##VIDEO ID:TrJrWy6vLEk## e e e it's 9:30 a.m. welcome to the planning board regular meeting on Thursday November 14th and again at 9:30 a.m. would everybody please silence their cell phones having done that uh Mr Hart would you please call the role member Rosen member Brown here member pal presid member chowski here member Axelrod here Vice chairperson mendleson here chairperson Goldenberg I am here also all right all rise for the pledge allegiance I pledge allegiance to the flag the United States of America and to the repic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all approval of the agenda is there a call to motion to accept the agenda as presented second all in favor I swearing under the public for those giving testimony please stand and raise your right hands to be sworn in by Mr Hart to provide testimony for the application you are affiliated with Mr art please wear them in so if you think you're going to be coming up and speaking at any point please stand by The Authority one second for any of the any of the comments today not just for the applications okay okay coms question yes you're coming up Podium which you have to you have to stand up if you're able thank you okay by the authority all right everyone M theart by the authority vested in me as a notary of the State of Florida do you swear or affirm that the testimony that you're about to give is the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth thank you you may be seated thank you we have approval minutes September 12th of 2024 are there any corrections to the minutes hearing none is there approval second second all in favor I unfinished business there is none we move on the first one is development order application pz d24 d8 Robert Hammond application by Daren dunlay Sedar Builders requesting site plan approval for new two stor 6,012 square foot single family residence with pool and jacuzzi for the property located at 42 03 Tranquility Drive do any board members have any expart Communications hearing none let's move on at this time the public meeting public meeting is open and Miss Allen please present the application all right good morning uh for the record in GD allent Town planner um as the board knows I typically like to start the uh applicant uh applicant driven applications uh with some Aerials so we'll go ahead and start there get this to work so uh the Aerials to start on page 12 of your packets um you can see this is the subject property uh 4203 Tranquility drive this is an overhead um and here you have the front of the home now I did make a little note um on the aerial that um the previous one-story residence that's actually shown here um has already been demolished the uh applicant did get a demolition permit from the town it's just the Aerials to the palmach County Property Appraisers which is typically the software that we use hasn't been updated they don't update I think maybe every six months or so so and here you have again this is in your packet you have the uh rear property line I'm sorry jacqu do we have the pointer and also in your packet this is a a photograph of the property you could see they have the fence now up for uh demolition thank you so much okay there we go okay um so as indicated this is a request for a site plan approval to construct a new twostory 6,012 foot single family residence uh this also has a pool in jacuzzi um as I already indicated is currently vacant uh the previous House was built in 1982 um we can go ahead and and look through the plans obviously this is a single family zoning District you can have a single family home in a single family zoning District um this is a rendering provided by the applicant the front rendering um again this is all in your packet these are the 11 by 17 plans this is the rear of the property and um here you have the survey and here you have the site plan then you have the first floor plan second floor plan again these are all in your packets the roof plan and uh here you have the elevations this is the rear side and here you have the tree disposition plan and here you have the landscape plans to follow uh so uh pursuant to our town code it's actually section 30- 38-6 the planning board for site plan approvals you either approve or deny the site plan um the approval may include conditions which clar ify but do not exceed the requirements of the zoning code um if the planning board chooses to approve this application uh pursuant to section 30-21 g commencement of construction shall be initiated within two years following the date of approval by the planning board uh staff uh did review the plans and the application the plans or dates stent received by the building department on October 24th 2024 and finds that the project is consistent with the town code of ordinances as it pertains to site development uh we do have the applicants authorized agent here uh Darren dunlay to address any questions and I'm here as well to address any questions that you may have thank you do any board members have any questions of Miss Allen hearing none the applicant can now now make a presentation if they would like or so like please come to the podium provide your name business and affiliation with application uh Darren dley sear Builders here to take any questions if anyone has any do any board members have any questions of the applicant I have comments sure think it's beautiful thank you all right I think it's a very nice design a very odd yeah nicely done thank you if there are any members of the public who would like to make any comment on this on this application hearing none I make a motion I make a motion to approve the application as received I'll second it all in favor I guess we have to have a roll call Vice chairperson Mendelson yes member chowski yes member Rosen member Brown yes member Powell yes member Axelrod yes chairperson Goldenberg yes thank you motion carries thank you very