Loading...
Minutes 02-06-23 DRAFT MINUTES � a PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD 100 E. OCEAN AVENUE, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 2023, 6:30 P.M. PRESENT: STAFF: Butch Buoni, Vice Chair Amanda Radigan, Planning and Zoning Director William Harper Andrew Meyer, Senior Planner Chris Simon (Left at 8:59 p.m.) Luis Bencosme, Senior Planner Courtlandt McQuire Jae Eun Kim, Principal Planner Thomas Ramiccio, Alternate Sean Schwartz, City Attorney Leslie Harmon, Prototype, Inc. ABSENT: Tim Litsch Trevor Rosecrans, Chair Jay Sobel GUESTS: Bradley Miller, Urban Design Studio, and Land Planner Rob Singer, Time Equities Kemissa Colin, Vice President of Development for Affiliated Development Elliott Young, Senior Vice President with RINCA, Architect Jeffrey Burns, CEO of Affiliated Development Nick Rowe, President of Affiliated Development The meeting was called to order at 6:32 p.m. 1. Pledge of Allegiance 2. Roll Call Roll was called and it was determined a quorum was present. 3. Agenda Approval Mr. Simon requested hearing Item 7D first and pushing staff items to the end. Amanda Radigan, Planning and Zoning Director, explained those items are part of the Master Plan Amendment,which is why they are presented first.Modifications must be heard in order to hear the Master Plan. At final approval, they can take it out of order if the Board chooses, but there will be more information in those amendments that are pertinent to the Town Square. Mr. Simon stated he is only available until 8:45 p.m. Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 2 February 6, 2023 Motion made by Mr. Simon, and seconded by Mr. Ramiccio, to approve the agenda as amended. In a voice vote, the agenda was unanimously approved (5-0). 4. Approval of Minutes 4.A. Approve board minutes from the 11/29/2022 Planning & Development Board meeting. Motion made by Mr. Simon, and seconded by Mr. Harper, to approve the November 29, 2022 meeting minutes. In a voice vote, the minutes were unanimously approved. (5-0). 5. Communications and Announcements: Report from Staff Amanda Radigan, Planning and Zoning Director, welcomed everyone to their first 2023 meeting. She made two announcements as follows: • Lyman Phillips has resigned from the Board, so there is a vacancy for an Alternate position. • An update was provided on a variance for the Pierce project at the November 29, 2022 meeting. The item was heard by the City Commission; however, it was tabled. The item will be moving forward with the rest of the applications for that project, and it will be heard in February and again in March. Mr. McQuire clarified it was an eight-foot variance abutting another property and it will be heard again for a Second Reading. Director Radigan stated the Planning and Development Board approved the project, and it was moved to the City Commission meeting and tabled to carry concurrently with the other applications. Today, the Board will hear everything from that project except for the variance since they already acted on it, and the variance will move forward to two City Commission meetings, which will be February 21, 2023, and in March. 6. Old Business -None. 7. New Business 7A. Approve modifications (CDRV 23-003) amending the LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, Chapter 2. Land Development Process, Article II, Planning and Zoning Division Services, Section 2. Standard Applications, to establish a process for proposed Development Agreements. Andrew Meyer, Senior Planner, provided a presentation regarding the Development Agreement Process Amendment as follows: • Development Agreements allow the City to set terms and conditions of developments, which are typically used in large projects and/or in private public partnerships; otherwise, known as Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 3 February 6, 2023 P3's. Per State Statutes, Development Agreements can have terms of up to 30 years and freeze the City's development standards currently in effect for the length of the contract. The City does not currently have a process for Development Agreements, so any Agreements fall upon the minimum requirements set by Chapter 163 in the Florida Statutes. • This proposed Amendment basically sets the Development Agreement Process within City code and allows the City to set additional standards above State Statutes. It includes three notable changes. First, to qualify, the project must be at least 15 gross acres to be eligible to enter into Development Agreements with the City; these are typically very large projects like Town Square and the Mall site. Second, it establishes submittal requirements of the State Statute including requiring a Master Plan or Conceptual Site Plan to be approved at the same time as the Agreement. Finally, it allows for flexibility within current standards to provide for alternative standards if approved by the City Commission. • Alternative standards include establishing a public art fee within the Agreement, the ability to reserve utility capacity for water and waste water service for up to six years from the date of the Agreement at no developer cost, Master Plans or Modifications approved with the Development Agreement shall remain valid up to 24 months, and developers will have up to 72 months after a Site Plan approval as part of a Development Agreement to secure building permits. • It is important to note that the City Commission chooses which, if any, alternative standards are made available in a Development Agreement. None of these options are going to be given by right. Mr. Ramiccio mentioned 44, the 72-month timeline, and questioned if that is standard. It seems a little long after Agreements and Site Plans have been approved. Mr. Meyer indicated these are going to be typically larger projects that have a longer timeframe hence the 72 months to capture that. Director Radigan advised there are a couple reasons why they landed on 72 months. First, it is important to remember that Development Agreements are not necessarily per Site Plan, so there may be multiple Site Plans within one Development Agreement. For example, a Master Plan consisting of four different Site Plans, with part of that being flexibility for phasing of the Master Plan that is going to be sequential and not cause delays in the approval process. They are trying to front end it and allow them to have availability by right for a longer period of time. It is also important to note that since Development Agreements can have a life up to 30 years per State Statute,they are trying to maximize their development into elements as much as feasible for now. They want to make sure they are minimizing risk on both sides, so the City and developer know what they are contractually obligated to do. Mr. Simon questioned the time of completion for the project and asked if what is currently in the code changing. Director Radigan stated there is no flexibility. Once a Site Plan is vested, they must adhere to building permit timelines and meet certain inspections every six months to keep the project alive. Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 4 February 6, 2023 Mr. Simon mentioned phasing for the Site Plan approvals and asked if Phase 1 is approved if it has six years to go in for a permit and that is when the City seeks fines or delays in the project. Director Radigan replied yes. It depends on the language of the Development Agreement; otherwise, it would rely on the code. The code would say that once the common order has expired, which is 18 months in normal cases, and in this case, it could be up to 72 months,time extensions are available and they would have to come to the City Commission and request those time extensions. Mr. Simon stated if Phase 1 is approved,they go for building permits and then other Phases could take up to the 72-month period. He asked if they could come in for Phase II eight years later since they have approval for Phase 1. Director Radigan advised every Development Order would have 72 months attached to it. Mr. Simon asked if this is strictly for projects that are joint ventures with the City. Director Radigan clarified this is strictly for projects going into Development Agreements, and it is still within the negotiation of the City Commission; it is not by right. Attorney Schwartz swore in all individuals who wished to speak on any items. Vice Chair Buoni opened discussion to the public. Hearing none, the public discussion was closed. Motion was made by Mr. Simon, and seconded by Mr. Ramiccio, to approve Item 7A. In a roll call vote, the motion passed unanimously. (5-0) Ayes: Harper, Simon, McQuire, Ramiccio, Buoni Nays: None 7B. Approve modifications (CDRV 23-002) amending the LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, Chapter 3. Zoning, to modify requires for commercial frontage within the Boynton Beach Boulevard Overlay. Andrew Meyer, Senior Planner, mentioned that the Board reviewed and recommended approval for Commercial Frontage Amendment to the code in 2022 establishing those requirements and this is going to be an Amendment to that. This is very limited in scope and is only along Boynton Beach Boulevard between Seacrest Boulevard and Federal Highway. Any of the other corridors identified in the previous Code Amendment are not being touched as part of this, so this is specific to that section. These are adjustment terms unique to the Boynton Beach Boulevard overlay. • The historical development pattern east of Seacrest Boulevard to Federal Highway is shifted towards Ocean Avenue and Downtown to focus those commercial uses and activity to that area. Boynton Beach Boulevard is more designed to move traffic between Federal Highway and Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 5 February 6, 2023 Seacrest Boulevard and also points west. Heavy traffic along Boynton Beach Boulevard should stay on there and not be routed through Ocean Avenue because they want to focus commercial and pedestrian friendly activities, etc. along Ocean Avenue. • Previously approved projects along Boynton Beach Boulevard are already oriented towards Ocean Avenue and they orient more garage access and things of that nature along Boynton Beach Boulevard, so it requires an amount of frontage that might not create an acceptable cohesion along that corridor. • The idea is to reduce the amount of frontage east of Seacrest Boulevard and west of Federal Highway,but not to completely eliminate it. It is currently set at 70%and the Amendment reduces commercial frontage from a 70% requirement down to 40% only along that corridor. The 70% commercial frontage requirement will remain along the remainder of the corridor from Seacrest to I-95. • There is also an Amendment to eliminate the commercial frontage requirement along Seacrest Boulevard, which is a residential street, so requiring commercial explicitly in that overlay, which is about 300 feet north and south of Boynton Beach Boulevard, is not very conducive, but it will not prohibit commercial units from establishing within that area if a development comes in and chooses to do so. • There is clarification on what is meant by minimum commercial space height. Previously, the code was vague and said ceiling height of 13 feet. Precisely, it is the vertical distance between the top of the first floor slab and the bottom of the second floor slab. The idea is that there is enough clearance to create quality commercial spaces. Ceiling is kind of ambiguous and can be measured either to the slab or to the finished ceiling, so they are clarifying that, so it is clear for developers. Mr. McQuire asked if the ceiling height is currently 13 feet and if it is increasing or is the same. Mr. Meyer stated the current code says 13 feet and they are just clarifying the beginning and ending of that measurement. Mr. Simon commented that does not seem that high and noted a lot of retail and commercial spaces occupy 14 or 15 feet. Mr. Meyer stated this is the minimum requirement; they want to provide a little flexibility because if it is set too high it might limit commercial in a way that might not be feasible. Mr. Ramiccio understands the reason of flipping commercial towards Ocean Avenue and off Boynton Beach Boulevard. He mentioned commercial traffic entering and exiting onto Boynton Beach Boulevard and the short distance between the building setback and the edge of road and asked how the City will enforce traffic safety and if there is enough distance. He