All right, call to order this meeting of the Delray Beach Planning and Zoning Board on July 20th, 2026. Ms. Miller, would you please call the roll?
Jim Charn. Here. Mitch Katz. Here. David Strong. Here. Karen Keseliski. Here. Roger Coe. Here. Price Patton. Here. Gregory Snyder.
Here. Okay. Does anyone have any changes to the agenda?
No changes.
Anybody here? In which case, can we get a motion?
Second.
Second.
I have a motion from Mr. Katz and seconded by Mr. Chard. All in favor? Aye. All in post? Agenda is approved. We need to approve the minutes of March 16th, 2026. So moved. Second. Moved by Mr. Katz, seconded by Mr. Coe. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Opposed? Okay. The minutes are approved. Now, if anyone here who wishes to speak tonight needs to be sworn in, if you could please stand, Ms. Miller will swear you in.
It's already best to me in the state of Florida. Do you swear it from the testimony you're about to give us the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Thank you. All right. All right. At this point, I would take comments from the public on anything that's not on our agenda. Seeing no one coming forward, public comments closed. We have no presentations. So we'll move right into 8A, judicial hearing items, quasi-judicial hearing items. And before we start that, I'll read the quasi-judicial rules. This hearing shall be conducted in accordance with the City of Delray Beach 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 each, 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 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 the project is a good project or not, nor may a decision be based upon 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. All right. If we could have item number 8A.
Good evening, board members. My name is Sean Adams, planner in training. At this time, I'd like to enter into the record file number 747-2026.
And just a reminder, Chair, you'll need ex parte as well.
Oh, ex parte. Yeah, thank you.
Mitch?
None. None. I went and drove around the street. None.
I drove around as well.
None whatsoever. Okay. Thanks.
Now, please proceed. So staff is asking the board to provide a recommendation to city commission on resolution number 119-26, which would rename three internal street segments within Lukaya Del Rey from Catherine Drive to Jada Court, Tally Trace, and Emma Lane. One correction to note on page 3 of the staff report, it references Naomi Way, which was an earlier name that was changed to Jada Court. This will be corrected in the version going to city commission for the staff report.
Yeah, the page 3. Okay, good.
For some background information, Catherine Drive is a continuous street segment that goes throughout the community of Lukaya Del Rey. There's 324 units built out across 81 buildings. It was developed in four phases. The community is surrounded by residential properties to the north, surrounded by South Congress Avenue to the east, West Lenton Boulevard to the south, and a canal to its west. It was developed in four different phases, and for some historical context, it was originally platted in 1974 as Del Rey Estates. So why is renaming needed? Like I mentioned earlier, Catherine Drive is a continuous street segment that goes throughout the community. So when a 911 call comes in for a Catherine Drive address, there's really no way of... It creates a confusion for responders and dispatch because they don't know which one of the three street segments it's referring to because they're all addressed as Catherine Drive. And this creates confusion because dispatchers and emergency response just don't know exactly which street segment it's referring to. And so to fix this issue, three street segments will be renamed from Catherine Drive to Jada Court, which is outlined in green on the map. Tally Trace, which is outlined in orange on the map, and Emma Lane, which is outlined in blue on the map. And I'd also like to mention that the interior loop that provides the entrance and exit points to the community will remain as Catherine Drive. And staff is also adding additional address corrections to the community. On the east side of Eileen Court, the homes are currently addressed as South Congress Avenue, while on the west side of the Eileen Court, they're addressed as Eileen Court. So even though both sides are accessed through the same street, which is Eileen Court, like I mentioned, one side is South Congress Avenue and the other side is Eileen Court. And so there's no real building access from South Congress Avenue. So an emergency responder relying on that information will be sent to the wrong address, which can cause confusion and further delay emergency response times. So again, to fix this issue, units will be readdressed to Eileen Court that are currently named South Congress Avenue. So for the street naming requirements, the criteria states that no new street name shall duplicate an existing street name or sound like an existing street name. So staff has checked Jada Court, Tally Trace, and Emma Lane, and we've confirmed that neither of them sound or are an existing street name. So they meet the city street name requirements. And as for sign implementation, if this is approved, staff will coordinate with Lucia Del Rey to replace street signs. Street sign replacement will be a joint effort between Lucia Del Rey and the city because Lucia Del Rey is responsible for signage within its private rights of way. And finally, here are the board's options for action.
Okay. Thank you.
Is there anyone who wishes – the public wishes to speak about this? Seeing no in public comments closed. I guess there's no rebuttal. How about board comments? Any comments? Yeah, go ahead.
I have one question. I'm sorry. No, please. You said the signs will be replaced. Just in driving through, there are no signs. Does that mean they will be put up? Yes, exactly. Okay.
That's a correction. Thank you.
How did the names come about, the actual names? Is there a little history with these unusual names? I know Catherine was obviously there, the section of it. But are these families in the neighborhood? And the follow-up to that would be like, has this neighborhood had any opportunity to say yay or nay about it?
So Amy Alvarez, Development Services. The names came from the neighborhood. They're the ones who provided the suggestions. So we were just charged at that point with confirming that there weren't any duplicates in the county. Where they got them from, I don't know. But it was their suggestion, and apparently the property owners voted on them.
Perfect. Cool.
I love it. Roger took some of my best questions. Are you ready for a motion?
He's like, at least he didn't start talking about Frank Lloyd Wright. There's nothing about trees here. There's nothing about trees. My question is.
Biodiversity is fantastic.
Never mind. Question. These are private roads, right? Meaning that the city doesn't maintain them or pay for maintaining them?
Correct. I believe Catherine Drive is the only city road, but the other ones are maintained by Lucia. They are private. Well, I'm going to say the roads that are private should be maintained by Lucia.
Should. I'm just wondering if there's any sort of knock-on legal issues here where they said, well, you've named it now, and so you need to maintain it.
Right. Well, I don't think that naming them would prompt that, but we've been working very closely with the property owners. Their property manager came to us with, we actually brought up some of these issues as a result of discussions with the fire department a couple of years ago. The community was not interested in changing any of the street names at that time, but they recently showed up in the lobby and said, hey, we need to do this. We're having issues. So that's why we're working together, and knowing that we had this issue, knowing that this was an issue a few years ago, that's why we went ahead and moved forward with it as a city-initiated request so that we could get it moving along. I think I've answered your question, and then some.
