All right, I'd like to call to order this board meeting of the Historic Preservation Board, Delray Beach, March 4th, 2026. Please call the roll. Carol Price? Here. Richard Kasser? Here. Jake Eliopoulos? Here. Benjamin Baffer is absent. Chris Cabezas? Here. Peter Dwyer? Here. John Miller? Here. Any changes to the agenda tonight? Okay, get a motion to approve. I'll make the motion. Second. Motion and a second. All in favor, say aye. Aye. Opposed? Okay, motion carries. We have minutes from February 4th, 2026. Anybody have any comments on those? Just a quick note. The format, you may have noticed, has changed slightly. This is so that we can align all of the boards at the city. Those are what the city commission minutes look like. It's purely based on the computer program that we're using. It is not based on anything else. So there's a cover page, you'll see. But they're largely exactly how we were doing them before. Thanks. Want to make a motion? I'll move to approve the minutes. Okay. Motion. Second. We have a second. All in favor, say aye. Aye. Aye. Motion carries. Okay. At this point, any members of the public who are going to speak on any of the quasi-judicial items tonight, if you'd please stand up and be sworn in. By the authority vested in me as a notary of the state of Florida, do you swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Yes. Okay. Thank you. Thin crowd tonight, but if anybody would like to speak on any item that is not on the agenda tonight, now is your opportunity. Okay. Seeing none. Any presentations, Michelle? Okay. Moving on to item 8. A. COA HP 415-2026. Let the record show Baffert has joined the party. Before we start, any ex parte communication on this item? No. None. I drove by and walked by the property front and back. Okay. No. Sorry. Michelle Hewitt, Senior Historic Preservation Planner, and I'd like to read into the agenda. Item 8A for 137 North Swinton Avenue, HP 415-2026. This is a Certificate of Appropriateness. We have the applicant here to present on behalf of the property owner. Expecting applause. Good afternoon. Good afternoon slash evening. My name is Solomon Stroll. I am with Caner Impact Windows, and we're taking care of this project for the homeowner at 137 North Swinton. It is obviously in the Historic District, which is why we are all here. And so I've just got a brief presentation, hopefully brief enough. This is my first time doing one of these. You've got 20 minutes. Okay. I'll try not to take all of that. I'm sorry. It's actually 15 now. Oh, they changed it. Just keep going down. Okay. All right. So there is an image of the property. I think I got all these notes from the document that was sent to us. So 1939, minimal traditional residence. It is a contributing structure. It is in the Old School Square Historic District. It is a single-family residential. That use remains unchanged. We are not creating or proposing any new openings. And yeah, let me get rid of that. All right. So yeah, so this proposal aligns with LDR section 4.5.1. Okay, so what is not changing? The original window openings will remain the same. The shutters will remain the same. There's no change to the facade. There are no structural modifications. We intend to use white aluminum frames, which match what is already there, with clear glass as required. For the windows, so we are planning to use impact-resistant aluminum windows with white frames, clear non-reflective glass. The change that the homeowner would like on this is that she would like to do the mutton pattern, that's the grid lines, on the top pane, only not on the lower sash. So she'd like to remove the muttons from that lower sash. So as you're looking at the image there, just because it's the easiest one to see that far right window, instead of having a 6 over 6 pattern, it would be 6 on top and none on the bottom. So existing, there are 4 over 4, 6 over 6, and 8 over 8. Again, we propose to leave the top sash unchanged, remove the lower sash grids. It maintains the colonial character at eye level, improves the interior lighting for the homeowner. There's no new pattern that's introduced, and doesn't create any false historical elements. Why this is historically compatible. Minimal traditional homes commonly feature simple, single-hung windows, colonial mutton patterns, minimal ornamentation. Our proposal keeps the top colonial pattern, retains proportions, retains scale, retains the rhythm. And we are not altering anything architectural. So that's it for the windows. Moving over to the door. The proposed, so the image is on the left, the two images there. The left image is the exterior of the door, as it is currently, and the center image is the interior of the door. So you can see that it is a wood door with a window in it. We propose switching this to a wood-look aluminum door with glass in the middle. That would be frosted glass, so it should get light coming in, but you would not be able to see it in or out. It would not have a tint on it. So again, the proposed door, impact-rated aluminum, teak woodgrain finish, three-panel glass configuration. Our justification, the woodgrain finish provides traditional appearance. The color