Manager Description Quote Summary Action Approved Approved Approved Approved Date 2/9/2015 - 11:10 AIM 2/9/2015 - 1:51 PM 2/11/2015 - 9:11 AIM 2/11/2015 - 11:07 AIM Page 123 of 350 Ln Lf) Lr) ko r-1 H IAN • • 0 Z LG z ril 140 Q Pe PU Q Z 1 :5 P E-1 C) "a H m Iq 0 u tD U Q 0 w w 0 FD H C3 0 14 C) Ix a 0 04 ski H z a 1 M 0 z g P4 H � 0 0 Do >q H 124 p p p P4 ul H H 04 N a p pe x 0 p Fq z � Of 1 �q w a 14 W > Ix Q t W Q 14 14 V1 E, z a) rD 0 w U p ca 0 W s D 1 U) 04 M W 0 U m 124 �H z CQ 0 z H 0 0 E H 1 p 0 H H S 04 u 0 Ol • M P4 04 H W m z Ln C) C) C) 0 0 Ln 0) M C) 0 M (D (n O N C; dl 0 01 N w C In M 00 Ch 03 m m m 00 Ln H H W cq a) 'A cq 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C) (D M 0 0 0 a 0 m Ln 0 0 Lf) 0 9 p 4 w 4 rl) 4 0 Ln Ln C) N (D C) m N w CN Lf) co (YI 00 m m m z Ln H H w C14 0 0 ix w C? �4 04 1-4 co H ril 4 m 4 cn ul 04 • a ) �q 2: n �q 0 �q Cl C• �q m u z PQ p P� z fx W. r4 1 P4 Ol Ho� 40� Fq 0 0 W P4 H F4 Z w z w z 0 0 C) 0 0 0 0 H H Q N H u H 0 z H • • ul W EA 0 wD Ol c) 0 0 000 Z u) 0 CD 0 6100 P 4 C 4 H M -zr w U) OD -4 Ln H m C14 C%4 "D N M -4' Ol W 0 I pm 0 0 0 0 0 B -� - C� O Lt O 0'-4 M M 0 N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C� C� O (� C; O 0 0 0 0 0 0 H H H H H rA 104 z t. 1 . J4 pH 09 04 H F H W "T 04 H 1 z 9 9 p 4 w 4 rl) 4 N N 124 z 04 r N W6P4 r 6 w C3 0 W _) w x ril u z 14 P4 w w 91 C4 r) w 04 w Ix w 0 ix w C? �4 04 co H ril 4 m 4 cn ul 04 • a ) �q 2: n �q 0 �q Cl C• �q m u z PQ p P� z fx W. r4 1 P4 wu� Ho� 40� Fq 0 0 0 H F4 Z w z w z zwz 14Z W IXQ MH NQH HmH MPH Q N H u H H > H H H Nmw lulw �qmw ul w �q ul w V) OQ mQ Z -I - • " Q U Q z 0 W ON M • N O 1 ♦ w w �O 0 H C4 r-4 M P4 PP M P. F-4 fX r-� M C)4 r�4 P4 p z z XPO r P 0 1 8PO - PO IZPO WP • x 1-i• z mnx • mnx • woo woo P400 moo PO �>Xu Eu ho HEU HEU HEU HE OXPQ xm mxm w zxm XE XO�D WO�D 0 �D NO�D P4 0 �D 90 wum zum �Dum wum �Dum WU 1 P4 0 z H • • ul W EA 0 wD Ol c) 0 0 000 Z u) 0 CD 0 6100 P 4 C 4 H M -zr w U) OD -4 Ln H m C14 C%4 "D N M -4' Ol W 0 I pm 0 0 0 0 0 B -� - C� O Lt O 0'-4 M M 0 N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C� C� O (� C; O 0 0 0 0 0 0 H H H H H rA Page 124 of 350 O "T -V -V v "V UN N N N N N U0 0 0 0 0 0 z -1 Page 124 of 350 Ln Ln Ln w MIR OVI • �D Z C3 ID 0 • 0 14 0 04 al z 0 a4 Ln z 04 0 0 w F P4 E� 04 In • C)l 040 W w En �D • W 134 04 0 04 M 0� M lip ral p p H In 0 U FO ul Ix W 0 Ga Pr CQ 0 z 0 0 H U 04 H 0 H 4 w ul H 0 e D Ea W Ot Ca W 04 04 H d4 z V] H 0 z I Page 125 of 350 REQUEST FOR OFFICE ASSISTANCE F R 0 M b;�m5c­ - It Date: 0 Copy Work — Number of Copies: Double-sided / Collated & Stapled Distribution: EM, M, Request for 121/Direct Pay Req. for the attached - Vendor or Person to be reimbursed: Vendo 744, nro Account Number: 30,2 - ffr�,Q2 - - 63 - Project No.: List Items w/Quantities & Unit Costs on the back of this request. Cost: Cost: 0 File As: 11 OTHER: Tlyeez i tt 7, 8S 75 �� 7 T4 M, r, ri ry r4 I MIT I r.7 TT I T' ff 7 -M r M I � I I � • � I � � � I I � � ! I • I : I I � 1 ! I I � 11 � � � � I I I I Page 126 of 350 350 d „ >� »: <r,r<?# <2 w: Page 128 of 350 �� >\ .... . � . . PRO ».v EZ \b\:\\/ AR �\ \fCEPR iE . »K( w \ \. 1. REMOVE EYJSITING PERIMETER FENCING AND BASKETBALL FENCING 8' H FENCE REMOVAL 949 LF @ j ff f c&o LF= l(YH FENCE REMOVAL 281 LF @ $ 6.&c LF = 2. INSTALL 1W H BLACK VINYL CHAIN LINK ITOP RAIL AND POSTS SCH40) 10'H VINYLTENNIS FENCE 27 LF @ $_� 1`55 1(r HVINYLTENNIS FENCE END POST4 EA.@ -40 3. FURNISH AND INSTALL 6 H 6 GA BLACK VINYL CHAIN LINK AROUND TOT LOT (Top RAIL AND POSTS SCH40) 4. FURNISH AND INSTALL 2 EA SWING GATES 4' H VINYL COATED 4 END POST W. HOOK UP 3 EA. @ $ -1-56c - -0 $-AE- 4'H BRACE AND TRUSS ASSEMBLY 3 EA. @ $ Amc, ---o - $__a 4' H VINYL COATED SWING GATE 12'OPG 2 EA.@ S %0 -00 = $ 00 S. REPAIR 6H AND 10H VINYL COATED FENCES (TOP RAIL AND POSTS SCH40� VINYL MID RAIL250 LF 10' H VINYL TENNIS FENCE BRACE AND TRUSS ASSEMBLIES 3 EA.@ $ 6'VINYL TENNIS FENCE BRACE AND TRUSS ASSEMBLIES 2 EA.@$ t= 6. FURNISH AND INSTALL SH BLACK MECHANICAL ALUM. FENCE (I- PICKETS) W/ MID RAIL AROUN1 TOTLOT 5'H MECHANICAL ALUM. FENCE W/4r MID RAIL 318 LF @ $-Ao, -00 LF = $ t2- 7. PERMIT FEES $ 15 fS & a ■ Page 129 of 350 Page 130 of 350 TO: Kevin Ramsey, Senior Project Manager Public Works, Engineering City of Boynton Beach 100 E. Boynton Beach Blvd Boynton Beach, FL 33435 1 47. I ZA IWIN 1 DW- 11 1101 IJ WRI F."I 0 M V a 135 TIJ p ILI Michael Brown Allied Aluminum & Railing, Inc Page 131 of 350 S, REPAIR fi'H AND lAY H VINYL COATED FENCES (TOP RAIL ANO POSTS SCH40) 'VIKYL IV110 RAIL 25� �F @ S LF 'a $_ 10 34V!?T 7F FENCE BRACE 6' V Wfl. E? WS FtINCE BRACL TRUSS ASSEM313fS I EA. 's 'la' HVINYL - ENNIS Sr FURNISH AND INSTALL 5'14 GLACX WICHANICAL ALLM, FENCE IV PIC107-5) WJ MID RAIL AROUND Mlr LOT rP Q r 7.. PERMIT FEES' _-,. �' ) , " I, - , - OT, (III S 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 71 TOTAL (MMS 1, 2, 4, S, 6. 7) Page 132 of 350 la REMOVE EXlg'rl PfRIME'lltil FIENCING AND BASKMALL FIENCING' 13"H FENCT RLF54 2.Rl Z. INS TAtL W H 0LACX VINYL CHAIN LINK (TOP RAIL AMO PCtj SCH lb7i" AIONYI, — WIN '74f—t 21 LF ,4rT "4DPIZ57 4 EA.. _0 10' H P7 3. FURNISH AND INSTAU W 6 GGA IA IANYL CHAIN WYX AROUND TOT LOT (TOP RAIL AND POSTS 6' 4, Fj GA V 1P1, rQATED PENCE 32d LF V END PC5T W. k=(QP2 E 6"VINYL COX= CORNER P05T We 40,0K UP 3 VA, 6' BRACE AN07RUSS A=MBLS' 9,)' rb 6 4. FURNU AND INSTALL 2 EA SWING GATES VINYL COATED 4' END -POST W. HOWUP .41, 0 4' H H RACE AM) TRUSS ASSEMBLY 3 EX @ A S, REPAIR fi'H AND lAY H VINYL COATED FENCES (TOP RAIL ANO POSTS SCH40) 'VIKYL IV110 RAIL 25� �F @ S LF 'a $_ 10 34V!?T 7F FENCE BRACE 6' V Wfl. E? WS FtINCE BRACL TRUSS ASSEM313fS I EA. 's 'la' HVINYL - ENNIS Sr FURNISH AND INSTALL 5'14 GLACX WICHANICAL ALLM, FENCE IV PIC107-5) WJ MID RAIL AROUND Mlr LOT rP Q r 7.. PERMIT FEES' _-,. �' ) , " I, - , - OT, (III S 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 71 TOTAL (MMS 1, 2, 4, S, 6. 7) Page 132 of 350 6.H. CONSENT AGENDA 2/17/2015 REQUESTED ACTION BY COMMISSION: Approve issuance of purchase order to Premier Printing Solutions of Coral Gables, FL for the printing and mailing of the City's annual report and calendar for an amount not to exceed $30,750.00. The award is based on three (3) written quotes. EXPLANATION OF REQUEST: The City planned on developing and issuing an annual report and a calendar in FY14/15. It was decided to combine these projects into one and requested printing quotes from three (3) vendors for the printing of an annual report /calendar. Premier Printing was the successful bidder with a printing quote of $20,935.00 for the printing of 35,000 copies. In accordance with City's purchasing policies the City Manager has the authority to approve purchase orders under $25,000.00. While developing the report /calendar information staff determined that it would be beneficial and efficient if the vendor would also take care of the mailing of the annual report /calendar to the City's residents as opposed to City staff processing and physically taking them to the Post Office and mailing with the City's mailing permit. Based on this decision Premier Printing needed to charge the City for the postage costs, this amounted to approximately $9,500.00 for mailing approximately 27,000 reports /calendars. With the addition of the postage costs it increased the purchase from $20,935.00 to $30,435.00. According to City's purchasing policies the City Commission approval is required for purchases over $25,000.00. Staff is requesting Commission approval not to exceed $30,750.00 based on the final bill for the postage. HOW WILL THIS AFFECT CITY PROGRAMS OR SERVICES? Producing an annual report /calendar is another method of communicating with the City's residents and providing information concerning the City and its operations to City residents. It is intended to encourage City residents to participate and to provide information concerning City Government and available resources and activities for citizens. FISCAL IMPACT: Budgeted Funds for this report /calendar was included in the approved FY14/15 budget under account number 001 - 1212 - 519 -4710 ( Marketing /Communications - Printing) and 001 - 1211 - 512 -4112 (City Hall- Postage) 0NI=1:7► Fill IU / *3111111111[= STRATEGIC PLAN: �g 0 0 _ ll 1 *11102:2 wi 1► I_ 1» 4[ Kill 1101 Ll A CLIMATE ACTION: No CLIMATE ACTION DISCUSSION: Page 133 of 350 Is this a grant? No Grant Amount: ATTACHMENTS: Type n Quotes REVIEWERS: Department F inance F inance Legal City Manager Description Premier Purchase Req backup Reviewer Action Howard, Tim Approved 6- coward, Tim Approved Swanson, Lynn Approved LaVerriere, Lori Approved Page 134 of 350 Ln Ln 'A ra o 0 P Ej 04 � 0 z P 14 > ril �D � � H E- F H u U > z Q 0 z H 0 8 H H 1 6 I E p H 0 H Iq (X ca u H 0 ca E4 W W a4 Qi C4 H W In �4 In H 14 z 0 m 0 0 z 0 m 0 Q Eq LO �4 U2 U W 0 d �q E� 0 x O O 0 0 0 z w E4 H Lo 0 0 z 0 0 E4 p (V) rQ C4 H ca OD 04 0 N r-4 U 0 r4 01, d z 0 ri) H 0 E-4 x H 0 F�C Q a4 > H 0 U2 (N Ix 14 w M 134 C4 M E z a4 Ln 0 l< C)4 H pD z 0 0 0 F-, H Z O 0 E4 H U) 0 H ca D; 04 E4 I In 0 H Q : b u z z 0 CY P4 F4 p DI ;> R 8 rn W DQ Ix �D U E4 W 0 C � C() 04 Mx U) ril �D � � H E- F H u U > z Q 0 z H 0 8 H H 1 6 I E p H 0 H Iq (X ca u H 0 ca E4 W W a4 Qi C4 H W In �4 In H 14 z 0 0 0 0 0 0 m LO cla W 0 d m Ol 09 0 0 0 0 w 0 0 Lo 0 0 kD 0 m 0 Ln m Ln 01, d z 0 H 0 0 FO C9 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 rn Ix �D 0 0 C � C() 0 ul H HO) z 0 41 N 0 .14 a) LO rd p ca z Ix z 'HWN H w 0 W mmu 0 m ca ril 0 4 �4 �H C4 0 z H x w z x ril 0 M ul U ix ca 0 �4 U X Z H n4 z H co 4J Fl 0 > 0 > HO 4WHPI rl� H w woul H .[�W W P r4 ri a) Ss PO 0 m 0 r-A �4 -r-A Z Z MHO X w H 0 4(dHH W 0 EPP 1 Z 6 K PQ .4 z z I ul 0 1 P4 • cil I x 14 z \ w H H 0 v q WOZH () >q � H P4 fx p N N -w 4 H U 0 E M Rug 0 > rj]4 n4 k H F4 O >qQ w 0> 4 >+ M m 0) W P 0 M>PO 04 8 E- 0 > �4 H X H x 44 0 d Q X Or-A Q:E W QX Our doo ZWOO Ho x u 2WOO Ln X U >4 0) a) x m 0 H p (n x Q H rd cd r ) ch U r. M Owum U 04U rd M cq ril 1:4 1 0 z n l ZEM 04 0 Q z W ul W Ol 00 00 O 0 0 C) H Ln Ln H Cq r U) m H m � C N CY W 114 N LO w o Co% (A 'W M 0) m 0 H m PO 0 0 0 0 0 C! M M 0 0 Ln CO ( 0 0 0 0 0 0 C; O C:; O 0 0 1-1 H r I z 0 E-1 0 U W F-4 I 0 z 1 H P4 E-4 z 0 u u 9 0200ca H H z zz� F-i H O Z R R R ril HHHHZ Q OQ rQ m 0 H zzzzH HHHF - q CO 1 r4 fx 0 0 04 04 a4124 U P4 0 0 N Ln Ln Llr) Fl C N H rA r• H CN CN 0 Iq rq H U,A H , - 00 0 0 40 0 0 z H P-1 9 G, H z M O U 14 :V4 E-4 ul H z 0 H H H H Ol 14 Ix (L) rc5 ri 0 V4 0 00 4J M 0 0 0 • u) • r) 41 0 m 0 4-) 0 • �4 • 4J �4 rl 0 (D I Om F� �4 a) PQ § �4 P4 E� • • rd • Q�O z 5 m • 00 H p u CD ril H (D (d CO ca m 0 ra H (U (d 0 r �) 41 41 a) aj Ol • th r 4,1 CV Ol 04 U U Page 135 of 350 TO] M P M MM Cty of Boyton Beach Eleanor Krusell 100 E Boynton Beach Blvd Boynton Beach, FL 33435 flc WrOW M. WMIU&MI Descdpdon -------------- Postage Paid by Premier Printing Solutions (Non Taxable) City of Boynton Beach 29pg + 4pg Calendar M All orders are subject to a 10% overlunder run as acceptable within the printing Industry. AN Sales are subject to a 7% Dads (6% Broward), Sales Tax charge. If Sales Tax Exempt cefficate Number Is net provided at the time or delivery, Florida Sales Tax cannot be credited or reimbursed at a later date. Acceptance of this invoke constitutes evidence of the di ° s sagalaction with the services rendered herein by Premier Printing Solutions, Inc. it is here that a service charge of 1 1/2 per ffKwM vAil be applied to all delinquent amounts over thirty (30) days. You agree to indemnify Premier Printing Solutions, Inc. for all expenses we may in toe collection of the amounts due under this agreement and to pay all costs of collection, including Attorney's fees and court costs. Thank you for working with Premier Printing Solutions, Inc. rjay . ments $0.00 p 6tv r # A ' G Y N 40111-11 136 of 350 Krusell, Eleanor �` Jr��l! !, �t' j2ts;t�j� '?����� Il�tlilltJ } # " � ''rtt r�iY! }1 }���ii}6 } }il) }`;, �;_ ��t } ��, 1)�t� } \�yay`" }) }�` ,{ { `.��i I .,�f &W �� � � �iii�� �((it������ft717;x �i � t, ���iffty, ! �4 '_,, PROJECT PROPOSAL City of Boynton Beach Proposal Date: 12123/14 Eleanor KruseIl 1. ications Manager Proposal #: 00009168 100 E. Boynton Beach Blvd. Project Name: City of Boynton Boynton Beach, FIL 33435 Calendar x Finished size: 9 x 12 New art supplied Physical proof for final client approval Trim scom -fold -qollate� saddlAstitch hanging) and carton separately 0 Page 137 of 350 Page 138 of 350 F107-7-TI'Mr-WIMIM Client: City of Boynton Beach ,-ontact Name: Eleanor Krusell Printing (ready for mailing 5-6 business days after proof approval*) $29,325.00 3500 NW Boca Qa*.c� Sui'e 601 Boca Ratoi Plot do 33d3 ' P 561338 7 797 F 561 338 7 704 W m Iz 4 "' P9 P" 1 c 6 r3 Client: City of Boynton Beach Description: City of Boynton Beach Calendar: Printing/ Mailing Services quote Total: $31,818.00 [on# ran "Im, TOMIT-W1711 Printing overruns/underruns will not exceed 10% of the quantity ordered. The printer will bill for the actual quantity delivered within this tolerance. rX47-77T. WI•- a!N 3530 NW Boca RaTo Bmdevarc 5%J.e. 603 1 Boca Rato - or da 3343'6 P W 338 7797 F5613387704 Wrn *664 ", -bfr350 U7175rul; IUMM-0 4552 N. San Andros West Palm Beach, FL 33411 pi tol"al t0i tGNI Uf I I Estimate 01/06/2015 1970 02/06/2015 Compmy Truck 9< 1 i a 4 1 It* 1 9 1 Pillow OILOWN Z= � Page 141 0 350 7.A. BIDS AND PURCHASES OVER $100,000 2/17/2015 REQUESTED ACTION BY COMMISSION: Approve award for the "ANNUAL SUPPLY OF SODIUM HYDROXIDE (LIQUID CAUSTIC SODA) Bid No. 025 - 2821- 15 /JMA to Brenntag Mid -South Inc. of Orlando, FL as the lowest, most responsive bidder meeting all specifications. Estimated annual expenditure is $165,000. This product will be ordered on an "As Needed" basis. EXPLANATION OF REQUEST: BID TERM: MARCH 2, 2015 through MARCH 1, 2016 On January 9, 2015, Procurement Services received and opened four (4) bid proposals for the supply of sodium hydroxide. The bids were solicited based on the total estimated purchase for the year using 115,000 gallons or 367 dry tons of 50% NaOH with important chemical criteria specified. The four bid proposals were: Allied Universal Corporation $510.55/per dry ton Brenntag Mid - South, Inc. $498.00 /per dry ton Key Chemical, Inc. $554.90/per dry ton Univar USA, Inc. $579.60/per dry ton Based on the bid submittals, Utilities Division Manager Bevis Pigott, and Chief Operator, Leon Liberus recommend that the bid be awarded to Brenntag Mid -South Inc. HOW WILL THIS AFFECT CITY PROGRAMS OR SERVICES? Feed water to the West Water Treatment Plant (West WTP) has a high pH and contains the dissolved gas hydrogen sulfide. Sulfuric acid is therefore added to the feedwater before the membrane filtration system to lower the pH, thereby aiding in reducing the formation of calcium carbonate scale on the membranes. However, this produces carbon dioxide which, along with hydrogen sulfide, remains dissolved in the water and is not separated out by the membrane system. During the degasification process that follows, sodium hydroxide is added to the system to neutralize the corrosive and noxious odors associated with the release of hydrogen sulfide to the atmosphere. This addition also raises the pH which prevents scaling of the pipelines to the consumer. Thus, minimal adjustment of pH or removal of hydrogen sulfide would pose great risks to the City's infrastructure and to public health. FISCAL IMPACT: Budgeted Funds are available in account number 401 - 2811 - 536- 52 -35. Actual Expenditure for Sodium Hydroxide in FY 2012/2013: $163,839.00 Actual Expenditure for Sodium Hydroxide in FY 2013/2014: $ 82,162.00 The lower than normal usage last fiscal year was due to the West WTP operating at a lower capacity resulting from various equipment malfunctions and operational efficiency decisions. The projected expenditure for this fiscal year is anticipated to be approximately $165,000. ALTERNATIVES: The City of Boynton Beach could explore the use of other neutralizing agents or anti - scalants. However, this may lead to higher water treatment costs or possible water quality infractions. Page 142 of 350 STRATEGIC PLAN: �g 0: f_ l 1 *11102:2 wi 1► I_ 1» 41 a_ l 1101 Ll A CLIMATE ACTION: No CLIMATE ACTION DISCUSSION: Is this a grant? No Grant Amount: fl^K ITC A P%T@ VENDOR NAME: Brenntag Mid South START DATE: 3/2/2015 END DATE: 3/1/2016 CONTRACT VALUE: MINORITY OWNED CONTRACTOR ?: No EXTENSION AVAILABLE?: Yes EXTENSION EXPLANATION: Three additional one (1) year renewals per bid documents. ATTACHMENTS: Type D Tab Sheets D Other D Memo REVIEWERS: Department F inance F inance Legal City Manager Description Bid Tabulation Brenntag Iid -South Proposal Department Recommendation Reviewer Action Date Howard, Tim Approved 1/23/2015 - 9:23 AIM Howard, Tim Approved 1/23/2015 - 0:23 AIM Cherot, Jim Approved 1/26/2015 - 10:35 AIM LaVerriere, Lori Approved 2/11/2015 - 10:33 AIM Page 143 of 350 ANNUAL SUPPLY OF SODIUM HYDROXIDE (LIQUID CAUSTIC SODA) "Offers from the vendors listed herein are the only offers BID DUE DATE: JANUARY 9, 2015 received timely as of the above receiving date and time. BID DUE TIME: 230 P.M. All other offers submitted in response to this solicitation, BID NO.: 025 - 2821- 15 /JMA if any, are hereby rejected as late" VENDORS ALLIED UNIVERSAL CORPORATION BRENNTAG MID - SOUTH, INC. KEY CHEMICAL INC. 3901 NW 115 Avenue 250 Central Florida Parkway 9503 Dovewood Place Miami, FL 33178 Orlando, FL 32824 Waxhaw, NC 28173 Tel.: (305) 888 -2623 Tel.: (407) 857 -9310 Tel.: (704) 843 -9873 Fax: (305) 463 -8369 Fax: (407) 851 -3512 Fax: (704) 973 -9281 E -mail: cathieg @allieduniversal.com E -mail: subach @brenntag.com E -mail: tgrimes @keychemicalinc.com Contact: Catherine Guillarmod Contact: Joe Funkhouser Contact: Toni Grimes BIDDER ACKNOWLEDGEMENT YES YES YES SUBMITTED SPECIFICATION CHECK OFF SHEET YES YES YES SUBMITTED - page 4 PRICE PROPOSAL - 50% SOLUTION SODIUM $510.55 $498.00 $554.90 HYDROXIDE - UNIT PRICE PER DRY TON CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE /ANALYSIS YES YES YES SUBMITTED MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEETS (MSDS) YES YES YES SUBMITTED CALENDAR DAYS FOR DELIVERY 2 to 3 2 to 3 3 SUBMITTED NON COLLUSION AFFIDAVIT YES YES YES SUBMITTED ANTI -KICK BACK AFFIDAVIT YES YES YES SUBMITTED MINORITY OWNED BUSINESS YES /NOT A MINORITY YES /NOT A MINORITY YES /NOT A MINORITY SUBMITTED OWNED BUSINESS OWNED BUSINESS OWNED BUSINESS DRUG FREE WORKPLACE YES YES YES SUBMITTED COMMENTS Page 144 of 350 ANNUAL SUPPLY OF SODIUM HYDROXIDE (LIQUID CAUSTIC SODA) BID DUE DATE: JANUARY 9, 2015 BID DUE TIME: 230 P.M. BID NO.: 025 - 2821- 15 /JMA "Offers from the vendors listed herein are the only offers received timely as of the above receiving date and time. All other offers submitted in response to this solicitation, if any, are hereby rejected as late" VENDORS UNIVAR USA, INC. 4 Steel Road East Morrisville, PA 19067 Tel.: (215) 428 -6444 Fax: (215) 428 -3993 E -mail: linda.campbell@univarusa.com Contact: Linda Campbell BIDDER ACKNOWLEDGEMENT SUBMITTED YES SPECIFICATION CHECK OFF SHEET YES SUBMITTED - page 4 PRICE PROPOSAL - 50% SOLUTION SODIUM $579.60 HYDROXIDE - UNIT PRICE PER DRY TON CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE /ANALYSIS YES SUBMITTED MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEETS (MSDS) YES SUBMITTED CALENDAR DAYS FOR DELIVERY 2 to 3 SUBMITTED NON COLLUSION AFFIDAVIT YES SUBMITTED ANTI -KICK BACK AFFIDAVIT YES SUBMITTED MINORITY OWNED BUSINESS YES /NOTA MINORITY SUBMITTED OWNED BUSINESS DRUG FREE WORKPLACE YES SUBMITTED COMMENTS Page 145 of 350 ww" a" A Page 146 of 350 Man m-, �Ko ANNUAL SUPPLY OF SODIUM HYDROXIDE (LIQUID CAUSTIC SODA) Sealed bids will be received in PROCUREMENT SERVICES, City of Boynton Beach, 100 E. Boynton Beach Boulevard, or mail to P.O. Box 310, Boynton Beach, Florida 33425-0310 on or by: JANUARY 9. 2015 No Later Than 2:30 P.M. (Local Time). Per Palm Beach County Code Section 2-355 after the deadline to respond to this Bid, members if the City Commission are prohibited from communicating directly or indirectly with Bidderg regarding a particular request for proposal, request for qualification, bid, or any other Page 147 of 350 competitive solicitation until such time as the City Commission (1) awards or approves a contract, (2) rejects all responses, • (3) otherwise takes action which ends the solicitation process. Improper communications during this "Cone of Silence" period may result in a penalty as outlined in Palm Beach County Code Section 2-357. CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH I 111 0 R110 Page 148 of 350 "ANNUAL SUPPLY OF SODIUM HYDROXID (LIQUID CAUSTIC SODA)11 i . - . - • • 1 . - I . - - • - - . 0- , • - - -0 I'll qzzliq 11 1W. 14 lei I IM M 1 IZN 0 a- 40 0 0 9. Coordinate all deliveries to the West Water Treatment Plant during the business hours • 7:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., Monday through Friday; with the exception • holidays. ♦ .. I 1 6 J.4 AI IJ:1-All If-ftei 41 toll *4010 0 1 0 01, - 4 Page 149 of 350 1. Acceptable Standard: Rayon Grade — Sodium Hydroxide 2. Sodium Hydroxide will be shipped as liguld caustic soda. 3. Delivery will be a twenty (20) ton minimum load (3,135 gallons). 'v 4. Total Anticipated Annual Volume (not guaranteed) is 115,000 gallons (1,467,400 lbs., or 367 dry tons) of 50% NaOH. v 5. The bidder must submit a certificate of compliance and a certificate analysis, as to the composition of the product with the bid. 6. The successful bidder's shipper is responsible for matching our receiving tank equipment with their tank discharge system. 7. The successful bidder must supply M.S.D.S. (Material Safety Data Sheets) on the product and conduct a one (1) hour safety seminar on site for staff who will handle this material. B. The successful bidder will provide a representative to visit the plant a minimum of two (2) times per year to coordinate shipping, safety, unloading and to inspect the results of product on the feed system. 9. Coordinate all deliveries to the West Water Treatment Plant during the business hours • 7:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., Monday through Friday; with the exception • holidays. ♦ .. I 1 6 J.4 AI IJ:1-All If-ftei 41 toll *4010 0 1 0 01, - 4 Page 149 of 350 V411:1124NOl c ;XDIUM CARBONATE 0.02% ' I O 4.0 PPM (MAX.) ICS 2.06 MERCURY O 0.5 PPM (MAX.) MCS 3.07 THIS PAGE TO BE SUBMITTED ALONG WITH PROPOSAL ORDER FOR BID PACKAGE TO BE CONSIDERED • r ACCEPTABLE Page 150 of 350 Page 152 of 350 ai ine olourdl 5 eApense. r%equest Tor the return of samples may be made within ten (10) days following the bid deadline. Each individual sample must be labeled with the bidder's name, manufacturer's brand name and number, and item reference. COST ADJUSTMENTS: The City acknowledges the fluctuating nature of prices for items specified. Accordingly, an escalation/reduction clause will be accepted for the renewal periods If the bid for the following condons: Page 153 of 350 Page 157 of 350 1. Keep and maintain public records that ordinarily and necessarily would be required • the City in order to perform the service; 2. Provide the public with access to such public records on the same terms and conditions that the City would provide the records and at a cost that does not exceed that provided in chapter 119, Fla. Stat., or as otherwise provided by law; 3. Ensure that public records that are exempt or that are confidential and exempt from public record requirements are not disclosed except as authorized by law; and 4. Meet all requirements for retaining public records and transfer to the City, at no cost, all public records in possession of the contractor upon termination of the contract and destroy any duplicate public records that are exempt • confidential and exempt. All records stored electronically must be provided to the City in a format that is compatible with the information technology of the agency. QUESTIONS: Any questions relative to the product specifications of this Invitation to Bid, should be directed to Julianne Alibrandi, Monday through Friday, 8:00 to 5:00 P.M., e-mail: alibrandij@bbfl.us. RENEWAL: The bid term may be extended, at the same terms and conditions for three (3) j,egiNj ijj,jgja=_g�Q-e MIA& 1 41 a 4 1 rw I a t;] I [;M Wi I Is SIZA I IN" r-A 9IQ HE Page 158 of 350 1 The City by written notice may terminate in whole or in part any Contract resulting from the invitation, when such action is in the best interest of the City. If the Contract(s) are so terminated the City shall be liable for only payment for services rendered prior to the effective date of termination. Services rendered will be interpreted to include costs of items already delivered plus reasonable costs of supply actions short of delivery. 3. The City of Boynton Beach reserves the right, before awarding the Contract to require a bidder to submit such evidence of qualifications as it may deem necessary, and may consider any evidence available to it • the financial, technical and other qualifications and abilities of a bidder, including past performance (experience) with the City in making the award in the best interest • the City. .V Vendor to indicate number of business days required for delivery. 1711 Page 159 of 350 Submit Bids To: PROCUREMENT SERVICES 100 E. Boynton Beach Boulevard P.O. Box 310 Boynton Beach, Florida 33425-0310 Telephone: (561) 742-6322 -7 ffTI 1=1 • Title: ANNUAL SUPPLY OF SODIUM HYDROXIDE (LIQUID CAUSTIC SODA) Bids will be opened in Procurement Services unless specified otherwise. Bid receiving date and time is scheduled for: January 9, 2016, no later than 2:30 P.M. (local time) and may not • withdrawn within ninety (90) days after such date and time. All awards made as a result • this bid shall conform to applicable sections • the charter and codes of the City. Name of Vendor: A")& 11 Co 11 IV A -ISni LjAn I Federal I.D. Number: 05 b L454 5 A Corporation of the State of: Area Code: Telephone Number: Area Code: 4ol - FAX Number: m W Mailing Address: 2-60 City/State/Zip: LpAanAn V4ne-ki)n 23 2,GZ4 Vendor Mailing Date: /Authorized Signature A III Name Typed Ilk Page 160 of 350 U V I @A =1 U :101 #w « IKI v «< oance with e s ecitications Tor the sum of: : yam hN M 0 40 MMOU.". - > Certificate of Compliance/analysis submitted? > Product Brand: Sodium Hydroxide — Rayon Grade — Caustic Soda, Liquid. MSIDS submitted? > It is further agreed that the product will be delivered within2*3 business days from thi date of S>«4 from the City. <+<#> : 0 1 1 ! L V Page 161 0 350 ➢ Specification "check-off' sheets (Pages 3-4) submitted 4YeNao COMPANY NAME SIGNATURE TELEPHONE NUWBE-? PRINTED NAME 1�15k-vm+ a TITLE E-MAIL ADDRESS I I • 01814 • Iffi Page 162 of 350 State of County of n tl,� c-m e 2) She/He is fully informed respecting the preparation and contents of the attached Bid and of all pertinent circumstances respecting such Bid; My commission expires s Pj STEPHANIE UBACH .-k (4071398-01 My COMMISSION #FF1 59432 EXPIRES September 11. 201 FlondallolarySerunce cll- v Page 163 of 350 A rem 5 1 XOT: I MR-1 • 111 1 RM By: NO SIGNATURE Ir this d y of NOTARY PUBLIC, State of Florida at Large 3cc�unv,hou!scf— NAME iJ N5 Manm cv- TITLE COMPANY 19 Page 164 of 350 STEPHANIE UBAC]H My COMMISSION #FF159432 t) EXPIRES September 11, 2018 140!1 398 -0153 e.com "OFFICIAL NOTARY SEAL" STAMP 3cc�unv,hou!scf— NAME iJ N5 Manm cv- TITLE COMPANY 19 Page 164 of 350 This requested form isto be made a part • our files for future use and information. Please fill out and indicate in the appropriate spaces provided which category best describes your company. Return this form with your bid proposal sheet making it an official part of your bid response. Is your company a Minority Owned Business? YES If Yes, please indicate • an "X" in the appropriate box� XUARU077 • 1� �M I M 9=0 1 101 A 41 IN 0 &111] 4 44*101, 1:2 ZE N11 NO Page 165 of 350 1) Publish a statement notifying employees that the unlawful manufacture, distribution, dispensing, possession, or use of a controlled substance is prohibited in the workplace and specifying the actions that will be taken against employees for violations of such prohibition. tl) Inform employees about the dangers of drug abuse in the workplace, the business's policy of maintaining a drug-free workplace, any available drug counseling, rehabilitation, and employee assistance programs, and the penalties that may be imposed upon employees for drug abuse violations. 5) Impose a sanction on, • require the satisfactory participation in a drug abuse assistance • rehabilitation program if such is available in the employee's community by, any employee who is so convicted. • Make a good faith effort to continue to maintain a drug-free workplace through implementation of this section. As the person authorized to sign the statement, I certify that this firm complies fully with the above requirements. V6ndor's Signature 21 Page 166 of 350 • I&OITAII(sliza 1411mr-follimTwo a - 0 Failure • respond may result in deletion • vendor's name from the qualified !E list for the City • Boynton Beach. COMPAVY-W,WE: ADDRESS: • SIGNATURE: DATE: lug 7 our rd No.: 025-2821-- • -he s owing reasons: ared toward brand or MEMEMMA 22 Page 167 of 350 Warner, SRQ Manager NAME OF NOTARY: Stephanie Ubach COMMISION NO: FF159432 Brenntag Mid-South, Inc. Te (407) 857-9310 250 Central Florida Pkwy. Toll Free (800) 456-9310 Orlando, R 32824-7601 Fax (407) 851-3512 Page 168 of 350 STEPHANIE U13ACH MY COMMI$6.10N #FF15943Z b& i 4407) 398-0153 �tidiaKstwy§��Vtcttorn Page 168 of 350 Wednesday, January 07, 2015 Material Safety Data Sheet MSDS Revision Date: 8/30/12 Page I of 5 PRODUCT: SODIUM HYDROXIDE SOLUTION 4% - 50% [TITUT, ZEN Chemical Formula: Na0H (aqueous) Molecular Weight: 40 Percent by Weight Brenntag Mid-South Inc. Technical Information: 270-830-1222 1405 Hwy 136 W Emergency Number: 800-424-9300 (CHEMTREC) Henderson, KY 42420 Emergency Number: 703-5273887 (international) 2. Hazards Identification Emergency Overview Danger! Corrosive- Causes severe burns to eyes and skin. May cause irreversible eye damage. Severly irritating to the respiratory tract and mucous membranes. Harmful or fatal if inhaled. Harmful or fatal if swallow; Environmental Hazard - This product is toxic to fish. Keep out of lakes, streams, ponds or other waters INHALATION: Inhalation of this material is irritating to the nose, mouth, and lungs. It may also cause burns to the respiratory tract that can result in shortness of breath, wheezing, choking, chest pain, and impairment of lung function. Inhalation of high concentrations can result in permanent lung damage. Repeated hiMation exposure may cause impairment of lung function and permanent lung damage. SKIN CONTACT: Exposure can cause severe irritation and/or bums characterized by redness, swelling, and scab formation. Prolonged skin exposure may cause destruction of the dermis with impairment of the skin at site of contact to regenerate. I -� ;gmA1111 I lsga% I $,moll I III t; in or, 11 IMOJLK�iq 0101'.AL-11KAF1 j 1 10 11 Or, til 0 a km I t' 1,40 no 07.1 "A I I M I 1 41 . I , i , F11 111111�1111111�ll 11�111;11�1111111F =. .AAA� ki I I 1 11 , 1 Willi''I'll l�, I !I 1 1 1 1 1, , I � I I Page 169 of 350 ITT MTMI lorrl,T� Percent by Weight Page 169 of 350 • J fl y: BRENNTAG • 25 0 Central Florid Orlando Flo • 1' � • CU LOT NUMBER SPECIFIC SSG 049429 3 15G 402384 5 3 s • 37129 497843 5 • -_ _ r- 1 BULK 7 66 522094 L T 12 1 r. • O LIN 1 4 J 0410 PARAMETERS SPECIFIC Na Assay, OA , S pecific gravity r t s • + • -_ _ r- Clea Li free of particle Max 100 Ppm f � •' � �l.f . • . _ r i ✓. I • •t i r ♦ � f : � ♦ :: f = i f Y. if �. �4 • � A Page 170 of 350 Alibrandi, Julianne From: Pigott, Bevis Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2015 4:36 PM To: Alibrandi, Julianne Cc: Liberus, Leon Subject: Sodium Hydroxide Bid Award Julie, Leon and 1 reviewed the bids submitted for the supply of sodium hydroxide from which it was apparent that Brenntag Mid-South, Inc. were the lowest cost, most responsive bidder. Based on this fact and their good servic WLQQ"= ROW, W-11TRIM, 9111". tl; @ Bevis Pigott, Division Manager Boynton Beach Utilities City of Boynton Beach 124 E. Wootbright Rd. I Boynton Beach, Florida 334U o: 561-742-6420 Rpjg2ttt2�� I ywLw�wbo n�tonbea�ch.or Please be advised that Florida has a broad public records law and all correspondence to me via email may be subject to disclosure Under Florida records low, email addresses are public records. Therefore, your e-mail communication and your e- it address may be subject to public disclosure. Page 172 of 350 9.A. PUBLIC HEARING 2/17/2015 REQUESTED ACTION BY COMMISSION: Approve Major Site Plan Modification request (MSPM 15 -001) to construct a four (4) story, 24,000 square foot mixed use building with medical use on the first two (2) floors and four (4) dwelling units on each of the next two (2) floors, and related site improvements. Applicant: James Comparato, Compson Associates Group, Inc. EXPLANATION OF REQUEST: The project site is a 0.42 -acre portion of the 106.499 -acre Boynton Village & Town Center master planned development, and is located at the east end of the "main street" portion of the site, along the northeast edge of the easternmost traffic circle and west of Renaissance Commons Boulevard. The parcel is currently vacant and has approval for 16 townhomes. Bradley Miller, of Miller Land Planning, Inc., representing Compson Associates Group, Inc., is proposing to construct a four (4) story, 24,000 square foot mixed use building with medical uses on the first two (2) floors and four (4) dwelling units on each of the next two (2) floors, and related site improvements. The proposed building is designed to reflect the architecture already existing within the Boynton Village & Town Center development and is a four (4) -story structure with a mix of flat roof areas with parapet walls, as well as hip roof features approximately 49 feet in height, and matching the standing seam metal material used throughout the entire development. The highest point of the roof is the standing seam metal hip roof at the top of the elevator shaft, at a total height of 54 feet 5 inches. It should be noted that one or more medical uses proposed are intended to provide in- patient medical care. Current zoning regulations would restrict medical uses within the subject district to those that provide out- patient services only. Staff is currently processing an amendment to the Zoning Regulations that would increase the zoning districts eligible for such medical uses; however, as proposed, the regulations would not allow them in the SMU Zoning District. As indicated in the conditions of approval, the plans should be amended to reflect proposed uses that are consistent with current zoning regulations, or seek and achieve approval through an alternate process. The applicants have contacted the City and commenced the Reasonable Accommodation application process for approval of the in- patient medical uses. The Planning & Development Board reviewed this item at their January 27, 2015 meeting and recommends approval. HOW WILL THIS AFFECT CITY PROGRAMS OR SERVICES? N/A FISCAL IMPACT: Increased revenue through added property tax, building permit fees and business tax. ALTERNATIVES: None recommended. STRATEGIC PLAN: STRATEGIC PLAN APPLICATION: N/A A41►h /_t9�_T��[�7►A Page 173 of 350 CLIMATE ACTION DISCUSSION: N/A Is this a grant? No Grant Amount: ATTACHMENTS: Type D Addendum D Addendum D Addendum n Addendum D Addendum D Addendum D Addendum D Addendum D Addendum D Addendum Action Approved Approved Approved Approved Date 1/29/2015 - 11:01 Ai 1/29/2015 - 11:10 Ai 1/29/2015 - 3:09 PY 2/11/2015 - 11:05 Ai Page 174 of 350 DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PLANNING AND ZONING DIVISION MEMORANDUM NO. PZ 14 -043 STAFF REPORT TO: Chair and Members Planning and Development Board and City Commission THRU: Michael Rumpf Planning and Zoning Director FROM: Ed Breese Principal Planner DATE: December 15, 2014 PROJECT NAME /NO: Boynton Village & Town Center/ MSPM 15 -001 REQUEST: Major Site Plan Modification PROJECT DESCRIPTION Property Owner: Compson Associates Group, Inc. Applicant: Compson Associates Group, Inc. Agent: Bradley Miller, Miller Land Planning, Inc. Location: Boynton Village & Town Center— SMU Parcel 5, located at the east end of the "main street" portion of the site, along the northeast edge of the easternmost traffic circle and west of Renaissance Commons (see Exhibit "A" — Location Map) Existing Land Use Existing Zoning: Proposed Land Use Proposed Zoning: MX -S (Mixed Use Suburban) SMU (Suburban Mixed Use) No change proposed No change proposed Proposed Use: Request major site plan modification approval to construct a four (4) story, 24,000 square foot mixed use building with medical offices on the first two (2) floors and four (4) dwelling units on each of the next two (2) floors, and related site improvements. Acreage: 0.42 -acres of the entire 106.499 -acre Boynton Village & Town Center parcel Adjacent Uses: North: Drainage retention area, then farther north is SMU Parcel 4, currently a vacant tract with approved WR -1 site plan for440 multi - family residential units, having a MX -S Page 175 of 350 Staff Report — Boynton Village & Town Center (MSPM 15 -001) Memorandum No PZ 14 -043 Page 2 (Mixed Use Suburban) future land use classification, and zoned SMU (Suburban Mixed Use); South: Right -of -way for easternmost traffic circle and "main street" roadway, then farther south is improved commercial development (Michael's, Target, & Best Buy) within the Boynton Village & Town Center development, with a Local Retail Commercial (LRC) future land use classification, and zoned Community Commercial (C3); East: Drainage retention area, then farther east is right -of -way for Renaissance Commons Boulevard and farther east is SMU Parcel 2, currently a vacant tract with Cortina master plan approval for 34 townhomes, 348 apartments and 80 single - family detached homes, having a MX -S (Mixed Use Suburban) future land use classification, and zoned SMU (Suburban Mixed Use); and West: "Main Street" portion of the master development with developed commercial buildings, then farther west is right -of -way for Congress Avenue and the Boynton Beach Mall. Site Details: The project site is a 0.42 -acre portion of the 106.499 -acre Boynton Village & Town Center master planned development, and is located at the east end of the "main street" portion of the site, along the northeast edge of the easternmost traffic circle and west of Renaissance Commons. The parcel is currently vacant and has approval for 16 townhomes. BACKGROUND Proposal: Bradley Miller, of Miller Land Planning, Inc., representing Compson Associates Group, Inc., is proposing to construct a four (4) story, 24,000 square foot mixed use building with medical uses on the first two (2) floors and four (4) dwelling units on each of the next two (2) floors, and related site improvements. The property is a former dairy farm that received land use amendment and rezoning approval in 2005. The portion of the property containing the Target and Best Buy stores was zoned C -3, Community Commercial, and the balance of the site was zoned SMU, Suburban Mixed Use, and approved with a corresponding master plan for development. Staff requested a master plan for the entire site, as the interconnectivity and shared amenities warranted a comprehensive review of the 106.499 acres. The original master plan depicted 405,328 square feet of commercial space (retail, restaurant, & office) plus 1,120 dwelling units. A Master Plan Modification (MPMD 12 -003) request was approved on July 17, 2012 to redesign the Cortina portion of the site from 458 townhomes to 34 townhomes, 348 apartments and 80 single - family detached homes, including the relocation and re- sizing of the park land dedication. The original Master Plan approval was subject to a CRALLS (Constrained Roadway At Lower Level of Service) designation for the Congress Avenue and Old Boynton Road intersection. A CRALLS designation is a tool utilized by Palm Beach County under their Traffic Performance Standards (TPS) review of projects, when there is not adequate right -of -way for intersection expansion to accommodate additional turn lanes and /or longer vehicle stacking for those turn lanes. The Page 176 of 350 Staff Report — Boynton Village & Town Center (MSPM 15 -001) Memorandum No PZ 14 -043 Page 3 County required other on and off -site improvements to assist with improved vehicle, bicycle and pedestrian movement facilitation, including the construction of the 3 and 5 lane segments of Old Boynton Road from Congress Avenue to Boynton Beach Boulevard, the continuation of Renaissance Commons Boulevard across the C -16 Canal and connecting with Old Boynton Road, the widening of Gateway Boulevard from Congress to High Ridge Road to 6 lanes, and the construction of the greenway path along the E -4 and C -16 canals. All of these improvements have been completed with the exception of the greenway path, which is to be constructed during the construction of the Cortina portion of the overall development. With respect to the proposed uses, the medical uses proposed are intended to provide in- patient care which is not permitted by current zoning regulations. The subject application indicates that a "medical center' would be located on the second floor of the proposed building, and is intended to provide 24 -hour, medical services. The City's zoning regulations currently limit uses that provide "in- patient" (e.g. overnight) medical care to hospitals, which are only allowed in the Public Usage (PU) Zoning District. The applicant originally requested preliminary zoning approval for the intended use in the form of a zoning verification letter, at which time staff informed the applicant of the current restrictions preventing such a use at that location. The applicant then commenced discussions with city staff regarding the intended use as a residential detoxification clinic, and the requirements of the City to provide "Reasonable Accommodation" for such uses. The City's LDR was amended in 2013 by Ordinance No. 13 -033 in order to provide a "Reasonable Accommodation" process to maintain its defensibility and compliance with federal requirements. In short, the City must provide reasonable accommodation to both housing and related services as necessary by those individuals protected by the Federal Fair Housing Act (FHA) and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). In the subject case, the protected individuals are those who are currently being treated for substance abuse and addictions. Therefore the conditions of approval include the requirement to either change the proposed uses for compliance with the City's Zoning Regulations, or seek and obtain approval for said uses through the City's Reasonable Accommodation process. Additional site or building modifications may be required if an agreement is reached for reasonable accommodation between the City and the applicant. Such modifications, if not shown on the subject site plan prior to final approval, would be processed subsequently as an amendment to the approved plan. It should also be noted that planning staff has been working closely with staff of the City Attorney's Office on proposed amendments to the zoning regulations to address the current deficiencies relative to in- patient medical care uses in an attempt to provide appropriate locations, and therefore reasonable accommodations, for these more intense medical uses. Concurrency: ANALYSIS Traffic: The applicant submitted an updated traffic study to Palm Beach County Traffic Engineering relative to the proposed decrease in residential units and increase in non - residential building square footage. The County has reviewed the study and has determined the proposed changes meet the Traffic Performance Standards Page 177 of 350 Staff Report — Boynton Village & Town Center (MSPM 15 -001) Memorandum No PZ 14 -043 Page 4 (TPS) and note that all previously approved TPS conditions and mitigation conditions related to the original CRALLS approval that may not have been completed, remain applicable. School: School concurrency is not required, as the request reduces the proposed number of approved residential units by eight (8). Utilities: The City's water capacity, as increased through the purchase of up to 5 million gallons of potable water per day from Palm Beach County Utilities, would meet the projected potable water for this project. Sufficient sanitary sewer and wastewater treatment capacity is also currently available to serve the project, subject to the applicant making a firm reservation of capacity, following site plan approval. Police / Fire: Staff reviewed the site plan and determined that current staffing levels would be sufficient to meet the expected demand for services. Drainage: Conceptual drainage information was provided for the City's review. The Engineering Division has found the conceptual information to be adequate and is recommending that the review of specific drainage solutions be deferred until time of permit review. Vehicular Access: As a master planned development, there are a number of ways to access the site, as well as cross - access through existing on and off -site developments. The Master Plan (Sheet MP) depicts three (3) points of ingress from Congress Avenue, two (2) points of ingress from Old Boynton Road and three (3) points of ingress off of Renaissance Commons Boulevard, which runs in a north /south direction, from Old Boynton Road to Gateway Boulevard. The Site Plan (Sheet SP -1) shows the proposed new building immediately north of the easternmost traffic circle, located at the east end of the "main street" portion of the Boynton Village & Town Center development. The main point of access to the new building would be the existing drive aisle branching off the north side of this traffic circle. No new driveways or access points are proposed or required. Circulation: Vehicular circulation would include two -way circulation that continues throughout the parking lot. Parking exists on the west side of the proposed building and would be slightly modified to create two (2) handicap parking spaces and a striped crosswalk to connect with the buildings to the west. A connection to the sidewalk around the traffic circle is also proposed. This connection point is intended to provide greater pedestrian access to the larger Boynton Village & Town Center development, as well as Renaissance Commons Boulevard, which connects to sidewalks on Old Boynton Road and Gateway Boulevard. Parking: The parking for this parcel was originally constructed in the development of the surrounding commercial buildings. However, the originally approved 16 townhouse units only required 24 parking spaces. The proposed new building would require 16 parking spaces for the 8 apartments, 2 guest parking spaces, and 60 parking spaces for the medical office space (12,000 sf at 1 parking space per 200 so. Therefore, a total of 78 parking spaces would be required for the new project. The Boynton Village & Town Center Master Plan, as amended in 2012, notes that 4,227 parking spaces are required for all built and proposed development not yet constructed. The Plan also depicts the provision of 4,270 parking spaces, providing Page 178 of 350 Staff Report — Boynton Village & Town Center (MSPM 15 -001) Memorandum No PZ 14 -043 Page 5 a surplus of 43 parking spaces throughout the entire development. The proposed new development would create a deficit 11 parking spaces (78 spaces required for the new project minus 24 for the original project = 54 parking spaces now required. With a surplus of 43 parking spaces, 54 spaces required minus the surplus of 43 leaves a deficit of 11 parking spaces). However, Chapter 4, Article V, Section 3.B. of the Land Development Regulations (LDR) provides a reduction of required parking up to 10% for developments that have common access drives and interconnectivity for both vehicular and pedestrian use, in an effort to encourage fewer vehicular trips. As a result of the reduction allowed underthis code provision, there is no longer a parking deficit per code, but a parking surplus of 184 parking spaces for the entire Boynton Village & Town Center development. Based upon staff observations throughout the year and over the holiday shopping season, the parking supply on site will not be adversely impacted by the proposed new 24,000 square foot development. All proposed parking stalls, including the size and location of the handicap space, were reviewed and approved by both the Engineering Division and Building Division. In addition, all necessary traffic control signage and pavement markings will be provided to clearly delineate areas on site and direction of circulation. Landscaping: The applicant has submitted a landscape plan (Sheet L1) for the proposed new building site. The landscape plan depicts the use of Mahogany and Pink Tabebuia canopy trees relocated out of the proposed building footprint, and Royal, Montgomery and Christmas palm trees. Typical accent plants include Pygmy Date palms , Hibiscus, White Bird of Paradise and Bougainvillea, and typical shrubs include Podocarpus, Small Leaf Clusia, Spanish & Simpson's Stopper, and Croton. The plan also depicts a decorative fence along the east and north sides of the building, with Spanish Stopper, Pink Muhly Grass and Fakahatchee Grass on the outside, and a six foot tall decorative wall along the south side and south west corner of the property in order to properly screen the proposed pool. The wall will be enhanced with Small Leaf Clusia, Dwarf Yaupon Holly and Green Island Ficus plantings in front. Building and Site: The proposed building is designed as a four (4) -story structure with a mix of flat roof areas with parapet walls at approximately 46 feet in height, as well as hip roof features approximately 49 feet in height, measured at the midpoint of the slope, and matching the standing seam metal material used throughout the entire development. The highest point of the roof is the standing seam metal hip roof at the top of the elevator shaft, at a total height of 54 feet 5 inches. The floor plans (Sheets A201 & A202) indicate the proposed first and second floors would be utilized as for medical purposes, and the third and fourth floors would have four (4) three - bedroom apartments each. There are also a couple of benches under the covered walk along the front of the building, as well as a couple covered bicycle racks within the stairwell areas on the north and south side of the building. A pool and deck area are proposed along the south side of the building. Building Height: The building elevations (Sheet A401) indicate the highest point of the structure would be the standing seam metal hip roof at the top of the elevator shaft, at a total height of 54 feet 5 inches, just below the maximum height of 55 feet allowed in the Page 179 of 350 Staff Report — Boynton Village & Town Center (MSPM 15 -001) Memorandum No PZ 14 -043 Page 6 SMU zoning district without benefit of Conditional Use approval, which would allow a height up of 75 feet. The proposed building is comparable in height to other buildings proposed to be constructed within the development and with others in the immediate vicinity. Design: The proposed building is designed to reflect the architecture already existing within the Boynton Village & Town Center development. According to the "Material /Color Legend" shown on Sheet A401 the base of the building will consist of sandstone split face block, with textured stucco walls painted a cream color, "Cachet Cream" and off -white color, "Vanillin" from Sherwin- Williams, with white trim and banding painted Sherwin- Williams "Extra White ", and red brick pilasters in a Terra Cotta color. The roof will consist of a standing seam metal material, painted Terra Cotta and the balcony railings and decorative wall light fixtures will be black. The Bahama louvered shutters will also be painted Sherwin- Williams "Extra White' and the canvas awnings will be Terra Cotta. Public Art: The applicant is undecided at this point and may consider paying into the Art in Public Places fund rather than placing art on site. Should they decide to provide art on site, ultimate review and approval of the artist and artwork would be under the purview of the Arts Commission. Site Lighting: No new freestanding light fixtures are proposed with this project, only the wall mounted light fixtures depicted on the building elevations (Sheet A401). Signage: No freestanding signage is proposed for the new building. Any wall signage or other signs would be required to comply with the adopted Sign Program for Boynton Village & Town Center. RECOMMENDATION The Development Application Review Team (DART) has reviewed this request for major site plan modification approval and recommends approval contingent upon approval of the accompanying master plan modification and satisfying all comments indicated in Exhibit "C" — Conditions of Approval. Any additional conditions recommended by the Board or City Commission shall be documented accordingly in the Conditions of Approval. S: \Planning \SHARED \WP \PROJECTS \Boynton Village & Town Center \Master Plan \MSPM 15 -001 \Staff Report.doc Page 180 of 350 1 *A:I1 :1hall BOYNTON VILLAGE AND TOWN CENTER (MSPM) N 062.525 250 37 500 �n��t1 of i SIDE ELEVATION rt.P, 6 M - T SITE PLAN d e �Ex a `� r �r %mss BUILDING DATA: 111UND FLOOR III F F. STI FLOOR aEa za NSS S.F SITE PARKING DATA. NES=N° O11E °��,P,Ea 6 LOCATION MAP TF, 'ROV ia'o �oN'. SE IN, D11ST„ IDIF— , a, FOR N,aTFIRDII�E SITE DATA: ONES P„aK-aECTIREO 1 .11 ESS(CFEEFFS REQUIRED TION S ISUS o,.) OCED DEN TOT NOTES FOR-T�oN I—SED El1.1110 o� .000 SF. NE,EEFEa. INC . —s,,,, F.i.a CRES) —O FFER S) .sa, -s. „ NEASTONEN ,N„ ,,,nvTHEEFF<E,EO,�EAS> �EON,PV TM E�ouS, NSF. o) SEE SUavE. CURRENT CODE ON FRONT ELEVATION D D D 0 0 0 ARCHITECTS PLANNERS w z� a � � O �z w0 O � � m AN RISE FETC FIIE FOR g F SP -1 4 �- � °'� `�`� �.