The URL can be used to link to this page

Agenda 08-23-22 CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD MEETING AGENDA DATE: Tuesday,August 23, 2022 TIME: 6:30 PM PLACE: City Hall Commission Chambers, 100 E. Ocean Avenue 1. Pledge of Allegiance 2. Roll Call 3. Agenda Approval 4. Approval of Minutes 4.A. Approve board minutes from 05/24/2022 Planning & Development Board meeting. 5. Communications and Announcements: Report from Staff 6. Old Business 7. New Business 7.A. Receive staff presentation on building height regulations and provide feedback relative to the potential reduction in the maximum building height permitted City-wide from 150-feet to 85-feet. 8. Other 8.A. Receive a short presentation on the Parks System Master Plan project from consultants, Perez Planning, LLC, and provide any related feedback about Parks and Recreation programming for their consideration. 9. Comments by members 10. Adjournment The Board may only conduct public business after a quorum has been established. If no quorum is established within fifteen minutes of the noticed start time of the meeting, the City Clerk or her designee will so note the failure to establish a quorum and the meeting shall be concluded. Board members may not participate further even when purportedly acting in an informal capacity. Decorum Any person who disrupts the meeting while addressing the Advisory Board may be ordered by the presiding officer to cease further comment 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 Advisory Board members present. Page 1 of 66 Notice Any person who decides to appeal any decision of the planning and development board with respect to any matter considered at this meeting will need a record of the proceedings and for such purpose 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 forty-eight (48) hours prior to the program or activity in order for the city to reasonably accommodate your request. Page 2 of 66 4.4.A. Approval of Minutes 8/23/2022 CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH AGENDA ITEM REQUEST FORM PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT MEETING DATE: 8/23/2022 REQUESTED ACTION BY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD: Approve board minutes from 05/24/2022 Planning & Development Board meeting. EXPLANATION OF REQUEST: HOW WILL THIS AFFECT CITY PROGRAMS OR SERVICES? FISCAL IMPACT: ALTERNATIVES: STRATEGIC PLAN: STRATEGIC PLAN APPLICATION: CLIMATE ACTION APPLICATION: Is this a grant? Grant Amount: ATTACHMENTS: Type Description D Minutes 05/24/22 Minutes Page 3of66 MINUTES � a PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD 100 E. OCEAN AVENUE, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA TUESDAY, MAY 24, 2022, 6:30 P.M. PRESENT: STAFF: Trevor Rosecrans, Chair Mike Rumpf, Planning & Zoning Administrator Butch Buoni, Vice Chair Amanda Radigan, Director Chris Simon Luis Bencosme, Planner Courtland McQuire Andrew Meyer, Senior Planner Tom Ramiccio Rebecca Harvey, Sustainability Coordinator Jay Sobel (Left at 7:49 p.m.) City Attorney Sean Swartz Jennifer Oh, Recording Secretary, Prototype ABSENT: Tim Litsch Lyman Phillips, Alternate The meeting was called to order at 6:30 p.m. 1. Pledge of Allegiance A moment of silence was held in honor of the recent victims in the Texas shooting. 2. Roll Call Roll was called and it was determined a quorum was present. 3. Agenda Approval Motion made by Vice Chair Buoni, and seconded by Mr. Simon, to approve the agenda. In a voice vote, the motion passed unanimously. (6-0) 4. Approval of Minutes 4.A. Approve board minutes from 04/26/22 Planning & Development Board meeting. Page 1: Courtland has a T at the end, which should be removed. Pages 6 and 7: Courtland McGuire should read as Courtland McQuire. Motion made by Vice Chair Buoni, seconded by Mr. Simon, to approve the April 26, 2022 meeting minutes as amended. In a voice vote,the minutes were unanimously approved as amended. (6-0). Page 4of66 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 2 May 24, 2022 5. Communications and Announcements: Report from Staff Amanda Radigan, Planning & Zoning Director, reported the Publix project that came before the Board last month was approved at the May 17, 2022 City Commission meeting. They just submitted for permitting and are moving forward. Ms. Radigan advised that Kevin Fischer, Board member, submitted a Letter of Resignation effective immediately. 6. Old Business -None. 7. New Business —None. 8. Other 8A. Presentation by staff on the City's requirements for preservation and natural areas. Andrew Meyer, Senior Planner, provided a brief overview of conservation, regulations, and policies as follows: • Conservation is the protection of environmentally sensitive lands. Per the Code, conservation is not landscape regulations, which are Land Development Regulations for new Site Plans and mitigation of existing tree removal, nor is it conservation buffers or buffering, which is Land Development Regulations focusing on buffering in incompatible zoning districts. • Regulations are regulated in the Comprehensive Plan under the Conservation Element, both in Goals, Objectives, and Policies, and in Environmentally Sensitive Lands. It is also regulated in the Land Development Regulations through Environmental Protection Standards, and it includes other related ordinances such as tree mitigation. • The Comprehensive Plan includes the Conservation Element. The goal of the Conservation Element is the development and maintenance of a high-quality natural environment based on the preservation and improvement of local existing natural resources. • The Conservation Element covers several topics, but one of the key topics is Eco Systems. Included in the Element is an inventory of these environmentally sensitive lands, which are expressed in a map form and table. These environmentally sensitive lands are identified through a Countywide survey completed in 1989. There is a rating of A — C based on the quality of Eco Systems, with A being the best. They regulate based on these ratings. • The Conservation Element has an Objective 4.5, which states the City shall maintain at least 75% of A rated Eco System Acreage through the long-term planning horizon and it also includes Policy 4.5.3, which requires a detailed Flora and Fauna Survey for A rated sites greater than ten acres with the development proposal. Development applications are also required to preserve a minimum of 25% of an A rated site. A location to preserve on site is determined by the results of the Flora and Fauna Survey. • Environmentally Sensitive Lands are regulated in the Land Development Regulations, specifically Page 5of66 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 3 May 24, 2022 in Section 4.E.4 in the Environmental Protection Standards. That Section is to preserve Environmentally Sensitive Lands from alterations that result in the loss or significant degradation of those lands. A table was shown with the amounts required to be preserved and whether it needs to be a unified preserve within a project or if it can be separated throughout the project. All of them require 25% preservation on site. A rated sites require preservation area be unified on site while B or C rated sites can be unified or preserved throughout the project. • If a development proposed on an A rated Environmentally Sensitive Land is brought forth, that development is required to ensure that no less than 75% of an A rated land is still protected Citywide and that 25% of an A rated land must be set aside on site in the unified area. • Other areas in the City, like Quantum, also have a Preserve requirement, which must be met in addition to the City's requirements. • Whenever vacant sites are developed, even if they are not rated as an Environmentally Sensitive Land, staff may request a Flora and Fauna Survey of the site during the Site Plan Review process. • While not specifically Conservation, Land Development Regulations also provide Regulations for Environmental Protection Standards, which apply to these lands as well as to all vacant lots with existing trees even if it is not in an Environmentally Sensitive Land. • Section 4C requires all existing trees that are not Preserve, in place, or relocated on site shall be mitigated in connection with the Land Development permit. That Code sections includes a table, which gives references as to how trees being removed from the site must be replaced. • Land Development Regulations also regulate landscaping, which applies to all new