much next item on the agenda development order application number pz 24-4 Daniel Edwards application by T papis Randall staf Architects requesting site plan approval for new three Story 2 unit 5,217 square foot per unit town home developed with pool and spa for the property located at 4306 South Ocean Boulevard do any members of the board have any experte Communications hearing none at this time the public meeting is open Town plan around please present the application okay again we'll start with the Aerials which start on page 42 of your packets here you have the property outlined in blue um here you have the front of the home in the corner there um and here you have the rear of the home um so um as indicated this is a new construction of a three-story 2 unit each unit will be 5,217 square feet Town Home Development with pool and spa um this is currently a single structure that has three twostory town home units and the property owner is proposing to demolish the existing structure um a 2unit town home is permitted this is a rml zoning District the residential multif family low density so obviously a town home is uh permitted I provided you a definition of multif family dwelling just um for reference purposes on page 37 of your packets uh so when you do the density calculation for this property uh they can do two units right so you take the lot size you divide it by an acre and then you multiply by the maximum density that's permitted which is six units per dwell uh six units per acre for the again rml zoning District you come out with two units now uh this property um has a little bit of nuance and I did put it in the staff report um we do have something in our code that's called the side uh Corner yard um and typically that side corner yard which would be the corner on the the Leo side uh where you typically have to apply the front setback but when you look at the definition which again I provided on page 3 seven of your packets you see the side corner yard has some exceptions right there's certain legal descriptions that are exemp exempt and lo and behold this particular properties exempt which is quite interesting uh so they are not um obligated to do the 25 foot setback along that side so they default back to the 12 foot side setback that is required for the rml zoning District so worth pointing that out uh the applicant indicates that there'll be no proposed changes to the landscaping and fdot's RightWay um they are proposing a new driveway which does require an fdot RightWay permit um they've gone ahead and received that permit um and according to our to a resolution that was passed um I believe it was in 2021 um the RightWay permit um has to go before actually that one is not part of the resolution I'm sorry that was actually in our code uh the RightWay permit um has to be approved by the town commission so that meeting uh where the town commission will consider the RightWay permit would be on December 17th now in addition this is a little bit different than what the board is typically used to because it's multif family our code says at the board you are re you're going to make a recommendation you're an Advisory Board any multif family has to have final approval by the town commission again they'll be going the applicate will be going on December 17th for that final approval for this request um and as always um if the commission decides to approve the application commen of construction will be initiated within two years following the date of approval by the town commission staff reviewed the applicants um request application the date St receip plans um October 24th 2024 and finds that the project is consistent with the town code as it pertains to site development I'll be glad to address any questions and again we have uh the app authorized agent here there's a a full team that can answer or address any questions thank you do any board members have any questions of the staff Roger sorry I'm I'm trying to understand the setback that you talked about you said this house has an exception right is there are there other homes that have exceptions if you look at the definition on page 37 uh block A2 lot one also is exempt from that side corner yard 37 37 yeah that's the definition and in the definition itself it gives you the legal descriptions of the properties that are exempt so there's one other property ien yeah I was going to ask the nature of the exemption but you just explained it so so they pick two addresses Bas exactly two legal descriptions I don't know right two lots I don't probably because they they run along Theo drive and my other question is so the height on this is it like where the garages and there's Windows is that living is that also living space next to the garages so it's like three stories or done let me pull up the site plan a001 yeah I'm just looking at that picture of the space next to the garages and the a001 in fact it's it's up there now there I'm sorry we didn't actually go through the yeah um this is the current survey um these are the Civil we get kind of pass this this is a landscape plan all the landscaping and irrigation coming up this is the tree disos I think I just passed it yeah okay and then let's go to the elevation since you're asking about height right first floor again these are all in your packet third floor Booth plan now we should start with the elevations so if yeah so the we those glass um things with Windows next to the two garages is that living space Also or occupying space uh let me see if I'm it looks like from the rear rear no up near yeah next to the garage next to the garage no down no next to the garage there's Windows next the you're talking about next those are windows right next to the garages yes okay so is that like people would you know that's living space or some kind of I believe it is living space yes okay and you can look at the the first FL plan you'll