Planning & Zoning Board Meeting 01-26-2026 5_01 PM - Jan 26, 2026

Price Patton? Here. Mitch Katz? Here. Deidre Strong? Here. Chard? Here. Roger Cope? Roger, are you here? Here. Judy Malikam? Here. Gregory Snyder? Here. Okay. Next item is the approval of the agenda. Are there any changes to the agenda? I move to second. All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Okay. Next is to approve the minutes. Motion to approve minutes of September 16th, October 20th, and November 17th. Oh, one moment. Just to make a quick note, you have a replacement version of one of the sets of minutes in front of you, so if you feel like you need to double-check the minutes, they're there. It's just a change to the members present. Yeah, I do want to say we need to change the minutes of September 16th because it shows members present who were not on the board on September 16th. On the September 16th, it shows Chris Brown and Jeffrey Meiselman as members present. We need to replace those names with Jim Chardin and Price Patton. So what I would like is a motion to... Motion as amended. As amended. Second. All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Okay. And October 20th and November 17th? Motion to approve October 20th and November 17th. Second. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed? Okay. Good. At this point, we'll swear in any members of the public who wish to speak tonight need to be sworn in. If you could please stand. Ms. Miller will swear you in. Please raise your right hand by the authority of estimate of the notary of the state of Florida. Do you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Thank you. And then at this point, we'll entertain comments from the public on any item that's not on our agenda tonight. Seeing no one coming forward, those public comments are closed. We have no presentations, so we'll move right into quasi-judicial hearing items. And I'll read the quasi-judicial rules. The 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 a group of people who are present but agree not to speak. The board members and 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 the 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. So, Mr. Godanek, would you please read the 8A into the record? Sure. Good evening, board members. Jillian Godanek, senior planner. At this time, I'd like to enter into the record file number 2025-118, and I turn it over to the applicant's representative. Thank you. And at this point, the applicant. Good evening. My name is Clara Solag, architect for the city's Water Treatment Improvements Project. Tonight, requesting site plan approval for upgrades to the city's existing water treatment facility. This is a city-initiated infrastructure project focused on reliability, regulatory compliance, and long-term service to residents. I'm going to briefly walk through the proposed site plan improvements, architectural design, and landscaping. Joining me this evening are Hassan Hajimiri, the city's Water Utilities Director, Ray Adgantos, the construction project manager, and Joan Fernandez, the permitting lead. Our civil discipline lead was unable to join because of the weather. He got snowed in, so David was not available. The agenda, as I mentioned, site information. We'll go over the proposed project site plan, architectural design, and landscaping improvements. So site information. This is the existing public water supply and treatment facility. The site supports three essential functions. Source water from superficial wells, lime softening, water treatment, distribution, storage, and pipelines. The site's located at 200 Southwest 6th Street, Delray Beach, Florida. And we're not currently planning to change the use and propose, well, it's going to stay the municipal water treatment plant. The image on the slide shows the existing water treatment plant where lime softening is currently used. As a result, residual lime is generated and has to be hauled off-site. So the plan improvements for the plant will actually reduce the amount of traffic going through the residential area due to no longer needing to haul the residual lime. The overall intent of the project is to replace aging infrastructure. As I mentioned, reducing the lime residue hauling. We're going to improve surface water infrastructure and incorporate enhanced treatment technologies for longevity. The upgrades ensure continued delivery of safe, reliable drinking water to the community. So existing site information. It's currently zoned for community facilities and is consistent with the proposed use as a water treatment plant. The property is approximately 7.9 acres. There are currently existing four in-and-out access points around the site. And the perimeter of the site is 8-foot chain-link fence. And there's varied setbacks in landscaping conditions throughout. Overall, the project is designed to sit within the existing footprint of the overall plant site. The proposed site plan includes a new process building shown in teal and a new administration building shown in purple. Key site elements of the proposed plan include increasing the total number of gates to five with three secured and two public access gates that will be on timers. One access gate will be maybe here down at this area and that will be on a timer. And then this here next adjacent to the administration building. Two dry retention basins to manage stormwater runoff. A total of 61 parking spaces, including four ADA spaces. And this exceeds the 55 spaces that are required. Bicycle racks are included. And in lieu of the existing chain-link fence, the majority of the perimeter will be replaced with an 8-foot-tall precast concrete barrier, helping with shielding and noise control. The proposed site plan includes adequate traffic circulation and accessibility for all vehicles, including emergency vehicles and pedestrians that wish to access the site. Based on the city's land development regulations, no relief or waivers were needed to accommodate the proposed site plan and building design. So all setbacks, as highlighted here on these images, are in compliance with land development regulations. And as I mentioned, it's a combination of perimeter wall and hedging and landscaping for buffering purposes. So the main facade of the membrane building will, the barrier will die into the end of those. So you still get the view of the building from the sidewalk. So touching on the architectural design of the project, this site aerial, in the rendering, you can see most of the 422-foot-long process building and the adjacent administration building, which is over here. The challenge overall architecturally was integrating something of this scale into the existing surrounding residential areas. The intent was to create a more community and civic-minded architecture along the perimeter of the site, sort of shielding some of the existing more industrial-looking facilities. As indicated on the rendering, a robust green buffer is provided along Southwest 7th Street here to help soften the edge of the site between the process building and the sidewalk. So for the process building, we drew from the historical Mediterranean revival style of architecture, utilizing language of signature, towers, arched openings, and roof lines to break down the overall scale of the building and introduce some more human-scale elements. Materials include precast panels along the base of the perimeter of the building and a stucco facade. Aluminum windows and storefront systems are primarily using translucent and spandrel glass