complements the structure. The glass increases interior light, and the scale remains residential, not commercial in proportion. Here are our, this is addressing the staff concerns that were in the document. From page six, elimination of the lower muttons. The modern door appearance, those are the two items. Our response again, top muttons preserved, no change to openings, no reflective glass, and the woodgrain door finish enhances the traditional character. There is no destruction, sorry, no destructive alteration to the historic fabric of the home. Addressing the Secretary of the Interior Standards, no destruction of historic materials. Standard one, the use remains residential. Standard two, historic character retained. Standard five, distinctive features preserved. Standard nine, new work compatible in scale and materials. Long-term preservation benefits. The hurricane, for hurricane protection eliminates the need for storm shutters, protects the historic structure, improves the building envelope, and enhances longevity of contributing structure. So our formal request is the proposed windows and doors preserve defining architectural elements, maintain facade rhythm and scale, use compatible materials and color, improve safety without altering historic integrity. So we respectfully request approval of Certificate HP 415-2026. I think that's it. Thank you. Thank you. Very nice for your first time. How was my timing? Perfect. So what's going to happen is staff is going to present, and then we may come back to you with some questions. Thank you. Once again, Michelle Hewitt, Senior Historic Preservation Planner, and this is for 137 North Swinton Avenue, HP 415-2026 for a Certificate of Appropriateness. On the screen here is an aerial image with the subject property outlined in red with North Swinton Avenue to the west and just shortly above to the north is Northeast 2nd Street. Just very brief history. The subject, 0.23-acre property, is located within the locally and nationally registered Old School Square Historic District. It contains a 1939 one-story Minimo Traditional Style structure that is classified as contributing within the district. Just a little brief description here about Minimo Traditional Style. They were simple in plan and design and in architectural features. They were typically designed with minimal decoration and included hints of more classical and traditional architectural styles, such as the colonial revival style. So, detailing would include shingle roofs with little to no overhangs, simple single-hung or double-hung windows with colonial mutton patterns, exteriors of wood siding, smooth stucco or brick, chimneys, traditional panel doors with simple door surrounds, and often no garages or car parking area. Going through some images here, this is the front or west elevation of the property to spaces towards Swinton Avenue. You can kind of see the existing window pattern and appearance of the shutters and the shutter dogs that are to remain on the structure. I'm going to go through a couple of images that also are going to show you what the proposed windows are next to it. So, here on the front slash side, northwest corner elevation here, on the right, you can see there is a 6 over 6 window that's supposed to go to 6 over 1, and then on the left there, there is a 4 over 4 window, and then it's supposed to go to 4 over 1. On the, in this image here, this is also the front or west elevation. You can see that front door there on the left with those three panels that it's proposed to go to, and then on the right is just a fixed window on this elevation. Looking at these windows here on the right side of the front elevation, the 6 over 6 on both of these windows are proposed to go to 6 over 1. Here, we have on the rear or east facing elevation, another 6 over 6 proposed to go to 6 over 1. And then this is the side or south elevation. This is a sliding glass door proposed to also be a sliding glass door, same appearance. In the rear, again, we have some 8 over 8s, and they're proposed to go to 8 over 1. On the side, there's a door replacement. It's going to have a slightly larger glass panel with the proposal. And then here, we have a 4 over 4 proposed to go to 4 over 1. And here's just a plan of all the locations of the windows and doors proposed for replacement. And then there, a schedule. You can see the list of single-hung, fixed sliding glass doors on here. All of the windows are proposed to be white frame aluminum with clear, no tint, non-reflective, no low-e glass. And the doors are proposed to have a teak finish. Here is a staff report excerpt from the Secretary of the Interior Standards. These are to be hurricane impact resistant windows to ensure storm protection and eliminate the need for storm shutters. The Secretary of the Interior Standards generally doesn't recommend changing button configurations. However, the proposed window pattern could be seen on the minimal traditional style structure. Here is an excerpt from the Visual Compatibility Standards section. Again, while this current pattern doesn't exist on the structure, it could be seen on this particular architectural style, provided the