questioned if this wants to trigger the building setback further off Boynton Beach Boulevard. Mr. Meyer advised this is not a change to the setbacks, this is only to the commercial frontage requirement. He is not a Traffic Engineer, so he cannot say whether their site visibility is adequate, but Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 6 February 6, 2023 these requirements do not relieve a developer from meeting site visibility requirements; all that is reviewed by the Engineering Department. Mr. Ramiccio thinks they should go hand in hand because if they wanted heavy commercial presence on Boynton Beach Boulevard they have active space, sidewalks, passive areas, and then the buildings and different configurations. If they are eliminating that as part of the frontage on Boynton Beach Boulevard, then they should go hand in hand. Director Radigan indicated that the active barrier requirement and the pedestrian requirements are being proposed to stay the same and those requirements can be satisfied in different ways depending on what is being constructed. There is an active area that would be required if commercial is proposed and the requirements in this Amendment are not going away, the frontage is being reduced from 70% to 40%. She still thinks it would be important to maintain an active area to use in conjunction with commercial spaces, but in the area where they are not abutting a commercial use, that space can be satisfied with enhanced landscaping with extended pedestrian ways. There are different mechanisms to use that space, depending on what they are abutting, but the space does not necessarily need to change. Mr. Simon mentioned ingress and egress for vehicular traffic coming from Boynton Beach Boulevard and asked if there would be a minimum distance requirement between the two components if there is a potential of a restaurant with outdoor seating. If landscaping is being increased in those areas, it reduces visibility. Director Radigan advised the code says explicitly if there is a side street, they shall not enter from Boynton Beach Boulevard. She thinks every project they have been approving on Boynton Beach Boulevard has access to the garages first,which is a block behind it,not from Boynton Beach Boulevard, to reduce conflicts between pedestrians and vehicles. The Engineering Department has a full set of engineering standards that talk about site visibility requirements and different scenarios. Through the Site Plan process, they would decide where it is safe for the spaces to be. The code does not say where the space needs to be, it just needs to front the road and it is a certain percent. It has flexibility built in to say this is an appropriate place for commercial space or not. All of that is reviewed on a site-by-site basis, but there is not verbiage regarding a set or minimum distance within the Land Development Regulations; those are housed within the Engineering handbook in the Engineering Division. Mr. Simon agreed with the ceiling heights and thinks that could be considered. There are a lot of commercial spaces that are sometimes two stories or single floors with higher ceiling heights. Most developers will build with the minimum, so he thinks an increase would benefit the City in the long run. Mr. Ramiccio recalled Director Radigan's presentation on the Board increasing the commercial engagement of those, especially on the main corridors, so something has changed. He asked why they are keeping it at 70% west of Seacrest Boulevard and why there is a reduction east. When he looks at that he sees the Time Equities project and asked if this is something specific to accommodate the hotel fronting Boynton Beach Boulevard. He also questioned the change of philosophy of what they want as a community from having more engagement regarding commercial. He noted that the Board recently changed the code to accommodate staff's recommendation and now they are slipping back. When Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 7 February 6, 2023 addressing this, Director Radigan made a comment that she did not think commercial should be on Seacrest Boulevard, but if commercial were to go on Seacrest Boulevard, he questioned if they would have to comply with the FAR and square footage engagement for commercial on Seacrest Boulevard. He asked what happens if Time Equities does not go through and if staff will come back to the Board because a new project came in and they want to go back to the engagement with the larger square footage. He asked if this is considered spot zoning and if they are doing this specifically for this project. Director Radigan stated when the original amendment was done, it was done through a series of overlays, which are locationally driven. While staff stands behind those recommendations, she thinks their hindsight is 20/20 and a lot of projects within the Downtown area stretch from Boynton Beach Boulevard to Ocean Avenue. When projects do that, they are under two different overlays; the Boynton Beach Boulevard overlay and the Ocean Avenue overlay. They were having that requirement in multiple locations, which could cause some infeasibility within those areas. Historically, she would say that the City, for as far back as the can remember, had the goal of creating Ocean Avenue as their pedestrian commercial roadway. As much as they would like Boynton Beach Boulevard to be vibrant and pedestrian-friendly, it has some attributes that make it difficult; its width, scale, speed, and the number of vehicles make it less conducive for commercial frontage. Ocean Avenue has a much more pedestrian- friendly scale where people can outdoor dine, shop, and walk along the street without having vehicles speeding by them. She does not think it was a change in philosophy, she thinks they are being true to what the overall goal is for Ocean Avenue and the constraints of Boynton Beach Boulevard. She thinks this is a refinement of the initial amendment. Regarding spot zoning, since this is done through overlays it affects multiple properties. Several parcels in this area have been approved and if revised, they would need to meet current standards and a new development would also need to meet the new standards. Vice Chair Buoni opened discussion to the public. Attorney Schwartz swore in all individuals who wished to testify. Mark Meyer, 633 Ocean Inlet Drive, Boynton Beach, Florida, was present as the INCA President; INCA is a non-profit. They have been in review of the Text Amendments and the proposed language and believe the percentages need to go in the opposite direction. They think it needs to go to 100%, and feel it is inconsistent with the existing Land Use; it is also inconsistent with what the public wants. The public did a survey six months ago with the CRA and the results were that people want retail restaurants, so a reduction is inappropriate. If speed is a concern on Boynton Beach Boulevard, which has a speed limit of 35 miles per hour, he recommended more speeding tickets be issued. He noted that traffic calming devices could also be used. He thinks this item should go back to the drawing board because it is not consistent. Everything to the west of Seacrest Boulevard is residential between I-95 and Seacrest Boulevard. People are going to walk to the main corridor, which is Ocean Avenue and the streets around it. He thinks 100% frontage would be appropriate with an option to relocate that to another area in the corridor or perhaps 50% frontage if they do two stories. He noted he is a Land Use Planner by trade and has a background in finance and construction, and mentioned the 13-foot height is minimal; after three feet of mechanical, plumbing, etc., they end up with a nine or ten-foot ceiling, which is not great. Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 8 February 6, 2023 Boynton Beach Vice Mayor Angela Cruz, suggested the Board look at the history and facts, and the fact that the Commission unanimously approved the 70%requirement all through Boynton Beach Boulevard on October 18, 2022, and again on November 14, 2022; it was a 5-0 vote. Chuck Bagley, 210 SE 2nd Avenue, mentioned egress onto Boynton Beach Boulevard and questioned where traffic is going to go from 1st Street. He thinks commercial on Boynton Beach Boulevard makes much more sense. Vice Chair Buoni closed public comments. Motion was made by Mr. Simon, to approve Item 7B. Motion failed as there was no second. Attorney Schwartz recommended the Board make a motion to approve or deny since this is an Advisory Board. Motion was made by Vice Chair Buoni, to approve Item 7B. Motion failed as there was no second. Motion was made by Vice Chair Buoni, and duly seconded,to deny Item 7B. In a voice vote,the motion passed unanimously. (5-0). 7C. Approve modifications to modify the existing methodology for the Payment in Lieu of Workforce Housing Units program; to include an FAR bonus; and to clarify the receiving areas for height, FAR, and density bonuses (CDRV 23-001) by amending LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, Chapter 1, Art 11. Sec. 2. C.II. In-Lieu and Off-Site Options (related to the Workforce Housing Program). Luis Bencosme, Senior Planner, described the proposal for Workforce Housing Payment in Lieu Amendment. Staff is proposing minor changes to the existing Workforce Housing Program, which are intended to make existing Payment in Lieu a more attractive and a feasible option for developers. They want to do whatever possible to make this a more popular option. He provided a brief overview of the existing program as follows: • The program is completely voluntary and is intended to encourage the construction and availability of much needed Workforce Housing for low to moderate income people by helping to offset the rising costs of land and construction with a provision of a density and/or height bonus. • As an alternative to building Workforce Housing units, the program allows developers to make a monetary contribution to be used as a Housing Trust Fund with a Pay in Lieu option, which is based off a percentage of the total number of units proposed. • The program has not been as successful as intended; it is largely underutilized and staff believes that is because of the existing payment methodology that requires developers to pay for more units than what will be provided through the program. Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 9 February 6, 2023 Proposed Amendments: • Applicant is proposing to change how the Pay in Lieu fees are calculated. Instead of basing fees on a percentage of the total number of dwelling units constructed, developers will be responsible for paying applicable Pay in Lieu fees based on the number of bonus dwelling requested. • For example, the way fees are currently designed, depending on the project type and location, there is a certain percentage that ranges from 15%, 20%, or 25% of the total number of dwelling units the developer will have to pay for. The fee is based on whether the unit is for sale, which is about $82,000, or for rent, which is about $36,000. • In a vision, staff is including a one-half floor area ratio (FAR) bonus to ensure that the units can actually be built. Staff has added a provision to prevent the combination of the Pay in Lieu option with other provisions to increase density. • The proposed amendment further clarifies the receiving locations where height,FAR, and density bonuses can be requested. Mr. McQuire commented that this is a proposal to allow developers to increase density, and therefore, they can pay to circumvent the Workforce Housing portion of the City's or County's recommendations. Mr. Bencosme stated it is based on the income cap. Director Radigan clarified the current Workforce Housing Program has two options; there is a Build Program and a Pay in Lieu Program, and both would be considered participation in the program. One gets to build units and the other gives a fee, which is put into the City's Housing Trust Fund, which the City uses to fund Workforce Housing. Mr. Ramiccio commented that they do not have unlimited land supply in Boynton Beach. It is almost promoting for developers to do this and historically, with the County, developers pay a fee. He thinks this is very developer-friendly and he does not like the project. Director Radigan stated that the program is voluntary, both the Payment or the Build Program, unlike the County, which has a mandatory vision and zoning ordinance. Her understanding of the County program is that Workforce Housing must be produced. It does not necessarily need to be on sites, they have displacement programs where they have to provide Workforce Housing if it is not within the project and is in another site within the County. Mr. Ramiccio reiterated that he does not like this project, it is counter-productive to what Boynton Beach is trying to do. They want to create something special and in looking what they really need, they need Class A office space, but they are trying to jam all the Workforce and Affordable components to Downtown, which is not necessary. If they open their minds about the future of how they want the City to evolve, he does not see this in the picture. When talking about the County's program, if Affordable Housing needs to be built in Boynton Beach,they could take the portability and build those in Belle Glade or Riviera Beach, There is no trigger or mechanism for Boynton Beach to get Affordable Housing with a Payment in Lieu of. As Mr. McQuire mentioned, most of the developers are going to pay into the In Lieu of fee. He asked if there is a substantial amount of money in the Housing Trust Fund. Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 10 February 6, 2023 Director Radigan replied no. Part of the reasoning is that this program as a whole, the Workforce Housing Program,both Build and the Pay in Lieu Program, have been largely unsuccessful. She thinks it is because of how the methodology is laid out to pay for the units. There are circumstances where they would be paying per unit at a higher rate than they would be given density for with the current program. This modification adjusts that. This amendment does two things to get this portion of the program running; the first is to adjust how they count the fee, and the second is the addition of an FAR bonus of.5%. As said previously, staff and the Commission recognize a larger overhaul of this ordinance is required and is a much larger undertaking than what is happening. This is trying to pump some life into the program they have had a lot of interest in, but so far it has been infeasible for developers to participate in. Mr. Ramiccio is hearing from the Board, as well as the Commission, that they do not want to see an increase in density and offer as an incentive more height and density for Affordability. He heard if a hotel or something spectacular would come Downtown that they would be flexible. He thinks this is tied to this upcoming project because the other projects already have vested rights. Director Radigan indicated this would apply to any project that is going to be submitted under the current regulations. Other projects might be under the previous version. Mr. Ramiccio stated they are talking about going forward with new projects and he asked if Time Equities would be one of the projects that needs to conform to this. He questioned if this is being adjusted for the Time Equities project. Director Radigan advised this is a Citywide change, the calculation of how they calculate Workforce Housing is Citywide, not just locational. Mr. Ramiccio questioned why they would not make it a requirement or mandate that units are built as part of the project instead of the Payment in Lieu of. They have to look at the Affordability of Boynton in general. When looking east of I-95,there is a lot of Affordability and there is not in the west;there has to be a balance. He does not like the Payment in Lieu of, the calculation, or incentives for density and height when it is not necessary. This Board and the Commission have already lowered the height from 150 feet to 85 feet in the MU district. All the projects are going to have an Affordability component to get the 25% density and height bonus. He asked if there will be people who live Downtown that can afford to shop Downtown. He likes market rate apartments and he is not speaking to projects already approved, he is referring to new projects going forward. He thinks this Commission and future Commissions want to see something exciting, a boutique hotel, shops, restaurants, active green space, great street trees, street lighting, etc., and they want it to be a special place. He thinks that can be created,but if they fall into these traps, they will be asking why they do not have the tax base ten years from now. They have huge developments that have a lot of apartments, but they are not paying a lot of ad valorem taxes, and a lot of that has to do with what is being built. Director Radigan clarified if developers are participating in the Pay in Lieu program,they are not building Workforce Housing. Those two things would not happen in the same building. If the Build program is being done, points and concerns would be valid. For the Pay in Lieu program, there is no Workforce Housing being built, they are getting a market rate product and the City is getting the benefit of the dollars Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 11 February 6, 2023 for those bonuses for the City to do with as they please and where they please. Mr. Ramiccio thinks both of his points are valid, but feels that the latter point is the most important, and that is the fact that they are not building Affordable Housing in the Payment in Lieu of. Director Radigan stated there are some exciting options when they do a more cohesive overhaul of this program to allow for bonuses or intensities. She thinks certain things the City is looking for, such as a hotel or vibrant places, can be worked into an ordinance. Mr. Simon mentioned the Pay in Lieu and questioned what dollar amount this fund collects the City can do something with to provide Workforce Housing. Director Radigan advised 100% of that fee must be used towards Workforce Housing. The fund can be used for projects, grant funding, rehab projects; it is not just building projects and any other program the City as a whole wants to use those funds for. Mr. Simon questioned how much money the City would make on a project such as the Pierce project with a Pay in Lieu. Director Radigan stated if they are doing for rent, it would be approximately $36,000 per unit above their base density. Mr. Simon commented if there were ten extra units the City would get $360,000. Director Radigan replied exactly. She noted the City would get $84,000 for every "For sale"unit. Mr. Simon questioned how many projects the Pay in Lieu would have to be used for in order to fund something significant. Director Radigan indicated this is a piece of a much larger overhaul. That number is currently about 15 years old. The Impact Fee by State Statute has to be based on a rational Nexus, it is not something the City can just come up with and it is typically done on a GAP analysis. That number should represent the difference between an Affordable Housing rate and a market rate and those are the numbers used to create a Pay in Lieu program. As part of their overhaul for this program, they will have to go out and do an additional rational Nexus study to update those numbers since they are so old. Mr. Simon questioned why come with an Amendment instead of focusing on the complete overhaul. Director Radigan stated this is a complex problem and is something they are not trying to solve; the County, State, and country are, and there are a lot of options and it takes a lot of time to get through those; it takes a lot of political influence and is something they need to talk to each of their Elected Officials about regarding the types of tools they want to see move forward. Vice Chair Buoni understands that overall, no matter whether this passes or fails, they still need to Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 12 February 6, 2023 overhaul the system. Director Radigan replied yes. The idea is that some of these Amendments would carry forward. They are looking to do a complete overhaul and it will be up to the City Commission to see what tools they see as necessary going forward. Mr. Simon understands this is addressing a couple of lines within the ordinance and not the larger problem. He thinks this should go back to the drawing board and come back with a complete overhaul rather than filling in some pieces. He questioned why they want to change something when the complete overhaul will be developed and they will be heading in a different direction. With all the political influence and time components, there is a great possibility that this might be something the State or County has voted for. He does not think this is the proper direction to address this. He has never been in favor of the Pay in Lieu of the Workforce Housing and noted that Developers not having to build Workforce Housing within the project is a misstep. Regarding the $36,000 and $84,000, developers will say they are all apartments, so they do not have to pay into the fund. He is trying to understand the ratio if an acre is permitted 80 dwellings and it is being reduced so they will only have to pay for ten instead of 20. Director Radigan indicated if they are allowed to do 80 units an acre the bonus would be 25%, which would allow them up to 20 units more,but they are only paying for what they are using,which is ten units. She understands part of this is a band-aid to a much larger problem and thinks this is an effort to collect what they can while the program is not working. This is an effort to fix little things to make it feasible, so it used while staff is working on an overhaul of the ordinance. Mr. Ramiccio asked if this pertains to current projects. Director Radigan replied there would be projects going under this ordinance and noted that any Amendments to projects would be under this as well as any new projects moving forward. Mr. Simon questioned if they could sunset this all together and not have this component as part of the development. He expressed concern about what is currently existing. Director Radigan advised the City Commission would have to ask for those changes;to sunset an existing program or create an additional ordinance to replace this program. Mr. Simon thinks that might be something the Board might consider and take a leading position within the County. Vice Chair Buoni opened discussion to the public. Mark Meyer, 533 Ocean Inlet Drive, commented that some components to this Amendment are confusing and he requested clarity. He asked if a developer can do the Workforce Housing component, buy out of it, and then increase the FAR 50%. If they are not participating in the program, he does not think it would be appropriate for developers to increase the FAR. In his opinion, developers would be allowed to have the FAR if they are participating and building the actual unit. He agreed this should go back to the drawing Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 13 February 6, 2023 board and try to lead the County. Vice Chair Buoni closed the public discussion. Motion was made by Mr. Simon, and seconded by Mr. McQuire,to approve Item 7C. In a roll call vote, the motion failed unanimously. (0-5) Ayes: None Nays: Harper, Simon, McQuire, Ramiccio, Buoni 7D. Approve request for Major Master Plan Modification (MPMD 23-004) of the Boynton Beach Town Square development to amend the number of buildable dwelling units,revise project phasing, reduce the commercial use areas, and decrease the number of hotel rooms. The subject properties are bounded by Seacrest Boulevard on the west, NE/SE 1st Street on the east, E. Boynton Beach Boulevard on the north, and SE 2nd Avenue on the south, and are currently zoned MU-3 (Mixed Use 3). Applicant: Robert Singer, Time Equities, Inc. Bradley Miller, with Urban Design Studio, and Land Planner for Boynton Beach, was present on behalf of the applicant, Time Equities. He provided a brief presentation as follows: • This was a public private partnership that happened in 2017/2018. As time went on, the private partner, JKM, did not come through with building commercial parcels and garages that were part of this project. • Time Equities has entered into a contract and this has been going on for eight or nine months. • This has been within the litigation process for several years and they are happy to say just recently the City Commission agreed to a Settlement Agreement with JKM, which was the first step in a sequence of steps for this project. • The Settlement Agreement is approved, which allows the lawyers to finalize that and let them move forward into actual entitlement for a new project and leave the old one behind. • There are captions they want to get rid of and move forward. • Time Equities currently has projects in eight to ten different countries. • Casa Mara in West Palm had a similar situation. Time Equities came in and it took three years to get through the entitlement process working with neighbors and they now have a successful project. • Casa Mara is full residentially and commercially. • Photographs were shown of Casa Mara. The top is a rendering used as they went through the process and it turned into the actual development. It is a similar type of project, Residential Mixed-Use, with ground level commercial space. Mr. Miller requested the Board look at this as moving forward with a much better project for Town Square for all of Boynton Beach. 