to minimize glow and glare on the outside of the site along the residential-facing street there on that south public-facing elevation. Standing seam metal roof systems on the towers and along the parapet of this building on three sides and then integrated louvered awnings and screen walls to help shield additional roof equipment and just break up the rhythm of the facade. The north elevation at the top of the slide is interior to the plant and has all of the same materials but just a more functional facade based on the use of the facility. The process building programming is broken into two primary areas. We've got the main volume that is the process area. This is the taller volume. And then we've got the more administrative and laboratory space. This is a slightly lower volume and different roof line just to break up, again, the overall length of the building. The square footage of the overall building is approximately 32,000 square feet. The administrative and lab space comprises 6,600 square feet and includes offices, operations, control rooms, and laboratory facilities as well as utility spaces, while the process area is primarily a high bay process area for all of the treatment equipment. The administrative building is a single-story structure with a hip roof similar to height and style of the adjacent residential houses on the east side of the site. The west elevation there at the top of the page is interior to the site, but it is the main entry and primary facade and would be what folks would approach as they entered either of the pedestrian or timed public gates in that corner of the site. We use the same language and rhythm of windows around the full perimeter of the site of the building. Architectural features for this also, from a materiality standpoint, match the process building. There's precast panels along the base transitioning to a stucco treatment, standing seam metal roof with overhang and aluminum windows, storefronts, and integrated sunshades. Mechanical and electrical equipment are isolated to the rear of the facility, so they're not visible as public or anybody approaches. The administrative building programming, this building supports administrative staff functions for the water treatment plant, and it serves as a consolidated structure bringing all the facilities that have currently been sort of scattered across the site into one building. Includes offices, a large training room, break room, bathrooms, and all of the necessary utility spaces to support the infrastructure. So from landscaping, the existing landscaping conditions vary across the site, as noted before, with varying setbacks. The design team conducted multiple site visits and coordinated closely with the city landscape planner and together identified unhealthy trees for removal, vegetation that's suitable for relocation, and trees that should remain and be protected on site. Ultimately, we ended up with 36 trees to remain, 39 trees to be removed, and 23 trees to be relocated. The landscaping is provided along the base of the new buildings and within parking islands. A substantial tree canopy, if you remember from the rendering, is located along 7th Street here, and the perimeter streets to provide beautification and screening and just soften the overall edge of the site. So many trees were planted in addition to the palms and shrubs and the trees that were to remain. We focused on 80% native trees, 76% of native shrubs and ground cover, and by utilizing native planting, irrigation demands are lessened, and it supports the local ecology. An irrigation system will be provided to ensure plant establishment. So, in summary, this project maintains an existing municipal use, meets all of the required zoning and land development requirements, and it complies with a comprehensive plan. It overall improves essential public infrastructure with respect to the surrounding residential areas. And we're happy to answer any questions. Thank you. Thank you. Chair, just a reminder for ex parte. Oh, that's a good point. None whatsoever. I've been to every community meeting about this, so that's my insights. None. None. I spoke with Neil Schiller. I'm sorry. It's the next one. No, none. Neil, what are you doing? None. Thanks, Wade. Sorry. Mr. Good night. Good evening. He's everywhere. Good evening again, board members. Julian Goodanek, senior planner. The applicant just gave a very thorough and detailed overview of the project, so I will try to move quickly, not to be redundant, just focus on some of the facts and some of the planning considerations that we made when this project was under review. As you're aware, it's a Level 3 site plan application for renovations and additions to the existing water treatment facility for the city. It's a community facility, zoning district. Again, existing site, and it's surrounded on all sides by low-scale single-family residential, which definitely informed how we were reviewing this during the technical review to make sure that it was appropriately mitigated to the best possible outcome. These are the surrounding properties. To the north is actually more of that community facility site that includes the SOC, some fleet storage, and then the water treatment facility to the east, west, and south. They're all single-story, single-family residential. And then this is the subject property facing the southwest 7th Street frontage, as well as the southwest 4th Avenue frontage, which is the south and west border of the property. Quick facts about the site plan. There are two new buildings being constructed. The process building, which is the large one on the southern property line, and then the admin building, which is on the east side of the structure. Total gross square footage is approximately 39,000 square feet. About 13,000 square feet of that is office and laboratory use. The remainder is that process, sort of infrastructure, industrial enclosure for the water treatment equipment. Additional parking spaces are being provided that didn't previously exist, and there's a revised vehicle circulation pattern just related to the change in operation with this new construction. And then importantly, there is a perimeter landscape buffer proposed around the entire project. At minimum 10 feet, it exceeds that in a lot of areas, and that's paired with an 8-foot wall, as mentioned, as well as some robust landscaping. So just looking at the membrane building specifically, you can see that the setbacks are 21 feet approximately. The community facility zoning district actually doesn't have minimum required setbacks. The only requirement is the 10-foot buffer. And then the setbacks are sort of just dependent on the approved site plan. But in no area does it extend closer than that 10 feet. And then at the admin building, which is this area, the closest setback to the residential zoning district of any of the new improvements is 59 feet. So quite a bit away of separation between the single-family residential. The applicant discussed the building layout and use functions, so I don't need to go over that. Looking at the landscape plan, again, perimeter buffering proposed around the extent of the site, including the decorative wall, or the concrete wall. It's not necessarily decorative. There's foundation landscaping proposed at the foundation of the buildings, both interior and exterior. In certain areas, there's the new shade tree canopy. And then the applicant stated, you know, there are some trees being removed, but a lot of them are existing to remain as well, and significant