buttons on the top are retained and unchanged in design. There is some concern with the proposed appearance of the front door, as the style is typically utilized with modern or mid-century modern style structures. The most appropriate door style would be a traditional paneled door, as it's simpler in appearance. Here are the standards that were applied from the Secretary of the Interior Standards, as well for the Visual Compatibility Standards. Here are the Certificate of Appropriateness Findings. And that concludes my presentation. Okay, before we move on to public comment, and lucky I didn't get chastised by our legal advisor, I'm going to read the rules to quasi-judicial hearings, which we were ripping through and I forgot to do. So, this hearing shall be conducted in accordance with the City of Delray Beach's quasi-judicial rules. The applicant and the city shall be permitted to present their case. The public shall be allowed to speak for three minutes or a maximum of six minutes if the person represents an organization or group of people who are present but agree not to speak. The City, Commission, Board members, staff, and the applicant may be allowed to cross-examine a witness. The City or the applicant will be allowed to offer rebuttal testimony. The decision to approve or deny an application or appeal may not legally be made upon personal views as to whether a project is a good project or not, nor may a decision be based on the number of citizens who support or oppose a particular project. The law requires that all decisions must be made on the basis of whether the project meets the requirements of law, the comprehensive plan, and the land development regulations. Thank you, and I apologize for that. So, public comment. Any members of the public want to comment on this? We're saying no. We're going to move on to rebuttal. Do you have any feedback about the staff's presentation? I think I have much to rebut. It was thorough. Okay. Staff. All right. We're going to move into board discussion. Anybody would like to start? Sure, I'll start. Question for the applicant. So, staff mentioned in their report that the – and overall, I think the windows are great. I think they complement the house well. I struggle with the front door because it is a modern front door, and the color being teak is not complementary to anything else that's visible from my point of view, anything else that's visible in the front of the house. So, if there was teak wood or trim or something, but you're leaving the blue shutters. So, is there an alternate door that the owner – would the owner be okay with something of a similar fashion or that they have their hearts set on? She's pretty set on this, if we can get it approved, obviously. I know this probably could have gone through without coming to the meeting if we were going to go with something closer to what's there. Part of it is – so, this is maybe an assumption. You might know more about this, actually. I'm assuming at some point that that door, because of the wood color on the inside, it was probably a wood color on the exterior as well when this house was built. There are other wood color options. There is a darker one that may be more in line with what's there on the interior. It's called Nogal. So, I could potentially make a switch to that. We could also – one of the – and this is more for function than form – but one of the things that she's trying to fix is that it is a particularly dark room. It does have a lot of windows around it, but they're all very small. And so, we're trying to kind of thread the needle with it and preserve the historic character as much as possible while also upgrading it so she is able to get more light in there. So, I don't know if it would be possible, maybe a different grid configuration instead of having just the two lines across. If there's something different that could be done that would satisfy what you're looking for but still keep some of that glass there? Well, could it be – I mean, I'm just thinking of – and understanding that light is a big thing. And I mean, I saw the house and it's set far back from the street. There are some trees. Yeah. And it – typically, when that house was built, light was not a consideration. So, understanding that. Would the owner be amenable? And again, it would have to be a board decision, but with a condition that the door be a darker, more in line with the traditional wood stain and also not the black aluminum hardware, but more of a traditional hardware. Yeah. The hardware, definitely not a problem. That's actually kind of a dummy on the picture. So, that's totally – I'm sure she'd be fine with that. And I think she would probably be okay with going with a darker color as well. Okay. That was my only question. Okay. Michelle, want to add to that? Yeah. So, thank you, Michelle Hoyland, principal planner, for the record. A solution to make the door look less modern, because it sounds like that's what you're struggling with, where the hardware wouldn't even maybe look as impacted, is if it was a two-light door and the top was the smaller and the bottom was the bigger. You know, it would – Almost like a Frank Lloyd