development, even ones without existing trees. If it is a vacant lot beyond Conservation, they require standard landscaping and buffering requirements. • Section 4 touches on landscaping such as the minimum number of tree species, the number of caliper inch at the time of planting, low to medium water use of vegetation and trees. Exotics are not permitted as part of the landscape plan and signature trees are required to provide a way to identify and access a site. • Under Urban and Suburban Standards, buffering is required because there is a different urban environment east of I-95 versus west, so there are different standards to account for that. In addition, the amount of buffering is related to the degree of incompatibility between parcels and districts. Mr. Sobel mentioned tree replacement and questioned if this is a guideline of how many trees can be replaced; he asked for the numbers. Mr. Meyer explained existing trees are shown on site, so if a tree is being removed the applicant must decide what to replace it with from the list. Mr. Sobel stated when members go on the Board, they have to take an on-site certification, which could have been read if it were presented via email instead of spending time during the meeting. Chair Rosecrans indicated the Board meets to answer questions and to follow up, so this meeting could not have been done through email; some members have follow-up questions. Page 6of66 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 4 May 24, 2022 Mr. McQuire commented he was a little confused about the A rated parcels that were 75% and 25% and asked if that could be broken down and discussed a little slower. Mr. Meyer stated the slide is a hypothetical. A Development Application that comes to the City must meet requirements of the Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Regulations. If a development is proposed on an A rated Environmentally Sensitive Lands, first it must meet the Comprehensive Plan requirement to ensure there is no less than 75% of A rated land that is still protected Citywide. Whenever the inventory is completed as part of the Comprehensive Plan,the applicant must make sure whatever they are proposing is not going to put the Citywide inventory of Environmentally Sensitive Lands less than 75% of what is on the map. There has been little development, but he was not aware of the number off hand. Ms. Radigan did not believe any of the Conservation and Preservation areas have been developed. They are at 100%, but that is based on this map, which was updated in 2008. If they are using this inventory, which is what is formally adopted, they are 100%. Mr. McQuire commented there was a second part with 25%. Mr. Meyer stated the 25% is covered in the Land Development Regulations that require 25% of the A rated land that is part of a potential site or development; 25% of the land on that site must be maintained in a unified manner. Mr. McQuire asked if this presentation is available for members to review in the future. Mr. Meyer indicated the presentation was included with the agenda and is available online. Mr. Simon questioned why development is being allowed on those lands if they are preserving Environmentally Sensitive Lands, which are already designated on the map with limited square footage within the City boundaries. He questioned if the goal is to conserve land that is already designated and why they would want development to occur on that land. Ms. Radigan assumed a total taking of development rights from land that is not zoned Conservation would be a problem if it is privately owned. These are the policies that have been in place and there is room for development of some of the A rated sites, but not a lot. Mr. McQuire asked if any of the sites are privately owned. Ms. Radigan replied absolutely. She mentioned a 100%privately owned parcel that is A rated. There are some instances where the City Eco Park is within this designation, so the City is allowing some development for parking and access. Mr. McQuire mentioned Quantum Park and stated there is already a designated percentage within that site and there is some open space and preserve areas within the property. He commented that he was distracted Page 7 of 66 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 5 May 24, 2022 during one of the questions and answers by a member of the audience who was showing complete disrespect during the presentation, and he did not think that should be allowed. Chair Rosecrans concurred. They are required to maintain decorum in these meetings and if someone continues to be a distraction they can leave. Mr. McQuire mentioned the parcel on the slide that showcases the deeper red and asked if the landowner decides to sell the parcel if the foot path of the parcel would go to City Planning for approval. Assuming the City denies, they can reissue to City Commission for approval and win land usage. He asked if that is a fair assessment. Mr. Meyer advised staff provides a recommendation with any Development Applications that come through. If an application is presented and the Board makes a recommendation to deny, it still goes to the City Commission for the ultimate decision, and they can make the determination whether to deny or approve the project. Any project of that scale would be a major Site Plan Application, which goes through this Board before going to the City Commission. Mr. Litsch commented that South Florida Water Management has recently been allowing some preserve land and Environmentally Sensitive Land along their canal system to be developed. He asked if any of those are called preserve in this survey or if they are potential development sites that are preserved as Environmentally Sensitive Land or Conservation Land. Ms. Radigan was not aware of any along the canals. Some are within the Parks and Recreation Master Plan, and some may be future developed parks, but not necessarily have a Conservation or Preservation overlay. If it did, it would not prohibit it from being developed as a park, it would be sensitively done as a small parking area and foot path. Mr. Litsch was concerned more so in the County where they are starting to take areas that were originally part of a development and they have preserved land along a canal bank that South Florida Water Management wanted them to maintain or preserve and now, developers are proposing to develop those preserved sites along the canal banks, and they are being approved. He questioned if that applies in any of their Conservation or Preservation sites. He is also concerned about the percentages and asked if they could be separated between public and private, so all public land for Conservation purposes would have 100% and there would be no chance of any development on the private land. Ms. Radigan was not sure the type of language that assumes the public preserve space is not 100%. She will review this Element to make sure it is not in there. With direction from the City Commission,policies within the Comprehensive Plan can be amended. There is not a Conservation requirement per capita,there is a level of service requirement for developed park per capita within the City, but not Conservation. The idea is more about developed park space facilities for residents and not necessarily open space, which is usually regulated through a Comprehensive Plan Citywide. There are policies that talk about acquisition of property when appropriated and budgeted. Page 8of66 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 6 May 24, 2022 Mr. Sobel commented that the chart says 394.15 acres and questioned if that is the total in the entire City. If so, he asked what amount is private versus public. Ms. Radigan clarified that is the total of A rated acreage in the whole City. She did not know offhand what amount was private versus public, but she can easily calculate it. Chair Rosecrans asked if Girl Scout Park is considered a Conservation Element for the City. Ms. Radigan did not believe it was on the Conservation list. There are formal recommendations on what constitutes an A, B, and C rated site, so it may be that the specific area does not meet the designation requirements. 