number of new trees are proposed. The perimeter buffer largely is comprised of live oak and dahoon holly. Live oaks create a really nice canopy over time, and then there's some other tree species intermixed. So this is just looking at the buffering. Actually, I wanted to point out at the southwest corner, there is a large canopy tree existing to remain, and then there's some other as well at the south of 7th Street entrance, which help buffer up that new canopy because there's some existing mature trees that are going to remain there. Looking at the architectural design, the applicant explained the thought process behind it. The intent was to ensure that the use, which is very industrial in nature, does not appear that way from the exterior. I think it was very successfully done to mitigate that. You know, is it appropriate for a civic building? Is it at a scale appropriate for the surrounding area? The community facility maximum height is 48 feet. These buildings are actually all below 35 feet, which is the maximum height for adjacent residential zoning districts. So I thought that was an important fact as well. And then there's some, you know, vertical articulation and movement across the long facade to help make it interesting and not so monotonous, which I think also is successful. The administration building for reference, I'll skip that because we've talked about it. Looking at the criteria for architectural elevations, it's pretty broad, essentially. You need to find that it's not, or that it is in conformity with good taste, good design, and generally contributes to the surrounding area, which staff finds that it does. In terms of consistency, compatibility, and concurrency, the CF zoning is consistent with the CF land use, and the use, which is a municipal water treatment facility, is consistent with that. Scope of work is fully concurrent. Transportation, not an issue. There's a TPS letter confirms no impact on the road network. Parks and open space in schools is not applicable. There are very specific goals in the comprehensive plan that specifically relate to improving utility infrastructure, including the water treatment plant. So the city has, you know, identified this as a needed area of improvement in the Always Delray Comprehensive Plan. And, you know, as mentioned, it complies with the LDRs with regard to height, setbacks, open space, and there are no waivers or variances necessary for this application. These are your board options, and I'm happy to answer any questions if there are any. Thank you. At this time, is there any member of the public who wishes to comment on this? Okay? Seeing none, public comment is closed. Is there any rebuttal by applicant or staff? Board comments. Who wants to start? Please, Mr. Katz. First of all, thank you. This is great. My only question is, have you thought about EV parking for the employees? EV charging options for employees? No, I don't think we included any EV parking. Okay, maybe something to consider in the future because you have, you know, other employees. Definitely enticing, too, the people that have EVs that potentially want to come work there because they can charge. But just something to think about. Otherwise, I'm good with it. And thank you for the clean water. Thank you, Mr. Katz. Sir. Good evening. I sound much more than you tell this department. There are some existing EV. Oh, you already have them? Yes, we already have them. So as part of this, there is none. But we do have them for those. That's great to know. And we currently have, yes. Thank you. City Hall for residents and guests and the garage. So great job. Thank you. Yes, sir. Thank you. Mr. Katz. Mr. Chard. I think we're spending, what, $280 million on this? I will allow the applicant to answer that. About. Can we take a couple dollars? And here's the reason for my question. I'm assuming we expect it to last a long time? Yes. The total cost is $287 million. Oh. Yes. I was off by a day. It was by $7 million. But yes, I mean, you built, designed and built a water plant for 50 years or so. And this water plant that is there, I think it's even older than me. So I don't want to go there. But it is very old. I remember when it was built. I don't think so. The reason I ask is it does say in here that it's going from 26 million gallons per day down to 22 million gallons a day. And I didn't understand that. I can't explain that. The plant is designed for 26 million gallons for this treatment plant that we have. However, our average daily flow is 14 million gallons a day. And the city's population is not going to go up. It's not going to get doubled. So there is no reason for us to build the 26 million gallons a day water plant. If we did a population projection and provided by TAS, and it was only like close to, I think, 80,000 within the next 20 years or so. So that is only 10% of what we have. So if we have 14 million gallons a day, probably close to 16, 17, the water plant is designed for 22 million gallons a day. However, there is a plan and there is room for the future expansion if we ever need it after 30 years or 40 years. So just because it was designed 26 million, it doesn't mean that the city needs it. Because the bigger plan, if you want to go to 26 million, you're talking about maybe close to 350, 400 million gallons, but only treating about 14 million gallons a day. Okay. So we're over capacity now and you're downsizing, basically. Well, again, this was done many, many years ago. No, I understand. So at that time, yes. But the treatment plan itself, the one that we have right now, it cannot treat 26 million. It was designed, you know, what it was designed for compared to what it actually can do is totally different. It's totally different. You know, we pretty much, if we run the four units that we have, we'd be lucky if we get close to 17 right now, 16, 17, because it just cannot operate in that level. Because we have to meet the water quality. It's not just pushing the water through. We've got to make sure the water that is coming out, it meets, you know, the primary water quality standard. So again, getting to the future, is this RO technology? It is not. It's a membrane software. RO is a reverse osmosis, and you only use it in the area that the surficial water is not available. Look, we have 30 wells, and those are all, basically, they use them from Biscayne Aquifer, or we call them surficial wells, which are about between 75 to 120 feet deep throughout the city. We've got five well fields. So if we didn't have these well fields, if we had to use the salt water, then you go with the reverse osmosis, which is RO. So RO is a similar technology, but it's a little bit operated at the much higher pressure, the power consumption is much higher, and it's just much more. So it uses less power. It does less power, and plus we've got all the wells. And treating the surficial well is much, you know, I don't want to say easier, but it's comparable with the RO. Again, thinking about the future, I read that it is designed to filter out PFAS. Correct. What about microplastics? Your microplastics, well, I don't know about the microplastics. I had a discussion with another, one of our customers. I mean, PFAS is designed to remove the PFAS to the four part per trillion. That's how fine it is. Parts per trillion, we cannot, it's just like a teaspoon. In a large swimming pool. So it's designed to remove that much impurity. I'm pretty sure when you take that things out, you're going to be taking everything out of this water. So for the microplastic, I