Planning and Zoning Board on 2025-10-20 5:01 PM - Oct 20, 2025

I call the order of the October 20th, 2025 meeting of the Delray Beach Planning and Zoning Board. Ms. Miller, would you call a roll, please? Price Patton? Here. Mitch Katz? Here. Deidre Strong? Here. Roger Cope? Here. Jim Chard? Here. Judy Mullica? Here. Gregory Snyder? Here. At this point, we have an amendment to the minutes. To the agenda, right? Of the agenda, sorry. I misspoke. Yeah, of, uh, go ahead. Yes, if our director, department director, would like to have a quick word before the approval of the minutes. Before approval of the minutes? Yeah, so you can approve the agenda as amended. Before approving the minutes. All right, I'll add a motion to approve the agenda, adding at the beginning of the agenda, the department director. Do we have a second? All in favor? Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay, that passes. At this point, then, Anthea? Anthea Janiotis, development services director for the record. You're all wondering why I'm here. I want to actually greet all new and returning members. Thank you for your service. And while we have a full house, and hopefully some folks are watching from home, I did want to make you aware there's a lot of frequent flyers in the house. So, um, we have had a second targeting of development services customers through an email spam attack. Uh, this had happened once, uh, before. Um, you, some of our customers are getting emails that say, uh, they're from us. And in order to remain on the agenda, you need to remit some outstanding fee in the several thousands of dollars of amounts. So, this is really just a public service announcement for all of you, um, that, uh, these emails are impersonating staff. There are typos in them. Like, this isn't the Planning and Zoning Commission. Like, there's mistakes, okay? Uh, but if you're not looking carefully, or this isn't the only time you're coming before a board, you may not be quick to realize that it's fraudulent. So, please, everyone understand that you are not scheduled for a board if there are outstanding fees to be paid. Um, if we've been incredibly benevolent and somehow put you on a board with the expectation you're going to pay a fee, it will always occur through your e-services portal. If you get something and it looks the least bit suspicious, reach out to your planner. You all know who your project planners are. Um, and please, if you get an email, forward it to us because our IT department wants to see them. Um, but at any rate, just so you know, we're never going to ask you to Venmo money, ever. We're not. It's never happening. Um, you know, and, um, honestly, uh, IT, our legal teams are actually working on this. We're trying to figure it out. If you have been looking, we took off email addresses, both for applicants and staff, from the agendas. We've taken off the phone. There's things we've been adjusting to try to insulate us, but I think with AI, it's just very easy to sweep through an agenda, find a legitimate contact, and reach out. So please do not pay any last-minute fees before a board. Anyone, whether it's this board or Historic Preservation Board or Board of Adjustment or SCRAB, just, when in doubt, reach out to your planner, um, and please forward whatever you're getting to us. And that's it. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Now go back to a regularly scheduled agenda. Okay. At this point, uh, approval of the minutes, do we have a motion to approve the minutes? Or do we have any changes to the minutes? I'll make a motion to approve the minutes for March 17th, April 21st, May 19th, and June 16th, 2025. Okay. Motion. I'll have a quick, quick question. I wasn't here for any of those meetings. I have no idea if they're true or false. Do we still have to vote? Yes. Yes. You should vote. Okay. Yes. You can vote no if you want. They're pretty accurate. Okay. All in favor? Aye. All opposed? No. So it's a six to one. Okay. At this time, uh, we'll swear in anyone who wants to speak to the meeting tonight. Be advised that if you're going to speak, you need to fill out the sheet that I don't think a lot of people didn't fill out because we need the information. The sign-in sheet. The sign-in sheet. Yes. And at this point, then, uh, Ms. Miller will swear people in. Please raise your right hand by the authority of estimate the notary of the state of Florida to swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Yes. All right. All right. Thank you. All right. At this time, are there any comments from the public on any items that are not on the agenda? Okay. Seeing none. That's closed. At this time, no presentations. We move on to quasi-judicial hearing items. And the first thing I'm going to 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 and 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 numbers 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. Item 8A is, if you could read that into the record, please. Sure. Good evening, board members. Julie Goodanek, senior planner with Development Services. At this time, I'd like to enter into the record file number 2025-065, and I will turn it over to the applicant's representative. We'll do an ex-parte. Is there any ex-parte? Other than the one email that I received. Okay. That's it. Okay. Mr. Theron? None. Mr. Patterson? Drive-by. Same. Drive-by. I did have a five-second conversation with Mr. DeJesus, but nothing about the project, but just that he was here for the project. Okay. And I did a drive-by. All right. At this time, Ms. Palenki, you have the floor. Hi. Thank you. No, but I will. Thank you. I'll make sure you have that. For the record, Christina Palenki, Ms. Palenki, Backman. My address is 14 Southeast 4th Street in Boca Raton, and it is a pleasure to be here this evening for item 8A. Oops. A little too far. So the subject site is highlighted in the yellow box on your screen. It's in the northern part of the city between Federal Highway and Dixie Highway, just south of Gulfstream Boulevard. The property is about 3.22 acres in size. It has a future land use of general commercial and is zoned automotive commercial. We are proposing to redevelop the site with a new automotive dealership for Hyundai and Genesis. The building itself will be about 55,000 square feet. So that's about 40% lot coverage. And we are providing the necessary perimeter buffers. We're also dedicating 10 feet of right-of-way along Federal Highway. So that's kind of highlighted in the yellow box on your screen. Just going back, so the property right now is utilized for vehicle storage related to an automotive use. There was a dealership previously on the site. It's been demolished for, I think, a couple years at this point, and does have that vehicle storage. We'll get into it a little bit further in the presentation, but you can see it's pretty much just cars. There's very little landscaping on the site today. So here we are meeting the perimeter buffer requirements, vehicular use area requirements for landscaping. We're providing foundation plantings. That's all the areas in green. Currently, there are also three curb cuts along Federal Highway. The more curb cuts you have, the more conflicts you have, especially along a corridor like Federal Highway that has a lot of vehicular traffic, higher rates of speed. So we are proposing one curb cut along the south end of the site, and then we have a curb cut on Dixie Highway on the back, and then a second curb cut that will have a gate for emergency access, essentially. So primarily, people visiting the dealership will come off Federal Highway, and they will park in these parking spaces that are on the front of the site. To the south of the property is a self-storage building right now. I believe it's a CubeSmart. And so because of that kind of benign and larger mess next door to us, we have the active areas kind of situated on the south side of the building. So we have loading zones along the south. You have access into kind of the service areas along the south. So just for compatibility, it made the most sense, given that the self-storage use is right next door. We also are providing vehicular circulation around the site. This, in part, is due to fire access to ensure emergency services can access around the entirety of the building. You know, if they need to get into the garage from the north end, we wanted to ensure they have adequate access. Their largest vehicles can circulate the site. So you do see that drive going along the entirety, around the entirety of the building. One point I wanted to mention on this slide is related to the front setback. So this portion of the city is within the North Federal Highway corridor, and there's a specific setback requirement for this area. You have to have a minimum 5-foot setback, but a maximum 15-foot setback. And so the expectation is to create more of a pedestrian-oriented corridor, which, when you have automotive zoning and automotive uses, it kind of contrasts to what you would expect with a pedestrian corridor. So our building is setback in excess of 15 feet, obviously. So there is a waiver requested, and that's allowed pursuant to LDR Section 4.4.10 F3, which allows the approving body to determine that a setback greater than 15 feet may be proposed if it can be demonstrated that it's not feasible to comply with the standard. And so to that, again, just providing for fire access, providing for that circulation throughout the site, it's not feasible to provide a 15-foot setback. So we felt this was a safe compromise, a comfortable compromise. We are not proposing any vehicle inventory within these parking spaces along Federal Highway. These parking spaces are for customers to access. So sometimes you see, especially older car dealerships have, you know, a line of inventory right out front, big, bright stickers on the cars. That's not what's going to be happening in those spaces. Those are for customer use. We do have two display areas, one kind of right here by the southern entrance, and one at the northern corner of the site. So that will allow for a vehicle in each of those two locations to be displayed. But otherwise, you know, they'll have the showroom internal to the building and inventory stored in the parking garage. So your required findings for the site plan are contained in LDR Section 3.1.1 related to the land use map, concurrency, consistency, and compliance with the land development regulations. So, again, the property is zoned AC. It has the GC land use. They are consistent, so we comply with that finding. In terms of concurrency, your staff report goes into detail on each of these items, but it has been determined that there is adequate capacity for water, sewer, solid waste. Drainage is adequately provided on site. In terms of traffic, we have the TPS approval from Palm Beach County, and schools is not applicable since it's a non-residential use. In terms of consistency with the comprehensive plan, there are a lot of different objectives that support kind of the legacy automotive use that's been important to the fabric of Delray Beach. Specifically, Policy NDC 2.5.1 speaks to accommodating automotive dealerships and auto-related uses on land with a general commercial land use, zoned automotive commercial, and located north of George Bush Boulevard between Federal and Dixie Highways, which is exactly where this property is located. So, the comprehensive plan really encourages this area to be developed with automotive uses, and the staff report notes that the proposed development maintains consistency and compatibility with the comprehensive plan. In terms of compliance with the LDRs, staff has thoroughly reviewed the site plan application on a number of occasions to ensure we are meeting the land development regulation requirements in terms of floor area ratio, height, all the required buffers, required parking, bicycle parking, architectural design standards. All of that has been fully vetted through staff. Here again, we have kind of our landscape areas highlighted. There is a special buffer that's required along Federal Highway. So, we are complying with that particular buffer requirement. Again, you see our vehicular open space area, so the landscape areas between parking stalls. We are complying with all of the perimeter buffer requirements, which are not there today. And we are actually providing additional landscaping along Dixie Highway. And that's, you know, this... Wrong button, sorry. Here we go. This row of trees right here that we are proposing to add to the site. And so, that area is not counted towards our open space, since it is within the right-of-way. But we felt it important to provide, you know, screening from Dixie Highway as well. And, you know, twofold. When you think of a lot of the other automotive uses located along Dixie Highway, particularly south of Linton, you have similar, you know, green spaces. It's not really buffered in any way by trees or landscaping in the back there. And in a lot of instances, loading and unloading activities for those dealerships occur along Dixie Highway. We wanted to ensure that didn't happen here. We have specific loading and unloading areas that we want, you know, people to use when they're coming in in trucks. It's been fully vetted for that. And we want to ensure that, you know, no matter what angle you're looking at this dealership from, it is an attractive product. And so, here we have the elevations. The top one is the elevation that is kind of the primary facade facing Federal Highway. You can see a lot of glass, a lot of nice transparency there. The south elevation is kind of where we have more of those active uses, the loading, the unloading, the access to service areas. Again, that's going to be kind of adjacent to the existing CubeSmart. We have the west elevation facing Dixie Highway on the top of this screen. Again, you don't have the landscaping in this image, but we'll have foundation plantings as well. And then you have the north elevation, which faces some industrial uses. And then kind of towards Federal Highway, there's, I think, a med spa there currently, but they'll have the glass facade kind of wrapped around close to them along Federal Highway. And so, here is a rendering of the proposed building. This does not factor in the landscaping that will be provided. I wanted to make sure that was clear because it's not shown here on purpose. We're intending to provide an image of what the building itself will look like. So, there will be additional landscaping on top of this that is reflected in the landscape plans. It's just not on this image. So, here you can see kind of one of the display spots, which is next to this sign where one of the nice vehicles will be highlighted. You have beautiful glass facade, a mix of materials, a nice contemporary look. So, we have the required findings for the front setback. I went over the setback in detail, but it's not going to adversely affect the neighborhood, significantly diminish any kind of public facility, create an unsafe situation. In fact, we're setting it back to allow for fire circulation. It does not grant a special privilege. And then the second waiver relates to an open space reduction. And so, LDR section 4.3.4K specifically allows for a reduction in open space in the context with dealing with dealership properties in the AC zoning district. So, it allows for an existing site to be, or to increase the percentage of open space, but provides for a reduction that may be approved by the approving body. In no instance shall that percentage be reduced below the existing percentage. And the board must find that the reduction does not diminish the practical application of the requirement, particularly as it relates to the perimeter of the site. So, what that means, essentially, is we need to still comply with the landscape requirements in terms of the perimeter buffers, in terms of the foundation plantings, the vehicular use areas. We need to still ensure we're complying with all of those requirements, but if we do not get to the threshold of the required open space, so long as we're providing more than what exists today, this board can approve a waiver. And so, that's what we're requesting. Here is an aerial of the existing site. The yellow is the only area where there is landscaping, if you can even call it landscaping, and I'll show you why. But there are no real perimeter buffers. There's next to nothing on this site. It's just a gravel parking area, essentially. Here you have the west property line. You can see there's no landscaping provided. Um, this landscaping is overgrowth from the property next door. Um, so the gravel is, is what's on the property today, um, adjacent to, you know, landscaping on the neighboring property. Uh, this is the north property line. Same thing, where there's overgrowth from the property next door, but no landscaping specifically on this site. Um, and this is the landscaping that is actually provided on this site right now, if you can even call it landscaping. Um, so in total, there's 1% of the site has this as landscaping currently. Um, so we are drastically improving the landscaping that's going to be provided on the property. Um, you see in the green, all of the perimeter buffer areas that will be planted. Um, the blue is the foundation plantings and the vehicular use area plantings. And then again, along Dixie Highway, um, there's kind of this yellowish green area, um, that is not counted towards our open space, but we are improving, um, and beautifying Dixie Highway as well. And here, uh, you have that landscaping in relation to the building again. Um, here, we just have some quick calculations. Um, math is not my forte, but 1,120 square feet of the existing site has that, uh, grass in it, which is 1% of the site. Um, so 1% of the site is currently landscaped. We're providing over 15,000 square feet, bringing it up to 11% of the site. Um, so it does result in an increase in open space. I would say a pretty significant increase from what is there today. Um, it does not comply with the 25% open space requirement, uh, but positive findings can be made in terms of the reduction under LDR section 4.4.10 H4. And, um, you know, I've walked through, you know, the various slides to demonstrate how positive findings can be made in terms of the waivers and, uh, the site plan itself. Um, and our team is happy to answer any questions you may have this evening, and I thank you very much for your time. Thank you. All right. Yes, good evening again, board members. Julie Gadanek, senior planner. Um, the applicant just gave a very thorough, um, overview of the project, so I apologize. Some of what I state might be redundant, but I'll try to move through it pretty quickly. Uh, again, this is file number 20-25-065. It's a level three site plan application for the Delray Hyundai Genesis Auto Dealership at 26-12 to 26-15 North Federal Highway. Um, this is the subject property. It's a little over three acres. The land use designation is general commercial, and the zoning district is automotive commercial. Uh, the proposed use is a full service automotive dealership. Again, just reiterating, automotive commercial, uh, existing zoning district in the GC zoning, uh, sorry, land use, uh, category. These are the surrounding properties for some overall context. It's mostly commercial with some industrial on the west side across the railroad tracks, and then on the other side of the industrial is, um, single family, or sorry, multifamily and then single family. So there is quite a buffer between the closest residential and the subject property. This is the subject property from the perspective of both streets, the Federal Highway Frontage on the left and the Dixie Highway Frontage on the right. You can see it is a largely vacant site, previously held a, um, used car dealership for a number of years, and for the last few years has been used as, um, automotive inventory storage. So looking at the site plan and just an overall summary of the project, it is a two-story, uh, dealership with a four-story, uh, integrated parking garage. The total gross square footage is approximately 167,000 square feet. That's inclusive of the garage square footage. Uh, the use includes showrooms and service areas for two distinct brands, both, uh, Genesis and Hyundai. There's administrative offices and there's vehicle inventory bullpens, uh, located interior to the garage. In total, there's 325 parking spaces provided. 153 of those are required to be allocated for customer and employee parking, and then that's calculated based off of square footage and, uh, the amount of service base, and then the remainder, uh, is eligible for use as, uh, inventory parking. Just to zoom into a couple areas of the site plan, uh, for clarification, this has been rotated. So Federal Highway is on the south part of the screen. Um, this is that access drive off of Federal Highway on the south corner of the property. Um, in the front setback area, we have some parking that the applicant clarified is going to be for customer parking. Uh, there is a 10-foot right-of-way dedication, which is that hashed, uh, detail, and then between the new property line and the parking spaces, there is a required 10-foot buffer that the applicant is providing. Um, there is the entry to both, uh, showrooms from the front, and then there is a, uh, access drive to provide vehicle access to the service bays. Looking at the rear, again, rotated, so Dixie Highway is on the top of the screen. Um, we have the two access points from Dixie. We have, um, a drive aisle that circulates the whole property. This provides necessary access for larger vehicles, including delivery trucks, as well as for fire access. Uh, there is a, um, trash enclosure at the corner that can be very easily accessible by a front-loaded, uh, garbage truck. We actually worked with the applicant to tweak that location to make sure it was very easily, um, accessed, so appreciated that. And then the applicant touched on the loading zone, but I just want to reiterate where it is. Um, oops, go back. Um, oh, sorry, I won't. Okay. So on the south side of the property, we have these two 20 by, uh, 30 loading zones, and we worked with the applicant to ensure that they were being configured so that they would be able to accommodate the oversized vehicle delivery trucks that are usually around 60 or so feet. Uh, we wanted to make sure that there was, uh, a very viable option for delivery that would not require the vehicles to be, um, you know, parked on Dixie Highway or Federal Highway. Um, that can be a nuisance, and we wanted to avoid that. So they've accommodated it with that configuration. Quickly looking at the ground floor plan, Federal Highway is to the left of the screen. Uh, we have the two, uh, showrooms, uh, for each brand. Uh, the building is sort of bisected by this, uh, service access drive. We have the sales offices, uh, and then as we move further to the right, you have the service area. Um, looking at the, this right here, this is the access from the south. So south is actually to the top of the screen, um, access to the parking garage. Uh, and then as we move to the rear, we have some restrooms, bicycle storage, some locker rooms, and then at the very back, we have the automated car wash. Quickly looking at the garage floor plans, uh, the second floor has some additional office area and showroom. And then, uh, that's where the bullpen parking, uh, begins. And then the, uh, the third and fourth level of the garage are, are all for bullpen parking. Uh, there's a few spaces that might be noted as reserved for, uh, um, employees. Just based on the parking counts, some of the third floor was required to be dedicated. Quickly looking at the, uh, facets of the landscape plan. There is a perimeter buffer on both sides, actually all three of the sides, both interiors and the Dixie highway side. And then on the interiors, there's 16 foot trees planted 30 on center. There's foundation landscaping at the, uh, adjacent to the front facade. And then there's that required 10 foot buffer adjacent to federal highway before any vehicular use area or hardscape other than sidewalks. And then as the applicant mentioned in the rear, there is a new shade tree canopy proposed on Dixie highway that does not currently exist. Looking at some considerations for the site plan. And before I get into these, I want to just clarify something. The applicant mentioned the, uh, waiver criteria and perfectly fine there. Uh, you know, it can't hurt to reference those, but both of these forms of relief are actually not subject to the standard waiver criteria because the relief, the mechanism for relief is written into the regulation itself. It basically says X, Y, Z is required. However, at the board's discretion that can be granted. So, and it specifies in the regulation, what's required to be considered in order to give that granting. And I'll go into it in a second. So the first request is front setback relief. As the applicant mentioned in the North federal highway overlay district, there is a range of a five foot minimum to a 15 foot maximum required. Generally that is intended to push the buildings closer to the corridor, create more of a pedestrian oriented design and sort of push some of the less desirable aspects of commercial development to the rear, such as parking, et cetera. Um, the applicant for the reasons that they stated are proposing a 78 foot setback. Um, again, it's generally required to accommodate the necessary circulation for fire access and larger vehicles to maneuver around the site given how the building's been placed and how the circulation pattern has been set up. The criteria is as italicized in the quote from the code. It's essentially if it can be demonstrated to the approving body that it is not feasible to comply with the standard. So that's really your only guiding consideration is if you think it's feasible or not to provide the setback. Moving on to the other consideration, it is the open space reduction, uh, required by code is 25%. However, in LDR section 4410 H4, which is in the automotive commercial zoning district, it specifies that the board at their discretion may allow a reduction for existing sites. Again, we've documented that this was an existing auto dealership. I took a screenshot from a few years back. It was Delray Auto Mall. It was that for a long time. And then since, uh, it's just been a storage lot. Um, the board has the discretion to approve a reduction of open space, uh, below 25%, so long as it is not being further reduced from the existing point. So as the applicant demonstrated, there is currently approximately 1% of open space on site. They are proposing 11%, which is less than required, but significantly more than existing, which is why this provision applies. So your criteria for this request is determining that such a reduction does not diminish the practical application of the requirement, uh, particularly as it relates to perimeter, uh, requirements. And the applicant went over that as well. And just to reiterate, they are providing the minimum required perimeter, uh, buffering. This is just an overview again. You saw this in the applicant's presentation showing the existing landscaping versus the new landscaping. And just to point out, I don't think the applicant mentioned it, but the existing landscaping on site at the front, um, of the site is not counted in this calculation because it's actually, um, incorporated within the 10-foot of right-of-way dedication. So it's no longer part of the site. Uh, moving on to architectural design. Um, it is a contemporary typology, um, with, uh, variation in material. Uh, there's shifts in the geometry and the massing that add some interest. There's a high ratio of glass, and it's pretty much consistent with the, you know, national prototype designs you would see for these dealerships anywhere you go. Uh, looking at the side elevations, this is the north and south elevation. You can see the sort of