0 A slide shows the Master Plan approved and it is currently on record today. Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 14 February 6, 2023 • Phase 1 includes the governmental part,the Civic part,the amphitheater,the Cultural Center,the Children's Museum, the parks, City Hall, and the library. • Phase II is the south parcel, which is south of the amphitheater running between SE 1st Avenue and South Ocean Avenue for the whole block between Seacrest Boulevard and SE 1st Street. The City had control of the parcel, which is slated on the current plan as a hotel site. The proposal they came in with is to move it to Ocean Avenue, which is the area where they can have hotel and restaurant space. The CRA recommendation plan from 2017, was hugely focused on getting the pedestrian corridor and the place where shops and restaurants are along Ocean Avenue. They feel it is a much better location and it creates a similar block on the north side of the project for the residential development. • The proposed plan has color, as requested by staff. • The government component of Phase 1 is created, then they add residential and commercial in the south component and the north parcel. The hotel and commercial, which they are starting to refer to as the City parcel, would be exchanged, it would be a land swap between moving the parcel from the corner of Boynton Beach Boulevard and Seacrest Boulevard to Ocean Avenue. One question staff received was what the difference in acreage is. Both parcels are platted at 1.1 acre, so it is an even acreage swap. When they are done, a thin strip will be added to the parcel, so the City would end up with a little more property in the long run. • They are proposing a total between the north and south parcels,which is a total of 933 units. They get that by the density of 62 units per acre, which is allowed by code, and by participation in the Workforce Housing program. He pointed out that currently in the code,they are allowed to build higher with the bonus, but the .5% of FAR that goes with it keeps them from doing it, so they get the incentive to go higher and do Workforce Housing, but they do not have the other component of having the FAR,which equates to the square footage of the project. Staff was trying to balance the provision in the code that is allowed in one place, but they cannot get there to use it, so it defeats the purpose. • With the 933 units, they have close to 2,300 parking spaces between the two garages and on- street parking. This is now for the overall Master Plan. There is going to be about 500+ spaces, they are still refining garages, etc., but there is a little over 500 spaces for government and civic uses, and available for the City and public. • Throughout the project there is about 15,000 square feet of commercial space. Some of that gets reallocated back to the new hotel site, which is something where commercial space could be recovered as part of the project. • To address the commercial space, there is about 11,000 square feet in the two projects. There are a couple components with the commercial space on Boynton Beach Boulevard that is problematic for those to be successful; one is the speed of traffic, and the other is parking related to that space. They are still providing the neighborhood space, the little shop, ice cream place, the hair salon, and that type of community space that would be tied with that and there is a connection in the northern parcel. There is an open plaza area that would be available for some kind of joint use and sharing space; however, it is planned by tenants. • Commercial space on the southern parcel is about 5,700 square feet. There is one space at the corner of Seacrest Boulevard and SE 1st Avenue, which is space he would see many employees being able to take advantage of. The gray space is the parking garage and on the other side of the Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 15 February 6, 2023 garage is another commercial space, which was a suggestion by staff, so it has immediate access from the amphitheater across the street. • Gray blocks are parking garages. He mentioned access from Boynton Beach Boulevard and noted that the prior plan had that access, which they felt was not the right thing to do, so they turned it around and access to the garage for the north parcel is coming off NE 1st Avenue on the back side of the Cultural Center. • Regarding the south parcel, traffic has been focused away from residents to the south and they come out onto SE I" Avenue. Circulation has been considered and there will be some controls relative to the intersection at Seacrest Boulevard and NE I" Avenue to limit some of the turning movements. • There are two different active community park settings in each building. Larger rectangles show the pool, grills, seating areas, firepits. Smaller rectangles on the west side of the garage are for a quieter, passive Zen Garden type of concept. MASTER PLAN VS SITE PLAN: • They have to get through the Master Plan step to get into the Site Plan, which will be detailed architecture, layouts, and parking. • Step 2 is the first of the Settlement Agreement. • The Master Plan is shown as a whole. The Plan of Recognition gives the recognition of the plan that is part of the record. • A couple renderings were shown and will be much more detailed as part of the Site Plan process. • The road that leads to the left is Boynton Beach Boulevard and the road that leads to the right is Seacrest Boulevard. • Commercial is eight stories of height. • The south building and the street leading to the left is SE 2nd Avenue and the street leading to the right is SE 1st Street. • Architectural features of the south building were shown. • A photo superimposed into an arial shows City Hall when looking southeast. Mr. Miller indicated that staff is recommending approval. They are saying that the project complies with code and they are moving forward. Their Civil Engineer and Traffic Engineer are present and available for questions. He requested reserving time if he wants to respond to public comments. Director Radigan announced the City Engineer and Deputy Utilities Director are present. Vice Chair Buoni opened discussion to the public. Paul VanStellant, 217 SE 3rd Street, questioned where they stand with the Bond issue and financials. He mentioned that houses on SE 2nd Avenue are not going to see the sun for most of the day. Vice Chair Buoni stated they do not have any input regarding the Bond issue and financials. Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 16 February 6, 2023 Vice Chair Buoni closed the public discussion. Mr. Harper mentioned the compatibility issue between and eight-story building on the south parcel, which looks like it is 30 to 40 feet and a single-family home. He questioned if there are any step-downs and what staff is recommending as far as compatibility. Director Radigan advised that is something staff and the applicant have worked around. They understand there is a big difference in intensity to the neighborhood to the south. That line, SE 2nd Street, represents the end of the Downtown area and it is a very defined land line on the Zoning Map. There is a distinct difference in the zoning district and intensities. There are a few things the applicant did that staff requested. Larger setbacks were requested, so they pushed the building back substantially more than required, and steps were requested to allow for a smaller scale at the ground floor, and last, was architectural components that related in scale more to the single-family than the eight-story building. It was represented on one of the graphics, and the facade facing SE 2nd Street was shown. The applicant first did parking,which was an added setback,they did front lawns and stoops, and tried to create varying lower rooflines that were a little more in scale to the single-family buildings versus the eight-story building. Mr. Harper asked if people living in those homes were sent a Public Notice about this meeting. Director Radigan stated whenever these changes come through, residents are Noticed by the applicant within 400 feet, so they were Noticed for this meeting and the City Commission meetings. In addition, the applicant also held a voluntary neighborhood meeting last week. Every house received a letter regarding the meeting and two people showed up. Mr. Harper commented that relocating a hotel directly adjacent to a children's area causes concern. He recommended focusing on some type of a buffer between a hotel where anyone can stay and an open children's play area. He noted there is a huge residential building abutting a City children's area, which is heavily utilized by children and families in the area. He did not see any renderings of the proposed hotel, but sees it is Phase IV. He asked the height of the hotel. Director Radigan clarified that the Master Plan takes into account all four phases; however,the applicant is only responsible for the development of Phase II and Phase III. It leaves the hotel within the City's ownership and the City's power, so the City can then go out to bid, do an RFP, in order to place the correct hotel or venue within that location. Mr. Harper mentioned the proposed rooms. Director Radigan stated this is a carryover from the original. This is slightly in transition, but the final will have up to 144 rooms and the plan currently shows 100. They are going back to the 144 rooms to maintain flexibility of the City land. It is also going up with the commercial uses. They are currently proposing 15,000 square feet within the whole and the proposal shows 4,000 square feet within the site. They are going back to the original requirement of 15,000 square feet and that will change before it goes to City Commission final adoption. Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 17 February 6, 2023 Mr. Harper questioned how high the hotel must be to fit 144 rooms. Director Radigan stated the height of the hotel would be maxed to whatever is in the zoning district, which is 75 feet. The other buildings are currently recommended 85 to 86 feet, so this would be slightly lower. She would say that the relocation of the hotel from Boynton Beach Boulevard to Ocean Avenue changes the scale of the hotel a little, she thinks they are talking about a boutique size hotel versus something seen on a much larger scale. She thinks the scale may change, but to maintain flexibility, they are maxing out the Master Plan and it can always be brought down within the Site Plan. Mr. McQuire likes how this will eventually create a Boynton Beach corridor that has a new fresh look. Overall, in looking at the proposal, it is maximum. He thinks there are some things they can work with and some things that need improvements. He likes the hotel swap that allows the developer to maximize savings by not mimicking the north and south Mixed-Use parcels, but essentially that they are very identical structures; there is no real difference between them. He thinks the architecture style is interesting, but it is a lot of the same. He thinks a lot of retail needs to be in the hotel. He noted that 15,000 square feet is the bare minimum and the community has spoken clearly that restaurants and things to do, and almost 1,000 units and 15,000 square feet of retail. He would like to see that number significantly increased. Director Radigan clarified that the 15,000 square feet would be located on the hotel parcel on top of the applicant's 11,000 square feet. They are looking closer to 25,000 square feet throughout the whole Master Plan. The hotel site will house 15,000 square feet of commercial space, which would be in control of the City,plus the applicant is proposing 11,000 square