Wright type. No, more like almost an interior colonial would look, right, like that, that you might have inside your house in solid wood. So, sort of, kind of a shaker-ish – But almost shaker-ish. But with glass. But it could be with glass, and it would not read as modern as that. And I know, because I'm looking at doors for myself right now, this is available. But the darker stain, too, kind of, I see where you're going with that. But the shape – because they could come back, paint the door, you know, at any point in time. Color is the easiest thing to change. You probably wouldn't recommend they paint this particular door, but an owner could. So, that's something like that, that would look more traditional, hence minimal traditional, to bring in the elements of a traditional architecture rather than modern. If I can ask a question on that, is that kind of like a 60-40 split, do you think? Yeah, or even a 70-30. Okay. I can definitely present it to her. I think she'd probably be okay with that. I mean, it's up to the board. I'm just providing an option. If it came in that way, we would have not had to bring it here. So, is it the color or the three openings that was more the concern? For us, the three openings and the lack of muttons on the lower half of the window is why it's at the board. Okay. If they had come in and the lower half of the windows all had the muttons like it does now, and they had a door similar to this, we would have approved it administratively. And the dark color for the door, is that customary for historic homes to be white with a dark wood door? I think they can do something like that. I wouldn't be surprised if this owner wants to come back at some point in the future and do a paint scheme, you know, and look at redoing it. But I don't think the wood grain door is going to detract. My feeling, maybe they want to go lighter because they went with a lighter wood. So, maybe the dark isn't their approach. So, maybe they would opt for white and bright rather than a dark wood. If it came in white, light wood, dark wood, all those colors, but it was this shape, we wouldn't have an issue with any of those. Do we need to approve the color today? So, the request is for a teak stain or a teak appearance. So, it is part of the request that you would have to include in your approval. I just think that, and again, walking, I walked a lot of the area today. I saw some really cool houses and really cool buildings. I was just walking to dinner and just sort of focused. I never focused on the actual structures. But a lot of them had the darker wood doors. And I think that back in the 1930s, you know, in the 30s when this house was built, teak was not a traditional, you know, finish. And I think also the teak would read a lot more modern in that. And it would change the look of the house. I think a dark wood would complement the white a little bit better. And up the street, we have a house with a pink door that came to the board and got approval. So, the colors are the easiest thing the owner can do to have some expression without really having a negative effect on the historic integrity. So, I see what you're saying as well, though. Anybody else? I can go. Go ahead. Are these the original windows from 1939? I believe this had a window approval that we saw in the file. Right, Michelle? It had, sorry, the previous was a partial. So, she had previously done another window project where she did part of the house. I think it was focused, there's a back structure as well. So, I believe that was all done. And part, a few of the openings on this structure, possibly, I have to double check that. You may have that answer. The history and the staff report? I thought we found a COA for this one. Different property? Okay. Well, I do know that some are wood, some are not. But with these colonial muttons, you know, six over six, is that what it looked like in 1939 with it? Yes. I think if you're looking at it here, the ones that are towards the front and the side, I believe, are the originals. And then a bunch of the ones on the back were replaced at some point. But they're still pretty old as well. So, is the reason that they don't want to have the muttons on the bottom is for more light to enter? That's one of her primary thoughts. Well, it's kind of, again, hopefully, threading the needle, getting that middle ground where we still keep the look, but let a little more light in. So, yeah, I struggled a little bit with that on the window. I think it is a happy medium if this is the desire of the applicant to bring more light in. And it does keep somewhat of the feature on the top portion. So, I'm not so concerned with it. I think I could be in support of that. For the door, I like the idea of making it more of a traditional look like what was described. And I guess the color, I'm not so concerned with. Okay. Anybody else? Yep. I'll go. So, my office is across the street. So, I see this house every day. But I like your windows. I think I don't have any problem with that change. The door, I feel, the same as the rest of the board. And I do know that down the street from my house, which is up the road a little bit, there is a