material and design features of the front wrapped around the corner. And then we have the, you know, the bulk of the, uh, of the parking garages. And then those service area accesses on the sides as well. And then in the rear, uh, the north, sorry, in the north, the upper image is the current proposal. I just wanted to walk you through some of the history. The bottom right image is the first iteration that staff reviewed of this project. We had some concerns over the screening, uh, proposed in the garage. They were originally showing some sort of open, um, metal cables. And we just thought that was too visually, um, not providing enough visual screening. So we worked with them to kind of beef that up and provide better quality screening of the garage. Where we landed at currently with what the applicant is proposing is the upper, uh, elevation. It's, uh, CBS wall with stucco. It's, uh, more substantial screening. They, uh, included more of that solid wall component here. Oops, sorry, wrong button. To amplify that screening. Uh, but staff still suggests that there might be an opportunity to introduce higher quality material, such as louvers or architectural mesh or some kind of metal screening panel. Uh, this is just an example at the bottom. It doesn't have to be like this. But we would just encourage you as the board to consider whether you're okay with what they've proposed at the top or whether you think that there might be room for additional improvement. Um, this is the architectural criteria. Generally, it's just that it needs to be found to conform with good taste, good design, and contribute positively to the city and not be seen as a detriment to the neighborhood. With, uh, regard to section 311, which is required findings for site plan actions. In terms of land use, it is already zoned automotive commercial. Um, obviously an automotive dealership is permitted within the automotive commercial zoning district. And that is also compatible with the general commercial land use. In terms of concurrency, uh, potable water and sewer will be provided, uh, via a system approved by the, uh, public utilities department, which has been reviewed for technical compliance. Drainage is provided via a very, very significant underground, uh, tank system for stormwater runoff. If you look at the site plan, I can go back, you'll see quite a lot of, uh, underground, uh, retainer tanks, retention tanks. That's the landscape plan, but you can see them pretty much under the entire parking lot. So that's how they're handling their, uh, stormwater retention, uh, transportation. The Palm Beach County TPS letter indicates that there's no significant impact to the road network expected and that it does meet concurrency and then parks and schools are not applicable. In terms of consistency with the comprehensive plan, there are multiple policies that apply to this. Specifically, policy NDC 251 specifically says that this exact location is where automotive dealerships should be encouraged in the city. It says located north of George Bush Boulevard between North Federal and Dixie Highways. That is where this property is located. So that is consistent with the comprehensive plan. And, uh, through the technical review, staff deemed that this project is technically compliant with all, uh, requirements of the LDRs, except for the two, uh, areas of relief that we mentioned, which is the front setback relief and the reduction in opens, open space. And these are your board motions. You can move approval, approval subject to conditions, denial, or continue with direction. I'm happy to answer any questions. So you're Danny. Thank you. Um, at this point, uh, the floor is open for any member of the public who wishes to speak. You'll have three minutes. For the record too, Ken, I forgot my quasi, my ex parte. I did speak to Mayor Carney briefly as well. Thank you. Hi. Good evening. Ingrid Kenimer, 760 Southeast 5th Avenue. Love the fact that we're trying to get some of the car dealerships between George Bush and 10th out of our downtown core. And this is the appropriate place for this. And, um, it's nice. It's a great industry and we love the business and the employment that this brings to Delray. Um, your planner suggested, I'm sorry. Yes. That's the one. I wanted to see that picture. So your planner suggests that the code requires that the, um, use is not a detriment to the neighborhood. So I have two concerns. And the precedent was set with the Volkswagen dealership when they came in for approval. In that the, um, open elevation on the third floor of the parking garage, when the guys go to find, guys else go to find the car and they start hitting the alarms. That is going to amplify, in my opinion, the car alarm sound going out into the neighborhood. Code enforcement can't enforce it. Every one of the dealerships say they won't ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever use a car fob to find a car. It's not true. The surrounding neighborhood has to listen to cars go on and on and on whenever the car dealership is open. So we, I would ask that you consider finding a way to screen the east elevation like Volkswagen did to reduce the sound they would carry from that. And the fourth floor, of course, there's nothing on that. The second concern, my concern is light pollution. That, uh, car display on that top fourth floor, that's a billboard. Um, what time is that turning off? That is, is that something that we want in Delray? Do we want big billboards? The reality is that's a 3D billboard. The, um, Volkswagen dealership, the top floor of the parking garage, we required and asked them and they complied to have downward lighting that turns off at night. That only there is lights behind the wall. That the light pole is very short so that light pollution is not spreading throughout. That it's contained on the site. So those are the things that concern those of us that live in the area about this particular use. We love the use. We just want you to be aware of pollution. The noise pollution and light control. Thank you. Thank you very much. Now it's coming forward. Uh, public comments closed. At this point, uh, applicant or the staff have any rebuttal, cross examination? Um, if I can just bring up Mr. Neal DeJesus to talk about, uh, the two items, uh, that the residents spoke to. Absolutely. Thank you. Good evening. Neal DeJesus, Chief Operating Officer for Superstore Auto, the applicant. Um, to, to the alarm issue, we have a, a policy now that, uh, does inventory control. It's an electronic system that marks where those vehicles are parked by their key fob. So there's no longer a need to, uh, find those vehicles by the, uh, key fob alarm, if you will. Um, so when a salesperson is going to identify a vehicle, they simply go to the computer. It tells them exactly the spot that is numbered and where that vehicle is located. So that addresses the alarm issue, if you will. In terms of the lights, uh, anything in terms of the, um, the illumination criteria that the city is required. In terms of the lower lights we've complied with and we've agreed to. So that should not be an issue as well. Is there any questions that I can answer from any of the board members? Not at the moment. I don't think. Thank you, sir. Okay. Thank you. Uh, anything else from the applicant? That's it for my end. Happy to answer any questions. Nothing at this time. All right. Board comments. How about Mr. Coe? Let the new guy go first. Well, so, so let's get right into it. Excellent presentation by both parties. Fabulous improvement to the site, uh, from what's exist, from what has existed forever to, to this. This is an absolutely stunning, uh, beautiful improvement to the, to the environment, to the stretch of the federal highway and to this particular site. Um, uh, I'm in favor of both of the waivers, uh, and the criteria that they have to, uh, rationalize to get there. Um, I'm, I'm, I'd like to jump right to the architectural component that you ended with. And, and asking us if we were happy with the architectural, uh, the architectural scheme, uh, and, and I think more or less on the backside of the west side. And the openings that were back there. And then that, if we thought that that was enough to, to, to support, or if we thought that there, we should challenge the designer and the team and ask for a little bit more. So, parlaying that into the public criticism of the east elevation and the acoustics of finding the car, not finding the car, FOB, not FOB. I'm, I would like to ask if the applicant and their architectural team, if it's appropriate with staff, would offer a, uh, the screening solution on the east elevation to assist in the acoustics. Uh, I don't, I hope that's clear. Uh, I think it could add to the architectural ambiance of the whole project. And if they choose to then, whatever that solution may be, swing it around and use a little bit of it on the, on the west side, then all the more better. Um, so that's an observation and a challenge, I guess, to, to make a bet, make for a better product and address the acoustics from within that garage. Um, again, I think it's a drastically improved aesthetic for the site. Um, I'm excited about it. I'm in favor of it. Uh, I love everything else about it. The landscaping is fantastic. It's, uh, it's a wonderful product. So, I'll end with that and maybe I'll add something else later. Okay. Thank you. Ms. Mulligan. I don't know if I can address. Oh, sure. I'm going to ask the question of the applicant if they'd like to address that. Yeah. Thank you. It's not his first radio. You're welcome. Thank you, thank you. Um, if I may. So, Hyundai and Genesis have very strict dealer requirements, uh, which have, uh, kind of limited us in terms of the design. Um, staff has pushed us and we've worked with them very closely, gone back numerous instances to Hyundai and Genesis and tried to, you know, do the best we can in terms of screening. But we are limited with what they will approve. Um, and so, you know, we're, we're open to having the conversation with them, but, um, I would be hesitant to a condition that would require any such improvement. Um, again, we're happy to speak with Hyundai and Genesis and see what they will allow. Uh, but ultimately it's, it's up to, you know, corporate from the dealership itself. I mean, like maybe corporate has a few solutions. Is that safe to say? Uh, we've, we've certainly pushed them as far as we can go. I know staff had, um, again, we've, we've come a long way already. And I think we're almost at that breaking point where we've done so much that I, I honestly don't know how much further they're willing to go. Um, I'm going to bring Mike Covelli up. He's got some of the history on that. I'm Mike Covelli, 1209 South Swinton Avenue. Could you bring the landscape plan up? We, we worked with staff on multiple submissions for these elevations. Um, and, and the one thing I'd like to point out is, which one is the, is it the bottom button or the top button? Okay, the top button. There we go. We have foundation planting along the building here. Then if you go over, there is another row of landscaping that we ran all along this area here. Then when you come over the required landscape buffer on the property line is here. And then we added this row of Oak trees with understory plantings. So we've done a four level tier of, of screening on the rear of this building. So that essentially from Dixie Highway, you're not going to see a whole lot. So being sensitive to the conversation that we had with staff with regards to screening of, of that, that area. So, um, hopefully that'll, that'll help with the discussion. I'm sorry. If I can just bring Neil back, uh, to speak to that architecture a little bit more as well. I apologize. I should have, I should have addressed this earlier. So our, our dealer agreement with Honda Genesis, what they call the new 2.0 is tied to a program guide. And so every time we deviate from the program guide, we lose either incentive or allotment in terms of car incentive or vehicle numbers. With that said, the new software program that was developed to, uh, inventory our, our stock eliminates the need for the, the sound barrier, if you will, because, uh, they no longer have to use the key fob to find the vehicle. It's identified by location within the computer system of that car, kind of like your OnStar. If, you know, any, anybody has OnStar, it, they can identify where that vehicle is at, at, at any given point. So, um, that has been worked into this, into this dealership. So I, I don't see that as, as an issue. And then additionally, working with staff to further buffer that as, as, uh, Mike Covelli has just said, we've layered in multiple areas of landscaping to, to, to, uh, buffer that if necessary. But again, um, under the new software program, it's, it pinpoints the location of the vehicle. Today, uh, at our current location, if they try to find a vehicle, they have to walk every lot where those vehicles are until they find it, sound the alarm. Under the new software program, it goes right through the vehicle's computer and it tells them where that vehicle is. So, um, that, that noise concern, uh, will not, would not be a concern. In addition to that, from the location of this building to the nearest resident, we're talking about several thousand feet, if not, uh, several hundred yards, uh, before, before that sound would travel. But again, there's no reason for them to use it. You have a, a better chance of, uh, of a customer setting their car alarm when they park, uh, and making that sound than us looking for a vehicle. Any questions for me? Thank you. Anything else? Thank you, Mr. Chair. Sir. Thanks. Anything else from you, Ryder? Not yet, no. Ms. Mallika. So, new guy did pretty good. Yeah. Very impressive. I am. I'm satisfied with the answers and hopefully Ingrid is as well with regard to the potential of the key fob noise and then the lighting. And I'm excited about this project and have no problems with, um, any of the waivers either. Oh, thanks. Mr. Strong. Yes. Thank you. Um, Ingrid, I appreciate you bringing up the, uh, Volvo dealership. I remember when that was being discussed. It is Ingrid, correct? Okay. I remember when, uh, that came before CRA. I think it was about 2018, 2019, there about. Um, and satisfied with the, uh, the whole noise, uh, solution because that was one of the issues that came up with that Volvo dealership. But the lighting, Mr. DeJesus, you did mention that you all were pretty much in requirement with, uh, I mean, in line with what? Yeah, I'll answer that if I may. Um, so the city has photometric requirements that any development has to comply with, including an auto dealership. It dictates illumination maximums depending on whether it's parking or building entry. Uh, and all lighting fixtures are required to be full cutoff luminaries oriented downwards for any development type, uh, not just auto dealerships. So we've looked at a preliminary photoventric plan through the initial site plan review, and then that would be re-verified at time of building permit. So it would have to comply with what the city standards are. Um, which again mandates that they're pointed downwards and, uh, within the allowable elimination. So that shouldn't be an issue. Correct. Moving forward. Okay. I'm fine. Mr. Chair, if I, if I may, uh, Mr. Strom, uh, during that period with the Volvo, I was actually the interim city manager. So I'm well aware of the lighting issues that, that, uh, we dealt with during that time. And so my communications to our architect was to make sure we comply with that. So we didn't have to deal with those issues again. Thank you. Ms. Blanke, do you have some further comment that's coming to you from your? Yeah, no, this is, this is the resident that spoke earlier. She's. Yes, I know. Oh, okay. Do you have more that you wanted to say? I'm glad to hear there's new software. Right. It's public comment is closed, but if you want to ask a question, but that's why I would like to limit the interruption and kind of limit it to discussion. But if, of course, if you have a question, you can always ask. Thank you. So that's for the board to decide. I'll have a question for Ingrid. Ingrid, what would you like to say? Mr. Cope, thank you. So that's great. I love to hear that there's a new software. The question is, when they don't use it, where are you guys? Can I have your cell phone number? Because Volkswagen doesn't use it, and we have to listen to those things all the time. I mean, Mark Woods was down at living at Ford dealership because the car alarms were going off forever in a day for code enforcement. And how do you enforce something that's 30 seconds long and then it takes away from the quality of our life? And it's not something that's in the background. It's an in-your-face kind of noise. The precedent was set with Volkswagen, so why can't they screen the one layer on the east side? And if it's about money and Hyundai, I appreciate that they have corporate requirements. This is our town. Who's, you know, is Hyundai running this or are we? Thank you. Before anyone else, like, interrupts during board discussion, at least acknowledge it with the board to make sure that people actually want to hear the question. That's right. Yeah. I thought that was appropriate. Okay, we're up. Mr. Patton. Me? Yeah. No, I, too, am in support of both the waivers. And I think the landscaping screening is sufficient. My question was, and I couldn't tell from the geometric, from the photometric designs, are there going to be any light poles on the fourth floor? Because I didn't see it in the photometrics or in the plans. I'll allow the applicant to confirm. If they are, again, we'll re-verify a time of building permit, there are maximum illuminations for rooftop parking decks. So it would need to comply if they are, but I'll let them confirm if they intend to or not. Yeah, I believe all the lighting is fairly low and within the walls, not on kind of taller light poles that you would see in some public parking spots. Because the Ford dealership has lights on poles. Yeah, I don't believe that's the case here. And then, can you go back to the elevation that showed the screening, the channel? I think it's, I was curious, it says there, is that the north elevation or the west elevation? This is the northwest elevation, which is the Dixie Highway elevation. This is the rear. That's a rear elevation. Okay, because I was going to say, if any elevation needs to be screened, that's the one that needs to be screened. I'm happy if they would at least consider going back and asking the corporate if they could get a little more space there. Or a little more screening there. But then, let's see, but I also like, Mr. Covelli, I like the use of all the native plants. The live oaks along the screen is a nice touch. And I like the architectural comportment of the structure. The one thing the resident asked about the two cars up in the little go-go booth on the top floor. A go-go booth. Is that, can that be, can that be screened from the rear so that light doesn't, doesn't penetrate? I'm, I'm told we can do one better. That's not actually lit up. It's not lit up at all. Those are just glass enclosures. It's just a glass enclosure. There's no lighting. So that solves that question. That's, um, I think I'm good. Thanks. Okay, great. Jared. I spent a lot of hours on this, so I, bear with me as I go through it. Yes. The cars on the roof, I find very disturbing. It looks like a Carvana bullet, or billet board on I-95. And I don't think we have anything else like it, uh, in Delray. Uh, and I hope, believe this would not set a precedent if we did it. So I, I would definitely be opposed to that. I also wanted to ask you about the two car pads. I guess this is one of them, uh, here in the front, but there are two. And are those elevated? And if so, how elevated? They're not elevated. It's just a pad. What about the other one that's not in the- Same. Same thing? Okay, great. Great. Um, the, uh, claim that this is in concurrence with the comprehensive plan because it's automotive, uh, in general commercial also has as one of those other 4.1 or whatever, that it's supposed to be mixed use. And that area is becoming less and less mixed use. So I'm wondering, as staff, why you wouldn't say that it has problems with the comprehensive plan? It's not customary for automotive dealerships to be in a mixed use configuration. So I wouldn't default to that assumption. That's not what the comprehensive plan says. Okay. Um, the underground storage, uh, well, I'd first like to say is, I say, I wouldn't say that the entire space right now is open space. And you're saying it's just this buffer that is really on the adjoining property, but it's open ground. It filtrates through. It bubbles through. And I have a problem where you say there's only, uh, one space, uh, 1% now. Um, and yet it's probably a hundred percent that, that rain would go through. And now to say, well, let's compromise between 25 and one and come up with 11. Uh, I just don't think that's in congruence with what the LDR say. So open space is a defined term per the comprehensive plan. And, or sorry, and the land development, land development regulations. So pursuant to the definition in the land development regulations, only 1% of the site would qualify towards what is considered open space. Um, in terms of drainage, we are providing the necessary drainage on the site to accommodate the proposed use. That's all been vetted through the city's engineering department. Um, so I, I mean, it's a gravel parking lot today. I don't know if there's drainage issues or not there when it rains. Um, I don't know if everything flows through, but we are accommodating the drainage as needed for this project. So can you give us some statistics on how much water can be stored underground and what sort of rainfall, uh, it would take to fill that up? Do we know? Does it mean like 20,000? I know Mike has the answer. I can't actually give you the numbers, but, um, the drainage calcs have been, been done on this by the engineer. And there is a drainage report in the file that proves that the drainage is adequate. Most of the drainage in this is, uh, through drainage faults, not exfiltration. So it has a much higher retention, uh, ability than exfiltration trench. I understand. And for the most part, just about the entire roadway that goes around the building is in drainage. So there's a massive amount of drainage being provided within this site to comply with- But that's not a permeable surface, right? The bottom of those, the bottom of all of those vaults are permeable. So what it does is when you have a really heavy rainfall, it has the ability for all that water to go underground, not be in a big puddle. And then the bottoms of them are open so that it can percolate over time. But, but what it does is it has a big volume so it can store that heavy rainfall without it puddling and then it over time, you know, goes back down into the groundwater. So that's the way- It would be nice to know what the numbers are. It's, it's, it's big numbers. So, yeah. Uh, I want to steal a note from, uh, Ingrid. Uh, the idea that we should be concerned about the corporate policies of Hyundai when our, our responsibility is to deal with the citizens concerns, uh, with regard to all of these factors that we talk about. Uh, I, I'm not quite sure why we should have to comply with what Hyundai and Genesis want. I, I understand the comment. Um, what I can say is again, you know, we've come a long way in this process working with staff on the architecture. Um, we have provided significantly more screening than what was originally contemplated. Um, we're, we're doing what we can. We're happy to have the conversation and see if there's something more that can be added. Um, I just don't know here this evening what specifically they would be willing to allow, but we're, we're happy to have a conversation. We can all remember every hamburger place had to have yellow arches and you'd look for the yellow arches. That day is gone. And it certainly is gone in Delray that we do have architectural standards. Uh, we do have LDRs that, uh, that we have to comply with. Um, I'm, I'm wondering a little bit why the screening is being done on Dixie on public land, as opposed to your land. Yeah. So, uh, we do have the perimeter buffer required on our property as well. Um, but there is green space that is within the right of way there currently. Um, and again, looking at a lot of the other dealerships along Dixie Highway, specifically if you go south of Linton, um, you see, you know, vehicles there unloading, whether they're supposed to or not. I mean, it happens. Um, we want to ensure, you know, we're preventing that. We want to beautify, uh, the right of way to the extent that we're able to. Um, so it's something additional that we're providing that we think will add to the project, add to the corridor. Um, it's really a beautification effort. The buffer strip that is on your property, on Dixie, what is that comprised of? Uh, we're providing landscape materials there as well, a mix of trees and hedges. Trees and hedges? Yes. Not just grass? Not just grass, no. Um, do the lights stay on all night in this configuration? Do they go off at a certain hour? Yes. Because I think that goes back to the Volvo case. Okay. They go off at closing hours. Okay. So, uh, Mr. DeJesus, just for the record, is saying they go off at closing hours. Okay. And just one final thing. I'm worried about the setback issue. That, uh, we go from a 15-foot maximum to a 75 or 78-foot maximum. I, I do know that probably one of the reasons of that, for that, are fire trucks. Correct. Uh, but if you have a 15-foot setback, the fire trucks can easily, now Chief DeJesus may disagree with me on this one, uh, can actually reach those buildings with their hoses and, and ladders, uh, so that the requirement to set back simply for fire department, I think that's a redundancy with Federal Highway. I will allow one of the experts to. I didn't know you were a Chief, too. I spent many time, many hours with the Chief on this. Um, originally, the way we talked about taking care of fire protection on this was to have a gate in the back northwest corner, like we show. There's a siren-activated gate. That road was going to come down along the north, and we're going to have an exit only on the Federal Highway. DOT said, uh-uh. No, you're not. So, with a 15-foot setback, you need a 25-foot inside radius to get the truck around the curve, and a 50-foot outside radius. So, in order to get that truck around that radius, you can't do it in 15 feet. So, the only, with DOT not allowing us to be able to get the truck out of the north road, we only, could only come and make that very large radius at the top of the screen there to get the truck around to go back out to either go left or right on the southern road. So, I mean, we spent multiple meetings with DOT and a lot of conversation related to circulation for fire protection, and this was the solution. And that fire equipment couldn't work from Federal Highway? No. And or come off of Federal Highway on the south side? Because what if the truck had to come up Dixie and not Federal? Federal. You don't have any way of getting out there. So, we had to provide full circulation to be able to service the site. Okay. I guess I'm just generally concerned that we're trying to squeeze too much into a five-pound bag here, and that maybe the parcel isn't really big enough for what Hyundai and Genesis want to put there. Let you think about this. If we did a 15-foot setback, everything in the front would be in the back. It would still be the same building. So, it doesn't save you anything. It does just add a huge safety factor to it by doing it that way. Thank you both. Okay. Mr. Katz. It's never easy following Mr. Chard here, but I'm going to attempt. I do have a couple questions about the parking, especially on that front. My first question is, are