Well, thank you. There are other communities in Delray that have this same problem. There's one off of Germantown Road that comes to mind. Is this something that the city is going to pursue further, or just if the community comes and asks for it?
Well, we're definitely not lacking for work, so we're not looking for them, but if they are brought to our attention.
I wasn't trying to give you an opportunity to have a PSA here.
No, but if they're brought to our attention, yeah, we can see what we can do because, of course, we don't want any issues with emergency response, not being able to find a location. Of course, they primarily use, I think, you know, maybe maps on their phones or iPads, whatever equipment they have in their vehicles, to get there. But it would still be, obviously, helpful for anybody, even if somebody's calling for help, saying that way they know where they're at, too. If it's brought to our attention, then we'll look at processing it, yeah.
That's all the questions I had, and I know Mitch wants to make a motion. I'm not there yet.
Does anybody else have any comments, Price?
Yeah, just a real quick one. Did you consult with the Post Office? Because if they are, are they going to have to change, like, no one has stationery anymore, but if they do, are they going to have to change their addresses? Because that's no longer going to a Catherine Drive address. It's going to a Lucini Road or whatever.
Right. So, working with all of our external agencies will be part of the process. Once the street's approved to be renamed, then we'll start the process of working with the Postal Service, with the property owners who I already know, but many of the properties are rentals, so the property owners themselves will have to work with their tenants on all of this. So, just because it's changed doesn't mean tomorrow, right away, your information is void, but we will be working with them.
Voter registration falls into that category, too, right? Mm-hmm.
Well, maybe. The election come on. Thank you for bringing that up.
Well, it won't be changed before the election. Yeah, it won't be changed until then, either, right?
I'm done. Have you had input from the Police and Fire Department about this or about any other place in the city?
Well, we looked at other existing street names.
Yeah, but I just wondered if the community brought this.
You said the Police and Fire brought it to the attention.
Initially, yes. The street naming issue. They did bring it in the previous... A few years ago. Yeah, okay.
That's the answer to my question. Okay. All right, Mitch.
Motion to approve, recommend approval of the City Commission Resolution No. 119-26 to rename three identified street segments within the La Caya community, finding that the request meets the applicable criteria of the land development regulations and is consistent with the comprehensive plan.
Second.
We have a motion by Mr. Katz, second by Mr. Cope. Ms. Miller, would you please call the roll?
Jim Charn. Yes. Mitch Katz. Yes. Ginger Strong. Yes. Karen Keseleski. Yes. Roger Cope. Yes. Price Patton. Yes. Greg Snider.
Yes. That's passed unanimously. Thanks, Sean.
Great job.
Thanks, Jamie.
Good start. In training.
Okay. Moving on to 8B. Please, if you could read it into the record.
All right. Good evening. My name is Ross Einstetter, Senior Planner with the City of Delray Beach. I would like to enter into the record, Agenda Item 8B, PZ 512-2026 for 1207 South Swinton Avenue for a variance request. We have James Johnston here for the applicant, and he has a presentation prepared.
All right. And we do need to export today again. None, but not at all. Yeah, I drove by it. Yeah, I visited.
I drove by twice trying to find it. It's right there.
None. All right. Thank you. Thank you.
Mr. Johnson, please.
Hi.
Good evening. James Johnston with Shutzen-Bowen, 300 South Orange Avenue in Orlando on behalf of Verizon Wireless. First, we appreciate staff's hard work on the staff report. We're in agreement with the staff report and what it says. But to give a brief background, what we're proposing is we're requesting front and rear setback variance. But this is Verizon is proposing to locate a fiber hub building on the property at 1207 South Swinton. And this is a relocation of a hub building from the area. And this hub building serves just as a background. And it's, imagine, you know, macro cell towers or small cells. When the signals come to them, it gets translated into fiber optics, which then all these fiber optics go to a hub building like this. And then it goes on further down the line. And so this is like an aggregation for the fiber for certain macro and small cell towers in the area. And so it's a relocation. They're on another spot in the area. But that lease is up. And so they have to relocate this building. I think it's important to note this does not involve a tower. It does not involve RF at all, no RF signal. It will just be the fiber optic hub building. This building is a 12 by 26 foot building, one story. I think it's like 10 feet tall with a two-foot concrete podium that it's on. It's going on an area of this property, which is already developed with a warehouse and office building, which I think was built in 1965. It's industrial zone. This use would be, it is permitted on the property, but obviously we're here because of the front and rear yard setbacks. And that's based on the unique configuration of the property. As you can see, we're kind of bounded by Swinton on the west and the railroad track on the east where it tapers to the north end. We are going on, you see the existing building. We're proposing, I'll show you, go to this one. And you can see kind of on the northern end in the taper, this is where we're going, and this is the cause for the front and rear setback variance. Industrial zoning requires a 30-foot front yard, 10-foot rear yard. We're going to be 10 feet, 7 inches from the front yard, and then 7 feet, 7 inches setback from the rear, so requiring a variance for both. And, again, we appreciate staff's efforts and the staff report as it runs through the various variance criteria. You know, we think we meet those variance criteria, and, you know, we would ask for your support on this, this needed infrastructure for existing wireless communications in the area. And I'm here to answer any questions.
Again, my name is Ross Seinsetter, Senior Planner with the City of Devray Beach. This agenda item is for 1207 South Swinton Avenue for a variance request. The applicant did a great job, so I'm going to just hopefully breeze through these to not belabor the point. So it is located at 1207 South Swinton Avenue. The future land use is industrial with the zoning also industrial. The property size is 0.3 acres. I would also like to note in the staff report there was an inconsistency. So the correct square feet is on the slideshow here, 23,086 square feet. The adjacent zoning to the north is the right-of-way, South Swinton Avenue. To the south is industrial. East is also industrial with the FEC Railway. And then to the west is also Swinton Avenue. Their proposal is the placement of a 12-by-26-foot prefabricated unmanned wireless communication equipment shelter. And their variance request is to Section 4.3.4K setback to allow the reduction of the front and rear setback. Setbacks are defined. The minimal distance between each structure may come to said lot line. Setbacks are established for the front, interior sides, side street, and rear lot lines. And then the development standards also establish the perimeter of the lot size, width, depth, open space, minimal height, minimum height, sorry, and the setbacks for non-residential development. So the required front setback for the industrial is 30 feet, and they are proposing 10 feet, 7 inches. And for the rear, the required rear setback is 10 feet, and they are proposing 7 feet, 7 inches. These are the same variance findings as the staff report. So if the board would like, we can go through them. If not, we can just, so A, B, C, and then we have D, E, F, and then here are the options for board actions.