home there. And they do have a dark door. It's a white house. And it's solid on the bottom. And then the top is the glass part. And they do have muttons there. And it looks very nice. And it's more traditional. So, I do think you need to go in that, you know, some sort of direction like that. Whether it's up to you. Sorry. I was just going to say, I think the way that Carol is phrasing it as far as, like, you know, some sort of the direction of the minimal traditional style door as opposed to, like, it should be this door is probably the way. I'm just saying there's options out there. Right, exactly. There's options out there. And I was just giving you an example. Allowing him to design it himself, but with the direction from the board on that. That's all. Well, I'm supportive of the mutton change. The six over one, I think, is reasonable and still looks colonial. So, the front door definitely screams mid-century, and I would like to see that changed as you have options. I think we could support something in that direction. Jake, want to weigh in? Yeah. I'm also in support of the windows. As far as the front door, I think if it was white or a darker color, that would complement it better and not be as aggressive. Now, along with that, a grid pattern or maybe a 10 light even could also let a lot of light in and also kind of keep the same look it has going. Okay. Yeah, my comments are I'm fine with the windows. The door, I agree. It's very mid-century with that three panel. So, I think that's easily rectified as we were discussing tonight. So, whoever makes a motion on this, I would recommend just to, you know, provide direction on that. You know, this house obviously didn't have aqua trim and shutters back in the 30s or probably the moon cutout. So, there's some slight modifications that have been made on it. But, I think actually that probably adds to the character in the neighborhood. It's very interesting visually. And, I drive by this one every day as well. So, I think we're very close. I'm sure you can work it out with staff on the final. So, anybody want to make a motion on this? So, the condition will be to work with staff to get an approved door design? So, I'm just wondering, would Michelle, would it just make sense for them to approve the windows and deny the door and then they bring back the door with the, okay, you tell me what makes the most sense instead. What I'm willing to do. Yeah. So, the condition could say something like that the door design be more in line with the minimal traditional style and to work with staff on that. If the owner is adamant and does not want to do a door that we're comfortable with, we'll bring it back. But, I think we can probably come to an agreement that gives them creative license so that the front door have more of a minimal traditional appearance and you can decide if you want to put anything specific about color. Okay. I'd like to make a motion to approve the Certificate of Appropriateness HP-415-2026 for the property located at 137 North Swinton Avenue, Old School Square Historic District by finding that the request and approval thereof is consistent with the comprehensive plan and meets the criteria set forth in the land development regulations subject to the following conditions that the front door adheres more to the minimalist traditional design and to work with staff for that portion. Okay. We have a motion. I'll second. We have a second. Any discussion? Okay. Please call the vote. Carol Perez? Yes. Richard Kasser? Yes. Jake Eliopoulos? Yes. Benjamin Baffer? Yes. Chris Cabezas? Yes. Peter Dwyer? Yes. John Miller? Yes. Good luck. Thank you, guys. All right. Any legislative items tonight? No. And any reports? Comments. No reports. Okay. Pardon me. So our next meeting is actually April 15th. I should have mentioned that because of Passover, I think. Um, I think I put it in the email wrong too. So please mark your calendars. It was Brittany that reminded me with her email to Jake. So, um, April 15th, tax day is our next meeting. Um, for those of you who've been on the board, this will be, you know, old news. But for our new board members, we do, um, historic preservation board awards every year in May. May is, um, National Historic Preservation Month, uh, where we as staff go through the list of projects that have been CO'd. Um, so they're completed and we formulate categories for the board to deliberate on and choose winners. And then in, that happens in April. So that will be at our next meeting. And then at the May meeting, we do an award ceremony. We invite the property owners to come, um, and present them with the certificate and a presentation and give them the chance to address the board and tell you about their feelings with the process, the project, and all that happens. Um, following that, we typically bring a very brief presentation up to the city commission. Um, there's proclamation that happens. So we are in prep mode right now to bring those, um, projects forward so you all can deliberate. Um, in the past, we've also done a few things like, um, honor a person or an organization. A couple of years ago, you'll remember we honored the Preservation Trust, the