8B. Presentation by staff on the City's requirements for sustainability. Luis Bencosme, Planner, provided a brief overview of the City's Sustainability Regulations as follows: • The City has a series of documents that recommend implementation of Green or Sustainable Regulations, which include the Comprehensive Plan, the Climate Action Plan, which was updated in 2010, as well as the CRA Redevelopment Plan adopted in 2016. Staff saw a need to work and draft the requirements, which were presented to the Planning and Development Board in 2019 and adopted by City Commission. The purpose of the Code requirement is to promote Sustainable Development practices as a means of addressing Global Climate Change, Protecting Natural Resources, and ensuring Quality of Life of Existing and Future Residents. It is intended for projects to utilize building design options that ultimately conserve energy, promote a healthy sustainable landscape, and support public health and safety. • The Code applies to all Site Plan Applications that were sold with an increase or replacement of building square footage by 5,000 square feet or more. Some buildings or structures are exempt from the requirements, which include interior renovations that would not cause an increase in square footage and construction of single-family and duplex residential buildings. Some projects are exempt from Building Code requirements of submitted Building permits or the Land Development Regulations in Governmental Review, such as public schools and Federal buildings. • The Code is two-fold, the requirements have two sections. There are required components and every project required to meet the Sustainable Development Regulations is required to provide these components. This includes painting the roof white to reflect sunlight and reduce temperature, installing warm white LED lighting to reduce light pollution, and preserve the quality of life, and installing butterfly attracting landscaping material to protect biodiversity. The other requirement is provision of electric charging stations. This is based on the type of project; if it is Residential, it is one charging station every 51 units and non-Residential, which includes Commercial Industrial projects, is one charging station every 50,000 square feet of building area. • This is a relatively new Code and staff is looking for a way to improve it. Other Cities have implemented EV readiness,which is something they might consider. It ensures the projects provide electric panels and antique conduits needed to install future Level 2 chargers in addition to the required charging stations. Another method would be increasing the number of required EV chargers. Page 9of66 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 7 May 24, 2022 • When it comes to calculating points, an applicant is required to accumulate points based on the type of project. When it comes to Multi-Family Residential and Mixed-Use, Planning Development is based on the number of dwelling units proposed. The more dwelling units, the more points must be accumulated. Non-Residential, Commercial, or Industrial developments, are based on the size of the property. The following categories were highlighted: • Energy cargo, which includes options and opportunities to reduce energy consumption. • Recycling and waste reduction. Options include utilizing recyclable materials and recycling stations at dumpster enclosures. • Water conservation and management options. These methods are to ensure utilization of permeable parking and sidewalk surfaces in combination with a stone water bowl system to capture rainwater to use for irrigation purposes. Applicants and developers are encouraged to group these options to reap the benefits. • Urban nature, which includes green and sustainable landscape options that are intended to encourage biodiversity, protect the habitat, and reduce the heated island affect. • Transportation, which has several options and opportunities that include reduction in surface parking by proposing a parking garage as well as encouraging the use of electric vehicles and other modes of transportation such as biking. • Flexibility, which allows an applicant to somewhat propose their creative green or sustainable methods they have been utilizing. This method must be approved by the Planning and Development Director. Mr. Sobel asked how many points are available on all the charts and noted the threshold is set so low developers do not have to do much to comply. Mr. Bencosme replied there are about 127 points. Ms. Radigan indicated this was the first introduction of Sustainable Development to the City. The idea is to bring a flexible option that is easy to build on in the future. This can easily be changed to require more points, require points in specific categories, move some things to require flat out instead of optional in the flexible category section. The method is incremental steps to move in a more sustainable direction. There are a lot of ways to move this forward and adopt it as the City becomes more sustainable. Mr. McQuire questioned when this presentation was worked up and he asked if it was based off LEED certification. Mr. Bencosme replied this was a collaboration between the Planning and Development staff and Rebecca Harvey, Sustainability Coordinator; it was adopted in 2019. Ms. Radigan advised LEED certification is specific for the building and it allows for a lot of site regulations. Page 10 of 66 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 8 May 24, 2022 Mr. McQuire mentioned the slide that says greater and less than. Chair Rosecrans suggested Mr. McQuire read it backwards. Mr. McQuire noticed there were no requirements for solar and it seems like that is an obvious necessity with energy demands of growing urban sprawl. In concert with that, he mentioned the net metering legislation that has been placed in favor of allowing Cities and individuals to harness their own solar without being governed or regulated by power companies,which is being taxed by kilowatt hour. He asked if solar mandates were put on Commercial or Industrial buildings greater than 200,000 square feet would circumvent future Legislation, allowing this development to be grandfathered in, or if such a policy was passed with the City allowing all residents to benefit from harnessing their own solar and not being governed by companies. Ms. Radigan stated it would depend on the details of the future Statutes as to whether it is preemptive. Most of the time, when preempted by any State or Federal Law, they usually are not grandfathered in; regulations must be revised to be consistent with the laws. City Attorney Swartz commented it depends on the Legislation. If the Legislation is retroactive, it would not matter what the City did. Mr. Simon commented that the City is striving to fix and modify a base model while moving forward and some things could become requirements. He asked if a transition to a requirement is something that needs to be voted on by the Commission of if staff makes the decision. Ms. Radigan indicated regulations can happen either way. The Commission can request to change the policy and bring amendments forward. Staff can also recommend revisions to the Land Development Regulations and present to the Commission for consideration. Any amendments to the Land Development Regulations require the Planning and Development Board recommendation and City Commission approval and it is also adopted via Ordinance, so it is a Public Hearing and a Second Reading. Mr. Sobel did not see landscape open space on any of the lists. To him, that is something that should be reviewed and implemented because a lot of projects are coming into the City, mostly in the higher density areas, and there is a minimal to zero requirement for landscape open space; it has to do more with water retention. He thinks the lack of landscape open space contributes to temperature increase within an area as well as weather patterns. The list of sustainable items is small, and he thinks the list should be updated before adding construction credits. He mentioned charging stations at Commercial locations and noted one charging station per every 50,000 square feet equals zero; the calculation does not add up. He commented a lot of the green energy is controversial and there is a lot of debate as to how much benefit there is. As a City, he thinks they should be aware of what potential harms there are within the types of green energy before recommending it be required. He asked if a developer must get the points or if they are forced to have limited numbers. Page 11 of 66 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 9 May 24, 2022 Ms. Radigan stated every developer that meets the applicability must participate in this program; it is not voluntary. They would have to do the four items required for every