see that okay and so then I guess so it's like really three stories so I'm just I was just curious about the height I didn't look at the height elevation yes it is three story that's what they request on the application right and that's the the same 35 fet that everybody else it's Max and that's the maximum height for this particular zoning district and when you look at the site plan um you know there's that tabular data and it it tells you what's required as far as the Land Development regulations and what they're proposing so let me go to that so um the height is again a Max of 35 feet and they're proposing 35 feet okay great thanks yeah one question Roger uh this is your neighborhood correct yeah how's it fit into it's actually on A1 a and the back of it faces Bader right and it's consistent with what the community it's very nice but you know if there's three units there now so the owner of the property couldn't put three units there again that's correct based on the density calculation and I know the board has heard this before we have this type of scenario throughout the town not just on South Ocean Bita we have it Highland Beach Drive Right based on the density now a lot of the units can't get back what they C what they have yeah so so again when when you do the density they can only get back two they couldn't get three any other questions of the staff thank you ingred applicant you may now make a presentation please come to the podium provide your name business and affiliation with the applicant if you so choose to good morning all uh my name to papis I am with Randle sta Architects and I am representing the agent for this project for Daniel Edwards do any board members have any questions to the applicant hearing none thank you very much that was easy are there any members of the public that has any comment about this would you please come forward and identify yourself so my name is Rich or resident at 4310 South Ocean which is the Jason Property just south of the proposed site I just have some general questions nothing specific um I did not notice in the plans any plans for a new bulkhead I just want to confirm that's the case would I address my question I'm sorry bulkhead isad wall yes that will have to be you have to come to the uh to the microphone you can stay yes the seaw wall will be redone but that is under a doc engineer so we don't have control over that that has to go through the through the engineering and then being presented at a later date then correct under a separate permit right any other questions what is the General hours of operation or or is that premature this is just the planning side this is the planning side okay we understand your concern as I said just have some general questions um excuse me I think the building department his rules about when you can work in Highland Beach you should look so I can check for that yeah um what we heard was that this project may not start for another two years it has to start within two years of of approval decision so that site may stay empty and vacant it can be it could that's why I use the word may could yes okay I have a concern with that but uh nevertheless um and when um I guess the privacy wall that is adjacent to our property and the Landscaping plan the timing of that is not known just yet as well I would that is we do not have that information you may talk to the architect inred why don't you go first whose privacy wall is it referring to the landscape plan landscape plan and the Privacy we in the site yeah I'll defer to the applicant to talk a little bit about the site we but the landscape plan is in your packet right um and just to address your other question right if you go to the town web page there's a whole construction manual has a lot of regulations about you know what time you could do construction and then with your regards to book the bulkhead so this application that is before the the board today it is solely for the home right and the pool and that's it any separate application regarding a new dock a new seaw wall That's processed under something called a special exception so that would be a separate application by the applicant a separate fee that would have to come back before the Comm the board on that ingred I'm just curious um I want to understand and clarify where's your major concern about the project I'm not really clear where your really major concern is I hear about the Landscaping I'm not so sure I have a concern I mean the plan looks quite uh accurate and um I'm sure it's going to add a lot of value to the community uh but I represent the association and we're concerned about the building staying vacant for two years number one we're concerned about a privacy buffer between the two units today we had Landscaping on that privacy wall since the wall has been removed our Landscaping now is dead and dying we have no buffer between the two units so it's more just about um maintaining the Privacy maintaining the um the Integrity of both of the the sites right now and have it empty for two years would be a bit of a concern obviously with everything going on in A1A plus the construction of this unit you know there's a lot of concern from the residents about the the impact to I say our you know our environment that's totally H in thank you and we're and we're pleased that you're here to represent the community uh in the architect do we have the privacy wall in in the structure to assuage any concerns they have yes the privacy wall is within the guidelines of the Town regulations it is within the property line there's a gentleman back there who I know I saw that uh young man I have bad eyes so it's I'm calling you yes come come up to come up yeah that's the point the young man uh in all due respect please identify yourself old eyes I'm Dan I'm the owner of the property but I can give you my cell phone number and you I live right in G