you selling used cars or just new cars? New cars. There's no used cars being sold? So, when you trade in cars, they're going to go to auction? They go to auction, yes sir. So, no more? For the record. Yeah. I'm sorry. I just asked that question because that's, in any dealership, I've been to the current car dealership, there's used cars. Yeah. So, under the new dealership agreement, we sell new cars. Our used cars, our trade-ins go to auction. Auction at all? Yes, sir. That's interesting. Because that's my concern is the, first of all, it comes to the whole keep fob thing. It doesn't, if you have used cars, that's not going to solve that problem. If it's all new cars, they'd be in your system. So, that would, that helps me understand that better because of, you know, obviously storage of new cars. You will be finding them, though, to transport them because they're going to, I mean, you're going to be trading cars every day, whether you like it or not. Every, every car dealer does. And there's going to be times to store them somewhere, get them to there. So, there, there could be some noise aspects. So, just to say that there will be none, I think is disingenuous. But, how can we mitigate that? I also get, I did, a couple years ago, I did a lot of work with Stellantis, which is another car manufacturer, and learning about how these are, a lot of them were all changing over their Chrysler stores and met with a lot of different dealer owners, just having conversations with them about these issues. So, I understand how hard it is to deal with the dealer, sorry, the owners of the brand on these new brand guidelines that they give them. It's not easy to comply with. I know that just from conversations I've had. I will say, if you wait two years to do this project, they will be all new Hyundai brand guidelines. What I probably visited, when I was partnering with them, a hundred different Chrysler stores, maybe more than that. And it's interesting, you can see every five years the reiteration of the brand guidelines with these stores, and they change them so drastically. A question about these 153 parking spots to staff. You said there's not going to be any parking there of for sale vehicles only for the public. Is that enforceable by code enforcement? So, if there is a line of new cars there, will code enforcement cite them for that? Or be able to cite them, I should say. I know you can't speak for code, but- Sure. Will we be giving them that ability within this? So, the requirement is that a certain number of the provided spaces are allocated or designated for parking of customers and employees, of which 153 are required. The applicant has on the site plan, I don't know if we can see it on the ground floor plan, but they've designated essentially all 88 of the spaces that are exterior to the building as well as a certain number interior to the building as spaces that are being allocated. And if vehicle inventory was parked in those spaces that are designated as allocated on the site plan, they would be violating their site plan. So, I do believe there would be grounds for some sort of remediation. Okay. Because, you know, things are going to, because that could change too. Like, I know you're not selling used cars now. You know, they don't want to put them there. They could, this could become a, you know, another brand in a couple of years. They sell the dealership or, you know, who knows, Hyundai goes out of business. Things change in the car industry. I remember when I sat on the stairs and I had former mayors and, you know, bike advocacy people tell me that nobody was going to drive cars in 10 years from now. Well, we're 10 years later. Guess what? They're building more car dealerships in town than they ever have. Yet, they were telling me we needed to reduce the size of the roads because we weren't going to have cars. And nobody needed to buy cars. And which is shocking that we're spending now millions and millions of dollars on car dealerships. I guess they were not 100% correct when they had made those statements to us. Could I ask, are you going to be doing maintenance there? There's service bays on there. There are service bays? Yes, sir. So it's not just the showroom? No. There's service bays in both Hyundai and Genesis. That's where they make the money. That's where all the employees are. Yes, sir. Yeah, the service is where the car dealerships these days, that's their profit they definitely want. I did have concern about those spaces, if they were really going to be freed up. I don't mind so much the cars at the top. I get if it was going to be lit up, since they're not lit. I think it's just aesthetic. And again, it's probably part of their new, whatever their particular brand guideline is. And I know that, yes, it's Delray. We don't want more golden arches, even though I'm pretty sure there is golden arches at the McDonald's in Delray. The only one out that I've seen not is in Arizona. Not those big ones. Not those big ones. But we saw there's a pretty big one there on Military Trail. But, you know, I get it. First of all, thank you for the presentations and all the questions answered, and there's been a lot. I am supportive of the plan. Question, if you were to add in, maybe this is for the applicant, but had you added, say you were allowed to add in that buffer in the back, as far as the percentage, did you calculate what that changes your percentage to, to make us feel better for that 12% we're giving up? It's, I don't remember the exact percentage, but it's over 8,000 square feet. So, right now we're providing 11,000 square feet on site. So, it's a pretty substantial increase over. So, you're probably going from 11 to maybe 20% if we counted that? No, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. It's 15. Right now you're at 11%. 15,000 square feet, and we're adding another 8,000 plus. So, it's about another 25% of that. You're getting closer to that. Correct. I know we can't count it, but to me it helps at least ease the pill of giving up that 13% or whatever, giving up 14%, I'm not doing my math right here, of difference. Mr. Katz, if I may, if you recall, when you were a commissioner, the city had offered all those property owners along that, back to the old Dixie, the opportunity to acquire, if you will, that right away and landscape it. And the previous owner of that property did not take advantage of that opportunity because I was aware of that. When this came up, we asked if we could take advantage of that opportunity and acquire that and landscape and beautify it. And that's where that property came in. I think it's great. That's why I said I'm very supportive of that extra landscaping. I know that this is a numbers game of trying to squeeze. I mean, I've been to when a couple of years ago buying a car, I visited your current dealership and I mean, you can't park there. You can't look, you can't. I mean, it's a, it's really, you guys are, it's, it's tight in there for anybody trying to buy a car. Hence why I bought a Tesla. You don't have to deal with car dealerships, but yeah, that's, that's really all the questions I had. Thank you. Yeah. I don't, I don't really have a lot that hasn't already been said because a lot has already been said. Um, to me, first of all, I think what I think something that was said is anything's an improvement over what's out there right now. And I think you're, you had a nice building and I think it's going to enhance the quarter to have it there. Um, and, and as to a lot of the, my colleagues concerns, it's a car dealer and it's an automotive car dealer zoned area. I think that, uh, the 15 foot, the limited setback is for when you talk about the mixed use areas, that's designed for general commercial, not for automotive commercial zoning. It's the, it's to have a walkable corridor with the, with the retail right there. That's not compatible with the automotive dealership. And I think, I don't think there's any problem with the 78 foot, um, setback because I think it's appropriate for the design and the use of the property. Um, I'd love to see more open space, but I don't see how you're going to do it. Um, the cars on top. Yeah, it's fine. It's not lit up. That as was said, I think that's the most important thing. It's not lit up. And as far as the screening, I think I could support, I realize the constraints you have and I realize the costs that you have associated with it, but let's have one more round of the applicant will work with staff to try and see if they can come up with more screening on the property. If we can do that. Is that acceptable to you? We're always willing to work. I mean, I mean, I realize it's, you have to deny it. I think we'd have to deny it to send back. No. So if you are wanting to continue it. Yeah. You would need to continue with direction. Yeah, exactly. You could approve with conditions. Approve with condition. Yeah. Can we make it a condition? Mr. Chair, if I, if I can, we don't want to continue. This is a fabulous project. So what I would, what I would suggest is, uh, there's, is that we ask, um, my very basic solution would be to continue the glazing and the, the framing, the glazing system up into six bays, the five that face east. And then the one that turns this, that south corner, that's a super simple, that's not a big ask. It makes the building look much more, uh, homogenous. It solves a lot of acoustical problems. It's at no great expense to the project. And if they can't get that past corporate, then, then I've got problems with everything else. Okay. I'm not really following you. You're at the south. If you want to put that last, that rendering up. Elevation or rendering. So, so, well, the rendering's a little bit different than this. This takes precedent over the rendering. So the open bays would be just above the two garage doors in the center to the left. So, so. Sorry. Wait, where? Oh, wrong way. So. Which side are we looking at? The Dixie side or the middle, or the federal side? That's bay number one. Now go to your left. There's two, three, four, and five. This is the federal side. Federal side. Okay, go ahead. And then it turns the corner. The sixth bay would be on the, the south, east corner. Yes. Which is this bottom elevation right here. There you go. Okay. I think, to me, that's, that solves just, you know, the aesthetics. You're saying like a stucco there? Hmm? Like a stucco wall there? No, no, no. A clear glazing system. Glass. It's an extension. It's an extension of the systems that are below that. It's very, very basic. Very simple. Go for it. So let me go over the options again. It's a motion to deny, to approve, approve subject to conditions. Right. And I would suggest that those conditions would be like non-substantive conditions. Or a motion to continue with direction. In that case, they would come back and do the application again. Okay. All right. My personally, I don't think it needs to come back. Absolutely. I agree. Um. You want to try to make a motion then? What do you mean so-so? I don't know. Well, it's- Are you- You mean- We would all agree. I got you. I got you. If it's a motion to approve with conditions, a motion to just approve. Right. And also, we would need to know what the conditions are. Yeah, exactly. Exactly. And I don't feel like that's clear. But that's just for- No, I don't think it is clear. Because I don't think- See, this is not a recommendation. This is a final approval. It's a final approval. Yeah. It's a final approval. I think the only condition that we're talking about right now is Roger's suggestion. Well, but if we put that condition on it, okay, then they have to do that. Is that acceptable? Yeah. That's correct. And is that- Are they going to be able to get that, to be able to do it? I guess my question is, is that clear to the applicant, and is it clear to staff? What I just described. Can we- Can we phrase it in a way that they can- You're telling them they have to do what you said to do. Correct. As opposed to giving them a thing that says they have to find a way to do it. Then it would have to come back to us. No, it wouldn't. Well, it should. It should. If it's not a condition, it has to come back to us. It should. It has a condition. I don't think they want to come back to us. I would want- Well, I just want to make sure that the whole board agrees on- Well, not agrees, because we'll vote anyways, but on what the condition is, that everyone's understanding what he's saying. And then I want to make sure the applicant and staff is also understanding what he's saying. I have a question. If we give this condition, Roger's proposing, condition that they put the glass on those bays, that's the simple condition. If they can't, we pass it with that condition. They go to Hyundai and they say, oh, we can't do that. Can they appeal this, our decision, the conditional decision to the commission and have another quasi-hearing with the commission to get the up or down and not have to come back to us? Because right now, you don't go in front of the commission unless they appeal it. Right. But if Hyundai come back and says, hey, glass is fine, you should be good to go. Mr. Chair, if I may, I don't have a problem with the suggestion. I do struggle a little bit with this perceived issue of noise to residents that are, I believe, not even close to where they would be affected if there was noise. And again, I know what the software program costs us. I know what the manufacturer requires us to abide by. And even if an employee was to say, I'm not going to use the computer system, I'm going to hit the key fob, we are so distant from the closest resident that you would hear traffic driving on Federal Highway before you would hear a car lock and unlock going off in a parking garage that far away. So while I understand Ingrid's concern, I just don't believe that in a residence that far away in Ocean Reef that you would actually hear that car alarm. So I want to just put that in perspective, if I may. With that said, our dealer agreement with the manufacturer is, we don't like it. But if you want to be a dealer, you have to comply with it. Their brand standard on this new 2.0, we've made about every concession we could working with staff and staff has been great to, excuse me, to get them to deviate from their brand standard as much as possible. I would certainly ask, and I'll give you my word that we will ask if we could glaze those, that floor above. If they say no, I would be willing to produce that to the city in writing. But I don't want to have to come, we are, we're in a settlement agreement with the city on our first denial, and we're six years behind on this project. I don't want to have to come back again to this board or even appeal to the city commission if at all possible. If that's what this board requires us to do, we will certainly do that. But I could tell you as the chief operating officer for the company, we will ask Hyundai Genesis if we could glaze those areas. And I say that hesitantly because I truly don't believe it's going to make a difference whether we do it or not, except change the facade of the building. Even in dealing with the city and staff on screening the old Dixie side of the building. We're screening the railroad tracks and an industrial section. We're at $40 million on this building. At some point, the owner's grandkids will see the profits from the building. So I understand the concerns, but I would just ask if you would consider keeping it in perspective on is this a real issue that we have to deal with? Or is it just something that we're trying to address because there's a concern? So I will, again, and just to wrap it up, I will certainly appeal to Hyundai Genesis and ask them if they will allow us to glaze those two areas. The car could be in the parking lot that they hit the alarm. And again, we went through this with the Volvo and Volkswagen dealership. I sat up here and heard the residents' complaints. And when you go to code enforcement, at the time there were three registered complaints about the noise. Three. That's a public record. I'm not making that number up. And I would say that the results would be the same today at our current location. And prior to one year ago, they were finding cars by hitting the key fob. But again, it could be a customer parking their car and locking it, and somebody could say, hey, they're setting off the alarm. So I hope I'm clear enough. I hope you understand where I'm coming from. If we can do it, we will certainly do it. But I would ask that if Hyundai Genesis denies us the opportunity to do that, that that approval be conditional upon whether they say yes or no. I'm going to take a stab at a motion if the board is okay with that. I'm going to move approval as amended of a Level 3 Site Plan application for a request for 2612-2650 North Federal Highway, including architectural elevations and landscape plan to construct an approximately 167-square-foot full-service automotive sales use by finding that the request is consistent with the land-developed regulations and comprehensive plan, subject to conditions that the applicant asks the Hyundai Corporation to glaze those five bays mentioned earlier. And if they cannot, they must provide the letter to the city showing the denial, and then it would be approved without the glaze after the letter is submitted if that is the case. I second. Okay. Motion by Mr. Katz, seconded by Mr. Chardt. Call the roll, please. Could there be some discussion? Oh. Six bays. Six bays. Six bays. Sorry. Thank you for the correction. Sorry. Correct. Is that clear to staff? Yes. Very clear. Yes. Six bays. We counted them. Sorry. Okay. Sorry. It's corrected to six bays and now we call it. Yes. Roger Cope. Yes. Jim Charn. Yes. Judy Monica. Yes. Gregory Snyder. Yes. The motion passes. Thank you very much. Appreciate your time. Thank you all. Thanks for your time. Good luck. Thank you. I'm not really going to be curious what the Hyundai says. Can we put that instead of new record? Can we bet that on hardrockbet.com whether or not they're going to say yes or no? It's just that man. It takes all the boards out of it. Next one. Yeah. It's car dealer night. To an extent it is. All right. Okay. I'll stay for the record. I'll stay for the record. My name is Susie Rodriguez, Senior Planner for Delray Beach. I would like to enter file number 2024-249 into the record. This is for agenda item 8B which is the recommendation for a level 4 site plan application for Kia Delray located at 2255 South Federal Highway. The applicant is here today to present. Thank you. If we could have any expert day. Mr. Cass. I drove by the site. I talked to a couple of residents. I believe it's Florida Boulevard but the adjacent east street and took a look at it from both sides. That's it. None. I did the same. I didn't talk to any residents but I went and visited the site on both sides. Yeah. I did the same visit site east and west. Mr. Sean. No ex parte. I visited the site. None whatsoever. All right. In that case. Ms. Belenke, welcome back. Hi. It is an interesting evening for me too. I only started learning about these dealerships about a week ago when I was told I was covering both of them. So here I am as well, surprised to be here on auto dealership evening. Here representing Kia Delray on this application for redevelopment of their property. So it sounds like many of you are very familiar with the site having driven by and in the area. This property is highlighted in the red box on your screen. It is on the east side of Federal Highway. It is a 3.07 acre site. It also has a future land use of general commercial and an automotive commercial zoning designation. Currently, it is an existing dealership. There are two buildings on the site. One was constructed in the 60s. The other was, I believe, in 86, which is almost 40 years ago, which my brain does not want to admit. But it's located kind of in an area heavily populated by car dealerships. You have Mazda immediately to the north. You do have a small commercial area south of this site, Delray Plaza. It's got West Marine coffee shop and a couple other uses in there. And then south of that, you have the Ford dealership. You do have the Tropic Isle community located to the east. It is Florida Boulevard that is immediately adjacent. So you have the property. You have the 50 foot right of way for Florida Boulevard. And then you have some existing residential uses. So here are some existing conditions. Images of the existing Kia dealership. Similar to a lot of the car dealerships that were developed in the past. There's not much landscaping on this site either. You do have landscaping along Federal Highway. But there is no buffer on the east, north or south sides currently. And you have about a 50 foot setback to the east property line right now. Here you have, again, just some existing conditions of the site. You have service bays that front Federal Highway. You have some service in the car wash with a tent in the rear. You have, you know, the inventory parking without any landscape there currently. And here we go. We are requesting to redevelop the site with a new dealership that has 42,000 roughly square feet of the showroom and office uses and a three-story garage. And we do have two waivers included in this request. One is a waiver to reduce the number of required showers from eight showers to one. And the second is a waiver to reduce the required setback of the rear wall. So just touching upon that briefly while we're on this site plan screen. So the showers are a function of the required bicycle parking. You know, the intent behind it is that if you have lots of people that are using their bicycles going to work, they would like a place to shower before going about their day. So based on the bicycle parking required, eight showers would be needed. That seems a little significant for a car dealership. We are requesting to go to one. And there is, for respect to the second waiver, there's an existing wall along the property line adjacent to Florida Boulevard, essentially right here. There's lush landscaping already existing within the Florida Boulevard right of way. If we are to remove the wall and create a new wall that's offset by, you know, another, it's two feet into the site. You know, we'd be probably impacting a lot of that existing mature landscaping and the root systems leading to a lot of that coming out. And we prefer to keep it in. And we think, you know, it's better for the residents that are living over there to have taller landscaping, more mature landscaping, than to take that all out just to move a wall two feet over and, you know, plant something that's not as mature, that's going to take more time to grow, that's not going to provide as great of a buffer from the start. And we'll get into both of those requests. But yes, that blue line is essentially where we are requesting the setback for the rear wall to be at zero feet rather than two feet into the site. This area of the city is also part of the South Federal Highway Redevelopment Plan. And so the plan was adopted in 2012. And it's essentially intended to guide the form, orientation and compatibility of development within this area of Federal Highway. It contains kind of explicit urban design strategies, guiding, building orientation, layout, screening. Again, to support the comprehensive plan and promote compatibility and context sensitive design. So, you know, they are policies, they are guidelines that are in place. The highlighted portion of the comprehensive plan actually speaks to an LDR text amendment being required in order to amend the development standards to address what's in the redevelopment plan. So, you know, we're working with these guidelines and trying to comply to the extent that we are able to, but essentially the LDRs still govern. So, we've spent a lot of time going back and forth with staff on these guidelines in trying to ensure we're providing compatibility in accordance with this redevelopment plan to the extent that we can. And just by way of that, along the rear property line, the redevelopment plan essentially requires us, and I'm going to just switch back to this site so you can have it in context, but requires us to have a 50 foot setback, minimum setback, as kind of our base setback. And then for at least 70% of the building, that setback needs to be increased to 75 feet. So, we could be 50 feet to the property line for 30% of the building, and then we have to be 75 feet back for the remainder pursuant to that redevelopment plan. The code does not require that setback. What we are providing complies with the code, but we are providing a minimum 60 foot setback, so greater than the 50% required. But just because of the site constraints and how narrow it gets, we're going up to a 68 foot setback along the rear property for the majority of the building. So, we're a couple feet off from what the redevelopment plan requires, but again, you know, we do have that additional buffer of the right of way. So, when you add the right of way from the residential buildings, we'd be even farther. The redevelopment plan also suggests that the wall be located 10 feet from the property line into the landscape buffer. Again, we're trying to keep the existing wall where it is, and we'll show you some of the photos of the existing landscaping. But I know the staff report kind of gets into the redevelopment plan a little bit, so I wanted to make sure I touched on it as well. So, in terms of site design, you have a single access point from Federal Highway. You have circulation around the entirety of the building as well. What you see here, this is essentially where customers would bring their vehicles to service. No service is actually happening in this area. But I know Honda has the same kind of thing where you drive in, you, you know, check in, you leave your vehicle, and then, you know, a service tech brings it around into the garage in order to actually perform the service. So, just wanted to clarify that that that's only a drop-off area. It does have glass doors that will come down at the end of the day for security purposes, but no service is going on in that area. All of the service is going to be internal to the garage and within a completely enclosed space. We are meeting the open space requirement. 