haven't done it. No, I don't know if, and the membrane technology, by the way, is a proven technology. The nanofiltration is used all over the more industrial, more throughout the whole United State, as the... I just wonder because a number of people think it's a real crisis in terms of microplastics. It's getting into our water supply, and it does cross the blood-brain barrier. Let me just make one comment. We're using surficial well that are 120 feet deep in the ground. We are not using surface water like river, lake, or the water that is run off from the ground, or leachate from the landfill. So microplastic, you know, I personally doubt it. I haven't been involved. I never heard of it. That is, you know, is inside the groundwater, which is 100 feet deep. So that's the water source that almost majority of the utilities in South Florida, they utilize the same water source. Which leads to my next question is, I understand we're going to, in the same area, put a deep discharge wastewater? It's a deep injection wall, which is 3,300 feet deep. And that goes way into the brackish water, which is black. It's just mucky, mucky water. It's not the water that doesn't have any beneficial purpose. And it's 3,300 feet. I'm not sure if that's the... I'm pretty sure most of the deep injection wall in this area, I have been involved myself with the five deep injection wall throughout my career beside this, and that's what they are. You go that deep, and then you dispose. Still, you cannot just dispose anything that you want to. Your effluent from the treatment plant, or in this case, which is a concentrate, is a membrane concentrate, that's what is purposed for, to use for that, to dispose. Because we have to dispose this membrane concentrate somehow. It has been generated. So from a professional point of view, you don't have any concern about the water being pumped down and the water being pulled out. Well, that is going 3,300 feet. We have a monitoring well for this two-type injection well, that we monitor the water as much, much, much higher than the 3,300. I think maybe 2,750. That's the base of the USDW, underground source of drinking water, for the entire United States. That's the water that we don't want to impact. So all this area that they have deep injection well, that monitoring well, we sample that water from that depth, from 2,750, which is almost like 600, 700 feet above where we inject this effluent. So we monitor that. So we monitor that. If we see any symptom, any symptom, then we have to take the remedy. And typically, majority of the deep injection well in this area, they're performing very well. And the water doesn't have that much upward movement to get to the base of USDW. USDW itself is almost 1,500 feet depth. And we're using the water, which is 100 feet below ground level. So we're checking the water. We're testing the water actually at 2,750 feet underground while we move, while we withdrawing the water from like 100 feet underground. I just have a couple more questions. If I may. You have the floor. I'm going to give it back. I saw in there there was no automatic sprinklers, which struck me as somewhat strange, given the fact that you have generators in there and other electrical equipment. Is there a reason that there are no automatic sprinklers? Are we talking about the fire? Are you talking about the fire purpose? Or are we talking about which sprinkler are we talking about? For the fire purposes. For the fire, I leave it to the engineer. That they can. Both buildings are fully equipped with automatic sprinklers, but the sprinklers are removed from the electrical room only so that the electrical gear is not damaged if the sprinklers were to go off. Because then the plant would go down. So there's an exception in NFPA 13 that allows to exclude sprinklers from a dedicated electrical room. So is there a fire retardant system that isn't water? It is protected by a two-hour fire rated wall, the electrical room. The rest of the building is fully sprinklered. And while you're there, this will be my last question. I won't go into landscaping. I may come back. But the windows and the architectural design, are those real windows? Can you actually see in? They are glazed windows. There's glass. And portions of them are completely transparent that you could see through. But the ones mainly along the process area are going to be translucent, sort of frosted, or partially spandral, which you can't see through, but still has a glass. So it looks like glass from the street. That'll help limit the amount of interior light that's along the street. But the glass in the admin building is all completely transparent. Yeah, I'm just always concerned when you have an architectural feature that looks like a balcony or a window, but it's just a faux design. No, it is meant to provide natural daylighting within. So there's aspects that are translucent. It's just knowing that it's along the pedestrian scale and people will be walking along that sidewalk. We wanted to minimize the amount of light pollution that would come when the process floor is illuminated at night. It would be good to see our investment there. But yes, there will be areas where you can't see it. Okay. Thank you. Sure. I have a much less complicated question than my colleague. Is the water going to taste better? I drink that water every day, and I think I'm okay. As far as the taste of the water, when you have the water, you basically, if it tastes, we're removing all the minerals. With the nanofiltration, much more mineral is being removed from the water. Right now, we also remove the mineral to a certain extent. And I have not experienced any bad taste of the water. The tint of the water has been issued throughout the city since the day I started here. A lot of concern that the color of the water is brownish, is yellowish. And that's because of the lime treatment that we have. You saw the site. So one thing I can definitely promise, that it's going to be much, much more clear. Clear. Yeah. And the taste of the water, I honestly, I don't taste any. And we all drink in the same water. So nobody had come and complain and say, hey, your water tastes bad. They all say, hey, we don't like the color. We don't like the color. Correct. Well, that's good, too. No, I think it's a very handsome building. I mean, I'm just concerned with the outsides, really. I think it's the handsomest water utility plant I've ever received in my life. Yeah, it's pretty good. It did nice job. Nice. So I'm in favor of it. Thank you very much. What did you say you had a concern with? Did you say you had a concern with anything? No. I got it. I just asked for the waters. Oh, yeah, I got that part. I don't have anything to add to all of that. And I'm absolutely in favor and happy that it's coming. I wish it weren't so expensive, but I'm happy that it's coming. No comment other than I'm surprised that Commissioner Childish walked away with removing 39 trees. No, no. That's not anything about that. Don't get him started. I did reserve the opportunity to come back. Okay. Thank you. I guess the real reason we're here is that the comment on the architecture and the site planning issue is not the technology and all that nonsense, but that is super, ultra, ultra important stuff, obviously. But I agree with Price. I mean, architecturally, the architect has done a fabulous job, very intelligent design. I would classify it as like a municipal style of architecture. All the detail appropriately on the long building, the larger building, spent toward the