� - `` "ass t �'� �•� �. .,a"'t� 7� araE aE ..i ` wn mEEi16 __ T %i -- _ - - - - -- PLANT L/ LANDSCAPE DATA _ -_ WIRE DETA It, /t Ke Map � J . ... ...... La Plan Scale: 1" = 10' North 1-1 U, `TORY f rve xsx. r 1 l i { �T71 17 7 lei l {` Kt PP.aJ -_r- All nL nE i NOV 84 no. 4164 SCH MARri �� COMPSON A SSOCIATE S GROUP, INC. MIXE USE BUILDI PRELIMINARY SITE ENGINEERING PLAN EHeEarH� conPOnanoH - - - -_ - 2 A 36 BE 3m STREET BOYNTON VILLAGE -A 1 11 rs wn , rx. ae11 ea1�1ue — - __ — - ,o � m u I- s6� za1 sez 11 ee� Cl o� 1 nxnra , rmao BOCA RATON, FLORIDA 33432 BOYNTON BEACH FLORIDA _ -- - - _ _ - ,., _., u!......o,. 1' I � ` — _ I I i I I < T NT j i I al y 1- .I r y I I_ R -� ' � '. 7 l _ n.oxFxs.re,nm eFecnewre.owc -.w.nu u�-rou n re aosmscwex ar emvsxacxosr�c. .pro ae xexoru I:' _ _ ` ✓ ' � �' I I _._ r I I cE come.ereo nno x ° xmFr xeoesurxexn ' o oxnveesmx onrxe ouvraa mss .uss rxov omn out u. - Cur x, _ i� I I I I � � ' xevnv x M1exeexerc«r ax exu mumxx rva - oss oxcrsc. ..eo � smreuxm so ssz �-�- F zFS CxuraeR - ' i ' ' ' i ' o sas awmu.woxe �nrox.w' ox..v�o ocuocrou armnrove. r. wPUxs¢uxn rtaowxaaxm rrx�sxui rxacne cones nxorxFnrsccurcaxm canes xemmr nr rnerve or renmrneac cnr ox _ 4 ��� ce.w oec xruo'r� PP.aJ -_r- All nL nE i NOV 84 no. 4164 SCH MARri �� COMPSON A SSOCIATE S GROUP, INC. MIXE USE BUILDI PRELIMINARY SITE ENGINEERING PLAN EHeEarH� conPOnanoH - - - -_ - 2 A 36 BE 3m STREET BOYNTON VILLAGE -A 1 11 rs wn , rx. ae11 ea1�1ue — - __ — - ,o � m u I- s6� za1 sez 11 ee� Cl o� 1 nxnra , rmao BOCA RATON, FLORIDA 33432 BOYNTON BEACH FLORIDA _ -- - - _ _ - ,., _., u!......o,. WEST ELEVATION d-!�_ 1 D��� n■ E.....n�lllllm.._ �1 NORTH ELEVATION �\ EAST ELEVATION In o -1-SE -11 -1 of TE -- o II- .- P. - -a= TE -- o -.L.-_ SlEl--L-11__-6909 -11-e o =-1-1--S -I-E o =IE- -L.-==I „oo1E- - -I.TE o , - 1- o—F.-I SlEll- 11-111=on -ET-. o 11T -11E=IE--L.- SS111909orv.o�� ARCHITECTS PLANNERS �w z� �5 �z wo < A401 �1 SOUTH ELEVATION mIIIIIIIIII o u Ilu II u�lll :: I l m ll 'i in 1 i iii �\ EAST ELEVATION In o -1-SE -11 -1 of TE -- o II- .- P. - -a= TE -- o -.L.-_ SlEl--L-11__-6909 -11-e o =-1-1--S -I-E o =IE- -L.-==I „oo1E- - -I.TE o , - 1- o—F.-I SlEll- 11-111=on -ET-. o 11T -11E=IE--L.- SS111909orv.o�� ARCHITECTS PLANNERS �w z� �5 �z wo < A401 �1 SOUTH ELEVATION e � neovF M (e�000 c Frvha eovF � R i i i i i k��j - tff --- 1� 1- -.. SECOND FLOOR PLAN 6,000 S F. GROUND FLOOR PLAN 6,000 S.F. 5O ARCHITECTS PLANNERS �w z� �5 �z wo < A201 FOURTH FLOOR PLAN a,000 s F. Mim ARCHITECTS PLANNERS �w z� �5 �z wo < A202 Exhibit C CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Project Name: Boynton Village & Town Center File number: MSPM 15 -001 Reference: 3 review plans identified as a Maior Site Plan Modification with an January 12, 2015 Planning and Zoning Department date stamp marking. DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT ENGINEERING / PUBLIC WORKS / FORESTRY / UTILITIES Comments: 1. The Landscape Architect should tabulate the total diameter inches of existing trees on the site proposed to be preserved in place, relocated or removed and replaced [diameter inches] on the site. X The replacement trees should be shown by a separate symbol on the formal landscape plan sheet. 2. All shade trees must be listed in the plant schedule as a minimum of 4" caliper, measured at 6" off of the ground. The height of the trees X may be larger than 12' -14' to meet the 4" caliper requirement. 3. Please verify the roof line, balconies, etc. will not interfere with the mature growth size of all trees and palms. X 4. At time of permit submittal, please provide an Irrigation Plan following the Florida Friendly - Waterwise principles using water saving components and depict turf and landscape components on X different zones and time duration. Also, trees should have separate irrigation bubblers to provide water directly to the root ball. FIRE Comments: 5. Please schedule a water flow test with Gina Morency of the Fire & Life Safety Division of the Fire Rescue Department at 561- 742 -6600. This is required to in order to determine adequate water supply and X fire flow, and shall be conducted before construction begins. POLICE Comments: None, all previous comments addressed. BUILDING DIVISION Comments: None, all previous comments addressed. PARKS AND RECREATION Page 188 of 350 Boynton Village & Town Center (MSPM 15 -001) Conditions of Approval Paae2of3 DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT Comments: 6. The Recreation Impact Fee for the eight (8) apartments is based upon $595 per dwelling, for a total of $4,760. X PLANNING AND ZONING Comments: 7. It is the applicant's responsibility to ensure that the application requests are publicly advertised in accordance with Ordinance 04- 007 and Ordinance 05 -004 and an affidavit provided to the City X Clerk. 8. The fence and wall appear to encroach into existing utility easements. Please provide utility easement consent forms from all utility providers or relocate the proposed improvements outside the X easements. 9. Please note that approval of this Major Site Plan Modification application is subject to approval of the companion application for X Master Plan Modification. 10. Application is understood to propose one or more uses to provide in- patient medical care for substance abuse treatment, which is not an allowed use by current Zoning Regulations. Prior to issuance of permits, application must be modified to comply with Zoning X Regulations, or approval justified and achieved through the Reasonable Accommodation process. 11. At time of permitting, please revise the site plan, landscape plan and all other appropriate plans to depict location of required public art. It is recommended you coordinate this effort with Debby Coles - Dobay, X Public Arts Administrator (561- 742 - 6026). 12. Applicants who wish to utilize City electronic media equipment for recommended PowerPoint presentations at the public hearings must notify the project manager in Planning and Zoning and submit a CD X of the presentation at least one week prior to the scheduled meeting. COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Comments: N/A PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD CONDITIONS Comments: None Page 189 of 350 Boynton Village & Town Center (MSPM 15 -001) Conditions of Approval Paae 3 of 3 DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT CITY COMMISSION CONDITIONS Comments: To be determined. S: \Planning \SHARED \WP \PROJECTS \Boynton Village & Town Center \Master Plan \MSPM 15 -001 \Staff COA after P &D.doc Page 190 of 350 DEVELOPMENT ORDER OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA PROJECT NAME: Boynton Village & Town Center (MSPM 15 -001) APPLICANT'S AGENT: Bradley Miller, Miller Land Planning, Inc. AGENT'S ADDRESS: 508 E. Boynton Beach Boulevard, Boynton Beach, FL 33435 DATE OF HEARING RATIFICATION BEFORE CITY COMMISSION: February 17, 2015 TYPE OF RELIEF SOUGHT: Major Site Plan Modification to the Boynton Village & Town Center development to amend a 0.42 -acre portion of SMU Parcel #5 from 16 townhomes to a four (4) story, 24,000 square foot mixed use building with medical uses on the first two (2) floors and four (4) dwelling units on each of the next two (2) floors. LOCATION OF PROPERTY: NE corner of Congress Avenue and Old Boynton Road DRAWING(S): SEE EXHIBIT "C" ATTACHED HERETO. THIS MATTER came on to be heard before the City Commission of the City of Boynton Beach, Florida on the date of hearing stated above. The City Commission having considered the relief sought by the applicant and heard testimony from the applicant, members of city administrative staff and the public finds as follows: Application for the relief sought was made by the Applicant in a manner consistent with the requirements of the City's Land Development Regulations. 2. The Applicant _ HAS HAS NOT established by substantial competent evidence a basis for the relief requested. 3. The conditions for development requested by the Applicant, administrative staff, or suggested by the public and supported by substantial competent evidence are as set forth on Exhibit "D" with notation "Included ". 4. The Applicant's application for relief is hereby _ GRANTED subject to the conditions referenced in paragraph 3 hereof. DENIED 5. This Order shall take effect immediately upon issuance by the City Clerk. 6. All further development on the property shall be made in accordance with the terms and conditions of this order. 7. Other DATED: City Clerk S: \Planning \SHARED \WP \PROJECTS \Boynton Village & Town Center \Master Plans \MSPM 15- 001 \DO.doc Page 191 of 350 9.B. PUBLIC HEARING 2/17/2015 REQUESTED ACTION BY COMMISSION: Approve Master Plan Modification request to Boynton Village & Town Center (MPMD 15 -001) to amend a 0.42 -acre portion of SMU Parcel #5 from 16 townhomes to a four (4) story, 24,000 square foot mixed use building with medical use on the first two (2) floors and four (4) dwelling units on each of the next two (2) floors. Applicant: James Comparato, Compson Associates Group, Inc. EXPLANATION OF REQUEST: The Boynton Village & Town Center master planned development is a 106.499 -acre property located between Old Boynton Road and the Boynton Canal (C -16 Canal) and between Congress Avenue and the LWDD E -4 Canal. The applicant is proposing to decrease the number of dwelling units within the master plan from 1,124 to 1,116 and increase the non - residential building area by 12,000 square feet, from 420,749 square feet to 432,749 square feet. The Planning & Development Board reviewed this item at their January 27, 2015 meeting and recommends approval. HOW WILL THIS AFFECT CITY PROGRAMS OR SERVICES? N/A X6119 0 gILhl; r_Tel il•►1 / -1 ALTERNATIVES: None recommended. STRATEGIC PLAN: STRATEGIC PLAN APPLICATION: N/A CLIMATE ACTION: CLIMATE ACTION DISCUSSION: N/A Is this a grant? No Grant Amount: ATTACHMENTS: Type Description D Addendum Staff Report D Addendum Location Map D Addendum Exhibit B D Addendum Exhibit B Page 192 of 350 Addendum Addendum Conditions of Approval Development Order Action Approved Approved Approved Approved Date 112912015 - 11:01 Al 112912015 - 11:10 Al 112912015 - 3:09 Pl 211112015 - 11:05 Al Page 193 of 350 DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PLANNING AND ZONING DIVISION MEMORANDUM NO. PZ 14 -042 STAFF REPORT TO: Chair and Members Planning and Development Board THRU: Michael Rumpf Director of Planning and Zoning FROM: Ed Breese Principal Planner DATE: December 12, 2014 PROJECT NAME /NO: Boynton Village & Town Center (MPMD 15 -001) REQUEST: Master Plan Modification to the Boynton Village & Town Center development to amend a 0.42 -acre portion of SMU Parcel #5 from 16 townhomes to a four (4) story, 24,000 square foot mixed use building with medical uses on the first two (2) floors and four (4) dwelling units on each of the next two (2) floors. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Applicant: Compson Associates Group, Inc. Agent: Bradley Miller, Miller Land Planning, Inc. Location: NE corner of Congress Avenue and Old Boynton Road (see "Exhibit A" — Location Map) Existing Land Use: MX -S (Mixed Use Suburban) Existing Zoning: SMU (Suburban Mixed Use) Proposed Land Use: No change proposed Proposed Zoning: No change proposed Proposed Use: Redesignation of a 0.42 -acre portion of SMU Parcel #5 within Boynton Village & Town Center from the previously approved 16 townhomes to 12,000 square feet of medical office and 8 apartments. Acreage: 106.499 -acres Page 194 of 350 Boynton Village & Town Center MPMD 15 -001 Staff Report Memorandum No. 14 -042 Page 2 Adjacent Uses: North: Right -of -way for the Boynton Canal (C -16), then farther north is the Renaissance Commons mixed use development, zoned SMU (Suburban Mixed Use); South: Right -of -way for Old Boynton Road, then farther south is a mix of multi- family and single - family residential, zoned R -3 and R1 -AA and commercial development (Oakwood Square shopping center), zoned C -3 (Community Commercial); East: Right -of -way for the Lake Worth Drainage District (E -4) Canal, then farther east is single - family residential (Sky Lake), zoned R1 -AA (Single - Family Residential); and West: Right -of -way for Congress Avenue, then farther west are developed commercial properties, zoned C -3 (Community Commercial). BACKGROUND Compson Associates Group, Inc. is requesting a Master Plan Modification to the Boynton Village & Town Center Master Plan to redesignate a 0.42 -acre portion of SMU Parcel #5 within Boynton Village & Town Center from the previously approved 16 townhomes to 12,000 square feet of medical use and 8 apartments (see "Exhibit A" — Location Map). The property is a former dairy farm that received land use amendment and rezoning approval in 2005. The portion of the property containing the Target and Best Buy stores was zoned C -3, Community Commercial, and the balance of the site was zoned SMU, Suburban Mixed Use, and approved with a corresponding master plan for development. Staff requested a master plan for the entire site, as the interconnectivity and shared amenities warranted a comprehensive review of the 106 acres. This original master plan depicted 405,328 square feet of commercial space (retail, restaurant, & office) plus 1,120 dwelling units. A Master Plan Modification (MPMD 12 -003) request was approved on July 17, 2012 to redesign the Cortina portion of the site from 458 townhomes to 34 townhomes, 348 apartments and 80 single - family detached homes, including the relocation and re- sizing of the park land dedication. Chapter 2, Article II, Section 2. D. 6., Master states that changes in planned developments Development Board and the City Commission. Plans, of the Land Development Regulations shall be processed through the Planning and ANALYSIS The applicant is proposing to decrease the number of dwelling units within the master plan from 1,124 to 1,116 and increase the non - residential building area by 12,000 square feet, from 420, 749 square feet to 432,749 square feet. The original Master Plan approval was subject to a CRALLS (Constrained Roadway At Lower Level of Service) designation for the Congress Avenue and Old Boynton Road intersection. A CRALLS designation is a tool utilized by Palm Beach County under their Traffic Performance Standards (TPS) review of projects, when there is not adequate right -of -way for intersection expansion to accommodate additional turn lanes and /or longer vehicle stacking for those turn lanes. The County required other on and off -site Page 195 of 350 Boynton Village & Town Center MPMD 15 -001 Staff Report Memorandum No. 14 -042 Page 3 improvements to assist with improved vehicle, bicycle and pedestrian movement facilitation, including the construction of the 3 and 5 lane segments of Old Boynton Road from Congress Avenue to Boynton Beach Boulevard, the continuation of Renaissance Commons Boulevard across the C -16 Canal and connecting with Old Boynton Road, the widening of Gateway Boulevard from Congress to High Ridge Road to 6 lanes, and the construction of the greenway path along the E -4 and C -16 canals. All of these improvements have been completed with the exception of the greenway path, which is to be constructed during the development of the Cortina portion of the site. The applicant submitted an updated traffic study to Palm Beach County Traffic Engineering relative to the proposed decrease in residential units and increase in non - residential building square footage. The County has reviewed the study and has determined the proposed changes meet the Traffic Performance Standards (TPS) and note that all previously approved TPS conditions and mitigation conditions related to the original CRALLS approval that may not have been completed, remain applicable. As previously noted, the proposed master plan (Sheet MP) depicts a four (4) story mixed use building to replace the previously approved 16 unit townhouse building. The proposed building would be placed within the footprint of the previously approved building, located at the east end of the "main street" portion of the site, along the northeast edge of the easternmost traffic circle, close to the center of the overall site. The details of the building and site will be discussed in greater detail in the Major Site Plan Modification staff report accompanying this application. However, the medical uses proposed are intended to provide in- patient care which is not permitted by current zoning regulations. The subject application indicates that a "medical center" would be located on the second floor of the proposed building, and is intended to provide 24- hour, medical services. The City's zoning regulations currently limit uses that provide "in- patient" (e.g. overnight) medical care to hospitals, which are only allowed in the Public Usage (PU) Zoning District. The applicant originally requested preliminary zoning approval for the intended use in the form of a zoning verification letter, at which time staff informed the applicant of the current restrictions preventing such a use at that location. The applicant then commenced discussions with city staff regarding the intended use as a residential detoxification clinic, and the requirements of the City to provide "Reasonable Accommodation" for such uses. The City's LDR was amended in 2013 by Ordinance No. 13 -033 in order to provide a "Reasonable Accommodation" process to maintain its defensibility and compliance with federal requirements. In short, the City must provide reasonable accommodation to both housing and related services as necessary by those individuals protected by the Federal Fair Housing Act (FHA) and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). In the subject case, the protected individuals are those who are currently being treated for substance abuse and addictions. Therefore the conditions of approval include the requirement to either change the proposed uses for compliance with the City's Zoning Regulations, or seek and obtain approval for said uses through the City's Reasonable Accommodation process. Additional site or building modifications may be required if an agreement is reached for reasonable accommodation between the City and the applicant. Such modifications, if not shown on the subject site plan prior to final approval, would be processed subsequently as an amendment to the approved plan. It should also be noted that planning staff has been working closely with staff of the City Attorney's Office on proposed amendments to the zoning regulations to address the current deficiencies relative to in- patient medical care uses in an attempt to provide appropriate locations, and therefore reasonable accommodations, for these more intense medical uses. Lastly, there are no changes proposed to the commercial portion of the master plan, other than Page 196 of 350 Boynton Village & Town Center MPMD 15 -001 Staff Report Memorandum No. 14 -042 Page 4 to update the plan with those slight modifications that have occurred since the last approval, such as the change of the former RBC Bank to a retail use. Staff considers the modifications to the approved master plan to be non - substantial. RECOMMENDATION The Planning and Zoning Division recommends that this request for Master Plan Modification be considered non - substantial, and approved subject to the comments included in "Exhibit U - Conditions of Approval. Any additional conditions recommended by the Board or City Commission shall be documented accordingly in the Conditions of Approval. S:\ Planning \SHARED \WP \PROJECTS \Boynton Village &Town Center\ Master Plan \MP 15- 001 \Staff Report MPMD 15- 001.doc Page 197 of 350 1 *A:I1 :1hall BOYNTON VILLAGE AND TOWN CENTER (MPMD) N 062.25 250 37 of Site Location Map ....... L\NDD E-4 CANAL MASTER PLAN —IT- III ARI.FFICTI PLANNERS MP I 95 3' S � T �.., - Site Location Map ---------- (ANGRESS AVENUE GRA-C SCALE ARCHITECTS PLANNERS C, MSD Exhibit C CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Project Name: Boynton Village & Town Center File number: MPMD 15 -001 Reference: 3 review plans identified as a Master Plan Modification with an January 12, 2015 Planning and Zoning Department date stamp marking. DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT ENGINEERING / PUBLIC WORKS / FORESTRY / UTILITIES Comments: None FIRE Comments: None POLICE Comments: None BUILDING DIVISION Comments: None PARKS AND RECREATION Comments: None PLANNING AND ZONING Comments: 1. It is the applicant's responsibility to ensure that the application requests are publicly advertised in accordance with Ordinance 04- 007 and Ordinance 05 -004 and an affidavit provided to the City Clerk. X 2. Applicants who wish to utilize City electronic media equipment for recommended PowerPoint presentations at the public hearings must notify the project manager in Planning and Zoning and submit a CD of the presentation at least one week prior to the scheduled meeting. X COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Page 201 of 350 Boynton Village & Town Center (MPMD 15 -001) Conditions of Approval Page 2 of 2 DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE I REJECT Comments: N/A PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD CONDITIONS Comments: None CITY COMMISSION CONDITIONS Comments: To be determined. S: \Planning \SHARED \WP \PROJECTS \Boynton Village & Town Center \Master Plan \MPMD 15 -001 \COA after P &D.doc Page 202 of 350 DEVELOPMENT ORDER OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA PROJECT NAME: Boynton Village & Town Center (MPMD 15 -001) APPLICANT'S AGENT: Bradley Miller, Miller Land Planning, Inc. AGENT'S ADDRESS: 508 E. Boynton Beach Boulevard, Boynton Beach, FL 33435 DATE OF HEARING RATIFICATION BEFORE CITY COMMISSION: February 17, 2015 TYPE OF RELIEF SOUGHT: Master Plan Modification to the Boynton Village & Town Center development to amend a 0.42 -acre portion of SMU Parcel #5 from 16 townhomes to a four (4) story, 24,000 square foot mixed use building with medical uses on the first two (2) floors and four (4) dwelling units on each of the next two (2) floors. LOCATION OF PROPERTY: NE corner of Congress Avenue and Old Boynton Road DRAWING(S): SEE EXHIBIT "C" ATTACHED HERETO. THIS MATTER came on to be heard before the City Commission of the City of Boynton Beach, Florida on the date of hearing stated above. The City Commission having considered the relief sought by the applicant and heard testimony from the applicant, members of city administrative staff and the public finds as follows: Application for the relief sought was made by the Applicant in a manner consistent with the requirements of the City's Land Development Regulations. 2. The Applicant _ HAS HAS NOT established by substantial competent evidence a basis for the relief requested. 3. The conditions for development requested by the Applicant, administrative staff, or suggested by the public and supported by substantial competent evidence are as set forth on Exhibit "D" with notation "Included ". 4. The Applicant's application for relief is hereby _ GRANTED subject to the conditions referenced in paragraph 3 hereof. DENIED 5. This Order shall take effect immediately upon issuance by the City Clerk. 6. All further development on the property shall be made in accordance with the terms and conditions of this order. 7. Other DATED: City Clerk S: \Planning \SHARED \WP \PROJECTS \Boynton Village & Town Center \Master Plans \MPMD 15 -001 \DO.doc Page 203 of 350 9.C. PUBLIC HEARING 2/17/2015 REQUESTED ACTION BY COMMISSION: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 15 -003 - FIRST READING - PUBLIC HEARING - Approve amendments to the Mobile Vending Unit regulations of the Land Development Regulations, Part III - Chapter 1, Article II; Chapter 2, Article II; Chapter 3, Article V; Table 2 -1 Applications by City Departments; and Table 3 -28 Use Matrix EXPLANATION OF REQUEST: Staff is recommending that Mobile Vending Assembly be moved to the Special Event permit process, to facilitate a more business friendly procedure for allowing Food Truck Rallies and other similar events to take place in the City. Additional changes include the removal of the requirement to pay both a Certificate of Use and Occupancy and local Business Tax (BTR). Mobile Vendors are required to have a local BTR from the location in which they are domiciled, as well as a County BTR. The City does require the vehicles to be inspected, which is a function of the Certificate of Use and Occupancy requirement. Any applicable department, i.e., Fire, Utilities, Code, Building, Public Works, etc., can be triggered to perform an inspection through that process, to assure that the vehicle is meeting all City regulations for conducting business on a specific site. The changes to the regulations also open three additional zoning areas for Mobile Vending; C -1, PUD and PU have been added as a result of feedback from property owners within the City. HOW WILL THIS AFFECT CITY PROGRAMS OR SERVICES? Relaxing the regulations should encourage more Mobile Vending activity in the City. Several property owners have requested additional zoning areas to be added to permit private events to occur as well as reducing the total site area requirements to have multiple vehicles. The staff review process remains unchanged; Special Event permits are reviewed by all applicable City departments, much in the same way the existing permit process does. Modifications to the Special Event Handbook have been made to allow regularly occurring events. The Special Event fee schedule will be modified by separate ordinance to facilitate cost recovery for staff review and inspection. FISCAL IMPACT: Budgeted There have been no additional revenues collected as a result of the prior code amendment. Staff anticipates that the new regulations will encourage more Mobile Vending events within the City, and potentially generate in excess of $2,250. (three (3) additional site permits @ $250 ea; thirty (30) vehicles @ $50 ea) ALTERNATIVES: Do not change the existing regulations. STRATEGIC PLAN: Great Neighborhoods: Safe, Affordable and Livable STRATEGIC PLAN APPLICATION: Action Item 1.6 Mobile Vending Regulations Page 204 of 350 CLIMATE ACTION: No Is this a grant? No Grant Amount: ATTACHMENTS: Type Ordinance Other Addendum REVIEWERS: Department Development F inance Legal City Manager Description Ord to Amend Mobile Vending Matrix Table Mobile /ending Mode Amendments Reviewer Action Byrne, Nancy Approved Howard, Tim Approved Cherof, Jim Approved LaVerriere, Lori Approved Date 112312015 - 10:33 Al 112312015 - 10:46 Al 112612015 - 10:30 Al 211112015 - 11:00 Al Page 205 of 350 I ORDINANCE NO. 15- 2 3 4 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, 5 FLORIDA APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE MOBILE 6 VENDING UNIT REGULATIONS OF THE LAND 7 DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, CHAPTER 1, ARTICLE II 8 ENTITLED "DEFINITIONS "; CHAPTER 2, ARTICLE 11, 9 SECTION 7C, ENTITLED "MOBILE VENDOR APPROVAL "; 10 CHAPTER 3, ARTICLE V, SECTION 10, ENTITLED "MOBILE 11 VENDOR REGULATIONS"; TABLE 2 -1 "APPLICATIONS BY 12 CITY DEPARTMENTS"; AND, CHAPTER 3, ARTICLE IV, 13 SECTION 3, TABLE 3 -28 "USE MATRIX"; PROVIDING FOR 14 CONFLICTS, SEVERABILITY, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 15 16 17 WHEREAS, at the August 29, 2014 Commission Strategic Planning meeting staff 18 was directed to modify the existing mobile vending unit regulations and return to the 19 Commission with recommended changes; and 20 WHEREAS, staff is recommending that Mobile Vending Assembly be moved to the 21 Special Event permit process to facilitate a more business friendly procedure for allowing 22 Food Truck Rallies and other similar events to take place in the City; and 23 WHEREAS, the City Commission finds it to be in the best interest of the citizens 24 and residents of the City to approve the recommendations of staff and amend the Land 25 Development Regulations as reflected herein. 26 NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF 27 THE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA, THAT: 28 Section 1 . The foregoing whereas clauses are true and correct and are now ratified 29 and confirmed by the City Commission. 30 Section 2. Chapter 1, Article H of the Land Development Regulations entitled 31 "Definitions" is hereby amended as follows: C: \Program Files ( x86) \neevia.com \docConverterPro\ temp\ NVDC\ 5E157484- B153- 46A0- BC8D- FE2DA6A6A538 \Boynton Beach.? 2.1.ORD - Mobile Vending.docc r n n a� r Pugh �slN49N1 31@14a.ag n.a.. ,,. e an - 1 - Page 206 of 350 2 MOBILE VENDING UNIT (MVU) - Any movable cart, trailer, or other vehicle 3 that is operated from an established location, from which food, flowers, and other 4 merchandise and services, as well as non - alcoholic beverages are provided to the 5 public with or without charge; except, however, that the provisions of this 6 ordinance shall not apply to mobile caterers, or service providers, generally 7 defined as a person engaged in the business of transporting, in motor vehicles, 8 food, beverages, or service equipment to residential, business, and industrial 9 establishments pursuant to prearranged schedules, and dispensing from the vehicles 10 the items or services at retail, for the convenience of the personnel of such 11 establishments. For the purposes of implementing and interpreting the mobile 12 vendor ordinance, the following definitions shall apply: 13 14 ADULTERATED - The condition of a food that bears or contains any 15 poisonous or deleterious substance or has been processed, prepared, packed 16 or held under unsanitary conditions, whereby it may have become 17 contaminated with filth, in a quantity which may render it injurious to 18 health. 19 20 APPROVED MANNER - Method of dealing with waste, solid or liquid, 21 which comports with adequate sanitation methods as established by the 22 Division of Hotels and Restaurants of the Florida Department of Business 23 and Professional Regulation. 24 25 APPROVED SOURCE — A licensed food processing establishment 26 considered satisfactory by the health director and serving food products 27 which are clean, wholesome, free from adulteration or misbranding and safe 28 for human consumption. 29 30 &1-" ,K , LV — A concentration of three (3) or more MVU's coordinated by 31 a single applicant intended to contribute to the vitality of publicly - accessible 32 spaces and community activities. Events of this type are-1- p• 34 10 oWain a Special Evem Perrnii . 35 36 COMMISSARY - A food processing establishment or food service 37 establishment approved by the Division of Hotels and Restaurants of the 38 Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation in which food, 39 containers or supplies are kept, handled, prepared, packaged or stored for 40 transportation by mobile vendors. 41 42 CORROSION RESISTANT MATERIAL - A material which maintains 43 its original surface characteristics under prolonged influence of food, C: \Program Files ( x86) \neevia.com \docConverterPro\ temp\ NVDC\ 5E157484- B153- 46A0- BC8D- FE2DA6A6A538 \Boynton Beach.? 2.1.ORD - Mobile Vending.docc r n n a� r Pugh �slN49N1 31@14a.ag n.-a.. ,,. e an -2- Page 207 of 350 I cleaning compounds, bactericidal solutions and other conditions -of -use 2 environment. 3 4 EASILY CLEANABLE - Surfaces are readily accessible and made of such 5 material and finish and so fabricated that residue may be effectively 6 removed by normal cleaning methods. 7 8 FOOD - Any raw, cooked or processed edible substance, ice, beverage or 9 ingredient used or intended for use or for sale in whole or in part for human 10 consumption. 11 12 FOOD HANDLER - A person, certified by the Division of Hotels and 13 Restaurants of the Florida Department of Business and Professional 14 Regulation, engaged in the preparation, handling or vending of food. 15 16 FOOD VENDOR - Any person, group of persons, firm or corporation who 17 individually or by or through an agent or employer, offers for sale, sells, 18 attempts to sell, exposes for sale or gives away any food intended for human 19 consumption from any vehicle or by a person afoot. 20 21 LABEL — A display of any written, printed, or graphic matter upon the 22 immediate container, not including package liner, of any prepackaged article 23 in accordance with state law. 24 25 LIQUID WASTE - Fluid, resulting from wastes produced from food 26 vending operations, composed of solids, whether dissolved or in suspension; 27 liquids, whether in solution, in emulsion or in separate phases; and gases. The 28 term shall also include melted ice. 29 30 MERCHANDISE - Items of clothing, jewelry (including timepieces), 31 photos, artwork, housewares, flowers, plants, landscape materials, carpets, 32 phones and accessories, small appliances, medicines, personal care items, 33 books and /or magazines as well as audio or video recordings, tapes, discs or 34 other media. 35 36 MISLABELED AND MISBRANDED - The presence of any written, 37 printed or graphic matter upon or accompanying any food or container of 38 food which is false or misleading and which is not presented in the English 39 language as stipulated by the Food and Drug Act, Title 21, Chapter 1- 40 101.15 or which violates any applicable federal, state or local labeling 41 requirements. 42 43 PERISHABLE FOOD - Food, including shelled eggs, of a type or in such 44 condition that it will become adulterated unless kept at a temperature which C: \Program Files ( x86) \neevia.com \docConverterPro\ temp\ NVDC\ 5E157484- B153- 46A0- BC8D- FE2DA6A6A538 \Boynton Beach.? 2.1.ORD - Mobile Vending.docc r n n a� r Pugh �slN49N1 31@14a.ag n.a.. ,,. e an -3 - Page 208 of 350 I will maintain product quality and wholesomeness. 2 3 PERMIT — A site specific license to operate a mobile vending unit which 4 shall be issued by the Planning and Zoning Division of the City's Department 5 of Development for a stated fee and shall be carried by a vendor or food 6 handler at all times while vending. 7 8 POTENTIALLY HAZARDOUS FOOD - Any food that consists in 9 whole or in part of milk or milk products, eggs, meat, poultry, fish, shellfish, 10 edible crustacea or other ingredients including synthetic ingredients, in a 11 form capable of supporting rapid and progressive growth of infectious or 12 toxigenic microorganisms. The term does not include clean, whole, 13 uncracked, odor -free shell eggs or foods which have a pH level of 4.5 or 14 below or a water activity (AW) value of 0.85 or less. 15 16 PUBLIC WAYS - Include all portions of public streets, alleys, sidewalks, 17 trails and parking lots of the City of Boynton Beach and, in addition, shall 18 include privately owned streets, roads, alleys, sidewalks, trails, and parking 19 lots that are provided for public use or access. 20 21 SAFE TEMPERATURES - As applied to potentially hazardous food, shall 22 mean temperatures of forty -five (45) degrees Fahrenheit (seven (7) degrees 23 Celsius) or below, or one hundred forty (140) degrees Fahrenheit (sixty (60) 24 degrees Celsius) or 25 above and zero degrees Fahrenheit (minus seventeen (17) degrees Celsius) or 26 below for frozen food storage. 27 28 SANITIZE - Effective bactericidal treatment of cleaned surfaces of 29 equipment and utensils by a process which has been approved by the 30 Division of Hotels and Restaurants of the Florida Department of Business 31 and Professional Regulation as being effective in destroying 32 microorganisms including pathogens. 33 34 SERVICES - Personal services to include portraits, body art, and hair 35 braiding; the cleaning and detailing of vehicles including automobiles, 36 trucks, vans, and motorcycles; and repairing household goods, tools, and 37 equipment. 38 39 SINGLE SERVICE ARTICLES - Cups, containers, lids, closures, plates, 40 knives, forks, spoons, stirrers, paddles, straws, napkins, wrapping materials, 41 toothpicks and similar articles intended for one -time, one - person use and 42 then discarded. 43 44 STICKER — A decal issued by the Planning and Zoning Division of the C: \Program Files ( x86) \neevia.com \docConverterPro\ temp\ NVDC\ 5E157484- B153- 46A0- BC8D- FE2DA6A6A538 \Boynton Beach.? 2.1.ORD - Mobile Vending.docc r n n a� r Pugh �slN49N1 31@14a.ag n.a.. ,,. e an -4- Page 209 of 350 I City's Department of Development shall be displayed on the mobile 2 vending unit. 3 4 UTENSIL - Any implement used in the storage, preparation, transportation 5 or serving of food. 6 7 VEHICLE - Every device in, upon, or by which any persons, food or other 8 commodity is or may be transported, pushed or drawn. 9 10 WHOLESOME - In sound condition, clean, free from adulteration and 11 otherwise suitable for use as human food. 12 ... 13 Section 3. Chapter 2, Article H, Section 7.C. of the Land Development 14 Regulations entitled "Mobile Vendor Approval" is hereby amended as follows: 15 C. Mobile Vendor Approval. 16 17 1. 18 General. 19 20 a. Purpose and Intent. The purpose and intent of this 21 subsection is to set forth well- defined application processes, review 22 criteria, and information to guide in the processing and review of 23 mobile vending units (MVU) submittals. 24 25 b. Applicability. This subsection is applicable to any MVU 26 proposed within the City in accordance with Chapter 3, Article V, 27 Section 10. It shall be unlawful for anyone to operate an MVU in 28 the City without first obtaining the necessary approvals as contained 29 herein. 30 31 Portable or mobile kitchens necessary to provide temporary food 32 services in connection with permitted construction work are not 33 subject to the removal requirement or size restrictions. Such 34 temporary units must be removed immediately upon completion of 35 work. 36 37 2. Submittal Requirements. See Section 1.13 above for the 38 submittal requirements of this application. Because of minimum separation 39 requirements between each MVU, in those instances when more than one (1) 40 application has been submitted for the same location, the earliest application 41 shall be processed and forwarded to either the Planning and Development C: \Program Files ( x86) \neevia.com \docConverterPro\ temp\ NVDC\ 5E157484- B153- 46A0- BC8D- FE2DA6A6A538 \Boynton Beach.? 2.l.ORD - Mobile Vending.docc r n n a� r Pugh �slN49N1 31@14a.ag n.-a.. ,,. e an - 5 - Page 210 of 350 I Board or the Community Redevelopment Agency, whichever is applicable. 2 3 3. Review Criteria. The MVU shall comply with the regulations and 4 requirements of Chapter 3, Article V, Section 10. Site constraints and 5 site plan functionality shall be satisfactorily addressed to justify the request. 6 7 4,=--A pproval Process. Staff shall review the proposed location and 8 dimensions of each MVU to ensure compliance with the review criteria 9 contained herein, and provide a recommendation. -1- 12 pp 4fi. v —C 1dfi sg :'F 14 - -i—r1 - 1iat4 ——i- Once an 15 individual or assembly MVU application is approved, a permit fee shall be 16 paid by the applicant, and Business Tax Receipt or Certificate of Use 17 received, prior to the operation of the MVU. 18 19 5ro Expiration. Each approval for an MVU shall be effective for one 20 (1) year, from October 1 until September 30, subject to annual renewal. 21 I Assembly permits are ri —u�—- 22 a a a sub -- � �o ffie S - ,jeccal Eyent Permit r IaLlI atis, ns 23 24 6. Fees. The annual renewal fees for an MVU shall be paid to the 25 Business Tax Division in accordance with the fee schedule as adopted by 26 I the City . As-sen 27 *N K 4i ORS: 28 29 7. Suspension. Approval of an MVU or Assembly permit may be 30 temporarily suspended by the City under the following circumstances: 1) 31 when necessary to clear sidewalk areas for a "community or special event" 32 authorized by the City; 2) when street, sidewalk, or utility repairs 33 necessitate such action; or 3) when the City may cause the immediate 34 removal or relocation of all or parts of the MVU or assembly in emergency 35 situations. 36 37 8. Denial or Revocation. The 38 Apps �'it iP, st1 ,1e for Business Tax Receipt and Certificate of Use, 39 6ie—- zn4 n- en4 —pan{ -shall have the power and 40 authority to deny or revoke the issuance or renewal of any application for 41 MVU or Assembly under the provisions of these regulations. In such 42 instances, the applicant shall be notified in writing of the denial of an 43 application or the suspension or revocation of an existing approval, and the 44 grounds thereof. Upon such notification, the operation shall cease and desist C: \Program Files ( x86) \neevia.com \docConverterPro\ temp\ NVDC\ 5E157484- B153- 46A0- BC8D- FE2DA6A6A538 \Boynton Beach.? 2.1.ORD - Mobile Vending.docc r n n a� r Pugh �slMON1 31@14a.ag n.-a.. ,,. e an -6- Page 211 of 350 1 until final action or outcome of the 2 An application approved under these regulations may be recommended for 3 suspension or revocation by staff, based on one (1) or more of the following: 4 5 a. Florida Department of Business and Professional 6 Regulation. 7 Cancellation of the Vendor's permit issued by the Division of 8 Hotels and Restaurants of the Florida Department of Business and 9 Professional Regulation. 10 11 b. Expiration. Expiration, suspension, revocation or 12 cancellation of any other business tax receipt, Certificate of Use or 13 permit required by the vendor. 14 15 C. Fraud. The permit was procured by fraud or false 16 representation of fact. 17 18 d. Consent. The abutting property owner or tenant 19 withdraws consent, in writing, for the mobile vending unit. 20 21 e. Violations. Violations of this or any other ordinance, the 22 City's municipal code, conditions of permit, or when conditions 23 exist that present a threat to the public health, safety, or welfare. 24 25 f. Miscellaneous. If determined to be noncompliant 26 with the review criteria contained herein or otherwise inconsistent 27 with the original approval, or changing conditions warrant the 28 removal of the unit from the public right of way 29 30 9. Appeal. Applicants who have been denied a request for an 31 MVU or assembly permit or who have had their approval revoked may 32 formally appeal such denial or revocation to the City Commission in 33 accordance with Chapter 1, Article VIII. 34 35 Section 4. Chapter 3, Article V, Section 10 of the Land Development 36 Regulations entitled "Mobile Vendor Regulations" is hereby amended as follows: 37 Section 10. Mobile Vendor Regulations. 38 39 A. Purpose and Intent. The purpose of this section is to provide 40 for the regulation of mobile vending activities, including Assembly, on 41 public and private property, in certain commercial and mixed -use zoning 42 districts of the City in order to promote the public interest by contributing to C: \Program Files ( x86) \neevia.com \docConverterPro\ temp\ NVDC\ 5E157484- B153- 46A0- BC8D- FE2DA6A6A538 \Boynton Beach.? 2.1.ORD - Mobile Vending.docc r n n a� r Pugh �slMON1 31@14a.ag n.-a.. ,,. e an -7- Page 212 of 350 I an active and attractive pedestrian environment. In recognition thereof, 2 reasonable regulation of mobile vending is necessary to protect the public 3 health, safety, and welfare and the interests of the City in the primary use of 4 public streets, sidewalks, and parking areas, for use by vehicular and 5 pedestrian traffic. 6 7 B. Definitions. See Chapter 1, Article H for specific definitions 8 applicable to 9 Mobile Vending Units 10 (MVU). 11 12 C. Approval Required. It shall be unlawful for any 13 establishment or organization to engage in or carry on the business of 14 vending food, goods, or services, upon private property or the public ways 15 of the City without first having secured a permit or permits as required by 16 this section. See Chapter 2, Article R Section 7.0 for the process and 17 procedure to obtain approval for an MVU. 18 19 It is not the intent of these regulations to be applied to mobile vendors 20 temporarily approved in conjunction with a special sales event Oh 21 E;�ent Permi See Section 6 above for additional regulations regarding 22 Special Sales Events. 23 24 D. Districts. The operating area of an MVU shall be entirely 25 located in the following zoning districts: C- 1, C -2, C -3, C -4, CBD, PCD, 26 SMU, MU -L1, MU -L2, MU- L3, MU -H, M -1, PU, REC, 1:_L — and PID 27 28 E. Compatibility. The use of an MVU shall be compatible with 29 the public interest. In making such a determination, staff shall consider 30 the type and intensity of use, the width of the sidewalk, the width and type 31 of right -of -way; location of fire lanes; fire hydrants; distance from 32 intersections and major driveways; the proximity and location of existing 33 street furniture, including but not limited to traffic control devices, 34 signposts, lampposts, parking meters, benches, phone kiosks, mailboxes, 35 fire hydrants, landscaping, trees, buffer yards, public art and refuse 36 containers, as well as the presence of truck loading zones. Staff shall also 37 consider established and emerging pedestrian and vehicular traffic patterns, 38 as well as other factors it deems relevant in determining whether or not the 39 proposed use would diminish required parking or result in congestion of the 40 public and private ways, on -site traffic circulation patterns, or the creation of a 41 safety hazard. 42 43 F. Location Criteria. An MVU shall be permitted to operate 44 throughout the City in approved zoning districts once a Business Tax C: \Program Files ( x86) \neevia.com \docConverterPro\ temp\ NVDC\ 5E157484- B153- 46A0- BC8D- FE2DA6A6A538 \Boynton Beach.? 2.I.ORD - Mobile Vending.docc r n n a� r Pugh �slMON1 31@14a.ag n.-a.. ,,. e an - 8 - Page 213 of 350 I Receipt or Certificate of Use has been issued; utility service connections are 2 only permitted once an approved Building permit has been issued. In addition, 3 an MVU must comply with the following location criteria, whichever is 4 applicable: 5 6 1. Public Property and Rights -of -Way. An MVU, 7 located on public property or within a right -of -way, shall comply 8 with the following requirements: 9 10 a. Maximum Area. An MVU shall not occupy an 11 operating area of more than (Z 20 12 square feet of space, including the unit, operator, trash 13 receptacle, signage, merchandise, and covering, if applicable, 14 per one -half (0.5) acre site. A single entity may request 15 approval for more than one (1) MVU per every one -half (0.5) 16 acre of site. 17 18 b. Maximum Dimensions. An MVU shall not 19 I exceed ten (10) feet in width by if.r 20 feet in length 21 22 C. Maximum Height. The maximum height of an 23 MVU, including any covering, such as its canopy, umbrella, 24 and / or transparent enclosure, shall not exceed fifteen (15) 25 feet, excluding venting equipment, 26 27 d. Sidewalks. An MVU vendor located on a public 28 sidewalk shall not: 29 30 (1) Vend at any location where the sidewalk is 31 less than 32 10 feet in 33 width; 34 35 (2) Vend within 20 feet of an entrance to any 36 building, bus stop sign, driveway, stop sign, or cross 37 walk of any intersection; and 38 39 (3) Obstruct the view of any directional sign, 40 traffic control sign, or device. 