25%, again, is the open space requirement, and we are providing that. We are providing a 25-foot buffer in the rear. As you can see, kind of on the bottom of your screen there, adjacent to Florida Boulevard, there's the existing landscaping, again, that we're proposing to maintain. We would add some plantings where there are some gaps that need to be filled. And then there would be additional trees planted internal to the site on the inside portion of the wall, which you can see kind of over here. The solid, more solid green line is kind of the wall where the hedge and a hedge that is there. And then we'd be planting internal all of these trees as well. And then that's in addition to the plantings along the perimeter of the site. Again, there's no perimeter landscape areas that exist today. So all of those plantings are new. And then along Federal Highway, we'd have attractive landscaping there as well. So that's the service reception and drop-off area. Our 68-foot setback. And I believe that the standard in the code is actually 10 feet. Again, the redevelopment plan provides for more, which is what we are trying to do by setting the building back further. There you have our 20-foot wide landscape buffer. And that's in addition to what's existing in the right-of-way currently. Here you have a graphic showing how we get to the 25%. So again, we do exceed the requirement. There's 12% existing, but we're planting along the perimeter of the site and internal in the vehicular use areas. And so this is a floor plan. So as with most dealerships, you have the showroom and consultation areas in the front. You have your office kind of in, you have offices adjacent to the showroom and a little bit further back. And then your service is entirely contained within the first floor of kind of that garage area. So all of the service is within an enclosed portion of the building. And then here are the renderings of the building itself. We spent a fair amount of time going back and forth with staff on the federal highway facade. We've added quite a lot of glazing to it. It does have kind of a more contemporary modern look with a lot of clean lines. And then you have the garage as well. We did, you know, make an effort to provide kind of solid enclosures where we could. So you can see the garage levels aren't open in its entirety. We do have some areas where you have kind of more solid screening to break it up. And, you know, the proposed use and the look and feel of it is consistent with surrounding automotive dealerships as well. Here are just a couple examples along Federal Highway. And again, just paying a little bit particular attention to the Ford dealership that was recently redeveloped and is located just south of the property. That's the one on the top right hand corner here. So that's, you know, most close to the property in proximity. And we do have similar glazing. The garage is tucked away in the back. And here are the elevations that were approved for the Ford. Again, trying to just put things into perspective a little bit in terms of, you know, what's adjacent to that residential community now. Directly across from the Ford dealership to the east, you do have the Florida Boulevard right of way. And then you have a five story condo unit. I think it's actually four or five buildings that are there that make up those condos. And so, you know, they're looking at the back of a garage. That's somewhat what happens in this area when you are, you know, adjacent to automotive uses and automotive zoning. But this is, you know, the screening that we have currently with the wall. So you can see kind of the lush landscaping that's there is already fairly tall and mature. We have another graphic. I think that shows it even a little bit better. And here we've kind of put the parking garage in the back of this image to see what it would look like. And again, this is just with the existing screening, not the supplemental landscape that will be planted on the inside of the wall. When in contrast, this is kind of the alternative when you're taking out the plantings and planting new landscaping. So this is Florida Boulevard, again, looking at the Ford dealership. That's, you know, two properties to the south. And, you know, personally, we feel like the existing mature landscaping really adds a lot. Whereas, you know, when you're putting in new landscaping, your meeting code requirements, it's it's not as tall. It doesn't provide as much of a canopy. You do have more visual into the site, at least for some period of time until that landscaping fills out. And depending on, you know, what materials you actually provide, it might not be as full as it could otherwise be. And so here again is another view of the existing vegetation just to show you the maturity of the spread, the, you know, height of the trees. It would be a shame to have that taken out just to move a wall, you know, two feet into the property. And so this relates to the shower waiver. Again, we're just showing you where the shower that we've included is located. It's kind of by an employee locker area. And we, again, understand, you know, that the future is hopefully less cars and more people biking and walking to work. But as we heard on the earlier item, you know, that hasn't happened really over the last 10 years. So, you know, we don't know when that will actually come to fruition, if at all. But we are providing one shower in the event, you know, an employee does bike to work or a couple employees. But census data shows that only 0.3% of the city's residents actually do that. And again, the Ford dealership was approved with zero showers and that was through a waiver. All right. And then we have the waiver criteria noted on your screen. The waiver will not adversely affect the neighboring area. I think we've shown how, you know, the waiver for the wall location will result in a better product, leaving the canopy and the existing vegetation in place. The shower certainly won't affect the neighboring area. The waiver will not significantly diminish the provision of public facilities. They will not impact water, sewer, drainage, things along those lines. The waiver will not create an unsafe situation. Again, it's for the wall location and the showers. And it would not result in the grant of special privilege. And again, the Ford dealership got a similar waiver on the showers. We do feel like we have shown compliance with the site plan performance standards in terms of building design, pedestrian, pedestrian, bicycle and vehicular connections, open space enhancements, the use intensity and density that are appropriate for this location. Again, being within an automotive zoning district. We do have the TPS letter showing traffic concurrency and it will meet the intent of CSR 5, which relates to energy efficiency. We also feel that the plan and elevations comply with the criteria for the design in terms of conformity with good taste, the exterior design and appearance being quality in nature and in harmony with the general area. And with that, our team is here to answer any questions. And again, I appreciate your time. Thank you. And to provide one correction for the Ford approval, they were approved with the condition to add one shower. So they were approved and certified with one shower. So it's just that correction. We made Ford put a shower in. Yes. Ford wanted no showers. Ford wanted no showers and the board made them put one shower in. Correct. So this is for the recommendation for a level four site plan application for Kia Del Rey. The property is located in the automotive commercial zoning district east of Federal Highway. The site is adjacent to the east medium residential residential zoning and directly north and across federal or other dealerships. The site is within the south federal redevelopment plan area. Currently, the site consists of two two story structures totaling in 24,000 square feet. The request today is for a recommendation for a level four site plan application with architectural elevations, landscape plans and two associated waivers. One waiver is to reduce the required bicycle showers. Second waiver is to maintain the location of the rear wall on the property line. The request also includes a loading demand relief and a height exception for the stair towers. The request is to demolish the existing structures and construct a three story, 143,672 square feet full service automotive dealership. The requested reliefs are as follow. To reduce the number of required showers from eight to one and to maintain the rear wall adjacent to the residential zoning at the property line rather than set back two feet. As this is a level four, the application requires a recommendation from PZB and final action from the City Commission. Review of the required findings is required for a level four application. The land use and zoning are consistent. All concurrent items have been reviewed and comply. LDR section 321 and 323 have been reviewed and are critical to ensure new development addresses traffic circulation, open space, mobility and land use compatibility. Landscape and lighting complies with LDR. The building design is inconsistent with some standards in the LDR and redevelopment plan. The garage lacks efficient articulation and variation in materials resulting in a visually heavy facade. The project complies with the pedestrian, bicycle and vehicular connection requirement and overall site supports functional circulation within and around the property. However, the requested waiver to reduce bicycle showers may limit long term alignment with City's multimodal transportation objectives. Open space and traffic circulations are met. The proposal is consistent with the Automotive Commercial District and supports redevelopment pattern along South Federal Highway. The corridor is characterized by similar full service automotive facilities and the overall scale and massing requires careful consideration of the compatibility with the adjacent residential area. There is an opportunity to improve the visual and spatial relationship with the adjacent residential. The project meets the technical standards in the LDR but falls short with the standards in the redevelopment plan. East of the site are single family homes and the three level parking structure may diminish privacy and visual character of the adjoining neighborhood. The board should consider if additional landscape layering, facade modulation and enhanced screening is required. No anticipated traffic and green building compliance is required during the building permit process. The comprehensive plan encourages the location of dealerships in designated areas specifically south of Linton Boulevard between South Federal Highway and Dixie Highway. The comprehensive plan supports clustering of dealerships in specific areas and the comprehensive plan states new improvements in development must comply with provisions within the adopted South Federal Redevelopment Plan. The plan required a structured public process that included a community workshop and planning and zoning board formal review. The City Commission adopted the plan on September 20th of 2012. Per the redevelopment plan, the following are applicable standards. Buildings more than 300 feet wide and 25 feet in height require a minimum 50 foot setback and at least 70% of the building setback 75 feet. The proposed rear minimum setback is 60.17 feet. The residential properties are separated with a 50 foot public right-of-way, Florida Boulevard. The board should consider the following. Is the proposed setback and right-of-way adequate distance from adjacent residential properties? Are the minimal projections and recessions sufficient to reduce the massive scale and uniform appearance of the parking structure? The other applicable standard is to the landscape buffer. The plan requires shade trees 18 feet minimum in height and 8 foot spread. 25 foot buffer, wall setback 10 feet, trees space 25 foot on center on both sides of the wall, and a hedge planted outside of the wall. The plan's intention is to buffer the residential properties with 10 foot of on-site landscaping, plus the right-of-way landscaping and separation. The proposal includes new trees west of the property line with a 25 foot spacing. Additional trees within the public right-of-way to comply with the 25 foot spacing. The wall will remain at the property line and a 25 foot buffer is provided on-site after the wall. The board should consider the following. Is utilizing solely public right-of-way landscaping sufficient buffering for adjacent residences? And does the combination of on-site and right-of-way landscaping achieve the intent of the redevelopment plan? The project complies with the LDR setback standards and the maximum height for the building minus the stair towers. Pursuant to LDR section 434J3, stair towers may exceed max height by 8 feet and requires board action for approval. The outside display complies with the buffer and screening requirements. The project has service bay doors to the west, east, and south facades. Some doors are facing the residential zoning district and a few are facing south federal. The doors comply with the separation requirement and the two doors facing federal and the east residences are proposed to be vehicle drop-off only. The board should consider the following. Is the proposed orientation appropriate due to the site constraints and proposed operations? Are there sufficient buffering and screening measures provided to minimize any potential visual impacts on the adjacent neighborhood? Offloading requirements are as follows. Must be located to the rear, 100-foot separation from the residential zone. And for this project, there is required to be three bays. A loading demand statement to reduce the numbers from the required three bays to just one was provided. And the proposed loading bay is to the rear and is separated 102 feet from the residential. The board should consider the following. Can one bay accommodate expected intensity without causing off-site congestion or circulation conflicts? And does the offloading adequately mitigate potential impacts related to the noise, circulation, and proximity to nearby residences? The lighting complies, and please note as this is a new construction and demo of the old site, the entire site must be brought to compliance. Overall, parking is being met with a total of 161 spaces plus 273 inventory spaces. Type 1 and Type 2 bicycle parkings are being met. However, the applicant has requested a waiver to the required bicycle showers from 8 to 1. The board should consider the following. Does granting the waiver align with the broader goals of the LDR, which aim to support alternative transportation options and sustainability? Does the applicant's justification sufficiently consider the potentially diverse composition of the workforce? Is there something particular to the operational realities of automotive dealerships that warrants the granting of this waiver? And does granting a larger employer waiver from this LDR requirement negatively impact the development of multimodal infrastructure? The second requested waiver is to reduce the two-foot minimum wall setback to maintain an existing wall to the rear on the property line. The proposal utilizes existing foliage on the public right-of-way to screen the wall, and the foliage includes the following. There's existing coconut trees, royal pontianas, king Alexander palms, and a green button wood. The existing hedge is aureka palms, I'm sorry, aureka palms, and there's going to be additional aureka palms to fill in the gaps on the hedge. And the proposed includes the eagleston holly, I'm sorry if I'm butchering the names, and the combo limbo, both are native species. The board should consider the following. Would the additional landscaping buffer be necessary to provide adequate screening for the adjacent neighborhood? Or is the existing vegetation adequate screening, and is it better to maintain the existing landscape rather than remove and replace? The following are your required findings. It shall not adversely affect the neighboring area, not significantly diminish the provision of public facilities, create any unsafe situation, or result in the grant of a special privilege. For landscape, the proposal includes the removal of three Christmas palms, a carrot wood, which is an invasive species and is not counted towards mitigation, and one royal palm. The removed trees meet mitigation standards with a one-to-one basis for the replacement of the four palms. And the project will preserve 24 trees and relocate nine trees. The project has been reviewed and complies in regards to the perimeter interior landscaping. The proposal complies with the LDR rear landscape buffer with a 25-foot buffer. However, as discussed before, the location and design of the buffer does not align with the redevelopment plan. The board should consider the following. Is compliance with the LDR landscaping sufficient? Or is a rearrangement of the buffer aligning with the redevelopment plan necessary? For the architecture elevations, the minimum requirement is to show proper design concepts, express honest design construction, and be appropriate to the surroundings. The height exception is as follows. The finished roof surface is at 44 feet. The parapet is at 48 feet. And the stair tower is at 53 to 56 feet, depending on the front and the back two stair towers. The board should consider if additional height is compatible with the surrounding. Overall, the showroom frontage achieves transparency and articulation. However, the garage presents a large monotone facade with limited relief and reliance on a uniform gray color palette, resulting in a utilitarian appearance. While the project supports the automotive character of the corridor, it does not adequately mitigate visual impact on the adjacent neighborhood. The board should consider the following. Are refinements such as added facade articulations, variation of materials, or enhanced landscaping necessary to achieve a more compatible or contextually responsive development? Here are the elevations to the west and the east. The board should consider if the proposed east elevation adequately addresses the redevelopment plan intent to protect the livability and stability of the adjacent neighborhood. Here are the side elevations. And these are your board motions. That concludes my presentation. Thank you. I believe at this point, the floor is open for any public comment. If anyone wishes to speak. Seeing no one, public comments closed. Would the applicant or the staff have any cross-examination or rebuttal? No cross or rebuttal, no. Ms. Rodriguez? None here. Okay. In that case, board comment. Mr. Katz. Mr. Katz. I'd love to follow Mr. Jard this time. Lucky guy. I don't have a lot. I mean, I spent a little time over there and I have a, I've talked to a couple of residents there. I actually have a family, my wife's family member lives nearby. So I've parked there even a couple of times. And I, I mean, I, I will tell you, and I, I don't agree 100% with this. Like, I think you can give up one to gain another if they had to redo the landscaping. Like, I don't think that would be necessarily terrible because there are some pros. The residents there right now, there's not, it's not very walkable because it's a very narrow, very narrow part of Florida Boulevard. This potentially could widen a little bit, at least, you know, the grassy area and buffering where cars could potentially park, you know, do more parallel parking there. You could easily walk there. So I'm not 100% sold on the, you know, maintaining it. I get, I get the reason is because you do have that mature foliage. So it does take a little bit of time to mature. But it's the trade off. And I'm, I didn't, I don't see a big objection from the residents here to say, hey, we, we don't want that. So if the residents had come and said, hey, you know what, we want a better landscape plan than when they're providing, I think I would be not apt to approve this. But because of that, I think I'm, I'm fine with approving it. I would, I wish there was a way they could add some improvement just to cleaning up a little bit and, you know, making it a little more walkable. But otherwise, I'm fine with it. The one shower, I think it's fine. Like I said, you're selling cars because people aren't riding bikes. Yeah. And to your point, you know, the landscaping will be cleaned up. Anything that's exotic or weeds and stuff will be removed. I actually used to live on Florida Boulevard, just down. I walked my dogs every day down Florida Boulevard. So yeah, I know exactly what you're talking about. Here in this location, you know, the elevation does change significantly. Yeah, that was a question I had too was on drainage. Is there, I meant to ask the person that lives there, do they have drainage issues? Because it looks like, you know, a major slope down. Is there any drainage issues there because of that slope? Would, if they had to comply, would that fix the slope? I know that recently those properties on Florida Boulevard were just zoned into the flood zone where they were not a year ago. Yeah. I don't know about current conditions right there. I didn't really experience any where I was living. But I can say with this project, we do have a dry retention area immediately on the other side of the landscaping provided by the wall. So, you know, the site itself will contain any stormwater in those retention areas. That rains on the dealership, but anything that rains on Florida Boulevard can't go the other direction. Yeah, I'm not sure where the drainage specifically goes. Never do. Right. That's what I mean, but it's just making it necessarily. But if they had to redo the landscaping, that potentially could ease that. But again, I'm fine with it. I'm not crazy about it, but I'm fine with it. Mr. Chari. Well, I'm glad Mitch left me a lot of questions that I could ask. Showers. I have no problem with either of the waivers. That's fine. I would like, as is my want, to talk about the landscaping. I noticed that none of the ground covers are native. And, you know, we have a lot of native ground covers that we could use that our nursery people have. I totally support that idea of the inside the wall plantings and the trees that you have picked are almost all native. So that's really good. So that's what I have on landscaping. Well, the one other thing is the red tip cocoa plums outweigh everything else by about ten to one in terms of the numbers you're using here. So it really isn't a landscape plant. It's a cocoa plum plant in that regard. I don't know that we have our landscape architect here, but I believe those are utilized for the hedge. Yes. Yeah. So, you know, it just provides consistency along the entire perimeter. And with the hedge, you have plantings closer together. So there's just more quantities. So it's a nice response, but a variety is a good thing too. There's plenty of them. The loading bays going from three to one. I don't understand why that is. It's an operational kind of requirement. It's just Kia has assessed their demands for loading and unloading. They know their timing for when trucks are coming in. Typically, they don't have, you know, more than one truck coming in at a time. There was a loading demand statement that was provided as part of the application that spoke to that. But just operationally, there's only a need for one space at a given time. Okay. Well, if the applicant's only asking for one, that's fine. The height, particularly the signs. Now, when the presentation was made, that was stated at, there we go, yes, in the elevators. That was an exception. And my question is, if that's an exception, why don't we require a waiver for that? So this is one of the provisions in the code that specifies these types of exceptions on the table. If it's meeting these, the height requirements, it's just subject to board approval. Mr. Charles, if I may also clarify, it's exactly like the loading demand. So it's within the code section. So it's up to the board description to grant it if this is important for the elevation and how the elevation is appearing. And also the function of the height, like why there is a height. Well, it's also related to the massing, and I'm sure Roger will get into this a little bit. What was the phrase, facade articulation? There is none. There is very little. It's going to, I believe, look like a big cement wall as I drive down Federal. So that definitely concerns me. The massing, the size, and I'm surprised that there's nobody from the community here to talk about that. That just does seem very, very large. It's two stories or three stories now? Three stories. Three stories. It's going to four. No, it's going to the roof. It's a three-story parking. It's a three-story parking. Oh, well, that's what I'm asking. It's one story now? Oh, sorry. Correct. Oh, sorry. Two. I'm being told it's two. Sorry. And it's going to four, right? If I count that right? It's a three-story parking structure. So that first... Wait. We're the rooftop. On top of the base, though. So it's actually four stories in the air. It's 48 feet high. Excuse me to interrupt. It's 48 feet high. I haven't dropped trouble with that. You have... Because we're looking at a four-story building. You keep talking about a three-story garage. Yeah, but it's on top of a one-story base. Correct. So you have the three stories of the garage and parking on the roof. The base, which is the showroom. Just to clarify. So the base is the showroom. It has... I don't have a floor plan of it, but it has the other operations on the first floor. Then to the rear, that is where the second floor of the parking garage starts. Then the third floor. And then there's a rooftop. So ultimately in the back, it's three stories. But that bottom floor is ultimately used for the operations of the facility. All right. So the bottom floor fits into the... Correct. The first floor of the garage. Correct. It's still... The top of the garage is still 48 feet, correct? Correct. So the top of the garage, the finish floor is at 44. The parapet is at 48 feet. So that's what you're seeing from the viewpoint. And the stair towers go to the 53 to 56 feet. 51, yeah. 56 feet. No, I appreciate that advice because that's exactly my concern as well. The... That's all I've got, Mr. Chair. All right. Thank you. Mr. Brant. You know, I just... I agree with... You know, Roger's the architect so he can talk about the architectural stuff. But I do agree that there's not much articulation in the facade. I think it's... I think it's too high. Especially with people, with residences right across the street. The height of the other one never concerned me because... I'm sorry. The height of the prior issue never concerned me because it was in the middle of it. It was surrounded on three sides by commercial property. And when I drove by... When I drove through and behind it this afternoon... I mean, you could see the top two stories of the Ford garage. And the applicant's application... Half of it centered on the fact that this is what the Ford garage... This is what the Ford dealership got. And that's not what's before us today. I wasn't on the board when the Ford dealership went through. But... And then... And several times in the staff presentation... It was noted... The concerns... And... And I think the one that caught my ear the most was that it... Does not adequately mitigate this dealership from the neighborhood. And that is... That's a big concern of mine. That's all. Thanks. Can I ask one additional question to staff? Yes. Was residents noticed just for signage or were they mailed as well? No. So for PCV, they were not noticed. But for City Commission, they will be noticed. So this goes to Commission? I thought it's... Yes. This goes to City Commission because it is a level four due to the waivers. Oh, because it's the waivers. Okay. It's different than the last one. Yes, it is. Yes. Mr. Strong. Okay. And I know this may seem funny, but the whole issue of the showers and the waivers. We did it once about a year ago for Ford. And they had the same argument. Nobody's riding the bicycles to work anymore. No need for all the showers. So we did the waiver for one when they wanted zero. Same thing here. You all want one instead of eight because nobody's riding the bicycles to work. So my issue is not so much with the waiver, but we've already set the precedent that whenever somebody comes in and says that there's no need for the... Nobody's riding the bicycles to work, no need for the showers, they're going to get the waivers. So I guess my question is to the commission, why don't we take a look at that and determine, you know, because if you're requiring eight showers based on the number of bicycle slots that you have, but nobody's riding bicycles to work and we're granting these waivers, at some point it's not a waiver, it's an automatic. Well, Mr. Strong, I just want you to like, since you posed a question, I mean, you're just supposed to be looking at every application individually and like, you're not really setting a precedent, I would say. You're just looking at everything individually. I mean, feel free to discuss that. I mean, we're looking at it individually, but, you know, you don't want us to use the word precedence, but, you know, that's what's happening. Because how do we justify telling somebody no when we've already told somebody yes based on the exact same argument? That's my concern. And again, it's not you all, it's just the city needs to go back and take a look at the requirements for all of these showers, when in fact whatever study they used previously is not coming to fruition because