you guys anyone can call me uh our plan is to demolish an ASAP and get it started but but lit I mean I can I can be down any time meet with anybody so I can give myself one thank you that's what we like to hear here on the planning board any other questions from from the audience chair I was waiting so yeah the Privacy Vault wall just to elaborate a little bit when you look at the site plan sheet that's a101 you'll see that there's a site plan uh a privacy wall at six feet that is the maximum height for walls in the town so that is in compli iance it's also on the landscape PL lp-1 so it's uh within town code yeah do any board members have any other questions of the staff or the public hearing none the public meeting the hearing is now closed is there a motion to accept so move second roll call please just to be clear it's a recommendation of approval Commendation R I'm sorry member Axel Rod yes member Rosen member Brown yes member pal yes member chowski yes Vice chairperson Mendelson yes chairperson Goldenberg yes and there will be a recommendation as so instructed to send back to the commission thank you all right let's move on proposed amendment to the town code of ordinances regarding accessory Marine facilities known as AMF and seaw wall regulations do any board members have any expart Communications to disclose right the public meeting hearing is now open Town planner alen please present the proposed amendment okay I just wanted to say for the record that this item was supposed to be on the board's October 10th agenda but um as you all are are aware that meeting was canceled due to Hurricane belon so we just moved it on this agenda given it's not um applicant driven uh so um a little bit of History here um at the April 2nd 2024 commission meeting the commission discussed the proposed amendments uh the amendment Concepts I should say to the accessory Marine facility and Seawall regulations of the town code if the board recalls uh chair Goldenberg on November 7th of 2023 uh provided the board's recommendations to the commission now on that April 2nd meeting consensus from the commission was to proceed with Amendment Concepts one through four and number six so if you look at the bottom of page 81 in your packets and on the top of page 82 you will see a table that I provided the First Column is the proposed amendment Concepts as they were initially provided by the previous vice mayor uh Greg Bobby the middle column column column excuse me is a recommendation by the planning board on each concept and then the third column is the um how the commission decided to proceed uh again based on their April 2nd meeting of 2024 so in addition to moving forward with Concepts one through four and um there there's a little bit of nuance here with regards to the latter and I'll go ahead and just read it as I put it in the staff report again on page 41 they ask that the board discuss and provide more detailed information regarding ladders to include timing placement and whether they should be mandatory or voluntary okay now I also wanted to add that at the um SE September uh 17th meeting um there was um in the agenda memorandum um and I have an an excerpt from that agenda memorandum that at the request of the Town manager there was some additional language that was proposed in the ordinance um that addressed floating uh vessel platforms and residential floating Boat Lifts um again there's been some discussion in the town about these as the board knows it was not part of the initial Amendment concept list but again uh Town manager suggested to put be put in there that those types of floating vessel platforms if you're in the single family zoning District that you would have to comply with the uh Marine side setbacks now the consensus from the commission um On That September 17 202 2024 meeting was to strike this language they didn't want to talk or include any type of Regulation regarding floating vessel platforms or floating Boat Lifts um as part of this ordinance uh they did indicate that they would like to see that come before them separately would you know be a separate ordinance so I just wanted to state that clearly for the record um on the bottom of page uh 82 there's um some lad provisions again the initial recommendation or I should say the consensus from the commission on April 2nd was to provide two versions regarding ladds they wanted one that's more of a requirement and then they wanted one that was more of an encouragement so what is in the ordinance on page 90 is the proposed ordinance we went ahead and added the encouragement one it doesn't mean I has to say that way we just put it in which reads the letters are permitted on Doc seols finger peers and other moing facilities so that they are permitted but then I've gone ahead and added your initial recommendation which was quite Nuance again it's on page the bottom of page 82 you know you talk about providing One ladder for each 100 feet abing the Waterway Canal or lake for properties less than 100 feet provide One ladder then you get into detail about the ladder shall coincide with the request with special exception the latter shall either be adjustable or fixed shall and shall extend into the water at mean loone low water line so um maybe you want to massage that a bit based on the direction that the commission gave you that will be up to the board and lastly we did have some housekeeping items I made a note of it on page 83 of your packets um you know in this section of the code it talks about you the building official calls out different staff so we just added the word design you know sometimes people's titles change right uh so we just added the word design just for better efficiency um again it's a non-substantive uh change and of course I've provided that very long uh history that we have on this amendment uh proposed amendment um going on like three almost four years so