41 42 2. Private Property. An MVU is allowed on private 43 property, provided that it complies with the following regulations 44 45 a.. Class "A" MVU. An MVU is considered "Class C: \Program Files ( x86) \neevia.com \docConverterPro\ temp\ NVDC\ 5E157484- B153- 46A0- BC8D- FE2DA6A6A538 \Boynton Beach.? 2.1.ORD - Mobile Vending.docc r n n a� r Pugh �slN49N1 31@14a.ag n.-a.. ,,. e an -9- Page 214 of 350 I `A "' if it is less than seven (7) feet in height, including its 2 canopy, umbrella, and / or transparent enclosure and if the 3 operating area is seventy -two (72) square feet or less, 4 including the unit, operator, and trash receptacle. This class 5 includes carts and small trailers. 6 7 A Class "A" or Class "B" MVU maybe placed within off- s street parking spaces but shall be restricted to excess parking 9 spaces only. It shall not obstruct or impede critical 10 vehicular use movements or otherwise create a hazard. 11 12 b. Class "B" MVU. An MVU is considered "Class 13 B "' if it is either greater than seven (7) feet in height or in 14 excess of seventy -two (72) square feet in operating area, or 15 both. This class includes carts, trailers and vehicles in 16 excess of the size limitations of a Class "A" MVU 17 18 A Class "B" MVU shall be allowed on all sites greater than 19 one -half (0.5) acre in size. No more than one (1) MVU per 20 one -half (0.5) acre for the first acre and one- duarter (.25) 21 acre for each additional MVU shall be permitted. 22 23 Both Class "A" and "B" MVU's are allowed on improved 24 property only, and if placed within walkways or right -of- 25 ways, shall not obstruct or impede pedestrian movement or 26 cause noncompliance with ADA accessible route 27 requirements. A minimum clear passage of four (4) -feet 28 must be maintained for pedestrian travel at all times. 29 30 G. Removal. Each MVU shall be removed daily. An MVU shall not 31 remain on any public or private property, or within any rights -of -way 32 between the hours of midnight and 6:00 AM. 33 34 H. Maintenance. The mobile vending unit, including any 35 canopies, umbrellas, or transparent enclosures, must be clean, and well 36 maintained. The vending site itself must also be clean and orderly at all 37 times, and the vendor must provide a refuse container for use by his 38 patrons. The container shall be removed after the unit has departed for 39 the day. Vendor wastes of any kind shall not be deposited or permitted to 40 be deposited upon the ground, sidewalk, streets, city waste receptacles, or 41 private dumpsters. 42 43 L S eparation. 44 45 1. Between Units. An MVU shall not be placed within C: \Program Files ( x86) \neevia.com \docConverterPro\ temp\ NVDC\ 5E157484- B153- 46A0- BC8D- FE2DA6A6A538 \Boynton Beach.? 2.1.ORD - Mobile Vending.docc r n n a� r Pugh �slM n1@.,a. n.-a.. ,,. e an _ Page 215 of 350 1 100 feet from another MVU of a different vendor for which a permit 2 had been granted unless requested as a condition of permit. 3 4 2. From Selected Land Uses. 5 6 I a. An MVU on a private parcel, shall not be placed 7 within 200 feet from the property line of any single- family 8 residential zoning district, except within PUD's. 9 10 b. An MVU on a private parcel or located within a City 11 right-of-way, shall not be placed within 150 feet from 12 the property line of any establishment that sells or provides 13 similar foods, merchandise, or services as that of the MVU 14 without the prior written consent of the similar 15 establishment. 16 17 J. Display. 18 19 1. Display of Permit and License. All vendors must 20 display the permit issued by the City in a prominent and visible 21 manner. In addition, an MVU capable of operating within public 22 rights-of-way shall display a current Florida Department of Highway 23 Safety & Motor Vehicles (DHSMV) license plate. 24 25 2. Display of Merchandise. No merchandise shall be 26 displayed using street structures (planters, trees, trash containers, 27 signposts, etc.) or placed upon the sidewalk or right-of-way. 28 Merchandise may be displayed outside the MVU on private 29 property with the written permission of the Property Owner 30 provided that it does not intrude upon the accessible area around the 31 unit, or otherwise impede parking or access to structures within the 32 site. 33 34 K Emergencies. Vendors shall obey any lawful order from a 35 police or fire department official during an emergency or to avoid congestion 36 or obstruction of the sidewalk. 37 38 L. Prohibitions. 39 40 1. Solicitations. An MVU approved and located within a right- 41 of-way shall not solicit or conduct business with persons in motor 42 vehicles. 43 44 C:\Program Files (x86)\neevia.com\docConverterPro\temp\NVDC\5EI57484-BI53-46A Beach.712.1.ORD - Mobile Vending. d T'PR ghaRgesl N49N 10 3 ' 1 @14diag Of4iRRR-e _ 11_ �. Page 216 of 350 1 2. Advertisements. Vendors shall not make loud noises, 2 use mechanical audio, noise - making devices, moving objects, or 3 lighting systems to advertise his or her product. 4 5 3. Unattended. No MVU shall be left 6 unattended. 7 8 4. Miscellaneous. 9 10 a. Vendors shall not hinder or impede the use of 11 any phone kiosk, mailbox, parking meter, fire alarm, fire 12 hydrant, or traffic control device. 13 14 b. No tables, chairs, or umbrellas are to be set up for 15 use by customers, with the exception for those located on 16 private properties or in public parks and utilized in 17 connection with a Class "B" MVU. 18 19 C. Freestanding signs, flags, banners, tents, tarpaulins, 20 canopies, or awnings shall be allowed in connection with an 21 MVU as a condition of permit. All signs, flags, banners, 22 tents, tarpaulins, canopies, or awnings shall be either 23 attached to, centered over, resting against the vending 24 vehicle / equipment, or located within a designated area 25 from the MVU based on permit condition. 10.M.2 b 26 27 d. Live entertainment, defined as performances, shows or 28 other forms of entertainment consisting of one (1) or more 29 persons, amplified or non - amplified music or other related 30 sounds or noise, including but not limited to entertainment 31 provided by musicians, disc jockey (DJ), master of ceremonies 32 (MC), or karaoke shall not exceed sixty (60) decibels at a 33 distance of one - hundred (100) feet from the source as measured 34 by a sound level meter. , 35 36 e. MVU's utilizing portable generators shall not 37 exceed sixty (60) decibels at a distance of one - hundred 38 (100) feet from the source as measured by a sound level 39 meter. 40 41 M. 1. AUTO /CAR WASH (POLISHING, WAXING, DETAILING). 42 An AUTO /CAR WASH (POLISHING, WAXING, DETAILING) type of MVU shall not be 43 allowed on public property or within any right -of -way. This type of MVU is only allowed on C: \Program Files ( x86) \neevia.com \docConverterPro\ temp\ NVDC\ 5E157484- B153- 46A0- BC8D- FE2DA6A6A538 \Boynton Beach.? 2.l.ORD - Mobile Vending.docc r n n a� r Pugh �slN49N1 31@14a.ag n.a.. ,,. an e -12 - Page 217 of 350 I private property and shall comply with the location criteria of paragraph "F" above. One (1) 2 freestanding canopy may be allowed for this type of MVU in addition to another canopy that 3 is either attached to, centered over, or resting against the vending vehicle or equipment. In 4 all instances, the size of the freestanding canopy shall be the minimum necessary to 5 accommodate one (1) parked vehicle, but not to exceed 20 feet in width by 20 feet in length, 6 and must be removed daily. 7 Section 5. Chapter 2, Article I, Section 2 of the Land Development Regulations 8 entitled "Types of Land Development Applications" is hereby amended as follows: 10 Section 2. Types of Land Development Applications 11 12 A. Table 2 -1. ADDlicatlons by City Departments. 13 ... 14 Section 6. Chapter 3, Article IV, Section 3 of the Land Development Regulations 15 entitled "Use Regulations" is hereby amended as follows: 16 ... C: \Program Files ( x86) \neevia.com \docConverterPro\ temp\ NVDC\ 5E157484- B153- 46A0- BC8D- FE2DA6A6A538 \Boynton Beach.? 2.1.ORD - Mobile Vending.docc: r n n ,. n r r.a r,,,,. ges lN4 N1, 3,1 @14, ia n n. e - 13 Page 218 of 350 REVIEWING PUBLIC APPLICATION CODE APPROVING AUTHORITY HEARING TYPE SECTION AUTHORITY (STAFF) REQUIRED? Other Applications Certificate of Art. II, Director of Director of Conformity Sec. 7A. P &Z P &Z No Lot Line Art. II, Director of Director of Modification Sec. 7.13. P &Z P &Z No Mobile Vendor Art. II, Director of Director of Approval Sec. 7C. P &Z P &Z No Director of CC Mobile Vendor Art. II P &Z`� � :) C en ts Yes . Assembly Sec. 7�C. �; (- -- h1.1 E� e "l t 13 ... 14 Section 6. Chapter 3, Article IV, Section 3 of the Land Development Regulations 15 entitled "Use Regulations" is hereby amended as follows: 16 ... C: \Program Files ( x86) \neevia.com \docConverterPro\ temp\ NVDC\ 5E157484- B153- 46A0- BC8D- FE2DA6A6A538 \Boynton Beach.? 2.1.ORD - Mobile Vending.docc: r n n ,. n r r.a r,,,,. ges lN4 N1, 3,1 @14, ia n n. e - 13 Page 218 of 350 I D. Use Matrix (Table 3 -28). 2 See attached Exhibit "A" 3 Section 7. Should any section or provision of this Ordinance or any portion 4 thereof be declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such decision shall not 5 affect the remainder of this Ordinance. 6 Section 8. This Ordinance shall become effective immediately on second. 7 FIRST READING this day of , 2015. 8 SECOND, FINAL READING AND PASSAGE this day of , 2015. 9 CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ATTEST: 26 27 28 29 Mayor — Jerry Taylor Vice Mayor — Joe Casello Commissioner — David T. Merker Commissioner — Mack McCray Commissioner — Michael M. Fitzpatrick VOTE 30 Janet M. Prainito, MMC 31 City Clerk 32 33 34 35 (Corporate Seal) YES NO C: \Program Files ( x86) \neevia.com \docConverterPro\ temp\ NVDC\ 5E157484- B153- 46A0- BC8D- FE2DA6A6A538 \Boynton Beach.? 2.1.ORD - Mobile Vending.docc r n n a� r Pugh �slN49N1 31@14a.ag n.a.. ,,. an e - 14 Page 219 of 350 D. Use Matrix (Table 3 -28). - co�mao Residential Commercial Mixed -Use Industrial Misc s R -1- R -1- R -1- R- R- R- IPUD PUD MHP C -1 C -2 C -3 G4 CBD PCD SMU MU- MU- MU- M -1 PID PU REC AAB AA A 1 2 3 L1 L2 L3 H Un bile Vending P 54 P 54 P 54 P :L P 54 P 54 P 54 P 54 P 54 P 54 P4 P 54 P 54 P 54 P 54 A54 - Formatted Table Formatted: Centered, Widow /Orphan control Page 220 of 350 Mobile Vendor Code Citations Part III (LDR), Chapter 1, Article II MOBILE VENDING UNIT (MVL1) - Any movable cart, trailer, or other vehicle that is operated from an established location, from which food, flowers, and other merchandise and services, as well as non - alcoholic beverages are provided to the public with or without charge, except, however, that the provisions of this ordinance shall not apply to mobile caterers, or service providers, generally defined as a person engaged in the business of transporting, in motor vehicles, food, beverages, or service equipment to residential, business, and industrial establishments pursuant to prearranged schedules, and dispensing from the vehicles the items or services at retail, for the convenience of the personnel of such establishments. For the purposes of implementing and interpreting the mobile vendor ordinance, the following definitions shall apply: ADULTERATED - The condition of a food that bears or contains any poisonous or deleterious substance or has been processed, prepared, packed or held under unsanitary conditions, whereby it may have become contaminated with filth, in a quantity which may render it injurious to health. APPROVED MANNER - Method of dealing with waste, solid or liquid, which comports with adequate sanitation methods as established by the Division of Hotels and Restaurants of the Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation. APPROVED SOURCE — A licensed food processing establishment considered satisfactory by the health director and serving food products which are clean, wholesome, free from adulteration or misbranding and safe for human consumption. ASSEMBLY — A concentration of three (3) or more MVU's coordinated by a single applicant intended to contribute to the vitality of publicly- accessible spaces and community activities. Events of this type are . l pry ia,. : 1 4 l ccirwl W)obl ahi `.� COMMISSARY - A food processing establishment or food service establishment approved by the Division of Hotels and Restaurants of the Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation in which food, containers or supplies are kept, handled, prepared, packaged or stored for transportation by mobile vendors. CORROSION RESISTANT MATERIAL - A material which maintains its original surface characteristics under prolonged influence of food, cleaning compounds, bactericidal solutions and other conditions -of -use environment. EASILY CLEANABLE - Surfaces are readily accessible and made of such material and finish and so fabricated that residue may be effectively removed by normal cleaning methods. FOOD - Any raw, cooked or processed edible substance, ice, beverage or ingredient used or intended for use or for sale in whole or in part for human consumption. FOOD HANDLER - A person, certified by the Division of Hotels and Restaurants of the Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation, engaged in the preparation, Page 221 of 350 MVU Regulations — 2/2015 handling or vending of food. P ,a < e 12 FOOD VENDOR - Any person, group of persons, firm or corporation who individually or by or through an agent or employer, offers for sale, sells, attempts to sell, exposes for sale or gives away any food intended for human consumption from any vehicle or by a person afoot. LABEL — A display of any written, printed, or graphic matter upon the immediate container, not including package liner, of any prepackaged article in accordance with state law. LIQUID WASTE - Fluid, resulting from wastes produced from food vending operations, composed of solids, whether dissolved or in suspension; liquids, whether in solution, in emulsion or in separate phases; and gases. The term shall also include melted ice. MERCHANDISE - Items of clothing, jewelry (including timepieces), photos, artwork, housewares, flowers, plants, landscape materials, carpets, phones and accessories, small appliances, medicines, personal care items, books and/or magazines as well as audio or video recordings, tapes, discs or other media. MISLABELED AND MISBRANDED - The presence of any written, printed or graphic matter upon or accompanying any food or container of food which is false or misleading and which is not presented in the English language as stipulated by the Food and Drug Act, Title 21, Chapter 1- 101.15 or which violates any applicable federal, state or local labeling requirements. PERISHABLE FOOD - Food, including shelled eggs, of a type or in such condition that it will become adulterated unless kept at a temperature which will maintain product quality and wholesomeness. PERMIT — A site specific license to operate a mobile vending unit which shall be issued by the Planning and Zoning Division of the City's Department of Development for a stated fee and shall be carried by a vendor or food handler at all times while vending. POTENTIALLY HAZARDOUS FOOD - Any food that consists in whole or in part of milk or milk products, eggs, meat, poultry, fish, shellfish, edible crustacea or other ingredients including synthetic ingredients, in a form capable of supporting rapid and progressive growth of infectious or toxigenic microorganisms. The term does not include clean, whole, uncracked, odor -free shell eggs or foods which have a pH level of 4.5 or below or a water activity (AW) value of 0.85 or less. PUBLIC WAYS - Include all portions of public streets, alleys, sidewalks, trails and parking lots of the City of Boynton Beach and, in addition, shall include privately owned streets, roads, alleys, sidewalks, trails, and parking lots that are provided for public use or access. SAFE TEMPERATURES - As applied to potentially hazardous food, shall mean temperatures of forty -five (45) degrees Fahrenheit (seven (7) degrees Celsius) or below, or one hundred forty (140) degrees Fahrenheit (sixty (60) degrees Celsius) or above and zero degrees Fahrenheit (minus seventeen (17) degrees Celsius) or below for frozen food storage. City of Boynton Beach, Planning and Zoning Division, 561 - 742 -6260 Page 222 of 350 MVU Regulations — 2/2015 P ,a < e 13 SANITIZE - Effective bactericidal treatment of cleaned surfaces of equipment and utensils by a process which has been approved by the Division of Hotels and Restaurants of the Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation as being effective in destroying microorganisms including pathogens. SERVICES - Personal services to include portraits, body art, and hair braiding; the cleaning and detailing of vehicles including automobiles, trucks, vans, and motorcycles; and repairing household goods, tools, and equipment. SINGLE SERVICE ARTICLES - Cups, containers, lids, closures, plates, knives, forks, spoons, stirrers, paddles, straws, napkins, wrapping materials, toothpicks and similar articles intended for one -time, one - person use and then discarded. STICKER — A decal issued by the Planning and Zoning Division of the City's Department of Development shall be displayed on the mobile vending unit. UTENSIL - Any implement used in the storage, preparation, transportation or serving of food. VEHICLE - Every device in, upon, or by which any persons, food or other commodity is or may be transported, pushed or drawn. WHOLESOME - In sound condition, clean, free from adulteration and otherwise suitable for use as human food. City of Boynton Beach, Planning and Zoning Division, 561 - 742 -6260 Page 223 of 350 MVU Regulations — 2/2015 Pa g e 14 Part III (LDR), Chapter 2, Article II, Section7.C. C. Mobile Vendor Approval. 1. General. a. Purpose and Intent. The purpose and intent of this subsection is to set forth well- defined application processes, review criteria, and information to guide in the processing and review of mobile vending units (MVU) submittals. b. Applicability. This subsection is applicable to any MVU proposed within the City in accordance with Chapter 3, Article V, Section 10. It shall be unlawful for anyone to operate an MVU in the City without first obtaining the necessary approvals as contained herein. Portable or mobile kitchens necessary to provide temporary food services in connection with permitted construction work are not subject to the removal requirement or size restrictions. Such temporary units must be removed immediately upon completion of work. 2. Submittal Requirements. See Section 1.1) above for the submittal requirements of this application. Because of minim separation requirements between each MVU, in those instances when more than one (1) application has been submitted for the same location, the earliest application shall be processed and forwarded to either the Planning and Development Board or the Community Redevelopment Agency, whichever is applicable. 3. Review Criteria. The MVU shall comply with the regulations and requirements of Chapter 3, Article V, Section 10. Site constraints and site plan functionality shall be satisfactorily addressed to justify the request. 4. Approval Process. Staff shall review the proposed location and dimensions of each MVU to ensure compliance with the review criteria contained herein, and provide a recommendation. 1 1—la i f i- wra— s —wr -_ a; -t ice— a i -tom. Once an individual or assembly MVU application is approved, a permit fee shall be paid by the applicant, and Business Tax Receipt or Certificate of Use received, prior to the operation of the MVU. 5. Expiration. Each approval for an MVU shall be effective for one (1) year, from October 1 until September 30, subject to annual renewal. Assembly permits ares a ,W) Lw W) ffic `SpLLufl E; \effl 1 6. Fees. The annual renewal fees for an MVU shall be paid to the Business Tax Division in accordance with the fee schedule as adopted by the City.s -i fal� pa€ City of Boynton Beach, Planning and Zoning Division, 561 - 742 -6260 Page 224 of 350 MVU Regulations — 2/2015 Page 15 7. Suspension. Approval of an MVU or Assembly permit may be temporarily suspended by the City under the following circumstances: 1) when necessary to clear sidewalk areas for a "community or special event" authorized by the City; 2) when street, sidewalk, or utility repairs necessitate such action, or 3) when the City may cause the immediate removal or relocation of all or parts of the MVU or assembly in emergency situations. 8. Denial or Revocation. Th for Business Tax Receipt and Certificate of Use, ra t �- shall have the power and authority to deny or revoke the issuance or renewal of any application for MVU or Assembly under the provisions of these regulations. In such instances, the applicant shall be notified in writing of the denial of an application or the suspension or revocation of an existing approval, and the grounds thereof. Upon such notification, the operation shall cease and desist until final action or outcome of the' >a: An application approved under these regulations maybe recommended for suspension or revocation by staff, based on one (1) or more of the following: a. Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation. Cancellation of the Vendor's permit issued by the Division of Hotels and Restaurants of the Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation. b. Expiration. Expiration, suspension, revocation or cancellation of any other business tax receipt, Certificate of Use or permit required by the vendor. C. Fraud. The permit was procured by fraud or false representation of fact. d. Consent. The abutting property owner or tenant withdraws consent, in writing, for the mobile vending unit. e. Violations. Violations of this or any other ordinance, the City's municipal code, conditions of permit, or when conditions exist that present a threat to the public health, safety, or welfare. f. Miscellaneous. If determined to be noncompliant with the review criteria contained herein or otherwise inconsistent with the original approval, or changing conditions warrant the removal of the unit from the public right of way 9. Appeal. Applicants who have been denied a request for an MVU or assembly permit or who have had their approval revoked may formally appeal such denial or revocation to the City Commission in accordance with Chapter 1, Article VIII. City of Boynton Beach, Planning and Zoning Division, 561 - 742 -6260 Page 225 of 350 MVU Regulations — 2/2015 Pa g e 16 Part III (LDR), Chapter 3, Article V, Section 10. Section 10. Mobile Vendor Regulations. A. Purpose and Intent. The purpose of this section is to provide for the regulation of mobile vending activities, including Assembly, on public and private property, in certain commercial and mixed -use zoning districts of the City in order to promote the public interest by contributing to an active and attractive pedestrian environment. In recognition thereof, reasonable regulation of mobile vending is necessary to protect the public health, safety, and welfare and the interests of the City in the primary use of public streets, sidewalks, and parking areas, for use by vehicular and pedestrian traffic. B. Definitions. See Chapter 1, Article H for specific definitions applicable to Mobile Vending Units (MVU). C. Approval Required. It shall be unlawful for any establishment or organization to engage in or carry on the business of vending food, goods, or services, upon private property or the public ways of the City without first having secured a permit or permits as required by this section. See Chapter 2, Article 11, Section 7.0 for the process and procedure to obtain approval for an MVU. It is not the intent of these regulations to be applied to mobile vendors temporarily approved in conjunction with a special sales event of )ecin1 I'veW 1'��z nfl See Section 6 above for additional regulations regarding Special Sales Events. D. Districts. The operating area of an MVU shall be entirely located in the following zoning districts: C- 1 . C -2, C -3, C -4, CBD, PCD, SMU, MU -Ll, MU -L2, MU- L3, MU -H, M- 1, PU, REC, 1' J D, and PIT) E. Compatibility. The use of an MVU shall be compatible with the public interest. In making such a determination, staff shall consider the type and intensity of use, the width of the sidewalk, the width and type of right -of -way; location of fire lanes; fire hydrants, distance from intersections and major driveways; the proximity and location of existing street furniture, including but not limited to traffic control devices, signposts, lampposts, parking meters, benches, phone kiosks, mailboxes, fire hydrants, landscaping, trees, buffer yards, public art and refuse containers, as well as the presence of truck loading zones. Staff shall also consider established and emerging pedestrian and vehicular traffic patterns, as well as other factors it deems relevant in determining whether or not the proposed use would diminish required parking or result in congestion of the public and private ways, on -site traffic circulation patterns, or the creation of a safety hazard. F. Location Criteria. An MVU shall be permitted to operate throughout the City in approved zoning districts once a Business Tax Receipt or Certificate of Use has been issued, utility service connections are only permitted once an approved Building permit has been issued. In addition, an MVU must comply with the following location criteria, whichever is applicable: City of Boynton Beach, Planning and Zoning Division, 561 - 742 -6260 Page 226 of 350 MVU Regulations — 2/2015 P ,a < e 17 1. Public Property and Rights -of -Way. An MVU, located on public property or within a right -of -way, shall comply with the following requirements: a. Maximum Area. An MVU shall not occupy an operating area of more than � 1 ( 120) square feet of space, including the unit, operator, trash receptacle, signage, merchandise, and covering, if applicable, per one -half (0.5) acre site. A single entity may request approval for more than one (1) MVU per every one -half (0.5) acre of site. b. Maximum Dimensions. An MVU shall not exceed ten (10) feet in width by —i ti,z 1 L-1 I feet in length C. Maximum Height. The maximum height of an MVU, including any covering, such as its canopy, umbrella, and / or transparent enclosure, shall not exceed fifteen (15) feet, excluding venting equipment, d. Sidewalks. An MVU vendor located on apublic sidewalk shall not: (1) Vend at any location where the sidewalk is less than 10 feet in width, (2) Vend within 20 feet of an entrance to any building, bus stop sign, driveway, stop sign, or cross walk of any intersection; and (3) Obstruct the view of any directional sign, traffic control sign, or device. 2. Private Property. An MVU is allowed on private property, provided that it complies with the following regulations a.. Class "A" MVU. An MVU is considered "Class `A "' if it is less than seven (7) feet in height, including its canopy, umbrella, and / or transparent enclosure and if the operating area is seventy -two (72) square feet or less, including the unit, operator, and trash receptacle. This class includes carts and small trailers. A Class "A" or Class `B" MVU may be placed within off-street parking spaces but shall be restricted to excess parking spaces only. It shall not obstruct or impede critical vehicular use movements or otherwise create a hazard. b. Class "B" MVU. An MVU is considered "Class B "' if it is either greater than seven (7) feet in height or in excess of seventy -two (72) square feet in operating area, or both. This class includes carts, trailers and vehicles in excess of the size limitations of a Class "A" MVU A Class `B" MVU shall be allowed on all sites greater than one -half (0.5) acre in size. No more than one (1) MVU per one -half (0.5) acre for the first acre and one - quarter (.25) acre for each additional MVU shall be permitted. Both Class "A" and `B" MVU's are allowed on improved property only, and City of Boynton Beach, Planning and Zoning Division, 561 - 742 -6260 Page 227 of 350 MVU Regulations — 2/2015 Pa g e 18 if placed within walkways or right -of -ways, shall not obstruct or impede pedestrian movement or cause noncompliance with ADA accessible route requirements. A minim clear passage of four (4) -feet must be maintained for pedestrian travel at all times. G. Removal. Each MVU shall be removed daily. An MVU shall not remain on any public or private property, or within any rights -of -way between the hours of midnight and 6:00 AM. H. Maintenance. The mobile vending unit, including any canopies, umbrellas, or transparent enclosures, must be clean, and well maintained. The vending site itself must also be clean and orderly at all times, and the vendor must provide a refuse container for use by his patrons. The container shall be removed after the unit has departed for the day. Vendor wastes of any kind shall not be deposited or permitted to be deposited upon the ground, sidewalk, streets, city waste receptacles, or private dumpsters. I. Separation. 1. Between Units. An MVU shall not be placed within 100 feet from another MVU of a different vendor for which a permit had been granted unless requested as a condition of permit. 2. From Selected Land Uses. a. An MVU on a private parcel, shall not be placed within 200 feet from the property line of any single- family residential zoning district exce t within PUD's b. An MVU on a private parcel or located within a City right -of -way, shall not be placed within 150 feet from the property line of any establishment that sells or provides similar foods, merchandise, or services as that of the MVU without the prior written consent of the similar establishment. J. Display. 1. Display of Permit and License. All vendors must display the permit issued by the City in a prominent and visible manner. In addition, an MVU capable of operating within public rights -of -way shall display a current Florida Department of Highway Safety & Motor Vehicles (DHSMV) license plate. 2. Display of Merchandise. No merchandise shall be displayed using street structures (planters, trees, trash containers, signposts, etc.) or placed upon the sidewalk or right -of -way. Merchandise may be displayed outside the MVU on private property with the written permission of the Property Owner provided that it does not intrude upon the accessible area around the unit, or otherwise impede parking or access to structures within the site. K Emergencies. Vendors shall obey any lawful order from a police or fire department official during an emergency or to avoid congestion or obstruction of the sidewalk. City of Boynton Beach, Planning and Zoning Division, 561 - 742 -6260 Page 228 of 350 MVU Regulations — 2/2015 L. Prohibitions. Page 19 1. Solicitations. An MVU approved and located within a right -of -way shall not solicit or conduct business with persons in motor vehicles. 2. Advertisements. Vendors shall not make loud noises, use mechanical audio, noise - making devices, moving objects, or lighting systems to advertise his or her product. 3. Unattended. No MVU shall be left unattended. 4. Miscellaneous. a. Vendors shall not hinder or impede the use of any phone kiosk, mailbox, parking meter, fire alarm, fire hydrant, or traffic control device. b. No tables, chairs, or umbrellas are to be set up for use by customers, with the exception for those located on private properties or in public parks and utilized in connection with a Class `B" MVU. C. Freestanding signs, flags, banners, tents, tarpaulins, canopies, or awnings shall be allowed in connection with an MVU as a condition of permit. All signs, flags, banners, tents, tarpaulins, canopies, or awnings shall be either attached to, centered over, resting against the vending vehicle / equipment, or located within a designated area from the MVU based on permit condition. l0.M.2 b d. Live entertainment, defined as performances, shows or other forms of entertainment consisting of one (1) or more persons, amplified or non - amplified music or other related sounds or noise, including but not limited to entertainment provided by musicians, disc jockey (DJ), master of ceremonies (MC), or karaoke shall not exceed sixty (60) decibels at a distance of one - hundred (100) feet from the source as measured by a sound level meter. , e. MVU's utilizing portable generators shall not exceed sixty (60) decibels at a distance of one - hundred (100) feet from the source as measured by a sound level meter. M. 1. AUTO /CAR WASH (POLISHING, WAXING, DETAILING). An AUTO /CAR WASH (POLISHING, WAXING, DETAILING) type of MVU shall not be allowed on public property or within any right -of -way. This type of MVU is only allowed on private property and shall comply with the location criteria of paragraph "F" above. One (1) freestanding canopy may be allowed for this type of MVU in addition to another canopy that is either attached to, centered over, or resting against the vending vehicle or equipment. In all instances, the size of the freestanding canopy shall be the minim necessary to accommodate one (1) parked vehicle, but not to exceed 20 feet in width by 20 feet in length, and must be removed daily. City of Boynton Beach, Planning and Zoning Division, 561 - 742 -6260 Page 229 of 350 MVU Regulations — 2/2015 Part III (LDR), Chapter 2, Article I, Section2 Section 2. Types of Land Development Applications A. Table 2 -1. Applications by City Departments. City of Boynton Beach, Planning and Zoning Division, 561 - 742 - 6260 P age 110 Page 230 of 350 REVIEWING PUBLIC APPLICATION CODE APPROVING AUTHORITY HEARING TYPE SECTION AUTHORITY (STAFF) REQUIRED? Other Applications Certificate of Art. II, Director of Director of No Conformity Sec. 7A. P &Z P &Z Lot Line Art. II, Director of Director of Modification Sec. 7.13. P &Z P &Z No Mobile Vendor Art. II, Director of Director of No Approval Sec. 7C. P &Z P &Z Lr t Mobile Vendor Art. II, l ex Assembly Sec. 7C. `. cial 1 E';� tw1]I•'s City of Boynton Beach, Planning and Zoning Division, 561 - 742 - 6260 P age 110 Page 230 of 350 D. Use Matrix (Table 3 -28). P - - - - Formatted Table G co ,m — R Residential C Commercial M Mixed -Use I Industrial M Mise R -1- R R -1- R R -1- R R- R R- R R- I IPUD P MU- M MU- U U M MU- M AAB A AA A A 1 1 2 2 3 3 L PUD M MHP C C -1 C C -2 C C -3 C C -4 C CBD P PCD S SMU M L1 L L2 L H M -1 P PID P PU REC L3 H Mobile Page 231 of 350 13.A. LEGAL 2/17/2015 REQUESTED ACTION BY COMMISSION: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 15- 002 - SECOND READING - PUBLIC HEARING - Approve amendments to the Land Development Regulations, including amendments to the Definitions, Zoning Use Matrix, and corresponding Use Matrix Notes to establish a new use titled Medical Care or Testing (In- Patient) to allow medical uses that provide 24 -hour services or treatment. EXPLANATION OF REQUEST: The City's Zoning Regulations accommodate uses that provide medical testing and treatment in the following three general categories; 1) hospitals; 2) medical offices; and 3) imaging, testing and support services. Of the three uses, the only one where in- patient medical care is permitted is hospitals. Hospitals, in summary, are institutional uses providing comprehensive medical treatment and care. Although nursing and convalescent homes provide basic, 24 -hour medical care, they are currently labeled a Type 3 Group Home in the City's LDR and function more as permanent or long -term housing for residents /patients rather than a medical service. Until recently there has not been a demonstrated demand in the City for medical services that provide 24 -hour care to patients. However, in response to the recent demand for services that provide 24 -hour care, treatment and /or testing pertaining to sleep apnea, eating disorders, labor and delivery, hospice care, and substance abuse, staff has analyzed the zoning regulations and proposes amendments to address this deficiency by accommodating these uses as well as other excluded businesses that similarly provide overnight medical care and treatment. Most significant to this analysis is that Hospitals are limited to the Public Usage (PU) Zoning District. The PU Zoning District is a unique district defined to "apply to those areas within the city whose ownership and /or operation is public, or whose use is primarily institutionally - oriented. When we think of "institutional" uses, we typically consider those uses that are public or public /private in nature and that engage in public service such as schools, places of worship, lodges and charitable organizations, government- operated facilities, and hospitals. However, given the number and variety of possible medical uses that similarly provide services around - the - clock, and the unique and limited locations of the PU Zoning District, other appropriate zoning districts should be considered that match the type of intensity and locational requirements of these medical uses. The proposed amendments to the zoning regulations are intended to ensure that the City's zoning regulations are defensible, by not unjustifiably zoning out certain uses, and more importantly, maintaining compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Fair Housing Act (FHA). In general, both acts prohibit discrimination against the "handicapped" or "disabled ". Of course the FHA emphasizes the access to housing, and the ADA targets access to services, programs, or activities of a public entity. Most relevant to this code review and analysis are the following points: • The application or coverage of the ADA and FHA was expanded so that "physical or mental impairment" includes alcoholism and drug addiction, and expanded to also apply to those businesses providing related services and treatments; • Zoning is an activity specifically referenced in the Technical Assistance Manual for the ADA in discussing this function and its importance to be monitored for compliance with the ADA and FHA; • Zoning that does not regulate equitably those uses with like characteristics and purposes, which affect handicapped individuals, could raise concerns under the ADA and FHA; and • When zoning fails to allow the integration of handicapped individuals into society, such as a when zoning narrowly classifies drug and alcohol treatment facilities as "institutional" while simultaneously excluding them from districts that allow related or similar medical businesses and services, such zoning could impede the integration expectation of the ADA and FHA. Page 232 of 350 Therefore, staff proposes the subject code amendments that have identified several uses currently excluded from the zoning regulations that provide 24 -hour patient care and treatment. The proposed changes also provide the necessary definition for said uses; identify the zoning districts appropriate for such intense medical uses; and include additional location standards and operational requirements to ensure land use compatibility and adherence to proper review processes. The proposed new use was originally recommended by staff to be added to the matrix, as a permitted use in the C -3 (Community Commercial), PCD (Planned Commercial Development) and PU (Public Usage) Zoning Districts. The C -3 Zoning District is the most intensive commercial district in the City's Zoning Regulations based on typical project size (i.e. land area and square footage) and customer traffic, and is intended to accommodate large commercial centers located with direct access from arterial roadways. Distances to residential areas are typically greatest, and design and buffering requirements are intended to match the scale of the project and mitigate impacts upon adjacent properties. However, the Planning & Development Board, forwards the item with a recommendation for approval, along with a specific recommendation to also include the C -1 and C -2 zoning Districts as they didn't think that the proposed amendments provided the subject uses with adequate (e.g. reasonable) location options. It should be noted that the proposed amendments still include the Iocational requirement that the uses be located along arterial roadways, and therefore Staff finds that the Board's changes still support the staff objectives to concentrate like land uses and preserve residential neighborhoods. Staff supports the Board's recommendations and therefore has included the changes within the Zoning Use Matrix and Use Matrix Notes (See the accompanying exhibits where each of the proposed amendments to the LDR definitions, and Zoning Use Matrix and Use Matrix Notes are indicated including the Board's recommendation for including the C -1 and C -2 Zoning Districts). :16]q►AT ► 114M1: 1&V_1JJx01 9101kVd:J:ZeZe30MLi636]: &I=1:1►T / Is] ��► / -1 FISCAL IMPACT: NA ALTERNATIVES: None recommended. ��0:7_l1X4[02»_1►F STRATEGIC PLAN APPLICATION: NA CLIMATE ACTION: No CLIMATE ACTION DISCUSSION: NA Is this a grant? No Grant Amount: ATTACHMENTS: Type Ordinance D Staff Report D Other D Other REVIEWERS: Department Reviewer Description Rev. Ord for Inpatient Care Staff report Exhibit 1 -A - Matrix Exhibit 1 -13 - LDR text Action Date Page 233 of 350 City Clerk Pyle, Judith Approved 21412015 - 2:26 PM Page 234 of 350 1 ORDINANCE NO. 15- 2 (Amended for First Reading) 3 4 5 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, 6 FLORIDA APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE LAND 7 DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, CHAPTER 1, ARTICLE II 8 ENTITLED "DEFINITIONS "; CHAPTER 3, ARTICLE IV, 9 SECTION 3_D, "Z4,-)NtNQ SE MATRIX NOTES "; CHAPTER 3, 10 ARTICLE IV, SECTION 3.D., TABLE 3 -28 "USE MATRIX "; 11 PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS, SEVERABILITY, AND AN 12 EFFECTIVE DATE. 13 14 15 WHEREAS, the City's Zoning Regulations accommodate uses that provide medical 16 testing and treatment in the following three general categories; 1) hospitals; 2) medical 17 offices; and 3) imaging, testing and support services, however, of the three uses, the only one 18 where in- patient medical care is permitted is hospitals; and 19 WHEREAS, until recently, there has not been a demonstrated demand in the City 20 for medical services that provide 24 -hour care to patients, however, in response to the recent 30 WHEREAS, the City Commission finds it to be in the best interest of the citizens C:APro ram Files (x86)\neevia.com\docConvelterPro\tgmp\NVDC\BF16A4C9-97ID-498B-B8C7-7E23D765B5E2\BL)y Beach.? LLMedical Care and Testing (In- atient Ord rev 1 2.do -1- Page 235 of 350 1 and residents of the City to approve the recommendations of staff and amend the Land 2 Development Regulations as reflected herein. 3 NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF 4 THE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA, THAT: 5 Section 1 . The foregoing whereas clauses are true and correct and are now ratified 6 and confirmed by the City Commission. 7 Section 2. Chapter 1, Article 11 of the Land Development Regulations entitled 8 "Definitions" is hereby amended as follows: 9 ... 10 Definitions (LDR, Chapter 1, Article II) 11 12 Medical Care or Testing (In- patient) 13 i� (at7 id 't' iric.`)fddirt + (£. i11('t'^ +4, ('Yit't' C #Yt #c.`5 G+.Yttt' ✓lf 5 1iinb; %rhich a e f ( ±i _ -✓i£ n 5 14 . en/h , re uir irr 15 ra ts, and are bayed eilher f =n (roar 'en l' planned, f =i° ';ehedrded adiniflanc e 11 = "; 16 Wi{✓lc.`frVI'l Oed and '; ec.11rectnec.e "o; h =('idle anon ' 16 -le 111, C f =Z 1?a {i('Yt {,5'. 17 inellicte 18 19 0 11, s' rida ,5� i �(�rrs (zdirtao sr a�ri ( °rrapr(0 39.x. 1lf i °ida i;irattat( >s,� 20 0 /0 =hf =) i° cheinical d('yj2jd('r I ' ar enfi en/ eer fern )i �(�rrscad'rtao st a�ri if = Chatri(�o. 3�T- 21 Ilf rich <`diattad(r,5, 22 0 tl(�rria h( ^atih io(z(aiori(�rrt ies — (�rrs(>d , trtao staari if = °hari(�o 3. f)f i °id(a i;irattat(zs 23 0 Bare cenfe 124 - hf nr 24 se t�iee(; s;Ileh (as di';, � de e(zr ferl;: 25 0 I >io ih c(>nfe ; )ieen"n eca" mr, ai =n 3 f a °ida i;aatta(as,� 26 0 11, faei)idie"; )ie en ";edam Mann df = Part 11 _ '�'ha 400: =rid(a irdatta(�s.� 27 0 1 disf � der arenfi ien/ e ('r1ferl;: and 28 • 111 uric nnd l " sienloehabi)iaatilTn )ieen "r edin1 ula1d11 =n 29 400.06 s_ 1)f =; °ida irdradtat( >s. 30 31 I k -1H 84 32 Ala, a ie,a rrr f a d: b are t,., ba 33 C:APro ram Files (x86)\neevia.com\docConvelterPro\tgmp\NVDC\BF16A4C9-97ID-498B-B8C7-7E23D765B5E2\BL)y Beach.? LLMedical Care and Testing (In- atient Ord rev 1 2.do -2- Page 236 of 350 1 • Hospital - 2 3 4 5 w941144 eqwp. _T-his 419p w94114 W-9-9 i1q,_P1514P ;neet40qg4e0+ft0-e0qee 6 '�� ° °� *�a ,.A,.;' a �'es, , h ;9ig 0t4 e effiees. see Medical Care or Testing (In- 7 Latient ; 8 • Medical or Dental Imaging /Testing /Support Services patient); 9 • Medical or Dental Office (Out patient) — A facility or clinic operated by one (1) or 10 more physicians, dentists, chiropractors, or other licensed practitioners of the 11 healing arts for the examination and treatment of persons solely on an outpatient 12 basis including intensive out - patient treatment Images, body fluids or other...... ; 13 Mental Health and Substance Abuse — see Medical 14 Care or Testing (Inpatient. 15 ... 16 Section 3. Chapter 3, Article IV, Section 3.D. of the Land Development 17 Regulations, Zoning Matrix Notes is hereby amended as follows: 18 I 19 No. 3. (to be amended) Amend 43 to read "Conditional use approval shall be required if 20 located within Pve one hundred (-2" (100) feet from a residential zoning district or mixed 21 use zoning district 22 No. 14. The subject use is only allowed on a lot that fronts on an arterial or collector 23 r-eadwa� street as defined in Part III, Ch. 1, Art. 2 of the LDR under definitions for "Street - 24 Arterial" and "Street- Collector ". ExceDt for uses nrovidine Medical Care or Testine (In- 25 patient) shall be limited to lots that front on an arterial roadway. 26 '14 27 28 � 4)1 — v -, 1 4iltr 29 No. 58. Restaurant. 30 a. All Districts. See Chapter 3, Article V , Supplemental Regulations regarding the 31 sidewalk cafe permit. 32 b. C -1 District. A restaurant is allowed as accessory use to a business or professional 33 office and/or a medical or dental office but subject to the following conditions: 34 (1) Signage. No external signage for the restaurant use shall be allowed, C:APro ram Files (x86)\neevia.com\docConvelterPro\tgmp\NVDC\BF16A4C9-97ID-498B-B8C7-7E23D765B5E2\BL)y Beach.? LLMedical Care and Testing (In- atient Ord rev 1 2.do -3- Page 237 of 350 1 (2) Hours of operation shall be limited to coincide with the hours of operation of 2 the principal use. 3 a. M -1 district. This non - industrial use is allowed within the M -1 district, provided that 4 it 1) is located within a multiple- tenant development on a lot that fronts on an arterial 5 or collector roadway; 2) does not exceed two thousand, five hundred (2,500) square 6 feet, 3) eopAa ns ^ maximum oft °'v e (»` seat ^ 3 excludes a drive -up, drive- 1 through, or drive -in facility, and -5 4) complies with all off - street parking 8 requirements of Chapter 4, Article V. In addition, the sale of used merchandise is 9 only allowed as accessory to the sale of new merchandise. to I - 1= --- Formatted: Font color: Red, Strikethrough 11 No. 101. Medical Care or Testing (In- patient) 12 Other requirements and site standards: 13 a. Minimum building setback shall be 50 feet when abutting a residential or mixed use 14 zoning district to enable proper site design regarding secured access, private outdoor 15 patron amenities, buffering, etc. 16 b. Site security shall be ensured through a minimum of surveillance cameras, limited 17 and controlled access points, and operational procedures to restrict unauthorized 18 and/or unarranged accessing or exiting of the facility and/or property. 19 a. Privacy and access control shall be ensured through a minimum of perimeter fencing 20 and landscape buffering intended to support the objective to control access and 21 increase privacy of areas intended for client or patient use. 22 d. Permitted locations shall exclude the Community Redevelopment Area to limit the 23 CRA to those complimentary uses available to the public and which contribute to the 24 synergy of successful downtown commerce pursuant to an applicable redevelopment 25 plan. 26 No. 102. Pre - existing. Such pre - existing uses which are no longer allowed uses pursuant to 27 amendments to the Zoning Matrix shall not be construed as non - conforming uses. However, 28 Mai or modifications to such uses shall be in accordance with the conditional use approval 29 process if required pursuant to the Zoning Matrix, and adhere to the site design and 30 operational restrictions of the applicable footnotes. 31 32 33 Section 4. Chapter 3, Article IV, Section 3D of the Land Development 34 Regulations, Use Matrix Table 3 -28 (Excerpt) is hereby amended as follows: C:APro ram Files (x86)\neevia.com\docConvelterPro\tgmp\NVDC\BF16A4C9-97ID-498B-B8C7-7E23D765B5E2\BL)y Beach.? LLMedical Care and Testing (In- atient Ord rev 1 2.do -4- Page 238 of 350 1 ... 2 D. Use Matrix (Table 3 -28). 3 See attached Exhibit "I -A" 4 Section 5. Should any section or provision of this Ordinance or any portion 5 thereof be declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such decision shall not 6 affect the remainder of this Ordinance. 7 Section 6. This Ordinance shall become effective immediately on second. 8 FIRST READING this day of , 2015. 9 SECOND, FINAL READING AND PASSAGE this day of , 2015. 