as we talked about in the last topic, nobody thought more people would be riding bicycles, but they're not. So, Mr. Chair responded. Oh, I would like to. Yeah. Oh, okay. Oh, okay. Yeah. This is the bicycle cone guy. Those two. Let me do it. Okay. And then I'll give you the floor. Because I was on the board, I was instrumental in getting them to put a shower in the floor dealer. Right. Okay. And where I, my thinking differs from yours is that we're talking about a car dealer. People who work for car dealers don't ride bikes to work. I agree. People who work for other businesses are more likely to, and I'm a big believer in the non-automotive transportation, that we ought to be pushing a lot more walking, bicycling and all that. And I think that the shower requirements, as they are in the code, are really good. But I think that automotive dealerships are different because, because of the people that you get. And now you can. Well, I would just like to add to that, that when those items were put in the LDRs, ten years or so ago, the idea was build it and they will come. That if you never built bike paths, if you never had connection on bike paths, if you didn't have a place to store your bike and lock it in and be able to change your clothes, then people will never do it. So that's sort of trying to get ahead of the game and encourage it. And I will say that those were added within the last five to six years to require the showers for bicycle parking. I don't know that staff would agree with the car dealership's logic that we sell cars so people don't ride bikes. I mean, we have, I'm sure, a wide range of workers, people who are washing the cars, who are doing the dirty jobs, not the salesmen. I'm sure the salesmen aren't driving, but I don't know that I would necessarily agree with that. But to Mr. Shard's point, we have the requirement because we need the infrastructure if we really want to move towards a fully multimodal city that. Okay. Yeah. Anything else? No. I mean, I'm okay with it, but it's just, you know, instead of making them do eight, just. Okay. You know, set it at maybe two or three. Fair enough. Talk to the commission. Ms. Malka. My comment will be briefer. No comment or question. Thank you. Mr. Cope, apparently the architectural expert. No. I really like the project. I'm not, it's, there's nothing that I wouldn't support on this project, including the architecture. I wouldn't change a thing. The height that the thing meets, you know, why is it 48 feet? Because it can be. So the code says so. Why are the pop-ups eight feet above that? Because that's what the code says. They can be. I think there's an articulation on the building that our staff's not super critical of it. Public's not super critical of it. The landscaping in the back's phenomenal and supportable. Totally supportable. Okay. You have a couple of things. I know they're all along the same lines. Um, I don't, I think the, what Mr. Cope said. Yeah. The back side is basically not what you want to be looking at the way it is, but nobody's going to be looking at it. If the landscaping is in and, and I drove down there and I looked at this lot and I looked at the Ford lot and you really, yeah, you can see kind of the top of the Ford garage, but you really don't see it. So I don't think that's a big issue. Um, the thing I noticed in the difference between the two, um, places is that landscaping that's along the wall on the public right away side behind Kia needs some work. I mean, yeah, I appreciate you're going to keep the mature things, but somebody has got to go in there and do some landscaping. It looks really scraggly. Yeah. And that will be done as part of the. Okay. That is just, it's. I agree. The Ford ones, maybe they're not as tall, but they're really pretty. Cause. Cause they're good. Somebody maintained. But somebody did it. Yes. That needs to be done. Um, how are we on not illuminating the neighborhood from the car dealer as far as the lighting? I mean, we talk, you know, nobody's talked about light pollution. Yeah. Is there, or is it, is there adequate mitigation of the lights that prevent, um, light pollution in the tropical neighborhood? So the lighting does comply with the 468 lighting section. And it also complies with the requirements in the 4410, the automotive dealership, which has further requirements. So they're all full cut off. They all have their specific requirements within, um, if they're the, the, um, parking area. So they all comply with that. Okay. The setbacks don't bother me. The wall I think should stay where it is because of the landscaping. Um, and the other thing is, and I guess there's no way around it, but the bay doors open to the residential neighborhood, but then again, that's behind the wall as well in the landscaping. And, and those bay doors are just for the drop off of vehicles. Um, it's not for service. The service bay doors are located on the north side. So, yeah, I think, I mean, it's definitely going to be an improvement looking at the old Kia buildings. It's a, it's time for new one. Do we have a motion? Or do we have more comments? Just one quick question to staff. They're responsible for the upkeep of that current landscaping there, correct? That's not being upkeep. Oh yeah. So now the residents, if they're, like you said, it looks scraggly, they should be calling code and saying, Hey, clean this up. I think that's a good point. Is that correct? They're, they're, they're responsible for that. Even though they're not putting new landings in there. Florida Boulevard? Yep. Behind the wall is like the city right of ways. So the city's responsible for maintaining it. Sure. But even though it's city right of way, it should be, they should be responsible for maintaining that shrubbery. Because had they moved the wall and put the shrubbery there, they'd be responsible. I mow, our association mows lawn on a military trail in the middle of the road because that was part of the right of way. So to me, it can, how can we ensure that they are responsible for that? Uh, cause I think they should be cause I think every, I mean, I'm pretty sure Ford is maintaining that. Yeah. And, um, I typically I've seen that handled when a developer is putting in landscaping on city property through some sort of maintenance, a maintenance agreement. Um, I don't know if that's required. I can speak to the city attorney's office about that, but we have no problem maintaining, uh, that section of right of way. I would, I would think that ought to be a condition just that there's an agreement that the, that, uh, the applicant will maintain them. I do. I mean, I have, I don't, not entirely sure that can be a condition because you only have the scope that you have right here. We are, we're, we're giving them a waiver to that wall. So as part of that condition to that waiver is that they must maintain the current landscaping. Staff seems to be okay with that. I see another land use attorney in the back saying, I'm leaning towards redundancy, but the staff here seems to not have an issue. We do do landscape maintenance agreements, but that's usually for in the CBD rather than this district. So, I mean, we do have the landscape maintenance standards. So if this is part of the approved site plan, then they're obliged to do it. I'm sorry. It may be redundant. I think would be a concern. It is a, it's a recommendation regardless. Yeah. Regardless it's going to go to the commission. And we're happy to maintain it. Hmm. So you're okay with condition? Condition. Yeah. Requiring us to maintain that area. That'd be fine. Yeah. Okay. However, the mechanism is. Great. So, is there any possibility of a motion here? You want me to make the motion? Again? Sure. I'll get them. Mr. Malika. You're used to always making these motions. Maybe. You always have a condition to add to it. Yeah. You don't like adding conditions. I'm all about adding the conditions. So. I move approval to recommend to the City Commission approval of a Level 4 Site Plan Modification with Architectural Elevations and Landscape Plan for Kia Del Rey to demolish the existing building at 2255. South federal housing served a two-story dealership with a three-story parking garage to the rear and two associated waivers. One, reduce the required number of bicycle showers and two, reduce the required setback for the rear wall subject to conditions of maintaining the landscaping on the east side of the barrier wall by finding that the request is consistent with the comprehensive plan and meets the criteria in the land development regulations. I'll second that. Okay. Motion by Mr. Katz. Second by Ms. Malika. We have the roll, please. Price Patton. No. Mitch Katz. Yes. Deidre Strong. Yes. Patrick Hope. Yes. Jim Chard. Yes. Judy Malika. Yes. Gregory Snyder. Yes. Thank you very much for your time. Thank you. Appreciate it. That was six to one. I'd like to say Susanna's presentation was excellent. As usual. And you can start cleaning up that landscaping even before you start construction. It's a nice tribute to the neighbors there. I'd like to enter file number 2025-058 to provide a recommendation to the city commission regarding the utilization of the masonry modern architecture style at the property located at 466-506 North East 5th Ave. And the applicant is here to present. Thank you. Ex parte. Mr. Cope. Rode by the site. Okay. I think that's it. Same. Mr. Strong. Mr. Pitt. And I, yeah, I drove by. None. I drove by. None. I drove by. Even pulled into the parking to turn around and take a look. All right. Sir. Driving a stop. Driving a stop. Yeah. Great. Thank you. Good evening board members. Thanks for having us today. My name is Jaime Mayo with H&M Architecture, 143 South Swinton Avenue, Delray Beach. We've been architects in the city of Delray Beach for over 20 years. Designed several buildings in and around. Been presented numerous awards from the city for some of our work. And happy here to present today, 466 Northeast 5th Ave. I'm going to start with the site plan just to kind of give you an idea of the context of where we are around. We're between 3rd and 5th Street on the west side of Northbound Federal. The client has put together these four parcels here. As you can see in this next slide. Oops. I went one too many. What happened here? So here's the site plan. It's bordered to the east with Federal Highway and the angled property line to the west parallel to the railroad tracks on the north side. Some small lots and the same on the south side. So we're kind of a pretty large conglomeration of several lots along the stretch of this block between 3rd and 5th or 4th and 5th, I'm sorry. And surrounded next to us are a bunch of smaller lots, a bunch of smaller little buildings. On the right you can see exactly who's around us. Directly across from us is Publix and almost aligned perfectly with the entry feature there and a couple of the smaller little buildings to the north and south of us and then the very stark railroad tracks to the west. And I'm bringing that up just to see how we're responding to the site in terms of how we shape the building, how we oriented the building, and how we're exposed, express the east and west facades, kind of responding to exactly what we're facing there and to promote, you know, obviously the pedestrian passageway there and try and avoid the train tracks, if you can say that. So one of the things that we try to do to kind of reduce the length of the building, being that we are four lots on this small stretch of this block, we try to break up the building so it feels a little bit more like what's in and around us and what's probably going to be developed in and around us on either side, which is smaller lots, smaller buildings. And we accomplished that with these two civic areas. We're only required to have one, but there's more of a private civic area on the north side where the residential entry is and then one on the south side that goes to the secondary egress stairs. The one at the north end is almost aligned with, you can see the entry feature to the Publix, so you can kind of see the pavers there. So we did set back the main entry to the residential entrance to kind of promote that pedestrian walk and we have some better pictures of those two civic areas that are coming up. But this site plan kind of shows you the ground floor plan. It's indicative of how we broke up this long site with these three major components on the ground floor, which is the retail. And this is kind of an area with the proposed building on top of it. You can see we're kind of new to this area. This property is a little bit awkward being that it tapers down from south to north. And if you can see, even as you continue south, it kind of tapers down to nothing. So again, we have a very long building here and we're trying to break it up so we don't kind of overwhelm not only the street facade but also overwhelm the pedestrian area, which is why we have those two civic spaces at either end, to kind of respond to the built environment around us a little bit and the future developments in order not to overwhelm that street. We reduce the building length while reinforcing the streetscape. So we separated the retail from the residential pretty clearly with the main drive. You know, it's a one-way in, one-way out. The southern entrance is the way in. The northern entrance is the way out. And that also kind of mitigates a little bit of the car traffic, cars coming in and out of both entrances. And it really promotes the pedestrian activity going on there and keeping it away from all the vehicular traffic. Here's just a 3D rendering of the front of the building facing Federal Highway. And the ground floor is all the retail. And the ground floor and the balcony above, which is to the residential, are both parallel to Federal Highway. On the back side, the west side, you'll see respond to the property line, the angle of that. And that same angle that's on the back on the... I'll get this here in a second. The angle of the property line on the west is actually the angle that you see for everything that's above the residential here, that two-story massive stone sculpture. All the balconies are also at that same angle, so we're kind of responding to a little bit of the northbound Federal, and it provides a lot of movement angles and fenestration in the front facade while not overwhelming the retail below. And another way we broke it up was by having that large balcony above the residential where we're separating the residential with the retail, not just in the x-axis by the two drives and separating the entry stairs at both ends, but also vertically by not having anything right above us, and then by changing the angles of all the balconies and all the... and that two-story stone mass that's meant to kind of... to represent what's left after we carved it out. So being that it's modern masonry, the whole idea of it is that it's one big block, and you start carving out sections of it. So what you see in the two-story mass that kind of vertically integrates the three stories above the retail is kind of meant to represent what's left or what we didn't carve out. But I think the angles on that and the angles on the balcony kind of gives it a lot of movement and some interest to the building while also reinforcing the retail and separating the retail from the residential and enhancing the pedestrian scale because I almost want to make the retail read like it's one story all by itself. And then in the wide direction, you know, we're separating it again with the different balconies. At the top you can see the variations in different types of balconies. No two balconies are the same in the same vertical column, if you can see. So we kind of reinforce the three retail spaces with vertical integration of what's directly above it. At the top here you can see the three different balcony types. It's all with different materials, different sizes, different angles, different depths, and it's quite a big depth. And then, again, this is the main entry tower here, and it's set back to create this little civic area here in the front so it doesn't impose on the retail that you see here along the ground floor. And introduced a hierarchy of this feature simply by the height. It's a lot taller, but it's set back to kind of promote a little bit more of the pedestrian and provide us more open space on the ground floor. And you can kind of see that right here. So these are the three retail spots, and then in front here it's set back from the retail just to create an open space and articulate a little bit more. You know, articulation doesn't always have to be in the walls, the buildings, and the glass. You can do it with the site plan. And by opening it up, I think it promotes a lot more pedestrian activity along the street. So these are just a few more shots kind of showing you that articulation, all the angles I was referring to before about the balconies, how it's responding to its built environment around it, angled. So it adds a little bit of interest, and it's actually the angle of the property line on the west side, and it's kind of facing the southeast, which is what everyone wants. I don't want to say it's facing the northbound US-1, but it is kind of at least bringing that to the attention that, you know, there is a street coming the other way. And again, it provides a lot of movement, so it's not one just big, long, big, long building. Right here, you can see it's broken up by the entry drive on the, this is the vehicular entrance side, right? So we're kind of breaking up the residential here and the retail over here with the two drives at either end. This is just a shot of those pedestrian areas here. Huge, large overhangs, and especially at the main entrance for the residential. And again, this is kind of that secondary civic space. It's not required open space, 10-foot overhang. Also, further enhance the hierarchy with, you know, 40 feet of vertical glass coming up through here. Very simple, strong forms, good proportions. I kind of spoke a little bit about the articulation along the front, and I think this is very representative of this. So we're looking at the south elevation here. And that's the civic open space. You can see how deep it goes into the site. The site's not very deep, but we try to bring that civic space as deep into the site as possible, and it kind of terminates on the other stair tower that you see there to kind of put a hard stop to this building as it turns the corner. You can see that done with the articulation of the deep eyebrow at the top, the glass balcony. And there's actually five different planes, you could say, from the front of the building all the way back to the main building wall, which is the vertical accent panel that divvies up the three retail spaces. Then there's the masonry balcony, the glass balcony, and then finally the main building wall. And then we kind of turn the corner here as well by upturning the slab of the balcony and kind of creating an end to this. And then we really kind of want to terminate that portion of the building by having the concrete eyebrow die into the concrete, into the stair tower there in the corner. So the building entry, oh, I'm sorry, I skipped a spot here, but that's all right. So this is, again, just another blow up of that corner showing you how we're turning the corner and articulating it with a lot of details, a lot of movement, a lot of angles, and kind of terminating it on the vertical glass that's the secondary egress stairs there. And it's also, again, it's a railroad behind us. So even though we're turning the corner, we're kind of stopping it hard with these two towers that we have at either end of the building. You can see how deep some of these balconies are, especially the one right above the retail. And everyone gets a little bit of a different balcony. Again, just emphasizing the streetscape here and the civic space. You can kind of see the access of that civic space terminates on that vertical glass wall. On the vertical glass wall here, this is kind of the termination of the civic space. We've integrated the building pretty good with the civic space, literally even kind of turning the building into a bench to integrate the civic with the building, and obviously promote the pedestrian traffic. We have bike racks, water fountains, pet-friendly drinking stations, and areas here underneath covered overhang with the tall glass to kind of reemphasize the base and the verticality of the retail space. This is the northern facade. And again, this is the main entry feature that's set back from the retail to kind of reinforce that secondary civic space in front of the stair tower here. And this right here is really just a stair tower elevator. Behind here is the parking garage. And then to kind of follow with the modern masonry, we carved out a huge chunk out of the corner. And you can see the very modern stylistic representation of the two white main features of this facade. But then we really kind of blew away the corner. And again, to kind of respond a little bit to the back there now you're going to see is the railroad tracks. And you can kind of see the sawtooth effect not only on the front but also on the back. And in order to kind of respond to the back a little bit and to avoid it being flat, you're going to see how we... Well, again, this is... I'll just go back a little bit here. But obviously this is that corner here we're referring to where we took out a big chunk. And these are large balconies here as well. They're projecting not only inwards but also obviously outwards. We carved in and popped it out. And then this is that secondary civic space, which is really the entrance to the main residential. And this is actually on access if you keep going across that street to the public's entrance that I was referring to before. And then this is the rear elevation facing the railroad tracks. And we played a little trick with trying to make it look almost bent as you get to the back. So again, this is that stair tower that terminated the civic on the other side. So we kind of tell them the story of what's on the back of this, right? We kept this same angle here. And then it kind of dives into a little bit more of the stark elevation. But even these are in the middle here are recessed balconies opened in there. And kind of telling the story of what we're looking at, which is really a railroad. Again, there's not much to view over here. But we try to bend this rear elevation here, as you can see, to not only create a little bit of movement here, but also to cut across in front of that stair tower with these balconies. And kind of provide some solids and voids as you go along these balconies. And then get very literal and very simple with what you can see, these nine windows. Again, the ones in the middle are actually balconies recessed in there. It's the railroad tracks. It's noisy. It's loud. And then those huge, large balconies all the way at the end, kind of anchoring the end of the building here. And this is just a combination of some of the similar building styles and ours. And you can see it's very compatible, especially the second one from the top on the left over here in our building. And I think it's going to be a nice addition to this somewhat defunct area of Federal Highway here. But it is a little bit of a weird site. And it was difficult to make it work given the shallowness of it and trying to create a lot of depth and interest to the elevations. And at the same time, you know, promote the pedestrian activity and provide a little bit of privacy as well to the residential. And that is the end of my presentation. Thank you very much. Thank you, sir. A real quick question. Sir, here. Where is that Valhalla project? Which one? The Valhalla, the second on the left that you said you're similar to. Where is that? That's a good question. Oh. Thank you. Never mind. That's it. Where is it? Oh, I think it was reference from staff gave us that reference. Maybe staff. Oh. Maybe staff knows where it is. That's how these first. Good evening again, board members. File number 2025-058 for architectural style masonry modern recommendation to city commission. I try not to repeat what the applicant said, like it's almost 0.7 acres site. It's a mixed use development. Ground floor is three stores retail. And they have 14 dwelling units. A variety of one, two, three bedrooms. It's in the CBD, central core sub-district. Existing on the side, because the masonry modern style, two things are important for us to look at tonight. One is the context, what's surrounding. Second is how good is the execution of the style as it is listed in the architectural design guidelines. So it's not only voting on how beautiful it is, how good it is, but also how good it is implementing and executing the architectural design lines as approved and listed in the architectural design guidelines of the CBD. So I will give a little bit on the context. What is existing right now on the site are five buildings and it's colored labeled. And you can see, I'll just give you a moment to look at it. Developed around 60 to 70 years ago. The five buildings, 1951, the oldest one in 1967, the most recent one. And this will all be demolished and will be replaced by the new proposal. I tried to provide some sort of facade like elevation. So the site is actually highlighted in red. And then if you look, look towards the west. So north east fifth and then the five buildings surrounding the site are actually photos like that. Here South CBD and then the second one is office and then retail and then personal service. And the last one on the block is a medical office. This is how it looks like all over one story in height. Our structure is three plus and this will fit here. It's at the back is Florida East Coast Railroad and then facing the public's across the road from north east fifth. And there is a parking area bordering the north east fifth. Again, the CBD guidelines gives us the criteria on how to evaluate and assess the site. And this style like in May 2023 city commission decided that they want to see two particular styles of the seven approved styles. One of it is the masonry modern. So tonight is voting on whether or not the applicant can utilize the masonry modern style. And then if you decide that for example, yes, so that means it will go to the city commission for final action. And then the whole site plan will come back before PCB. Again, if this is the case, so most importantly, this is from a direct extract from the architecture design guidelines. So there is the upper part is important how the parapets are being introduced, recessed windows and the windows could be subdivided into basically right angles like no circles, no curves in it. The composition of the building, how is it composed, how solid it is, smooth stucco, railing could be metal eyebrows, the identification of the entrance and more importantly, also the articulation of a base, middle and top. And this is again, like more details into it. And then this is direct extract from the architecture design guidelines. And then back again to the highland. So those are actually masonry modern styles that are approved in the city prior to the requirement of the city commission to actually approve the particular masonry model. But this was approved. And then this is a direct also extract from the development projects map. The site is highlighted in a red circle and I am giving an example of four masonry modern projects. The one top left is the link. You saw this last PCB meeting. Now this was approved by PCB and then also approved by city commission. Last time when you saw it, it was for the entire site plan where you recommended continuous. And then top right is the edge of pineapple growth. This is a masonry modern style approved prior of the requirement of May 2023. So it's also approved. And then the 109 project is approved by city commission for the utilization of masonry modern. Still with us, like still staff are still