Historical Society. And Spadey Museum for their contributions to the community and preservation. Um, so we're going to look and see what else we might add to the agenda, depending on how many projects we have. Um, so that's next. Next month, it's really important that you attend. Um, if you feel like you've got a conflict, let us know. We definitely don't want to come to the board meeting without a quorum. Um, because that would push us back for the May plan. Okay. That's what I have. Great. Uh, one of our board members has some comments. Before you do that, can I officially on the record welcome, um, Mr. Jake Eliopoulos, our new board member who was appointed by the city commission. Um, tonight's his first meeting. Welcome to the Historic Preservation Board. Thank you. Welcome. It was a great meeting. It's always just easy in that short. Yeah. Yep. Yes. We're going to suck you in and pound you over the head next time. Um, so I, I was, I will make this quick because I know we're trying to fly through. Um, I was watching random YouTube videos and one was one that came up and the algorithm was the town of Palm Beach's historic, uh, landmarks, uh, commission. I don't know the exact name of the organization, but they, um, did a video on not that they have two different categories and one is a landmark and the other is a historic, historically significant building or structure designation. Um, and I thought that was really cool, um, because it's, doesn't need to be, uh, it's not landmark status, um, and it doesn't necessarily need to be in a historic district. So I know that, you know, there's some buildings here that are not in a historic district and are not landmarked and could be torn down at any time. Um, and I know that we don't necessarily have that sort of middle ground, um, or if we do, correct me if I'm wrong. Um, but I think it would be, it's, it's definitely something that's interesting to at least think about and explore, um, because the, the town of Palm Beach, they have their own, the town council there set their own criteria for it. Um, but one of it is, you know, if it's a certain feature in the building, then that is what is historically significant to that building. Um, and then it can't be altered or amended or torn down or changed without coming forth for approval. Um, and it also allows for some FEMA exemptions. Um, and again, that's set by whatever the resolution that the council or the commission would set. Um, but it does allow, that designation does allow for some FEMA exemptions, um, in terms of flood zone and, and elevations. So I can reach out first. Thank you. And if you could share the video with me, please send it to me. I would love to watch it. Um, but I could also reach out to Frederick Mittner, who is their historic preservation lead. She was at West Palm for many years and ran the program there. Um, I know that when she started, there was a lot of work to do. There weren't even staff reports, I don't think, being forwarded up to their historic commission. Um, so I'd like to find out from her because in order to qualify for the FEMA status, you do have to be considered a bona fide historic site per FEMA. Um, so it's possible that it's semantics on their ordinance of what we call the local register of historic places and what they call their landmark of places. I, I'd have to look into it a little closer and see. Um, but my guess is that if they're qualifying for FEMA exemptions, um, they actually are sites that are more than just significant. Go ahead, Mr. Baffer. So ironic that you would bring this up because I was late tonight because I was at the town of Palm Beach commission meeting all day where they brought forth six properties that their landmarks commission had determined were, uh, historic properties. Um, and, um, um, wish I would have brought the, I had, had the agenda in my car and I didn't think to bring it cause I didn't know we're going to talk about this, but so there were, there were six, six, six, six properties. And all six of them were just amazing, fantastic, like John Volk or, you know, uh, uh, significant historic properties. Um, so in most were in like pristine condition and, and all certainly worthy of landmark status that we would, in this town, we would consider them as a individually designated historic property. Um, the interesting thing was that the commission voted affirmatively for all six, four of them, the homeowners showed up at the, at the, uh, commission meeting and objected to their, their home being designated as a historic property. Um, and, um, um, they, they, they, they objected because they were concerned about the restrictions that would potentially be placed on the property. Although it's appears there is now a state statute 2.4, something or another that, um, that gives the homeowner, despite the historic designation, the homeowner still can demo the property if they want. So that, that, that was kind of interesting to, because the, the, the town commissioners were, were telling the homeowners, well, you, you realize that you still, you don't have, you know, we're, we're not telling you, we're, we want to designate your property as historic, but