development and then each development, depending on what is being constructed, is required to do a certain number of points. Mr. Sobel asked how many required points there are and if they are looking for 15 points beyond as a minimum on some projects. Ms. Radigan advised it could be anywhere within the six categories; there is no regulation that says three points are needed from energy or three from transportation. Mr. Sobel commented that his point is everyone will look for the easiest way out. There are cheap ways to meet the minimum requirements and there are ways that need consideration in constructing the project. He thinks big steps are needed to make changes; bigger increments are needed to accomplish something. Mr. McQuire thinks the easiest possibilities to improve the scorecard should be done. He agreed that 50,000 square feet for one charging station is way too low; a larger number must be mandated, which should be easy. He also thinks Residential units should be raised, which could make a significant difference, and solar should be included on large Industrial and Mixed-Use projects to offset energy usage. Mr. Litsch mentioned LEED certification and noted the scorecard has nothing to do with scoring that is used for LEED certification. He asked if points would be used if a developer received or achieved a certain number of points to get more density or height, or if they would receive any type of incentive. Ms. Radigan stated if a LEED certification building were being built, they would get a lot more points. The system in how this program was modeled is like LEED, but the components are not. She indicated there are no incentives,just requirements. Vice Chair Buoni agreed with everything said. If anyone has been following the Bill about net metering, it sounds like a good Bill, but it is not; they need to be cautious. What is good about this presentation is that staff is listening to the input of the Board, and he thinks most of them encourage a standard to raise. Ms. Radigan advised these conversations are happening at staff level; they are meeting with Rebecca Harvey, Sustainability Coordinator, on these things and they are keeping up to date;within ten years 30% of the cars on the road will be EV, and that is a good basis to start upping some of the regulatory requirements and at a minimum for new construction as it coincides with the ability for growth of EV. Vice Chair Buoni commented that his Village has been having discussions regarding EV charging stations for years. Originally, they were going to put them inside the Village, but there is a section of road, and they have parking places outside their fence where he would personally like to install EV charging stations, so it is multi-use; it would be for residents or whoever drives along 2nd Avenue. They could not give it away for free, so they there would have to be a charge, but to charge, they need a business license, and they are a non-profit, so it gets complicated because of the overlap. There has to be some carveouts to allow that because they would be glad to supply. Page 12 of 66 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 10 May 24, 2022 Ms. Radigan agreed and noted she would be happy to discuss that in further detail. Mr. Sobel commented that everyone he knows who has an electrical vehicle has a charging station at their home. He thinks vehicles are the way to the future, but everyone is going to charge at home unless they are going a long distance. Vice Chair Buoni mentioned condominiums and stated no matter what the documents say, the Legislature has said they must allow residents to have a charging station. They must also assume the financial liability and at the present time, charging stations must be removed when someone leaves or sells their residence. They have already started carving out places where charging stations must be allowed. As of today, Tesla opened all their super chargers to any make of automobile. Mr. McQuire has friends who have Homeowner's Associations that do not allow charging stations. It is not out of the question to ask a new development to have four or five charging stations at the minimum. Mr. Simon commented that projects coming in for review will be ready in three to five years, so why not say 30% of their parking spaces must provide electric charging stations. Ms. Radigan stated staff has been talking about that. Retrofitting existing townhomes and Condominium Associations is difficult because although Homeowner's Associations cannot prohibit it, they still have to meet Zoning and Building regulations. It is difficult if someone has a condominium on the third floor and needs to meter a charging station separate from their unit and from what she has heard, it becomes cost prohibitive. They are reviewing new research and reviewing new Legislation; they will be revising appropriately. Chair Rosecrans thinks the scoring is too low and asked if staff has considered giving a bonus for LEED certified buildings. He asked if they were starting to get a handle on the low hanging fruit and if scoring can be adjusted down at some point so those are worth less. Ms. Radigan advised some language is already there. She noted they would not say LEED, she thinks it is Green Building Accreditations, and the City is exempt from these regulations because they must follow more strict rules. If they were to bring forward an amendment, she thinks the first approach would be to remove things being used repeatedly. It is not that they will be changing points, the first thing would be to remove it from optional to required. Chair Rosecrans asked if a green wall could be Art in a Public Place. Ms. Radigan replied yes, as long as it is approved by their Art Commission. It is budgeted and there has been conversation about this on a few different projects because the Art in Public Places Program has a dollar amount attached. The budget is quite hefty; the requirement is 1% of construction value and 75% is the budget for art and 25% of the 1% is administrative costs. They have big numbers coming in that can be used for some of these elements. Page 13 of 66 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 11 May 24, 2022 Chair Rosecrans mentioned the vault system for stormwater and asked how many points that is. He questioned if developers would want to reduce the amount of permeable area and use the stormwater vaults as a way to get out of open space. Mr. Bencosme replied vault systems are four points. Ms. Radigan stated they have not found that yet. She thinks they have had a couple vault systems and the project on Woolbright had to switch to some sort of vault system, but she did not think it was associated with open space. There are open space requirements; it is 1%to 2%of the overall site, depending on what zoning district they are in. It was short sited not to include open space and give it a lot of merit in the point system to encourage more green permeable space. There are some areas where permeable parking is mentioned, but there is not additional open space. She thinks that can easily be inserted and those types of incentives can be implemented by how many points are required. Chair Rosecrans asked what their neighbors do and if they have looked at Delray requirements. Ms. Radigan did not think they have sustainable development standards. Mr. Simon commented this is a presentation and he asked where they go from here Ms. Radigan advised this came before the Board twice. The first time was informational and joint with the Sustainability Board, and it was to get feedback and comments. They took some of the comments and brought the Board a final for a Recommendation to Commission. There is no action on this item, but they are listening and taking notes. If the Board wants them to move forward with recommendations, they can and they can bring them back for review and ultimately the City Commission will be the approving body. Vice Chair Buoni thought a consensus instead of a motion would suffice. Chair Rosecrans asked if staff could research and come back to the Board. He would like to see what other Cities are doing with this. Ms. Radigan stated they can do something similar to what they did when they initially brought this forward. They can invite the Sustainability Board, staff will conduct research, get with Rebecca Harvey, Sustainability Coordinator, and bring back a set of recommendations with changes. At that time,they will gather feedback and from there they can do an amendment and bring it