Thank you. Do we have any rebuttals?
Chair, public comment.
Okay. Do we have any public comments? Anyone from the public wishing to speak on this? Seeing non-public comments closed, now do we have any rebuttal?
No rebuttal from staff.
Okay. In which case, the board. Does it help?
I don't have any objections at all. I mean, it seems very appropriate to support the request, given the site, given the conditions, and everything else involved seems very, very supportable.
I agree. I agree, but the only thing I would suggest is that it be associated with this use only, with this application. With whom? A variance applies, rides with the land, right? So I just was going to suggest that it only be allowed for this development proposal from this application that we're hearing tonight.
Yeah, the variance is associated with the site plan that we have in with this. They just wanted to see if they can get the variance before moving forward with engineering plans and that sort of things.
My only question is, it's really pretty extensively buffered by hedges. Is that going to be the same? Because there are some residential properties to the west.
I'm going to give to the applicant.
Yeah, I think we're going to have to meet whatever the code landscaping requirements there are, but there are already existing along Swinton a pretty fence, shrubbery, and existing trees. So I think it's already pretty well buffered along that, and this is only a one-story, a 10-foot-tall building.
Oh, so this isn't even going to impinge? Okay. Yeah. Good.
Sure. Move closer. So this is a lease for the whole parcel, and it's just taking a corner of the parcel?
No, it's only a lease for this area, and it's put in this location so as not to impede the existing operations on the property. It's only a lease for where this building will be located.
Okay. And what about noise? I know it's wireless, but could you hear anything from the street?
No, I mean, there are air conditioning units, but, again, we'll have to meet the noise code requirements of the city, and I think one of the units is facing towards the existing industrial building to the south. There is one on the north, but it's actually behind. There is a generator that's enclosed in a sound attenuating device to protect from noises, and so you have that, but then you have the air conditioning, which is actually will be buffered by that structure as well.
Just following up on Price's question, the trees are there now, and they're fairly extensive. Are there any plans in the process of construction to take them down?
No, no. Our lease area does not.
How can we be sure of that?
Because our lease area doesn't include where those trees are.
It's only the base of the building? Correct.
And there will be a site plan that comes after the variance, so there will be an opportunity for that review to occur as well.
Yes. Thank you. Would it make any sense at all to move it further south so you wouldn't need the variances?
I think then you start to get into the potentially impeding the existing use of the property. This is where we can go, and it doesn't impact the existing use. And I don't know, even if we pulled it somewhat south, I still think we would have a variant situation just by the pretty severe point of the property.
And the current use is a parking lot?
No, the current use, there's a warehouse industrial building on the south end, and so it has doors and stuff that orient to the north. So, again, there's a parking area, drive area that if we went south, we'd be impeding into the existing building use.
Do you have a concrete foundation? I don't have a foundation. Is it going on a foundation? The variances are going to be happy they can make their phone calls.
It's not on dirt.
No, it's going on a concrete foundation.
There's dirt there now.
Yeah, but my only comments were what Mr. Chard brought up about moving it closer to the building. But what I understand you're saying is you're leasing a small portion of these other people's property to put the building on. Right. So, if you move it close to the building, you're interfering with their business.
Correct.
Okay. I think that's a reasonable answer.
One of my questions would be, do the neighbors need to be contacted? It's a fairly significant residential building to the west and a residential community to the north, and some of those buildings to the south of it are office buildings.
We had to provide notice to 500, all properties within 500 feet, and we did.
Yeah, they already did that. They noticed. Yeah.
No problems, no concerns.
No, I think there were a couple people that asked about it, but then no further comment after they...
Yeah, there was public notice that was sent out, and we did receive a few questions, but no public comment. Just basically what they're doing or what the extent of this application is for.
Yeah, I think we're talking about, I think Mr. Katz kind of said it, it's a box going down... Very fancy box. It's not... There's nothing noisy going to be really going on inside there that's going to disturb... I mean, it's got to be air conditioning. They want to... They have air conditioning.
And the generators could be.
It's not being powered by the generator, right? No. No, it's a backup generator. It's an emergency generator. There's a storm everywhere.
That's so if the power does go out, people can still use it. Yeah, that's good.
A lot of us who have been through some hurricanes where they couldn't get cell phone service would appreciate that.
All right. Do we need to know how long the lease is, or does that have any effect? What happens? The lease expires and the building is sitting there. What happens?
I mean, the variance would still exist, but that would be the only ramification, really. Would the variance go away if the building were removed? Well, so the variance is tied to the site plan. So if there are site plan modifications, you know, the variance could come into question again. But if the lease expired, even if the building was removed, in theory, the variance would still legally exist. Right. Maybe an alternate entity could come in and put the same box down and operate, but it
doesn't need to be tied to the lease. If it was a new site plan, the variance would not apply to a new site plan. If somebody else bought the property and came in with a new site plan.
Or the current owner has the right to build a new building within those same parameters.
But I think it would have to be this same type of building, same exact dimension, same
It's really a hypothetical that I don't really could fully answer because there's a lot of variables, right? If they were just modifying the warehouse to the south, but not modifying the data center that they are proposing. Don't know if they would need the variance again to keep something that's already existing. If they came in to modify the building that required the variance, yes. I mean, they would need an additional variance if they were going to expand upon that. But the variance does not need to be tied to the lease or length of lease of the applicant here.
It's literally, it's 12 by 26 feet. I mean, it's, it's limited though. Would you like me to make a motion? I love somebody to make a motion.
Five story house. Move approval of the variance request for 1207 South Swinton Avenue, PZ 512-2026. There, PZ from LDR section 4.3.4K, development standards matrix for non-residential zoning districts to allow for the reduction of the front setback from 30 feet to 10 feet, 7 inches, and the reduction of the rear setback from 10 feet to 7 feet, 7 inches, is required by finding that the request is consistent with the findings set forth in LDR section 2.4.811A5A through F.