we don't want, you know, you are not losing the opportunity to demolish the home. Um, and, and, and I think that the homeowners had no intent to demolish the home, but they were concerned about how that would affect the resale value that, um, to a potential buyer that, you know, that their house would be less attractive on the, um, you know, on the market. Um, if, if somebody buying it said, well, this is a historic, uh, landmark property, so we cannot demolish it. So, um, so, so, so, so that there's that going on too, that, that we would need to look into is really what, what is this state statute? How does that, how does that apply? But, but the FEMA is also a, a consideration because, um, when, when they got, what, for these properties to get designated as historic property, they, they were then exempt from some of the, the FEMA flood because, um, there were, there are homes in, in Palm Beach that are at elevation six. And now the, you know, the new FEMA regulations are elevation seven. So that, that is a, that, that is a part of it. And, and I think that they're also, um, you know, would benefit like, like we do with the ad valorem benefits for, for 10 years. Um, so I think they're, they're doing it the same way, the same way we're, we're doing it in Delray because I think it's all like, statute based with, with the state. Um, but the, the interesting thing is the homeowners in Palm Beach, I don't think we're concerned about the ad valorem savings because maybe they've been, you know, it's pocket change to them. I'll definitely reach out to Frederique, talk to her a little bit more so I can understand what, what it is they're doing. I know Coral Gables, um, their ordinance allowed for any property that was coming through to be demolished. If it was older than 50 years, it allowed staff to go and assess to see would it qualify for designation. And if it did, it automatically would go up to their board for a designation. Didn't need homeowner sign off. Now that was their own local code, right? Um, about consent and things like that. As far as allowing the demolition, I'm curious to know exactly what that is about with Palm Beach. And that may be a new statute too. There are new statutes. There were some things that went through legislature. You know, legislature, um, I think is in some ways doing really great job in that they're trying to streamline things, make it easier for property owners, protect private property rights. Um, but in some instances, the, the wide swath that they're using, um, with specifically some amendments that occurred based on projects in Miami, how did they have an effect on other cities? And that's something we've been looking at and digesting, but I think that was more tied to FEMA, um, and how old a city's ordinance was. Our ordinance dates to 89, so there's also legislation and case law that shows we have certain protection status because our ordinance is so long, um, long running in, in our code. But I will reach out to her and see, hopefully in the next couple of weeks, see what, what that was, what was going on. Um, um, I know that since she's been in Palm Beach, there's a lot more happening. Uh, so I think that was strategic on the town's part to get her in that position. I would say just as another comment on things, I mean, I think she can look into it just to see kind of what it is exactly. But the state legislature does also have like SB 180 out there, which, um, kind of puts limits on the ordinances we can, well, it does put limits on the ordinances that we can pass right now, whether there's, if there's stricter guidelines on property owners. So it would be something that, you know, if it, if it results in stricter guidelines for property owners, we would have to evaluate whether that would, um, conflict with SB 180 and deal with that too, just as a, you know. Yeah, and this, this specific video was on Tarpon Island and, um, town of Palm Beach is only private island. Um, and it was, the whole series that the Landmarks Preservation Commission, I, I guess that's what they're called. It's a very interesting cause they really go in depth in a lot of landmarks and, and historically designated homes. Um, but I'll send you that video because they talk about FEMA and they talk about a lot of the logistics in certain aspects of that house being designated as historically significant. Um, and it was, it was renovated and added onto, but certain parts of it had to stay the same, um, in that renovation. So I'll send, I'll send it to you tomorrow because it's really, it's really cool. Thank you very much. Thank you. Anybody else? Um, I have a question just on applications in the pipeline for COA. Um, hearing rumors that there, there are a lot in the system. Is there a number that you could share? I can't. Is there a hundred or fifty? No, there's not. I mean, we had one item on our agenda tonight. Do we need to be scared? Is that what it is? Well, I'm just curious when we have one item on the agenda and we've rounded up a lot of people for an evening meeting and I'd like to see three or four items on the agenda. Me too, but I also don't want to get in the habit of canceling a meeting to