forward for a recommendation. This would take about two months. Mr. Simon commented there is 1% to 2% required for open space and he does not think any developer would take additional open space for more credits. The only way to go is to require a greater percentage. Ms. Radigan indicated that would become more a complex conversation about development, density, and height, which they are currently having with the City Commission. They expect to have more direction regarding that issue. Page 14 of 66 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 12 May 24, 2022 Vice Chair Buoni thanked staff for the presentation and suggested more presentations during future meetings if there is time. Chair Rosecrans agreed and noted if there is not a lot on the agenda and staff wants to educate the Board, it is welcome. NOTE: Mr. Sobel left the meeting at 7:40 p.m. 9. Comments by Members Chair Rosecrans mentioned meeting decorum and asked if it was handled correctly in the beginning of the meeting. He asked if the City could do anything or if it is only taken care of by the Chair and Board. City Attorney Swartz stated they could talk about getting a Security Guard. If someone is out of line, they can be asked to leave. Mr. Simon commented that most developments coming before the Board are proposing apartment complexes, buildings, etc., they are not proposing condominiums that are owned. He asked where that stems from and if the developers are saying they want to develop apartments because they can make more money than with condominiums, or if it is a type of building required in the district, and if so, if there are means to change it. They have discussed Workforce Housing, Affordable Housing, or Cost of Living within the City. Apartments are coming in with average rents between $2,500 and $3,500 or higher, and if someone purchases a home, a mortgage payment can be less than rent. If they are looking to consider offering more Affordable Housing or Affordable Cost of Living for residents, perhaps that is something to consider when changing zoning requirements. Ms. Radigan explained the difference between apartments and condominiums are ownership or rental. The zoning code does not dictate that product, it dictates use and density. There is nothing physical about the difference between condominium and apartments, it is almost purely market driven. What has been seen in Boynton Beach repeatedly is that apartments get transferred to condominiums and condominiums get transferred to market, depending on the market at the time. Zoning does not distinguish between ownership or rental. Mr. Simon asked if anything could dictate it or require one over the other. Ms. Radigan did not believe so. She is unaware of any City that has those types of factors because zoning is about product, physical impacts, relationships, and compatibility; there is no difference in the product that will be built; it is purely a financial scheme. Mr. Simon stated the other piece is the overall view of the City moving forward. Apartments create or relate to more of a transient lifestyle or transient residence. People who live in apartments are there temporarily until they can afford something or move out of the area. Apartments do not create a local environment of people who are here for a long time. Page 15 of 66 Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 13 May 24, 2022 Ms. Radigan read a document called "Higher Densities, Myth and Facts", which she shared. It talked about some of the points made and she thinks a lot is subjective. Some people cannot buy a home; this is private banking. As a Planner, they strive for housing options, so they do not lean towards ownership or rentals, or condominium or townhomes; their goal is to make sure there are a variety of options to sustain the City, so they have all kinds of demographics. A lot of that is largely dictated by the market and market cycles and switching from condominiums to apartments does happen. Vice Chair Buoni mentioned demographics and noted someone can own a home if they can qualify. Mr. McQuire stated when he was running for District 3, a big concern with many residents was high density, Multi-Family Residential, and rentals. Lenders or lending institutions like to lend money to high density apartment buildings because they deliver dividends in perpetuity. He questioned the balance and how to stave off overflow. He agreed, they need to somehow encourage developers to have home ownership. 10. Adjournment Upon Motion duly made and seconded, the meeting at was adjourned at 8:03 p.m. [Minutes prepared by C. Guifarro,Prototype,Inc.] Page 16 of 66 7.7.A. New Business 8/23/2022 CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH AGENDA ITEM REQUEST FORM PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT MEETING DATE: 8/23/2022 REQUESTED ACTION BY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD: Receive staff presentation on building height regulations and provide feedback relative to the potential reduction in the maximum building height permitted City-wide from 150-feet to 85-feet. EXPLANATION OF REQUEST: At the direction of the City Commission, staff has prepared an informational presentation in order to obtain Board feedback related to building height and potentially reducing the maximum overall height permitted City- wide to 85-feet. Specifically, this would affect two (2) zoning districts: MU-4 which currently permits a maximum height of 100 feet, and MU-C which allows a maximum height of 150 feet. History of Height Over the last 20 years, the City has embraced redevelopment planning which included specific emphasis on the topic of height. In the year 2000, when the height maximum City-wide was 100', public workshops were held for the creation of the Federal Highway Corridor Community Redevelopment Plan ("FHCCRP"), which was later adopted in 2001. In 2002, the City updated the Land Development Regulations (LDR) to implement the changes recommended in the FHCCRP and established the original MU-H and MU-L zoning districts which included a maximum height of 150-feet for MU-H. Mixed use was expanded to Boynton Beach Boulevard in 2006 following the adoption of the Boynton Beach Boulevard Corridor Plan, which established a pattern of increasing intensity from Interstate 95 (being the lowest) to downtown Boynton Beach (being the highest). Also in 2006, the FHCCRP was updated which led to an additional distribution of mixed use heights and densities and established the MUL-1, MUL-2, MUL-3, and MUH zoning districts. The City hosted a series of public workshops in 2016 to consolidate the various redevelopment plans that were drafted, into a single Community Redevelopment Plan (CRA Plan). The LDR was updated in both 2016 and 2017 to further distribute the mixed using zoning districts, per the CRA Plan recommendations. This amendment added MU-4, which provided an intermediate step between the height caps of 75-feet and 150- feet within the Mixed Use and Mixed Use Core classifications. The establishment of the various Mixed Use zoning districts assisted in the creation of the Downtown Transit Oriented Development ("TOD") District Overlay, which is outlined in and around the site that is anticipated to become a future commuter rail station. TOD's often include a mix of commercial, residential, office and entertainment centered around or located near a transit station. Dense, walkable, mixed-use development near transit attracts people and adds to vibrant, connected communities. Successful TOD's depend on access and density around the transit station. Convenient access to transit fosters development, while density encourages people to use the transit system. Examples for Discussion On May 17, City staff gave a brief presentation to the City Commission on the City's building height regulations. To further the discussion, on June 25, 2022, City staff held a workshop for the City Commission on the topic of regulating building heights and presented four examples for discussion that could be used to address lowering the maximum height permitted City-wide. The four examples are as follows: Page 17 of 66 Example A Lower height maximum of MU-C from 150-feet to 85-feet Lower height maximum of MU-4 from 100-feet to 80-feet Example B Lower height maximum of MU-C from 150-feet to between 110-feet and up to 149-feet Example C Make no changes to LDRs; Amend Downtown District portion of the CRA Plan; Reduce proposed intensity on select parcels; for example, parcels slated to go to Mixed-Use