Second. Okay. Motion by Mr. Chard, seconded by Mr. Cope. And Ms. Miller, would you please call the roll?
Jim Chard.
Yes.
Mitch Katz.
Yes.
Titor Strong.
Yes.
Karen Kieseliski. Yes. Roger Cope. Yes. Bryce Patton. Yes. Gregory Snyder.
Yes. That passes unanimously. Thanks, Mr. Ernstettler. Thanks, everyone. Thanks, Mr. Johnson.
Now I get the big guns. Now I get the really tough ones with the big guns.
Yeah, but we got a senior historic planner.
Okay. For the record, I'm Katharina Palavoda, senior historic preservation planner, and I'd like to enter file number PZ-429-2026 into the record. Mr. Copelli, the agent, is here to present.
Okay. Ex parte. I did walk through the project recently, and I was even there last week, and I did vote on the original site plan for this eight years ago, 10, whatever it was, a long time ago.
How did you vote?
I voted yes. You did? That was the last vote I ever took as a city commissioner, 2 o'clock in the morning.
Ah, before they made the cutoff time.
Mr. Chard.
I was there with Mr. Katz. It was 2 o'clock. I also voted yes.
It was also his last meeting. It was also my last vote. No regrets on that yes vote.
I visited a couple of times and walked around. I also watched a video of the HPB meeting that discussed this project.
Yeah. Same thing. I attended the HPB meeting, and I've been through there several times.
I drove around there.
I was there that night eight years ago, too. I'm still pissed off. No, it's you, too. No, I didn't vote that night. Unlike you guys, I'm intimately familiar with Sunday Village, and I happen to have been at the HPB meeting last month, so I saw the presentation. I've seen this before, and it's great. All right. Thank you.
Mr. Covelli, you're on the floor.
After all that, Mike Covelli, 1209 South Swinton Avenue, just south of the one you just had. You were right there. I thought you might get up and talk about that. I was right there. Did you get noticed? Yeah, I did. Very good. Tonight, we have an application for conditional use. This is for evening outdoor dining, and as you know, for evening dining in the historic district, it is a conditional use. This is the second meeting of three. First one was at HPB, where we got a unanimous approval to recommend approval to this board. This board will actually make a recommendation to the city commission, and, well, final action city commission. This is in Sunday Village, Block 61, south of Atlantic and west of Swinton. The yellow area shows where the historical homes are. This is only for those five or six structures that are of that area, and if you see, these are all of the patios or decks that were approved as part of the original site plan application. So when the site plan was approved, it was approved for all of these units to be restaurants. We're now in the adaptive reuse part of this, where the buildings have been restored, the site has been done, and now we're looking at the tenants coming in and doing these particular uses through that adaptive reuse process. So we have all of these areas that were established in that site plan that are going to be used for outdoor dining. We understand they can have dining outdoors right now up until the daylight hours end. We'd like to extend that into the evening hours up to midnight. At the last meeting, there was some talk about noise. If you look at the proximity of these areas, and mind you, these areas are not very large. The porches on building A, for instance, are less than, around 600 square feet, less than 600 square feet. And if you look at the proximity of that area to C, it's kind of self-policing, because if somebody, your neighbor is blasting music or something, obviously you're encroaching on your neighbor. And between tenants and management, probably the issue will go away, but we don't anticipate it. Building C has been up and operating. I don't believe they even have music. And so we don't really think that in this particular case, noise is an issue because space is of a premium. So you're not going to have somebody turn something into a nightclub after hours, or you're going to have like a band stage somewhere in these areas. There just isn't a room. So this is the area that will be specifically for the outdoor dining. And just to show you a little more detail, this is building A, and I'm going to go from north to south. These are the front porch on the left and the back porch on the right. And again, you can see the proximity of the building next door. The next building south is C, and they have their patio area along the north side of the building and wrapping a little to the rear. Then this is the largest area, which is in the center of the site, which is Cathcart House, building E, where they have a patio in the front, some of the porches, and then a small patio in the back on the pedestrian walkway. And then building B and F were put together because the building is very small, and it has a deck in the front that goes through a breezeway to a small deck in the rear. As you can see, these areas are not huge. And then building G to the south is a patio in the front on the street and a small deck in the back. So those are the areas that would be covered by this conditional use application. And then when you do a conditional use, there are some items that have to be looked at. Section 3.1.1 has four items of which land use is one, concurrency is the other. These items were all vetted when the site plan was approved, and so we know that we're in compliance with these items. Then the other ones are consistency and compliance to LDRs. The consistency items talk about adaptive reuse to an extent, and that's the process we're in, where we're actually reconfiguring these units to be used as a restaurant and not as the original single-family house. But positive findings can be found for all of Section 3.1.1. And then the other item is Section 2.4.6. There's two items that basically says that the approval of the conditional use will not have a detrimental effect on the stability of the neighborhood. I think the redevelopment of this property is quite the contrary in terms of establishing better stability to the neighborhood. And it won't hinder development or redevelopment of the area since it's all contained within the site. There's nothing that will actually cause any issues with redevelopment or development of adjacent areas. So positive findings could be made for this, and you could recommend approval. I would appreciate it if you could recommend approval, and I'll answer any questions.
Thank you. Ms. Palomola.