10 CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA 11 12 YES NO 13 14 Mayor — Jerry Taylor 15 16 Vice Mayor — Joe Casello 17 18 Commissioner — David T. Merker 19 20 Commissioner — Mack McCray 21 22 Commissioner — Michael M. Fitzpatrick 23 24 25 VOTE 26 ATTEST: 27 28 29 30 31 Janet M. Prainito, MMC 32 City Clerk 33 34 35 36 (Corporate Seal) C:APro ram Files (x86)\neevia.com\docConvelterPro\tgmp\NVDC\BF16A4C9-97ID-498B-B8C7-7E23D765B5E2\BL)y Beach.? LLMedical Care and Testing (In- atient Ord rev 1 2.do -5- Page 239 of 350 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT PLANNING AND ZONING Memorandum PZ 14 -047 TO: Chair and Members Planning & Development Board FROM: Michael Rumpf Planning and Zoning Director DATE: January 21, 2015 RE: Interim LDR Amendments (CDRV 15 -001) To include 1) Provisions for the new zoning use Medical Care or Testing (In Patient) 2) Continued codification of the Transit - Oriented Development (TOD) overlay development standards; 3) Amendments to the sign standards applicable to commercial uses in certain M -1 zoning districts; 4) Amendments to sign regulations to facilitate certain improvements to non - conforming signs at shopping centers; and 5) The decrease in parking requirements for hotels. OVERVIEW The rewrite of the City's Land Development Regulations (LDR) allowed staff to perform a complete review and analysis of each standard, regulation, and process. As part of the post- adoption process, staff anticipates the periodic need for, and is prepared to expeditiously process, updates and amendments to the LDR for one or more of the following reasons: 1. Furthering business and economic development initiatives; 2. Advancing sustainability initiatives; 3. Maintaining internal consistency; 4. Achieving regulatory compliance; and 5. Incorporating implementation feedback necessary to meet original or current objectives and vision. The proposed amendments would further items #1 "business and economic development initiatives "; #2 "Advancing sustainability initiatives, and #4 "achieving regulatory compliance ", as well as facilitate the physical improvement of the streetscape. t00050878.1 306 - 9001821 } - I - Page 240 of 350 1. MEDICAL CARE — IN- PATIENT (ZONING USE) The City's Zoning Regulations accommodate uses that provide medical testing and treatment in the following three general categories; 1) hospitals; 2) medical offices; and 3) imaging, testing and support services. Of the three uses, the only one where in- patient medical care is permitted is hospitals. Hospitals, in summary, are institutional uses providing comprehensive medical treatment and care. Although nursing and convalescent homes provide basic, 24 -hour medical care, they are currently labeled a Type 3 Group Home in the City's LDR and function more as permanent or long -term housing for residents /patients rather than a medical service. Until recently there has not been a demonstrated demand for medical services that provide 24 -hour care to patients. However, in response to the recent demand -for services that provide 24 -hour care, treatment and /or testing pertaining to sleep apnea, eating disorders, labor and delivery, hospice care, and substance abuse, staff has analyzed the zoning regulations and proposes amendments to address this deficiency by accommodating these uses as well as other excluded businesses that similarly provide overnight medical care and treatment. The definition of "Hospital" is currently indicated in the LDR (Chapter 1, Article II) as: An establishment typically referred to as an institution (excluding "Group Home, Type 4') that provides comprehensive, inpatient and outpatient healthcare, including typical emergency medical, surgical, diagnostic, rehabilitation and treatment services, as well as other specialized services ranging from bariatrics to wound care. This use would also include accessory meeting /conference facilities, limited retail sales, and administrative offices. Most significant to this analysis is that Hospitals are limited to the Public Usage (PU) Zoning District. The PU Zoning District is a unique district defined to "apply to those areas within the city whose ownership and /or operation is public, or whose use is primarily institutionally - oriented. When we think of "institutional" uses, we typically consider those uses that are public or public /private in nature and that engage in public service such as schools, places of worship, lodges and charitable organizations, government- operated facilities, and hospitals. Historically, communities would have only one hospital, which corresponded with a unique and tailored zoning district appropriate for the scale of the use, size of property affected, and surrounding land uses. However, given the number and variety of possible medical uses that similarly provide services around - the - clock, and the unique and limited locations of the PU Zoning District, other appropriate zoning districts should be considered that match the type of intensity and locational requirements of these medical uses. The proposed amendments to the zoning regulations are intended to ensure that the City's zoning regulations are defensible, by not unjustifiably zoning out certain uses, and more importantly, maintaining compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Fair Housing Act (FHA). In general, both acts prohibit discrimination against the "handicapped" or "disabled ". Of course the FHA emphasizes the access to housing, and t00050878.1 306 - 9001821 } Page 241 of 350 the ADA targets access to services, programs, or activities of a public entity. Most relevant to this code review and analysis are the following points: • The application or coverage of the ADA and FHA was expanded so that "physical or mental impairment" includes alcoholism and drug addiction, and expanded to also apply to those businesses providing related services and treatments; • Zoning is an activity specifically referenced in the Technical Assistance Manual for the ADA in discussing this function and its importance to be monitored for compliance with the ADA and FHA; • Zoning that does not regulate equitably those uses with like characteristics and purposes, which affect handicapped individuals, could raise concerns under the ADA and FHA; and • When zoning fails to allow the integration of handicapped individuals into society, such as a when zoning narrowly classifies drug and alcohol treatment facilities as "institutional" while simultaneously excluding them from districts that allow related or similar medical businesses and services, such zoning could impede the integration expectation of the ADA and FHA. Therefore, staff proposes the subject code amendments that have identified several uses currently excluded from the zoning regulations that provide 24 -hour patient care and treatment. The proposed changes also provide the necessary definition for said uses; identify the zoning districts appropriate for such intense medical uses; and include additional location standards and operational requirements to ensure land use compatibility and adherence to proper review processes. Definitions (LDR, Chapter 1, Article 11): Medical Care or Testin g (In patient) A facility, including emergency clinics and hospitals, which are open 24 -hours per day or provides 24 -hour healthcare, treatment, and/or examinations, typically requiring overnight stays, and are based either on emergency, planned, or scheduled admittance to facilities with controlled and secured access to ensure appropriate care of patients. Such facilities include: • Hospitals licensed pursuant Chapter 395, Florida Statutes; • Alcohol or chemical dependency treatment centers licensed pursuant to Chapter 397, Florida Statutes; • Mental health treatment facilities licensed pursuant to Chapter 394; Florida Statutes • Urgent care centers (24- hour); • Inpatient testing services such as sleep disorder centers; • Birth centers licensed pursuant to Section 383.305; Florida Statues; • Hospice facilities licensed pursuant to Part IV of Chapter 400; Florida Statues; • Eating disorder treatment centers; and t00050878.1 306 - 9001821 } - - Page 242 of 350 • Nursing homes and physical rehabilitation centers licensed pursuant to Section 400.062, Florida Statutes. Additionally, the subject amendments warrant other modifications to the definitions, as shown below in underlined and crossed -out text: • Hospital - , . see Medical Care or Testing (In- ap tient) • Medical or Dental Imaging /Testing /Support Services patient); • Medical or Dental Office (Out patient) A facility or clinic operated by one (1) or more physicians, dentists, chiropractors, or other licensed practitioners of the healing arts for the examination and treatment of persons solely on an outpatient basis including intensive outpatient treatment Images, body fluids or other...... ; • Mental Health and Substance Abuse see " Medical Care or TestiW (Inpatient Zoning Matrix (LDR, Chapter 3, Article IV, Section 3.D.): See Exhibit "A" for an excerpt of the Zoning Matrix with the proposed changes shown in underlined and crossed -out text. The proposed new use is seen added to the matrix, to be a permitted use in the C -3 (Community Commercial), PCD (Planned Commercial Development) and PU (Public Usage) Zoning Districts. The C -3 Zoning District is the most intensive commercial district in the City's Zoning Regulations based on typical project size (i.e. land area and square footage) and customer traffic, and is intended to accommodate large commercial centers located with direct access from arterial roadways. Distances to residential areas are typically greatest, and design and buffering requirements are intended to match the scale of the project and mitigate impacts upon adjacent properties. The C -1, C -2, and C -4 Districts are not appropriate given the intense nature of such businesses, the need for greater land area than the minimum size required by the zoning districts, and need for appropriate separation from residential areas. Whereas the C -1 (Office Commercial) Zoning District accommodates offices including medical and dental offices, this district is often considered a "transitional" zone between residential zoning districts and more intense commercial land uses given its compatibility with residential environments due, in part, to the limited hours of business operation and locations along the periphery of residential neighborhoods. Similarly, the C -2, (Neighborhood Commercial) Zoning District is to be compatible in scale and operation with residential zoning districts, and in fact is intended to be located in close proximity to residential land uses to facilitate access to convenient retail goods and services. The C -4 District would t00050878.1 306 - 9001821 } Page 243 of 350 also be inappropriate for such uses given the smaller parcels that comprise most of the existing C -4 -zoned properties, and their close proximity to local streets and residential areas. The PCD District corresponds with the C -3 District with the principal difference being the requirement for a master plan as part of the rezoning process. Additional changes to the matrix would also include adding the same "(Out- patient)" description to the "Medical or Dental Office" use title, the individual "Hospital" use item currently in the matrix would be removed, and an unrelated change but necessary for consistency in the matrix is the addition of a "P" and footnote " #22" to the "Counseling" use item to allow such uses within the M -1 District similar to the treatment of general business offices if, in part, they are located along an arterial roadway. Zoning Matrix Notes (LDR, Chapter 3, Article IV, Section 3.D.): Existing Notes: No. 3. (to be amended) Amend #3 to read "Conditional use approval shall be required if located within �we one hundred (2" 100 feet from a residential zoning district or mixed use zoning district No. 14. (to remain unchanged) The subject use is only allowed on a lot that fronts on an arterial or collector roadway street as defined in Part III, Ch. 1, Art. 2 of the LDR under definitions for "Street - Arterial" and "Street - Collector". The following amendment is an unrelated, "house- keeping" amendment intended to remove the cap on maximum seats, with maximum floor area remaining to achieve the intended objective of limiting eligible sites to quick turn-over, convenience retail. No. 58. Restaurant. a. All Districts. See Chapter 3, Article V , Supplemental Regulations regarding the sidewalk cafe permit. b. C -1 District. A restaurant is allowed as accessory use to a business or professional office and /or a medical or dental office but subject to the following conditions: (1) Signage. No external signage for the restaurant use shall be allowed; (2) Hours of operation shall be limited to coincide with the hours of operation of the principal use. c. M -1 district. This non - industrial use is allowed within the M -1 district, provided that it 1) is located within a multiple- tenant development on a lot that fronts on an arterial or collector roadway; 2) does not exceed two thousand, five hundred (2,500) square feet; 3) cant ins - m e€t- weho =e (12) seats 4 3 excludes a drive -up, drive - through, or drive -in facility; and -5 4) complies with all off - street t00050878.1 306 - 9001821 } Page 244 of 350 parking requirements of Chapter 4, Article V. In addition, the sale of used merchandise is only allowed as accessory to the sale of new merchandise. New Notes: No. 101. Medical Care or Testing (In- patient) Other requirements and site standards: a. Minimum building setback shall be 50 feet when abutting a residential or mixed use zoning district to enable proper site design regarding secured access, private outdoor batron amenities. buffering_ etc.: b. Site security shall be ensured through a minimum of surveillance cameras, limited and controlled access points, and operational procedures to restrict unauthorized and /or unarranged accessing or exiting of the facility and /or property, c. Privacy and access control shall be ensured through a minimum of perimeter fencing and landscape buffering intended to support the objective to control access and increase brivacv of areas intended for client or batient use. d. Permitted locations shall exclude the Community Redevelopment Area to limit the CRA to those complimentary uses available to the public and which contribute to the synergy of successful downtown commerce pursuant to an applicable redevelopment plan. No. 102. Pre - existing. Such pre - existing uses which are no longer allowed uses pursuant to amendments to the Zoning Matrix shall not be construed as non - conforming uses. However, rn j or modifications to such uses shall be in accordance with the conditional use approval process if required pursuant to the Zoning Matrix, and adhere to the site design and operational restrictions of the applicable footnotes. 2. TOD (OVERLAY PROVISIONS INCLUDING DENSITY BONUS) The proposed amendments would further the codification of TOD regulations that commenced in 2013, and continued in 2014 with the establishment of a Downtown Transit - Oriented Development District within the Comprehensive Plan. Specifically, the proposed amendments would implement Future Land Use Element Policy 1.18.1, which established a Downtown TOD District, and Policy 1.18.2.b, which allows twenty five percent (25 %) density increase for selected future land use classifications within the District. For the past eight years, the City has been participating with the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) and other agencies to expand the Tri-Rail commuter system to include new service on the FEC Railroad. The expanded service, named the "Tri -Rail Coastal Link," would add a series of new passenger rail stations on the FEC Railroad in t00050878.1 306 - 9001821 } Page 245 of 350 Palm Beach, Broward, and Miami -Dade Counties, including a new Boynton Beach station just south of Boynton Beach Boulevard. FDOT and its transportation partners, including the South Florida Regional Transportation Authority (SFRTA), Palm Beach Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council (TCRPC), have all prioritized the need to improve land development patterns in advance of station development for the following reasons: (1) transit - oriented development (TOD) improves ridership for transit service, thereby increasing efficiency; (2) transit service increases access to station areas, thereby increasing potential for higher intensity and density land development; (3) TOD equally accommodates all modes of transportation (car as well as pedestrian, bicycle, and transit), further increasing access to station areas and potential for increased development capacity; and (4) TOD encourages a park -once environment, which reduces vehicular demand on the roadway network, further improving efficiency and reducing carbon emissions. The most significant features of a TOD are (1) increased density and intensity of development, with minimum levels of development recommended by FDOT; (2) walkability and interconnectivity throughout the area; and (3) a mix of uses appropriate to the service and area. In June of 2013, the City Commission approved amendments to the Land Development Regulations to create provisions for TOD and the corresponding standards in the mixed use zoning regulations, including the minimum density and intensity standards for mixed use districts within the Transit Core and the Station Area, defined as a' /4 mile and' /2 mile radius around the future station, respectively. The Comprehensive Plan policies adopted in 2014 gave a broad support to these regulations. First, they established a Downtown TOD District with boundaries coinciding with the Station Area. In addition, they instituted a density increase of up to twenty five percent (25 %) for projects located within the District and classified Special High Density Residential, Mixed Use or Mixed Use -Core Future Land Use. The amendments increased maximum densities for these Future Land Use categories to twenty five (25), fifty (50) and one hundred (100) dwelling units per acre, respectively. Currently, the total number of units within the District is estimated at about 3,100, resulting in the gross area -wide density of 7.027 dwelling units per acre. The Community Center station, a model for the Boynton Beach Downtown TOD District, stipulates optimal densities between 11 and 16 dwelling units per acre. (The density of 11 dwelling units per acre corresponds to 4,862 units in the subject area). The proposed amendment would potentially help to reach this desirable threshold. Significant areas east of the FEC Railroad right -of -way are already classified as either Mixed -Use Core or Mixed Use (see Exhibit A) and more are targeted for higher density and intensity mixed -use development both east and west of the tracks. There are no properties currently classified as Special High Density Residential within the District, but some may be reclassified to this category in the future. t00050878.1 306 - 9001821 } Page 246 of 350 3. AMENDMENT TO SIGN STANDARDS APPLICABLE TO COMMERCIAL USES IN CERTAIN M -1 ZONING DISTRICTS This proposed amendment would allow maximum sign area for commercial uses proposed in the M -1 zoning district that are located along arterial and collector roadways, to be based on the ratio applicable to the commercial zoning district rather than the industrial (M -1) zoning district. Staff is recommending a "cleanup" of the sign code regulations applicable to those areas of the M -1 (Industrial) zoning district located on road rights -of -way in which non- industrial uses are allowed. Based upon the M -1 Corridor Study conducted several years ago, in an effort to create an improved visual image of industrial zoned properties abutting major thoroughfares within the City, the allowed uses were expanded to accommodate limited office and commercial type businesses. However, at the same time, the sign regulations were not updated to reflect this expanded use list. Office and retail properties are allowed a maximum wall signage allocation based upon the lineal front footage of the building/tenant space, multiplied by a factor of 1.5. For example, a tenant with a 30 foot front lease space would be allowed up to 45 square feet of wall signage (30 LF X 1.5 SF = 45 SF). However, industrial zoned properties are limited to one (1) square foot of wall signage based upon the front footage calculation, due to their typical locations along roadways of lower classification and traffic, such as local and collector streets. Using the same example as above (30 LF X 1.0 SF = 30 SF), the amount of wall signage is reduced by one - third. Since it is generally recognized that office and commercial tenants rely more heavily on signage than industrial businesses, due to customer traffic, and locations along roads with higher classification and design speeds, it seems appropriate that the sign regulations be updated to reflect the fact that non- industrial uses are now allowed on major thoroughfares in the industrial zoning district, and that such uses be afforded the same signage allotment as other office and retail businesses on the same corridor. This amendment would allow the limited list of non- industrial businesses accommodated on an arterial roadway within the M -1 zoning district to utilize the same signage calculation as office and commercially -zoned properties. 4. REGULATING OF NON - CONFORMING SIGNS AT SHOPPING CENTERS TO BENEFIT PHYSICAL APPEARANCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. The proposed amendments would increase flexibility in altering a non - conforming sign at a commercial shopping center for the purpose of accommodating additional tenant space, as long as the modifications would not worsen the magnitude of non - conformity, and result in some physical improvement to the design of the sign. The City has a number of nonconforming pole signs throughout commercial zoning districts, mainly located at the larger retail centers. Pole signs are tall signs, typically supported by one or more poles /posts, which provide a list of tenants within the shopping center. When the majority of these shopping centers were constructed, poles signs were a t00050878.1 306 - 9001821 } - Page 247 of 350 permitted type of sign and the code at that time allowed sign heights up to 20 feet, regardless of property size and roadway classification. As a result, these signs continue to be maintained by the center owners in order to maintain the height and visibility the signs afford. Current sign regulations require these types of signs to be Monument Signs, which are defined as signs mounted to the ground or pedestal /foundation, completely along the bottom of the cabinet/sign. Monument signs are limited to a maximum of 12 feet in height, which is typically about one -half the height of the pole signs in existence today. Therefore shopping center owners make every attempt to maintain their existing signs, concerned that removal due to maintenance or damage may result in diminished visibility and advertising associated with a new code - compliant sign. The Nonconforming Signs portion of the code does not allow signs to be modified except for re- lettering or change of sign copy, unless the modification brings the sign into compliance with the sign code. While staff has permitted typical maintenance such as color changes or adding minor architectural enhancements that do not further the nonconformity, and in many cases lessen the nonconformity and enhance the appearance, there are few other changes that are allowed to these signs. Because many of the shopping centers have grown over the years, added outparcels or attracted well known national tenants that require larger signage in their leases, sign cabinets were added /modified over the years (when the signs were still deemed conforming), which has resulted in a hodge - podge, less than desirable appearance of these signs. Many times the center owners are the first to acknowledge this and desire improvements, but the code will not permit the structural modifications necessary to improve the design because of the nonconforming status. Over the last several years, a number of shopping centers have undergone major renovations and only minimal work could be permitted on these pole signs. Staff proposes to modify the Nonconforming Signs section of the Land Development Regulations (LDR) with the objective to allow certain modifications to nonconforming signs that would improve the image along the rights -of -way without worsening nonconformities. Staff recommends that wording be added to this section of the LDR to allow modification of nonconforming pole signs at shopping centers, when regulated by, or to be regulated by a Sign Program, as long as the mass of the sign structure is not increased (i.e. height, length, and width). Such work may be structural in nature and may involve removal /replacement of sign cabinets. The sign owner would be required to make improvements that bring the sign structure(s) further into compliance with current sign regulations and shall, under no circumstance, worsen the nonconformity. The Nonconforming Signs section of the code already allows repairs to damaged signs up to 50% of the original cost of the sign, so it is logical to allow the owner to make aesthetic enhancements to these signs, again, as long as the mass of the sign structure is not increased. Staff firmly believes these signs are not going away, unless removed by a hurricane or other destructive force, therefore we believe additional latitude is necessary to improve their look and the image of the City. t00050878.1 306 - 9001821 } Page 248 of 350 As part of these regulations, and as further incentive for shopping center owners to upgrade their signs, staff recommends wording that would change the allowed amount of repair of these renovated signs from the current language of "50% of original cost of the sign construction" to read "50% of the value of the upgraded sign ". As part of the above discussion, staff envisions another opportunity to address the visual quality of these nonconforming signs and at the same time further economic development efforts to bring more and larger tenants to shopping centers experiencing vacancies. As noted previously, one of the key points in lease negotiations with prospective tenants is the amount and location of their signage, in order to gain maximum visibility. In many instances, this older shopping center sign is completely filled with tenant signage leaving no space on the sign for new, larger and /or potentially beneficial tenants . Most leases clearly denote the amount and location of signage granted to each tenant. Unless existing tenants are willing to modify the language within their leases, the prospective tenant will look elsewhere, possibly outside the City. Therefore, staff proposes to allow additional tenant signage on these nonconforming structures, again under the same requirements as noted above that requires approval of a Sign Program to support the proposed modifications as well regulate all other signage for the project, and results in the overall aesthetic improvement of the sign as reviewed and approved through the City's site plan amendment process. Staff does not envision these regulations being applied to single tenant property signs, as they tend to be of a smaller scale (only one tenant panel versus several) and less costly to replace. Therefore, staff recommends no further changes regarding the single tenant signs, but remains open to further review in the future. 5. MINIMUM PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR HOTELS The purpose of this proposed amendment is to lower the minimum parking ratio for hotel rooms to better reflect actual demand as justified by the parking requirements of several other cities, as well as the user characteristics at a hotel located in the City. The proposed minimum parking ratio would minimize the construction of unnecessary impervious areas of a project and therefore support the City's green initiatives. Staff has been made aware that our parking requirements for hotels outside the Mixed Use High (MU -H) district are greater than nearly all other communities. Staff has taken pride in the fact that we have been able to reduce unnecessary parking for many uses, created overlay areas where parking requirements have been reduced and designed code language to cap maximum parking, all in an effort to preserve more green space /pervious area on site and reduce development costs. Reducing parking requirements furthers Green Initiatives championed by the City Commission and the leadership team. The City Code requires one and a quarter (1.25) parking spaces per a one bedroom hotel room and two (2) parking spaces per two bedroom hotel room, other than in the Mixed Use High (MU -H) zoning district (downtown), in which the requirement is one (1) t00050878.1 306 - 9001821 } - 10 Page 249 of 350 parking space per hotel room, regardless of the number of bedrooms. Staff reviewed the parking codes of twenty -five (25) cities within Palm Beach County and the State and various counties within the State. The results indicated that none of those surveyed differentiated between one and two bedroom hotel rooms, likely due to the fact that most occupants arrive in one vehicle, such as a family on vacation, therefore making the required second parking space unnecessary. The survey also noted that only one jurisdiction, Volusia County, required a parking ratio in excess of 1.25 parking spaces per hotel room (1.5). Nineteen of the twenty -five surveyed required 1.0 parking space or fewer, with the majority of those also requiring additional parking for employees and /or meeting space. Staff conducted an analysis utilizing a recently approved hotel (Towne Place Suites in Quantum Park) for the scenarios, calculating parking based upon the various formulas of the surveyed jurisdictions. Our code as currently written requires 151 parking spaces for the project. Only two (2) of the twenty -five (25) jurisdictions required more parking (159 and 156 parking spaces). The mean parking requirement averaged out to 137 parking spaces. Had this project been constructed in the City of Delray Beach, their code would have required only 97 parking spaces. In determining the mean average, staff discarded the two highest parking requirements (159 & 156) and the three lowest (83, 97 & 97) to provide a fair and more accurate portrayal of the median numbers. As a result of this analysis, staff believes our requirement for a separate parking calculation for the two (2) bedroom hotel room to be unnecessary and unjustified. Staff recommends the code be modified to a single calculation of 1.25 parking spaces per hotel room, which would have resulted in 145 parking spaces required in the above scenario, instead of 151 for the 116 unit hotel. This calculation is still higher than the mean number of 137 from the study, and would more than account for employees and social functions. This recommendation is based upon survey results treating all hotel units identically with a single parking calculation, regardless of the number of bedrooms, the fact that our minimum parking requirement exceeded nearly all others surveyed, and that the proposed amendment furthers the City's Green Initiatives. Staff additionally recommends an amendment to the code to address a hotel that has an internal restaurant or lounge open not only to the guests, but to the general public. In these instances, staff would recommend that parking be provided for those uses open to the general public at a rate of 50% of their requirement of a standalone operation. CONCLUSION / RECOMENDATION Staff is recommending approval of the proposed amendments. Overall, these amendments are intended to achieve regulatory compliance, promote Transit Oriented Development, encourage /promote business /economic development by allowing businesses that otherwise may be discouraged from finding suitable locations in the City, maximize compatibility among land uses and improve the aesthetics of the streetscape. Attachments S:A PLANNING \SHAREDAWP \SPECPROJACODE REVIEWAIN- PATIENT MEDICAL CARE \STAFF REPORT - COMBINED TEXT ITEMS.DOCX t00050878.1 306-90018211 - 11 - Page 250 of 350 EXHIBIT 1 -A: Use Matrix - Table 3 -28 (Excerpt) - LDR, Ch. 3, Art. IV, Section 3.D. M X x 13 Page 251 of 350 Residential Commercial Mixed -Use Industrial Misc. P: Permitted Use n C: Conditional Use — N w C x N w d A: Accessory Use OFFICE & HEALTH CARE continued Counseling P P P P P P P P P P P P 27 1 16 16 16 16 16 31 P P P P 3 3 3 3 F P4nia, aFl ;.arc. or 1_? iLL —t-; lrriaaFiic rri! 1d 101 1d 101 1d 101 1d 101 — Ulf 102 102 102 102 Medical or Dental P P P P P P P Imaging /Testing/ P P P P P 24 Support Services 1 16 16 16 16 16 27 31 Medical or Dental P P Laboratory P 13 29 Medical or Dental P P P P P P P P Office (Out- oatientY P 1 P P P P 16 16 16 16 16 22 27 31 M X x 13 Page 251 of 350 EXHIBIT 1 - B ITEM No. 1 - MEDICAL CARE — IN- PATIENT (ZONING USE) Definitions (LDR, Chapter 1, Article 11): Medical Care or Testin g (In patient) A facility, including emergency clinics and hospitals, which are open 24 -hours per day or provides 24- hour healthcare, treatment, and/or examinations, typically requiring overnight stays, and are based either on emergency, planned, or scheduled admittance to facilities with controlled and secured access to ensure appropriate care of patients. Such facilities include: • Hospitals licensed pursuant Chapter 395, Florida Statutes; • Alcohol or chemical dependency treatment centers licensed pursuant to Chapter 397, Florida Statutes; • Mental health treatment facilities licensed pursuant to Chapter 394; Florida Statutes • Urgent care centers (24- hour); • Inpatient testing services such as sleep disorder centers; • Birth centers licensed pursuant to Section 383.305; Florida Statues; • Hospice facilities licensed pursuant to Part IV of Chapter 400; Florida Statues; • Eating disorder treatment centers; and • Nursing homes and physical rehabilitation centers licensed pursuant to Section 400.062, Florida Statutes. Additionally, the subject amendments warrant other modifications to the definitions, as shown below in underlined and crossed -out text: • Hospital - see Medical Care or Testing (In- a tient • Medical or Dental Imaging /Testing /Support Services (Outpatient); • Medical or Dental Office (Out patient) A facility or clinic operated by one (1) or more physicians, dentists, chiropractors, or other licensed practitioners of the healing arts for the examination and treatment ofpersons solely on an outpatient basis including intensive outpatient treatment Images, body fluids or other...... ; • Mental Health and Substance Abuse see " Gpomp 4 4Wme , 4; 4 Medical Care or Testing (In- p atient). Zoning Matrix Notes (LDR, Chapter 3, Article IV, Section 3.D.): Changes to Existing Notes: No. 3. (to be amended) Amend #3 to read "Conditional use approval shall be required if located within �we one hundred k2" 100 feet from a residential zoning district or mixed use zoning district Page 252 of 350 EXHIBIT 1 - B No. 14. The subj ect use is only allowed on a lot that fronts on an arterial or collector r-eadway street as defined in Part III. Ch. 1. Art. 2 of the LDR under definitions for "Street - Arterial" and "Street - Collector". Except for uses providing Medical Care or Testing (In- patient) shall be limited to lots that front on an arterial roadway. The following amendment is an unrelated, "house- keeping" amendment intended to remove the cap on maximum seats, with maximum floor area remaining to achieve the intended objective of limiting eligible sites to quick turn-over, convenience retail. No. 58. Restaurant. a. All Districts. See Chapter 3, Article V , Supplemental Regulations regarding the sidewalk cafe permit. b. C -1 District. A restaurant is allowed as accessory use to a business or professional office and /or a medical or dental office but subject to the following conditions: (1) Signage. No external signage for the restaurant use shall be allowed; (2) Hours of operation shall be limited to coincide with the hours of operation of the principal use. c. M -1 district. This non - industrial use is allowed within the M -1 district, provided that it 1) is located within a multiple- tenant development on a lot that fronts on an arterial or collector roadway; 2) does not exceed two thousand, five hundred (2,500) square feet; 3) eentains a- - t- weho =e (12) seats; -4 3) excludes a drive -up, drive- through, or drive -in facility; and 4 ) complies with all off - street parking requirements of Chapter 4, Article V. In addition, the sale of used merchandise is only allowed as accessory to the sale of new merchandise. New Notes: No. 101. Medical Care or Testing (In- patient) Other reauirements and site standards: a. Minimum building setback shall be 50 feet when abutting a residential or mixed use district to enable proper site design regarding secured access, private outdoor patron amenities, buffering, etc. b. Site security shall be ensured through a minimum of surveillance cameras, limited and controlled access points, and operational procedures to restrict unauthorized and /or unarranged accessing or exiting of the facility and /or property. c. Privacy and access control shall be ensured through a minimum of perimeter fencing and landscape buffering intended to support the objective to control access and increase privacy of areas intended for client or batient use. Page 253 of 350 EXHIBIT 1 - B d. Permitted locations shall exclude the Community Redevelopment Area to limit the CRA to those complimentary uses available to the public and which contribute to the synergy of successful downtown commerce pursuant to an applicable redevelopment plan. No. 102. Pre - existing. Such pre - existing uses which are no longer allowed uses pursuant to amendments to the Zoning Matrix shall not be construed as non - conforming uses. However, major modifications to such uses shall be in accordance with the conditional use approval process if required pursuant to the Zoning Matrix, and adhere to the site design and operational restrictions of the applicable footnotes. Page 254 of 350 13.B. LEGAL 2/17/2015 REQUESTED ACTION BY COMMISSION: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 15 -004 - FIRST READING - Approve amendments to the Land Development Regulations to decrease parking standards for hotels to more closely match actual demand, which minimizes construction of unnecessary parking areas, reduces impervious surfaces, and lowers project costs. EXPLANATION OF REQUEST: The purpose of this proposed amendment is to lower the minimum parking ratio for hotel rooms to better reflect actual demand as justified by the parking requirements of several other cities, as well as the user characteristics at a hotel located in the City. The proposed minimum parking ratio would minimize the construction of unnecessary impervious areas of a project and therefore support the City's green initiatives and lower project costs. Staff has been made aware that our parking requirements for hotels outside the Mixed Use High (MU -H) district are greater than nearly all other communities. The City Code requires one and a quarter (1.25) parking spaces per a one bedroom hotel room and two (2) parking spaces per two bedroom hotel room, other than in the Mixed Use High (MU -H) zoning district (downtown), in which the requirement is one (1) parking space per hotel room, regardless of the number of bedrooms. Staff reviewed the parking codes of twenty -five (25) cities within Palm Beach County and the State and various counties within the State. The results indicated that none of those surveyed differentiated between one and two bedroom hotel rooms, likely due to the fact that most occupants arrive in one vehicle, such as a family on vacation, therefore making the required second parking space unnecessary. The survey also noted that only one jurisdiction, Volusia County, required a parking ratio in excess of 1.25 parking spaces per hotel room (1.5). Nineteen of the twenty -five surveyed required 1.0 parking space or fewer, with the majority of those also requiring additional parking for employees and /or meeting space. Staff finds that our requirement for a separate parking calculation for the two (2) bedroom hotel room to be unnecessary and unjustified. Staff recommends the code be modified to a single calculation of 1.25 parking spaces per hotel room. This recommendation is based upon survey results treating all hotel units identically with a single parking calculation, regardless of the number of bedrooms, the fact that our minimum parking requirement exceeded nearly all others surveyed, and that the proposed amendment furthers the City's Green Initiatives. Staff additionally recommends an amendment to the code to address a hotel that has an internal restaurant or lounge open not only to the guests, but to the general public. In these instances, staff would recommend that parking be provided for those uses open to the general public at a rate of 50% of their requirement of a standalone operation. [ ]q► q►11 :1!;x_1 x 3 �' :Z Z�3:7_1► ►i �3 7:�9 :Z / [ 3 OI -1 FISCAL IMPACT: NA ALTERNATIVES: None recommended STRATEGIC PLAN: �g 0 :7 _ l 1 *11102:2 _ 1► I _ 1 » 41 a _ l 1101 L A Page 255 of 350 CLIMATE ACTION: Yes CLIMATE ACTION DISCUSSION: Proposed amendments indirectly support the CAP by reducing impervious surfaces represented by parking areas, and the overall "heat island" effect of a given project. 4.5.2 Sustainable Construction - Objective: Revise the LDR as needed for policy and short -term land development decision - making that supports the Climate Action Plan. Item 2 - Review its land development regulations to determine the feasibility of using land use and parking strategies that reduce reliance on automobiles, including but not limited to, strategic reductions in parking supply, encouraging short -term over long -term parking, promotion of par- and -ride and bike - and -ride areas and shared parking facilities. Is this a grant? Grant Amount: ATTACHMENTS: Type Ordinance D Staff Report REVIEWERS: Department Development Legal F inance City Manager Description Ordinance decreasing parking standards for hotels Staff Report Reviewer Action Date Byrne, Fancy Approved 112612015 - 2:14 PM Swanson, Lynn Approved 211112015 - 4:33 PM Howard, Tim Approved 211112015 - 4:40 PI LaVerriere, Lori Approved 211212015 - 3:30 AIM Page 256 of 350 1 ORDINANCE 15- 2 3 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA 4 AMENDING PART III, LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, 5 CHAPTER 4, ARTICLE V. SECTION 2.11. (TABLE 4 -17 RESIDENTIAL 6 AND LODGING USES) TO DECREASE PARKING STANDRADS FOR 7 HOTELS TO MORE CLOSELY MATCH ACTUAL DEMAND; 8 PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT, SEVERABILITY, INCLUSION; AND 9 EFFECTIVE DATE. 10 11 WHEREAS, the purpose of this amendment is to lower the minimum parking ratio 12 for hotel rooms to better reflect actual demand as justified by the parking requirements of 13 several other cities, as well as the user characteristics at a hotel located in the City; and 14 WHEREAS, the proposed minimum parking ratio would minimize the construction 15 of unnecessary impervious areas of a project and therefore support the City's green initiatives 16 and lower project costs; and 17 WHEREAS, staff recommends the adoption of the amendments to the Land 18 Development Regulations Chapter 4, Article V, Sections 2.B. (Table 4 -17 Residential and 19 Lodging Uses)to decrease parking standards for hotels to more closely match actual demand.. 20 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF 21 THE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA: 22 Section 1 . That the foregoing "WHEREAS" clause is true and correct and hereby 23 ratified and confirmed by the City Commission. 24 Section 2. That Part HI, "Land Development Regulations ", of the City of Boynton 25 Beach Article H, Chapter 4, Article V, Section 2.B. (Table 4 -17 Residential and Lodging 26 Uses), is hereby amended as follows: 27 C:AProgram Files ( x86 )Aneevia.com \docConverterProA temp\ NVDC\ D1DA1126- 9A7E- 41EC- 9FDE- 889033663E84 \Boynton Beach. 827.1. Decrease parking for hotels_- _Ordinance.doc 1 Page 257 of 350 B. Table 4 -17. Residential and Lodging Uses. 2 Residential and Lodging Uses Standard Number of Required Parking Spaces Building area size is based upon gross floor area (in square feet) unless specifically expressed otherwise. Single - family, duplex dwelling, or mobile home: 2 Efficiency or one (1)- bedroom apartment: 1.5 1,2 Within mixed use high district: 1.33 Two (2) or more bedroom apartment: 21'2 Within mixed use high district: 1.66 Dormitories: 1 per unit Hotel & motel suite edfo : - i27 � . ��t per unit' Within mixed use high district: 1 per unit Group home (types 1 through 4): 1 per 3 beds Bed & breakfast: 1 Live /work unit: 1 per 2 units 4 5 1 Residential driveways shall satisfy the parking space requirements for single- family 6 detached dwelling units, duplexes, and multi - family dwelling units containing garages, 7 provided such driveways are of sufficient size to meet the parking space requirements of this 8 subsection. A residential driveway of sufficient size shall be provided prior to the issuance of 9 a certificate of occupancy. For all required parking spaces not located within an enclosed 10 garage, the first parking space shall be the minimum size required for a handicap space, 11 exclusive of public or private rights -of -way, and all other required spaces must be 12 dimensioned in accordance with current city standards. All driveways shall be setback at least 13 two (2) feet from interior side and corner side property lines, and maintained and drained so 14 as to prevent nuisance conditions or a danger to the public and /or adjacent property owners. 15 Any expansion to an existing driveway shall require a zoning permit from the Planning and 16 Zoning Division in accordance with the procedures specified in Chapter 2, Article II, Section 17 5 .B.; however, any driveway expansion (or similar impervious surface) that is equal to or 18 greater than eight hundred (800) square feet shall require the approval of a land development 19 permit in accordance with Chapter 2, Article 111, Section 3 . Any work, such as a driveway, C:AProgram Files ( x86 )Aneevia.com \docConverterProA temp\ NVDC\ D1DA1126- 9A7E- 41EC- 9FDE- 889033663E84 \Boynton Beach. 827.1. Decrease parking for hotels_- _Ordinance.doc 01 Page 258 of 350 1 proposed within the swale (right -of -way) shall require a permit from the Engineering Division 2 in accordance with the procedures specified in Chapter 2, Article 111, Section 4 . 3 2 Guest parking shall be provided at a rate of 0.15 spaces per unit for residential 4 developments consisting of three (3) or more dwelling units. 5 3 Required parking shall be calculated on the basis of one (1) space per each employee, 6 manager, or owner and one (1) parking space for each guest unit. Newly created parking may 7 be located only in the rear and side yard. 8 4 In addition to the required parking for the residential unit, the city requires that one (1) 9 parking space per two (2) live /work units be provided to meet business activity needs. 10 Parking provided to meet this requirement shall be located on the lot, built into or under the 11 structure, or within three hundred (300) feet of the unit in which the use is located. The 12 distance shall be a straight line measurement from a point on the boundary line of the property 13 of the subject unit to the closest boundary line of the property on which the parking is 14 located. Parking provided to accommodate said space, including driveways of adequate depth 15 in front of the unit's garage, shall not serve as meeting required parking for the unit's 16 residential use. 17 5 H Irnotr l Uses og n to the tern r°i U blk' x Uch a xx a r°r stQUr°ant Or° 10Lrr F , xxF oll r - (.wi dr irr° rrl in 18 a r ° f the r ° it xxtarldolo n tion. 19 20 Section 3. All prior ordinances or resolutions or parts thereof in conflict herewith are 21 hereby repealed to the extent of such conflict. 22 Section 4 . If any section, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance is held to be 23 invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, then said holding shall in no 24 way affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. 25 Section 5 . It is the intention of the City Commission of the City of Boynton Beach, 26 Florida, that the provisions of this Ordinance shall become and be made a part of the City of Boynton 27 Beach Code of Ordinances; and that the sections of this ordinance may be renumbered or re- lettered 28 and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "section," "article," or such other appropriate word or 29 phrase in order to accomplish such intentions. 30 Section 6 . This Ordinance shall be effective immediately after adoption by the City 31 Commission. 32 C:AProgram Files ( x86 )Aneevia.com \docConverterProA temp\ NVDC\ D1DA1126- 9A7E- 41EC- 9FDE- 889033663E84 \Boynton Beach. 827.1. Decrease parking for hotels_- _Ordinance.doc 3 Page 259 of 350 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 'M FIRST READING this day of , 2015. SECOND AND FINAL READING ADOPTED this day of , 2015. CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA YES NO Mayor — Jerry Taylor Vice Mayor — Joe Casello Commissioner — David T. Merker Commissioner — Mack McCray Commissioner — Michael M. Fitzpatrick VOTE ATTEST: Janet M. Prainito, MMC City Clerk (Corporate Seal) C:AProgram Files ( x86 )Aneevia.com \docConverterProA temp\ NVDC\ D1DA1126- 9A7E- 41EC- 9FDE- 889033663E84 \Boynton Beach. 