I'm happy to address any questions that you may have ingred um in listening to the commission's meeting um my feeling was a little bit of lack of understanding um and the recommendation was if they had been at some of our meetings to hear the dialogue it might have been an easier discussion for them to have uh especially when we got into ladds U when we got into the latter area as they were discussing it I felt that safety was not really a topic of conversation as much as uh the look The feel what it meant and I'm really wondering if we're going to be able to answer some of their questions without them being here and listening to the dialogue that was my concern as I listen and as I listened to the commissioner speaking uh even to the point that some of them said that maybe we should go out in the water way uh and we should also take another look to better understand it so I'm just curious what we'd like to accomplish here to give them a better level of satisfaction and that's a question yeah I have a comment I have question comment so I disagree that they didn't understand what we did because like I was against ladders from day one I'm still against you know making people have ladders I think that um it it should be permitted you can even add you know I don't know requested no I wouldn't even put requested but because I think that there's another issue that I I think I brought up at the time and it's like a liability if you put out Len my friend lawyer Len is saying yes if you put out a ladder and anything about it is wrong or it breaks or the guy couldn't get to it because it was in he in what he thought was the wrong place he's GNA sue you and th this is just like a whole horn its nest of Regulation that I am absolutely violently against and so I don't I think that the commission might have felt the same way about it you know I I don't if people want to do this because they think that it's proper for safety because they're on the water they can do it and they can deal with all the repercussions if they do it wrong um I I just think this is overreach so I I um they were even questioning where to put the ladders in as far as the spacing right but but that's because everybody's going to want to do it different and to mandate at 100 feet maybe like that guy sues you because it should have been at 72.4 feet and it's just you know yeah I I don't disagree with you iene I think that the reason I was originally brought up was for a safety issue and if you know and I brought it up so I'm I'm I'm more than willing to adjust or drop that if that's what's going to hang up this this whole the whole whole application and and you know the proposed amendment I have no issue with that I just want to be make sure everybody's aware of that yeah I mean yeah absolutely Roger I'm I'm okay with it also but if that's the case you can't recommend it either because the recommendation and not adhering to the recommendation would bring up on the same liability I agree it and I said this before the town commission being somebody who's actually fallen in the water myself and was very thankful that there was a ladder to be able to get out of the water I'm a strong proponent of ladders but if people don't want to have them then let them not have them well can we adjust it to say encourage or just leave it completely encourage it and they don't do it and that's the liability also that's fine with me and I was then they have full Authority you know to do whatever they think is right for their property what about the other board memb MERS how do we feel about that go ahead I I kind of agree that if if you're going to have any reference to Lads it should be that they're permitted but they're not they're neither required nor encouraged nor any setback again I think the liability issue is wide open and not something that we want to undertake I I will defer to the attorneys on the board all right do we are we agreed that we're going to change the language to permitted um if you look at page 90 it reads ladders are permitted on dock seaw walls finger Piers oring facilities then obviously we just leave it alone you know no action it's not a requirement I think we should take lades out completely because I think even if we don't encourage it it could be the reverse that there could be a discussion why wen't their lad why is it Force the ladder issue and somebody falls into the water can't get out drowns you're in a situation where there's no lad soad I I I'm a little and I Look to Len about this if you know there could be a question in the town are we permitted to have ladders like we want to put one up are we permitted so I don't think the liability is quite the same if you just say it's permitted but you know Len I'll agree the commission was concerned about liability understand be better to say that they're not prohibited no I I think it's fine to say it's permitted I I think it should be the individual homeowner's Choice whether they want to do it or not because right as Eileen sort of explained it's where the liability comes in is people challenge how you did it so it's you know whether it's it was long enough it was in the right place it was whatever and that really should be up to each individual homeowner to decide whether they want to why those or not why can't we take ladds completely out of this uh because well because I think if somebody wants to put in a ladder they should be they can well if they're not they can they should know that it's permitted yeah second we the board first we just put in 18 new ducks and there's ladders it's a condominium group obvious but we have 18 ducks and we put in Ladders because of the amount of traffic that we have out back and the age group is changing we have a lot of younger people moving in right now and we were concerned about having uh many of these younger people who are now having boasts and things of that nature