Okay, this request is a recommendation to the City Commission for a conditional use request for Sunday Village. So this is the entire Sunday Village development. It spans four blocks. The area that's part of the request tonight is the area circled in red. It's the five historic structures that face South Swinton Avenue. Here's a close-up, and then I'm going to just briefly go through the images. I know Mr. Covelli also showed these as well. So here we have the rectory, which is building A, building C, building E, which is the Cathcart House, buildings B and F, and then building G. Okay, so this is the overall site plan. So you can see this is block 61 of a Sunday Village site. The areas that are highlighted in or outlined in red are the proposed outdoor dining at night areas. As Mr. Covelli did note, this was part of a previous approved site plan. So all the areas that are highlighted have already been approved and already exist on site. The request only specifically asks that the outdoor dining that already exists in the daytime continue to nighttime. So the area is located within the Old School Square Historic Arts District, also known as OSHAD Zoning, also within the Old School Square Historic District Overlay, which is the historic district. And part of the OSHAD Zoning 4424C, this does note that the principal uses for restaurant are allowed with accessory use for outdoor dining in the daytime. So the existing uses that have been approved for the outdoor dining in the daytime for the restaurants already exist and are approved. This request specifically asks, according to the conditional use in 4424D, that outdoor dining, which operates at night, is allowed for these specific uses for the five existing restaurants on site. So here's another outline. This is also in the staff report. It's got all the different square footages for indoor and outdoor dining that have already been approved. And as I previously noted, that these areas already have been approved and already exist on site. So with this conditional use request, just going through the process, I know some of you have already either been to the meeting or have already seen it on TV. The recommendation for this first has to go to HPB because it's within a historic district, followed by another recommendation going to PZB, and then the final determination is going to City Commission. This was reviewed on July 1st by the Historic Preservation Board, and they did vote to recommend this to Planning Zoning Board 7-0. These are some required findings. Staff had no concerns with the required findings. There's a benefit for the activation of the downtown core area, also with the Atlantic Avenue neighborhoods, with the addition of the outdoor dining at night for the historic houses off of South Swinton. Additional required findings of 331. These do meet and are in compliance with the LDRs, and these were already approved with the previous full approved site plan. I did also want to note, just following up on Mr. Covelli's comments about noise and any potential music or anything that could be proposed, there isn't any currently with the proposed site. If they were to come in, or if they wanted to add that, as this specific request only asks for outdoor dining at night, any other type of music or entertainment would have to be approved with another modification to the site plan. That concludes my presentation.
Thank you. At this point, anyone in the public who wishes to speak, please step forward. You state your name and address, and you have three minutes.
Yes, hi, Kira Bossis, 117 Southwest 2nd Avenue. It's the CODA townhomes. I'm on the board. We're excited about outdoor cafes. We love the idea. I don't see any problem, actually, with it being at midnight. But there are three concerns, one being the noise, and that's just people. It doesn't have to be music. Garbage. I see no receptacles on the outer parts where the walkways are. And I, years ago, requested a receptacle over at the corner of the courthouse, 1st and 2nd, 1st Street and 2nd Avenue. And I finally got it, and now people use that. I'm a good neighbor. I pick up any cans or such that I see. But that's just the beginning. I was walking my dog this morning. There was the ice cream shop containers sitting on the stoop. You know, I'm going to pick that up and throw it away. But I think we need more receptacles on that strip around the Sunday Village. Parking is a big issue, and I've spoken to Mr. Moore, and we're trying to work on that. But everyone is dribbling over to our streets to park. There's also been a situation with the valets, which is from downtown, going down 1st Avenue and zipping, you know, dropping off at the church's parking lot and then zipping back down. And so traffic, traffic's a situation. We're not so concerned with the sound, I think, that it can be monitored. But garbage and parking. So I wanted to bring that to your attention. Thank you.
Thank you.
Anthony Marino, 111 Southeast 1st Avenue. I'm all in favor of it. I'm thrilled with what Sunday Village has done. And it's tough enough for small businessmen to exist without limiting their hours. So anything you guys can do to help them out would be, I think, well appreciated. Really aren't any of us live that close. I don't see any residential where they would be affecting anyone. But I think it's been a huge plus for the neighborhood. And they've done a beautiful job. And I commend them on it. The only thing I'm not happy with is how long it's taken. So a lot of you guys speed it up. Eight years. Because we're all very happy about what's going on there. And I don't see many people here opposing. If they would, they would be here. But I thank you.
Thank you. Anyone else? Seeing no and public comments closed. Mr. Gravelli, Ms. Bogg, any rebuttal or cross-examination? Ma'am?
I have no rebuttal for the applicant. But comments for public comment, I can address.
Please.
With regards to the garbage, there was a very elaborate detailed plan for the garbage that's in the approved site plan. If the applicant does wish or the public comment wants to know, you can just let us know. And we can send that to you if you do a public records request or email us. In addition to the noise, I know we did address that if there's anything other than music or additional people that is subject to code enforcement. So that's something that if there's an issue, you can notify them and get that addressed. And then with regards to traffic, for Sunday Village purposes, they do have approval for a very large four-story parking garage that's almost near finish, as well as another – they have a lot of underground parking. So specifically for the Sunday Village site, their parking has been covered. With regards to other areas, it's a very popular city. But, yes, I guess we'll have to see once the garage is finished. It is public-private, so we'll have to see how that goes.
Okay. Board comments.
Catherine, what new garage are you speaking of? Are you not the one that's just opened or a new one that's on the books?
It's not open yet. We're still going through – it's on Block 69. It's right next to the Fettersfield Garage.
Right, so a couple blocks west.
Yes.
That's the garage you're talking about.
Oh, okay.
That's the one you're talking about?
Well, yes. Okay. But it's not finished. At this current time, you're not able to get parking in there. Okay. But soon.
But it looks beautiful. But it's the Fettersfield. Beautiful.
Right next door.
And, of course, there's all the subterranean parking underneath the entire site.
Correct, yes.
So – and I almost think it's like a compliment that the person would say, I don't see where all the trash receptacles are throughout the property. I mean, it's one of the cleanest sites I've ever seen in my life. But it is an important issue, obviously. So, listen, this is a $280 million project, I believe. Maybe it reached $300 million. I have no idea. I'm, you know, and still going. So, I don't know how this could be any better of an economic impact to that area. We can all recall what it used to be just a few short years ago. So, these historic little houses are really, really tiny footprints, all of them. And so, like, the Cathcart House appears to be the biggest structure over there, when, in fact, it's probably the smallest, other than maybe Building B. But because it has a wraparound porch, it appears gigantic. And so, it's going to be really interesting to see how a microbrew company operates out of that. But I'm in complete favor of all these decks and the outdoor spaces. And even in the case of the Cathcart House, they're seeking, you know, some of the square footage is, in fact, that wraparound porch. So, that's a very integral architectural piece that, of course, they should be allowed to have outdoor dining on that, you know. But the new decks that have been added, some of them elevated, a few down at grade level, like in front of the Cathcart, they're all beautifully integrated into the site plan. And this entire site's been designed by a world premier architectural firm in New York City, Gensner & Associates. And so, that's something Del Rey should be very, very proud about. And I think they, if I'm not mistaken, they designed the garage and all the other buildings and the other blocks. And then, of course, we've got the Sunday House itself, which is just south of all this, that will be a huge renovation project soon. And it will be spectacular. And then, last but not least, there's a couple more historic houses that haven't been dealt with yet, really. The one that was relocated in the southwest of Sunday Village is sitting back there. It's going to become something. And then, a replication of the 1913 house. So, there's a couple more historic things that are coming along that they've kind of got up their sleeve. I think they worked the music thing out. I don't know why we need to limit it to 12, the seating and the outdoor activity to midnight. You know, I can see them coming in the beginning of this summer or the beginning of this season and asking for a 2 a.m. extension. But, no, Mike's shaking his head no. But, I think this is a fantastic application, a fantastic concept. I couldn't be more excited about it. I think it should be more music, more everything.