827.1. Decrease parking for hotels_- _Ordinance.doc M Page 260 of 350 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT PLANNING AND ZONING Memorandum PZ 14 -047 TO: Chair and Members Planning & Development Board FROM: Michael Rumpf Planning and Zoning Director DATE: January 21, 2015 RE: Interim LDR Amendments (CDRV 15 -001) To include 1) Provisions for the new zoning use Medical Care or Testing (In Patient) 2) Continued codification of the Transit - Oriented Development (TOD) overlay development standards; 3) Amendments to the sign standards applicable to commercial uses in certain M -1 zoning districts; 4) Amendments to sign regulations to facilitate certain improvements to non - conforming signs at shopping centers; and 5) The decrease in parking requirements for hotels. OVERVIEW The rewrite of the City's Land Development Regulations (LDR) allowed staff to perform a complete review and analysis of each standard, regulation, and process. As part of the post- adoption process, staff anticipates the periodic need for, and is prepared to expeditiously process, updates and amendments to the LDR for one or more of the following reasons: 1. Furthering business and economic development initiatives; 2. Advancing sustainability initiatives; 3. Maintaining internal consistency; 4. Achieving regulatory compliance; and 5. Incorporating implementation feedback necessary to meet original or current objectives and vision. The proposed amendments would further items #1 "business and economic development initiatives "; #2 "Advancing sustainability initiatives, and #4 "achieving regulatory compliance ", as well as facilitate the physical improvement of the streetscape. t00050878.1 306 - 9001821 } - I - Page 261 of 350 1. MEDICAL CARE — IN- PATIENT (ZONING USE) The City's Zoning Regulations accommodate uses that provide medical testing and treatment in the following three general categories; 1) hospitals; 2) medical offices; and 3) imaging, testing and support services. Of the three uses, the only one where in- patient medical care is permitted is hospitals. Hospitals, in summary, are institutional uses providing comprehensive medical treatment and care. Although nursing and convalescent homes provide basic, 24 -hour medical care, they are currently labeled a Type 3 Group Home in the City's LDR and function more as permanent or long -term housing for residents /patients rather than a medical service. Until recently there has not been a demonstrated demand for medical services that provide 24 -hour care to patients. However, in response to the recent demand -for services that provide 24 -hour care, treatment and /or testing pertaining to sleep apnea, eating disorders, labor and delivery, hospice care, and substance abuse, staff has analyzed the zoning regulations and proposes amendments to address this deficiency by accommodating these uses as well as other excluded businesses that similarly provide overnight medical care and treatment. The definition of "Hospital" is currently indicated in the LDR (Chapter 1, Article II) as: An establishment typically referred to as an institution (excluding "Group Home, Type 4') that provides comprehensive, inpatient and outpatient healthcare, including typical emergency medical, surgical, diagnostic, rehabilitation and treatment services, as well as other specialized services ranging from bariatrics to wound care. This use would also include accessory meeting /conference facilities, limited retail sales, and administrative offices. Most significant to this analysis is that Hospitals are limited to the Public Usage (PU) Zoning District. The PU Zoning District is a unique district defined to "apply to those areas within the city whose ownership and /or operation is public, or whose use is primarily institutionally - oriented. When we think of "institutional" uses, we typically consider those uses that are public or public /private in nature and that engage in public service such as schools, places of worship, lodges and charitable organizations, government- operated facilities, and hospitals. Historically, communities would have only one hospital, which corresponded with a unique and tailored zoning district appropriate for the scale of the use, size of property affected, and surrounding land uses. However, given the number and variety of possible medical uses that similarly provide services around - the - clock, and the unique and limited locations of the PU Zoning District, other appropriate zoning districts should be considered that match the type of intensity and locational requirements of these medical uses. The proposed amendments to the zoning regulations are intended to ensure that the City's zoning regulations are defensible, by not unjustifiably zoning out certain uses, and more importantly, maintaining compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Fair Housing Act (FHA). In general, both acts prohibit discrimination against the "handicapped" or "disabled ". Of course the FHA emphasizes the access to housing, and t00050878.1 306 - 9001821 } Page 262 of 350 the ADA targets access to services, programs, or activities of a public entity. Most relevant to this code review and analysis are the following points: • The application or coverage of the ADA and FHA was expanded so that "physical or mental impairment" includes alcoholism and drug addiction, and expanded to also apply to those businesses providing related services and treatments; • Zoning is an activity specifically referenced in the Technical Assistance Manual for the ADA in discussing this function and its importance to be monitored for compliance with the ADA and FHA; • Zoning that does not regulate equitably those uses with like characteristics and purposes, which affect handicapped individuals, could raise concerns under the ADA and FHA; and • When zoning fails to allow the integration of handicapped individuals into society, such as a when zoning narrowly classifies drug and alcohol treatment facilities as "institutional" while simultaneously excluding them from districts that allow related or similar medical businesses and services, such zoning could impede the integration expectation of the ADA and FHA. Therefore, staff proposes the subject code amendments that have identified several uses currently excluded from the zoning regulations that provide 24 -hour patient care and treatment. The proposed changes also provide the necessary definition for said uses; identify the zoning districts appropriate for such intense medical uses; and include additional location standards and operational requirements to ensure land use compatibility and adherence to proper review processes. Definitions (LDR, Chapter 1, Article 11): Medical Care or Testin g (In patient) A facility, including emergency clinics and hospitals, which are open 24 -hours per day or provides 24 -hour healthcare, treatment, and/or examinations, typically requiring overnight stays, and are based either on emergency, planned, or scheduled admittance to facilities with controlled and secured access to ensure appropriate care of patients. Such facilities include: • Hospitals licensed pursuant Chapter 395, Florida Statutes; • Alcohol or chemical dependency treatment centers licensed pursuant to Chapter 397, Florida Statutes; • Mental health treatment facilities licensed pursuant to Chapter 394; Florida Statutes • Urgent care centers (24- hour); • Inpatient testing services such as sleep disorder centers; • Birth centers licensed pursuant to Section 383.305; Florida Statues; • Hospice facilities licensed pursuant to Part IV of Chapter 400; Florida Statues; • Eating disorder treatment centers; and t00050878.1 306 - 9001821 } - - Page 263 of 350 • Nursing homes and physical rehabilitation centers licensed pursuant to Section 400.062, Florida Statutes. Additionally, the subject amendments warrant other modifications to the definitions, as shown below in underlined and crossed -out text: • Hospital - , . see Medical Care or Testing (In- ap tient) • Medical or Dental Imaging /Testing /Support Services patient); • Medical or Dental Office (Out patient) A facility or clinic operated by one (1) or more physicians, dentists, chiropractors, or other licensed practitioners of the healing arts for the examination and treatment of persons solely on an outpatient basis including intensive outpatient treatment Images, body fluids or other...... ; • Mental Health and Substance Abuse see " Medical Care or TestiW (Inpatient Zoning Matrix (LDR, Chapter 3, Article IV, Section 3.D.): See Exhibit "A" for an excerpt of the Zoning Matrix with the proposed changes shown in underlined and crossed -out text. The proposed new use is seen added to the matrix, to be a permitted use in the C -3 (Community Commercial), PCD (Planned Commercial Development) and PU (Public Usage) Zoning Districts. The C -3 Zoning District is the most intensive commercial district in the City's Zoning Regulations based on typical project size (i.e. land area and square footage) and customer traffic, and is intended to accommodate large commercial centers located with direct access from arterial roadways. Distances to residential areas are typically greatest, and design and buffering requirements are intended to match the scale of the project and mitigate impacts upon adjacent properties. The C -1, C -2, and C -4 Districts are not appropriate given the intense nature of such businesses, the need for greater land area than the minimum size required by the zoning districts, and need for appropriate separation from residential areas. Whereas the C -1 (Office Commercial) Zoning District accommodates offices including medical and dental offices, this district is often considered a "transitional" zone between residential zoning districts and more intense commercial land uses given its compatibility with residential environments due, in part, to the limited hours of business operation and locations along the periphery of residential neighborhoods. Similarly, the C -2, (Neighborhood Commercial) Zoning District is to be compatible in scale and operation with residential zoning districts, and in fact is intended to be located in close proximity to residential land uses to facilitate access to convenient retail goods and services. The C -4 District would t00050878.1 306 - 9001821 } Page 264 of 350 also be inappropriate for such uses given the smaller parcels that comprise most of the existing C -4 -zoned properties, and their close proximity to local streets and residential areas. The PCD District corresponds with the C -3 District with the principal difference being the requirement for a master plan as part of the rezoning process. Additional changes to the matrix would also include adding the same "(Out- patient)" description to the "Medical or Dental Office" use title, the individual "Hospital" use item currently in the matrix would be removed, and an unrelated change but necessary for consistency in the matrix is the addition of a "P" and footnote " #22" to the "Counseling" use item to allow such uses within the M -1 District similar to the treatment of general business offices if, in part, they are located along an arterial roadway. Zoning Matrix Notes (LDR, Chapter 3, Article IV, Section 3.D.): Existing Notes: No. 3. (to be amended) Amend #3 to read "Conditional use approval shall be required if located within �we one hundred (2" 100 feet from a residential zoning district or mixed use zoning district No. 14. (to remain unchanged) The subject use is only allowed on a lot that fronts on an arterial or collector roadway street as defined in Part III, Ch. 1, Art. 2 of the LDR under definitions for "Street - Arterial" and "Street - Collector". The following amendment is an unrelated, "house- keeping" amendment intended to remove the cap on maximum seats, with maximum floor area remaining to achieve the intended objective of limiting eligible sites to quick turn-over, convenience retail. No. 58. Restaurant. a. All Districts. See Chapter 3, Article V , Supplemental Regulations regarding the sidewalk cafe permit. b. C -1 District. A restaurant is allowed as accessory use to a business or professional office and /or a medical or dental office but subject to the following conditions: (1) Signage. No external signage for the restaurant use shall be allowed; (2) Hours of operation shall be limited to coincide with the hours of operation of the principal use. c. M -1 district. This non - industrial use is allowed within the M -1 district, provided that it 1) is located within a multiple- tenant development on a lot that fronts on an arterial or collector roadway; 2) does not exceed two thousand, five hundred (2,500) square feet; 3) cant ins - m e€t- weho =e (12) seats 4 3 excludes a drive -up, drive - through, or drive -in facility; and -5 4) complies with all off - street t00050878.1 306 - 9001821 } Page 265 of 350 parking requirements of Chapter 4, Article V. In addition, the sale of used merchandise is only allowed as accessory to the sale of new merchandise. New Notes: No. 101. Medical Care or Testing (In- patient) Other requirements and site standards: a. Minimum building setback shall be 50 feet when abutting a residential or mixed use zoning district to enable proper site design regarding secured access, private outdoor batron amenities. buffering_ etc.: b. Site security shall be ensured through a minimum of surveillance cameras, limited and controlled access points, and operational procedures to restrict unauthorized and /or unarranged accessing or exiting of the facility and /or property, c. Privacy and access control shall be ensured through a minimum of perimeter fencing and landscape buffering intended to support the objective to control access and increase brivacv of areas intended for client or batient use. d. Permitted locations shall exclude the Community Redevelopment Area to limit the CRA to those complimentary uses available to the public and which contribute to the synergy of successful downtown commerce pursuant to an applicable redevelopment plan. No. 102. Pre - existing. Such pre - existing uses which are no longer allowed uses pursuant to amendments to the Zoning Matrix shall not be construed as non - conforming uses. However, rn j or modifications to such uses shall be in accordance with the conditional use approval process if required pursuant to the Zoning Matrix, and adhere to the site design and operational restrictions of the applicable footnotes. 2. TOD (OVERLAY PROVISIONS INCLUDING DENSITY BONUS) The proposed amendments would further the codification of TOD regulations that commenced in 2013, and continued in 2014 with the establishment of a Downtown Transit - Oriented Development District within the Comprehensive Plan. Specifically, the proposed amendments would implement Future Land Use Element Policy 1.18.1, which established a Downtown TOD District, and Policy 1.18.2.b, which allows twenty five percent (25 %) density increase for selected future land use classifications within the District. For the past eight years, the City has been participating with the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) and other agencies to expand the Tri-Rail commuter system to include new service on the FEC Railroad. The expanded service, named the "Tri -Rail Coastal Link," would add a series of new passenger rail stations on the FEC Railroad in t00050878.1 306 - 9001821 } Page 266 of 350 Palm Beach, Broward, and Miami -Dade Counties, including a new Boynton Beach station just south of Boynton Beach Boulevard. FDOT and its transportation partners, including the South Florida Regional Transportation Authority (SFRTA), Palm Beach Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council (TCRPC), have all prioritized the need to improve land development patterns in advance of station development for the following reasons: (1) transit - oriented development (TOD) improves ridership for transit service, thereby increasing efficiency; (2) transit service increases access to station areas, thereby increasing potential for higher intensity and density land development; (3) TOD equally accommodates all modes of transportation (car as well as pedestrian, bicycle, and transit), further increasing access to station areas and potential for increased development capacity; and (4) TOD encourages a park -once environment, which reduces vehicular demand on the roadway network, further improving efficiency and reducing carbon emissions. The most significant features of a TOD are (1) increased density and intensity of development, with minimum levels of development recommended by FDOT; (2) walkability and interconnectivity throughout the area; and (3) a mix of uses appropriate to the service and area. In June of 2013, the City Commission approved amendments to the Land Development Regulations to create provisions for TOD and the corresponding standards in the mixed use zoning regulations, including the minimum density and intensity standards for mixed use districts within the Transit Core and the Station Area, defined as a' /4 mile and' /2 mile radius around the future station, respectively. The Comprehensive Plan policies adopted in 2014 gave a broad support to these regulations. First, they established a Downtown TOD District with boundaries coinciding with the Station Area. In addition, they instituted a density increase of up to twenty five percent (25 %) for projects located within the District and classified Special High Density Residential, Mixed Use or Mixed Use -Core Future Land Use. The amendments increased maximum densities for these Future Land Use categories to twenty five (25), fifty (50) and one hundred (100) dwelling units per acre, respectively. Currently, the total number of units within the District is estimated at about 3,100, resulting in the gross area -wide density of 7.027 dwelling units per acre. The Community Center station, a model for the Boynton Beach Downtown TOD District, stipulates optimal densities between 11 and 16 dwelling units per acre. (The density of 11 dwelling units per acre corresponds to 4,862 units in the subject area). The proposed amendment would potentially help to reach this desirable threshold. Significant areas east of the FEC Railroad right -of -way are already classified as either Mixed -Use Core or Mixed Use (see Exhibit A) and more are targeted for higher density and intensity mixed -use development both east and west of the tracks. There are no properties currently classified as Special High Density Residential within the District, but some may be reclassified to this category in the future. t00050878.1 306 - 9001821 } Page 267 of 350 3. AMENDMENT TO SIGN STANDARDS APPLICABLE TO COMMERCIAL USES IN CERTAIN M -1 ZONING DISTRICTS This proposed amendment would allow maximum sign area for commercial uses proposed in the M -1 zoning district that are located along arterial and collector roadways, to be based on the ratio applicable to the commercial zoning district rather than the industrial (M -1) zoning district. Staff is recommending a "cleanup" of the sign code regulations applicable to those areas of the M -1 (Industrial) zoning district located on road rights -of -way in which non- industrial uses are allowed. Based upon the M -1 Corridor Study conducted several years ago, in an effort to create an improved visual image of industrial zoned properties abutting major thoroughfares within the City, the allowed uses were expanded to accommodate limited office and commercial type businesses. However, at the same time, the sign regulations were not updated to reflect this expanded use list. Office and retail properties are allowed a maximum wall signage allocation based upon the lineal front footage of the building/tenant space, multiplied by a factor of 1.5. For example, a tenant with a 30 foot front lease space would be allowed up to 45 square feet of wall signage (30 LF X 1.5 SF = 45 SF). However, industrial zoned properties are limited to one (1) square foot of wall signage based upon the front footage calculation, due to their typical locations along roadways of lower classification and traffic, such as local and collector streets. Using the same example as above (30 LF X 1.0 SF = 30 SF), the amount of wall signage is reduced by one - third. Since it is generally recognized that office and commercial tenants rely more heavily on signage than industrial businesses, due to customer traffic, and locations along roads with higher classification and design speeds, it seems appropriate that the sign regulations be updated to reflect the fact that non- industrial uses are now allowed on major thoroughfares in the industrial zoning district, and that such uses be afforded the same signage allotment as other office and retail businesses on the same corridor. This amendment would allow the limited list of non- industrial businesses accommodated on an arterial roadway within the M -1 zoning district to utilize the same signage calculation as office and commercially -zoned properties. 4. REGULATING OF NON - CONFORMING SIGNS AT SHOPPING CENTERS TO BENEFIT PHYSICAL APPEARANCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. The proposed amendments would increase flexibility in altering a non - conforming sign at a commercial shopping center for the purpose of accommodating additional tenant space, as long as the modifications would not worsen the magnitude of non - conformity, and result in some physical improvement to the design of the sign. The City has a number of nonconforming pole signs throughout commercial zoning districts, mainly located at the larger retail centers. Pole signs are tall signs, typically supported by one or more poles /posts, which provide a list of tenants within the shopping center. When the majority of these shopping centers were constructed, poles signs were a t00050878.1 306 - 9001821 } - Page 268 of 350 permitted type of sign and the code at that time allowed sign heights up to 20 feet, regardless of property size and roadway classification. As a result, these signs continue to be maintained by the center owners in order to maintain the height and visibility the signs afford. Current sign regulations require these types of signs to be Monument Signs, which are defined as signs mounted to the ground or pedestal /foundation, completely along the bottom of the cabinet/sign. Monument signs are limited to a maximum of 12 feet in height, which is typically about one -half the height of the pole signs in existence today. Therefore shopping center owners make every attempt to maintain their existing signs, concerned that removal due to maintenance or damage may result in diminished visibility and advertising associated with a new code - compliant sign. The Nonconforming Signs portion of the code does not allow signs to be modified except for re- lettering or change of sign copy, unless the modification brings the sign into compliance with the sign code. While staff has permitted typical maintenance such as color changes or adding minor architectural enhancements that do not further the nonconformity, and in many cases lessen the nonconformity and enhance the appearance, there are few other changes that are allowed to these signs. Because many of the shopping centers have grown over the years, added outparcels or attracted well known national tenants that require larger signage in their leases, sign cabinets were added /modified over the years (when the signs were still deemed conforming), which has resulted in a hodge - podge, less than desirable appearance of these signs. Many times the center owners are the first to acknowledge this and desire improvements, but the code will not permit the structural modifications necessary to improve the design because of the nonconforming status. Over the last several years, a number of shopping centers have undergone major renovations and only minimal work could be permitted on these pole signs. Staff proposes to modify the Nonconforming Signs section of the Land Development Regulations (LDR) with the objective to allow certain modifications to nonconforming signs that would improve the image along the rights -of -way without worsening nonconformities. Staff recommends that wording be added to this section of the LDR to allow modification of nonconforming pole signs at shopping centers, when regulated by, or to be regulated by a Sign Program, as long as the mass of the sign structure is not increased (i.e. height, length, and width). Such work may be structural in nature and may involve removal /replacement of sign cabinets. The sign owner would be required to make improvements that bring the sign structure(s) further into compliance with current sign regulations and shall, under no circumstance, worsen the nonconformity. The Nonconforming Signs section of the code already allows repairs to damaged signs up to 50% of the original cost of the sign, so it is logical to allow the owner to make aesthetic enhancements to these signs, again, as long as the mass of the sign structure is not increased. Staff firmly believes these signs are not going away, unless removed by a hurricane or other destructive force, therefore we believe additional latitude is necessary to improve their look and the image of the City. t00050878.1 306 - 9001821 } Page 269 of 350 As part of these regulations, and as further incentive for shopping center owners to upgrade their signs, staff recommends wording that would change the allowed amount of repair of these renovated signs from the current language of "50% of original cost of the sign construction" to read "50% of the value of the upgraded sign ". As part of the above discussion, staff envisions another opportunity to address the visual quality of these nonconforming signs and at the same time further economic development efforts to bring more and larger tenants to shopping centers experiencing vacancies. As noted previously, one of the key points in lease negotiations with prospective tenants is the amount and location of their signage, in order to gain maximum visibility. In many instances, this older shopping center sign is completely filled with tenant signage leaving no space on the sign for new, larger and /or potentially beneficial tenants . Most leases clearly denote the amount and location of signage granted to each tenant. Unless existing tenants are willing to modify the language within their leases, the prospective tenant will look elsewhere, possibly outside the City. Therefore, staff proposes to allow additional tenant signage on these nonconforming structures, again under the same requirements as noted above that requires approval of a Sign Program to support the proposed modifications as well regulate all other signage for the project, and results in the overall aesthetic improvement of the sign as reviewed and approved through the City's site plan amendment process. Staff does not envision these regulations being applied to single tenant property signs, as they tend to be of a smaller scale (only one tenant panel versus several) and less costly to replace. Therefore, staff recommends no further changes regarding the single tenant signs, but remains open to further review in the future. 5. MINIMUM PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR HOTELS The purpose of this proposed amendment is to lower the minimum parking ratio for hotel rooms to better reflect actual demand as justified by the parking requirements of several other cities, as well as the user characteristics at a hotel located in the City. The proposed minimum parking ratio would minimize the construction of unnecessary impervious areas of a project and therefore support the City's green initiatives. Staff has been made aware that our parking requirements for hotels outside the Mixed Use High (MU -H) district are greater than nearly all other communities. Staff has taken pride in the fact that we have been able to reduce unnecessary parking for many uses, created overlay areas where parking requirements have been reduced and designed code language to cap maximum parking, all in an effort to preserve more green space /pervious area on site and reduce development costs. Reducing parking requirements furthers Green Initiatives championed by the City Commission and the leadership team. The City Code requires one and a quarter (1.25) parking spaces per a one bedroom hotel room and two (2) parking spaces per two bedroom hotel room, other than in the Mixed Use High (MU -H) zoning district (downtown), in which the requirement is one (1) t00050878.1 306 - 9001821 } - 10 Page 270 of 350 parking space per hotel room, regardless of the number of bedrooms. Staff reviewed the parking codes of twenty -five (25) cities within Palm Beach County and the State and various counties within the State. The results indicated that none of those surveyed differentiated between one and two bedroom hotel rooms, likely due to the fact that most occupants arrive in one vehicle, such as a family on vacation, therefore making the required second parking space unnecessary. The survey also noted that only one jurisdiction, Volusia County, required a parking ratio in excess of 1.25 parking spaces per hotel room (1.5). Nineteen of the twenty -five surveyed required 1.0 parking space or fewer, with the majority of those also requiring additional parking for employees and /or meeting space. Staff conducted an analysis utilizing a recently approved hotel (Towne Place Suites in Quantum Park) for the scenarios, calculating parking based upon the various formulas of the surveyed jurisdictions. Our code as currently written requires 151 parking spaces for the project. Only two (2) of the twenty -five (25) jurisdictions required more parking (159 and 156 parking spaces). The mean parking requirement averaged out to 137 parking spaces. Had this project been constructed in the City of Delray Beach, their code would have required only 97 parking spaces. In determining the mean average, staff discarded the two highest parking requirements (159 & 156) and the three lowest (83, 97 & 97) to provide a fair and more accurate portrayal of the median numbers. As a result of this analysis, staff believes our requirement for a separate parking calculation for the two (2) bedroom hotel room to be unnecessary and unjustified. Staff recommends the code be modified to a single calculation of 1.25 parking spaces per hotel room, which would have resulted in 145 parking spaces required in the above scenario, instead of 151 for the 116 unit hotel. This calculation is still higher than the mean number of 137 from the study, and would more than account for employees and social functions. This recommendation is based upon survey results treating all hotel units identically with a single parking calculation, regardless of the number of bedrooms, the fact that our minimum parking requirement exceeded nearly all others surveyed, and that the proposed amendment furthers the City's Green Initiatives. Staff additionally recommends an amendment to the code to address a hotel that has an internal restaurant or lounge open not only to the guests, but to the general public. In these instances, staff would recommend that parking be provided for those uses open to the general public at a rate of 50% of their requirement of a standalone operation. CONCLUSION / RECOMENDATION Staff is recommending approval of the proposed amendments. Overall, these amendments are intended to achieve regulatory compliance, promote Transit Oriented Development, encourage /promote business /economic development by allowing businesses that otherwise may be discouraged from finding suitable locations in the City, maximize compatibility among land uses and improve the aesthetics of the streetscape. Attachments S:A PLANNING \SHAREDAWP \SPECPROJACODE REVIEWAIN- PATIENT MEDICAL CARE \STAFF REPORT - COMBINED TEXT ITEMS.DOCX t00050878.1 306-90018211 - 11 - Page 271 of 350 13.C. LEGAL 2/17/2015 REQUESTED ACTION BY COMMISSION: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 15 -005 - FIRST READING - Approve amendments to the Land Development Regulations to allow sign standards to be based on the commercial use within the M -1 Zoning District, and to increase flexibility for modifying a non - conforming sign at a shopping center to promote economic development and aesthetics. EXPLANATION OF REQUEST: This item involves two different sign code topics. The first topic is the maximum sign area allowed for commercial uses within the M -1 Zoning District. The second topic involves lessening the restrictions on the alteration of a non - conforming sign existing within a commercial shopping center to allow physical (aesthetic) improvements as well as to allow additional tenant signage to promote economic development. The first topic would allow maximum sign area for commercial uses proposed in the M -1 zoning district that are located along arterial and collector roadways, to be based on the ratio applicable to the commercial uses rather than the industrial (M -1) zoning district. Based upon the M -1 Corridor Study conducted several years ago, in an effort to create an improved visual image of industrial zoned properties abutting major thoroughfares within the City, the allowed uses were expanded to accommodate limited office and commercial type businesses. However, at the same time, the sign regulations were not updated to reflect this expanded use list. Office and retail properties are allowed a maximum wall signage allocation based upon the lineal front footage of the building /tenant space, multiplied by a factor of 1.5. However, industrial zoned properties are limited to one (1) square foot of wall signage based upon the front footage calculation, due to their typical locations along roadways of lower classification and traffic, such as local and collector streets. This amendment would allow the limited list of non - industrial businesses accommodated on an arterial roadway within the M -1 zoning district to utilize the same signage calculation as office and commercially -zoned properties. The second topic would increase flexibility in altering a non - conforming sign at a commercial shopping center for the purpose of accommodating additional tenant space, as long as the modifications would not worsen the magnitude of non - conformity, and result in some physical improvement to the design of the sign. The City has a number of nonconforming pole signs throughout commercial zoning districts, mainly located at the larger retail centers. Pole signs are tall signs, typically supported by one or more poles /posts, which provide a list of tenants within the shopping center. When the majority of these shopping centers were constructed, poles signs were a permitted type of sign and the code at that time allowed sign heights up to 20 feet, regardless of property size and roadway classification. As a result, these signs continue to be maintained by the center owners in order to maintain the height and visibility the signs afford. Current sign regulations require these types of signs to be Monument Signs, which are limited to a maximum of 12 feet in height, depending the characteristics of the adjacent roadway. Therefore shopping center owners make every attempt to maintain their existing non - conforming signs, concerned that removal due to maintenance or damage may result in diminished visibility and advertising associated with a new code - compliant sign. The Nonconforming Signs portion of the code does not allow signs to be modified except for re- lettering or change of sign copy, unless the modification brings the sign into compliance with the sign code. While staff has permitted typical maintenance such as color changes or adding minor architectural enhancements that do not further the nonconformity, and in many cases lessen the nonconformity and enhance the appearance, there are few other changes that are allowed to these signs. Page 272 of 350 Staff proposes to modify the Nonconforming Signs section of the Land Development Regulations (LDR) with the objective to allow certain modifications to nonconforming signs that would result in the accommodations for additional center tenants, as long as 1) there is a sign program in place for the subject project; 2) the non- conforming aspects are not worsened; and 3)the overall appearance of the sign is improved. Staff does not envision these regulations being applied to single tenant property signs, as they tend to be of a smaller scale (only one tenant panel versus several) and less costly to replace. Therefore, staff recommends no further changes regarding the single tenant signs, but remains open to further review in the future. [ ]q► q►11 :1!;x_1 x 3 �' :Z Z�3:7_1► ►i �3 7:�9 :Z / [ 3 OI -1 FISCAL IMPACT: NA ALTERNATIVES: None recommended STRATEGIC PLAN: STRATEGIC PLAN APPLICATION: NA A41► ►i /_l9 =Fi %1101LlM►1T. Is this a grant? Grant Amount: ATTACHMENTS: Type n Ordinance n Addendum REVIEWERS: Department Legal F inance City Manager Description Page 273 of 350 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 ORDINANCE NO. 15- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA AMENDING THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, CHAPTER 4, ARTICLE IV, SECTION 4.C.l.b. TO ALLOW SIGN STANDARDS TO BE BASED ON THE COMMERCIAL USE WITHIN THE M -1 ZONING DISTRICT; AND CHAPTER 4, ARTICLE IV, SECTION 7.A., TO INCREASE FLEXIBILITY FOR MODIFYING A NON - CONFORMING SIGN AT A SHOPPING CENTER TO PROMOTE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND AESTHETICS; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS, SEVERABILITY, CODIFICATION AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, staff is proposing amendments to the Land Development Regulations (LDR) regarding the sign code; and WHEREAS, the first amendment would allow maximum sign area for commercial uses proposed in the M -1 zoning district that are located along arterial and collector roadways, to be based on the ratio applicable to the commercial uses rather than the industrial (M -1) zoning district; and WHEREAS, in the course of work on TOD- related Comprehensive Plan amendments, staff reviewed recommendations provided by the Florida TOD Development Guidebook for three types of transit centers; and WHEREAS, the second would increase flexibility in altering a non - conforming sign at a commercial shopping center for the purpose of accommodating additional tenant space, as long as the modifications would not worsen the magnitude of non- conformity, and result in some physical improvement to the design of the sign; and WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Boynton Beach deems it to be in the best interest of the citizens and residents of the City to amend the Land Development Regulations to allow sign standards to be based on the commercial use within the M -1 Zoning District and to increase flexibility for modifying a non - conforming sign at a 1 Page 274 of 350 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 shopping center to promote economic development and aesthetics. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA, THAT: Section 1 . The foregoing whereas clauses are true and correct and are now ratified and confirmed by the City Commission. Section 2. Chapter 4, Article IV, Section 4.C.l.b of the City of Boynton Beach Code of Ordinances, Part III, Land Development Regulations, is hereby amended as follows: Chapter 4, Article IV, Section 4.C.1.b. (Table 4 -14 Maximum Sign Area) 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 i Wall signs are allowed for nonresidential developments within the following: 1) single - family residential districts; 2) the R -2 and PUD districts; and 3) all developments containing multiple - family residential uses (in excess of ten (10) dwelling units). The cumulative signage area shall not exceed thirty -two (32) square feet. The top of the sign(s) shall not exceed the height of ten (10) feet. 2 Wall signs are allowed within all developments containing multi - family residential or non - residential uses. 3 Pursuant to Section 5.C.2. below, the maximum wall sign area may be increased by ten percent (10 %) to allow for additional signage on rear facades of multiple- tenant buildings within non - residential developments. 4 For a multiple- tenant building designed as an indoor shopping mall, the maximum allowable wall sign area may be increased, provided the total signage area (per wall of a 2 Page 275 of 350 Ratio of Maximum Allowable Signage Area Zoning District Sign Area (square feet) Building Frontage Residential Single- Family districts R -2 ' PUD 1 s. f. 1 -foot R -3 2 IPUD z CBD Industrial' Commercial, excluding CBD Mixed Use 1.5 s.f. 1 -foot 3,4 Miscellaneous 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 i Wall signs are allowed for nonresidential developments within the following: 1) single - family residential districts; 2) the R -2 and PUD districts; and 3) all developments containing multiple - family residential uses (in excess of ten (10) dwelling units). The cumulative signage area shall not exceed thirty -two (32) square feet. The top of the sign(s) shall not exceed the height of ten (10) feet. 2 Wall signs are allowed within all developments containing multi - family residential or non - residential uses. 3 Pursuant to Section 5.C.2. below, the maximum wall sign area may be increased by ten percent (10 %) to allow for additional signage on rear facades of multiple- tenant buildings within non - residential developments. 4 For a multiple- tenant building designed as an indoor shopping mall, the maximum allowable wall sign area may be increased, provided the total signage area (per wall of a 2 Page 275 of 350 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 Section 3. Chapter 4, Article IV, Section 7.A. of the City of Boynton Beach Code of Ordinances, Part III, Land Development Regulations, is hereby amended as follows: Sec. 7. Nonconforming Signs. A. General. A sign, which does not conform to the requirements of this article, shall be deemed nonconforming. A nonconforming sign cannot be modified (excluding re- lettering or change of copy) unless the modification brings the sign into compliance with all sections of this article or ototalitmr -rl. in . be-low, NorrconfiDrri'riin. Freestandir l i -n w Slr l::sl:srth C rr1: r . The Cily's ob irrrlrr r lllr i rrrr.� rr Irr rre rls frr rr rarer , rrr r rI n tni ; i t li tv of multi-tenan l.pr i:r r ties al on" 61V til r ou 'L l'mfirre ::rerly owners modifv n nconf r'mirru f eestan irr si crrs rra c rrt rs beyond the limitations contained within Section A rrboye in le of r'rrmance with the f ll wino r "r III rrr'mt'rt. 1. The sho ler rrter sl'mrr.11 l'mrr.y r rr.t'm r (,,)1.Y1r tl Si >t'm l rom r "rr.mr'm in )r m. o m. sr R > ll lsrt} >m,rr "'m 4,r t,}�11:smt}. �. � reciri l fbr an atTien men r to the pis itm Si , -nm Pro,u' m.rm'm i emisl:sr d, v . The amended Sion Prop >rrrn'm will allow itnlrr \�enrertts to the existin siot'm St11l(elrlt"V-(S which do not increase the mass of ' the si &n 6,e, heiJ"11 ierl width in lrr ino renmyrr.l, rr )air and 'or rr islacernent of sigt'm cabinets, 4. l lmt sr , l .jose inr sr�. yernents will lrr in the sign into firr Cher conl e with the Si arm rr- Utrlaltions and in"i roye the aesthetics of the Sig >,rr. 5. As an o f the Cit 's e e tm tTlI ey-elo merrt ittittati es additional sr n ss-irnrre- ft,}d;}ta >e- also J Lio % n as d o j, - , 'Y area" rr'mll,w' be added lt,} the sign in instance when aesthetic irrrir "oVerrrerrts and recli Ili red larldsl ai:T- inri::rr yerr'merrts are mad lr rt'm imr'rrr'mr irr.tr l mtrr "r rrtm irr lllr i t'm, rrt'm itr iltiati ns where the additional si does not increase the mass of the siun 6,e, heiohl leri irPlll 6, T he amount of future r e of the newl�� r en yate si o �lilrr.t the p �WJ rl owner will be allowed to cotril'ilete will be an amount not to exceed 50".b of the new \ able of the shan as rP t rrr'min rP lr a licensed si gi an c onfir °mere b _ s taff 3 Page 276 of 350 I The 1VU Ldations contained irr lrU, "r 4, Aqi le l ' Section I rr:bo e are no 2 intended to allow rear ��rrl and reconstruc of the sipan in errlre1 rr� �rrr °lr at sirtrrrrti rr 3 would rer the si -n lo res, me into r ot1i With Crrr Si,1211 rr"1Uulrr i01'r. 4 5 Section 4. Should any section or provision of this Ordinance or any portion 6 thereof be declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such decision shall 7 not affect the remainder of this Ordinance. 8 Section 5. Authority is hereby given to codify this Ordinance. 9 Section 6. This Ordinance shall become effective immediately. 10 FIRST READING this day of , 2015. 