not having a l of there but that was our concern um but it was our choice uh all right so so if we can move on a bit uh do we have to make a any motion to make that revision to or to of no action for the lads well um again the language is on page 90 if you're content with that it's number eight on the top of page 90 um you'll see it underlined says ladders are permitted on Doc sew well finger Piers another Bing facilities if you're fine with that language then that is what's going to go back before the commission I mean if you want to it by so the board will now take a vote on no action is that what we're doing on on ladders um you're gonna take a vote on on the recommended language but did you have any public comment on this well I'm not just yeah I just want to sure all right thank you is there any public comment on on this issue oh if I may just add I believe on the days you were handed out some additional comment that was received on November 12th just want to say that for the record the doctor all right young man would you come would you come to the if you're able he give him the mic give on the latter issue I have uh had some involvement with a case where uh the mafia got a group of kids on rubber boats in a NAA uh outfits and they went and went over the seaw walls to rob the houses and all seems to me the only thing that given the uh the uh another reason not to have the bladder is that it would make it easy for them to just climb the ladder to get into the back of the house thank you thank you so I think what ingred and Len just said was I make a motion we have I didn't see there there's one other person doctor okay I'm sorry go ah okay is there any other any other any other ingred com that's not yet we didn't do that yet well this is the this isn't there another one after this that's a home based ordinance is it about this particular yeah bring it to him the town is going to be 75 years old in December I've been a property owner with my wife Moren for 52 years everything has been resolved every never had this problem now we get the EPA coming in and uh doing away with our uh provisions and our code and no nobody takes any offense to we got home rule we have a right as a as a a dignified Community to maintain our own own values but we never when when this first matter came up to my attention the I was told that the cities or the town hands were tied well nobody tried to do anything nobody tried to show that uh the EPA had no problem what has been the problem in 75 years that we need the Environmental Protection Agency to come in and protect us what have we done wrong we're all going to die tomorrow from some some disease and it it just hasn't doesn't understand why we don't stand up for our rights and we we we we want to run our Our Town the way we want to not some a agency uh in dealing with uh things that don't involve this now the the the this all started because of uh commissioner Greg I don't know what his last name is I can't pronounce it Bobby filed a report and it points out that several people very few people are G going to be uh affected by uh the the uh changing of the code Mr Brown is one of them so it's you got that they're they're asking the the the code to be change the the code to be change to protect interests or enhance interest that they want to do themselves uh the the the reduction of the the the the setback line from 25 to 10 feet can't this what what's the purpose of that what what what is the reason for doing that I on my contention the only thing I can think about is those Property Owners want to get a clear view of the of the uh of the of the lake and that they they don't want to be their view to be uh uh locked by any AMF which is what they want to have so what they're going to do is they're gonna they're gonna hopefully they're gonna get the the the the property line or the setback move down to 10 feet and then they're going to move all the all the AMC that they have or they want to Within the 10 ft to bother the neighbors and not to them so they have a clear view and the neighbors to each side of them will have to live with seeing whatever a jet ski live uh whatever Contraptions that they want to do and uh the I leave you with this this adage if it ain't broke don't fix it thank you thank you and if if I can be correct in saying that we were concerned about the na neighbor uh having losing their line of sight to quote unquote the lake or their their view of the water uh and I think the 25 foot setback that we originally had was very restrictive because it would limit remember this is not just the size of the boat this is the accessory Marine facility I.E the lift so at 25 ft it would be restrictive for the homeowner and we tried to come up with a reasonable distant setback that would accommodate just about everyone and that would be a how did we put it a [Music] minimum um if you look on page 82 right that's your recommendation but if I just may I'll I'll let you finish no no go ahead I just want to make a clarification for the record so there was a proposed amendment concept to go to 10 feet uh townwide and for Lots less than 100 feet the setback is 10 10% of the width however the setback cannot be less than five feet but again if you look at the chart on page 82 the town commission decided to move to have no action on this amendment concept so the ordinance that's before you today does not include any changes to the setback the setback remain as is there's no changes to it the commission again decided to take no action on this particular Amendment concept so you got what you wanted yes yes we're fine so you're okay they didn't change that part they didn't change it didn't change it that part about the setback the commission still at 25 correct it's still at 25t they change it was proposed and not accepted just because of you you right ask a question I I don't understand the EPA thing uh