We can hear it from the tin roof.
Tin roof should be chastised for their music.
Just a reminder, the only thing that's before the board is evening outdoor dining.
Yes. Right. I'm surprised they don't want to work something out with music right now. But, apparently, they don't. No. Ms. Kizaleski.
Yeah. I don't know all the history. I wasn't there eight years ago. But, I do think this is a good use. My concerns were the noise and lighting. So, if you could just refresh me as to what is happening on the east side. She can't hear you. You've got to be mic. On the east side. I'm sorry. We're sharing over here.
Like along Swinton.
Yeah. Along Swinton. And then in block 70. Because those are the ones that I would have anticipated be affected by any kind of noise or light. And, I appreciate that it's not entertainment at this point. This might be better. Okay. So, you said on the east side of Swinton and south west.
The, that's going to be my question, too.
Oh, so the two and the other two additional blocks across the street. Okay.
Wow. So, block 69 and 70. So, those were also previously approved. Block 69 is a four-story garage. And, that's the one that's right next to the Fettersfield garage. Adjacent to that is block 70. And, that house is a four-story, I think three stories, four office. And, then there's also an underground garage in that, too.
And, then the houses that are along Swinton.
That's Swinton Social. That's another project that's in bankruptcy.
That's a different project.
That's a mess. It's so, yes.
But, it has, because it's not in historic.
It is in historic. It's one of our projects, but, yes. Not a part of Sunday Village, but just adjacent to it.
They were approved to be a social club of some sort a long, long time ago. Right?
Before, I was elected to commission in 2005.
And, they're still approved for that. But, they've sat unimproved forever.
They were front of code enforcement recently.
All right. Well, I have no problems with the request. My only issue was, again, the noise. But, you addressed that. So, I'm okay with that, because this is strictly dining. And, at some point, if they do want to do noise, would that come back for us? Or, is that?
It would be a historic preservation board, I believe, because it would be a site.
It would depend on the request. More than likely, if it's a conditional use. There's another conditioning use in OSHA that allows late-night dining, which is anything, I think, after, I think, midnight, which would be, like, to 2 a.m. Something like that would have to come before you again. But, other than that, any other modifications, more than likely, would just be HPB or city commission.
Can I jump back in with one more question? Would it be a fair question to ask what, and I haven't been to either restaurant, but the new restaurants in the new building on the corner, have they been issued cafe permits and similar rights to have outdoor dining that we're asking for tonight?
Yes, actually, they were originally approved, I think, back in a few years ago. They came in for an approval for Buildings 1 and 2, which is now Double Knot and Barcelona Wine Bar. They came in for the conditional use for outdoor dining at night until midnight. So, the midnight is just going to be consistently across the site.
Any complaints so far?
None.
Also, not that we're aware of.
It's also not the season. I just walked by there the other night, and there's three people outside of Barcelona.
Who's next?
Are you done? Yes. Let me follow up on what Roger said about conditional use. There's nothing to stop the applicant, even though he was shaking his head no. There's nothing to stop the applicant from coming in and asking for an extension to 2 a.m., right?
Correct. If they wanted to modify it, they would have to come back.
I mean, it comes through all the boards and all that stuff. Correct. And raise all the questions about noise.
Mm-hmm.
Now, if you say no more serving after 10, does that mean if you serve at 11.59, they can stay there until they're done eating? Stay there and drink? Or what time does the kitchen close? What time does the bar close under this proposal?
So, knowing that they can only have outdoor dining at night until midnight, they would probably have to stop serving for some other time frame in order to remove the chairs after midnight.
So, that means no eating after midnight? No.
Not outside.
Correct.
If you look at the definition of a bonafide restaurant in the zoning code, it talks about you have to have seats for every person that's going to be in that restaurant. And it also says that, you know, if you're serving to midnight, the kitchen has to be open until midnight. Doesn't mean you're serving or anything. You're cleaning. You're doing whatever. Right. But everything stops at midnight.
At midnight.
It doesn't differentiate between this or that function. It's just at midnight, you lock the doors.
So, if I'm there, is there continuation of food and drink being served on the inside of the restaurant?
No. At midnight, everything's shut down.
Inside, outside. Everything's shut down. You talk about outdoor dining, but this is a whole shebang. Right. So, in theory, I could be there with eight buddies, and we order a bunch of drinks and a bunch of food, and it gets delivered at 1159. We could be there until 1 o'clock, correct?
They're going to make you drink really fast.
So, there's no drinking after midnight?
No.
Okay. But you can eat after midnight.
And not all of these establishments have alcohol in it, anyway.
Yeah. And the ice cream's power, I suspect. That doesn't have it. Then, I noticed, since everyone was. He said, eat that ice cream quick. Since everyone else disclosed their previous votes in this project, I voted eight years ago, seven, and the board voted seven to nothing against this project, primarily because we were really concerned with what was going to happen to these historic buildings. It was also a four-story project. Since PET took over, they've done a remarkable job and, I think, gone above and beyond what they needed to do to really not only preserve the historic buildings, but replicate them to as much as close to what they looked like back in the early turn of the century. So, I mean, oh, the only question, quick question, when you showed the Cathcart House, the large patio in the front, there's no shade there. If they choose to erect, I know they'd have to come back before if they wanted a tent that had poles in the ground and stuff, but if they choose to select these large awning tables, that's entirely, the city has no say over how much they might obstruct the city. The view of the Cathcart House from the street.