High Could be modified to be slated for Mixed-Use Medium. Example D Make no changes. The City Commission has provided direction to move forward with Example A for consideration of a draft and discussion during the September 8th Commission meeting. Feedback from the Board will be relayed to the City Commission along with the proposed amendments to the Land Development Regulations. The Planning and Development Board will be provided the Ordinance at the September 20th, 2022 meeting. Thereafter, the City Commission will consider first reading of the Ordinance on October 18th, 2022, and second reading on November 1St, 2022. HOW WILL THIS AFFECT CITY PROGRAMS OR SERVICES? N/A FISCAL IMPACT: N/A ALTERNATIVES: N/A STRATEGIC PLAN: STRATEGIC PLAN APPLICATION: N/A CLIMATE ACTION APPLICATION: N/A Is this a grant? No Grant Amount: ATTACHMENTS: Type Description Exhibit Exhibit A- Staff Presentation D Minutes Exhibit B - 6/25/22 City Commission Workshop Minutes Page 18 of 66 m mom rn IM MM CN,Q) a LM E o m mom C U) O O U L 0 � L � }a C: Q O CU p _ m O o mof o oo N a� Mo 00 c6 E o N X o LU N co C'7 0 LM s= +r O 0 p (D _O s= U) C Cv 06 U) o CO 0 > N co LL p03 Q O _ p 0 0 0 0) �_ o cn (D D C � = U = O ■ ■ ■ m ■ ■ ■ ■ N { y[c �, " E i �. inl'jiEt�ilt� tjJ I 41 ( J � ate I'll"', i k t N rr„} (� o + n � .._. r - N N co d C^/)0 1 L O W E .� } m cn LL O � v v a) C: a > (6 N -m0 E O }' O C: Q O (6 cn Q o � W O 0 � v c6 N =3O N Z-- .O � -5 U > _ 5 — W W Q N O M N •x O U) a_ w Cf) • { y[c �, " E i �. inl'JiEt�ilt� tjJ I 41 J � ate I'll"', i k t N rr„} N N co d U) ^0^ o W _L>.N W o C/)06 � '� c C/)0 > c cn o > .0 o o E cn N N cn O � � U � U N •cn > •� •cn U � D U C: m Q o U = 0 0 AT An94/ J i 1 N 0 0 o a N f f v j:j 4� N a r, 4,1 �yy r \1 CDl v `o occ W LL LL � L¢l N o n o o C,.) o N N ® N co cn L<L. d . . ca+ rO LM 0 cn - I G O LMC CL LL d s N 06 p ► o � ,- p a . +� LL � U i ,a cn 2 Ln CIO LL D O Cn N ° LL s ati� 1 4 a kt��z I Yll t Q C U CL Q - O � CLCL p Ot f`e Y 4 cr Cl) +� + U N 0) .p 4-1 N (6 O Q co %I;;.,hL, Y. U ULMCa 4-0 p NN (6 .0 N �_ to0 •� Q (6 O O to (o ++ 4-1 0 fn L LO Q Nch cnLM 4-0U ® 4-1 N U (o N > Q = O (1) N N > U N O N (6 ® Q O i p N L L p U o wCDO � oCL) -0 c� a� ' l � � 41 w a a a o19 a a -u o 0 r- E, r SE m v 73 _ y u, c � Co CL CL ° o v s w o ti u ai a NiTS Ln cli —0 tN m co Cl) e., v fii£4 � .. _. � 0. 7 � 'U dpi Cc: as a v > j)j 11YY{ > t 4 � I � � w a a a LLa a a s m : o , s � 0 IL � v v CID U) Q L Q U 0 � L }a .� C U C: Q CU 0 _O m Q E m N m , +r (n 42 O >, m of O O O N a) c6 0 o N X LU N co C'7 0 LM s= +r O 0 N O 2 >, 2. +' C6 VN Q E N 06 � O � 0- O CO 0 �> U (D U Cl) LL p F _ +r Q O _ CO +� (D (D Q p Q o (D p a) = FD (D 0 (D 2 U 2 tr � v x e w u i 0 N N co d IN Q m C6 — U U O M O }, -0 m E v c o N LL o .� m u U 0 0 C6 i N i m N O U O "Mo o -0 U U LN O 0 W N U LL cn W �, 41 a--+ Q X v u }' UU Co cn 07 U +, 41 +-+ O 'n 'n U Q 0 rn rn � v N � D . 0 L7 tr � v x e w u Y i • Y •�� ,� .��- vim, r�� .., , fi 1 yyr n u A z i t�t Q 3 m J U 0 OM O U (/) O ++ Ln i N LL O L p J }' O p •� m U N > U O O (10 i N p z L m N v U N v U O U O O N U Q) U w N C: U � c6 m � p o m CL X U � vi > � N 41 L M v p p m p 2 Ln un LF Q U LL (3) (3) Q) ! ! p p • • • r-I N rn -zt Ln to 17 tr LL� i K� 4 �I ( yf I § yf +1 0 N N co d IN 0 0 ��aabrl9 '41", � � @11,4 R I Ek g � F, wi O4 n TIT l i M I i C _C13 O +r C13O oLL 'ITO C o cn �� LL O cu O }�( , _0 c ?� N 70 _ N a > E �X C6 CL C N O O N Cn j a > C E 7 J � 0 = N D X m N X C cu E -0� 03 E C L 06 IL E = v L 0 0 Q C .L 7 G O cn aD U Fz CO ~o U U) U') � m O LO O 0 U 1 -0 c E. nO > o cn mm E Z Z) C6 x o X000 LL _J o -J a m o _ O O O O O OCD CD CD CD C) -a V OCD N N N N cu N .S N 00 a r w i `~ }a O U }, om 'L C6 m M oco c6 z� c ocoL CL E .L O O D L C C . O Cll O Cll 0L LL _0 5 O L N 2 c 0 � -0 >1 = O (ll Z) L -I--� O O Cll >, Z) U C � x O o o a) o (D c c o _ -1-, O O O LL CO J C (D cn Z 0 .0 L }, 70O }' O m C 0 L � U U � r (D CL 0 0 CD F O N M 0 0 - oA.-J U Q 0 0 (1) o S2 _ � _� N N � NOLL N N � N � U • i �R a #, .f s ;fw x .1 Y� n'M�+t7gp En t (E } Y 7 A 4 �a x t `2 l "'i, Ain, g 3 tt1r rc. k r w,; u� E„tea � x r afs� a �. p 4 r s (`NOT �i1 ''S-` #4r s Zav4 3 �5i azo s� sFa t 13 f r � 1 4n ag 4��s ¢' a. 6 i 3 �. jr i gYda $ ”" s (ei e.' p .,'1,'at ,'d� k`r4Y L 2 fi Ydtg Ea f A 4a�"Y{' ' 1 i�iq , 41 r �r ` � �, 4T " , x��pd "� P ' � �s } c � Jar ap its �p tir r sr A � x Y9 € cam An RINI,'spit 4 ! 3' rr*ybtl Y yS V� `r, rn 14 11 s CD u +- 0b.0 o M M 0 0 co d .n t S I 5`j c f nl E u I �q CD u +- 0 0 0M co (0 d CD9 I E u I �q l I Z O t a LU0 ., AMA U cl •E - m Q 2 0 ILI � Xa LM LM t � H Z Z O N 1 CID fnO •� LO U (6 i A N N O m m N coO co a� Mo 0 0 m m C6 E �_ O ° U w M co 0 LM +r O 0 N O O = }, 's- >, 2.2 +' C6 U) U N O E N 06 � O � 0- O CO 0 �> CO LL -F N i }, O 06 U- O r CO (D C O O 0) O viN ._ Q }, N D (D D >1C (D 2 U 2 C6 O � N Q) •N � m I N L > O Q ?�. O U L) O C6 O +i `�• }' v v Q c Q +� o U b.0 0 O c Cp N +� N N f6 a) O -ON M a) >ra N L ca N ' N � a) - CL � L a o a CL U U w I ,C 0p n Ln O�1. 00 O� O lU 00 rl r-I rl N 2 f'n (M) O ++ 0 0 O O O O O O 0 O 0 O O O O O O O Q 0 O O O O O O r'� a Q0 Q0 000 � m � 000 � N N N h lz:j- m m N 00 O r-i u1 Ln M m l0 N Ol N M l0 lA Ol r4 N N r-I rl Ln m N r-I Ln V) a) - - U -CI f6 U V m U (7 m (10 a) U N -C C CO m CO ca a) m a j o m c a) m C: c� o m oc ca cu a v +, v o ' 4-1 o o v v C) m a m a o Q ®mom p O L v ® =3 ® ®mom _ ro LM LM Oro N Q) r-1 (`n Q 0 � LL ® � U yi N �l +-' c-I p u U C6 4-J U U L U O L Q> O Q U Q Q ® Q Q X '0 M Q U U m U v Q0) 2 ca o UeGoo 1 ..... .. O l I u y IV a� I i 112 ca 17 t TETi ` -, r f!� 2L> w a r3, q i F � a B Z i i ,12 Ot ts Til Sw �9~% l 4 S �n �ft aS t l pa i f \ 1 1' y' i \ 1 . { x NASA ��Sr jkl y P [IMI ,131 j.u.�' �� q Ma owl '�N k93Jb]A IY13 r7 (yJ {k pyqrgI f I d pis Isms WPM Igo A- i MOF, .. � tJICS')y 1 hiN IIk17dIC (i i Pd � >P 'd{ � { 4 lot MIR kT, tfl"" rA �� k I. L a) L ® p MENEM a) E Q _O Q MEN M M ME tiN N C r r r O N N N CN C C C -a,—) O O O H LO r ti ti 04 p � MENEM >_ >_ ®No= > Oft It N C) Z __ __ Oft70 XX X L L L Nv— CLU) Q Q Q O SvRtk t`d1 it�L�» s s O co 110 ma G $ ff�ixX� �4 � � �� vttQYif �4 �' ;; a iUiAt7{d'4t�S V(Ka lvt �}2��,1� � ii. t4{<p Pa t 1� t K�� ti t �uSlS s�teff'}+ 'I� ts�� t e Vt i�ss� € s i ��jr `a c � at t >41 ti ti (D 4EMP N N U) 4EMP U MENEMi —6 C.) —6 N I,- > ® I- > C N N O LO LO —0 r Z5 7 ® N Z N N CD U > U > L6 U) >_ Oft Oft C) > > CD > >TEME TEE > Q Q Q Q Co ®MOM L Q No Oft N N N N N Q QMENEM Q Q ®momQ UUUUoo coo U Lm 0 75 9 7 , .. t t ,a.} Pr " 1,4 w ,fly m—� ys3'v ^�'7�.� link ��7 f � K° � € � ,d,Y✓` � _ s. r ' i All NEW - a 8 i a AIN VO k 4 7 ma CL 2E 0 mom CL M ma C4 Lm TMM 0 N (o d w 'Eft ry � ((44 •vv H ❑ CAIS)`.. _ _ N 9 y_ li x — M1 vn „ w v ff U 1 1. R' � s abs . s CD 0 0 om 0 co 0 a� cc E N d 0 0 %%Moo U) U) ca U) 0 TMM TMM CD M CD CD 0 CL icl U) O O U L (n � L � }a (6 CU O � m Om00 � O O C C (n >' o 4-1O N M000 NO X �° LU co C'7 L6 6 a 0 LM s= +r O 0 N O O = }, 's- >, 2.2 +' C6 U) U N O EN 0S � O � 0- O CO 0 �> CO LL -F N i }, O 06 U- O r CO (D C O O 0) O viN ._ Q }, CU D (D D >1C (D 2 U 2 C6 O � N � I t C VMV AN O 0 0 .co LO L � d 0) E O A.-a s O U E � a� -moo Q � � o � � O � > X06 0 cL cL o _ O O > E O O cn o O W0 0 . . 0 . . If } CL. . '�" t c SEL � Q = US '0 �} I w 0 own a mp co CD O O C ry �`• O Ca O O O i N p N N � cn 4-4 O D N 0 o O '� ca i O •� U LL (n O0U M •� _ w i CQ �cn cm cm c6 0 E 06 a� o � •� N T cn cn TO M o U =3 O r- C O M i -0 O (D O 0 (D Ca N � o O •� Q CO CO _ U z cn C U) O CU C � � p L U CU � CU C U OCU i 00 p c6 +-� � O Om00 � O O (n CU O(6 -0 CZ � m E X o LU co C'7 Cfl a 0 LM s= +r O 0 N O O = }, 's- >, 2.2 +' C6 U) U N O EN 0S � O � 0- O CO 0 �> CO LL -F N i }, O 06 U- O r CO (D C O O 0) O (� N ._ Q }, CU D (D D >1C (D 2 U 2 C6 O � N C C: 0000 cu op �� o po "r' CV to E COO U � -� � �� , O) a� o O)c 0 C6 V C6 O) QO (n N O N O O)� C6 0)•EE O) i O N70 E •L �••� O N � 0 _UV L � �_' QE cu 'L -0 O() O E O) N70 N J (n C (n C C= E 'i N �'� C C C6 O p L E_ C6 U �+� U LM > cn � c6 4-1� N� � O O N ,V JX � opo LO)CU .V L app o NNS U UC � L p � N � U +r Q% O p CaC6'� �� >+ (Dp2 OL ■ ■ N E6 0 OD � Ucl Z LL (n U) c6i) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CD ■ CO■ 0 0 ■ U co U � a) m Q _ >1 > Cl) C13 0 C-) U '� ca -I--� � a) � a) C °-^ = L ^` i UL- � N 0) cp a) �--' (a O c � N > 'arc L > L �._ O � a) � '� � � Q Q U � (U co NVE 0O ti U COO 0 La) q 0 -4-- (= (.) C: L a) Eos oa) LM > -0 a ) C � CL soca � vcn o aL E a) c cn Of) 'o � � L a) c }, -a a) o CL � � a cu a) -0 0) � C ca -0 a) 4� 0_ a) 0 � a Of) 0CE 0 � :3 -0M0 0 Jc6 .E 2t Q �U C6 O C O 0) + m cn 0 � •X 0o .