residents across the street. I'm sure they very much appreciate that. And obviously, nobody came out tonight from that neighborhood to dispute anything. So I think that's kind of important. They had the opportunity to. But it's a very handsome building. The glass, I'm assuming the city of Delray Beach has approved the blue roof. And I'm assuming that that's going to be a blue roof, as the renderings indicate, and the architects are saying yes. So staying out of the color schemes, let the city handle that. Very handsome landscape plan. Obviously, our landscape architect has gone over the whole thing. I love the one tree on 7th that the sidewalk wraps around and curbs and makes an effort to stay away from that guy. So obviously, that's a very important tree. So it's a great project, good for the neighborhood, good for the city, very well done by the applicant. And, you know, try to get out of our way and let them build this thing. Thanks. You got a comment on the landscaping? Diedrich kind of already spoke for me. There are an awful lot of trees being removed. And a lot of those have been around for, I would guess, 75 or 100 years. So I was wondering about the necessity of that. And there's an awful lot of St. Augustine grass, which does take a lot of water and irrigation and sprinkling over time. And I didn't see anything about native grasses at all, you know, Thakihachi or muley grass or anything. And I think that that would require a lot less maintenance. And I can never quite figure out how we get to the counts on what's organic or what's native and not native. There are a number of palm trees listed in there, the Alexander palms and the Date palms. Are those in that number and that ratio of native to non-native counted as non-native? There he is right there. While he's making his way up there, coconut trees are not native. Or palms are not native. Most of them. Not most of them. All of them. I'm pretty sure. Well, he's coming up, too. I just want to also comment on the injection well. And thank you for adding that. As a former member of the Treatment Plant Board, along with my colleague, when I went to the meetings, that's very important so that we don't have that runoff on the ocean. So I know we need that. So I'm glad you guys incorporated that. We're attempting to open the landscape plan. So Mr. Glover can reference it. My computer, unfortunately, crashed. So I'm just trying to re- Mine did the same thing. Trying to re-broot it. So if you just bear with us a moment, I think he got hit. On the landscape one? I couldn't get the landscape one. Yeah. They did that on purpose for Jim. Very slow. Mine's not saying LTE. It's not connected to the Wi-Fi. There might be a Wi-Fi issue in the building. Anyway, I'll let them do it. Yep. I'm working. It's a long down. In the meantime, if you want to repeat the question, that would be great. I know there were a few pieces that can be maybe broken down. And we can try to clarify as much as we can. There's a preponderance of St. Augustine grass, which is basically a native, but it requires a lot of maintenance as opposed to things like Fakahatchee grass or Muley grass or Love grass or any of the other natives that we have. And I was also wondering how we got to the ratio of native versus non-native. Is that because I don't know if the Alexander Palms and the Date Palms are included in that. And I guess the final question is, when you talk about relocated, is that relocated on site or is that hoping somebody – it is? Yeah, it is relocated on site. Okay, good. Is that watering with the reclaimed water or the – Because that's a good thing. Yes, thank you. We're just bringing the reclaimed water in that area. Yes, we're bringing the reclaimed water in that site. But right now it's not available, but that's what – But it will be. So the St. Augustine will get more of the reclaimed water, which will help less water going into the injection well. Yeah, oh yeah, definitely. So I like having the St. Augustine because we want to use up that reclaimed water. We have a – Because we have a percentage of reclaimed water we have to use by law for a certain period of date. So great job. Thank you all. I like the St. Augustine because I can water more. I've got one picture. I've got one page. Good evening, board. My name is David Glover. I'm the senior landscape planner for the city of Delray. So the reference to your question about how do we get to the percentage calculations of the native trees, trees, it's based on what the LDR is requiring for the scope of that work or the proposal of that plan and then divide it by the square foot so you would get your percentage on that. So even though you might see other trees that are mentioned in the plant schedule, it's not necessary that those are being included in the native count. It's based on if that tree is a native tree to Florida. So when you say square footage, I can see that for a ground cover. How does that work with trees? Is that the drip zone? No. So I guess I can explain it this way. So say you have a perimeter barrier and it's based on 30 foot on center. So if it was to take 18 trees to come out to 18 trees in that perimeter barrier, if you're using 10 trees or native, then whatever percentage of that requirement out of that 18, that's how you get the percentage. Based on the required number of trees. So it is the canopy that you're measuring, right? Not the trunk. No, no, no. If I can understand what David's saying, I believe it's the numerical amount of required trees, not the number of provided trees. So if there's trees in surplus of what's required, they're not factoring into the percentage of native. It's only the amount that's required. So in the example he provided, if a perimeter buffer requires 18 trees, whatever the percentage of the code requires for native is based off of the minimum required amount, even if they provide more than 18 trees. Is that correct? Okay. Based on the number of trees, not the size of the trees? The percentage is not based on coverage. It's based on usage. Meaning the trunks of the trees? No, meaning the use of the trees, of how many, the number of trees. So if you had 10 trees, five of them were native, five of them were not native, you would be using 50% native, 50% non-native. But the code is strictly, you know, it's based on, it has, well, we have to use 50% of native trees on every project. The applicant is able to go over, but they can't go under, but I always push to go above. That's good. Yes. And for ground coverage and shrubs, that's square footage? Yes. What's left over. So whatever area is left over that they're using, ground cover, or that area is appropriate for ground cover. It depends on how much they use, and then that's how you calculate to get the percentage. So it's all based off usage of whatever square footage area is left over. Okay. Thank you. Mm-hmm. Okay. I just have one thing about the architecture and the landscaping together. On the east facade of the admin building, it's a pretty bare facade, architecturally, as far as I can tell. The problem may be me trying to interpret the pictures, but. All right. Do you want the landscape? East elevation. East elevation of the admin building. Is that right? Yes. Yeah, that's the rear of the admin building. So that's facing east. North and south. The east. Yeah, the one, the second down. Yes. So how, I just want to ensure that if that's going to look like that, it's going to be well-screened from the residential neighborhood. Yes, there is a section of the eight-foot concrete wall along