So we actually met with the owners and Mike Cavelli about possibly doing some sort of temporary, like, structure, like, awnings or things like that. We went over a bunch of different things and what would require board approval, administrative approval, and, like, different processes for that. So they did inquire about that, and if they, you know, once they're actually working and they do decide to come in for something like that, that would have to go to the board.
Anything, any kind of awning or wrong structure would have to be, yeah, would have to be, like, come before the board. But, like, a freestanding large umbrella.
Yes.
If I may add to that. Is that okay with you?
Okay. We had a lot of discussion about it, even to the extent of tables with umbrellas and even the style of the umbrella. So we talked about pergolas, and we kind of agreed that in the rear it isn't as critical to have a small pergola, but in the front we really want to maintain the look of the building if we can. And so at this point, the only thing that we've actually talked about in terms of what actually happens there would be tables with umbrellas. But leaving a central, the central part of that walkway open to where the tables are on either side of that.
Yeah, because they make those umbrellas pretty big.
Yeah, but again, you know, we actually talked about even the style of the umbrella, so to embrace the historical aspect of Gathgarden.
So I've been to the ice cream shop, and correct me if I'm wrong, there are umbrella tables on the north side of the ice cream shop. They're lovely. Right. But don't they get the right to put other umbrella elements on all these outdoor decks without having to come back before us? Right. I think they do, and they don't have to be consistent.
As long as it's not a structure, as long as they're not sitting. Right. Correct.
And it also depends, because specifically this one, because it's forward of the structure, I think you just mentioned that, Mr. Patton. And that's why it's the main concern for it. Like, what are they going to put in front of the structure? So it depends on what they're proposing and where.
And probably none of that has to do with night dining.
But it does. No, but it's a concern. Okay. It is. No, I'm good. And I appreciate the continued concern about keeping the view open. I'm done.
I'd like to press on this a little bit more. Mr. Covella, you said that there would be self-policing here. And we have had a lot of experience in the last year with a particular applicant whose neighbors are very unhappy with the noise. And to date, nothing has really happened there.
I think you'll find that the difference is this is a fully managed property. So you have a management company, you have security, you have all of those things that most developments in town don't have. And so there's another layer of interface between tenants, talking to tenants about things between them that they don't appreciate, let's say. But there's also, remember, they're tenants, and they answer to ownership. And ownership has a management company that actually sees that as well. So they have a lot invested into this piece of property, and obviously they want everyone to be successful. And so management is very active in all of those things. We're involved in every aspect of the redevelopment of the interior of these buildings, the exterior of these buildings. It isn't just, okay, we signed the lease and we're letting the tenants go. So, you know, rest assured, they are not like absentee landlords. Their office is going to be in one of these buildings. They're moving their offices from Boca to this site.
To the shade issue, among the things that you considered, I assume you did shade cloths, big sales?
No, because you get into really serious structural elements in terms of the post in the ground meet wind loads. And it just gets way more complicated than it needs to be. Because if you think about it, I don't know how many people are out there really in the daylight hours sitting out on the patio. It's really an evening thing. So, you know, for those few, they'll have umbrellas to put up for shade in the wintertime. But it's just an option. Because remember, there's not a lot of interior square footage. I mean, Cathcart House doesn't have a lot of square footage. And when you add two handicapped bathrooms and a kitchen, your first floor is pretty much eaten up.
Well, I think that's why the question is really relevant, because most of the serving is going to be out of those. Cathcart is tiny.
Upstairs and outside. So, yes, we've had a lot of conversation about what you do with that and what that looks like.
Catherine, you mentioned that code enforcement could come to play in on this. But they're not out after 5 o'clock, are they? Yeah, they go out. I don't think they are.
I believe they run different hours. I know they have code enforcement out at night, and they do look at noise. From what I know of that department, they do have different hours.
That wasn't my understanding, but if you've seen it different, that's fine. Will they have the equipment to measure disabilities? I believe so.
Yes, we will. I've actually seen the device and participated in the training session where we showed both code officers and police officers how to use the equipment.
Okay. What about video screens on the outside, particularly at the drinking pig? Drinking pig is very small. Well, but that's why the videos would be on the outside rather than the inside.
I can't imagine where you would put it. If you look at the facade of that, the back of it is windows and doors everywhere. The front of it is, see like here, you have a door, a window, a door, a window, a door. There's really very little place that you would put a screen short of blocking a window or a door in the rear. And the front has the porch, and that's your access into the building. So if you look, there's really, and I find it highly unlikely that they would do something like that.
William, could we make that a condition of approval?
Well, that would require a site plan modification, right, Katharina? So I don't think there's a need to add a condition of approval because it would be a site plan modification that would have to go to the store planning board regardless. Okay.
That's all I got?
First of all, I agree with, I think they should have considered music or whatever when they're doing it all at once. Because, I mean, like the brewery, for example, any of those be successful. There's usually some type of live music element that kind of, they need to draw people in besides just beer. And so I think, well, you're going to see them back because they're going to need, you know, generate business somehow. It's interesting about the TV. I just saw the Geronimo's during the World Tournament had a screen outside. And it's really, I mean, they did a good job the way they did it. And it was, I don't know if it's approved or not or whatever, but that's what made me think. I don't know anything about it. But it's, you know, it's across the street. I just happened to walk by it and saw it. But it looked classy. And I could see something like here. I could see something like that working here. If they, you know, they're going to want to have sport, you know, during football season. If they are a barbecue, whatever, whatever that name is, it sounds like somewhere.
It's a barbecue.
Any barbecue, they're going to want to watch football, too. And people like to see it from the outside. So they're going to have to figure that out. And I'm guessing they're going to have to come back again once they figure it out. But I don't have a problem. I appreciate the neighbors coming and speaking up. And hopefully you're hearing that, too, can pass on to the garbage issues, to the management company. I do have a question because it is all part of the same site plan. But, you know, we haven't seen any work done on the Sunday house. And it is part of that. When can we anticipate some upkeep or work on that Sunday house? We'd love an update. I would say the whole city would love an update.