11 SECOND, FINAL READING AND PASSAGE this day of 12 2015. CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 ATTEST: 28 29 30 Mayor — Jerry Taylor Vice Mayor — Joe Casello Commissioner — David T. Merker Commissioner — Mack McCray Commissioner — Michael M. Fitzpatrick VOTE YES NO 31 Janet M. Prainito, MMC 32 City Clerk 33 34 35 36 (Corporate Seal) 4 Page 277 of 350 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT PLANNING AND ZONING Memorandum PZ 14 -047 TO: Chair and Members Planning & Development Board FROM: Michael Rumpf Planning and Zoning Director DATE: January 21, 2015 RE: Interim LDR Amendments (CDRV 15 -001) To include 1) Provisions for the new zoning use Medical Care or Testing (In Patient) 2) Continued codification of the Transit - Oriented Development (TOD) overlay development standards; 3) Amendments to the sign standards applicable to commercial uses in certain M -1 zoning districts; 4) Amendments to sign regulations to facilitate certain improvements to non - conforming signs at shopping centers; and 5) The decrease in parking requirements for hotels. OVERVIEW The rewrite of the City's Land Development Regulations (LDR) allowed staff to perform a complete review and analysis of each standard, regulation, and process. As part of the post- adoption process, staff anticipates the periodic need for, and is prepared to expeditiously process, updates and amendments to the LDR for one or more of the following reasons: 1. Furthering business and economic development initiatives; 2. Advancing sustainability initiatives; 3. Maintaining internal consistency; 4. Achieving regulatory compliance; and 5. Incorporating implementation feedback necessary to meet original or current objectives and vision. The proposed amendments would further items #1 "business and economic development initiatives "; #2 "Advancing sustainability initiatives, and #4 "achieving regulatory compliance ", as well as facilitate the physical improvement of the streetscape. t00050878.1 306 - 9001821 } - I - Page 278 of 350 1. MEDICAL CARE — IN- PATIENT (ZONING USE) The City's Zoning Regulations accommodate uses that provide medical testing and treatment in the following three general categories; 1) hospitals; 2) medical offices; and 3) imaging, testing and support services. Of the three uses, the only one where in- patient medical care is permitted is hospitals. Hospitals, in summary, are institutional uses providing comprehensive medical treatment and care. Although nursing and convalescent homes provide basic, 24 -hour medical care, they are currently labeled a Type 3 Group Home in the City's LDR and function more as permanent or long -term housing for residents /patients rather than a medical service. Until recently there has not been a demonstrated demand for medical services that provide 24 -hour care to patients. However, in response to the recent demand -for services that provide 24 -hour care, treatment and /or testing pertaining to sleep apnea, eating disorders, labor and delivery, hospice care, and substance abuse, staff has analyzed the zoning regulations and proposes amendments to address this deficiency by accommodating these uses as well as other excluded businesses that similarly provide overnight medical care and treatment. The definition of "Hospital" is currently indicated in the LDR (Chapter 1, Article II) as: An establishment typically referred to as an institution (excluding "Group Home, Type 4') that provides comprehensive, inpatient and outpatient healthcare, including typical emergency medical, surgical, diagnostic, rehabilitation and treatment services, as well as other specialized services ranging from bariatrics to wound care. This use would also include accessory meeting /conference facilities, limited retail sales, and administrative offices. Most significant to this analysis is that Hospitals are limited to the Public Usage (PU) Zoning District. The PU Zoning District is a unique district defined to "apply to those areas within the city whose ownership and /or operation is public, or whose use is primarily institutionally - oriented. When we think of "institutional" uses, we typically consider those uses that are public or public /private in nature and that engage in public service such as schools, places of worship, lodges and charitable organizations, government- operated facilities, and hospitals. Historically, communities would have only one hospital, which corresponded with a unique and tailored zoning district appropriate for the scale of the use, size of property affected, and surrounding land uses. However, given the number and variety of possible medical uses that similarly provide services around - the - clock, and the unique and limited locations of the PU Zoning District, other appropriate zoning districts should be considered that match the type of intensity and locational requirements of these medical uses. The proposed amendments to the zoning regulations are intended to ensure that the City's zoning regulations are defensible, by not unjustifiably zoning out certain uses, and more importantly, maintaining compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Fair Housing Act (FHA). In general, both acts prohibit discrimination against the "handicapped" or "disabled ". Of course the FHA emphasizes the access to housing, and t00050878.1 306 - 9001821 } Page 279 of 350 the ADA targets access to services, programs, or activities of a public entity. Most relevant to this code review and analysis are the following points: • The application or coverage of the ADA and FHA was expanded so that "physical or mental impairment" includes alcoholism and drug addiction, and expanded to also apply to those businesses providing related services and treatments; • Zoning is an activity specifically referenced in the Technical Assistance Manual for the ADA in discussing this function and its importance to be monitored for compliance with the ADA and FHA; • Zoning that does not regulate equitably those uses with like characteristics and purposes, which affect handicapped individuals, could raise concerns under the ADA and FHA; and • When zoning fails to allow the integration of handicapped individuals into society, such as a when zoning narrowly classifies drug and alcohol treatment facilities as "institutional" while simultaneously excluding them from districts that allow related or similar medical businesses and services, such zoning could impede the integration expectation of the ADA and FHA. Therefore, staff proposes the subject code amendments that have identified several uses currently excluded from the zoning regulations that provide 24 -hour patient care and treatment. The proposed changes also provide the necessary definition for said uses; identify the zoning districts appropriate for such intense medical uses; and include additional location standards and operational requirements to ensure land use compatibility and adherence to proper review processes. Definitions (LDR, Chapter 1, Article 11): Medical Care or Testin g (In patient) A facility, including emergency clinics and hospitals, which are open 24 -hours per day or provides 24 -hour healthcare, treatment, and/or examinations, typically requiring overnight stays, and are based either on emergency, planned, or scheduled admittance to facilities with controlled and secured access to ensure appropriate care of patients. Such facilities include: • Hospitals licensed pursuant Chapter 395, Florida Statutes; • Alcohol or chemical dependency treatment centers licensed pursuant to Chapter 397, Florida Statutes; • Mental health treatment facilities licensed pursuant to Chapter 394; Florida Statutes • Urgent care centers (24- hour); • Inpatient testing services such as sleep disorder centers; • Birth centers licensed pursuant to Section 383.305; Florida Statues; • Hospice facilities licensed pursuant to Part IV of Chapter 400; Florida Statues; • Eating disorder treatment centers; and t00050878.1 306 - 9001821 } - - Page 280 of 350 • Nursing homes and physical rehabilitation centers licensed pursuant to Section 400.062, Florida Statutes. Additionally, the subject amendments warrant other modifications to the definitions, as shown below in underlined and crossed -out text: • Hospital - , . see Medical Care or Testing (In- ap tient) • Medical or Dental Imaging /Testing /Support Services patient); • Medical or Dental Office (Out patient) A facility or clinic operated by one (1) or more physicians, dentists, chiropractors, or other licensed practitioners of the healing arts for the examination and treatment of persons solely on an outpatient basis including intensive outpatient treatment Images, body fluids or other...... ; • Mental Health and Substance Abuse see " Medical Care or TestiW (Inpatient Zoning Matrix (LDR, Chapter 3, Article IV, Section 3.D.): See Exhibit "A" for an excerpt of the Zoning Matrix with the proposed changes shown in underlined and crossed -out text. The proposed new use is seen added to the matrix, to be a permitted use in the C -3 (Community Commercial), PCD (Planned Commercial Development) and PU (Public Usage) Zoning Districts. The C -3 Zoning District is the most intensive commercial district in the City's Zoning Regulations based on typical project size (i.e. land area and square footage) and customer traffic, and is intended to accommodate large commercial centers located with direct access from arterial roadways. Distances to residential areas are typically greatest, and design and buffering requirements are intended to match the scale of the project and mitigate impacts upon adjacent properties. The C -1, C -2, and C -4 Districts are not appropriate given the intense nature of such businesses, the need for greater land area than the minimum size required by the zoning districts, and need for appropriate separation from residential areas. Whereas the C -1 (Office Commercial) Zoning District accommodates offices including medical and dental offices, this district is often considered a "transitional" zone between residential zoning districts and more intense commercial land uses given its compatibility with residential environments due, in part, to the limited hours of business operation and locations along the periphery of residential neighborhoods. Similarly, the C -2, (Neighborhood Commercial) Zoning District is to be compatible in scale and operation with residential zoning districts, and in fact is intended to be located in close proximity to residential land uses to facilitate access to convenient retail goods and services. The C -4 District would t00050878.1 306 - 9001821 } Page 281 of 350 also be inappropriate for such uses given the smaller parcels that comprise most of the existing C -4 -zoned properties, and their close proximity to local streets and residential areas. The PCD District corresponds with the C -3 District with the principal difference being the requirement for a master plan as part of the rezoning process. Additional changes to the matrix would also include adding the same "(Out- patient)" description to the "Medical or Dental Office" use title, the individual "Hospital" use item currently in the matrix would be removed, and an unrelated change but necessary for consistency in the matrix is the addition of a "P" and footnote " #22" to the "Counseling" use item to allow such uses within the M -1 District similar to the treatment of general business offices if, in part, they are located along an arterial roadway. Zoning Matrix Notes (LDR, Chapter 3, Article IV, Section 3.D.): Existing Notes: No. 3. (to be amended) Amend #3 to read "Conditional use approval shall be required if located within �we one hundred (2" 100 feet from a residential zoning district or mixed use zoning district No. 14. (to remain unchanged) The subject use is only allowed on a lot that fronts on an arterial or collector roadway street as defined in Part III, Ch. 1, Art. 2 of the LDR under definitions for "Street - Arterial" and "Street - Collector". The following amendment is an unrelated, "house- keeping" amendment intended to remove the cap on maximum seats, with maximum floor area remaining to achieve the intended objective of limiting eligible sites to quick turn-over, convenience retail. No. 58. Restaurant. a. All Districts. See Chapter 3, Article V , Supplemental Regulations regarding the sidewalk cafe permit. b. C -1 District. A restaurant is allowed as accessory use to a business or professional office and /or a medical or dental office but subject to the following conditions: (1) Signage. No external signage for the restaurant use shall be allowed; (2) Hours of operation shall be limited to coincide with the hours of operation of the principal use. c. M -1 district. This non - industrial use is allowed within the M -1 district, provided that it 1) is located within a multiple- tenant development on a lot that fronts on an arterial or collector roadway; 2) does not exceed two thousand, five hundred (2,500) square feet; 3) cant ins - m e€t- weho =e (12) seats 4 3 excludes a drive -up, drive - through, or drive -in facility; and -5 4) complies with all off - street t00050878.1 306 - 9001821 } Page 282 of 350 parking requirements of Chapter 4, Article V. In addition, the sale of used merchandise is only allowed as accessory to the sale of new merchandise. New Notes: No. 101. Medical Care or Testing (In- patient) Other requirements and site standards: a. Minimum building setback shall be 50 feet when abutting a residential or mixed use zoning district to enable proper site design regarding secured access, private outdoor batron amenities. buffering_ etc.: b. Site security shall be ensured through a minimum of surveillance cameras, limited and controlled access points, and operational procedures to restrict unauthorized and /or unarranged accessing or exiting of the facility and /or property, c. Privacy and access control shall be ensured through a minimum of perimeter fencing and landscape buffering intended to support the objective to control access and increase brivacv of areas intended for client or batient use. d. Permitted locations shall exclude the Community Redevelopment Area to limit the CRA to those complimentary uses available to the public and which contribute to the synergy of successful downtown commerce pursuant to an applicable redevelopment plan. No. 102. Pre - existing. Such pre - existing uses which are no longer allowed uses pursuant to amendments to the Zoning Matrix shall not be construed as non - conforming uses. However, rn j or modifications to such uses shall be in accordance with the conditional use approval process if required pursuant to the Zoning Matrix, and adhere to the site design and operational restrictions of the applicable footnotes. 2. TOD (OVERLAY PROVISIONS INCLUDING DENSITY BONUS) The proposed amendments would further the codification of TOD regulations that commenced in 2013, and continued in 2014 with the establishment of a Downtown Transit - Oriented Development District within the Comprehensive Plan. Specifically, the proposed amendments would implement Future Land Use Element Policy 1.18.1, which established a Downtown TOD District, and Policy 1.18.2.b, which allows twenty five percent (25 %) density increase for selected future land use classifications within the District. For the past eight years, the City has been participating with the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) and other agencies to expand the Tri-Rail commuter system to include new service on the FEC Railroad. The expanded service, named the "Tri -Rail Coastal Link," would add a series of new passenger rail stations on the FEC Railroad in t00050878.1 306 - 9001821 } Page 283 of 350 Palm Beach, Broward, and Miami -Dade Counties, including a new Boynton Beach station just south of Boynton Beach Boulevard. FDOT and its transportation partners, including the South Florida Regional Transportation Authority (SFRTA), Palm Beach Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council (TCRPC), have all prioritized the need to improve land development patterns in advance of station development for the following reasons: (1) transit - oriented development (TOD) improves ridership for transit service, thereby increasing efficiency; (2) transit service increases access to station areas, thereby increasing potential for higher intensity and density land development; (3) TOD equally accommodates all modes of transportation (car as well as pedestrian, bicycle, and transit), further increasing access to station areas and potential for increased development capacity; and (4) TOD encourages a park -once environment, which reduces vehicular demand on the roadway network, further improving efficiency and reducing carbon emissions. The most significant features of a TOD are (1) increased density and intensity of development, with minimum levels of development recommended by FDOT; (2) walkability and interconnectivity throughout the area; and (3) a mix of uses appropriate to the service and area. In June of 2013, the City Commission approved amendments to the Land Development Regulations to create provisions for TOD and the corresponding standards in the mixed use zoning regulations, including the minimum density and intensity standards for mixed use districts within the Transit Core and the Station Area, defined as a' /4 mile and' /2 mile radius around the future station, respectively. The Comprehensive Plan policies adopted in 2014 gave a broad support to these regulations. First, they established a Downtown TOD District with boundaries coinciding with the Station Area. In addition, they instituted a density increase of up to twenty five percent (25 %) for projects located within the District and classified Special High Density Residential, Mixed Use or Mixed Use -Core Future Land Use. The amendments increased maximum densities for these Future Land Use categories to twenty five (25), fifty (50) and one hundred (100) dwelling units per acre, respectively. Currently, the total number of units within the District is estimated at about 3,100, resulting in the gross area -wide density of 7.027 dwelling units per acre. The Community Center station, a model for the Boynton Beach Downtown TOD District, stipulates optimal densities between 11 and 16 dwelling units per acre. (The density of 11 dwelling units per acre corresponds to 4,862 units in the subject area). The proposed amendment would potentially help to reach this desirable threshold. Significant areas east of the FEC Railroad right -of -way are already classified as either Mixed -Use Core or Mixed Use (see Exhibit A) and more are targeted for higher density and intensity mixed -use development both east and west of the tracks. There are no properties currently classified as Special High Density Residential within the District, but some may be reclassified to this category in the future. t00050878.1 306 - 9001821 } Page 284 of 350 3. AMENDMENT TO SIGN STANDARDS APPLICABLE TO COMMERCIAL USES IN CERTAIN M -1 ZONING DISTRICTS This proposed amendment would allow maximum sign area for commercial uses proposed in the M -1 zoning district that are located along arterial and collector roadways, to be based on the ratio applicable to the commercial zoning district rather than the industrial (M -1) zoning district. Staff is recommending a "cleanup" of the sign code regulations applicable to those areas of the M -1 (Industrial) zoning district located on road rights -of -way in which non- industrial uses are allowed. Based upon the M -1 Corridor Study conducted several years ago, in an effort to create an improved visual image of industrial zoned properties abutting major thoroughfares within the City, the allowed uses were expanded to accommodate limited office and commercial type businesses. However, at the same time, the sign regulations were not updated to reflect this expanded use list. Office and retail properties are allowed a maximum wall signage allocation based upon the lineal front footage of the building/tenant space, multiplied by a factor of 1.5. For example, a tenant with a 30 foot front lease space would be allowed up to 45 square feet of wall signage (30 LF X 1.5 SF = 45 SF). However, industrial zoned properties are limited to one (1) square foot of wall signage based upon the front footage calculation, due to their typical locations along roadways of lower classification and traffic, such as local and collector streets. Using the same example as above (30 LF X 1.0 SF = 30 SF), the amount of wall signage is reduced by one - third. Since it is generally recognized that office and commercial tenants rely more heavily on signage than industrial businesses, due to customer traffic, and locations along roads with higher classification and design speeds, it seems appropriate that the sign regulations be updated to reflect the fact that non- industrial uses are now allowed on major thoroughfares in the industrial zoning district, and that such uses be afforded the same signage allotment as other office and retail businesses on the same corridor. This amendment would allow the limited list of non- industrial businesses accommodated on an arterial roadway within the M -1 zoning district to utilize the same signage calculation as office and commercially -zoned properties. 4. REGULATING OF NON - CONFORMING SIGNS AT SHOPPING CENTERS TO BENEFIT PHYSICAL APPEARANCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. The proposed amendments would increase flexibility in altering a non - conforming sign at a commercial shopping center for the purpose of accommodating additional tenant space, as long as the modifications would not worsen the magnitude of non - conformity, and result in some physical improvement to the design of the sign. The City has a number of nonconforming pole signs throughout commercial zoning districts, mainly located at the larger retail centers. Pole signs are tall signs, typically supported by one or more poles /posts, which provide a list of tenants within the shopping center. When the majority of these shopping centers were constructed, poles signs were a t00050878.1 306 - 9001821 } - Page 285 of 350 permitted type of sign and the code at that time allowed sign heights up to 20 feet, regardless of property size and roadway classification. As a result, these signs continue to be maintained by the center owners in order to maintain the height and visibility the signs afford. Current sign regulations require these types of signs to be Monument Signs, which are defined as signs mounted to the ground or pedestal /foundation, completely along the bottom of the cabinet/sign. Monument signs are limited to a maximum of 12 feet in height, which is typically about one -half the height of the pole signs in existence today. Therefore shopping center owners make every attempt to maintain their existing signs, concerned that removal due to maintenance or damage may result in diminished visibility and advertising associated with a new code - compliant sign. The Nonconforming Signs portion of the code does not allow signs to be modified except for re- lettering or change of sign copy, unless the modification brings the sign into compliance with the sign code. While staff has permitted typical maintenance such as color changes or adding minor architectural enhancements that do not further the nonconformity, and in many cases lessen the nonconformity and enhance the appearance, there are few other changes that are allowed to these signs. Because many of the shopping centers have grown over the years, added outparcels or attracted well known national tenants that require larger signage in their leases, sign cabinets were added /modified over the years (when the signs were still deemed conforming), which has resulted in a hodge - podge, less than desirable appearance of these signs. Many times the center owners are the first to acknowledge this and desire improvements, but the code will not permit the structural modifications necessary to improve the design because of the nonconforming status. Over the last several years, a number of shopping centers have undergone major renovations and only minimal work could be permitted on these pole signs. Staff proposes to modify the Nonconforming Signs section of the Land Development Regulations (LDR) with the objective to allow certain modifications to nonconforming signs that would improve the image along the rights -of -way without worsening nonconformities. Staff recommends that wording be added to this section of the LDR to allow modification of nonconforming pole signs at shopping centers, when regulated by, or to be regulated by a Sign Program, as long as the mass of the sign structure is not increased (i.e. height, length, and width). Such work may be structural in nature and may involve removal /replacement of sign cabinets. The sign owner would be required to make improvements that bring the sign structure(s) further into compliance with current sign regulations and shall, under no circumstance, worsen the nonconformity. The Nonconforming Signs section of the code already allows repairs to damaged signs up to 50% of the original cost of the sign, so it is logical to allow the owner to make aesthetic enhancements to these signs, again, as long as the mass of the sign structure is not increased. Staff firmly believes these signs are not going away, unless removed by a hurricane or other destructive force, therefore we believe additional latitude is necessary to improve their look and the image of the City. t00050878.1 306 - 9001821 } Page 286 of 350 As part of these regulations, and as further incentive for shopping center owners to upgrade their signs, staff recommends wording that would change the allowed amount of repair of these renovated signs from the current language of "50% of original cost of the sign construction" to read "50% of the value of the upgraded sign ". As part of the above discussion, staff envisions another opportunity to address the visual quality of these nonconforming signs and at the same time further economic development efforts to bring more and larger tenants to shopping centers experiencing vacancies. As noted previously, one of the key points in lease negotiations with prospective tenants is the amount and location of their signage, in order to gain maximum visibility. In many instances, this older shopping center sign is completely filled with tenant signage leaving no space on the sign for new, larger and /or potentially beneficial tenants . Most leases clearly denote the amount and location of signage granted to each tenant. Unless existing tenants are willing to modify the language within their leases, the prospective tenant will look elsewhere, possibly outside the City. Therefore, staff proposes to allow additional tenant signage on these nonconforming structures, again under the same requirements as noted above that requires approval of a Sign Program to support the proposed modifications as well regulate all other signage for the project, and results in the overall aesthetic improvement of the sign as reviewed and approved through the City's site plan amendment process. Staff does not envision these regulations being applied to single tenant property signs, as they tend to be of a smaller scale (only one tenant panel versus several) and less costly to replace. Therefore, staff recommends no further changes regarding the single tenant signs, but remains open to further review in the future. 5. MINIMUM PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR HOTELS The purpose of this proposed amendment is to lower the minimum parking ratio for hotel rooms to better reflect actual demand as justified by the parking requirements of several other cities, as well as the user characteristics at a hotel located in the City. The proposed minimum parking ratio would minimize the construction of unnecessary impervious areas of a project and therefore support the City's green initiatives. Staff has been made aware that our parking requirements for hotels outside the Mixed Use High (MU -H) district are greater than nearly all other communities. Staff has taken pride in the fact that we have been able to reduce unnecessary parking for many uses, created overlay areas where parking requirements have been reduced and designed code language to cap maximum parking, all in an effort to preserve more green space /pervious area on site and reduce development costs. Reducing parking requirements furthers Green Initiatives championed by the City Commission and the leadership team. The City Code requires one and a quarter (1.25) parking spaces per a one bedroom hotel room and two (2) parking spaces per two bedroom hotel room, other than in the Mixed Use High (MU -H) zoning district (downtown), in which the requirement is one (1) t00050878.1 306 - 9001821 } - 10 Page 287 of 350 parking space per hotel room, regardless of the number of bedrooms. Staff reviewed the parking codes of twenty -five (25) cities within Palm Beach County and the State and various counties within the State. The results indicated that none of those surveyed differentiated between one and two bedroom hotel rooms, likely due to the fact that most occupants arrive in one vehicle, such as a family on vacation, therefore making the required second parking space unnecessary. The survey also noted that only one jurisdiction, Volusia County, required a parking ratio in excess of 1.25 parking spaces per hotel room (1.5). Nineteen of the twenty -five surveyed required 1.0 parking space or fewer, with the majority of those also requiring additional parking for employees and /or meeting space. Staff conducted an analysis utilizing a recently approved hotel (Towne Place Suites in Quantum Park) for the scenarios, calculating parking based upon the various formulas of the surveyed jurisdictions. Our code as currently written requires 151 parking spaces for the project. Only two (2) of the twenty -five (25) jurisdictions required more parking (159 and 156 parking spaces). The mean parking requirement averaged out to 137 parking spaces. Had this project been constructed in the City of Delray Beach, their code would have required only 97 parking spaces. In determining the mean average, staff discarded the two highest parking requirements (159 & 156) and the three lowest (83, 97 & 97) to provide a fair and more accurate portrayal of the median numbers. As a result of this analysis, staff believes our requirement for a separate parking calculation for the two (2) bedroom hotel room to be unnecessary and unjustified. Staff recommends the code be modified to a single calculation of 1.25 parking spaces per hotel room, which would have resulted in 145 parking spaces required in the above scenario, instead of 151 for the 116 unit hotel. This calculation is still higher than the mean number of 137 from the study, and would more than account for employees and social functions. This recommendation is based upon survey results treating all hotel units identically with a single parking calculation, regardless of the number of bedrooms, the fact that our minimum parking requirement exceeded nearly all others surveyed, and that the proposed amendment furthers the City's Green Initiatives. Staff additionally recommends an amendment to the code to address a hotel that has an internal restaurant or lounge open not only to the guests, but to the general public. In these instances, staff would recommend that parking be provided for those uses open to the general public at a rate of 50% of their requirement of a standalone operation. CONCLUSION / RECOMENDATION Staff is recommending approval of the proposed amendments. Overall, these amendments are intended to achieve regulatory compliance, promote Transit Oriented Development, encourage /promote business /economic development by allowing businesses that otherwise may be discouraged from finding suitable locations in the City, maximize compatibility among land uses and improve the aesthetics of the streetscape. Attachments S:A PLANNING \SHAREDAWP \SPECPROJACODE REVIEWAIN- PATIENT MEDICAL CARE \STAFF REPORT - COMBINED TEXT ITEMS.DOCX t00050878.1 306-90018211 - 11 - Page 288 of 350 13.D. LEGAL 2/17/2015 REQUESTED ACTION BY COMMISSION: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 15 -006 - FIRST READING - Approve amendments to the Land Development Regulations to support the continued implementation of the Downtown Transit Oriented Development (TOD) overlay standards, including provisions for a 25% density bonus for selected future land use classifications. EXPLANATION OF REQUEST: The proposed amendments would further the codification of TOD regulations that commenced in 2013, and continued in 2014 with the establishment of a Downtown Transit - Oriented Development District within the Comprehensive Plan. Specifically, the proposed amendments would implement Future Land Use Element Policy 1.18.1, which established a Downtown TOD District, and Policy 1.18.2.b, which allows twenty five percent (25 %) density increase for selected future land use classifications within the District. The Comprehensive Plan policies adopted in 2014 gave a broad support to these regulations. First, they established a Downtown TOD District with boundaries coinciding with the Station Area. In addition, they instituted a density increase of up to twenty five percent (25 %) for projects located within the District and classified Special High Density Residential, Mixed Use or Mixed Use -Core Future Land Use. The amendments increased maximum densities for these Future Land Use categories to twenty five (25), fifty (50) and one hundred (100) dwelling units per acre, respectively. Currently, the total number of units within the District is estimated at about 3,100, resulting in the gross area - wide density of 7.027 dwelling units per acre. The Community Center station, a model for the Boynton Beach Downtown TOD District, stipulates optimal densities between 11 and 16 dwelling units per acre. (The density of 11 dwelling units per acre corresponds to 4,862 units in the subject area). The proposed amendment would potentially help to reach this desirable threshold. See accompanying exhibits for a map of the Downtown TOD area, and the proposed changes to the LDR definitions and development standards. HOW WILL THIS AFFECT CITY PROGRAMS OR SERVICES? NA FISCAL IMPACT: NA ALTERNATIVES: None recommended. STRATEGIC PLAN: STRATEGIC PLAN APPLICATION: NA CLIMATE ACTION: No CLIMATE ACTION DISCUSSION: NA Page 289 of 350 Is this a grant? Grant Amount: ATTACHMENTS: REVIEWERS: Department Type Description n Ordinance Ordinance Amending LDRs for TOD sections D Addendum IMap of Downtown TOD District and Future Land Byrne, Nancy Approved Uses D Addendum Proposed Amendments to LDR Definition and 211212015 - 1:50 PIM Finance Development Standards D Addendum Proposed Amendments Development Standards - Pyle, Judith Approved Site Regulations (Table 3-4) D Addendum Proposed Amendments to LDR Development Standards - Mixed Use Districts Descriptions D Addendum Proposed Amendments to Development Standards - Site Standards (Table3-21) D Addendum Proposed Amendments to LDR Development Standards - Overlay Zone Provisions D Addendum Proposed Amendments to LDR Development Standards - Reference to TOD District D Staff Report Staff Report REVIEWERS: Department Reviewer Action Date Planning & Zoning Rumpf, Michael Approved 112612015 - 11:30 AIM Development Byrne, Nancy Approved 112612015 - 11:40 AIM Legal Swanson, Lynn Approved 211212015 - 1:50 PIM Finance Howard, Tim Approved 211212015 - 2:00 PIM City Clerk Pyle, Judith Approved 211312015 - 2:48 PIM Page 290 of 350 1 ORDINANCE NO. 15- 2 3 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, 4 FLORIDA AMENDING THE LAND DEVELOPMENT 5 REGULATIONS, CHAPTER 1, ARTICLE II, DEFINITIONS; 6 CHAPTER 3, ARTICLE III, SECTION 1, OVERVIEW; CHAPTER 7 3, ARTICLE III, SECTION 5; CHAPTER 3, ARTICLE III, 8 SECTION 5; CHAPTER 5, ARTICLE III, SECTION 8, OVERLAY 9 ZONES; AND CHAPTER 4, ARTICLE III, SECTION 6, TO 10 SUPPORT THE CONTINUED IMPLEMENTATION OF THE 11 DOWNTOWN TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT (TOD) 12 OVERLAY STANDARDS, INCLUDING PROVISIONS FOR A 13 25% DENSITY BONUS FOR SELECTED FUTURE LAND USE 14 CLASSIFICATIONS; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS, 15 SEVERABILITY, CODIFICATION AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. 16 17 18 WHEREAS, staff is proposing amendments to the Land Development 19 Regulations (LDR) which would further the codification of TOD regulations that 20 commenced in 2013 and continued in 2014 with the establishment of a Downtown Transit 21 Oriented Development District within the Comprehensive Plan; and 22 WHEREAS, the proposed amendments would implement Future Land Use 23 Element Policy 1.18.1, which established a Downtown TOD District, and Policy 1.18.2.b, 24 which allows twenty -five percent (25 %) density increase for selected future land use 25 classifications within the District; and 26 WHEREAS, the City Commission deems it to be in the best interest of the 27 citizens and residents of the City to amend the Land Development Regulations as 28 proposed to support the continued implementation of the Downtown Transit Oriented 29 Development (TOD) overlay standards, including provisions for a 25% density bonus for 30 selected future land use classifications. 31 NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION 32 OF THE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA, THAT: 33 Section 1 . The foregoing whereas clauses are true and correct and are now Page 291 of 350 1 ratified and confirmed by the City Commission. 2 Section 2. Chapter 1, Article II, Definitions, of the City of Boynton Beach 3 Code of Ordinances, Part III, Land Development Regulations, is hereby amended as 4 follows: 5 STATION AREA A geographic area established for planning and regulatory 6 purposes, and which is characterized by "Compact Development" within a one -half (1/2) 7 mile radius around a transit station. Within the framework of TOD and transit station 8 M 10 planning, this area includes the "Transit Core." See "Transit Corr.." The SIakon Ar, ,� of V, Mile z K1iUS rr: OUL11d, tb,. , znk. °seclioll of OC ,r:rz AVC11LIC LUILI 111 1'101 F,LIS (_'O ,�AS> n�jl Corridor, Ill,. to ,Aioll of ffic E o%v,Wo%v,�n Zlr %,Holt He._zcl? SIakoll Ior ffi 11 I rl, izz�, rl �r,zt,i71 r�.r `1'ri -�. z1 t rrrr >I61 1,iizh . >,.r i r r,z� Il�r 1 1:r r� rrridor, Coincides %villi the 12 E r, z�tcr z� `1 rrr:rz ,il - rir z�I�.cl E )eyelo - ri W Dis> rid E 1 t )ESE,). 13 Section 3. Chapter 3, Article III, Section 1, Overview, of the City of Boynton 14 Beach Code of Ordinances, Part 111, Land Development Regulations, is hereby amended 15 as follows: 16 Page 292 of 350 Zoning Districts and Overlay Zones (LDR Ch. 3. Art. 111. Sec. l.Overview) 2 E. Mixed Use Urban Building and Site Regulations (Table 3 -4). IXED USE, MU -LI MU -L2 MU -L3 MU -H BAN Lot Area, Minimum (acres): Public park: N/A N/A N/A N/A All other uses: 0.50 0.75 1 1 Lot Frontage, 100' 100 150' 200 Mi nimum (feet): Structure Height, 30 30 30 30 Minimum (feet): Classification of Maximum Building /Structure Height (HT), Density (DU), and Floor- Area -Ratio (FAR): project frontage on type of roadway: THTDU"- FAR HT' DU -- FAR' HT' DU_ FAR HT' 6 DU F 3.0/ F F4.0 Arterial: 45 20 1.0 65/100' 30/40 2.0/2.5 75/100' 40 150/125 80 ' F 3.5',' Collector: 45 20 1.0 65 30/40 2.0/2.5 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a — Local Street' : 45 20 1.0 45 30/40 2.0/2.5 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Build-to-line (feet) ": ront abutting a 0'° 0'° 0'° 0'° p ublic right -of -way: Rear: 0'° 0'° 0'° 0'° Interior side: 0'° 0'° 0'° 0'° Building Setbacks, Mi nimum (feet) Rear abutting' . Residential single- 257/01 25 25 7 25 family: Intracoastal 25 25 0' 0 ' waterway: Side abutting' Residential single- 257/07,1 25 25 7 25 family: Usable Open Space, Minimum (square 2 %" feet): 1. Maybe reduced if frontage extends from right -of -way to right -of -way. ormatted: Font: 8 pt, Superscript ormatted: Font: 8 pt, Superscript ormatted: Font: 8 pt, Superscript ormatted: Font: 8 pt, Superscript Page 293 of 350 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 2. Minimum of fifty (50) feet, if frontage is on a collector /local collector roadway. 3. For property abutting the MU -H district located west of US 1, the area of increases in height, density and FAR shall extend a distance of one hundred (100) feet from the MU -H zoning district line and shall require conditional use approval. For properties abutting the MU -H district located east of US 1, the area of increase for height shall extend a distance of one hundred (100) feet from the MU -H zoning district line and shall require conditional use approval; however, no increases in density and FAR are allowed. Must also have principal frontage on arterial roadway. 4. Must also have frontage on local collector or higher roadway classification. 5. Maximum height on any street frontage is forty -five (45) feet. Maximum height on Intracoastal Waterway is thirty -five (35) feet. Heights may require reduction where adjacent to a single - family zoning district where necessary to achieve the compatibility requirements of these regulations. 6. Maximum height reduced to one hundred twenty -five (125) feet for the entire project where property abuts any MU -L or residential zoning district not separated by a right -of -way. 7. Plus one (1) additional foot for each foot of height over thirty -five (3 5) feet. 8. Where there is an intervening right -of -way of at least forty (40) feet. 9. Subject to permitting agency approval. 10. Buildings and structures shall be located no farther than zero (0) feet from the property line, excluding those instances where strict adherence hereto would cause visual obstructions to vehicular traffic, particularly within the triangular- shaped area of property formed by the intersection of two (2) rights -of- way. See Section 5.C.2. below for additional relief provisions from build -to line requirements. 11. Listed eligible historic structures are not required to meet these standards. 12. The ultimate setback is also a factor of height and application of the Sky Exposure Plane in accordance with Section 5.C.3. below. 13. Usable open space shall be required for all developments two (2) acres in size or larger. A minimum of two percent (2 %) of the site shall be devoted to usable open space, consisting of plazas or public open space, excluding private recreation. See Chapter 4, Article III, Section 8 for additional regulations. 14. Projects within the transit core shall have minimum densities as follows: MU -1 -eleven (11), MU -2 - twenty (20), MU -3 - thirty (30) and MU -H - forty (40) dwellings per acre (except that minimum density for the MU -H district applies to projects located within the entire station area). 15. Projects within the transit core shall have a minimum FAR as follows: MU -L3 -one and three - quarters (1.75) and MU -H - two (2.0) (except that minimum FAR for the MU -H district applies to projects to be located within the entire station area). 16. i11e; n1<`Sdinum 41 11:.11: "tm ro'ecl' ;'i 1111111 ° Disiricl t s,,-11a v.! one (11 e S� a l ionl Area 11u be inn e a , ,e 11 =1) to I F 111. 11ee pgvonl V '5"" 01-T1,11'. , IM "JIM1111 c1 11 I Al, wed d in 111e to der1' m zor6 dis° ricf. 38 Section 4. Chapter 3, Article III, Section 5, of the City of Boynton Beach 39 Code of Ordinances, Part III, Land Development Regulations, is hereby amended as 40 follows: 41 Mixed -Use (LJrban) Districts. 42 43 A. General. 44 2. Description of Districts. 45 46 a. Mixed Use -Low Intensity 1 (W -L1). The MU -L1 district implements the 47 mixed use (MX) future land use map (FLUM) classification of the Comprehensive 48 Plan and has a maximum residential density of twenty (20) dwelling units per 49 I acre, ors S—;tr :tt:rSlido?� ;4 45 41r t: �d:— i Page 294 of 350 1 ��;"�._ §��1"a"r. "' �-. : "'e`3 'rr�— t 1 -4i4.. t:`o� €rt:� }� '� \'S��1111 �:Ilt: �� €'j1 \.57� €'j1 \Sl �S tll.'•�S�-(;DISt:11� €C 2 I1 €•v Ir�I)IrI W Di ,hri��1 ; "I1`1 t IE 1E � t §:. r1,.1§ /. €one: ;Ili €. : Itlli €,Sr 3 st€ 1ah71rut€ d nsit , is hv, n 1iy€ ) dAv I1ilz;_1 r nSl DC I ,.l €.. III ,LKIdilir�n 4 I €, c,ll €.d v'ilhilz 111c IS msil c o1 IN. `.Ilako,n AN 'a . >h,lh 11,AV ,1 srtinil7uurt dCI1 >ilV 01 5 e:1 €.r €;n 'H dl vAlin , This minimum density requirement shall be 6 applicable to any such project regardless of whether the site is partially or entirely 7 located within the transit core. 8 9 b. Mixed Use -Low Intensity 2 (W -L2). The MU -L2 district implements Format Justified, widow /orphan cont rol '_ 10 the mixed use (MX) future land use map (FLUM) classification of the 11 Comprehensive Plan and has a maximum residential density of thirty (30) 12 dwelling units per acre,S 13 rr §av—£ r €:i llrzli 111c, E.)c, Ilk", zr 1 S, li ,SI- 14 Clsi€ Wed, E cv'€ lo'IneW Dis�ric 1 ! "I 1`1 t IE 7E , t §v rlm /olle r Ili €. `.I1'11€ ll A'r €x,.1 1r€ r€ 15 1h €. St €,l6171ut€ LICIT Sl ` is ffiif , ev'€.n , d' a IM11 I 5 '1 d%v I1ilz tl lilS € S LWI—C. In 16 rciclfion, I+S a j €.€ s I €, c,ll %v lhin 111 €. Core o1 ffi flltlkoll Arc "_1 S €r11 1111AV €r 17 st €inil7 ldrl cI€ IISih 01 hvQll ? r ' ()) c1 %vcI1in ttnil�> 1�€ 5�,1 €_r€ . —This minimum density 18 requirement shall be applicable to any such project regardless of whether the site 19 is partially or entirely located within the transit core. 20 21 a. Mixed Use -Low Intensity 3 (W -L3). The MU -L3 district implements- - -- Formatted: Justified, indent: Left: se pt, 22 the mixed use (MX) future land use map (FLUM) classification of the Widow /orphan control 23 Comprehensive Plan and has a maximum residential density of forty (40) dwelling 24 units per acre.r§S ri§r:t:rS §ido? 8i 511ir: t:: 1 =: § i1 25 k,r ilrl +r rr §ate£. ,.r €: �>I hill Ili €: 1)c, S l €, zr I S li•it -t i €:S le i1 26 I1 €y€.lo € €.nl Di hid (I)`1tIE 11)) Zone: Ili €. Sltlkoll Afea), %\11cre fic 27 stl lailrr� stl cl€ nsit 1 , 1iI l '.. c1 € 11i1z r111Sl > € r ,l €.. In '1. 1ddi1ioll i)ro d > to ,11e:;d1 28 %v lhin fi IS llesil Core o1 Ili €. `SI ak€ ll Arc "_1 S €r11 ht,V €r srtinil7lrurt cI € IISil ' 01 111il 29 ; €1 d%v, Ihn; Anil. jLc ,1 €_rc. This minimum density requirement shall be 30 applicable to any such project regardless of whether the site is partially or entirely 31 located within the transit core. 32 33 d. Mixed Use -High Intensity (W -H). The MU -H district implements the 34 mixed use core (MX -C) future land use map (FLUM) classification of the 35 Comprehensive Plan and has a maximum residential density of eighty (80) 36 dwelling units per acre p rilhin th €. E 1 €,arnl €, n 1 S llzsit -t Iii €.nl€ cI 37 I1 €y€.lo € €.nl Di hid (I)`1tIE 11)) Zone: Ili €. Sltlkoll Afea), %\11cre fic 38 st€ L61 stl cI €.nsi iS 11WILIl €•c1 d%v I1ilz;_ tu?SI DC I ?LWI . III ,LKId'lir�n. 39 I €, c,ll €:;d ,vilhin ffic `.Il;rkoll Ar€ a Sh €r11 h lr € €r St €inic7 kill cI €.Sr: >i 01 111i l ;;....��'. 40 Ian €.11i1z UdlilS 1a€ r ,lcwr €;. This minimum density requirement shall be applicable to 41 any such project regardless of whether the site is partially or entirely located 42 within the transit core. The intent of this district is to supplant the central business 43 district (CBD) in the historic downtown and marina district. 44 45 3. Location and General Use Requirements. 46 c. Mixed Use -High Intensity (W -H). 47 (2) The MU -H district is appropriate for high density /intensity 48 development intended for the downtown area, which is generally located east of Page 295 of 350 1 the FEC Railroad, including the marina district, and which extends out from the 2 planned train station by approximately three (3) to four (4) blocks. Such 3 developments shall include a mix of uses designed in a compact vertical style. 4 Developments proposed within Iii. Do %v,Wo%vn E X y'c1o nl 5 i dish - icl O jai> v /.on (the `.station Affrea must contain a residential component 6 and have space on the first floor which shall be devoted to commercial uses for 7 those portions of the project having frontage along Ocean Avenue or an arterial 8 road. 9 10 Section 5. Chapter 3, Article III, Section 5, of the City of Boynton Beach 11 Code of Ordinances, Part III, Land Development Regulations, is hereby amended as 12 follows: 13 C. Building and Site Regulations. 14 1. Building and Site Regulation (Table 3 -21). 15 IXED USE, MU -L1 MU -L2 MU -L3 MU -H BAN Lot Area, Minimum (acres): Public park: N/A N/A N/A N/A All other uses: 0.50 0.75 1 1 Lot Frontage, 100 100 150 200 Mi nimum (feet): Structure Height, 30 30 30 30 Minimum (feet): Classification of Maximum Building /Structure Height (HT), Density (DU), and Floor- Area -Ratio (FAR): project frontage on type of roadway: THTDU.4- FAR HT' DU "' ' FAR' HT' DU B FAR HT' 6 DU FARy F 3.0/ F Arterial: 45 20 1.0 65/100' 30/40 2.0/2.5 75/100' 40, 150/125 80 4.0 3.5 3,15 F Collector: 45 20 1.0 65 30/40 2.0/2.5 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a F Local Street' : 45 20 1.0 45 30/40 2.0/2.5 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Bur ld -to -line (feet) ront abutting a 0'° 0'° 0'° 0'° p ublic right -of -way: Rear: 0'° 0'° 0'° 0'° ormatted: Font: 8 pt, Superscript ormatted: Font: 8 pt, Superscript ormatted: Font: 8 pt, Superscript ormatted: Font: 8 pt, Superscript Page 296 of 350 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 In terior side: 0'° 0'° 0'° 0'° B uilding Setbacks, N/li nimurn (feet) R ear abutting' . Residential single- 257/01 25 25 7 25 family: Intracoastal 25 25 0' 0 ' waterway: Side abutting' Residential single- 257/07,1 25 25 7 25 family: U sable Open Space, Nfi nimurn (square 2 %" feet): 1. Maybe reduced if frontage extends from right -of -way to right -of -way. 2. Minimum of fifty (50) feet, if frontage is on a collector /local collector roadway. 3. For property abutting the MU -H district located west of US 1, the area of increases in height, density and FAR shall extend a distance of one hundred (100) feet from the MU -H zoning district line and shall require conditional use approval. For properties abutting the MU -H district located east of US 1, the area of increase for height shall extend a distance of one hundred (100) feet from the MU -H zoning district line and shall require conditional use approval; however, no increases in density and FAR are allowed. Must also have principal frontage on arterial roadway. 4. Must also have frontage on local collector or higher roadway classification. 5. Maximum height on any street frontage is forty -five (45) feet. Maximum height on Intracoastal Waterway is thirty -five (35) feet. Heights may require reduction where adjacent to a single - family zoning district where necessary to achieve the compatibility requirements of these Regulations. 6. Maximum height reduced to one hundred twenty -five (125) feet for the entire project where property abuts any MU -L or residential zoning district not separated by a right -of -way. 7. Plus one (1) additional foot for each foot of height over thirty -five (3 5) feet. 8. Where there is an intervening right -of -way of at least forty (40) feet. 9. Subject to permitting agency approval. 10. Buildings and structures shall be located no farther than zero (0) feet from the property line, excluding those instances where strict adherence hereto would cause visual obstructions to vehicular traffic, particularly within the triangular- shaped area of property formed by the intersection of two (2) rights -of- way. See Section 5.C.2. below for additional relief provisions from build -to line requirements. 11. Listed eligible historic structures are not required to meet these standards. 12. The ultimate setback is also a factor of height and application of the Sky Exposure Plane in accordance with Section 5.C.3. below. 13. Usable open space shall be required for all developments two (2) acres in size or larger. A minimum of two percent (2 %) of the site shall be devoted to usable open space, consisting of plazas or public open space, excluding private recreation. See Chapter 4, Article III, Section 8 for additional regulations. 14. Projects within the transit core shall have minimum densities as follows: MU -1 -eleven (11), MU -2 - twenty (20), MU -3 - thirty (30) and MU -H - forty (40) dwellings per acre (except that minimum density for the MU -H district applies to projects located within the entire station area). 15. Projects within the transit core shall have a minimum FAR as follows: MU -L3 -one and three - quarters (1.75) and MU -H - two (2.0) (except that minimum FAR for the MU -H district applies to projects to be located within the entire station area). 10. 1lie; nY<`a dinum Cl tIsi " 1m ro'ecl' ;'i i liin D isiricl �tl,t,`rrai 1 1iE�`,Patti� rat fit° s�ta; ruarE - , ;E� x s�� .1�ee 1 r E - s�� '' %ertheIna"Jinum cl 11 i , Al,wed in diet 1 dnderl'Yiht 7011111 di" 460. 3. Additional Standards. See Chapter 4, Article III, Section 6 .H. for additional Page 297 of 350 1 standards related to urban design and building location for properties located in within the 2 transit core of +, 11it. 1 o%y,ill'a1G'il 1 i >tilsil -t iit nlf.cl E 1t vt.lo E 1is> rid t vt rt >t ' Zpint; 3 Hhe S tation A- real_ . 4 Section 6. Chapter 3, Article III, Section 8, Overlay Zones of the City of 5 Boynton Beach Code of Ordinances, Part 111, Land Development Regulations, is hereby 6 amended as follows: 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 F. 1), mill, nrrr d")'/ (11�erk 1' 'o 1. IlllcW. " his overl /olle igi rotas llofic No.1.141.1 X11 11it. t olli llellsivt 11Ln S Ffltlfrt. 1.?t11LI Use Fl rota il�hicll t.sabllslt.s tht. 1)`1 t )DI 1 lo If111d i.It.yE.lo micill ML0lCl — l1S ?tIf' U.l1d, 1I1 11. U.l - . Sr ,0:i0ll 01 llie 71?tllllCd, C€ MI . CIA'iC . 111e Ovt rt t /011E. S ICLfl .1 1111 - 1 r enh1- 1-mc". 1111; ViSi011 t inb0dit;1 I 1 iiiiat it- it. >lr iiliil dig rids ilith ilit it. >1 >t.ct d n >i >tlld ilile mil is 111;11 as . >lifln t itit illf • >i�, yin illl'l - C llilCCky' l;' lh f'att}11101,0 llit MCd. I e illt.'.i . The 11E 1 v rl >t !fain. Coincides %\ illi 11it. f'Ittkoll Ale" f'aI q tr , lilill l8diUS ?UOU.11d, 1111. ifflels .Boll of i ce"-m AVC11flt. LUld, flt. 1`101 - id t E.rt31 ( fa N 1 ,1'il t.orrii.lf'ar , %\Iiicll is ffic alllicj k.'d. Ioc.,tAioll of 11 1)f)"a\Sllf'%Vll Hf'1 oll Ebt. ?tell S'Nioll 161 - ffiC DILUllltat i o'er - tS > al I ink sen'ice oil ffic FEC Corridor. ... at.Slt.1'r1.t. See }_tct[1SISf'a11}t1 SldllldLULk }tllcl I - C� I f#ifCMCIll.S IiV rill N t.cl f #'3f. ftiit - ) 11 clr,lric" s b tsed. fail llie jLmj ,ilnill" to lti li tiil'olttlioll ill I11t —.' Artit"tt. III, .` eclioll 5.A. -1. I 1 .5 Allmy t d. For ffic DT ODD, 1E 16 'LdI y Cd it. >l.s LUC iNAS L1 fail ffiC 1111LICI /f'ailill dis rid. See Use U'flii� TI A)Ie 3 -2'e" ill ( 'hf11)1C i 3'. Arlicl; IS `."edioll 31). 5. I1f#ildill dllcl SflC I1!C LitLlifails. 'SC ( ld )z Cl 3 Aflicle III., _1t.ctroll S.(-'. >'sdd lion >tl `SI alldards. `'Sec (A la )t r -I Article III.. `Iedioll 6.11. I lr >tciclili�inill S> d lld,LULIS r 1,LdCLI tO1f1 )MI cte>i dild bflildin- If ct Oion lor jLr_(2t ) ilics Ioc cd. 1\ilt"ii11 ffic i ort. of Ihc. `.Ild troll 1rt f1. Page 298 of 350 1 Section 7. Chapter 4, Article III, Section 6, of the City of Boynton Beach 2 Code of Ordinances, Part III, Land Development Regulations, is hereby amended as 3 follows: 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 B. Building Location. 1. General. The revitalization of urban places depends on safety and security, with building /street design having a symbiotic relationship. The location of a building and its proximity /interaction with the public realm is paramount when trying to create urban areas that have a "sense of place" that is consistent with smart growth principles and neo- traditional planning efforts. Development must adequately accommodate automobiles, but in ways that respect pedestrians and the forms of public space and gathering areas. 2. Standards. a. Each building shall meet the build -to line and reduced setback areas of the respective zoning district or Overlay Zone, whichever is applicable. The location of off - street parking areas is strongly discouraged between buildings and rights -of -way. However, in certain instances, this type of design may be impractical, and strict adherence may deter incremental improvements or upgrades to individual properties, which therefore, perpetuates the blighted conditions of the redevelopment areas. In these circumstances, deviations from the build -to line and reduced setback area requirements may be allowed, but only contingent the submittal of a Community Design Appeal application that satisfactorily addresses the evaluation criteria and when such application is approved by the City Commission. b. Within mixed -use and non - residential developments, structures proposed along arterial roadways shall be required to occupy the entire length of the street frontage, notwithstanding adjustments for cross - visibility, and open areas devoted to public gathering or pedestrian circulation. This building location requirement along the arterial roadway only applies to new construction or major site plan modifications to existing developments. Also see Chapter 4, Article IL Section 4 .13.5. for additional streetscape design requirements. c. For properties fronting on arterial and collector roadways within o %v, o%v11 1 z izsit -t ii�.z�I� l E icy l p liu. , W E iis, rig � t v rlr /.on . the `station � iirea), building location and design shall contribute to a "streetwall" of pedestrian scale, so as to prevent any interruptions to building massing, except in limited circumstances to promote project functionality as determined by the Director of Planning and Zoning. Interruptions in the streetwall shall be limited to those necessary to accommodate pedestrian pass - throughs, public plazas, entry forecourts, and permitted vehicular access driveways when access is not available from a local street. F. Off - Street Parking Area Standards 5. Miscellaneous Standards. Page 299 of 350 1 f. Off - Street Parking for Station Area. See Section 6.H. below for additional standards 2 regarding off - street parking areas located within the E o %y, Wo %v,gin '1_r msfl - 0iicWcd 3 E )L QjLnLwW Di, 6_1 ) cfh_ � I r Zone ;the station Aareal. 