the perimeter of the site. Oh, okay. Along that. Yes. Along that. Okay. So the residential would not be able to see that. And then there is landscaping as well. There's a dry retention pond directly behind that. Right. And then some trees as well. Okay, great. Thank you. While you're up there, do you have a detail of that eight-foot wall in the drawing? I believe they're on the civil plans. On the civil? Okay. Yes. Okay, that's good enough. Thank you. Are you ready? Let me know. Yes, stand by. I want Mr. Cobb to look at, be able to look at the wall. I didn't find in my package any renderings. I saw elevations, but no renderings of what it would actually look like. Staff didn't receive renderings, so the applicant has them in their presentation. I can call them up if you'd like for reference. Please. This is the only rendering we included in the presentation, but we have, there are others of more on the streets scale. This is 7th Street? Yes. Southwest perspective? Yes. Southeast, I would say. Southeast, yes. But the wall depicted by the parking on east of the main building, it would be the same wall? Yes. Over on the other side? Yes. All right, thank you. Also, this is a huge improvement over what's there now, especially, not just the water quality. The chain link fence. Just the chain link fence. I mean, it's always, you drive by that, it's like, this is God, and we can do better. And they are doing better, so thank you. Mr. Cobb, are you satisfied? I couldn't find the detail. Okay. I'll, I'll, let's not, we should move on. Can we have a motion, please? Move approval of a Level 3 Site Plan application request for the Delray Beach Water Plant, including architectural elevations and landscape plan for renovations in addition of an existing facility by finding that the request is consistent with the land development regulations and the comprehensive plan. Second. We have a motion by Mr. Katz, seconded by Mr. Chard. Would you call the roll, please, then? Royce Patton? Yes. Mitch Katz? Yes. Deirdre Strawn? Yes. Jim Chard? Yes. Roger Cope? Yes. Judy Malica? Yes. Gregory Snyder? Yes. It passes seven to nothing. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you very much. And I, just in a note, I had a neighborhood meeting the other day, and this was brought up, and the people were excited that the color's going to change. The water. Of the water, yeah. Of the water. The admins on Facebook groups are very disappointed because of less traffic. Aw. All right. Moving on to 8B, Mr. Godan, could you read this into the record? Hello again, board members. Julian Godanek, senior planner. At this time, I'd like to enter into the record file number 2024-104, level 3 site plan application at 109 Southeast 5th Avenue. And let me just go full screen. How do I go full screen on PDF? There you go. All right. Mr. Schiller, the floor is yours. Do you want to do our expert day? Oh, expert day. I'm way behind on that tonight. Mr. Gatz. I met with Mr. Schiller and the applicant. I spoke with Mr. Schiller. I spoke online with Mr. Schiller and the applicant. Same with me. Mr. Schiller and the applicant. I spoke with Mr. Schiller. I tried to speak to you. I was tempted to speak to you. Same with me. I received an email, but politely responded. Thank you. Okay. In that case, apparently now, Mr. Schiller, the floor is yours. Thank you so much. Before I begin, my client, Mr. Badoff, wants to make a few words. Please. Jerry Badoff for 109 5th, LLC. How are you tonight? Thank you so much for entertaining this proposal. I've been a developer for approximately 35 years, and I have an unusual motto, and that is do anything and everything the township would like. And that was what I started with in the original discussions I've had before these boards, before the meetings, and also my instructions to Neil and my experts. So one of the main things is no variances, no waivers. Make it as simple as possible. We've dealt for the last almost two years, maybe 20 months or so at least or more. And we had probably over 191 comments, and we've actually addressed them all. We think this proposal, after numerous changes of designs to the building and numerous changes to the site plan, actually exceeds, in many respects, what's required. For example, trees, I think, are interested by certain people, and most people, including me, by the way. So we're required to have 55 trees, and we actually have 98 trees. In the old detail, a little more. And also the civic space, which is important to me, that has a significant percentage higher, I think it's 20 or 25 percent higher, than what is required. And that's space that, you know, people could try to use to make money. But again, I want to try to do a good project, one that I'll be proud of, not one that just sits in there and makes some money. So that's a critical part to me. In fact, we even have a water feature. I'm thinking maybe we do a spa and a cold plunge, you know, combo. I'll hand out snacks and do a suntan lotion if needed, okay? So that's my only thought process. So thank you very much. Thank you, Jerry. Good evening, Board. Neil Schiller with Government Law Group, 137 Northwest First Avenue, or First Street, sorry, right across the street from City Hall. So we're here tonight, Site Plan Level 3 approval. We're asking you to approve our Site Plan Level 3 application tonight. Oops. If you don't know where the site is, we are on the corner of First Street and Fifth Avenue and Sixth Avenue, where the old PNC Bank building is now. Just a little bit of history. We've been in this process for 461 days. We've satisfied 195 different comments to get to tonight's hearing. In April 2025, the Planning and Zoning Board recommended contemporary functionalism as the architectural style that went to the City Commission as an alternative architectural style. In June later that year, the Commission voted not to approve a new style called contemporary functionalism, but did approve the use of masonry modern and said that these two styles seem very close, so just go with masonry modern, which is what we did, and we're here tonight for our final vote for a Level 3 Site Plan approval. This is our previous rendering from the northwest corner, and you can see where the building, how the building lies and interplays with both Southeast Fifth Avenue and Sixth Avenue, and you'll see some differences from this rendering, which is the current rendering, again, from that same corner. You've noticed that we've highlighted some changes for you in the next slide, or one of the future slides. That is the same corner with our landscaping and salt. We wanted to have both, so you can see some of the amenities that are there outside of the landscaping, including our water feature, some benches, bike rack, and most importantly, the entrance to the building. And here is the landscaping that is going to make that even more beautiful and attractive to pedestrians. Here is another rendering that was in our package of the massing plan of the new building with the current architecture. You can see that we have included a sky bridge on Levels 2, 3, and 4 above the first floor to connect the two buildings over the public alleyway, which we have actually improved by expanding to 20 feet wide. So as I said, these are our changes from our previous design. The previous design that was contemporary functionalism is on the top, and the current design, Masonry Modern on the bottom. We focused on more stucco, reduced mixed materials and color to create unity of form, which is a tenet of Masonry Modern, we