then perhaps say, is the board necessary? Yeah, I mean, it's a delicate balance, but you know, we did institute the e-services platform last year, um, project docs and the hub, which is EPL as well. So this is a system where we've already been doing permits through a digital system. This is a system for development applications that's, I mean, Jake, you're probably, and maybe Pete. I've had some experience with it and I'm just curious to see how it's going. So you're making applications. I think what we're seeing is the years and years and years and years worth of applicants saying the city is slow. My application's been in, what's taking so long are long gone because we're mandated by Florida state statute for review times. Um, now the state statutes also require a sufficiency period for review, which means your application's either sufficient or it's not. So we have several that are sitting in the queue that are not sufficient. Um, so we can't even, I can't even drag them up to do a review until they get sufficient. Um, and then we have, we've been very closely monitoring our project workload internally, um, amongst our department and within the historic division and the current division, because we're down a planner in the current division. Michelle is lending a hand over there. Um, so that team lead and I are very closely watching. There are things ready to go that are sitting, just somebody needs to pay a fee or they need to submit their owner consent so that they can get to the next stage for us to review. And then there are projects that we've reviewed that have either just come in or been in the pipeline for 400 days. And it's the applicant who's taking that long. So we also get really nervous that they're all going to descend on us at one time and be ready to roll to the board. We just don't have control, um, on how that happens. And I think if we were facing a situation like that, it would have to be who came in first. If we, if I ended up with like 10 items, I'm not going to do a 10 item board meeting. None of us want to be careful right now. Unless it's like how Magnolia came in and there's five lots and it was five things that were all the same. Um, so it's, it's, I can't predict, unfortunately, but we are slammed. So I can say that for the ones that got in and are getting their projects deemed sufficient for review. And then we have a bunch that need to pull their stuff together. Okay. From a contractor looking in at the system on the permitting side, as well as development side, I think the software may be part of the issue. Oh, the software is amazing. It's amazing. Okay. What do you think, Jake? I mean, um, is the software amazing? No, let's just be frank. I think we're, uh. Yeah, I do think we're probably getting outside board purview. But if you, you guys are, everybody's always welcome to talk to the city on their, on their own. I'll say this. I think it's growing pains. We're like one of the last cities in the county to go from a paper process to a digital process. Um, so I've experienced this program with other cities. My colleagues who are in the private sector are submitting through this same exact program at other cities. So I think as much as it's a learning curve and it's repetition. Right. Right. So like when you learn a new computer program, you don't, you don't ace it until you use it every day. Right. Um, so I think for some of our homeowners that are new to the process, we're lending a hand to help them through the process. That would be helpful. We also have, and I do kind of want to just put this on the record if it's okay. We do have internal monthly meetings where we're tracking issues we're seeing with the system and getting them fixed immediately. We have a dedicated IT person whose only job is the integration and management of this software. The reason why I think it's awesome is the reviews for us is very easy. Digital reviews, laying plans on top of each other in a virtual light box setting, being able to make comments and annotate the plans, um, and then it has some good tools built in and the transparency of applications. I, I think we have been overburdened and I will say it was like this when I was here from 98 to 03 and then walking back in the door in 16 and nothing had changed and the sentiment hadn't changed that the city is slow that no longer is we, people can't hide behind that anymore because we are able to say here, here's what happens. And if somebody, we had an architect who's new to this type of software call yesterday, we stopped a meeting. So Michelle could get on the phone, call him and make sure he had what he needed to submit. So we're trying to be really quick with customer service and help. I know we've been through with your office too. Um, and you guys are applying outside of Delray and other cities. So the goal is to make it really easy for everybody, but those who have never used it, it's going to, or use anything like it. It's going to be hard. Okay. Yeah. Thank you for that. Yeah. All right. I think I'm going to adjourn if there's no other comments and then feel free to stay afterwards and discuss. Okay. Have a good night. All right. I'm going to get.