working with them on the site plan. This will come before the PCB board in a later stage when they are ready. The fifth avenue townhomes is already approved. Also for masonry modern style by the SPRAB and by the city commission. And the site plan is already approved. They are in building terms. I just wanted to give you some context into what we did in the last few years. And again, the proposal is 14 dwelling units and the request is to utilize the masonry modern style. The staff report have digested the proposal and provided some extensive analysis on the style and how it is complying or the areas where it falls short. Basically, we utilize the same sequence and the framework of analysis provided by the architecture design guidelines. So the massing and the facade, the balanced rhythm that is appearing on the east side is not really reflected on the other sides or most all of it. The architectural elements, the color palette that they are using is really matching what should be appearing in the masonry modern. However, the cladding and the veneer is not really a good friend with the masonry modern, if I may say. Style is something different, just hybrid roof corners and the identification of the entrance could be better. But again, this is still in progress. Like you're not really voting on the site plan. It's just the applicant. We are still working with the applicant on the site plan development. It's just the style like can a masonry modern happen here? Can it happen like that? You can still provide also recommendations as you wish because we are still working with the applicant. The context is important as I mentioned. So this is the first redevelopment of a building in this block. This is why it's important. So consideration for the board today. Is this appropriate for this location? Is this a good execution for the masonry modern? This is for you to vote on today. And these are the board motions in front of you. And I'm ready for any questions. Thank you. Mr. Mayor, thank you. At this time, is there any members of the public who wish to speak? Seeing none, public comments closed. Is there any cross-examination rebuttal from either the applicant or the staff? No, I think we're good. I mean, we've taken their comments into consideration. We've been working on this for a couple of years now. You know, we're not coming in here looking for any deviations, any waivers. We're meeting all the site plan requirements and LDR regulations. Might be a little bit of disagreement in maybe the specifics on masonry modern, but I think we've achieved a good job of it. And the articulation and the definition of the entry features and really enhancing the pedestrian and the retail more so than anything, which is what this part of the town really needs. You know, it's not far away from Atlantic here, and there's really no one walking here because it's kind of barren, very small little shops. And I think this will be a nice link to kind of bring the north part of Federal closer into interacting with Atlantic in a pedestrian manner. Great. Thank you. Thank you. At this point. May I just add one thing? Yes, sir. Thank you, Mr. Snyder. Just a little correction with the applicant. You said like you've been working on this for a couple of years, maybe from your end. That's important for me to highlight that we have this since June. We had an application that lapsed that was submitted earlier, and then this was closed, and then the reactivation. So we have this since June this year, and then this is the second submission, September, just for clarification. Thank you. Oh, okay. Thank you. Good point. Yep. So, Mr. Cove, I'm going to let you go first. No, just for clarity. Two things you're asking us to make a judgment on are whether or not Masonry Modern is a style that is appropriate for this site. That's easy. The second one's much harder. As he achieved an adequacy or an excellence with his interpretation of that style. Now, before you answer that, or I'm not even sure that was a question, but if we say yes to the first part, is he locked into this design? Or does this design continue to evolve? I'm happy to answer that. Okay. So, if you say yes to the Masonry Modern style, let's say to both criteria, this design is not locked. Cool. Okay. It will come back again. It's evolving. It's just the style. Like, let's say this is not a classical style. So, he's not doing classical. Thank you. He's doing a Masonry Modern. Thank you. So, I have a hard time saying it's not appropriate to, I mean, he and his client have decided this is the category that they're going to, you know, he has seven categories of architecture. We're probably the only city in the world that have to be categorized architecturally in seven categories of architecture. Imagine if Frank Lloyd Wright came to Delray and we said, buddy, you've got to be in the Art Deco style or the Anglo-Caribbean style, he would laugh and run away. So, here we are. We've predetermined seven styles of architecture that every guy has to present to his client. Not an easy task. So, I'm pretty sure they've decided, as many other people have, this is an open category that is up for a lot of interpretation. And that's exactly why the city commission has said there's so much of that happening. We now want to regulate it one more step and we want to see that come to us. So, they can be much more aware of, hopefully, an excellent example of it because there's a lot of crap out there that's Masonry Modern. And I think that's like the, you know, a couple of them were shown as examples because what has happened in the past that developers are relying on paint and really cheesy articulation to try to achieve the masonry or the detailing of something. And so, I think what we're globally trying to figure out is how can we challenge architects to create as best a product within that masonry modern style as possible. So, that's, I think, where we're at. So, your staff report is probably the most eloquent architectural critique I've ever read in the city of Delray. You did a killer job on your analysis of his product. And laced in there, every paragraph, you're relatively critical of him, the style, falling a little short of what you apparently think it should be. So, I'm perfectly happy sending them to the city commission, but it seems like there's a lot of work that needs to be done. So, do you want us to get into that tonight? It goes to commission regardless of if it's an approval or denial, a recommendation of approval or denial. You can always feel free to, like, add your comments, you know, recommendation of approval with X comments or denial with X comments. I don't see how we could not recommend the style. That would be my personal opinion. Rebecca can say why we have to recommend it. Well, no, I think Mr. Ibrahim was about to chime in on this. So, while we have the seven prescribed styles that were shown historically to be present within the downtown with the later addition of Mace Ray Modern, anyone could come in. Like, if someone wanted to put the Prague dancing house here, they could. They would just have to go through the process to get that alternate style approved because we really do value the ability of architects to show their skills. But I'll let Mr. Ibrahim take over here. Yes. We'll add to this. So, there is a way for applicants to pick an alternative architecture style. This board has approved before the Miami Modern style and they can do as long as it comes before the board and then you see, like, this new style could be approved. Of course. Yeah. I didn't want to overlook that. I don't know if that's the only project that has ever gone through that process, which is the Ray. The Ray downtown decided they were so committed to their style, which they deemed Miami Modern or Miami something or tropical Miami. There's another one. There's another one. Yeah. So, they went through a two-year conditional approval process to defend that style and they got it approved and I think it's one of the most beautiful buildings in the city. So, I'm not saying there is an opportunity. Frank Lloyd Wright's not going to wait around for two years to do that. So, but your critique, you know, your analysis is everything from critical of the front door on the ground floor, you know, and so, and the articulation of the stone and the use of this, that, the other, and you're, you're, it's two different subjects in my opinion. You're a hundred percent right, but he's a hundred percent right in having the privilege to seek this style. So, I don't know what else, I don't want to spend three hours beating up the actor. Yeah, they'll figure it out. I would say if it comes back exactly like this, I would be critical of it because he is, the city has been, the staff has spent months and months and months reviewing this stuff, so. If I could interject, I understand that they've spent months and months on this, but again, we spent years on this. I totally understand. And I think some of his comments are a little bit critical and I think I got a great rebuttal to him. It's a, you're talking about one man's opinion. I'm talking about, you know, a team of 15 architects in my office that have re-reviewed this and might have a different interpretation. Yeah. It kind of stinks that they make us hold to a style. I mean, we're architects, we're meant to create style, not to mimic and be other buildings. So is this a perfect masonry modern? If you see the first picture he put up of masonry modern, if we put that up on this property, I think we'd get kicked out of town. So we provided something that's very different. It's, it falls within masonry modern, but the details of it I think are a lot better than the interpretations of what we have for masonry modern in this town now. So you, there's a tremendous amount of cool things that are happening in your project with the angled site and how you've interpreted it, how you brought that into the plan. And you've skewed the back of the building to kind of reflect some motion and think you've done that in other buildings and that's really cool and successful and most appreciated. And it's a very, I looked into every, not every, I looked into a half a dozen architectural history books that I happen to have. You will not find the term masonry modern in any architectural history book, none, not one. So we have created a two word category that has opened up the floodgates. Every building in that any of us design has masonry in it. Is it modern? It was built yesterday. That makes it modern. So, so there you go. I've just had, that's a masonry modern building. So now the creative liberal art aspect of making it a beautiful piece of architecture is the challenge. And your interpretation of it should be your interpretation of it. I'm just sensing a critique from him that seems to have some, a little bit of merit, more than a little bit of merit, some merit. So, so while he says it's weak on where the front door is, you're going to have to. I think it's the complete opposite. I think it's a strong connection to help the streetscape of it. So we'll get into that apparently at some other time. Could we, could we push that door all the way to the front? Yes. And then you're going to overwhelm the retail. You're going to overwhelm the pedestrian and you're going to bring all the people into the front door of the residences. So my last Frank Lloyd Wright reference, he wouldn't want you to find the front door. So, so, and I mean, it's articulate. It's got a 10 foot deep canopy in the front of it that does come out to the front of the retail. So I think, I mean, for you and your team. Yeah. I think maybe one analogy is you're 75% there. Yeah. And we'll continue working with him. He's been great to work with. And I'm not going to say he's, some of the things he's pointed out, I probably would agree with him. Maybe a little bit with the windows, maybe the way we turn the corner on the building entry feature. We could add some more mullions, but it was pretty critical. And we have already gone through this a couple of times. And I know you said it's only in June, but before you got there, we had submitted this. And then there were some issues with the applications. We've, we've gone through like three or four times already here. Yeah. But don't. And we'll continue working with Rafiq. It's been a pleasure working with you. And regardless, we're just here tonight for approval of the style, not the design. Correct. So I don't want to like harp too much on the design. It is the style and it's, do we meet the style is the second part of it. So it's the design and the style. I'm giving you overwhelming appraisal support for the first half of that. Yeah. But cautiously suggesting that there's, you know, take it, take it the last yard. You know, you're on the one yard line. Try to try to get to the end zone. Yeah. Just for the records, we have been working like diligently with the applicant. He's responding to many, many of the comments. And we have like lots of discussions and good discussions. We are reaching there. And when we are thorough in our analysis, doesn't mean necessarily critical. So we are happy, bring it better and better. And there is like in architecture, as you know, very well, there is no optimum solution. There is no perfection. So that, but there is also a point that we really need to stop designing. So right now we are designing. So there's a room for improvement. As long as there is a room for improvement, let's do it. And then before we draw a line and say like, that's it, it's fixed. And then it's approved. Let's build it like that. So now there is a room. So just wanted to add this. Okay. I'm in favor of the, I'm in favor of the choice of style. Okay. Overwhelmingly. You know. Okay. Thank God he didn't come in here with an Art Deco project. Thank you. I will say Chris Brown would be proud of you tonight. It's your. Absolutely. Absolutely. He would have been overwhelmed and, and do it back to us. Well done. Let's move on. So I think, yeah, I think it's a beautiful building. I'm like so sad to see commercial buildings go away. And even though it's mixed use, you know, condos come up all along federal. But that's kind of what I have to say. This is strong. Okay. This is Beth. Yeah. Roger's concerned. I'm glad you're willing to, you know, seek a little bit more common ground and work to improve it. At least reach a little more of a common ground. I do recall that Anthea said that she left a little wiggle room in the discussion. Stuff like Frank Gehry came to town. He could build what he wanted to. But, and then let me just say. The seventh category. The Frank Lloyd Wright quote. Which I think I've said to Roger many times. Frank Lloyd Wright once said, a doctor can bury his mistakes. An architect can only plant ivy. What? Ivy. Oh, funny. Exactly. So, yeah, I mean, this is an important place. And I think we all want it to look, it could really be a handsome incredible building. So. Thanks. Mr. Chair. I too want to talk about Rafiq's analysis. Because it was not only eloquent, it was on point. And I thought that the sort of subtle criticism he made of Mr. Mayo's design was certainly worth taking into account. I wrote a couple of them down and I'd like to hear your reaction. Sure. Deeper facade. Well, we were discussing what's going before the city commission. Yeah, but they're not, this is. We're discussing. Our style. Our modern. Masonry modern. What we have to say is, is it okay to use masonry modern and assist building meet the criteria of masonry modern? And if you want to say, there, I think you should be saying what you want to say. Thank you. But we don't need to design the, redesign the building. I'll give you an example. I'm not, I'm not trying to redesign it. I think they were saying. Go ahead. I'll give you an example of meeting, the last meeting you were at, we sent a project back. That project came to us for approval, this step, right? Mm-hmm. We approved it here as they could do mason modern. That was where the smoke cigar shop is. It came back to us last time with the changes. We weren't happy with them. Mm-hmm. And we sent them back. Yeah. So that's, so we, right now we're really just saying masonry modern or not. Then the next step we can, that's when we really start. We tear them up. Well, we can do this. We can do this all over again. But my, my thought was that, that the work that the staff has done in your cooperation with them is very, very impressive. Very impressive. And that some of these things like the shading devices, whether or not there is enough shade. And maybe there is. I don't know. But the, the question was. Sure. That, that'd probably be something that I, I probably would disagree with. I mean, I don't think you're going to find deeper balconies or deeper concrete eyebrows anywhere up and down federal based on this. You're looking at it here, maybe a little bit 2D. Some of my pictures kind of depict the, the, the shading devices a little bit better than, than this shot does. But there is a 10 foot eyebrow in the front. The, there's a six foot canopy above the retail. The, the eyebrows are about six feet deep on every floor. So, I mean, the, there is a lot of shading devices. The two story stone sculptural, the, the well proportioned two story provides tons of shade. Just looking at this, you can kind of see the shadows. Okay, I got it. And the effects that have been made at the vertical panels. What's, what about the cladding? The cladding, the thin cladding. I don't know how, how Rafiq can, can tell whether the cladding is thin or not. That might be a two foot deep block there. But I think that was an indirect response to adding, asking us to add some more stone or to add some richness and materials. You mentioned veneer. Like, so, you know, like the cladding is not usually something that goes with the masonry modern, like, and especially like the texture of, and the color of the stone that you used. And you, you said it's veneer. Like, this is how you described it. And back to the shading, which is, I don't disagree with you. There are, again, room for improvement, like the south and north elevations. There are like, you know, large solid areas. And then even the use of circular windows. This is not something common with the masonry modern. I'm not, so we can work with this together. Can we, I think the chair wants to say something. Can we just talk about two things? Sure. Is it okay to use the masonry modern? Is this building a masonry modern building? I think the answer is yes and yes. I'm ready for that. Is it a masonry modern building? That's the question before. Is it any comments regarding that? Any comments about how to redesign the design will be when the site plan comes back. Okay. In the meantime, the staff and the applicant are going to keep working on it. And when we get the site plan, we're going to get the absolute best product the two of them can put out. So we won't have to worry about it at that point. But in the meantime, do you have any more comments? Yes. Please go ahead. I haven't had any yet. I know. First of all, I want to echo what Ms. Monica said about the commercial space. We're losing 8,000 square feet of retail space in our commercial core, replacing it with three little things that, you know, we're losing that. We're also losing that property tax income. And I'm going to bring it up every time we get one of these convert. Let's convert all of our commercial to residential. And then the governor next year is going to put on the ballot to get rid of. So those condos are not going to be paying property taxes. It's thousands upon thousands of property taxes that are going to go away because we're not going to have commercial space. And how are we going to pay for our police and fire and all these other things that we want? I don't know. We just can't constantly take all of our commercial space and turn it into more condos and more condos and more condos. The question of modern masonry is, and I think, and I agree, Roger, your comments about, like, this is designed. Like, the architect goes, somebody came, buys a piece of property and says, hey, what can we build there? Here's the seven guidelines. And I think the city, I think the reason why they added that step was not so much to be critical of it because every single project said, we're just going to choose Mason Monterey. And they're close to redesigning those guidelines, right? You're in, I believe, Rebecca, are we looking at the guidelines? We are looking at them to see if there should be something more specific that would really make it more of a style that we want rather than having this process every time, but to give it a little more definition. Right. Because it's right now, it's just everyone's coming to us. Everyone gets approved, goes to the commission, it gets approved, and then we're going through this cat and mouse game every single project. I did look up the Valhalla Condos, by the way, for you, and it's not approved yet. The style might have been approved, but according to the city website, it's still under review as of 2022. And it's 235 Southeast Fifth Avenue. I know it's not built. I can tell you that. Valhalla is built. It's built? Yeah. 235 Southeast Fifth? I don't know. You look it up on your website. It says under review. We'll check that out. I'm just curious. It's been through, I think, and I think it may have been... And the condos are under precondition. So maybe I mixed it with something else. I was curious what it was, too, because I never saw it in front of us in the last year. Would you entertain a motion? I would love to. That was much done. A recommendation of approval to allow the utilization of a masonry modern architectural style on a proposed four-story mixed-use development within the Central Business Development CBD at 466-506 Northeast 5th Avenue, pursuant to land development regulations, section 4.4.13, parens F, parens 3, parens E, appropriate architectural styles. By finding that the request is consistent with the comprehensive plan and meets the criteria set forth in the land development regulations. I'll second that. Okay. We have a motion by Mr. Chard, second by Mr. Cope. Is there any discussion? We have... Yeah. Just, I wanted to add, because I'm going to be voting no, but my reason being, again, I do not think we need mason modernery up and down with condos on Federal Highway is what we're getting. And that's why it's in front of us to make that a permissible. And I just, I think it needs to be, we have six other styles they need to start, the architects need to start looking at. Okay. In that case, could we have the role, please, Ms. Miller? Price Patton? Yes. Mitch Katz? No. Deidre Strong? Yes. Roger Cope? Yes. Jim Chard? Yes. Judy Mullica? No. Gregory Snyder? Yes. And just to be clear, my no tonight might not mean a no next time. Because if the commission says, now you can do mason modernery, then we're not looking at that anymore. We're just looking at the style. And look, we hate to be pigeonholed into a style like that as well. I know, yeah. We're modern by nature, and then we designed it, and then when we see we have to pick a style, we'll, which is the one that works most. Very good chance I'll be yes next. The votes. That's over. We're going to take three minutes. Just so I can clarify, so we go to city commission next. Yeah, they can help you. Yeah. I think you should eliminate all six styles. Yep. There you go. No more. We're going to take... Keep that for comments. ...a quick break. Again, 826, back at 830. I got it. That's right. That's why you're can't wait for the record. Good evening. Barbara Pinkston, Senior Planner. I would like to read into the record file number 2025-50, a privately initiated request to amend the land development regulations as it pertains to the Light Industrial Zoning District. Mr. Schiller. Thank you so much. You're welcome. Thank you so much. Thank you so much, Mr. Chair and honorary board members. I just wanted to say we're not talking about car dealerships and we're not proposing any masonry modern here tonight. Though, maybe some people think it's worse what we're proposing. I don't, actually. I think it's just as good. And this is an LDR text amendment to allow gun range indoor into the Wallace Overlay District as a conditional use. And that's a lot of caveats and I'll get into that as to why, but we feel like we're proposing this amendment to allow a specific use in at really at 1215 Wallace Drive. We can't file a specific text amendment for specific property, so we met with staff. This is what we've come up with. Lots of points of agreement, a couple points of disagreement, and I'm sure we're going to get into that. So we're asking to amend the land development regulations to permit service industry uses as principal uses in light industrial. Allow private gun range to operate in the LI zoning district within the Wallace Overlay, Wallace Drive Overlay District as a conditional use. Also providing an actual definition for gun range indoor in the LDRs and other effectuating language. What we've passed out to you today is the NRA range source book. This is specifically included in the language of the proposed amendment as almost like a Bible. I don't want to say Bible and NRA together, but almost like this is where we're going to take a lot of our direction from in terms of source, design, et cetera, or sound and design attenuation, design, et cetera. So we can get into that if there are any questions. So history here is on April 8th. Commissioner Long sponsored the proposed amendment to the commission and received consensus to schedule a request for June 10th of this year. At the June 10th commission meeting, the city commission unanimously sponsored the request to allow for a formal application of the amendment to the city. And October 20th today is the planning and zoning board meeting. And again, if approved by the city commission and this board, the applicant must go through the site plan and conditional use approval process. You will see this application again if we are so lucky to be approved tonight and at city commission. Just looking at the text of the ordinance, there are really no changes to some of this language, section one and section two, principal uses, et cetera. And so on that first page one through seven exists today in your code. We get into eight, which is service industry uses that are those which are primarily engaged in providing an offsite service for, but for which maintain inventory storage of materials and a business office at a central location. And you can see a through F the different categories of the service industry uses that we're proposing. Then we get into subsection D conditional uses and structures allowed within the ally zone. And we're proposing sub five gun range indoor within the Wallace Drive overlay district subject to section 4.3 KK. Now, I do want to point out sub D is for conditional uses. That is what's making this gun range indoor use a conditional use. And that conditional use is going to be subject to certain other further conditions. For instance, security and safety standards, compliance with this whole range source book. So this range source book has both indoor and outdoor ranges, has pistol, has air gun, has anything and everything you could do. It even goes as far as what the verbal commands are in the range. I am not a gun expert. I don't purport to play one on television. But I understand that obviously safety and security are paramount. We've also included 24 video security, no sale of alcoholic beverages. Did you know that there was a gun range in Fort Lauderdale that actually has a cigar bar and an alcoholic bar within the gun range? So we don't want that here. We are designed to be primarily safe. And frankly, the reason we came up with this to begin with is because our client wanted to do something special for Delray Beach Police Department. And one of the things that we will hopefully eventually get to propose is a indoor gun range that is 50 yards