removed a lot of the wood paneling and closed in the balconies to create a solid massing with punched openings, another tenet of Masonry Modern, and we added elements on the building and in the elevations to reinforce the tripartite composition, which as you know, is a significant tenet of Masonry Modern architecture. Here is our proposed site plan. The buildings are outlined or colored in, excuse me, in blue, and you can see where they will sit on the property in relation to the streets. The most important thing to one of your members, maybe, is our landscape plan. We have 98 trees on this landscape plan, excuse me. The previous site had something like 57 trees, we are having more trees than the previous site, and we are saving, I think the last count was 23 trees on site that we are saving. Here is a, just so you know where our parking plan is, this is the level one parking plan at ground level. And then if you can't get a spot here, there are additional spots on what we're calling level two parking plan, but which is a traditional mezzanine parking level. We had our architect identify some four-story buildings in the vicinity, so you can see how our project, which is four stories, 54 feet, all within code, interplays with the other buildings in and around the area. We highlighted IPIC, the Marriott, Caspian, and another four-story apartment building. And it should be noted that on the east side of this project, there is a four-story multifamily residential building just south of that east tower. Our project highlights, ladies and gentlemen, we're talking about 26 residential units, four stories, 54 feet tall. It does get a little taller with the elevator equipment and the air conditioning equipment, but that's allowed by code. We are proposing 59 parking spaces that are 57 are required. We have 1,220 square feet of civic space. That's the civic plaza. However, on the northeast corner, there is an additional 700 square feet that is not considered our public civic plaza, but it will be programmed very similarly with trees and benches so that pedestrians can take refuge on that corner, too, if they're going either north or east to west or west to east. We're in central core land use designation, CBD zoning. We're under the FAR, and we are under the density, proposed density. You have, as you know, section 3.1.1 required findings. I'm going to go through very fast because your staff, in their staff report, points out that we meet and exceed the required findings. So here is the land use map. The site is squarely within the commercial core and land use designation and the central business district, and this use is allowed in both. As far as concurrency goes, you have all the different water drainage, transportation, solid waste, and schools, which the project meets or exceeds those areas. There's no concurrency failures here, as well as we are consistent with your comprehensive plan and your land development regulations. You have specific site plan approval criteria. I'm going to run through them really quickly now. The first is whether or not the building creates unwanted distractions or visible blockage from traffic. The existing visibility site triangles have already been dedicated to the city, so there are those visibility site triangles on the site plan. I'll just show them briefly. Right here, you can see them right here on the northwest side right there and the northeast side right there. So from a visibility standpoint, we aren't concerned with traffic, and then if there is any landscaping, it will be continuously maintained to avoid any blockages from the road. All development shall provide pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicular interconnections with adjacent properties. There is an existing alleyway that we are maintaining and expanding to the site north and south. Additionally, we provide at least 1,900 square feet of civic open space on the northwest and northeast corners with expanded sidewalks, which is important. Again, as far as open space enhancements and recreational amenities, providing this 1,900 square foot of civic space, which is 21% more than required by the code, that includes benches, trees, and on the northwest side, a beautiful water feature. Additionally, those corners correspond directly with the entrances to the building, so they will be used by people going in and out of that building, as well as pedestrians crossing that street, which, as you know, there are no pedestrian amenities currently. I talked about the expansion of the access to 20 feet, and there is a two-foot right-of-way dedication adjacent to the alley that will be accomplished by this application. E, development of residentially zoned vacant land shall be planned in a manner consistent with adjacent development, regardless of zoning designations. While this is not specifically residentially zoned, it's a mixed-use development, we are proposing residential only, and this project does comply and is consistent and compatible with the uses and the other buildings in the downtown area. The property shall be developed or redeveloped in a manner so that the use, intensity, and density are appropriate in terms of soil, topographic, and other physical considerations. Again, we're compliant with the permitted density and compatible with adjacent land uses in the CBD here. Two more, and then I'll get to staff's concerns. But G is the development shall provide a variety of housing types. We feel that creating residential units in the downtown adds housing stock and is critical to the success of the downtown area. And then lastly, further consideration shall be given to effective development that I'll have on safety, livability, and stability of the surrounding neighborhoods. And again, positive residential development in the downtown really does strengthen the whole downtown, so we have residents that can live, work, and play 24-7 in our downtown, not just come and go between 9 and 5, Monday through Friday. Development shall not be approved if the traffic associated with such would create a new high accident location. Because this is a commercial use currently, the 26, the traffic generated by the residential units is substantially less than the previous bank use. So we're improving traffic there. And then as far as totlots and recreational areas serving children, that is not necessarily applicable here. We shall not exceed the maximum limits established in Indy 1, which we don't. And then the development shall meet the intent of energy efficiently and diverse energy mix, which we will have a lead expert assigned to construction documents and final design to ensure that we maximize the lead points and make this green building as green, as sustainable as possible. We did note in your staff report that there were some concerns and we wanted to address them with some parts of our presentation, specifically our civic open space on the northwest corner. Your staff does correctly point out that the expansion of the sidewalk, integration of civic space at the northwest corner and an introduction of a shaded tree canopy are substantial amenity improvements within the public realm that will benefit the general public. That's a plus, plus, plus. But they were concerned that there were no quality active uses adjacent to the civic space or even lining the civic space to make this really, from a planning perspective, make that civic space be used more and be more active. And we understand where staff is coming from. But I do want to point out that we have a beautiful water feature