� � 0 UUP — Cll cn to O) o Q _ CL 0 o-� Z Cl) O 0 'Fnocn � � C cncn 000 +0 .Ln >1 00- 00O2 0 V �0 O) o O)o Uro � � � 0 Eo = cn •cam ° � � '� (D0 ooa- Hca N .0 0 O .v CT}>—, X 0 0 O a Q— OUCll C �— � i (n N > Om •- 0 � (nom +r � Cll -0O � •>� � Cll N° L US C13 OUB (D MO L 0tc� cu (D � � }' � � 0 J iia � c.00 � � --C: a) o a) � E 0 7 E � C6 � U � C6CaU UUP N +O+ n m 00 01) CL 0 co E co Om N m 4-0 o 0 a (1) -•p a) a) a) � � C13 �_ a) }, ?0 a) •C L o0 L o N cu E_ (a0C� Fz �NC6 � �L a) JLL U�— •� _0 �ot—a)ca o c oo �a) a) •L �a) = ,oa-)� ou m o � �-0 te o-a) o ` aa) � 0 L)0 cnc �Qa) ° o a) � o o N c > o"+Q LM Oa -0a LOa)N •� OUNz � O L (D �O �(n a)� o �� 4-5 o�O to L �) co i (u ..a) (n u' a� OO V� _ N L p _Q-0 _a 0 C: _ -0.0 c6�0 �; N CLQ,O C/) �a)rz a)L o 0 Eco 0 m a) C>0 Z c6 v/)ca m LL Foa- m ZI CD co co ■ C4 N cn r m rr co L -t co ( C ° QED 0 U i o cli MO _ CL 0-!E '� > Cll ami G1 O Cll p }' cc L� C6 0 i CD 40-- L = O O L- L- (1) Q-0 O •— N ft� y —own 0 N O C6 .N Cll •� Cll C13 U 0 O , � U O � = Q O cn C13 Co •cn L C L O- o _ = E LC 0 cm 0 C6 L O U (D O -0 (D L L 00 . — � .=_ > � > w Ln m O O . 0 > N Q N 00 Q O E 0 (1) 0L LL 0 :3 No= O O N L d7 a--+ (D00 0 CC� V O N a--+ o co E CD a--+ N �CY) O U C'7 0) �CL T- 0 - a Nate1 N c co a) co Q� Coco m cn U CD O co •o Co Co O C: p a� C: N a� O OO co a� 4-0 > c� O O m° U) '^ C � O O i }� U) .co 0 Qm O Om00 � o O m .0 >� -I.- O m C: a� mo o Nx qt LU LO 0) co C'7 a 0 LM s= +r O 0 N O 2 >, 2. +' C6 UN O Cv 06 � O � 0- O CO 0 �> CO LL 0 U -FN i }, O C6 C:)- O = CO (D C O O 0) O viN ._ Q }, CU D (D D >1C (D 2 U 2 C6 O � N 1 C a) •0 > CL a) � C:) O .� LO > � \ co E t� a) c Cb U () ca c0 � c:)- -se Co- o co a) Q (D •L OO C � •p LLJ .. U a) c6 c6 D L O0 -0 U Q W p O U � _ — >, a) o coW _ Lo Co co E CU -0 (D (� d ��I r � i � o- 0 0) Cl) p C) 000 U') C:) F- C: (D "" -- "'- C= cn f' s > •� � 0 ° °0 U') O p p c (FfG0 0 \ � Q CL E O 0 Z �� FFt �� _CU -0C6 CO U a) L� 4-- 0 , r - C6 U O OU -0 j f — i - - C UI N r � `� � — O N Z) Z) ;, � O U C6 N + E ^C^`` = 2 Nom^,, \ Co O O a 'r f,r, ar C (n c6 Uj E E +r mU E E cu Co i •m U a) C 0 = a) O _0O � -o �-- �-- 'O O U C6 M E = � � � Q E caJU X o o c W JJ C� � Nc� 4 L6 (6 L (ll (ll •Q c .cm LO O ; Cll Cu Cll n p n ._ E CZcu Cll -o Q Cll 'i E N > C6 N t O C : C6 c L Q = O (1) ° ya) c cuW O LO C6 C6 _0 (1) a� CU cu C6 Cll cu LM V- >1 Cll O l -FD U — U O > >_ E 0) O U_ O L C6 L E ��r `, N .� N C6 L � }, Q O U.) CL p b Q U c6 V E Z 1 d- Cu c L� 0 0O V C .> OU -0 U N � 0 0 0 N O c c m .o C E O57 0 Ci U Cll Uj E > cn ? 0 E C6 U c C > m N Cl) C6 cn C6 Cll U = aDE _0 -oCll (DO }' O 'p N .. p) -o m � i Cu -I-- O +r N M S U L cmG1 'F +� Cll L cn C6 C) O .E .p CZ c0 E c: c ECll = Q U J U X p O W J V � CVC� 4 L6 (6 s� r A y ; fit phi �� nl QStIyR�\ "'Rem" n ` � RI O Ln N 0) co d L Q O OU U U U Q O N TD > U) O � � N am Q Lr) Q O N N N = O 1 +� L It co E .2 � J LL (o (6 - LLr) (1) U U) _j O_ >, O � � O N LL LL L U) - L a) — a) uj cn � � X CL0C � D 0 0 = � � � 4-0 U co E O N .p U 0 O ++ p N O c6 N �_ 06 V Q L U Co .- (n + N — N -0 c: m .2: Q Of 2 • -13 �tC �9 ( X �� i •�i m, '� , i,,�l�\ � tii i� _..�Iz {r�l(il �; S � ai t�qt �$'(i�1�Y�S srt4� �{ '� �s�f�� }��r��,�, �Y■ %!��} €1 � ,_@ �• llR i��$��i1ti %f�4� S� {��7��}t{f�(i��i�i "i �� 4�1v �t�,' ��,�(}S�Sl,�{��) ��Ys��;��s�' �•�'� � �'� � ,, I��`�� ,� �• y�1 II��G� �}�i�; +�° ��j i� ��i ty��l �t��;�ll�,t��3��j�§��i � l� �'`�4" �� i�� i � Pit;t�� ;- ,; ��;��lt.��t� � � ��$�,s� ,�' �� •i � t�l� lots � s c 'f�S �, �1 # •� �� `°��2�s} �F,,= Mir MAS '2 i 1 � • 1 . 1 1 1 1 • 1 • 1 • • • 1 i • 1 1 • � 1 1 i I r i i i i , 1 tl 1 i I 1 C I C i -. i 1 � � � • • � I • • 1 • Ilei- � Ilei- Ilei- ; Ile�- CIO m 0 rn LO (2) 0) 0 co d Minutes of the City Commission Workshop Held Online Via the GoToWebinar Platform and In-Person at the City Hall Commission Chambers 100 East Ocean Avenue, Boynton Beach, Florida On Saturday, June 25, 2022, at 10:00 A.M. Present: Mayor Ty Penserga Kathryn Matos, Assistant City Manager Vice Mayor Angela Cruz Mike Cirullo, City Attorney Commissioner Thomas Turkin Maylee De Jesus, City Clerk Commissioner Aimee Kelley 1. Agenda Items A. Call to Order - Mayor Ty Penserga Mayor Penserga called the meeting to order at 10:08 A.M. Roll Call City Clerk Maylee De Jesus called the roll. A quorum was present. Invocation by Mayor Penserga The Invocation was given by Mayor Penserga. Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag led by Mayor Penserga Mayor Penserga led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. Agenda Approval: 1. Additions, Deletions, Corrections Mayor Penserga added Public Comment after Item B. 2. Adoption Motion Commissioner Turkin moved to approve the agenda as amended. Vice Mayor Cruz seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. B. As requested by the City Commission, staff has prepared a presentation to review relevant information regarding building height. The presentation includes a review of the history of height regulations and redevelopment planning efforts within the City, the City's current height regulations, a Page 60 of 66 Meeting Minutes City Commission Meeting Boynton Beach, FL June 25, 2022 height comparison, factors for consideration when changing height standards and examples of possible changes for discussion. Amanda Radigan, Planning and Zoning Director, introduced the topic of building height, and the workshop agenda. She spoke about the factors that shape a City: size, population, history, existing "fabric", and socio-economic factors; redevelopment visions and goals; economic development goals; dimensional standards; transit-oriented development (TOD); and principals of a successful TOD-Regional Transportation Authority (RTA). She explained the Geographic Organization of Boynton Beach and showed a map with the main arteries of the City. She spoke about the redevelopment planning since 2000, including the Public Workshops and updates that were given regarding the LDR's and the CRA Plan. She explained the current height regulations: land by height. She showed maps in regard to buildings and communities that are 55 feet and below, and the ones that are up to 150 feet. She explained the current regulations: height limitations by zoning district. She talked about height comparison with municipalities that are within Palm Beach County. She further explained each of the following municipalities' height limitations: Jupiter; Delray Beach; Palm Beach Gardens; Boca Raton; and Boynton Beach. She spoke about the height comparisons of Deerfield; Downtown West Palm Beach; and Pompano Beach. She explained the considerations for the Commission: Economic Development Considerations (TOD); impacts on housing affordability; is a TOD and a rail station site desired; station area goals and employment goals; and the compactness. Michael Cirullo, City Attorney, explained the legal considerations for the Commission. He spoke about the following: amending a comprehensive plan, Florida Statute 163.3184; Development Regulations, Florida Statute 163.3202; zoning in Progress - Smith v. City of Clearwater, 383 So.2d (Fla 1980); Moratorium WCI Communities v. City of Coral Springs, 885 So.2d 912 (Fla. 4t" DCA 2004); property rights; Bert J. Harris Jr. Private Rights Protection Act, Florida Statute 70.001; and examples of potential Bert J. Harris claims. Ms. Radigan went over examples for discussion: Example A- Lower height maximum of MU-C from 150 feet to 85, and from 100 feet to 80. She explained the considerations for Example A. She spoke about Example B- lower height maximum of MU—C from 150 feet to 110-149 feet. She explained the considerations for Example B. She spoke about Example C- make no changes to LDR's; Amend downtown District portion of the CRA Plan; Reduce proposed intensity on select parcels; MXH (150 feet) to MXM (75 feet) or MXL (55 feet). She explained the considerations for Example C. She spoke about Example D- Make no changes. She explained the considerations for Example D. Kathryn Matos, Assistant City Manager, explained that there are technical difficulties happening, and that there are issues with comments by virtual guests. She provided her 2 Page 61 of 66 Meeting Minutes City Commission Meeting Boynton Beach, FL June 25, 2022 email to the remote audience and invited them to send their comments so she can read them into the record. Commissioner Turkin thanked Ms. Radigan for the presentation. He asked if the dwelling units near the TOD includes existing structures. Ms. Radigan responded yes and outlined the