long. And that is one of the longest indoor gun ranges in South Florida to allow Delray Beach Police to practice firing at those long ranges. That's the first thing. The second thing is we went to meet with Delray Beach PD at the very onset of this project to determine what they needed. What could we offer as a corporate citizen to benefit the Delray Beach Police Department? And this is what we came up with. So again, classroom safety space for safety programs. Our client is dedicated to gun safety, not just the proliferation of an indoor range, but gun safety and wants to, as I said, make this a private club only for private guests, private members, excuse me, and the police department. And half, when we get there as a conditional use, half of the operating hours will be dedicated solely to the police department. But again, we're putting the cart before the horse because this amendment has to be approved first. So again, that is the text of the amendment. And then finally, you get the gun range indoor definition that I think the city does not have right now. They have gun ranges indoors, but no definition. Again, that definition says a facility located entirely within an enclosed building designed and operated for the discharge of firearms at targets for the purpose of training, practice, qualification or educational use under supervised conditions, including accessory uses such as classroom training, training rooms and accessory retail. As you can see, that accessory retail for us as our proposed use will be limited to our private members and Delray Beach Police Department. I've talked a lot about conditional use, conditional use, conditional use. Well, the conditional use is, as you know, a separate process in addition to a site plan approval process. And there are some higher hurdles. And so the city commission and your board, actually, when you deal with conditional uses must find that for any approval, you must find that the text amendment is I'm sorry, the required findings for this item, not just the conditional use. But you have to find that this is consistent with the comprehensive plan and that the amendment furthers the implementation of an adopted neighborhood plan. Your staff and we've found a number of different comprehensive plan policies and goals and objectives. Your staff did also. These are the several of the policies that we highlighted. NDC 1.12 provided complimentary mix of land uses, including residential office, commercial, industrial, recreational, community facilities with design characteristics that provide similar uses of intensity, height, development patterns facing each other, especially in residential neighborhoods, uses that meet the daily needs of residents and public open spaces that are safe or attractive. Your staff's response to this was that the amendment to the zoning district is not site specific. All parcels zoned LI are impacted. The service industry uses are similar to the intensity of other existing principal uses in LI and staff has not identified any concerns. I want to highlight the uses permitted in light industrial. You have research and development, wholesaling, office, self service, urban agriculture, CBD oil establishment. Accessory uses include parking lots, waste storage areas, monitoring wells, repair, truck rentals, urban agriculture, and these would be the conditional uses. Rental and sales of modular structures, food preparation and processing, uses requiring storage of regulated substances and pet services with outside use areas. Why are all these conditional uses? Why are all these conditional uses? Because they require a bit more vetting, a bit more analysis to determine whether or not those uses are appropriate for LI specific uses. And we want to add gun range indoor to that list of conditional uses. Objective ND 1.4, industrial land use designations. In the interest of time, I'm not going to read through all of these. You guys can certainly read. These are regular comp plan policies, goals, and objectives that deal with industrial land use. Same thing with this. You have an economic prosperity element to sort of address Commissioner Katz's or Board Member Katz's issue with the property tax. And again, this is, I can tell you from our perspective, this is not aimed to be a money maker. This is aimed to be a significant resource for Delray Beach Police Department and, you know, provide a little monetization for the property with the private gun club. I do want to point out a couple of things. LI zoning is literally limited to two very small areas east of 95 in the whole city. I've highlighted them for you. Here you can see them highlighted in purple or pink or magenta, whichever color floats your boat. In addition, the Wallace Drive Overlay District encompasses one whole area of light industrial. And that property or that area consists of only 13 properties. And some research in the Wallace Drive Overlay District that used to be a county enclave that was annexed into the city. And really the city didn't know how to deal with it. So they just created this overlay district to sort of let everything happen. And it has. And it's worked for many, many years. I do want to point out that the gun range indoor use is listed as a permitted use in the code in the industrial zoning districts and the MIC zoning districts. So if somebody were wanting to open a gun range in those districts, they would literally just file an application and file a site plan. And it would be a permitted use approved by staff. What we're proposing makes us jump through several more hurdles in order to get that approved in the Wallace Drive Overlay Zoning District. This is the subject property. This is the property our client owns at 1215 Wallace Drive. That property, if approved, that will be demolished and built anew. There will be, I believe, several warehouses on the property with the gun range really being all the way on the west side of the property. But again, we haven't gotten there yet. This is putting the cart before the horse. As I was telling you earlier, the conditional use approval, you must find that the conditional use has, does not have a significantly detrimental effect upon the stability of the neighborhood, which it will be located. Nor will the proposed conditional use hinder development or redevelopment of nearby properties. Those are two large standards or hurdles to qualify for. And again, if we're allowed to, we look forward to proving how this particular gun range indoor will meet and exceed those standards. Distance requirement. So staff has proposed a distance requirement when we met with them about having the gun range X feet away from residential. We declined to include that. And I'll tell you why. Because we're proposing the conditional use. The conditional use can take in a number of different objectives. They can take in, as you guys just did with the conditional use on the glazing, right? So take it a step further with the conditional use of the gun range, you can regulate a number of different things. Hours of operation. Landscape buffering. Burn requirements. Sound attenuation. I mean, you can really run the gambit to make sure that if this use is allowed in this particular area of the Wallace Tribe Overlay District, that it will literally fit on that property and in that neighborhood. But without this text amendment, this property is a non-starter. Again, special requirements for the use include safety, security, noise, education, etc. And as you know, conditional uses are created to allow for more intense uses to be established with a variety of conditions that limit the impact of the use on the public. I passed out the range source book and then we included the operational plan, which somebody said may have told us when to change the light bulb in the gun range. But this is comprehensive. It's not the end all be all. I think you'll hear from members of the Delray Shooting Center that this is not the end all be all. But this is a very good start for us. Our client has taken this extremely seriously from day one, which is why we have taken the liberties of this book. As far as sound is concerned, I do have a brief summary about sound that I can pass out now. Miss Miller, if you want to pass that out for me. This is a very brief executive summary that says indoor gun ranges typically produce 70 to 95 decibels outside the building during active firing. Now that granted that depends on the gun you're firing and the ammunition you're firing, etc. But that's generally 70 to 95 immediately outside the building during active firing. That drops to about 40 to 70 decibel at property lines. Well designed ranges comply with noise ordinances, which are about 65 decibels at boundaries. I think the city is about 60 decibels here. But you can see the difference between handguns, 9mm .45s, to rifles .233 high powered. And you can see what's the difference between inside the firing range, behind interior walls, 1 to 3 meters outside, 10 to 20 meters usually at a parking lot and at a property line. These are real world measurements taken from a California range, a Texas facility with a New York City indoor range and a European range. Again, those studies were conducted between 2018 and 2023. And we've had some best practices in terms of soundproofing that again, should we get to the next step, we will employ. Because again, our goal here is to provide a unique resource to Delray Beach Police Department while also providing a private club for a small number of members to monetize a little bit the gun range. So these are just a couple of purposes or general purposes of different sections of the source range book. So in conclusion, we believe we meet the criteria for the amendment to be approved or make recommendation for approval by this board to the city commission. The service industry uses make sense as part of LI, your staff agrees with that. The gun range indoor use is limited to Wallace Drive Overlay District, which is 13 properties large and would be a conditional use. This would not be a permitted use in LI. In fact, this would not be permitted in LI whatsoever. It has to be in the Wallace Drive Overlay District. We felt like we've gotten super as specific as staff will let us get without being spot zoning. So that's the reason why, because of the conditional use, we don't feel the distance requirement is needed and it may be overkill. And again, the definition for gun range indoor. Your spelling is not real good. I'm a lawyer. I'm not a speller. Yeah, but I don't need to know about gun range indoor. So I'm sorry. There will be no rage at this range. Okay. There'll be no rage. So I appreciate that. And that'll be fixed before city commission. So we ask for your approval tonight at this late hour. Thank you for being here and serving. And we're here to answer any questions you may have. Thanks, Mr. Schiller. Ms. Pinkston. Okay. As you heard, this is an amendment to the land development regulations. So the request would be to provide a recommendation to the city commission on ordinance number 27-25, a privately initiated amendment to add service industry uses as a principal use and gun range indoor as a conditional use in the light industrial zoning district by amending section 4.426, 4.33, and appendix A, adding a definition. On April 8, 2025, the applicant requested city commission sponsorship of an amendment to the LI zoning district, use regulations, and the land development regulations. The applicant proposed to amend the principal use regulations to allow service industry uses in the LI zoning district, and the city commission agreed to sponsor the amendment. Just some background information just to let you know what typically service industry uses are. They're those which are primarily engaged in providing an off-site service but which maintain inventory, storage of materials, and a business office at a central location. Repair of equipment and materials associated with the service is also permitted at this central location. Examples of uses are land development services, contractor and trade services, repair of office equipment, business services, limousine service, food preparation and or processing, and indoor gun range. You can see where it is allowed as the applicant indicated in industrial and mixed use mixed industrial and commercial zoning without limitation. That is where more intense uses are allowed. In planned commercial center zoning district, it's also allowed but indoor gun ranges are specifically prohibited. So less intense uses would go in these locations. And just to note that there's a gun range located on Poinsettia Drive, approximately a quarter mile from the overlay. The applicant requested to include gun ranges as part of the service industry use category. Staff requested that it be classified as a conditional use and the applicant agreed. LI's own properties as previously indicated are located in two specific locations. Between Southwest 10th Street and Southwest 7th Street, east of Southwest 15th Avenue and west of Southwest 13th Avenue. And this overlay is located between Linton Boulevard and Southwest 7th Street, east of Wallace Drive and west of Southwest 9th Avenue in the Wallace Drive overlay district. And this is a little bit to tell you about the purpose and intent of the LI zoning district. It is to provide an opportunity to site, develop, and maintain high quality industrial land uses outside of an industrial park setting. It also allows certain industrial land uses to be located in areas which are considered to be environmentally or aesthetically sensitive. This district is appropriate in such areas due in part to the development standards which are more strict than those found in the industrial and MIC districts. While the LI district has flexibility in its application, it is not to be applied to small lots or other circumstances which would lead to non-conforming site development. And this is just a little bit of the history of Wallace Drive. In 2004, the Wallace Drive redevelopment plan was adopted with the main purpose of providing strategies to revitalize the area and facilitate economic development by creating the framework for future redevelopment. In 2012, an update to the plan acknowledged that market conditions created challenges for the redevelopment of the area with light industrial uses. And this is a list of the applicant's proposal. So in light industrial district, subsection B, these would be the principal uses and structures that are permitted. And these all fall under the heading of service industry uses. And the next section, I'm sorry, subsection D would be the conditional uses that are allowed. And that would include the gun range indoor, indoor gun range, in the Wallace Overlay, Wallace Drive Overlay district specifically. There are also special requirements that were indicated regarding safety standards, sound attenuation, safety training, 24-hour security, controlled access, not allowing the sale of alcoholic beverages, and the construction of exterior doors and how they are made. Okay, in Appendix A, definitions. This is a new definition because the use was in the code, but there was no definition. And a facility located entirely within an enclosed building designed and operated for the discharge of firearms at targets for the purpose of training, practice, qualification, or educational use under supervised conditions, including accessory uses such as classrooms, training rooms, and accessory retail such as firearms, ammunition, related equipment, and safety gear. And this talks a little bit about the different types of use. So a principal use is something that would come in and just be approved administratively through the Zoning Certificate of Use process. Conditional use would require review by this board that would actually make a recommendation to the City Commission. So these are just some examples of the regulations from other jurisdictions for comparison's sake. So the City of West Palm Beach requires City Commission approval, and their process is called Class A Special Use. They allow it in light industrial and industrial zoning districts, must be enclosed in air-conditioned building, and they have 1,000-foot separation requirements. So this facility would have to be 1,000 feet from residential zoning districts, schools, and public parks. The City of Boynton Beach, they allow gun ranges by right in the certain districts that are indicated above. So they only have a 300-foot separation requirement if from planned industrial development district only to residential uses. And we also have here unincorporated Palm Beach County in the City of Lake Worth. So in unincorporated Palm Beach County, where gun ranges are allowed, there's a 500-foot separation requirement from residential, civic, and parks. In Lake Worth Beach, approval is subject to administrative or conditional use approval. It's allowed in an industrial park of commerce. They have noise regulations and separation requirements of 400 feet from residential without regard to intervening structures. So if there are buildings in between, it doesn't matter. That distance still applies. So these are some of the findings. So some of the comp plan requirements, as indicated again, because this impacts all properties that are zoned light industrial. So the difference with Wallace Road, that would be the only place that the gun range would be allowed, subject to conditional use approval. And this is a map that kind of shows what's around the Wallace Overlay. So the area that's bounded in red, all of that is part of the Wallace Overlay District. So essentially, anything in this area could accommodate a gun range. And one of the things, I just wanted to make sure that some of the uses that were indicated, I think indicated a little bit further down, or maybe on the next slide. You can see Groves of Delray 2, which is a residential, I think it's a senior housing facility. North of there, Calvary Bible Alliance Church. And a little bit to the east of there is an elementary school. And again, here are additional policies. And the board needs to take into consideration if the proposed use changes are consistent with the character of uses already allowed in the established zoning district. And if the proposed regulations and conditional use review and approval process are sufficient to mitigate any potential impacts on adjacent properties. In more comp plan elements, this one deals with economic prosperity. And the board also, in this case, needs to consider if the uses proposed by the applicant support the goal of making the Wallace Drive Overlay more marketable, and the broader comprehensive plan goals in support of a dynamic entrepreneurial ecosystem and the preservation of industrial land uses. And now the housing element. Staff recommended that the applicant add distance separation requirements from residential uses for the gun range, but the applicant declined to include this requirement. The board should consider whether a minimum distance separation requirement is appropriate or if the conditional use process is sufficient. Additionally, the board should consider if hours of operation should be adopted for the gun range use. Land development regulations require that any 24 hour or late night business located within 300 feet of any residentially zoned property obtain a conditional use permit from the city. The board should consider if this requirement is sufficient or if additional limitations should be adopted. So this is just a summary of board considerations, things that you may need to think about. Are the proposed service industry uses appropriate for light industrial zoning? Is a gun range an appropriate use in the Wallace Drive Overlay? Should there be a required distance separation between gun ranges and residential uses? Or is the conditional use process and special requirements for the use sufficient to mitigate potential negative impacts on adjacent residential areas? And should there be limitations on the hours of operation of indoor gun ranges? And here are the options for board action. Thank you. Thank you very much. Is there any public comment on this? All right. Is there any further discussion before the board? Mr. Schiller? Ooh. Don't hurt yourself. It's all right. It's hard. Without socks, it's tough. No rage. No rage. No rage, Mr. Chair. First off, I don't think we have a problem adding hours of operation with those in the original draft. I believe staff asked us to remove that. We don't have a problem with that. However, that can be addressed through the conditional use process. But again, if you feel strongly about putting hours of operation in now, we're fine with that. Okay. Thanks. Anything else? No. I have a question. Anything else from you? No, nothing from me. I'm ready. Any questions? Mr. Kat. I definitely have questions. Number one is staff. I know you said these requirements. Is there any, have you found any zoning anywhere in the state, much less the county, that does not have a distance requirement to residential schools? I believe based upon the research, because it was more local, Boynton is a little different. So in some cases they do, some cases they don't. I believe Lake Worth, well actually Lake Worth does. Palm Beach County does. Everybody has a distance requirement. It's pretty standard, correct? Yes. And it's something staff would like to see in this? Yes. All right. I'm just asking them questions right now. Okay. I'll come back to you. Okay, please do. Please do. But my, there's the distance, the fact that this is right across from a residential community, right near an elementary school, it brings up a lot of concerns with that. And I get Mr. Schiller said that we can address it in the conditional use process, but you can't address the distance requirement if it's not listed as a potential conditional use. Am I correct, Madam Attorney? Because it's not listed. There's all kinds of things here we can look at when it comes back to us. But distance is not there, so we can't really address that later. There are certain conditions that you can enforce as part of a conditional use, even if it's not part of the criteria. I can go ahead and pull that up and answer you while you ask the next question. Okay. But that's, I mean, that's because I, I gave Mr. Schiller, I said we can go back and deal with it then. But if it was already here, we wouldn't have to deal with it and make it easier. And then I thank you for this book. And I found, I'm curious, because I'm like, all right, this is a lot of information. And I, and I looked, because to me, it's like, this should tell you where you should put the gun range, right? So they do. It wasn't in the backup, but it's in here. And it says site selection. Site selection for indoor rangers should be based on geographical as well as, this is page 2333, as well as marker factors, distance from utilities, local zoning relationship of the range to its customers, target market, and other social and economic factors should be considered in the planning in sight. To me, those other social factors are somebody's house, a school that should be taken into consideration. That's in, that's in what was provided us. So I think we should be doing that as well and putting some type of separation. I don't know what that number is, but there should be some type of separation requirement from schools and residential. Other question, maybe, you know, you can answer this. But, um, anecdotally, um, somebody told me that many gun ranges have, um, um, ancillary accident or accident, I don't think is the word, discharges outside of the range is a common occurrence. And I've heard that before. Can you, has staff heard that before? I've never heard that. So like during COVID, there was no, um, you know, people committing suicide outside the ranges here in Delray Beach. There is. I don't have that information. My understanding is that I talked to, I talked to Christina Morrison today cause she sent us an email. She told me that did happen and was, you know, uh, uh, that was, came from her today. She also sent an email that's in the backup. I did have a discussion with her about that as well. And I think, I mean, if, if there are potential of accidental people are, you know, they, they, they, cause you have to bring in my understanding. And I haven't shot in a gun range in a long time, but I, my memory is you have to like bring your gun in on a certain way. Like you have to be unloaded in this and that. But if you forgot to do that before you left the house and you get to the car, now you got to fiddle around and get your gun in order to be accepted when you walk into the range. And that's where you potentially could have accidental discharges. And if you are across the street from residential neighborhood, a school, I don't think is, is wise. So that, that's all I have. I, I, I, I'm curious of what my other board thinks, but maybe I can be swayed. I don't know. I do have the answer to your question about the conditional use process. So yes, you can. So in addition to some requirements I'll mention in a moment, you can limit the hours of operation or the longevity of the use. And then the other limitations, um, are based on compatibility with nearby uses, consistency with the requirements of the LDR, consistency with the comp plan or, um, any of those types of items. So it could be, it could be looked at later. That's good. That's good to know. Um, because that's, it has, it has to be looked at. I mean, that's, I think that's important. I mean, we, we just talked about recently, like vape shops, distance to like schools and things. And, um, I remember when we'd pass tattoo parlors, can't be too close to schools, but, and, and, but gun rangers, we'll just put them right next door. With all due respect, there is no school across the street from the proposed. How many feet is the school? It's not, it's not across the street. Pine Grove. Yeah. Right. It is roughly 700 feet. 700 feet. From what? That's fine. From the, from the. This site. This site. But that's, this site, this site where they're wanting it, but the entire district is going to be zoned. So you could put a gun range on the opposite end of it, correct? With the conditional use. Right. So this board I know won't approve a conditional use of a gun range next to the school. I'm saying, right. It's 700 feet from this proposed site, but we're not just approving. It's not a, it's not a, that's on the bottom half of the site. That big empty space up on the top across from Calvary, right? They could potentially do a request there. They, of all 13, all 13 properties can get a request pump, excuse me, but that's a conditional use. So that they can't walk in and tomorrow get a build like this. This site makes, I mean, this site may make a little more sense because it is, like I said, 700 feet. The other isn't. That's why if you had, say a 500 feet requirement from the elementary school, this would, this one would meet that condition. We don't have a problem with that. That's all. There's also a retail shop a few hundred feet from there that sells beer. Is that part of the condition that it not be within a certain distance of a retail shop? No. The, I mean, retail shops, I mean, retail is retail. So as far as related to alcohol sales, we are not allowing alcohol on our property, in our property, in our gun range whatsoever. No cigar bar allowed to this one. It's only in Filardo, man. I'd like to ask a little bit about the police station. Is, is that a temporary situation that the police would be using this facility? They, or will they have a gun range in their new building when it's built? Um, I don't believe that you're having a 50 yard gun range in the new police facility, police city hall facility. But I, I don't, I don't know. Our, our intent is to leave this a hundred percent for the police. We're doing this primarily for the police department. Um, again, we have a private club, as I said, to monetize a little portion of that property, but this is primarily being done