feet within the private portions of this. Those changes will be clarified before going to the City Commission. Mr. McQuire commented that putting that in perspective of how many square feet of development is miniscule and he still thinks it is not enough; he thinks that is something they need to push for. There is very little access for pedestrians to occupy green or public spaces and he believes some cutouts or public spaces would compliment the street scape and break up and improve the architecture. Mr. Ramiccio stated that this is a huge improvement over the previous experience with JKM. He asked if Time Equities has control of the property or if it is still in settlement. Mr. Miller replied they have not closed on the property yet,there are other sequences in the process they have to get to. Contractually, they have full control. Mr. Ramiccio indicated that he has a different opinion than his fellow board member on the location of the hotel. They have a Master Plan, a CRA Plan, and Master Plan for the City, and it has been their focus and desire to see as people enter the Downtown a boutique hotel on the corner. It will look a little different and he wants to explore options of having the hotel on the corner versus having a residential component at that location. He asked if they have any wiggle room with regard to the hotel and the land swap. He does not see the hotel on Ocean Avenue. Mr. Miller stated he has talked to a lot of people about this, and Mr. Ramiccio is the first person to say Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 18 February 6, 2023 that. They felt that it makes more sense because of the focus to Ocean Avenue and it is a half block closer to the marina and other restaurants. From their plan standpoint, not making the swap would be dumb. Director Radigan advised the City Commission has taken its first action towards this land swap and it is currently in the Due Diligence phase. Mr. Ramiccio asked what is being done on the site next to the children's museum and he noted there is also the Historic Magnuson House. He questioned what will happen to the Historic Magnuson House and if it will have to be relocated or demolished. Mr. Miller stated this Master Plan does not include the Magnuson House. He prefers to refer to it as a City site because it is up to the City as to what it is going to be. There is currently a parking lot there,just east of the children's museum. Mr. Ramiccio questioned the engagement of more commercial because as mentioned, they want to see a lot of shops, restaurants, and walkability on Ocean Avenue. He asked if they would be open to doing more unique establishments that will create the pedestrian flow they are looking for in the Downtown. Mr. Miller thinks they are hearing the comments. Time Equities is not going to be in control of the north parcel and develop the north and south parcel, so they do not have any access to direct frontage on Ocean Avenue. As they created the plans, there was the code and staff initiative of having commercial space at Boynton Beach Boulevard and Seacrest Boulevard to give an active look at ground level and they feel they are doing that with the commercial space proposed. He mentioned commercial space at Seacrest Boulevard and the south parcel and thinks both have the function of the neighborhood type of community where residents who live in the building or around the building could use it. Their intent was to provide some of the neighborhood space on the frontage of Boynton Beach Boulevard. Regarding parking, they are trying to get some on-street parking spaces, but Boynton Beach Boulevard is going through a design process to construct that road, so there are some issues, and they are working with FDOT. They have provided commercial space in the garage and with wayfinding signage to get to that space from the garage space. Rob Singer, with Time Equities, mentioned retail and stated they do not want retail that does not succeed because people cannot park and access the property. In his professional opinion, based on parking available, how traffic and everything works, and the way it is positioned for success, they can deliver. He referenced Casa Mara and noted there are eight stores, and they are perfectly curated. Of the 40 million square feet, probably 15 square feet is retail all over the world. They know how to work retail and know what it takes to succeed. It is not quantity, it is quality, and its success is having the right people, the right retailers, and the right spaces. With staff, the issue has always been making sure it is active because having active street frontages are better than having two-story commercial spaces that no one can pay the rent and will not stay. This design has apartments on the ground floor with stoops and people walk right out, there is a main entry, amenity spaces, and shops. It is all the way around the building except for the garages;there is no mechanical or dead space. It is a highly activated ground floor on both sides. There are ten-foot side walls with landscape with buffers and on-street parking. This was done at Casa Mara, and it is highly successful. They are trying to maximize and minimize and they do Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 19 February 6, 2023 not have time for that. They care a lot about their projects, and they know how to make them economic and functional in communities. Things are needed that function financially and for communities; by not having the full block,the building does not function. With respect to the architecture,they studied making one building green, one purple, etc. Two buildings are architecturally similar because this is the best way to have a cohesive Master Plan. There are differences at the ground level and the southern building has house vignettes, which related more to the homes to the south. They have spent an enormous amount of time and money working with the existing land seller,with the City,with the code,working with the best professionals, with no budget to try to get to something that all parties can win here. They are a win-win developer, they do not flip their properties. He wants people to understand that they build $500 million projects, and they have the best architects and planning; they take their time and deliver. Mr. McQuire mentioned carefully curated retail and does not think the landscape of Boynton is carefully curated; it is a very broad demographic with lots of different interests. These two parcels will control what the community has access to with a large respect. He believes the density was over 900 and asked if that includes the 100-unit boutique hotel. Mr. Singer replied no. Mr. McQuire disagreed that they do not want to create a retail space that fails with over 900 residential units and a lot of parking. He feels something of this density could feed more retail. Mr. Singer stated they are happy to look at that. Mr. McQuire thinks they should be open to that idea because a few things mentioned were if the land swap deal does not happen, they are out. The land swap deal might not happen, the Board has some control over that; they have influence and can speak to the Commissioners and the CRA and give them their opinion. He is familiar with their work and this looks like a first-class project; there are a lot of things he likes. He questioned the breakouts of ones, twos, threes, and studios under 900+. Mr. Miller stated there are probably roughly 5% to 7% studios, ones, and threes, and then 45% are basically ones and twos. Mr. McQuire saw ample parking, which told him there are a lot of studios and ones. That is 2,000+units of which the City will get 500+. Mr. Singer indicated the City is getting its code parking, which they bargained for however long ago, what it needs for code in an elegant way, and that is what they are delivering. Mr. McQuire thinks they should revisit retail. He questioned if all the retail is on the first level. Mr. Singer stated the 25,000 square feet is all on the first floor. Mr. Simon mentioned the purview and asked if it is strictly for the increase in residential units and the decrease in commercial and hotel, rather than the approval of the Master Plan. If that is only what is under the purview, those conversations may not be valid or useable within the vote in the Master Plan. Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 20 February 6, 2023 If the Board is able to go into some of these items under the purview of the request, then he thinks they should be discussed. Mr. McQuire questioned if this is all rental. Mr. Simon replied yes. Mr. McQuire stated he does not like that, he thinks they need condo, and half would be an ideal benchmark. The City is starved for homeownership in this area and that is another transient sort of mecca that will be created and they do want some permanent residents. Mr. Ramiccio mentioned that City employees need parking. He asked if that is being covered in the garage to the south and how they are coming and going from the property. Director Radigan indicated that this Master Plan covers the required parking for the entire Master Plan, which includes parking for City Hall, the amphitheater, and an additional 100 spaces for public parking. The details on how parking will be situated will be done through a Parking Lease Agreement between the City and developer, which will run concurrently with the Development Agreement. Currently, within the two garages,the City will be getting approximately 470 parking spaces and about 110 surface spaces, which is all the on-street spaces. In total, the City is looking at about 580 parking spaces that they will have rights to, and she believes the Parking Agreement delineates it for about 100 years. Mr. Simon wanted to verify that the Board is not overstepping their purview. Attorney Schwartz clarified they are looking at revisions in this case; this is for the Master Plan Modification. The request is the phasing of the Master Plan, not the configuration of the Master Plan or any comments related to the renderings that were seen. Director Radigan advised that the Master Plan approves the overall densities, intensities, heights, and building locations, as well as general access and pedestrian and vehicular flow. The phase relates to Site Plans, and since this is a four-phase Master Plan, there will be four corresponding Site Plans, one of which is already done, Phase 1, the Civics phases, two of which the applicant is responsible for; the two residential Mixed Use components, and the fourth is the hotel, which the City maintains control over. Those will each come separately in Site Plan form. Mr. Simon thinks there is way too much density for the area. The request for an increased number of apartment units is a non-starter. The fact there are 933 units aside from the traffic it will create, and the noise, it is transient with people who do not care about their environment as much as someone who is vested as an owner. A lot of negative components with the fact that they are apartments and he does not agree that they should be apartments. If it were something where there is a percentage of condos and apartments,potentially, owners in the building might be more vocal about their neighbors as far as trash, litter, and changing oil in the parking garage; it might be a step in the right direction. Regarding the reference to Casa Mara in West Palm, there are height differences between the two projects, there are commercial spaces dispersed, and in separate buildings there is limited residential above the buildings. Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 21 February 6, 2023 The space between the buildings and retail spaces creates foot traffic, which creates movement and flow for pedestrians. He thinks that is a more successful approach and it also allows for the potential of commercial spaces being stepped down next to residential areas on neighboring streets. There are single family homes and across the street there are 60 80-foot walls. The vignettes are the most minimal approach, and he thinks they do not do anything. Staff has come before the Board with different scenarios and means to mitigate the differences between the compatibility of new projects and existing homes. If a project is a certain height requiring a stepdown approach in all the illustrations, demonstrations, and discussions, it is not that they are going to apply a gable roof over ten feet of the initial building and then go 80 feet from that,it has always been a building depth within all the illustrations reviewed and approved with the City staff. He does not think that is something the City was diligent when they were reviewing and working with the developer on that means for compatibility. He thinks if there is a different approach to the commercial. It was mentioned they know how to park the commercial, but if they do not have the parking they do not succeed, and he agrees with that. He mentioned the amount of commercial space provided in Phases II and III, the north and south plots. On the proposed modification, they are demonstrating there is 15,000 square feet and the majority of the square footage is within the hotel. A question from another Board member is that the hotel will fall under the directive of the City; they are going to work directly with the hotels and come up with something they like. Within the application, they are requesting to reduce the amount of commercial retail space and putting the brunt of that commercial space effort on the City, which he thinks is bold. He does not think that is something a successful developer should be doing. They also stated they are not here to maximize and minimize, but that is what the request is. They are requesting to maximize and increase the number of units and reduce the commercial and hotel units within the project. He agrees this is a very large project and the code allows something of this size to be built, but he has never been a fan of the scale that this calls for. He lives nearby and enjoys watching the moon over the tree line and he will never be able to do that again with anything like this. He hopes they consider his comments. He is not against the project,but he thinks there are a lot of avenues they could review and pursue that might make it a great and unique project. Mr. Harper mentioned a news article and noted that the thing that caught his attention for the project in West Palm was that it said"Dine, wine, design". He does not see how the commercial layout here allows for that. He thinks SE I" Avenue is more for City employees to utilize, which, in his opinion, calls for Monday through Friday, 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., grab and go lunch spot. Mr. Singer stated the headline was a little dramatic. He noted there are eight small 1,000-square-foot shops filled with people who could succeed with a parking arrangement that could succeed in a zoning context of that particular property,which is completely different than the zoning context of this property. The reason they bring it up is because it shows execution down the street. They delivered something within the context of that situation next to factories, on the train tracks, etc., that worked for the community. Within the context of this zoning, and they are happy to add commercial, he would like to understand, but it comes back to if it can be successful, it is not just about jamming as much as they can. They have created on-street parking on Boynton Beach Boulevard and have tried to match up the amount of commercial they have on Boynton Beach Boulevard with the spaces they are trying to provide. There is a balance of who can park there, the stores that can succeed, and the customers. Over time, people could learn to come around the back and enter the parking garage and cut through, but they can look to increase it to some extent, but they do not believe it is going to be feasible for enormous amounts of Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 22 February 6, 2023 retail. It is not about passing the buck; it is about where bigger restaurants and retail be more successful and more pedestrian oriented and they feel like that is Ocean Avenue. Mr. Simon commented when they force retail into the hotel, that is potentially ground floor and taking up potential room space for a boutique hotel, so it makes the building taller. When looking for an example, something like a Fresh Market or grocery store would do a great success and service all the tenants in the buildings. They already have different types of retail two blocks to the east. He does not think they need to repeat types of businesses and there are other types of businesses that may be more beneficial instead of just a retail space and might service the public and the local residents as well as tenants. Mr. Singer stated it is parking, traffic, and a lot of things they are balancing. They are happy to look at increasing the amount of retail on the project, but he is not hopeful that it is going to turn into grocery stores. He does not think the traffic works. Mr. Simon stated it is not the amount of commercial, it is the location. There are two small areas to the south and two to the north. Mr. Singer indicated they are working on this with staff. The idea was that Boynton Beach Boulevard and Seacrest Boulevard had to be something special and the architecture shows a beautiful corner and is active. There was not an effort to short the retail and the design direction they were hearing was more focused on making sure the whole perimeter was active, so they could put people on the street with stoops and make it feel safe and active. Space is needed on the ground floor for lobbies and packages, etc. The building has to function, it has to be active on the ground floor, and they are happy to look at making it bigger. He does not believe it is possible or appropriate given the context of this to be grocery stores. They were asked to put retail on Boynton Beach Boulevard in a format that looks something like this, then with respect to the south parcel, being across from City Hall and the Amphitheater,they are talking about 3,500 square feet and another 2,000 square feet, which is not a small area. Could they be another 2,000 square feet larger without breaking all the traffic models, probably, and if that is something the Board wants them to look at, they are happy to do so. This is an attempt to deliver something that is going to function, be forever beautiful, and add value to the community. Their project is 80 feet tall, so when talking about maximizing, they looked at this and said 99 feet is too tall. The maximum on the south parcel is 87 feet and theirs is 80 feet. They are trying to fit in and create an economic thing that functions and is scaled appropriately. They are doing what they think is financeable and correct for the community. Vice Chair Buoni thanked Mr. Miller and Mr. Singer and stated that whatever decision made tonight is the first decision. Staff has taken all the comments and the City Commission will make the final decision. Motion was made by Mr. Simon, and seconded by Mr. McQuire, to approve Item 7D. In a roll call vote, the motion failed, with Mr. Harper in favor. (1-4) Ayes: Harper Nays: Simon, McQuire, Ramiccio, Buoni Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 23 February 6, 2023 7E. Approval of the Pierce Rezoning (REZN 22-001) from Central Business District (CBD) to Mixed-Use Core (MU-C)with a Master Plan for 300 multi-family residential units and 17,015 square feet of commercial square footage. Applicant: Jeffery Burns, Affiliated Development. Kemissa Colin, Vice President of Development for Affiliated Development,was present on behalf of the applicant. She provided a brief presentation as follows: • This site is currently under-utilized and this is going to be a catalyst to the creation of a true Downtown in the City of Boynton Beach. • The property location was shown in relation to the City's two major thoroughfares; Boynton Beach Boulevard and North Federal Highway. • Boynton Beach Boulevard is on the north side, Ocean Avenue on the south side,Federal Highway on the east side, and NE 4th Street on the west side. They are also neighboring the FEC Railway. • The Pierce is an eight-story multi-family Mixed Use development. They have 300 units and it is connected to a parking garage. A portion of the parking garage will be accessible to the public. They have 17,000 square feet of retail. This is a mixed income community; 50% of the units will be dedicated to Workforce Housing, which creates a more diverse urban environment for the City. It brings an increased tax base, more walkable community, and more individuals to visit the restaurants and businesses along the corridor as well. • A realistic picture was shown of how the building and project fit within its surroundings. Director Radigan indicated Ms. Colin will be presenting all the applications together, Item 7E, 7F, 7G, 7H, and 7I, and wanted to make sure the Board is okay with that. Vice Chair Buoni stated it is okay. He asked if all the applications should be read separately. Attorney Schwartz replied no, as long as each item is voted on separately. Jeffrey Burns, CEO of Affiliated Development, was present and continued the presentation as follows: • One challenge they always face with a four-sided property that abuts the public realms is how they put more public services components somewhere other than the street. • Trash and loading will be off the street and next to the garage, so it will not be visible to the public. • Originally, they contemplated a stand-alone parking garage, separating 1st Street and it was important for them to have more connectivity. They went for a redesign that contemplated connecting the main residential building to the garage to be more interconnected and they felt that helped bring it all together much more favorably. • They wanted to go away from the big block structures, so the edges of each of the major buildings with height touched the main streets and the goal was to bring the public in. They feel it is more inviting and creates a lot more pedestrian connectivity and access to the site. • They have been working in this City for over two years, and working with the community and Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 24 February 6, 2023 local businesses. When they first approached Hurricane Ally, they wanted to do everything possible to ensure their long-term success in the City. Kim, with Hurricane Ally, was open to helping them anchor the project on the Boynton Beach Boulevard site. The parcel they have access to is not very large, so they were a little perplexed when looking to see how they would do this, and Kim volunteered anchoring the commercial component, which gives the entire side a lot of balance. Kim will also have a game lawn in the back area and he thinks that is something that is really needed. • Another key component of connecting the building to the parking garage was having a sense of arrival. By connecting the two buildings, they were able to accomplish the porte-cochere feeling when coming off Federal Highway. • Ocean Avenue is the primary commercial corridor. They will have three different commercial spaces, one being a two-story restaurant with a rooftop deck, which will be more of a nighttime activation, and daytime will be inside. They also have commercial space that borders Dewey Park on Ocean Avenue, which is envisioned to be more of a cafe, daytime activation. They are hoping to get a breakfast user in there. They purchased the Ocean Food Mart on the key corner of Ocean Avenue and Federal Highway, and that is a key component. This is the main corner. They decided to display their public art component at this location. Ms. Colin continued as follows: • The landscape buffer variance was eventually approved by this Board in November 2022. • They have submitted a Rezoning from Central Business District to Mixed Use Core, they have a new Master Plan, a new Major Site Plan, and an abandonment of three alleyways, four community design appeals for the garage, and a height exception for the parking garage. • They meet the criteria for Rezoning for the CBD to the MU-C. • They meet the criteria for the Major Site Plan for both applications. • They meet the criteria for the new Major Master Plan and Major Site Plan. • The abandonment they requested are for an alleyway between Ocean Avenue and the south portion of the parking lot, the other is a portion of NE 1st Avenue, and the last is the alley south of Boynton Beach Boulevard. The reason for the abandonment is to connect an enhanced connectivity throughout the property and the development. Elliott Young, Senior Vice President with RINCA, Architect for the project, was present and continued with the project description and the four appeals. • The four community design appeals stem from the parking garage component that is connected, but by the City code definition of fully integrated. They think the proposed design and configuration meets the design intent of the code and also architecturally and landscape wise, it enhanced it greatly to feel integrated with the development while meeting those criteria for approval. • By elevation,the north garage elevation facing what will be the future Hurricane Ally on Boynton Beach Boulevard, and on the other elevations, they tried to integrate it with the multi-family buildings, so there are openings with staggering to conceal fully the parking garage ramping. Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 25 February 6, 2023 Window openings have framing that is reminiscent with the framing of the window systems on the multi-family building, with some intermediate precast panels that have a pattern, different color tones that are reminiscent of the multi-family building as well. • The right side of the elevation is a proposed projection screen where movie nights or a Sunday football game could be projected on the garage allowing activation for that outdoor space adjacent to Hurricane Ally. • Additionally, there is landscaping that is very lush, there are large palms, hedges, a green wall in certain areas, to ground the structure through the use of landscape. • Both elevations are facing the multi-family building. One of the garage entrances on the right side would be directly off the porte-cochere drop-off area. The architectural treatment can be seen, signature mural elements painted on the garage that has the building logo and identifies it as a public parking structure. The left side of the south elevation, faces the loading dock area in the back of house area, which is completely behind a secured screen. There is an access gate for deliveries or move-ins, but similar architectural treatment. • They are proposing a perforated metal screen element that has a postcard type of treatment, so it is an image that can be printed onto this material or it can be used to get the image to appear. It wraps around to the west elevation and faces 4h Street. This will be something that is seen from the train while passing through and is something that tells that they are in Boynton Beach. It would be part of the Arts in Public Places component, so it would be an RFP for an artist to create that image. Their component would be designed by a professional artist and printed on the material. • They are proposing a public bike share station, so there is biking kind of urban mural in front of that on the first floor, as well as additional landscaping where they could fit it in. • The second parking entrance and exit is also on 4h Street. • Looking at the east garage elevation, this is part of the landscape variance proposed, with a lot more landscaping above and beyond what is required by code, but they are introducing some planter boxes on the first few levels that add some color, some Bougainvillea vines or something like that. They are also introducing various types of tree species spaced at almost double what the code requires for a landscape buffer. This facade would also have a similar architectural treatment. It must be a solid facade because of fire separation reasons, but they are going to apply a metal trim that looks like the window systems on the rest of the project to make it look like punched opening very much integrated with the multi-family building. • Left of the elevation identifies an entrance mural that says "Public Parking"with the development name as well integrated onto that corner. • The four community appeals they provided with their Land Use Attorney is justification that it meets all the criteria, that is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, it will not detract from visibility or appearance with the City. • The height exception for the parking structure comes down to one egress stair that needs a tall enough increase above the 75-foot max, which is about 2'11" to allow for a doorway to egress off the top level of the parking structure. They shifted the stair to be as far down the structure as they could get before running into a code issue with egress, but that is what the height exception entails. It is just one stair element and the stair is completely concealed from view, integrated into the rest of the design. Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 26 February 6, 2023 Mr. Ramiccio asked if that is in the center of the building. Mr. Young indicated that the multi-family building is on the right side, which is taller with height restrictions, so there is a stair within the multi-family building. The other stair they needed to add is what would be on the left side of the garage closest to Hurricane Ally. That stair technically goes above the 75-foot requirement for the garage height since it is more a part of the garage. Mr. Burns went through the renderings in more detail. • The corner is an Arts in Public Place component. They did not want to have a sculpture that did not have meaning or was not interactive. The unique part of this is that there will be a tremendous amount of commercial space and restaurants and activities, so they wanted something that could be interactive and educational. Since Boynton Beach is very marine oriented, they thought it would be nice to do something specific to the ocean. Their idea is that they have a boat and underneath they have a coral reef sculpture with information about different marine species, which is just up the street. There will be a lot of visitors in this area, and it is nice to have something to keep children busy and interactive while waiting at restaurants. • Many people focus on daytime renderings, but most people are coming home at night. They want to be sure to design a building that is not just beautiful during the day, but also beautiful at night. There is a light feature that runs on the top side of the key component of the building being on the major thoroughfares. They feel like it gives the building an inviting sense of presence. They want people to feel comfortable walking around at night. • The penthouse unit is an amenity. A lot of their buildings have an outdoor rooftop amenity observation deck. • They did not have a sense of arrival when things were separate and by integrating the residential building with the parking structure, they were able to accomplish that. This gives a convenient spot for people to get dropped off or picked up and it is another entrance to the public parking garage. • The entrance is a circular area to keep cars moving and it also has a pull off area. One thing they have accomplished is providing areas for fire trucks and other services to be able to pull off if needed. • Dewey Park was something they wanted to integrate in the overall development, so from a pedestrian experience, they encourage people to walk through the park. If someone takes the elevator down in the parking garage and they want to go to Ocean Avenue and Federal Highway for food, they would walk past retail on 4 1 Street, through Dewey Park, through the next retail space abutting Dewey Park, and then down Ocean Avenue. • By bringing retail space to the street front, they wanted to hide all the back of house things mentioned earlier such as trash pick-up, FP&L things, etc. If there is no space, these things are forced to be on the right-of-way. • There are 40 Brightline trains that pass by every day, so they thought it would be nice to capture a theme that says this is where you are at and there are things going on in Boynton Beach. They are working with a metal manufacturer because they want the screen to be nice ten years from now. This will be made of durable material that is hurricane rated. Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 27 February 6, 2023 • To focus on the outdoor space between the parking garage and Hurricane Ally, there will be two floors with seating upstairs with a bar, and a bar and kitchen downstairs, and outdoor seating in the back as well. • They are offering Workforce Housing. Workforce generally means people who are making a good income, but right now they cannot afford a $3,500 a month apartment. The key is to give people a luxury experience at a fair price. All of their communities have more amenities than seen in most hotels. They have a pickleball court, an off-leash dog park, a fitness facility with a yoga studio and spin studio, an infrared sauna room with massage tables, an infinity edge pool with sun shelves, so people can be outside and be social and interact with one another. They have a cohort facility. Many residents work from home, and they are giving them an opportunity to be outside of their unit, interact with other members of their community, and have it almost feel like their own office. All these amenities are free of charge. • There is a rooftop observation deck with a bar, they have lockers for people who want to keep certain beverages of their choice, a separate room people can reserve if they want to host a dinner party; it is meant to be interactive. They will have shuffleboard and lots of activities. They wanted to carry on the park theme a little and make it relaxing, so they are calling it Hammock Park, there will be hammocks. Mr. Burns stated they agreed to exceed their requirement from a cost standpoint, and they understand that is an important element. This is over two years of meeting with residents, business owners, and stakeholders, getting positive feedback. This process is here for a reason and they have worked hard to be sure they have met as much of the goals possible. Mr. McQuire requested they go to the slide that showed the five things the applicant is looking for. Director Radigan advised that staff is recommending denial on these items based on the fact that staff could not recommend approval of the variance. The way the recommendations are outlined, they are recommending denial of the application. Should the City Commission approve the variance, then staff is recommending approval of the applications. Each application is written that way. Vice Chair Buoni asked if they need to say "Subject to Commission approval of the variance" when making the motions. Attorney Schwartz replied yes. Mr. McQuire mentioned Rezoning for Central Business District and asked if this would qualify for the grandfathered in previous height. Director Radigan replied yes. This project was submitted before that ordinance was approved that retired Mixed Use Core. Mr. McQuire questioned if there are current plans to make the parking structure to have the ability to go higher or would that be considered in their plans. He asked why they would need to do that. Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 28 February 6, 2023 Mr. Burns stated that is a technical question and he would need to defer to Director Radigan. They were lead in that direction by staff, so he assumes there was a technical reasoning behind it. Director Radigan indicated this is a private application, so the applicant is requesting this. She noted that the CRA Plan recommends Mixed Use Core for this item and that is the way it was structured into the RFP. Mr. McQuire would like to know if this is approved as is if the developer has plans to potentially take a portion of the site and redevelop in the future or if that would be something that might be beneficial for selling a decade from now. He mentioned the new Master Plan and stated the new Major Site Plan is part of that. Abandonments are the streets they want to build over that are currently alleyways. Those are big requests, but he is not necessarily not in favor of what he sees. He requested clarification on the four community design appeals for the parking garage. Director Radigan clarified that the request for the community design appeals and noted there is essentially one for each face of the garage. Garages within this zoning district are required to be integrated, which means wrapped with habitable space and they are not proposing that in this Site Plan. An appeal is required to have a garage that is not wrapped with habitable space. There are four appeals, one for each side of the garage to vary from the code required habitable space requirement. Mr. McQuire commented what they have shown, which is a large seven-story mural, only covers a portion of that and that is why they are looking for that. Director Radigan stated the mural or screen is part of their justification for one of the elevations. That screen is on the facade facing the rail tracks. Mr. McQuire mentioned the height exception for the parking lot and noted that is the stair. He applauded the applicant for sticking to the Workforce Housing. He thinks that is a great thing for the community and it is something they would like to see more of. He questioned if they sell the parcel if the Workforce Housing will carry. Mr. Burns replied yes. It runs with the land. At the time they get under way, they record a Restrictive Covenant with the property, so regardless of who owns it, they are required to keep it that way. Director Radigan stated the 50%requirement of Workforce Housing was part of the RFP from the CRA. It will start out at 50% and at different increments of time, the requirement is lessened. She believes at the end of 15 years, 5% of the units remain Workforce Housing in perpetuity. Mr. McQuire questioned the actual Workforce Housing discount as per market rate. Mr. Burns stated there are a certain number of units set aside at different levels, the first being 80% of AMI. Nick Rowe, President of Affiliated Development, was present. He advised there are different levels of Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 29 February 6, 2023 affordability in the building. One bedroom at 80% of AMI, which is 80% of the median income, rents for $1,380 a month, and a two-bedroom rents for $1,656 a month, and those numbers are set by HUD every year for every County in the entire country. All Housing policies typically revolves around those numbers. Mr. McQuire asked if the 5% after 15 years is in perpetuity. Mr. Rowe replied yes. Mr. Ramiccio commented that he is very excited, and he likes the changes; the porte-cochere, the drop- off area, the abandonment of the alleyway, and condensing the garage. He is okay with some of the changes because the height is minimal for the height of the building and the increase is two feet for the stairwell. He understands the design changes because if it was a freestanding garage, it would have to be wrapped all the way around with residential. He feels much more comfortable with the way it is designed now and with the appeal, eliminating residential on the ground floor. He likes the way they are handling all the back of the house things off 4 1 Street behind the gate. He likes the artwork and thinks this is the type of project he can support. He likes the break up between commercial and residential and he likes with what they did to the bus bench feature. He likes the landscaping. If they build to what was shown, it is exciting, it fits in and is compatible. Mr. Harper concurred with his colleagues. He is glad to see that their requests were taken to heart; it makes him feel that their input was at least considered when making changes. Based on the video and if it is built the way they are planning, it is a place he can foresee himself be a patron. Vice Chair Buoni mentioned the screen and is glad they covered the maintenance. He reminded the applicant that they are the gateway to the Gulfstream, so that is nice thing to put on the screen. Vice Chair Buoni opened discussion to the public. Paul VanStellant, 217 SE 3rd Street, stated that they "nailed" it. Valerie Pleasanton, 235 SW 13'h Avenue, or Boynton ACE Hardware, 510 East Boynton Beach Boulevard, was present. She is not opposed to this design other than the fact that the abandonment of the north alleyway impacts her business as well as the gas station directly east of her. She requested they not abandon the alleyway directly behind her business or the gas station. She thinks they can do the project without that small piece, and it will still allow them to have trucks come in for deliveries. They have a lot of deliveries and service a lot of people in Boynton Beach. There has been a lot of discussion at the store regarding this development and most of it is positive, but there are many people who are emphatic that they want them to stay and in order to stay, they have to be able to run their business and get deliveries. She asked that they consider not abandoning that small portion, so they can continue to use it. Mr. Simon requested Ms. Pleasanton show the exact location of her business. Director Radigan stated the red dot represents the existing ACE Hardware. Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 30 February 6, 2023 Ms. Pleasanton commented that the top of the screen shows the store and directly behind the store is the portion they want to abandon. Vice Chair Buoni asked if Ms. Pleasanton was consulted or if she received a postcard or anything prior to this meeting. Ms. Pleasanton replied no. Mr. Burns stated that although they are asking for an abandonment of the full right-of-way, they are not building on Ms. Pleasanton's portion. Director Radigan pointed out the existing ACE Hardware and showed the area for the abandonment request, and noted that the new dash-line represents the split of the abandoned area. When rights-of-ways are abandoned, half of the land goes to each side of the road and they are proposing within their portion of the road to landscape those areas leaving access. Vice Chair Buoni asked if there would be enough of the alleyway to get a tractor trailer through. Mr. Burns stated when they were looking at that they felt they could easily get a tractor trailer through and there are two points of ingress and egress throughout. They are not proposing to build in that area. When looking for an abandonment, Ms. Pleasanton will pick up half as her property. Mr. Burns indicated that is added property on their behalf, which makes the numbers work well if they are given additional property. Ms. Pleasanton thinks they are talking about five feet. Mr. Burns stated the building is not directly upon the alley, so there is still probably another 12.5 to 15 feet between the building and the alleyway, so they still have the 12 feet plus the additional 12.5 to 15 feet, which is enough to accommodate a truck. Vice Chair Buoni suggested they work with the landscaping and scale it back in a little, so there is enough room for a truck because it could be a box truck or a tractor trailer. Ms. Pleasanton stated her other concern is that their power poles are on the south side of the alleyway, and it is not clear what would happen with the power poles. Director Radigan advised that the existing power lines will be undergrounded or relocated. Ms. Pleasanton mentioned the sewer lines that come from her building and go underneath the alleyway to wherever they go. Mr. Burns stated they will not be impacting the utility service. Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 31 February 6, 2023 Director Radigan clarified if utilities are remaining in alleyways, there will be easements held over the alleyway to maintain the utilities and access to them. Ms. Pleasanton indicated that she would appreciate it if they would do something so they could keep that space to drive through. Mike Meyer, 633 Ocean Inlet Drive, current resident of INCA, expressed similar concerns. He referenced Exhibit Dl, which is the Justification Statement or the Abandonment for the north alley, and noted that it does not contain or support sanitary, sewer, cable, or telephone. It seems to be an error in the Justification Statement because there are underground clay pipes coming out of the businesses and overhead power lines. He mentioned another concern regarding the abandonment of NE 1st Street. He thinks it will create a safety issue because they are cutting off for loading and people will be backing out onto 4th Street. He mentioned a couple of clean up items and concerns related to pedestrian access. Originally, when this came through the RFP process it looked like there was a substantial amount of public space. He is going to meet with the group this Wednesday and hopefully clarify some of those things, but it looks like there was a reduction in public amenity space from the original RFP. Mr. Harper asked Mr. Meyer to explain what INCA is. Mr. Meyer indicated that INCA is a non-profit. It started in the mid-1990's and represents a lot of the non-HOA communities in District 11 on the east side of Federal Highway. Thomas Turkin, Commissioner, 132 SW 2nd Street, was present. He stated this is coming back to the Commission on February 21, 2023, and encouraged Affiliated to meet with the ACE Hardware owner. He also asked Director Radigan to come up with some type of win-win resolution. He thanked the Board for staying late. Mr. McQuire questioned density. Director Radigan stated the zoning district is much more than just the allowable height. This is taking advantage of the density within Mixed Use Core that is currently allowed, as they were submitted before the latest amendment to the zoning district. Motion was made by Mr. Ramiccio, seconded by Mr. Harper, to approve Item 7E including staff recommendations. In a roll call vote, the motion passed unanimously. (4-0) Ayes: Harper, McQuire, Ramiccio, Buoni Nays: None 7F. Approval of three (3) applications for abandonments to vacate a portion of an alleyway located within the northern section of the proposed The Pierce Development AKA North Alley (ABAN 22-001), a portion of NE lst Avenue (ABAN 22-002), and the full length of an alleyway located within the southern section of the proposed The Pierce Development AKA South Alley (ABAN 22-003). Applicant: Jeffery Burns, Affiliated Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 32 February 6, 2023 Development. Vice Chair Buoni opened discussion to the public. Hearing none, public comments were closed. Motion was made by Mr. Ramiccio, seconded by Mr. McQuire, to approve Item 7F with the recommendation to the Commission that they try to work with the abutting property owner of ACE Hardware to see if a resolution or a win-win could be worked out, and including staff recommendations. In a roll call vote,the motion passed unanimously. (4-0) Ayes: Harper, McQuire, Ramiccio, Buoni Nays: None 7G. Approval of four (4) Community Design Appeal requests (CDPA 22-002, 23-006, 23- 007, & 23-008) for Chapter 4, Article III, Section 5.F.2.c, Freestanding Parking Garages, prohibiting freestanding parking garages from having frontage on any arterial or collector roadway, to allow for alternative design solutions for the freestanding parking garage as proposed. Application/Agent: Jeffrey Burns, Affiliated Development. Vice Chair Buoni opened discussion to the public. Hearing none, public comments were closed. Mr. McQuire commented that they need to focus on moving forward on a Downtown. He thinks their design and colors were non-traditional and he mentioned the vision. It will not be a perfect package, but it is a pretty package. Motion was made by Mr. McQuire, seconded by Mr. Ramiccio, to approve Item 7G including staff recommendations. In a voice vote,the motion passed unanimously. (4-0) Ayes: Harper, McQuire, Ramiccio, Buoni Nays: None 7H. Approval of Height Exception (HTEX 23-001) for Chapter 4, Article III, Section 6.F.2.c. to exceed the maximum height of 75 feet for a freestanding parking garage to allow for a height of 77 feet 11 inches for the egress staircase. Applicant/Agent: Jeffrey Burns, Affiliated Development. Vice Chair Buoni opened discussion to the public. Hearing none, public comments were closed. Motion was made by Mr. McQuire, seconded by Mr. Harper, to approve Item 7H including staff recommendations. In a roll call vote, the motion passed unanimously. (4-0) Ayes: Harper, McQuire, Ramiccio, Buoni Nays: None Meeting Minutes Planning and Development Board Page 33 February 6, 2023 7I. Approval of a New Master Plan (MPMD 22-005) and New Major Site Plan Modification (NWSP 22-004) application for a mixed-use development consisting of an eight(8)-story building with 300 dwelling units, 17,089 square feet of commercial space, associated recreational amenities, and parking on a 3.04-acre site. Applicant: Jeffrey Burns, Affiliated Development. Vice Chair Buoni opened discussion to the public. Hearing none, public comments were closed. Motion was made by Mr. Ramiccio, seconded by Mr. Harper, to approve Item 7I including staff recommendations. In a roll call vote, the motion passed unanimously. (4-0) Ayes: Harper, McQuire, Ramiccio, Buoni Nays: None 8. Other—None. 9. Comments by Members —None. 10. Adjournment Upon Motion duly made and seconded, the meeting at was adjourned at 10:05 p.m. [Minutes prepared by C. Guifarro,Prototype,Inc.]