additional units, if all the planned projects are constructed and built as planned. Commissioner Turkin asked if Boynton Beach is competing with Delray Beach for a TOD station. Ms. Radigan responded that she wouldn't say that we are competing but cannot speak on whether the RTA would put a station in both Boynton Beach and Delray Beach. Commissioner Turkin asked if there can be language crafted to allow for site plans to continue. City Attorney Cirullo explained how the City could continue to allow for site plans. He explained development standards and tradeoffs, to offset height differences. Commissioner Turkin said that he preferred Example A as a resolution. Commissioner Kelley commented that she feels like there are few vacant parcels left, and that she likes the idea of restricting individual parcels without having to go through a complete height restriction. She thanked Ms. Radigan for her presentation. Vice Mayor Cruz mentioned that she would still like to speak to Ms. Radigan in regard to this. She stated that she is concerned with traffic, and legal takings of properties. She stated that she would potentially be in favor of amending the CRA Plan but would like to educate herself further before deciding. Mayor Penserga stated that this is a fascinating topic and more complicated that he thought. He explained that in regard to competing, we are going against all other downtowns. He said that there are concerns of traffic, and when you live close to a restaurant, it is walkable and easier to get to. He asked why some places are not taking advantage of the full height allowed right now. Ms. Radigan explained why it might not be advantageous for a business to go to the full height allowed. Mayor Penserga asked how Floor Area Ratio (FAR) is calculated. Ms. Radigan explained how FAR is calculated and the minimums. She further explained the setbacks and step backs, and everything that is included. 3 Page 62 of 66 Meeting Minutes City Commission Meeting Boynton Beach, FL June 25, 2022 Mayor Penserga gave an example and asked about property rights. He summarized what their options are: tall and skinny or short and fat structures. Vice Mayor Cruz stated that she would like to find a way to find green space without taking someone's property. Mayor Penserga asked for clarification on the term "taking." City Attorney Cirullo explained what it would mean by the City taking a property. He explained that they also have to go through steps, and everything is really fact specific. He spoke about what the best and right steps are, instead of speculating. Vice Mayor Cruz spoke about moratoriums. She asked if the City wanted to establish one, what would be the steps and how long would it be. City Attorney Cirullo explained what the process is, identifying what the goal is, getting recommendations from the Planning and Zoning board, it would go as a public hearing at two Commission meetings, and then figuring out how long the moratorium should be, while reviews are being done. He stated that a moratorium is usually 3-6 months. Vice Mayor Cruz asked if it would pause any projects being approved. City Attorney Cirullo responded that it depends on where they are at in the process. He stated that it depends on what the Commission would like to do. Commissioner Turkin stated that the City has options, and he explained what people in his district would like to see in the downtown area. He said that we don't need height to be successful and offered that this is a way to be proactive, not reactive. Commissioner Kelley commented that it seems like we are asking for updates on where the City is in regard to drainage, infrastructure, road maintenance, utilities projects, and what's upcoming for our downtown. Mayor Penserga asked staff what the role of development projects in infrastructure is. Ms. Radigan explained concurrency and existing issues that the City has. She stated that any development that is approved has to be mitigated by that property, such as utilities, and traffic. She explained the TCEA, and that it is generally in the downtown areas. She spoke about the Transportation Mobility Plan, and how we can move people in different ways and not just cars. C. Public Comments 4 Page 63 of 66 Meeting Minutes City Commission Meeting Boynton Beach, FL June 25, 2022 Susan Oyer, 140 SE 27th Way, Boynton Beach, explained the voting history of the City in the 1980's. She spoke about keeping the height low. She spoke about drainage. Evangeline Ward stated that economic development means more Police, more schooling, and not being able to get around easily. She said that the City residents needs to be able to feel safe. She said that we need to be practical about what we're thinking about doing. Thomas Ampliss stated that he came to Boynton Beach to get away from all of the traffic in Boca, and that we are turning into Boca. He stated that we need to look at the long- term goals. Mara George explained that there was a plan that was passed a long time ago because of Al DeMarco. He said that there has been good and bad growth, but we need to get back to smart growth. He stated that we have great staff that looks at everything before it moves forward, and he commended staff. Christy Ward spoke about housing affordability, and how cost of living has gone higher. She said that we need to fix what we have now. She stated that we need to count the cost of this, how it will affect us, and who are we trying to attract. Michael Weiner, spoke about traffic, building volume, canyonization, compatibility, other municipalities and their cost. He said that it is not going to wreck Boynton. Cortland McGuire, 506 Whispering Pines, Boynton Beach, spoke about wanting a vibrant downtown and what it looks like. He commented on projects that are upcoming, greenspace, and rail stations. He suggested hosting another workshop. Mike DeBose spoke about trying to meet the needs for a train station. He commented that he has sent listings of properties to developers, and nobody is interested because of the red tape that Boynton already has. Tyler Knight stated that he understands why having a 4-story building would exacerbate the downtown. Jim Knight explained that a long time ago people were against Walmart, but it was built and is great for the community. He spoke about limiting ourselves to rental products. He said that Delray is better for TOD. Bill Morris commended staff for the presentation. He commented about density in Delray, and smart growth. He stated that this City is looked upon favorably and to think about not doing a moratorium. He thanked the Commissioners for their service. He discussed historical points about Boynton Beach. He spoke about the Fire Department. Virtual comments were read by Assistant City Manager Kathryn Matos. Mayor Penserga closed public comments. 5 Page 64 of 66 Meeting Minutes City Commission Meeting Boynton Beach, FL June 25, 2022 Commissioner Turkin asked about the LDR and if it was a change to the CRA Plan. Ms. Radigan explained the consolidated plan. She said that the original plan went up to 150 feet. She explained the changes that have been made over 20 years. Commissioner Turkin stated that we need to consider what we are voting on and mentioned that him and his neighbors do not want a train station in their backyard. He said that they have a lot to discuss and maybe another workshop meeting is needed, so they can go over their options. Commissioner Kelley thanked the residents that attended and staff. Vice Mayor Cruz stated that she wishes we would have had more residents. She stated that she will continue to speak with staff to see how we could best move forward. Mayor Penserga thanked everyone. 2. Adjournment There being no further business to discuss, the meeting was adjourned at 12:22 P.M. ATTEST: Maylee De Jesus, MMC City Clerk 6 Page 65 of 66 8.8.A. Other 8/23/2022 CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH AGENDA ITEM REQUEST FORM PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT MEETING DATE: 8/23/2022 REQUESTED ACTION BY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD: Receive a short presentation on the Parks System Master Plan project from consultants, Perez Planning, LLC, and provide any related feedback about Parks and Recreation programming for their consideration. EXPLANATION OF REQUEST: HOW WILL THIS AFFECT CITY PROGRAMS OR SERVICES? FISCAL IMPACT: ALTERNATIVES: STRATEGIC PLAN: STRATEGIC PLAN APPLICATION: CLIMATE ACTION APPLICATION: Is this a grant? Grant Amount: Page 66 of 66