for the Delray Beach Police Department. And I would like to say that, um, our concern and caution to the applicant was that whether you call it a private gun club, primarily for use of the Delray Beach Police Department. It would function very similar to another gun club or shooting range. And I think there were issues that we had with just saying, well, we're mostly going to do it for the police, but other people can join as well. So it's either a shooting range or it's not. And I think from staff's perspective, it didn't really matter who the clientele is. It's a shooting range. And then the issues related to noise, et cetera, are what were in our considerations as we're evaluating the request. I'm not sure what you just said. Clients don't matter to us. Like it's a gun range is a gun range. So is the use good? It can be both is what you're saying. We were uncomfortable with the characterization of it. I think they initially came in with calling it a public safety gun club or indoor shooting range, something like that. And we said that's too specific, especially with our similarity of use process. If somebody wanted to come in next door and say, well, I'm just a gun club or a gun range. So I'm pretty similar to how this operates. That it's just it's messy. It's too specific. It's not necessarily helpful. So the client population or the customer population we felt was irrelevant and potentially messy and sticky for administering zoning code. And so it's something that staff can't. How do we monitor that? It's not something that can be monitored. Is there any limitation to the weapons that can be brought in? Could I bring in an AR-15 or a Bushmaster? Sure. We haven't gotten that far as what weapons are allowed to be used there. I don't want to go back to this, but that can be addressed through a conditional use process because I will say this because we're defining gun. We're defining indoor gun range and we don't have any like limitations of what firearms can be brought into a gun range that can be approved as of right. And I will say this, thanks to Mr. Costello's handiwork, the closest school is 1144 feet away from Pine Grove. From Pine Grove. And from a church 658 feet away. Well, the staff report says 700, so something's wrong. The school district property, it's 1144 feet. The west half of that property where Pine Grove is, is basically used as an agreement with the city for a park. So basically, we're over a thousand feet away from that park and Pine Grove and over 600 feet away from Calvary. How far from Milagro? Milagro is on 2nd Street. No, no, it's right up the street. Oh, you're talking about the village across from Carver, from Catherine Strong Center. And generally... No. Yeah. It's right across from the Chief Village Academy in the south. Yeah, right across from Catherine Strong. It's the same area. Oh, oh, okay. It's over. Yeah. Okay. Far, far. Staff report. That's where I got it from. It says 700 feet. Right. Yeah, so, go ahead. Oh, so are you speaking about your particular property? I'm talking about the overlay. We're talking about our specific property. Right. So I'm talking about the, this, what's in the staff report is from the overlay. So it's a conditional use. Which is any place a gun range could go in any of those areas. So if you want to, as far as distance criteria, not only is it limited to the Wallace Drive overlay, but if you want to put 500 feet from a park, church, school, so be it. So be it. We're fine with that. But we didn't want it. We were all right across the residential district. Right. And so, look, it's very, it minimizes the location, which it's almost to the point it's just one. I guess my major concern, Neil, is what can't go into a service principal use. What, where do you sort of draw the line? Could a crematorium go in there? No. So the list, if you want to list. Yeah, the list is there. The list is there. We can go back up to the list of uses in the LA. That doesn't matter because of the conditional use. No, no, no. This is just for a gun range. The conditional use is for gun range. Just for a gun range indoor. That's the only conditional use in the Wallace Drive overlay. We'll show the conditional uses in LA. Okay. So it's very limited in the LA. And also, as you may, we wanted to provide flexibility in the LA zone district. We understand that with the passing of the Live Local Act, there's even more pressure on industrial. And we just talk about tax base. So we want flexibility for those that have non-residential properties to make, to make, to make that investment. Now, this particular site owned by our client is not only this aspect, but there's actually a corporate headquarters that would be on the east side. Yeah. We don't have a site plan or conditional use to present that at this point. Their whole intention, they owned a property. It would be a foundation corporate, foundation headquarters. There's also been some research and development potentially on this site. So there are intervening uses. The way the preliminary site plan is laid out, the use is on the far west side facing Wallace Drive. Granted, right across the street, up from this property, is MIC. And if you look at the zoning map across the street from residential, where the market is, where the roofing company is, where the multi-bay condominium is, is zoned MIC. It's a permitted use there. We're actually making more restrictive regulations that really apply just to the LI when somebody could go in right across from the residential in I or MIC right on the south side of 10th Street. So we understood that. We understood the concern with the Wallace Drive. But it really, the I and the MIC really are no restrictions. Right. There's no regulations. There's no definition. And so we're taking all that into consideration to make this a high-quality, private, membership-driven facility that's not generally open to the facility. Private facility, yes. Can it be also conditional use then to be membership only? So they either have to be by the police department, they have to be a member of the club. I see a nodding a yes, somebody in there. Again, we don't have a problem with that. I do think that your staff would, and you ask your staff, I would guess that they feel it's too specific of a condition. I know you're not saying police, but as a private club, like for example, in order to purchase a beverage at the Delray Beach Elks Lodge, you must be a member and present a card. It's a private membership. Well, I don't know that operationally. I think the clients are less concerned than for us to request that the board evaluate if operationally this works in this area. And I think the membership itself was a less important component of our analysis if the board feels that that's important in maintaining a character. Because then the owners can vet the members to not, somebody's not just going to go in, buy a gun. 100%. That's what we're trying to do. You could help do that by adding the membership requirement in there to make things a little more feasible than just open to the public. Yeah, I don't know. I mean, there's a waiting period, I think, to buy guns. I don't know. I'm not a shooter. But I think, again, operationally. Not in Florida. Not in Florida. For handguns, yes. But rifles like big AR-15s, you can walk in and buy whenever you want. I still don't think I got an answer, and I know the chairman disagrees with me here, on the conditional use. If you can come in and do a conditional use on shooting ranges, can't the next person come in and get a conditional use for a crematorium or a rendering works? So they'd have to go through this process. They'd have to submit a privately initiated text amendment to do that. And if they were going into the Wallace Drive overlay district, I would assume that this board would want that to be a conditional use. That's what I said. Yeah, of course. Why? Because those uses have greater impacts than permitted uses on the neighborhood. Right? And any board would want the ability to do their best to mitigate those uses on the neighborhood. Allowing this as a conditional use gives you that ability to do that. Thank you. Go ahead. I just, you know, one thing I just can't get my hat around. You can go, there's zoning districts you can go into and buy a piece of land and just apply for a permit. Well, we own this property. We felt like, well, we own this property. And we feel like this is an opportunity to do something special here and create a scenario where there are this project, whatever ends up being, is going to be vetted so that it fits within the community. I think that, frankly, I think all gun range uses should be conditional uses in the city like they do in other cities. And granted, the other cities may have distance requirements, but those zoning districts don't necessarily just have 13 properties. And those zoning scenarios may have been established years and years and years ago. And we're getting the opportunity to do it here and now and in a very different regulatory environment than it's ever been. We have open carry allowed in the state of Florida now. Like, nobody could have thought that was going to happen. You take that AR-15 you buy there and walk in a bunker. They don't allow guns. But that being said. They do. They do. Yeah. They are going to. Okay. All that other noise. Your question is, why don't we go buy another piece of property? We're looking at other pieces of property, but we feel like this is a use that should be evaluated. Because, again, we are trying to do something really for the public by promoting or having this indoor gun range use on this site that's not going to be for the public. It's going to be for private members and primarily for the police department. And I think that's been our goal, like, since the beginning. Our intent has always been to do this for the police department. Your staff can tell you we fought with them over public service or public service indoor range or public safety indoor range. That is the police department publicly endorsed this project. Not as if not. Or asked for it in writing? No. Okay. I'm curious because I keep hearing the police, but I don't see the police. I mean, I met the union guys before once or twice, and they usually show up when they want something with t-shirts on. Lots of them. Here I am. Mr. Patton's floor. Sorry. Yeah, no, no. And like I said to you earlier, you know, just make a conditional use of the noise. Well, and I think we tried to address some of your noise concerns trying to identify what it may sound like to the best of our ability, right? It's not built yet. We don't have the ability to test it. But what we found, I think, was pretty compelling and what's also backed up in the source book. So, I agree with staff. This whole thing of trying to market this to staff and to us as, well, we're doing this for the police department. And, you know, so that's what it is. And it's a private club. It's still a gun range, regardless. It's a gun range. So, on the one hand, you're saying, well, you're doing this because it's a public service. But then, on the other hand, you're excluding the public because it's a private club. It doesn't jive with me. I don't like the fact that it's close to a church. I don't like the fact that it's close to a senior citizen development and it's within 700 feet of a school. When you have an MIC area that allows for this, that already has a gun range, that apparently is not, that has the distance requirements that the city is requiring. You all don't want to do distance. But if you move the range a quarter mile, what is this, west, you're right in line with everything that the city is requiring. Like you said, there's no restrictions there, there's no conditional use. I just, it doesn't smell right to me. One of the things that we're supposed to look at, according to what was up on the graphic, was whether or not it makes the overlay more marketable. Having an exclusive range that's not open to the public, I don't understand how that's making any area more marketable. It's just making it exclusory. I mean, you're preventing the people in the area for being able to be, to use the facility. We already have one that's a quarter mile away. Why do we need two? I just, again, I don't like the sound of it. I don't, I don't like the smell of it. And I don't think it meets the criteria that's required based on what we were given to read through. Something else, but I lost my train of thought and that's what I get for not bringing a pen. But, for now, that's it. That's it. I just, it doesn't sit right with me. Thank you. So, to Mr. Katz's point, the police didn't seem to know anything about this. They had their own range. So, I was confused about that. So, not only, I guess. Here's the one in Boyden. Pardon me? It's all in Delray Beach, but it's in Boyden. Oh, yeah? Oh, their training, their training thing? I've been at that training thing. Okay. So, I was confused about that because I would think they would be interested in that if that's something, but you haven't contacted them? We've had discussions with the police department. Mark, Mark or Jeff, do you want to talk about the police department discussions? They occurred before I was brought on board. Okay. Were you sworn in? I am not. I'll go ahead and get sworn in. You've raised your right hand by the authority of estimated nowhere in the state of Florida. I'm not. Do you swear to affirm a testimony about to give us the truth, the whole truth, and nothing to the truth? Yes. If we can look before you leave, right on the signing sheet. Yes. Yes, we'll do. Mark Grafton, also counsel for the applicant. We did have an initial meeting that Rob Long, Vice Mayor Rob Long, put together, and it was a really, really productive session where we had multiple members of the police department there, including Lieutenant McCabe. And we had really, really productive dialogue about what they needed in terms of a facility. And that discussion kind of evolved into designing this facility. And there were discussions about even when they do get their new facility in the new police department, it's going to have a lot of limitations based on that location. So things like low light shooting situations, kind of a shoot house, different kind of breaching a door, things like that that they don't have the ability to do. So this is really intended to be a state of the art facility that is designed specifically to meet police department's needs. And so we actually did have a lot more criteria specifying, kind of showing our intent as part of this land development text amendment. As part of the negotiation with staff, they thought it was a little bit too specific. So that's why it's a little bit more general now. But absolutely, when you see this come back as a conditional use, if you're not convinced that this is primarily for law enforcement, you will have the ability to deny it. And I would encourage you to deny it, because that has always been the intent. So you will get an opportunity later. Thank you. Thank you. I have nothing to add. I'm in favor of it. I would just say, generally, excuse me, totally support adding the service industry to the LI zoning. But nobody's talking about that. I'm trying to establish consensus, Mr. Chair. I appreciate that. We left it for you. As far as the gun range goes, I can support the gun range, but I think there's about three things that need to go into the section here of 4.3.3 KK. Okay. One is a separation thing. I don't have a number that rings quite well particularly. If you guys are happy with 500 feet, I could be happy with 500 feet. From? From a school. From a school. From a school, a church, or a park. A park. A park. There you go. It doesn't help the residential. No, it doesn't help. No, it doesn't say residential. It's not going to say residential. It's not going to, it isn't that far from residential. This isn't. It's right across the street. Right across the street from the senior living. Exactly. I suppose no. Okay. My next thing is hours. I think it should have designated hours. I don't know what you think the appropriate hours are. Eight in the morning, nine at night, or less than that, or slightly longer? I would say no more than 12 consecutive hours at the most, and we can refine that. Wait. Can you sit this morning? He's not going to talk. Hi, Jack. They dealt with that response. So initially, I mean, through the conditional use, I think that's the best approach. We had hours of operation that after closing to the membership that law enforcement could come in, and I think we had it at like 11 o'clock. But we took that all out because then there was a concern that, well, if you go to midnight, then you're a late night business which requires another conditional use. So we took all the time out and hours of operation and just would deal with it through the conditional use. Unless... Yeah, it's going to come back in conditional use. I do think hours of operation is important. Yes. It can go to that. It can go to that. And the other thing I got is noise. And I talked to Mr. Schiller today at probably length about this. It says in here, comply with chapter 99 of the code of ordinances. And chapter 99 of the code of ordinance doesn't say anything relevant to this operation. So currently, there is a... We're moving towards the decibel level that would constitute a violation. Ms. Vega may have an update on where that ordinance is in the process, but we are looking to adopt decibel based regulations for that. So if the board was comfortable with waiting on that to come through to be applicable. So we left it vague knowing that that ordinance is coming, but we can certainly look to whatever direction the board has. It's an appropriate level, but do you think that it's more appropriate to leave it and see what the ordinance is? Ms. Yeah, I mean you can make your suggestion if the board decides, but I don't have a number right now for you. Okay. Ms. We could either put it in as... If you wanted to make it a specific decibel recommendation, we could... Either way, we'll communicate it to commission that PZB had the concerns that you all are listing. And so it would be... I don't know that I feel comfortable with saying to take a different path other than the noise ordinance, but I think we can state the concern that the noise ordinance would be adequate for this situation. That's what I said. Noise needs to be addressed. The hours can be addressed. I like that. I like that. There's any kind of consensus here on the motion, is there? I would agree. Tell you what. Wait. Yeah, I'll tell you. Oh, he's the vice chair. Meister Patton is. Oh, you are. One of you guys. He's the second vice chair. Nobody has to sit next to me. It's a penalty. You haven't done this in a while, but you've been chairing. I have a question. So the proposed ordinance encompasses both the light industrial as well as the gun rates fitting into that definition, correct? Yes. So, but only within the Wallace Drive overlay district. It wouldn't be anywhere else. Yes. I'm sorry. Why would the conditional use, if we're saying, yes, change the zoning to this, then why would we ever need a conditional use once we change the zoning to that? Well, so, again, with the different use paths that you can take, it would be, like, principle would be something that we could approve administratively because it has less of a potential to create some kind of disruption to the surrounding properties, whereas conditional use is for something that may, what's the wording, that may not be generally appropriate, so it allows the board to approve on a case-by-case basis. So let's say if this amendment is approved and they come in and their conditional use is approved, if another gun range wanted to come in to the north of it, then you could decide if that was appropriate based on that circumstance. So it doesn't allow blanket use within a zoning district. It allows the deciding bodies to determine on the case-by-case basis. Contractor and a grade repair box, blah, blah, blah. All those in that, if this passes, are allowed in that area. But they added gun range to certain uses. Gun range is in a separate paragraph that says condition. Yes. Okay, thank you. Okay. Recommend approval. Move to recommend approval to the city commission ordinance number 2725 as amended. Amending article 4.4 base zoning district, article 4.3 district regulations, general provisions, and appendix A definitions, finding that the amendment has amended and approval thereof is consistent with the comprehensive plan and the criteria set forth in land development regulations. And those amendments are that no gun range distance, gun range will not be within 500 feet of any school, park, or church, and noise control that any sound detected at the property line shall be at or less than 60 decibels. That's what we agree. Well, I think we said that we could bring, we can bring that suggestion to city commission, but it was perhaps better to be in line with the city ordinance level. I'll second the motion. You have to call yourself a chair. Yeah. Happy anniversary. Yeah. Call the roll. Yeah. Call the roll. Price Patton. Mitch Katz. Coming back, but I'm going to say yes, because they'll come back to us initially. Didger Strong? No. Andrew Cope? Yes. Jim Chard? No. Judy Mullica? Gregory Snyder? Sorry, it's a 4-3, correct? 4-3. 4-3 in favor? No. 4-3 against. 3-4. 3-4. 3-4. Let me- Thank you. Thank you so much. We would just normally, we would redo it, but I think because it's a recommendation, it's fine. Because normally we would always want to redo it. Do it. If you want. I'll make a motion to recommend denial based on the criteria listed. I'm just not entirely sure if it has to be, because I know we would normally do that. It doesn't have to be just a recommendation anyway. It's going to go. It's a recommendation. It's just if it was normal. Yes. Motion he would. Okay. Perfect. Good. Thank you. One less second. Okay. Reports and comments. Staff. No comments. Just a reminder that the next meeting dates are November 17th and December 15th. December 15th. You want these back there? I have a short one. I'm sorry. I'm sorry to pick on Mr. Katz just a little bit, but I know that this is not a real issue that we would have, but you mentioned in a past item, the commercial residential property tax issue, and you said that you would bring it up every single time. I didn't say that. Oh, you said you'd bring it up every time it came forward. I know you would never, like, use that against the applicant or a justification. Oh, I see. They still voted yes. I know. I just want to make sure, make it clear that that's never, you know, to be used against them or as a justification. Well, can you justify it if it's coming for a zoning change? Absolutely. Sure. Yeah. And that's more something that we can bring up in commissioner comments. I just never want it to be used against the applicant. But no, if it's a zoning change, that's an absolute consideration. Sure. But not in these cases. And we're essentially changing the zoning of that property. And I have something this night. Did I turn this on or off? So, with regard to the, I think that they said that the MIC zoning, they can put a gun range in easily. Is that already one there? Huh? Right. Is that already one there? Is it off? Yes. That's an industrial. There it is. Sorry? So, it's just to the east of the MIC. I understand. Industrial. I understand. But there should be rules in place for ranges that the other cities have in place. So, perhaps our city needs to look at that. With regard to decibels and distances from parks, schools, churches, and residential. That was presented. Hmm? I think they did that research. No. They did research, but we don't have those rules. We don't have those rules. But somebody could open up one later on. Right. Yeah. I think it's valid. Who does that? In the mix. That's us. So, we didn't bundle it with this amendment because we always have to be careful with private amendments that we don't have scope creep. I see. But we can certainly add that to the discussion. Okay. To see if that's appropriate. Yeah. Thank you. In decibels. That's it. That's it. That's it. Mr. Goh, welcome aboard. Oh, thank you. Any final comments? Good to be here. Let's not make it this late next time. You have not brought up quite as many architects as Chris Brown, and they did not teach you like they taught Chris Brown, and you haven't had lunch with them like Chris Brown, but it was very impressive. Mitch, he's probably the first guy I ever met when I moved here 40 years ago. Can we keep going? Happy anniversary. I don't know where we are. Who had a chance to comment and who had a chance to comment? Mr. Goh, my son. You made your comments. Happy anniversary. Thank you. Happy anniversary. Tell Carolyn happy anniversary. Thank you. Happy anniversary. Thank you. You and Carolyn. I hesitate to ask you. Do you have any more comments? No. I do. No. Look at that. See? I have one thing. In the discussion about, I can't remember, the maestery modern. Oh. Okay. That item is coming back to us, though. He's not talking about that. Keep your comments. This is a general discussion about architecture. This is nothing new with this specific thing. One of the things I heard, Mr. Katz, thank you, is that, or somewhere, that it's a proliferation of missionaries. Missionaries. Missionaries. Missionaries. Yeah. Got it. It's too long. Part of the problem is that's the proliferation. That's all we ever see. Everybody wants to do that. And as a result of that, the commission has now got a change to where it has to go through a special approval to use it. I think they ought to look at, this is for staff. Yeah. I think they ought to look at maybe a moratorium of some period of time on the maestery modern that, like for the next two years, it's not acceptable. I think the moratorium was making it come before the moratorium. But it hasn't helped. Everything comes unless it gets approved. No. That wasn't. All right. I wanted to say no for a period of time. Don't bring that. Don't bring masonry modern. If you want to do that, forget it. Go somewhere else. What it seems like, Roger, you just mentioned they sit down with the seven guys. You know, the client sits down with the architect, says, these are your seven choices. And the client says, what's the cheapest? Modern masonry. Exactly. Great. That's the most broad. Right. That everything will fit within. Okay. I mean, Kerry Glickstein famously said, I don't want to ever see another Art Deco project ever again. Stop that stuff. He was right about that project. We had a beautiful Art Deco project come before us recently. Well, again, I should check the staff on this. How many, because since May, you've had May 23, you've had to request the style. Every single style has been requested and approved. You know? What's the point? Right. So we have to listen to the same thing twice. Right. Exactly. Anyway. Yeah. For what it's worth, I think it has resulted in a higher quality product for these applicants. It gives staff a little more leverage to push. So there's that benefit, but we are certainly, to your point, looking at the style and whether it should continue on in the guidelines or if it should change. So when we have that ready, it'll come forward and we'll have to do anything through the workshop process to make sure that the public has a chance to chime in. Do you want our opinions now? Definitely. Do you want our opinions on詞? Do you want to keep me tantal Aka that is very useful for god or a suitor? Yes, La red. Exactly. And it's really good? Same type, right? Perfect, right? What is- Is for tomorrow. How can you happier or not, do you want time? Sorry. That's sick, no tomorrow, tell. We don't want to be annoying. Earth. See yourself here or nothing. Episode 4, ready? I have been tempted too long. . There's an Kenthora пол and I want you to try. All right. You want to like me. Does a smart business, but it's enough happening? Does it have a deal? as good snake?