4 Section 8. Should any section or provision of this Ordinance or any portion 5 thereof be declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such decision shall 6 not affect the remainder of this Ordinance. 7 Section 9. Authority is hereby given to codify this Ordinance. 8 Section 10. This Ordinance shall become effective immediately. 9 FIRST READING this day of 1 2015. 10 SECOND, FINAL READING AND PASSAGE this day of 11 2015. 12 CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA 13 14 15 16 Mayor — Jerry Taylor 17 18 Vice Mayor — Joe Casello 19 20 Commissioner — David T. Merker 21 22 Commissioner — Mack McCray 23 24 Commissioner — Michael M. Fitzpatrick 25 26 27 VOTE 28 29 ATTEST: 30 31 32 33 Janet M. Prainito, MMC 34 City Clerk 35 36 37 38 (Corporate Seal) 39 YES NO Page 300 of 350 EXHIBIT 2 -A DOWNTOWN TRANSIT - ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FUTURE LAND USES Legend Land Use SPECIAL HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (SHDR) AGRICULTURE (A) MIXED USE SUBURBAN (MXS) LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (LDR) Max. 5.00 D.U./Acre OFFICE COMMERCIAL(OC) RECREATIONAL (R) DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT (DRI) MODERATE DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (MODR) Max. 7.5 D.U./Acre LOCAL RETAIL COMMERCIAL (LRC) PUBLIC & PRIVATE GOVERN M ENTAUINSTITUTIONAL (PPGI) CONSERVATION (CON) MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (MEDR) Max. 10.00 D.U./Acre GENERAL COMMERCIAL (GC) MIXED USE (MX) CONSERVATION OVERLAY (CIO) HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (HDR) Max. 11.00 D.U./Acre ?: INDUSTRIAL (I) _ MIXED USE CORE (MXC) Page 301 of 350 EXHIBIT 2 - B TOD (OVERLAY PROVISIONS INCLUDING DENSITY BONUS) Definitions (LDR, Chapter 1, Article 11): Page 302 of 350 EXHIBIT 2 — C TOD (OVERLAY PROVISIONS INCLUDING DENSITY BONUS) Zoning Districts and Overlay Zones (LDR Ch. 3. Art. HL Sec. l.Overview) E. Mixed Use Urban Building and Site Regulations (Table 3 -4). MIXED USE, MU -LI MU -L2 MU -L3 MU -H URBAN Lot Area, Minimum (acres): Public park: N/A N/A N/A N/A All other uses: 0.50 0.75 1 1 Lot Frontage, 100' 100 150' 200 Minimum (feet): Structure Height, 30 30 30 30 Minimum (feet): Classification of Maximum Building/Structure Height (FFf), Density (DU), and Floor- Area -Ratio (FAR): project frontage on type of roadway: HT DU' - FAR HT' DU- FAR' HT' DU' FAR HT '° DU FAR 3.0/ Arterial: 45 20 1.0 65/100 30/40 2.0/2.5 75/100' 40 150/125 80" 4.0' 3.5' Collector: 45 20 1.0 65 30/40 2.0/2.5 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Local Street' : 45 20 1.0 45 30/40 2.0/2.5 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Build -to -line (feet) ": Front abutting a 0'° 0'° 0'° 0'° p ublic right -of -way: Rear: 0'° 0'° 0'° 0'° Interior side: 0'° 0'° 0'° 0'° Building Setbacks, Minimum (feet) " Rear abutting' Residential single- 257/01 25 7 25 7 25 7 family: Intracoastal 25 25 0' 0 ' waterway: Side abutting' Residential single- 25 7/07,1 25 7 25 7 25 7 family: Usable Open Space, Minimum (square 2 %" feet): Formatted: Font: 8 pt, Superscript Formatted: Font: 8 pt, Superscript J ) Formatted: Font: 8 pt, Superscript Formatted: Font: 8 pt, Superscript Page 303 of 350 EXHIBIT 2 - C 1. Maybe reduced if frontage extends from right -of -way to right -of -way. 2. Minimum of fifty (50) feet, if frontage is on a collector /local collector roadway. 3. For property abutting the MU -H district located west of US 1, the area of increases in height, density and FAR shall extend a distance of one hundred (100) feet from the MU -H zoning district line and shall require conditional use approval. For properties abutting the MU -H district located east of US 1, the area of increase for height shall extend a distance of one hundred (100) feet from the MU -H zoning district line and shall require conditional use approval; however, no increases in density and FAR are allowed. Must also have principal frontage on arterial roadway. 4. Must also have frontage on local collector or higher roadway classification. 5. Maximum height on any street frontage is forty -five (45) feet. Maximum height on Intracoastal Waterway is thirty -five (35) feet. Heights may require reduction where adjacent to a single - family zoning district where necessary to achieve the compatibility requirements of these regulations. 6. Maximum height reduced to one hundred twenty -five (125) feet for the entire project where property abuts any MU -L or residential zoning district not separated by a right -of -way. 7. Plus one (1) additional foot for each foot of height over thirty -five (35) feet. 8. Where there is an intervening right -of -way of at least forty (40) feet. 9. Subject to permitting agency approval. 10. Buildings and structures shall be located no farther than zero (0) feet from the property line, excluding those instances where strict adherence hereto would cause visual obstructions to vehicular traffic, particularly within the triangular- shaped area of property formed by the intersection of two (2) rights -of -way. See Section 5.C.2. below for additional relief provisions from build -to line requirements. 11. Listed eligible historic structures are not required to meet these standards. 12. The ultimate setback is also afactor of height and application of the Sky Exposure Plane in accordance with Section 5.C.3. below. 13. Usable open space shall be required for all developments two (2) acres in size or larger. A minimum of two percent (2 %) of the site shall be devoted to usable open space, consisting of plazas or public open space, excluding private recreation. See Chapter 4, Article III, Section 8 for additional regulations. 14. Projects within the transit core shall have minimum densities as follows: MU -1 -eleven (11), MU -2 -twenty (20), MU -3 - thirty (30) and MU -H - forty (40) dwellings per acre (except that minimum density for the MU -H district applies to projects located within the entire station area). 15. Projects within the transit core shall have a minimum FAR as follows: MU -L3 -one and three - quarters (1.75) and MU -H -two (2.0) (except that minimum FAR for the MU -H district applies to projects to be located within the entire station area). y 1 (7. 1 �Ir„ nYtyVIll YtdS'TY C� IL.YI ",' IctY° l�sl `t'1 <i 'i YI�IYiY 1�1e � 9�ti 111t3'i� 11 1 Y; §IYf; Y� f 3Y Yr,tlll r�C� � P,.4 r,t �t31 }Illr,tlll � )Y:'iY Ya 1 f 34 E�Y 'li� ,' t��tll E� t t�ir,t "`rv1ii2Yt311 3.Y .tt§ i S'TY § �"I � YTYi;Y § r,. C� t? 1�t 1T r,tlll � ( ( , r,tY'a,r 111 �� '� tt4 r,tY Lyle 11 Y<`SV(ll YtdS'I'Y c� 11 YI � r ���ti r,EC� YTY L�iE� al -YTY 1ttl IYIY COY °,IYY "i Page 304 of 350 EXHIBIT 2 - D TOD (OVERLAY PROVISIONS INCLUDING DENSITY BONUS) Zoning Districts and Overlay Zoning (LDR Ch 3. Art. III. Sec. 5) Mixed -Use (Urban) Districts. A. Ueneral. 2. Description of Districts. a. Mixed Use -Low Intensity 1 (MU -L 1). The MU -L 1 district implements the mixed use (MX) future land use map (FLUM) classification of the Comprehensive Plan and has a maximum residential density of twenty (20) dwelling units per acre,: ( }1°ienlecl I Iek'C l< L. ) Il11`111 11i.";Cric1 I I l ( MI � Overla !,one ; a Slallon r`'11°ef3 \N liege 1I1C 111,'1 - Min den ily 1y IyNen1y f1ye 3, L ) 1hNCIiln? 1u111i l)er acre. lil �C�1��111 <}ZL. l?l <>� 1; I <1 1 1�I yy'1I11111 1I1 I1�111siI d}l <>I 111 1 I1 11 1 iii III liakv a T 1lli111111111 den il of cl1 kyii ( 1 U.11ils -)er acr . This minimum density requirement shall be applicable to any such project regardless of whether the site is partially or entirely located within the transit core. b. Mixed Use -Low Intensity 2 (MU -L2). The MU -L2 district implements Formatted: Justified the mixed use (MX) future land use map (FLUM) classification of the Comprehensive Plan and has a maximum residential density of thirty (30) dwelling units per acre, is sir:ilruril3: rte : -�.i is rte -�; ;a�� =� l €���= —I?-i: � �1 .: =sue •. ��,.� � � +� �� 1�1i1i1 Il�� I I< zi�< 1� 11 r1il.�i1- ()1°ienled l<un 11`111I i.";ric1 (f)lOIIII , t Overla / ne l lip ` r " y IIIC 111,'1 d 11 i1y 11 1111n y ; t' 1 1111E I1lfl t 1 1�I1yIf111 1�1L11 l #1'T r1�`l�`. In add 1fini l?i Ieas located VN, Ili ii 1lic 11i111tsil core t11 11ic ` Area sllall I1av �. 1 IZ11i1111,11 d 11.y11y <11 1yy nly (2 0LLhNCIIi1V L1,1111 re. —This TTllmmum density requirement shall be applicable to any such project regardless of whether the site is partially or entirely located within the transit core. c. Mixed Use -Low Intensity 3 (MU -L3). The MU -L3 district implements t Formatted: indent: Left: se pt the mixed use (MX) future land use map (FLUM) classification of the Comprehensive Plan and has a maximum residential density of forty (40) dwelling units per acre_ is s11 $i. 1:? lit6 ll is -�; O iei1led Dey l <>l)111011 Di yricl 1�lTl llll) ll F' ,t>11 ( l lull 1 1 Iiere 1IIC 111i1 1 den ily DI; 1Ifi l d\N `llilh! 11111 y 1? i 1 In Ilddilio )role lis l ocated \N,1111111 11ic Ir "In sit core of llie `"t1i111on Are h,'11i 111T11111u1 deasily' of I1i111y (X0 dvN, e llil- 1111I S Del it IV. -This minimum density requirement shall be applicable to any such project regardless of whether the site is partially or entirely located within the transit core. Page 305 of 350 EXHIBIT 2 - D d. Mixed Use -High Intensity (MU -H). The MU -H district implements the mixed use core (MX -C) future land use map (FLUM) classification of the Comprehensive Plan and has a maximum residential density of eighty (80) dwelling units per acre, �% 1i1 vi itliiil the 1 - � mui1 <>i 1i 1 11,11 - 1 ri 111 it D eyel < ip 111em 1 isffi11 .. }1 � ) )t' 1 1s1 F ' <i1i ; a "1 f 11 1()11 r1r s ?)..11 the IlUI°11111U.ind 11.111E 1tv liluidre 10 0 ChNC1111121 1u111S - )era re. 111ilddilwil ?ro ectis l ocated 1(111iii1 11ie �Slallon r`' re h,'111 li l' 111111111 - Min dens11 F of Ili11w 30,! dvN, C llilW, L1.11i1 liar ac re . This minimum density requirement shall be applicable to any such project regardless of whether the site is partially or entirely located within the transit core. The intent of this district is to supplant the central business district (CBD) in the historic downtown and marina district. 3. Location and General Use Requirements. c. Mixed Use -High Intensity (MU -H). (2) The MU -H district is appropriate for high density /intensity development intended for the downtown area, which is generally located east of the FEC Railroad, including the marina district, and which extends out from the planned train station by approximately three (3) to four (4) blocks. Such developments shall include a mix of uses designed in a compact vertical style. Developments proposed within 11ie DovN, 1i1mN, 1i 1 r i1111s`11- Oriente 1 De%` 1 <) - )me111 111 u - ic1 Oyerla bone (the S tation A irea) must contain a residential component and have space on the first floor which shall be devoted to commercial uses for those portions of the project having frontage along Ocean Avenue or an arterial road. Page 306 of 350 EXHIBIT 2 - E TOD (OVERLAY PROVISIONS INCLUDING DENSITY BONUS) Zoning Districts and Overlay Zones (LDR Ch. 3, Art. III., Sec. 5.) C. Building and Site Regulations. 1. Building and Site Regulation (Table 3 -21). MIXED USE, MU -LI MU -L2 MU -L3 MU -H URBAN Lot Area, Minimum (acres): Public park: N/A N/A N/A N/A All other uses: 0.50 0.75 1 1 Lot Frontage, 100' 100 150' 200 Minimum (feet): Structure Height, 30 30 30 30 Minimum (feet): Classification of Maximum Building/Structure Height (FIT), Density (DU), and Floor- Area -Ratio (FAR): project frontage on type of roadway HT DU ''- FAR HT' DU 3 ' 4 FAR' HT' DU'._ FAR HT '° DU _ FAR 3.0/ Arterial: 45 20 1.0 65/100 30/40 2.0/2.5 75/100' 40- 150/125 80 4.0' 3.5' Collector: 45 20 1.0 65 30/40 2.0/2.5 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Local Street' : 45 20 1.0 45 30/40 2.0/2.5 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Build -to -line (feet) ": Front abutting a 0'° 0'° 0'° 0'° p ublic right -of -way: Rear: 0'° 0'° 0'° 0'° Interior side: 0'° 0'° 0'° 0'° Building Setbacks, Minimum (feet) Rear abutting' Residential single- 257/01 25 7 25 7 25 7 family: Intracoastal 25 25 0, 0 ' waterway: Side abutting' Residential single- 25 7/07,1 25 7 25 7 25 7 family: Usable Open Space, Minimum (square 2 %" feet): { Formatted: Font: 8 pt, Superscript f Formatted: Font: 8 pt, Superscript C F ormatted: Font: 8 pt, Superscript Formatted: Font: 8 pt, Superscript Page 307 of 350 EXHIBIT 2 - E 1. Maybe reduced if frontage extends from right -of -way to right -of -way. 2. Minimum of fifty (50) feet, if frontage is on a collector /local collector roadway. 3. For property abutting the MU -H district located west of US 1, the area of increases in height, density and FAR shall extend a distance of one hundred (100) feet from the MU -H zoning district line and shall require conditional use approval. For properties abutting the MU -H district located east of US 1, the area of increase for height shall extend a distance of one hundred (100) feet from the MU -H zoning district line and shall require conditional use approval; however, no increases in density and FAR are allowed. Must also have principal frontage on arterial roadway. 4. Must also have frontage on local collector or higher roadway classification. 5. Maximum height on any street frontage is forty -five (45) feet. Maximum height on Intracoastal Waterway is thirty -five (35) feet. Heights may require reduction where adjacent to a single - family zoning district where necessary to achieve the compatibility requirements of these Regulations. 6. Maximum height reduced to one hundred twenty -five (125) feet for the entire project where property abuts any MU -L or residential zoning district not separated by a right -of -way. 7. Plus one (1) additional foot for each foot of height over thirty -five (35) feet. 8. Where there is an intervening right -of -way of at least forty (40) feet. 9. Subject to permitting agency approval. 10. Buildings and structures shall be located no farther than zero (0) feet from the property line, excluding those instances where strict adherence hereto would cause visual obstructions to vehicular traffic, particularly within the triangular- shaped area of property formed by the intersection of two (2) rights -of -way. See Section 5.C.2. below for additional relief provisions from build -to line requirements. 11. Listed eligible historic structures are not required to meet these standards. 12. The ultimate setback is also afactor of height and application of the Sky Exposure Plane in accordance with Section 5.C.3. below. 13. Usable open space shall be required for all developments two (2) acres in size or larger. A minimum of two percent (2 %) of the site shall be devoted to usable open space, consisting of plazas or public open space, excluding private recreation. See Chapter 4, Article III, Section 8 for additional regulations. 14. Projects within the transit core shall have minimum densities as follows: MU -1 -eleven (11), MU -2 -twenty (20), MU -3 - thirty (30) and MU -H - forty (40) dwellings per acre (except that minimum density for the MU -H district applies to projects located within the entire station area). 15. Projects within the transit core shall have a minimum FAR as follows: MU -L3 -one and three - quarters (1.75) and MU -H -two (2.0) (except that minimum FAR for the MU -H district applies to projects to be located within the entire station area). y 1 (7. 1 �Ir„ nYtyVIll YtdS'TY C� IL.YI ",' IctY° l�sl `t'1 <i 'i YI�IYiY file � 9�ti 111t3'i� 11 1 Y; §IYf; Y� f 3Y Yr,tlll r�C� � P,.4 r,t�aplllr,tlll � )Y:'iY Ya 1 f 34 E�Y 'li� ,' t��tll E� ' Liir� "rv1ii2Yt311 3Y tt §i STY § i�� YTYi;Y § r C� t? 1�t11 rtlll � ( . ( ,rtY °a,r 111 �� '� tt4rtY Lire llY<`Sy(llYtdSl'Y c� 11 YI � r ���ti rEC� YTY LiiE� t?l111 `lI -YTY 1ttl IYIYC�Y °,IYY"i 3. Additional Standards. See Chapter 4, Article III, Section 6 .H. for additional standards related to urban design and building location for properties located in within the transit core of +f ffic D eloI )Irle w E is, ric. Ovei Zone ffli ' A- ,rrea't . Page 308 of 350 EXHIBIT 2 - F TOD (OVERLAY PROVISIONS INCLUDING DENSITY BONUS) Zoning Districts and Overlay Zones (LDR, Ch 3, Art. M., Sec. 8. Overlay Zones) L. Dow ntown ti rrr,wl - r1err ecI t'r "' t €Jr7 1 , i tl.� 'ic t ?rye rrl rt° t Y' 1, hit nt. This �wlav Corte inrtl-rlerrrertts Policv No, 1.1L8.1 of the Conmrdlensi��e Plan's future Land Use Element which establishes the fI'F0Qfl to rrrtl:s -g e I�r, deg, el l tYrerrl l rr.88errts around the fit8rtre station of thel)lanned commuter ser;-iree. The o e lav one' fe -at trey fi�trther enh�r.n e the � i ion eryiborPier P l)� mir�erP -rt e zonin districts with increased rPert itv and intent itv as well as strortu ernr on interne rtrtecti ; itv thr u0mo tt the area, I Defined, The DT ODD \ erla, one coincides with the Station Area of a/2 Mile r adius around the intersection of Ocean Ay yen e and the Florida East Coast aril corridor which is the antic - ated location of 'the Downtown Boynton Beach Station for the slrr.rtrterrl to ommtiter Fri -Rail Coastal Link ser \-ire e on the I LI 'tin idor v8. General, See additional standards (urban) district based on the proximity to the Dianned train station in CIra.I:rter 3 Article Ill, Secli rt 5.A. 4, I ����,��� �rP. I ��r �.Er l I1 ; fll r.���,��� rP rr� r.r based on the r ndel itr'�> �s�rrirr > district, See Use ht rix ", Table-" -28 in I IratIpter 3, Article 1V Section 3),Q, Buildinu and Site ller >rtIatrons, See Char.)f r 31 Ar Ill Section 5,C' 6, Additional Standards, See f'Ita I:ler 41 Article Ill lleclion ry >.I-I, fbr additional standards related to urban deem n and boil itru location fir rm oper°ties located within Blte transit core of the Station n Area, Page 309 of 350 EXHIBIT 2 - G TOD (OVERLAY PROVISIONS INCLUDING DENSITY BONUS) Exterior Building and Site Design Standards (LDR, Ch. 4, Art. HI., Sec. 6.) B. Building Location. 1. General. The revitalization of urban places depends on safety and security, with building /street design having a symbiotic relationship. The location of a building and its proximity /interaction with the public realm is paramount when trying to create urban areas that have a "sense of place" that is consistent with smart growth principles and neo- traditional planning efforts. Development must adequately accommodate automobiles, but in ways that respect pedestrians and the forms of public space and gathering areas. 2. Standards. a. Each building shall meet the build -to line and reduced setback areas of the respective zoning district or Overlay Zone, whichever is applicable. The location of off - street parking areas is strongly discouraged between buildings and rights -of -way. However, in certain instances, this type of design may be impractical, and strict adherence may deter incremental improvements or upgrades to individual properties, which therefore, perpetuates the blighted conditions of the redevelopment areas. In these circumstances, deviations from the build -to line and reduced setback area requirements may be allowed, but only contingent the submittal of a Community Design Appeal application that satisfactorily addresses the evaluation criteria and when such application is approved by the City Commission. b. Within mixed -use and non - residential developments, structures proposed along arterial roadways shall be required to occupy the entire length of the street frontage, notwithstanding adjustments for cross - visibility, and open areas devoted to public gathering or pedestrian circulation. This building location requirement along the arterial roadway only applies to new construction or major site plan modifications to existing developments. Also see Chapter 4, Article II Section 4 .13.5. for additional streetscape design requirements. c. For properties fronting on arterial and collector roadways within Downtown Transit- Oriented Lie eh)Dtnent District ; erlav one the S- station Ai rea , building location and design shall contribute to a "streetwall" of pedestrian scale, so as to prevent any interruptions to building massing, except in limited circumstances to promote project functionality as determined by the Director of Planning and Zoning. Interruptions in the streetwall shall be limited to those necessary to accommodate pedestrian pass - throughs, public plazas, entry forecourts, and permitted vehicular access driveways when access is not available from a local street. F. Off - Street Parking Area Standards 5. Miscellaneous Standards. f. Off - Street Parking for Station Area. See Section 6.H. below for additional standards regarding off - street parking areas located within the Downtown Transit-Oriented Transit-Oriented Deyeh DiTient District crl r: r rrc the Station Aareal. Page 310 of 350 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT PLANNING AND ZONING Memorandum PZ 14 -047 TO: Chair and Members Planning & Development Board FROM: Michael Rumpf Planning and Zoning Director DATE: January 21, 2015 RE: Interim LDR Amendments (CDRV 15 -001) To include 1) Provisions for the new zoning use Medical Care or Testing (In Patient) 2) Continued codification of the Transit - Oriented Development (TOD) overlay development standards; 3) Amendments to the sign standards applicable to commercial uses in certain M -1 zoning districts; 4) Amendments to sign regulations to facilitate certain improvements to non - conforming signs at shopping centers; and 5) The decrease in parking requirements for hotels. OVERVIEW The rewrite of the City's Land Development Regulations (LDR) allowed staff to perform a complete review and analysis of each standard, regulation, and process. As part of the post- adoption process, staff anticipates the periodic need for, and is prepared to expeditiously process, updates and amendments to the LDR for one or more of the following reasons: 1. Furthering business and economic development initiatives; 2. Advancing sustainability initiatives; 3. Maintaining internal consistency; 4. Achieving regulatory compliance; and 5. Incorporating implementation feedback necessary to meet original or current objectives and vision. The proposed amendments would further items #1 "business and economic development initiatives "; #2 "Advancing sustainability initiatives, and #4 "achieving regulatory compliance ", as well as facilitate the physical improvement of the streetscape. t00050878.1 306 - 9001821 } - I - Page 311 of 350 1. MEDICAL CARE — IN- PATIENT (ZONING USE) The City's Zoning Regulations accommodate uses that provide medical testing and treatment in the following three general categories; 1) hospitals; 2) medical offices; and 3) imaging, testing and support services. Of the three uses, the only one where in- patient medical care is permitted is hospitals. Hospitals, in summary, are institutional uses providing comprehensive medical treatment and care. Although nursing and convalescent homes provide basic, 24 -hour medical care, they are currently labeled a Type 3 Group Home in the City's LDR and function more as permanent or long -term housing for residents /patients rather than a medical service. Until recently there has not been a demonstrated demand for medical services that provide 24 -hour care to patients. However, in response to the recent demand -for services that provide 24 -hour care, treatment and /or testing pertaining to sleep apnea, eating disorders, labor and delivery, hospice care, and substance abuse, staff has analyzed the zoning regulations and proposes amendments to address this deficiency by accommodating these uses as well as other excluded businesses that similarly provide overnight medical care and treatment. The definition of "Hospital" is currently indicated in the LDR (Chapter 1, Article II) as: An establishment typically referred to as an institution (excluding "Group Home, Type 4') that provides comprehensive, inpatient and outpatient healthcare, including typical emergency medical, surgical, diagnostic, rehabilitation and treatment services, as well as other specialized services ranging from bariatrics to wound care. This use would also include accessory meeting /conference facilities, limited retail sales, and administrative offices. Most significant to this analysis is that Hospitals are limited to the Public Usage (PU) Zoning District. The PU Zoning District is a unique district defined to "apply to those areas within the city whose ownership and /or operation is public, or whose use is primarily institutionally - oriented. When we think of "institutional" uses, we typically consider those uses that are public or public /private in nature and that engage in public service such as schools, places of worship, lodges and charitable organizations, government- operated facilities, and hospitals. Historically, communities would have only one hospital, which corresponded with a unique and tailored zoning district appropriate for the scale of the use, size of property affected, and surrounding land uses. However, given the number and variety of possible medical uses that similarly provide services around - the - clock, and the unique and limited locations of the PU Zoning District, other appropriate zoning districts should be considered that match the type of intensity and locational requirements of these medical uses. The proposed amendments to the zoning regulations are intended to ensure that the City's zoning regulations are defensible, by not unjustifiably zoning out certain uses, and more importantly, maintaining compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Fair Housing Act (FHA). In general, both acts prohibit discrimination against the "handicapped" or "disabled ". Of course the FHA emphasizes the access to housing, and t00050878.1 306 - 9001821 } Page 312 of 350 the ADA targets access to services, programs, or activities of a public entity. Most relevant to this code review and analysis are the following points: • The application or coverage of the ADA and FHA was expanded so that "physical or mental impairment" includes alcoholism and drug addiction, and expanded to also apply to those businesses providing related services and treatments; • Zoning is an activity specifically referenced in the Technical Assistance Manual for the ADA in discussing this function and its importance to be monitored for compliance with the ADA and FHA; • Zoning that does not regulate equitably those uses with like characteristics and purposes, which affect handicapped individuals, could raise concerns under the ADA and FHA; and • When zoning fails to allow the integration of handicapped individuals into society, such as a when zoning narrowly classifies drug and alcohol treatment facilities as "institutional" while simultaneously excluding them from districts that allow related or similar medical businesses and services, such zoning could impede the integration expectation of the ADA and FHA. Therefore, staff proposes the subject code amendments that have identified several uses currently excluded from the zoning regulations that provide 24 -hour patient care and treatment. The proposed changes also provide the necessary definition for said uses; identify the zoning districts appropriate for such intense medical uses; and include additional location standards and operational requirements to ensure land use compatibility and adherence to proper review processes. Definitions (LDR, Chapter 1, Article 11): Medical Care or Testin g (In patient) A facility, including emergency clinics and hospitals, which are open 24 -hours per day or provides 24 -hour healthcare, treatment, and/or examinations, typically requiring overnight stays, and are based either on emergency, planned, or scheduled admittance to facilities with controlled and secured access to ensure appropriate care of patients. Such facilities include: • Hospitals licensed pursuant Chapter 395, Florida Statutes; • Alcohol or chemical dependency treatment centers licensed pursuant to Chapter 397, Florida Statutes; • Mental health treatment facilities licensed pursuant to Chapter 394; Florida Statutes • Urgent care centers (24- hour); • Inpatient testing services such as sleep disorder centers; • Birth centers licensed pursuant to Section 383.305; Florida Statues; • Hospice facilities licensed pursuant to Part IV of Chapter 400; Florida Statues; • Eating disorder treatment centers; and t00050878.1 306 - 9001821 } - - Page 313 of 350 • Nursing homes and physical rehabilitation centers licensed pursuant to Section 400.062, Florida Statutes. Additionally, the subject amendments warrant other modifications to the definitions, as shown below in underlined and crossed -out text: • Hospital - , . see Medical Care or Testing (In- ap tient) • Medical or Dental Imaging /Testing /Support Services patient); • Medical or Dental Office (Out patient) A facility or clinic operated by one (1) or more physicians, dentists, chiropractors, or other licensed practitioners of the healing arts for the examination and treatment of persons solely on an outpatient basis including intensive outpatient treatment Images, body fluids or other...... ; • Mental Health and Substance Abuse see " Medical Care or TestiW (Inpatient Zoning Matrix (LDR, Chapter 3, Article IV, Section 3.D.): See Exhibit "A" for an excerpt of the Zoning Matrix with the proposed changes shown in underlined and crossed -out text. The proposed new use is seen added to the matrix, to be a permitted use in the C -3 (Community Commercial), PCD (Planned Commercial Development) and PU (Public Usage) Zoning Districts. The C -3 Zoning District is the most intensive commercial district in the City's Zoning Regulations based on typical project size (i.e. land area and square footage) and customer traffic, and is intended to accommodate large commercial centers located with direct access from arterial roadways. Distances to residential areas are typically greatest, and design and buffering requirements are intended to match the scale of the project and mitigate impacts upon adjacent properties. The C -1, C -2, and C -4 Districts are not appropriate given the intense nature of such businesses, the need for greater land area than the minimum size required by the zoning districts, and need for appropriate separation from residential areas. Whereas the C -1 (Office Commercial) Zoning District accommodates offices including medical and dental offices, this district is often considered a "transitional" zone between residential zoning districts and more intense commercial land uses given its compatibility with residential environments due, in part, to the limited hours of business operation and locations along the periphery of residential neighborhoods. Similarly, the C -2, (Neighborhood Commercial) Zoning District is to be compatible in scale and operation with residential zoning districts, and in fact is intended to be located in close proximity to residential land uses to facilitate access to convenient retail goods and services. The C -4 District would t00050878.1 306 - 9001821 } Page 314 of 350 also be inappropriate for such uses given the smaller parcels that comprise most of the existing C -4 -zoned properties, and their close proximity to local streets and residential areas. The PCD District corresponds with the C -3 District with the principal difference being the requirement for a master plan as part of the rezoning process. Additional changes to the matrix would also include adding the same "(Out- patient)" description to the "Medical or Dental Office" use title, the individual "Hospital" use item currently in the matrix would be removed, and an unrelated change but necessary for consistency in the matrix is the addition of a "P" and footnote " #22" to the "Counseling" use item to allow such uses within the M -1 District similar to the treatment of general business offices if, in part, they are located along an arterial roadway. Zoning Matrix Notes (LDR, Chapter 3, Article IV, Section 3.D.): Existing Notes: No. 3. (to be amended) Amend #3 to read "Conditional use approval shall be required if located within �we one hundred (2" 100 feet from a residential zoning district or mixed use zoning district No. 14. (to remain unchanged) The subject use is only allowed on a lot that fronts on an arterial or collector roadway street as defined in Part III, Ch. 1, Art. 2 of the LDR under definitions for "Street - Arterial" and "Street - Collector". The following amendment is an unrelated, "house- keeping" amendment intended to remove the cap on maximum seats, with maximum floor area remaining to achieve the intended objective of limiting eligible sites to quick turn-over, convenience retail. No. 58. Restaurant. a. All Districts. See Chapter 3, Article V , Supplemental Regulations regarding the sidewalk cafe permit. b. C -1 District. A restaurant is allowed as accessory use to a business or professional office and /or a medical or dental office but subject to the following conditions: (1) Signage. No external signage for the restaurant use shall be allowed; (2) Hours of operation shall be limited to coincide with the hours of operation of the principal use. c. M -1 district. This non - industrial use is allowed within the M -1 district, provided that it 1) is located within a multiple- tenant development on a lot that fronts on an arterial or collector roadway; 2) does not exceed two thousand, five hundred (2,500) square feet; 3) cant ins - m e€t- weho =e (12) seats 4 3 excludes a drive -up, drive - through, or drive -in facility; and -5 4) complies with all off - street t00050878.1 306 - 9001821 } Page 315 of 350 parking requirements of Chapter 4, Article V. In addition, the sale of used merchandise is only allowed as accessory to the sale of new merchandise. New Notes: No. 101. Medical Care or Testing (In- patient) Other requirements and site standards: a. Minimum building setback shall be 50 feet when abutting a residential or mixed use zoning district to enable proper site design regarding secured access, private outdoor batron amenities. buffering_ etc.: b. Site security shall be ensured through a minimum of surveillance cameras, limited and controlled access points, and operational procedures to restrict unauthorized and /or unarranged accessing or exiting of the facility and /or property, c. Privacy and access control shall be ensured through a minimum of perimeter fencing and landscape buffering intended to support the objective to control access and increase brivacv of areas intended for client or batient use. d. Permitted locations shall exclude the Community Redevelopment Area to limit the CRA to those complimentary uses available to the public and which contribute to the synergy of successful downtown commerce pursuant to an applicable redevelopment plan. No. 102. Pre - existing. Such pre - existing uses which are no longer allowed uses pursuant to amendments to the Zoning Matrix shall not be construed as non - conforming uses. However, rn j or modifications to such uses shall be in accordance with the conditional use approval process if required pursuant to the Zoning Matrix, and adhere to the site design and operational restrictions of the applicable footnotes. 2. TOD (OVERLAY PROVISIONS INCLUDING DENSITY BONUS) The proposed amendments would further the codification of TOD regulations that commenced in 2013, and continued in 2014 with the establishment of a Downtown Transit - Oriented Development District within the Comprehensive Plan. Specifically, the proposed amendments would implement Future Land Use Element Policy 1.18.1, which established a Downtown TOD District, and Policy 1.18.2.b, which allows twenty five percent (25 %) density increase for selected future land use classifications within the District. For the past eight years, the City has been participating with the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) and other agencies to expand the Tri-Rail commuter system to include new service on the FEC Railroad. The expanded service, named the "Tri -Rail Coastal Link," would add a series of new passenger rail stations on the FEC Railroad in t00050878.1 306 - 9001821 } Page 316 of 350 Palm Beach, Broward, and Miami -Dade Counties, including a new Boynton Beach station just south of Boynton Beach Boulevard. FDOT and its transportation partners, including the South Florida Regional Transportation Authority (SFRTA), Palm Beach Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council (TCRPC), have all prioritized the need to improve land development patterns in advance of station development for the following reasons: (1) transit - oriented development (TOD) improves ridership for transit service, thereby increasing efficiency; (2) transit service increases access to station areas, thereby increasing potential for higher intensity and density land development; (3) TOD equally accommodates all modes of transportation (car as well as pedestrian, bicycle, and transit), further increasing access to station areas and potential for increased development capacity; and (4) TOD encourages a park -once environment, which reduces vehicular demand on the roadway network, further improving efficiency and reducing carbon emissions. The most significant features of a TOD are (1) increased density and intensity of development, with minimum levels of development recommended by FDOT; (2) walkability and interconnectivity throughout the area; and (3) a mix of uses appropriate to the service and area. In June of 2013, the City Commission approved amendments to the Land Development Regulations to create provisions for TOD and the corresponding standards in the mixed use zoning regulations, including the minimum density and intensity standards for mixed use districts within the Transit Core and the Station Area, defined as a' /4 mile and' /2 mile radius around the future station, respectively. The Comprehensive Plan policies adopted in 2014 gave a broad support to these regulations. First, they established a Downtown TOD District with boundaries coinciding with the Station Area. In addition, they instituted a density increase of up to twenty five percent (25 %) for projects located within the District and classified Special High Density Residential, Mixed Use or Mixed Use -Core Future Land Use. The amendments increased maximum densities for these Future Land Use categories to twenty five (25), fifty (50) and one hundred (100) dwelling units per acre, respectively. Currently, the total number of units within the District is estimated at about 3,100, resulting in the gross area -wide density of 7.027 dwelling units per acre. The Community Center station, a model for the Boynton Beach Downtown TOD District, stipulates optimal densities between 11 and 16 dwelling units per acre. (The density of 11 dwelling units per acre corresponds to 4,862 units in the subject area). The proposed amendment would potentially help to reach this desirable threshold. Significant areas east of the FEC Railroad right -of -way are already classified as either Mixed -Use Core or Mixed Use (see Exhibit A) and more are targeted for higher density and intensity mixed -use development both east and west of the tracks. There are no properties currently classified as Special High Density Residential within the District, but some may be reclassified to this category in the future. t00050878.1 306 - 9001821 } Page 317 of 350 3. AMENDMENT TO SIGN STANDARDS APPLICABLE TO COMMERCIAL USES IN CERTAIN M -1 ZONING DISTRICTS This proposed amendment would allow maximum sign area for commercial uses proposed in the M -1 zoning district that are located along arterial and collector roadways, to be based on the ratio applicable to the commercial zoning district rather than the industrial (M -1) zoning district. Staff is recommending a "cleanup" of the sign code regulations applicable to those areas of the M -1 (Industrial) zoning district located on road rights -of -way in which non- industrial uses are allowed. Based upon the M -1 Corridor Study conducted several years ago, in an effort to create an improved visual image of industrial zoned properties abutting major thoroughfares within the City, the allowed uses were expanded to accommodate limited office and commercial type businesses. However, at the same time, the sign regulations were not updated to reflect this expanded use list. Office and retail properties are allowed a maximum wall signage allocation based upon the lineal front footage of the building/tenant space, multiplied by a factor of 1.5. For example, a tenant with a 30 foot front lease space would be allowed up to 45 square feet of wall signage (30 LF X 1.5 SF = 45 SF). However, industrial zoned properties are limited to one (1) square foot of wall signage based upon the front footage calculation, due to their typical locations along roadways of lower classification and traffic, such as local and collector streets. Using the same example as above (30 LF X 1.0 SF = 30 SF), the amount of wall signage is reduced by one - third. Since it is generally recognized that office and commercial tenants rely more heavily on signage than industrial businesses, due to customer traffic, and locations along roads with higher classification and design speeds, it seems appropriate that the sign regulations be updated to reflect the fact that non- industrial uses are now allowed on major thoroughfares in the industrial zoning district, and that such uses be afforded the same signage allotment as other office and retail businesses on the same corridor. This amendment would allow the limited list of non- industrial businesses accommodated on an arterial roadway within the M -1 zoning district to utilize the same signage calculation as office and commercially -zoned properties. 4. REGULATING OF NON - CONFORMING SIGNS AT SHOPPING CENTERS TO BENEFIT PHYSICAL APPEARANCE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. The proposed amendments would increase flexibility in altering a non - conforming sign at a commercial shopping center for the purpose of accommodating additional tenant space, as long as the modifications would not worsen the magnitude of non - conformity, and result in some physical improvement to the design of the sign. The City has a number of nonconforming pole signs throughout commercial zoning districts, mainly located at the larger retail centers. Pole signs are tall signs, typically supported by one or more poles /posts, which provide a list of tenants within the shopping center. When the majority of these shopping centers were constructed, poles signs were a t00050878.1 306 - 9001821 } - Page 318 of 350 permitted type of sign and the code at that time allowed sign heights up to 20 feet, regardless of property size and roadway classification. As a result, these signs continue to be maintained by the center owners in order to maintain the height and visibility the signs afford. Current sign regulations require these types of signs to be Monument Signs, which are defined as signs mounted to the ground or pedestal /foundation, completely along the bottom of the cabinet/sign. Monument signs are limited to a maximum of 12 feet in height, which is typically about one -half the height of the pole signs in existence today. Therefore shopping center owners make every attempt to maintain their existing signs, concerned that removal due to maintenance or damage may result in diminished visibility and advertising associated with a new code - compliant sign. The Nonconforming Signs portion of the code does not allow signs to be modified except for re- lettering or change of sign copy, unless the modification brings the sign into compliance with the sign code. While staff has permitted typical maintenance such as color changes or adding minor architectural enhancements that do not further the nonconformity, and in many cases lessen the nonconformity and enhance the appearance, there are few other changes that are allowed to these signs. Because many of the shopping centers have grown over the years, added outparcels or attracted well known national tenants that require larger signage in their leases, sign cabinets were added /modified over the years (when the signs were still deemed conforming), which has resulted in a hodge - podge, less than desirable appearance of these signs. Many times the center owners are the first to acknowledge this and desire improvements, but the code will not permit the structural modifications necessary to improve the design because of the nonconforming status. Over the last several years, a number of shopping centers have undergone major renovations and only minimal work could be permitted on these pole signs. Staff proposes to modify the Nonconforming Signs section of the Land Development Regulations (LDR) with the objective to allow certain modifications to nonconforming signs that would improve the image along the rights -of -way without worsening nonconformities. Staff recommends that wording be added to this section of the LDR to allow modification of nonconforming pole signs at shopping centers, when regulated by, or to be regulated by a Sign Program, as long as the mass of the sign structure is not increased (i.e. height, length, and width). Such work may be structural in nature and may involve removal /replacement of sign cabinets. The sign owner would be required to make improvements that bring the sign structure(s) further into compliance with current sign regulations and shall, under no circumstance, worsen the nonconformity. The Nonconforming Signs section of the code already allows repairs to damaged signs up to 50% of the original cost of the sign, so it is logical to allow the owner to make aesthetic enhancements to these signs, again, as long as the mass of the sign structure is not increased. Staff firmly believes these signs are not going away, unless removed by a hurricane or other destructive force, therefore we believe additional latitude is necessary to improve their look and the image of the City. t00050878.1 306 - 9001821 } Page 319 of 350 As part of these regulations, and as further incentive for shopping center owners to upgrade their signs, staff recommends wording that would change the allowed amount of repair of these renovated signs from the current language of "50% of original cost of the sign construction" to read "50% of the value of the upgraded sign ". As part of the above discussion, staff envisions another opportunity to address the visual quality of these nonconforming signs and at the same time further economic development efforts to bring more and larger tenants to shopping centers experiencing vacancies. As noted previously, one of the key points in lease negotiations with prospective tenants is the amount and location of their signage, in order to gain maximum visibility. In many instances, this older shopping center sign is completely filled with tenant signage leaving no space on the sign for new, larger and /or potentially beneficial tenants . Most leases clearly denote the amount and location of signage granted to each tenant. Unless existing tenants are willing to modify the language within their leases, the prospective tenant will look elsewhere, possibly outside the City. Therefore, staff proposes to allow additional tenant signage on these nonconforming structures, again under the same requirements as noted above that requires approval of a Sign Program to support the proposed modifications as well regulate all other signage for the project, and results in the overall aesthetic improvement of the sign as reviewed and approved through the City's site plan amendment process. Staff does not envision these regulations being applied to single tenant property signs, as they tend to be of a smaller scale (only one tenant panel versus several) and less costly to replace. Therefore, staff recommends no further changes regarding the single tenant signs, but remains open to further review in the future. 