maybe somebody well was not just EPA government government intrusion the town should make and did the mafia come into Belo well you were away at the time yeah your ninj okay we'll let it slide okay now mean I'm serious I moving on so now we have to send this back to the commission I was going to make a motion about yes that's what I want to just double check again it's a recommendation so this is an ordinance right amending so I make a motion to recommend to the commission that we have the language that you reference at that is in section 3068 Lads are permitted on Doc seaw walls finger peers or other moing facilities so whatever they it's on the it's on the the chart yeah no no but and she said it was page0 number eight on page 90 on the sort of the top part of the page right okay so that's my motion for recommendation that we tell the commission that we like the language in paragraph 8 on page 90 and not to change and not to change no action no action a second on that second second roll call David Vice chair person mendleson yes member pal yes member Rosen member Brown member Brown member chowski yes member Axel Rod yes chairperson Goldenberg yes thank you thank you n moving on is it proposed amend Amendment to the town zoning code Chapter 30 relating to homebased businesses do any members of this board have any exper Communications to disclose at this time the public hearing is open Town planner Al please present the proposed amendment okay so uh this proposed amendment is a change to the town zoning code which is chapter 30 uh these will bring regulations regarding homebased businesses into compliance with State Statute it's specifically section 55995 five and on page 193 and 194 of your package I've actually provided you the section from the statute uh this um this restricts the power of Municipal governments to regulate homebased businesses um and the this initiative if you want to call it that this amendment to the homebased businesses uh is initiative that was on the town strategic priorities plan so I just want to make that very clear just some brief background again I I talk about this on page 185 what brought this about there was a house bill 403 which came became effective on July 1st of 2021 again prohibiting local governments from licensing or otherwise regulating homebased businesses now currently in our code we have Provisions regarding home occupations and you're going to see that in the ordinance it struck through right so we're it's really a change of terminology here as well it's pretty obvious we're going to go from home home occupations to now homebased businesses okay and currently home occupations they're permitted in all the zoning districts except the government services District um so when you change the code in our uh if you amend the code the section 30-44 uh indicates that that change has to be consistent with the town's comprehensive plan and the town's code of ordinances which this amendment is in compliance um and there's also I put a little reference to this business impact estimate which is now required for any type of ordinance however uh because this ordinance is about being in compliance with State Statute the bie is not required so um I'll be happy to address any questions um you may any board members have uh questions of what's the definition of a homebased business so I right now right now homebased businesses are permitted correct well we have home occupation right so what's the difference between home occupation and home page 191 of your packet you will see the current definition of home occupation it means a professional occupational trade or business performed in a residential dwelling by a resident or family member but we are amending that right to be more compliant to be compliant with the statute you could see the underline and strike through so now it reads home homebased businesses means a professional occupational trade or business use as those defined as those terms are defined in section 151 that operates in whole or part from a residential dwelling subject to the requirements of section 3067 so they're permitted not not not permitted right they are permitted the state mandated that they be permitted yes yes I mean most municipalities permitted them anyway but the state now has prescribed what you can regulate and that's go ahead dve so in in just continuing on the definition does that in I mean I understand that they you know the the primary people of the operation that this need to reside there they can have two additional Personnel um work there um and that the parking for all of that has to conform with regulations um and and a like non-home business based business are they permitted to customers at the Homebase business is my real question so is it could it be could it be a dentist or that's an occupation well no probably more of you know some type of commodity exchange no you can still have there's no restriction on that there's you can have a dentist or anything yeah as long as you know the parkings complied with and we did uh the commission was concerned about signage we can they'd have to to comply with the signage that applies to Residential Properties it wouldn't be allowed commercial signs they're not allowed to change the character of the neighborhood but they are allowed to conduct businesses subject to these regulations they could run a retail business their theoretically but you know the parking is still limited Judith what is sorry naive and I go back and look at this but what is definition of a residental delling sure we have that in our code I could pull it up she's went on top it's really any any dwelling people reside it could be multif family single family look at there's a more specific but what is the commission asking us to do so this is an amendment to the code yes so they had an intro right that's how we typically process it right I understand that