If I may, it's like in a nutshell, it's been a case of, every provider that we interview wants something different. Wants what? Wants something different in terms of the restoration and what you do. So, you know, we came to realize that we did a plan, and that plan isn't necessarily the plan. And so rather than go and expend a ton of money and start doing all this, we've been talking with providers. We are very close to a high-end provider. And then we'll start to work that plan to meet their needs. So, and the other part of it is Block 61 is a massive undertaking. And we also build Block 70. 70 is, Block 70 is almost done, and the parking garage is almost done. And so when we get Block 61 done, and it's the natural progression is to go into the Sunday house.
I get you. I just, I will say that's been the, you know. We're very aware. Everybody is very happy, I think. Anybody I speak to, you know, and I've taken, we've gone to Barcelona and walked around it, and everybody loves it. And just for the neighbors to know, that was, could have been a four-story building there on the corner that is now a three-story building, thanks to that 2 o'clock in the morning boat. That 7-0 was for a four-story. It didn't happen. I think it really, it's big now. Four-story, it would have just been, whoa. It really shows me, like, what a great thing to get it back down to the three stories. But I think it's, I think you guys are short-sighted, not coming in once to get it all done, but I don't have a problem with the use, because I think you're going to need that second part to make it work at night, you know, especially some of those large outdoor spaces. You know, but, and hopefully when they think about it, I will tell you if they do come back to us, like, not loud noise, you know, acoustic bands, or, you know, TVs, not something that's going to be, and projected the right way, because you're going to have to take those neighbors into consideration, because it's not a permitted use now. There is no, I know people keep talking about entertainment district. We don't have an entertainment district in the city, correct, Murphy? Great. There's no actual entertainment district, right?
I think it's, yeah, the noise ordinance amendment does categorize as an entertainment district.
So now we have an entertainment district. Finally, we have an entertainment district. We did not up until, what, a month ago? A tiny one. Gotcha. Gotcha, yeah, so, but this is not included in that, right, entertainment, right, area. So, yeah, that's, definitely, I think they're going to have to come back eventually, but I'm okay with, I mean, they're going to need the outdoor use to be successful as a small business, and these are not, except for the ice cream place, I don't think any of them are big chains.
There you go. Where's the loon? Does that mean I got two or three? My man? Loon's big. That's big, yeah.
Double nuts, Jay. Yeah, I just have, I want to clarify a couple things here. So we're going to approve, or not approve, depending on what we do, people eating dinner in the evening, or ice cream, as the case may be. Correct. We're not approving music, we're not approving anything like that, and that is not allowed at this point, because I think the outdoor dining thing is, in the evening, is obvious, frankly. You can't run a restaurant here that closes at sundown. It just doesn't work. But as Mr. Charm mentioned, we've had some bad experience in the city with people who are going to do this, and it turns out that they're doing something else, and gosh, how horrible it is to have to make them follow the rules. And, yeah, so if there wants to be entertainment, there wants to be outside video or something, that's a whole separate issue. So, fine. And, really, that's the entertainment thing, that night dining until midnight. And my only other question is, who's eating dinner at midnight? Kids. Okay. I think that, yeah. Okay, I yield on that one. Sorry. Those days are long gone.
I'm showing you, right? Yeah, no kidding.
Okay. So, yeah, no, I think this is.
I was just insisting.
I think what we're voting on tonight is entirely appropriate, and I think a lot of things we talked about are not the issue here. Absolutely. And can we vote on or have a motion on what we're supposed to be voting on?
I make a recommendation and approval of the City Commission for conditional use HP-000492-2026 to allow outdoor dining at night associated with restaurants located along South Swinton Avenue within the existing historic structures of Sunday Village of Block 61, Old School Square Historic District, by finding that the request is consistent with the comprehensive plan and meets the criteria set forth in the land development regulations. Second.
We have a motion by Mr. Katz, seconded by Mr. Chard. Do we have any discussion of the motion? In which case, Ms. Miller, would you please call a roll?
Jim Chard? Yes. Mitch Katz? Yes. Didger Strong?
Yes.
Karen Keseleski? Yes. Roger Cope?
Yes.
Price Patton? Yes. Gregory Snyder?
Yes. That's passed unanimously. Thank you very much. Thanks, Mike. Yep. Thank you. Thanks. Can I bring it? Thank you so much. Okay. We have no legislative items.
For five people, beers are on price at the beer price. If he can find nine people, beers are on price at the beer place. Yeah. If I can find him. Thanks very much. Okay. Let's move it along.
Staff comments? No comments. Just a reminder of the next board meeting, which is August 17 and the following one, September 28th.
Yeah. Could you notice that? Right there in front of you.
It's on the screen. August 17. The notice is that the September 28th is not on the normal third Monday. Yes. Because of budget hearings.
And do you have October?
Agenda is posted in the website.
And we can share the full agenda with board members.
The only change is that September because of the public hearings. Yeah. Okay.
Board attorney comments. Mr. Rennett. Nothing for me, Chair. Thank you. Oh, my.
Board comments. I have none. Sorry I missed you guys last month, but I was having dinner at midnight in Spain. Well, in Spain, yeah. Where the sun was going down at 11 o'clock. Is it noisy? You would hope so. In Madrid, yes. Yeah. It's actually incredible in the squares in Madrid at 11 o'clock at night. I mean, you're literally, 11 o'clock at night, you can be in a square. And there are restaurants open. There's a park always in the middle. Kids are out playing. People are eating and drinking, like, on a Tuesday night. Like, it's, and there's a lot of noise because everybody's outdoors and everybody's talking.
Jim?
No comment.
Great. I just, I'll be unable to attend the August 17th meet.
Roger.
I thought it was very interesting that one of the restaurants at Sunday Village was named after one of my old girlfriends. And I'll let you guys figure out which one it is. And it's not the ice cream shop.
Covelli thinks of everything. Yeah, that's right. He knew.
That is pretty funny.
Can I, has there been an official grand opening of Sunday Village? No. I don't think there has, has there?
I don't think it just bit by bit. There was an official ribbon cutting, but there wasn't an official.
Ribbon cutting for the construction.
There was a, yeah, there was a ribbon cutting.
There was a big ribbon cutting.
Yeah.
Okay.
That's it.
That's it. That's it. I have nothing.
Meeting is adjourned. No, we didn't set it right.
No, we didn't set it right. Yes. No, we didn't set it.
No, we didn't let's say it. We didn't set it. This one is going to set it. We didn't set it. We didn't set it. Step 11 will be