5. MINIMUM PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR HOTELS The purpose of this proposed amendment is to lower the minimum parking ratio for hotel rooms to better reflect actual demand as justified by the parking requirements of several other cities, as well as the user characteristics at a hotel located in the City. The proposed minimum parking ratio would minimize the construction of unnecessary impervious areas of a project and therefore support the City's green initiatives. Staff has been made aware that our parking requirements for hotels outside the Mixed Use High (MU -H) district are greater than nearly all other communities. Staff has taken pride in the fact that we have been able to reduce unnecessary parking for many uses, created overlay areas where parking requirements have been reduced and designed code language to cap maximum parking, all in an effort to preserve more green space /pervious area on site and reduce development costs. Reducing parking requirements furthers Green Initiatives championed by the City Commission and the leadership team. The City Code requires one and a quarter (1.25) parking spaces per a one bedroom hotel room and two (2) parking spaces per two bedroom hotel room, other than in the Mixed Use High (MU -H) zoning district (downtown), in which the requirement is one (1) t00050878.1 306 - 9001821 } - 10 Page 320 of 350 parking space per hotel room, regardless of the number of bedrooms. Staff reviewed the parking codes of twenty -five (25) cities within Palm Beach County and the State and various counties within the State. The results indicated that none of those surveyed differentiated between one and two bedroom hotel rooms, likely due to the fact that most occupants arrive in one vehicle, such as a family on vacation, therefore making the required second parking space unnecessary. The survey also noted that only one jurisdiction, Volusia County, required a parking ratio in excess of 1.25 parking spaces per hotel room (1.5). Nineteen of the twenty -five surveyed required 1.0 parking space or fewer, with the majority of those also requiring additional parking for employees and /or meeting space. Staff conducted an analysis utilizing a recently approved hotel (Towne Place Suites in Quantum Park) for the scenarios, calculating parking based upon the various formulas of the surveyed jurisdictions. Our code as currently written requires 151 parking spaces for the project. Only two (2) of the twenty -five (25) jurisdictions required more parking (159 and 156 parking spaces). The mean parking requirement averaged out to 137 parking spaces. Had this project been constructed in the City of Delray Beach, their code would have required only 97 parking spaces. In determining the mean average, staff discarded the two highest parking requirements (159 & 156) and the three lowest (83, 97 & 97) to provide a fair and more accurate portrayal of the median numbers. As a result of this analysis, staff believes our requirement for a separate parking calculation for the two (2) bedroom hotel room to be unnecessary and unjustified. Staff recommends the code be modified to a single calculation of 1.25 parking spaces per hotel room, which would have resulted in 145 parking spaces required in the above scenario, instead of 151 for the 116 unit hotel. This calculation is still higher than the mean number of 137 from the study, and would more than account for employees and social functions. This recommendation is based upon survey results treating all hotel units identically with a single parking calculation, regardless of the number of bedrooms, the fact that our minimum parking requirement exceeded nearly all others surveyed, and that the proposed amendment furthers the City's Green Initiatives. Staff additionally recommends an amendment to the code to address a hotel that has an internal restaurant or lounge open not only to the guests, but to the general public. In these instances, staff would recommend that parking be provided for those uses open to the general public at a rate of 50% of their requirement of a standalone operation. CONCLUSION / RECOMENDATION Staff is recommending approval of the proposed amendments. Overall, these amendments are intended to achieve regulatory compliance, promote Transit Oriented Development, encourage /promote business /economic development by allowing businesses that otherwise may be discouraged from finding suitable locations in the City, maximize compatibility among land uses and improve the aesthetics of the streetscape. Attachments S:A PLANNING \SHAREDAWP \SPECPROJACODE REVIEWAIN- PATIENT MEDICAL CARE \STAFF REPORT - COMBINED TEXT ITEMS.DOCX t00050878.1 306-90018211 - 11 - Page 321 of 350 13.E. LEGAL 2/17/2015 CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH "• - AGENDA ITEM REQUEST FORM COMMISSION MEETING DATE: 2/17/2015 REQUESTED ACTION BY COMMISSION: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 15 -007 - FIRST READING - Approve Ordinance creating Boynton Beach's Civil Rights Act. EXPLANATION OF REQUEST: On October 21, 2014, the City adopted a Non - Discrimination Policy Ordinance and The Boynton Beach Domestic Partnership Act Ordinance, which provides policies for employees of The City of Boynton Beach. The Palm Beach Human Rights Council has asked the City to consider adopting a Boynton Beach Civil Rights Act Ordinance. HOW WILL THIS AFFECT CITY PROGRAMS OR SERVICES? Adopting this Ordinance would require any entities doing business with The City of Boynton Beach to prove that they provide the same non - discrimination and domestic partnership provisions within their organizations. FISCAL IMPACT: Non - budgeted None ALTERNATIVES: Do not approve the adoption of the Boynton Beach Civil Rights Act Ordinance. STRATEGIC PLAN: STRATEGIC PLAN APPLICATION: CLIMATE ACTION: No CLIMATE ACTION DISCUSSION: Is this a grant? No Grant Amount: ATTACHMENTS: Type Description D Ordinance Ordinance Codifying Civil Rights Act REVIEWERS: Department Reviewer Action Date Human Resources Oldbury, Julie Rejected 2/2/2015 - 1:03 PM Legal Swanson, Lynn Approved 2/2/2015 - 1:06 PM Human Resources Oldbury, Julie Approved 2/2/2015 - 1:39 PM Finance Howard, Tim Approved 2/5/2015 - 6:06 AM City Manager LaVerriere, Lori Approved 2/11/2015 - 11:09 AM Page 322 of 350 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 ORDINANCE NO. 15- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING CHAPTER 1 OF THE CITY'S CODE OF ORDINANCES, ENTITLED "GENERAL PROVISIONS ", BY CREATING SECTION 1 -12, TO BE ENTITLED "CIVIL RIGHTS "; PROVIDING FOR NON - DISCRIMINATION WITHIN THE CITY AND ALL OTHER ACTIVITIES PROMOTED OR SPONSORED BY THE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH; PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION, CONFLICTS, SEVERABILITY AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City Commission seeks to codify the City's policy of non- discrimination; and WHEREAS, the City Commission seeks to further ensure a policy of non- discrimination in all activities promoted or sponsored by the City; and WHEREAS, the City Commission finds that codifying a non - discrimination policy is in the best interests of the citizens and residents of the City. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1 . The foregoing "WHEREAS" clauses are hereby ratified and confirmed as being true and correct and are hereby made a specific part of this Ordinance upon adoption hereof. Section 2. Chapter 1, entitled "General Provisions ", of the City of Boynton Beach Code of Ordinances is hereby amended by specifically creating Section 1 -12, to be entitled, "Civil Rights" to read as follows: Section 1. P ose freedom from discrimination because of race, color, national origin, religion, 1 Page 323 of 350 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 of access to remedies in the case of alleged discrimination, to wit, the Equal Section 3. It is the intention of the City Commission of the City of Boynton Beach that the provisions of this Ordinance shall become and be made a part of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Boynton Beach, Florida, and that the Sections of this Ordinance may be renumbered, re-lettered and the word "Ordinance" may be changed to "Section," "Article", or such other word or phrase in order to accomplish such intention. Section 4. If any clause, section, or other part or application of this Ordinance shall be held by any court of competent jurisdiction to be unconstitutional or invalid, such unconstitutional or invalid part or application shall be considered as eliminated and so not affecting the remaining portions or applications remaining in full force and effect. 2 Page 324 of 350 I Section 5. All Ordinances or parts of Ordinances, Resolutions or parts of 2 Resolutions in conflict herewith be and the same are hereby repealed to the extent of such 3 conflict. 4 Section 6. This Ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and 5 adoption 6 FIRST READING THIS DAY OF , 2015. 7 8 SECOND, FINAL READING AND PASSAGE this day of 9 2015. 10 11 CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA 12 13 YES NO 14 15 Mayor — Jerry Taylor 16 17 Vice Mayor — Joe Casello 18 19 Commissioner — David T. Merker 20 21 Commissioner — Mack McCray 22 23 Commissioner — Michael M. Fitzpatrick 24 25 26 VOTE 27 28 ATTEST: 29 30 31 32 Janet M. Prainito, MMC 33 City Clerk 34 35 36 37 (Corporate Seal) 38 39 3 Page 325 of 350 13.F. LEGAL 2/17/2015 REQUESTED ACTION BY COMMISSION: PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 15 -008 - FIRST READING: 1) Amend Section 18 -55 - Definition of Annual Earnings to clarify the exclusions of pay per Florida Statutes 112.66(11); and 2) Amend Section 18 -82 - Re- Employment to allow for the purchase of prior city service on a full actuarial basis after one year of reemployment by the city. EXPLANATION OF REQUEST: 1) In 2011 the State of Florida approved statute amendments related to public pension codes in Chapters 112, 175 and 185. The purpose of these amendments, among others, was to limit the use of earned leave time (vacation) and sick leave towards the calculation of an employee's final rate of earnings. It is the final rate of earnings upon which an employee's retirement pension is calculated. The State pension amendment also limited the amount of overtime to 300 hours that can count towards an employee's final rate of earnings. The State amendment established an effective date based upon the date of ratification of the first collective bargaining agreement after July 1, 2011. In December of 2013, the City of Boynton Beach adopted Ordinance 13 -035 with the intent of Codifying the revisions to State statute discussed above for the General Employee Pension Fund. It was important that local municipal code be congruent with State statute. Furthermore, Ordinance 13 -035 established the effective date of June 18, 2013, again per statute. It was staff's intention at the time of adoption that an employee's accrued Ieave(vacation or sick) as of the effective date would count towards the final rate of earnings and that any time accrued by the employee after the effective date would not count towards their pension calculation. Upon ratification of Ordinance 13 -035 the pension administrator implemented this ordinance but the interpretation was such that accrued leave in totality was no longer to be counted toward pension calculation. This interpretation was contrary to the intended purpose of Ordinance 13 -035. Both the Police and Fire pension plans were not affected by Ordinance 13 -035 and these plans continue to allow the inclusion of leave time in the pension calculation. Attached for Commission consideration is a new ordinance that very clearly denotes that leave accrued prior to, and up to, the effective date will be included in the final rate of earnings and thus be incorporated into an employee's pension calculation. This ordinance is presented to the City Commission following formal approval action by the General Employee's Pension Board at its meeting on January 24, 2015. It is appropriate this be approved at this time so that employees can continue to rely upon this methodology for calculating the final rate of earnings much as they have done so for many years prior to these pensions amendments. 2) The amendment to Section 18 -82 Reemployment is an addition to allow the buyback of prior City time at the full actuarial cost within 5 years of re- employment. Members are currently permitted to re- purchase prior City of Boynton Beach general employee time within one year of re- employment with the City by repaying the contributions with interest. This amendment proposes to add 4 additional years that the member can re- purchase time, but at the full actuarial impact of the additional years of service, if the time is purchased after the first year. The amendment to Section 18 -82 Reemployment is an addition to allow the buyback of prior City time at the full actuarial cost within 5 years of re- employment. Members are currently permitted to re- purchase prior City of Boynton Beach general employee time within one year of re- employment with the City by repaying the contributions with interest. This amendment proposes to add 4 additional years that the member can re- purchase time, but at the full actuarial impact of the additional years of service, if the time is purchased after the first year. Page 326 of 350 HOW WILL THIS AFFECT CITY PROGRAMS OR SERVICES? No impact to city programs or services. FISCAL IMPACT: The impact of this ordinance on the City's contribution to the General Employees' Pension Plan will be amortized over the next nine years. The actual amount will be determined by the funding method that the pension board adopts which have been discussed and being reviewed. The funding method would include the amortization of this change to the plan and the way the plan recognizes recent asset gains over the next nine years. The anticipated impact of this change is approximately $600,000. ALTERNATIVES: Not approve amendment. STRATEGIC PLAN: STRATEGIC PLAN APPLICATION: CLIMATE ACTION: CLIMATE ACTION DISCUSSION: Is this a grant? Grant Amount: ATTACHMENTS: Type D Addendum D Addendum REVIEWERS: Department City Manager F inance Legal City Manager Description Amended Ordinance Ordinance 1 -035 Action Approved Approved Approved Approved Page 327 of 350 January 20, 2015 January 23, 2015 ORDINANCE , 2015 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING ARTICLE III, OF CHAPTER 18 OF THE BOYNTON BEACH CODE OF ORDINANCES, ENTITLED "EMPLOYEES' PENSION PLAN;" AMENDING SECTION 18 -55 THE DEFINITION OF ANNUAL EARNINGS TO CLARIFY THE EXCLUSIONS OF ELEMENTS OF PAY PER FLORIDA STATUTES §112.66(11); AMENDING SECTION 18 -82 REEMPLOYMENT TO ALLOW FOR THE PURCHASE OF PRIOR CITY SERVICE ON A FULL ACTUARIAL BASIS AFTER ONE YEAR OF REEMPLOYMENT BY THE CITY; PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND, PROVIDING FORAN EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF. WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees ( "Trustees ") of the Employees' Pension Plan of the City of Boynton Beach, Florida ( "Pension Plan ") recommends amendment of the Ordinance to clarify the plan provision implementing Florida Statutes §112.66(11); WHEREAS, the Trustees of the Plan recommended permitting members to purchase service at the full actuarial cost if the member requests to purchase such time more than one year after reemployment; and WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Boynton Beach, Florida, desires to so amend the Employees' Pension Plan of the City of Boynton Beach, Florida; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA: Section 1. The foregoing "WHEREAS" clauses are hereby certified as being true and correct and are incorporated herein by this reference. Section 2. The definition of Annual Earnings of Section 18 -55 of Article II of Page 1 of 6 Page 328 of 350 Chapter 18 of the Boynton Beach Code of Ordinances is hereby amended as follows: Sec. 18 -55. Definitions. The following words and phrases, as used in this article, unless a different meaning is plainly required by the context, shall have the following meanings, and the same and similar terms when used in connection with any civil service system or any other ordinance of the city shall not necessarily apply to the members of the retirement system hereby created except when specifically adopted: Annual earnings. Gross earnings received by the employee as compensation for services to the city, including overtime pay. Bonuses shall be excluded. Flexible benefits shall be excluded. Effective June 18, 2013 overtime included in pensionable compensation is limited to 300 hours per Member per year. Prior to June 18, 2013 all overtime is included in the definition of pensionable compensation. No hours of unused accumulated sick and vacation leave earned after June 18. 2013 shall be considered Annual Earnings. However, priorto june 18, 2013 members may include all unused hours earned prior to June 18, 2013 provided that Cite amount of hours is were cashed in at retirement. Beginning with annual earnings after December 31, 2008, and pursuant to Internal Revenue Code Section 414(u)(7), the definition of annual earnings includes amounts paid by the city as differential wages to members who are absent from Page 2 of 6 Page 329 of 350 employment while in qualified military service. Section 3. Section 18 -82 of Article II of Chapter 18 of the Boynton Beach Code of Ordinances is hereby amended as follows: Sec. 18 -82. Reemployment. When any former employee of the city is reemployed, he or she will become a member of the plan upon reemployment as a full -time permanent general city employee. When a former employee of the city is reemployed and said employee had withdrawn contributions previously made to the plan, he or she may have forfeited credited service reinstated upon satisfaction of each of the following conditions: (1) The break in city employment is not more than 60 months; and (2) The plan is paid the total amount previously withdrawn (consisting of accumulated member contributions plus any interest previously paid by the plan on those contributions). This total amount is brought forward with interest for the total number of months from the date of withdrawal to the date of repayment, calculated to the nearest month. This calculated amount equals the amount to be repaid to the plan in a lump sum. The interest to bring forward the total amount will be at the equivalent compound monthly rate derived from the earning rate assumed by the actuary in the most recent actuarial valuation submitted to the Division of Retirement pursuant to Florida Statute Chapter 112, part VII. (3) Repayment of withdrawn contributions, interest thereon, and Page 3 of 6 Page 330 of 350 administrative processing fee, must be made no later than one year from the date the fund's actuary delivers a repayment calculation to the employee. (4) The application is made within one year of reemployment by the city. Should a member fail to make application within one year of reemployment for the purchase of prior city time, then the member may within five years of reemployment by the city request the purchase of the prior city time. This time may be purchased at the full actuarial impact of the purchase of service, plus the cost of the actuarial services to calculate the buyback. When a former employee of the city is reemployed and said employee had previously terminated his or her employment with a vested right to a deferred annuity, provided he or she had not withdrawn contributions previously made to the plan, he or she will again become a member of the plan as of the date of his or her reemployment as a full -time permanent general city employee. The credited service which such reemployed member had accumulated as of the date of his or her prior termination of employment shall be reinstated and he or she shall accrue additional credited service from the date of his or her reemployment. Any benefits to which such reemployed member subsequently becomes entitled shall be based on the sum of his or her credited service prior to his or her previous termination of employment plus credited service subsequently to his or her reemployment. Page 4 of 6 Page 331 of 350 Section 4. It is the intention of the City Commission of the City of Boynton Beach that the provisions of this Ordinance shall become and be made a part of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Boynton Beach, Florida. The Sections of this ordinance may be renumbered, re- lettered and the word "Ordinance" may be changed to "Section," "Article" or such other word or phrase in order to accomplish such intention. Section 5. All Ordinances or parts of Ordinances, Resolutions or parts of Resolutions in conflict herewith be and the same are hereby repealed to the extent of such conflict. Section 6. If any clause, section, or other part or application of this Ordinance shall be held by any court of competent jurisdiction to be unconstitutional or invalid, such unconstitutional or invalid part or application shall be considered as eliminated and so not effecting the validity of the remaining portions or applications remaining in full force and effect. Section 7. This Ordinance shall become effective upon passage, unless otherwise provided for in this amendment. FIRST READING THIS DAY OF 2015. SECOND, FINAL READING and PASSAGE THIS DAY OF , 2015. PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS DAY OF 2015. CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA Mayor Vice Mayor Page 5 of 6 Page 332 of 350 Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner ATTEST: CITY CLERK HABB GE 1297 \Plan Docs \AMEND \2015Wnnual earnings clarification and buyback of city time (1- 20- 15).wpd Page 6 of 6 Page 333 of 350 January 15, 2013 February 18, 2013 February 27, 2013 March 12, 2013 May 15, 2013 May 28, 2013 ORDINANCE NO. 13 -035 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA, AMENDING ARTICLE III, OF CHAPTER 18 OF THE BOYNTON BEACH CODE OF ORDINANCES, ENTITLED "EMPLOYEES' PENSION PLAN;" AMENDING SECTION 18 -55 THE DEFINITION OF ANNUAL EARNINGS TO EXCLUDE ELEMENTS OF PAY PER FLORIDA STATUTES §112.66(11); AMENDING SECTION 18 -117 TERMINATION OF SERVICES PRIOR TO ELIGIBILITY FOR RETIREMENT TO CLARIFY PAYMENT START DATE; AMENDING SECTION 18 -120 MEMBER RECORDS; STATUS STATEMENTS; BENEFICIARY DESIGNATIONS TO EXPAND CLASSES OF INDIVIDUALS TO WHOM PAYMENTS MAY BE MADE AT DEATH IN THE ABSENCE OF A DESIGNATED BENEFICIARY; AMENDING SECTION 18 -127 TO INCORPORATE PROVISIONS OF FLORIDA STATUTES §112.66(11) AND TO CLARIFY THAT DROP MEMBERS MUST TERMINATE EMPLOYMENT AT THE END OF THE DROP TERM; PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND, PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF. WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees ( "Trustees ") of the Employees' Pension Plan of the City of Boynton Beach, Florida ( "Pension Plan ") recommends amendment of the Ordinance regarding Florida Statutes §112.66(11) and the required law changes to the definition of Annual Earnings and a corresponding change to the transfers of accumulated sick and vacation leave; WHEREAS, the Trustees of the Plan recommended clarification of the pension start date for vested terminated employees; WHEREAS, the Trustees of the Plan recommend clarification of the DROP providing that DROP members must terminate employment at the end of the DROP term; Page 1 of 9 Page 334 of 350 WHEREAS, the Trustees of the Plan recommend expanding the individuals to whom payment may be made when a member dies and there is no designated beneficiary; and WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Boynton Beach, Florida, desires to so amend the Employees' Pension Plan of the City of Boynton Beach, Florida; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA: Section 1. The foregoing "WHEREAS" clauses are hereby certified as being true and correct and are incorporated herein by this reference. Section 2. The definition of Annual Earnings of Section 18 -55 of Article II of Chapter 18 of the Boynton Beach Code of Ordinances is hereby amended as follows: Sec. 18 -55. Definitions. The following words and phrases, as used in this article, unless a different meaning is plainly required by the context, shall have the following meanings, and the same and similar terms when used in connection with any civil service system or any other ordinance of the city shall not necessarily apply to the members of the retirement system hereby created except when specifically adopted: Annual earnings. Gross earnings received by the employee as compensation for services to the city, including overtime pay. Bonuses shall be excluded. Flexible benefits shall be Page 2 of 9 Page 335 of 350 excluded. Effective June 18, 2013 overtime included in pensionable MIM IT all overtime is included in the definition of pensionable compensation Effective June 18, 2013 Nno hours of unused accumulated sick and vacation leave earned aftff jWhg * o m e fiv.• fht!t' shall be considered Annual EarninQS,. rHowever. prior to June 18, 2013 that the amount of hour0s- -were cashed in at retirement. Beginning with annual earnings after December 31, 2008, and pursuant to Internal Revenue Code Section 414(u)(7), the definition of annual earnings includes amounts paid by the city as differential wages to members who are absent from employment while in qualified military service. Section 3. The definition of Final average monthly earnings of Section 18 -111 of Article II of Chapter 18 of the Boynton Beach Code of Ordinances is hereby amended as follows: (4) "Final average monthly compensation," for the purposes of this section, shall mean the monthly average of the employee's Annual earnings during the highest 60 consecutive calendar months occurring in the 120 calendar months immediately preceding his or her normal retirement date if such date falls on or after January 1, 1979, and based upon compensation immediately preceding actual retirement date if normal retirement date preceded January 1, 1979, or he or she elected to continue to contribute after normal retirement date as provided in section 18 -95. " Annual Earnings" as used in the above sentence shall mean gross earnings received by the employee as compensation for service to the city as provide for in Section 18- 55 ineluding eveftime pay and siek pay paid in the lump sum at termination E)Y- r-etifement btA Page 3 of 9 Page 336 of 350 Section 4. Section 18 -117 is hereby amended as follows: Sec. 18 -117. Termination of services prior to eligibility for retirement. In the case of voluntary resignation or discharge of any member of the plan, the total amount contributed by said employee to the fund up to the time of his resignation or discharge (together with interest at the rate of three per cent (3 %) per annum to January 1, 1977, and five per cent (5 %) per annum thereafter compounded from the end of the year in which contributions are made to the date of termination of service) shall be returned and said employee shall immediately cease to be a member of the plan and shall not be entitled to any other benefits from the plan unless the member has completed five (5) years of credited service under the plan or is totally and permanently disabled. If he has completed five (5) or more years of credited service or is totally and permanently disabled he shall be fully vested and entitled to a deferred annuity commencing at his or her otherwise expected early or normal retirement date. The monthly amount of such deferred annuity shall be an amount computed in the same manner as the deferred annuity described for early retirement in section 18 -114. For the purpose of such calculation, the member's date of termination of employment shall be considered as his early retirement date. An employee who is entitled to a deferred annuity under the provisions of this section 18- 117 may waive his right to such deferred annuity and accept in lieu thereof the total amount he has contributed to the pension fund (together with interest thereon as described above) up to the time of his resignation or discharge. Page 4 of 9 Page 337 of 350 In the event of resignation or discharge of any member as described in this section 18- 117, any contributions theretofore made by the city relating to such member, with accruals thereon, which have not vested in accordance with the provisions of this section 18 -117, shall be used to reduce contributions to be made thereafter by the city and shall not be used to increase the benefits of any member. Section 5. Section 18 -120 is hereby amended as follows: Sec. 18 -120. Member records; status statements; beneficiary designations. A. A separate record of account shall be maintained for each member and among other things shall show his service record, his accumulated contributions to the plan, his exact age, his designation of beneficiary, together with any such information as is necessary for an active and comprehensive determination of his status under this plan. $_ A member of the plan shall complete and file with the board a designation of beneficiary which names the person who is to receive any death benefits that may become payable under sections 18 -115 and 18 -116 other than benefits paid to a surviving spouse. Such designation of beneficiary is to be completed by the employee at the time he initially becomes a member of this plan. An employee who has failed to designate a beneficiary at the time of his initial membership in this plan may file a designation of beneficiary at any time thereafter. A member may change his designation of beneficiary at any time by filing a new designation of beneficiary form. If a member has failed to file a designation of beneficiary, Page 5 of 9 Page 338 of 350 any death benefits which would normally be paid to a designated beneficiary shall be paid to in full to the first class of the following relative which has a 2. dependent children of the member: MUM MIM M i . 11MB1±I•"+ hereunder Section 6: Section 18 -127 is hereby amended as follows: Sec. 18 -127. Deferred retirement option plan. (d) Upon exercising the right to participate in the DROP, an employee's creditable service, accrued benefits and compensation calculation shall be frozen and shall utilize the average of the five highest of the ten years immediately preceding participation in the DROP as the compensation basis. Accumulated, unused sick and vacation leave shall be included in the compensation calculation s provided for and limited by the definition of Annual Earning. No -1 Page 6 of 9 Page 339 of 350 of hours is eum °Gd in at retirement. ; provided, however, a minimum balance of 120 hours of sick leave and 120 hours of vacation leave shall be maintained by the employee and excluded from this calculation. The retained leave balance, including any additions, shall be distributed at the conclusion of DROP participation and separation from service. In accordance with the definition of Annual Earnim& the accumulated sick and vacation leave that is includable in the compensation calculation will phase out but hours may still be L(Itmitit MUM Section 7: A new subsection (n) is hereby added to Section 18 -127 as follows: Sec. 18 -127. Deferred retirement option plan. Section 8. It is the intention of the City Commission of the City of Boynton Beach Page 7 of 9 Page 340 of 350 that the provisions of this Ordinance shall become and be made a part of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Boynton Beach, Florida. The Sections of this ordinance may be renumbered, re- lettered and the word "Ordinance" may be changed to "Section," "Article" or such other word or phrase in order to accomplish such intention. Section 9. All Ordinances or parts of Ordinances, Resolutions or parts of Resolutions in conflict herewith be and the same are hereby repealed to the extent of such conflict. Section 10. If any clause, section, or other part or application of this Ordinance shall be held by any court of competent jurisdiction to be unconstitutional or invalid, such unconstitutional or invalid part or application shall be considered as eliminated and so not effecting the validity of the remaining portions or applications remaining in full force and effect. Section 11. Ibi O -di ee- ..t h rrcrR - �ccc �ttttj� Uf)0 PRSSa! ?e. Hirie,; ,,, Y crc eF proN ided f4- !Hi 1' - 1 This Ordinance shall become effective when the following have occurred: LZ the Citv Commission has received and has accepted a report establishing the actuarial soundness of these amendments (b) a copy of this Ordinance has been sent to the Florida Division of Retirement, and (c) when a collective bargaining agreement ratifNing the foregoing, changes to pension benefits has been ratified bN the Cit Commission and the General Employees' Pension Board of Trustees, or their successor organization, or a letter from such union stating it accepts the terms of this Ordinance or otherwise does not object to its contents. Upon satisfaction of all of the above requirements, then in that event, the terms and Page 8 of 9 Page 341 of 350 provisions of this Ordinance shall become effectIN e FIRST READING THIS 19" DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2013. SECOND, FINAL READING and PASSAGE THIS Z DAY OF ��cun der , 2013. r PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS S DAY OF ' Dece M her .2013. CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA ATTEST: Jan M. Prainito, MMC Clerk Page 9 of 9 Page 342 of 350 vice mayor — w ooarow L. nay 8'' , �% E��' Commissi er — David T. Merker 13.G. LEGAL 2/17/2015 REQUESTED ACTION BY COMMISSION: Consider options for future administration and maintenance of the Quantum Park Overlay Dependent District including the following: 1. Continue current operations whereby future administrative actions and vision of the District are overseen by the existing Board of Supervisors and their elected successors. 2. Remove and reappoint the Board of Supervisors thus injecting new leadership and vision. 3. Dissolve the Quantum Park Overlay Dependent District and assume all debt and common ground maintenance. (STAFF REQUESTS ITEM TO BE TABLED UNTIL MARCH 2, 2015) EXPLANATION OF REQUEST: Quantum Park consists of 600 acres of mixed -use development including residential units, retail and office businesses, warehouse and industrial properties, as well as schools and public services. Historically, there were three regulatory entities within Quantum Park, the Quantum Park Overlay Dependent District ( "QPODD "), the Quantum Park Community Development District ( "QPCDD ") and the Quantum Park Property Owners Association ( "QPPOA "). The QPODD and the QPCDD were both created by the City; whereas, the POA is a private association within Quantum Park. In 1991, the City created the QPCDD. The QPCDD constructed and maintained a number of infrastructure improvements in Quantum Park for many years. The original plan of the QPCDD contemplated the development of an industrial /commercial park; however, the land use changed over time, and residential development was permitted in portions of the QPCDD. To address the changes in Quantum, in 2005, the City created the QPODD. The QPODD was created for two reasons. First, it provided a vehicle for all property owners in the Overlay District (both residential, and non - residential) to have a voice on the QPCDD Board. Second, the intent was for the QPCDD to convey all of its assets to the QPODD, and transfer all of its operation and maintenance responsibilities of the public infrastructure in Quantum Park to the QPODD. The transfer of assets was accomplished, and the QPCDD remained in existence until all of its debts were paid off. In 2014, the City Commission dissolved the QPCDD. Olen Properties Corp., a large property owner in Quantum Park has approached the City and requested that the City consider either the dissolution of the QPODD, or the replacement of the QPODD Board Members. The QPODD was created by the City in 2005, as a method to finance, deliver and manage community services within the QPODD, and to operate and maintain the public infrastructure in Quantum Park. Overtime, the QPODD's function has changed, and the QPODD was required to provide fewer services, as Quantum Park is almost built out, and in 2013, the City took over the maintenance of the roads within the QPODD. At the present time, the QPODD's duties primarily relate to lake and waterway management and maintenance. Olen Properties Corp. owns a parcel of land, which has been approved for development by the City. As a condition of development, Olen was required to also obtain permits from the South Florida Water Management District. Olen has advised the City, that although the City approved the project and issued permits, that the South Florida Water Management District has refused to do so based upon a letter of objection provided by the QPODD. The QPODD enacted a policy stating that it would not review drainage permits unless the QPPOA Architectural Review Committee first provided approval. In essence, the QPODD has delegated its authority to grant surface water management permits to the QPPOA's Architectural Review Committee. As the Commission is aware, Olen is currently involved in contentious litigation with the QPPOA. It is Olen's assertion that the QPODD, a governmental entity created by the City, has now delegated it's authority to the QPPOA, a non - governmental entity, which was not the City's intent in creating the QPODD and extends beyond the scope of the QPODD's authority. Page 343 of 350 Olen has requested that the City consider taking over the responsibilities of the QPODD, and dissolving the QPODD. In the event the City chooses not to take over the QPODD's function, Olen has requested that the City Commission consider the replacement of the QPODD Board Members. Currently, the Board is comprised of five members, none of which own property in Quantum Park. Olen is requesting that the Board members be replaced with either members of City staff, or members of the public with professional experience related to the QPODD's duties. HOW WILL THIS AFFECT CITY PROGRAMS OR SERVICES? FISCAL IMPACT: The Quantum Park Overlay Dependent District is a State authorized district with non ad valorem taxing authority. Non ad- valorem taxes are assessed on all parcels within the District boundaries. Total annual District revenue is $769,215, which includes debt revenue of $387,379 and operation and maintenance tax revenue of $381,566. Operations and maintenance expenses support operation of stormwater detention basins and maintenance of other common grounds to include landscaping, irrigation, foot paths, preserve area, etc. Dissolution of the District would require the City to assume the District's debt and maintenance responsibilities, without the benefit of the non ad- valorem tax received by the District as noted above. Therefore, District dissolution should not be seriously considered from a fiscal perspective. Rather, if the City Commission desires new vision and leadership within the District as has been requested, some variation of new oversight and vision by the Board of Supervisors may be preferable. Any new vision could prompt a revised tax levy and revised public services with potential tax reduction to property owners within the District. Any such action would be the responsibility of the Board of Supervisors. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Dissolve the Quantum Park Overlay Dependent District, which would require the City to undertake the lake maintenance and management obligations, as well as the District's outstanding debt. Dissolution of the District would be done by Ordinance; 2. Replace the Board Members of the Quantum Park Overlay Dependent District. Replacement of the Board Members would be done by a Resolution of the City Commission; or 3. Do nothing, and retain the status quo in the District. STRATEGIC PLAN: STRATEGIC PLAN APPLICATION: CLIMATE ACTION: No CLIMATE ACTION DISCUSSION: Is this a grant? Grant Amount: ATTACHMENTS: Type D Letter REVIEWERS: Department Reviewer Description Letter from Andre Parke on behalf of Olen Properties Action Date Page 344 of 350 City Clerk Pyle, Judith Approved 21612015 - 1:55 PM Page 345 of 350 SACHS SAX CAPLAN ATTORNEYS AT LAW SUITE 200 6111 BROKEN SOUND PKWY NW BOCA RATON, FLORIDA 33487 TELEPHONE (561) 994 -4499 DIRECT LINE (561) 237 -6829 FACSIMILE (561) 994 -4985 December 18, 2014 Lori LaVerriere, City Manager City of Boynton Beach 100 E. Boynton Beach Blvd. Boynton Beach, FL 33425 ANDRE S. PARKE, ESQ. aparke @ssclawfirm.com Re: City Commission Hearing/Quantum Park Overlay Development District Dear Ms. LaVerriere: Please accept this correspondence as Olen Properties Corp.'s ( "Olen Properties "') formal request for the City of Boynton Beach to review and make a determination at an upcoming meeting of the City Commission regarding Olen Properties' request for the City to dissolve the Quantum Park Overlay Development District ("Overlay District ") or replace the existing members of the Overlay District Board with City of Boynton Beach professional staff. Olen Properties is submitting this request due to the fact that it has maintained a substantial interest in Quantum Park as both a property owner and developer. The failure of the Overlay District to perform its duties in a professional and ethical fashion directly affects Olen Properties' ability to develop its properties in a manner consistent with development approvals granted by the City. The Overlay District's failure to operate in a professional manner also precludes the City and its residents from obtaining tangible financial benefits derived from the development of the properties in the form of increased tax revenues and the considerable developmental fees to be paid by Olen Properties in association with its developments. As you are aware, Olen Properties and its representative have met with both City Staff and City Commissioners on numerous occasions in order to advise the City of the manner in which the Overlay District is being operated by its existing Board of Directors. The existing Overlay Board has enacted policies that overstep its authority as set forth within City of Boynton Ordinance 05 -061 ("Enabling Ordinance ") which established the Overlay District and created specific authority and duties granted to the District.' The Overlay District Board has also inexplicitly entangled its procedures for granting governmental permits with regulations enacted by the nongovernmental Quantum Park ' Ordinance 05 -061, attached as Exhibit "A ", specifies the expressed authority granted to the Overlay District. A Dependent District may not enact policies which go beyond the scope of its expressed authority. Page 346 of 350 Lori LaVerriere, City Manager City of Boynton Beach December 18, 2014 Page 2 Property Owner's Association ( "POA ") and has explicitly delegated its ability to grant surface water management permits to the POA's Architectural Review Committee by enacting a policy specifying that it will not review drainage permits unless the POA Architectural Review Committee first gives its approval. The intertwining of the Overlay District's expressed duties to review engineering calculations and plans related to surface water drainage into waterbodies within Quantum Park with the dictates of a nongovernmental entity has resulted in damages to Olen Properties estimated in the millions of dollars. Furthermore, the Overlay District's actions have resulted in an absurd policy that requires Quantum Park property owners seeking permits to install underground drainage pipes that drain into abutting waterbodies to first obtain architectural approval from a nongovernmental entity prior to obtaining their drainage permits. This policy is especially egregious in light of the fact that the Overlay District assesses Quantum Park property owners thousands of dollars per year to maintain the very same waterbodies. That the Overlay District's official governmental duties are so entangled r with the interests of the nongovernmental POA should come as no surprise, given the fact that several Overlay District officials are also affiliated with the POA. As an illustration, one of the Overlay District Board Members also works as an accountant and board member of the POA.' Additionally, the Overlay District Engineer, who is responsible for reviewing surface water permits submitted to the Overlay District, is also an employee of the POA, serving as the POA's Engineer. Although the Overlay District officials indicated above have direct financial ties to the POA and its private management, other District officials have ties of friendship with POA management. It is also of significance that none of the Board Members own property within Quantum Park or represent a property owner in Quantum Park. As a result of the property owners' lack of direct or indirect representation on the Overlay District Board, the Overlay District has evolved into little more than a subsidiary or affiliate of the POA. The Overlay District Board is simply not accountable to the Quantum Park property owners because the Board does not represent the interests of Quantum Park property owners. The stated purpose of the Overlay District was to provide the "best alternative available for delivering the community services and facilities to the area that will be served by the District ". It is also stated within the Enabling Ordinance that the District "will constitute a timely, efficient, responsive and economic way to deliver community services ". The Overlay District has clearly failed in its stated purposes due to the failure of z A copy of the minutes of the Overlay District evidencing the adoption of this policy is attached as Exhibit „ 3 The minutes of the Overlay District board meeting establish that Board Member, Desha Pencheff, also employed as the POA accountant, proffered the motion to establish the policy requiring POA Architectural Review approval before the Overlay District would review drainage permits. Ms. Pencheff also voted in favor of the motion. SACHS SAX CAPLAN 6111 BROKEN SOUND PARKWAY NW • SUITE 200 • BOCA RATON, FL 33487 • TELEPHONE (561) 994 -4499 • TELECOPIER (561) 994 -4985 Page 347 of 350 Lori LaVerriere, City Manager City of Boynton Beach December 18, 2014 Page 3 its Board to restrict the scope of its operations to the functions that it was assigned by the City under the Enabling Ordinance. By entangling itself with the politics and dictates of the POA, the Overlay District has ceased to be an effective governmental arm of the City of Boynton Beach and instead resembles a subsidiary of the dysfunctional nongovernmental POA. As a governmental agency, the duty of the Overlay District is to review engineering plans in an efficient and professional manner and not to delegate their duties to nongovernmental entities, specifically where officials of the Overlay District have a financial relationship with the nongovernmental agencies. Such actions are improper and run counter to the established rationale for the creation of the Overlay District and the expressed goals of the Overlay District. Additionally, due to the fact that Quantum Park is almost fully developed, the regulatory functions that the Overlay District Board has been authorized to provide to Quantum Park properties are no longer essential. The City and South Florida Water Management District already provide necessary regulatory review of development and drainage into Quantum Park waterbodies. These governmental agencies provide the necessary developmental services to Quantum Park property owners and provide oversight regarding proposed development or amendments to existing development in Quantum Park. The Overlay District comprises an unnecessary third layer of governmental regulation. Additionally, instead of providing useful regulatory functions, the Overlay District provides only managerial services for common properties (mainly waterbodies) within the Quantum Park area. These managerial services may be undertaken by either the City or through a professional managerial staff. In fact, it is both beneficial and logical that the managerial functions of the Overlay District should be handled by the City of Boynton Beach either through the auspices of the City or through City professional staff acting as Overlay District board members in order to avoid the type of fiduciary conflicts that are existent in the Overlay District Board. Either of these two alternatives would serve the Quantum Park property owners by bringing back a level of professionalism and accountability to the provision of services in Quantum Park that the Overlay District presently lacks. Olen Properties is thus requesting the City Commission to review and take action to either dissolve the Overlay District or to remove the existing members of the District and place professional staff on the Overlay District Board. The Overlay District was created by the City to deliver community services and facilities to the property owners within Quantum Park. The existing Board has failed to provide such services and has violated the spirit and expressed contents of the Enabling Ordinance. Olen Properties is requesting the City to restore professionalism and accountability to the provision of services in Quantum Park through fulfilling this request. SACHS SAX CAPLAN 6111 BROKEN SOUND PARKWAY NW • SUITE 200 • BOCA RATON, FL 33487 • TELEPHONE (561) 994 -4499 • TELECOPIER (561) 994 -4985 Page 348 of 350 Lori LaVerriere, City Manager City of Boynton Beach December 18, 2014 Page 4 Per your request, we have spoken with several property owners within Quantum Park. We have obtained specific letters of non - objection to our request. We have also received support from other large property owners to our attempt to reform the POA (attached hereto as Exhibit "C "). Although Olen Properties is more imminently affected by the policies and attitudes of the Overlay District Board due to the fact that it owns undeveloped parcels in Quantum Park, it benefits all property owners and residents to restore accountability and professionalism to the provision of services in Quantum Park and to remove the Overlay District, a governmental agency, from the politics of the nongovernmental POA. Thank you in advance for your consideration of this request. We look forward to discussing this matter at an upcoming City Commission hearing in the hope that the City will take action to dissolve the Overlay District or take action to restore the accountability and effectiveness of the Overlay District by removing the existing Board Members and replacing them with professional staff. Very truly yours, SACHS SAX CAPLAN Andre S. Parke ASP /cc Attachments cc: Mayor and City Commission City Attorney SACHS SAX CAPLAN 6111 BROKEN SOUND PARKWAY NW • SUITE 200 • BOCA RATON, FL 33487 • TELEPHONE (561) 994 -4499 • TELECOPIER (561) 994 -4985 Page 349 of 350 14.A. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS 2/17/2015 CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH AGENDA ITEM REQUEST FORM • T•]►► il►► il&1111 Eel ►► ►il=1 =k Il► Eel .7_rIf►14 IFIKIZf~� REQUESTED ACTION BY COMMISSION: Update from Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council on options for Town Square project - 3/2/15 EXPLANATION OF REQUEST: :[•]q►AT ►114M1:11; FM JJx•1IK•3kl'd:J:Z•Ze3:f_1► ►i63•]: M=1:1►T / Eel *' r] FISCAL IMPACT: ALTERNATIVES: STRATEGIC PLAN: STRATEGIC PLAN APPLICATION: CLIMATE ACTION: No CLIMATE ACTION DISCUSSION: Is this a grant? No Grant Amount: REVIEWERS: Department F inance F inance City Manager Reviewer Action Date Howard, Tim Approved 2/9/2015 - 3:39 PM 6- coward, Tim Approved 2/9/2015 - 3:40 PM LaVerriere, Lori Approved 2/11/2015 - 11:10 AIM Page 350 of 350