it's first introduced to the commission they talk about it as uh Mr rubben indicated they wanted to add a little provision regarding signs like a cross reference so I wanted to add that we added that cross reference on page 189 of your packets under G the last sentence because they were concerned that people could put a sign but right our town code when you look at the definition of what a permanent sign is it's only to really identify or describe a residence or a hotel or motel but a hotel or motel is not necessarily incidental we have vacation rental regulations and that's something separate that you have to get an application for an inspection so um they did the introduction they made that uh uh their consensus was they wanted that cross reference to the sign code and now it comes to you because it's an amendment to the zoning code so the code says when you're amending the zoning code the planning board needs to make a recommendation so so basically they want us to approve their recommendation that no signs be permitted uh commercial signage be permitted and all the other stri entire the entire ordinance everything right and modernize the ordinance to because of technology these 12 compant with the statute yeah I don't I mean is there there's not a um choice in agreeing to comply with the statute there is not a choice a matter of fact there's a formality so but I do have a question I was a little confused does it does it change the whole thing about Airbnb and that I mean because I knew we had some rules about that how does that play into it yeah that falls under vacation it it doesn't impact that okay so that's still stay well that's a commercial Enterprise that's regulated separately totally different okay what happens with condo rules that say condos say you cannot problem yeah those are stay so the followup the followup the definition essentially residential I meant to give that 190 188 I'm sorry 188 where the listing of the various types of residen is listed on that chart is that essentially it I think there is a definition but those are all the different types I just and that's adequate I just want to make sure that's what it is it's just it's just where anyone resides yeah he question Len uh according to this anything can be challenged correct if there's a conflict any any of these items can be challenged correct so no matter what we put in print if some well th we've tracked the statute so we we're com so we're compliant with this excuse me we're compliant with state law okay so and the thing is and what I was going to say is now whenever the legislature does this lately they say okay here's what you have to do and if somebody sues you because you violate it you have to pay their attorneys fees okay so that this section also has that PR they you know home rule there was a reference to home rule by Mr Garrett it's a roing all right do we can we move on at this point all right have one more question go ahead Roger is a homebased business is not required to have like a a a occupational license or whatever they call it in this state in the city you can require it's it's a BTR now business tax receip it's not required now it we were we do require one I believe with the home occupation so people come in with the Palm Beach County uh business tax application and when you look at that application there's a section there for a zoning sign off from the local municipality so so long as it was compliant with the home occupation regulations I'd have each person that came in for a home occupation initial you know under each regulation that they're in compliance we don't have our own we don't take in business tax receipts so we use the county application right and many M palities do we don't we just they have to get a counted one though you have to I looked into you do and in reference to signage you know you can put up a sign to name your house right like you know Len's house you're allowed to do that right there's a I'll be happy to read you that provision um as to what the definition is of a of a permanent sign spare with me so we make it very clear for the board and you have to get a permit for that you have to get approval from the town for that yes we have a sign code if you're putting a permanent sign there are certain thresholds of how big the sign can be so yes we have to get a bear with mam I incorrect that I always thought that Professional Services doctors's lawyers uh had a little bit of leadway in that as far as signage no um I'm gonna find that definition I'll read it for you all right well oh here it is bear with me tiny laptop I okay here it is um okay okay so a permanent sign per our code which is section 23-1 uh means a sign used to identify or name a residence apartment or condominium building motel or hotel that's it so somebody came in trying to name a business well that's not consistent with our definition of what a permanent sign is all right any other questions and at this time the public meeting is now closed is there a motion to approve or disapprove of this I move to approve second all in favor I guess we need to have a Mr Hart rce chairperson Mendelson yes member chowski yes member Rosen yes member Brown yes member pal yes member Axel Rod yes chairperson Goldenberg yes thank you all right let's move on to announcements November 19th 1:30 p.m. is a town commission meeting December 3rd 2024 1:30 p.m. it's the town commission meeting and note please make note December 12th at 9:30 a.m. as a planning board regular meeting Miss mlon will be chairing that meeting uh before I forget I'd like to make a note for the planning board members that the January meeting will be January 16th so we all aware of that and the February meeting will be the 13th because of Staff requirements the 13th was would have been well I'm just I'm just reviewing that thank you could I have a motion to adjourn so moved second all in favor