with a glass wall that's bringing the public into that part of the building. We have a bicycle rack that will be used by residents and visitors to the building. We have benches and trees, as I've shown you. And most importantly is our entrance to the building. That glass entrance to the building, people have to walk into the public civic plaza. The other additional consideration to think of here is there are no trees, there are no benches currently on Southeast First at this corner. Having the trees and benches there for pedestrians to take refuge when it gets hot out or even if it's raining like it was this afternoon is a tremendous upgrade. And so while it may not be as active as staff would like, I would also remind you that we are a 100% residential building. We're not proposing mixed use here. That's additional traffic that I don't know that the site can necessarily handle. And that's not what we're interested in. We're interested in a residential building where our residents and their guests can walk to the building and other pedestrian passerbys can take advantage of the civic space. This is our civic area plan that we've given to the city and submitted to the city. And we've highlighted the three major areas where the trees are, in addition to our water feature, benches, the building, lobby, etc. So you get a 2D. May I have a few more minutes? Thank you, Mr. Chair. This is the civic space lined with trees. So you can see that an active quality use is, we feel, there and apparent. Additionally, staff was concerned about the tripartite composition of our building, which is essentially the architecture of masonry modern. Excuse me. We feel that we have a definitive top, middle, and bottom on all the elevations. We pointed out the north elevation, our south elevation. Here you can see the punch out right in the middle there and the bottom. Our west elevation, top, middle, and bottom. Again, we think clearly defined tripartite composition. And then here in the rendering from the northwest corner, you can see definitive top, middle, in between those blue lines and the bottom below those lines. Additionally, I think staff was concerned that due to our rendition of masonry modern, that maybe this building wouldn't fit into the downtown. And we pointed out four other buildings in the area that are very similarly addressed or dressed as masonry modern. Everything from the Caspian to Courtyard Marriott to parts of Atlantic Crossing and to a residential project at 318 Southeast Fifth Avenue. I want to give your staff a lot of credit. They have vetted this project for a long time. I would say more than 180 days. And they've done a great job of vetting this project. And we pointed out some points of praise as far as our existing conditions, discussion of the site plan, traffic impacts, which I've told you, discussion of our landscaping meeting, all the landscaping regulations. And I think the last one is the discussion of the building design. And he says, additional thorough collaboration with staff. The applicant has refined aspects of the design to facilitate a building that is well integrated with the public realm, provides significant outdoor amenity space for residents, and successfully addresses functional and operational elements, such as relegating back-of-house uses, trash and loading to the interior site, and preserving the external perimeter for pedestrian use. That is high praise from your staff, and we take that very seriously, and we are thrilled to have that sentence or sentences in our staff report. And in conclusion, I want to remind you, no waivers, no variances. We've designed completely within the code. We have more civic space than required. We meet and exceed criteria for approval. And we fit truly within the downtown. This building is going to be a tremendous benefit to our downtown, and we look forward to your approval tonight. So thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. Hello again. Julie Gedanek, Senior Planner. As you're aware, before you at this time, is a Level 3 site plan application at 109 Southeast 5th Avenue. It's a 26-unit multifamily residential development, not mixed-use, purely residential, four stories. It is located in the Central Business District, Central Core. Property size is a little under one acre. The existing use is a commercial office building that previously contained a financial institution, and as mentioned, the proposed use is multifamily residential. It's surrounded on all sides by Central Business District, right in the middle of two very prominent streets, Southeast 1st Street, and in between two primary designated streets, the Federal Highway Pairs. So a very important site in the city. These are the surrounding properties for some context of the area, varying commercial and residential south, or the lower left image is residential. Varying different styles and varying different ages. This is some other surrounding, the lower right rendering is a project that was approved across the street at 102 Southeast 5th Ave, just for some idea of what project will be coming across the street in terms of massing, scale, and architectural style. And this is the subject property, existing conditions, looking at the building from sort of an elevated perspective at the northwest corner. So that's the 1st and 5th intersection, and then the street view is from the 6th Street, sorry, 6th Avenue perspective. Just a bit of background, again, to reiterate some of the things the applicant stated. Applicant requested, as part of this application, approval of an alternative architectural style, which was termed contemporary functionalism. That was recommended for approval by the Planning and Zoning Board, but was not approved by City Commission, and instead the City Commission approved the use of the masonry modern architectural style, which is permitted as one of the styles in the design guidelines, but requires additional approval. So that style has been approved. However, the execution of the style, how it's implemented, the specifics of the design are under your purview today. Looking at the site plan, there are two structures proposed as part of this development that are sort of tied together, for lack of a better term, by a pedestrian bridge that, you know, extends over the internal alley. Talk about that more in a bit. Total gross square footage is 98,000 square feet approximately. That includes the interior garage square footage. Again, 26 units, two and three bedrooms, four stories in height, under the maximum height, as measured from the top of roof. And there is 1,200 square feet of civic space in the northwest corner, some additional surplus civic space in the northeast corner, and it does exceed the amount required. So the applicant was correct in that instance. And importantly, I think it's, you know, worth mentioning that all vehicular access from this property has been internalized to the alley, which preserves the entirety of the perimeter for the pedestrian environment. That is very different than what's currently there, where there's multiple curb cuts and vehicle ingress and egress points on both 6th and 5th. So that is definitely an improvement that we've worked with the applicant to achieve. This is just quickly a composite plan, so you can see the site plan overlaid with the landscaping to get a better idea of the landscape, and we'll talk about that in a bit as well. Just highlighting some specific areas. This is the southeast 5th Avenue frontage. It's kind of turned on its side just so I can make it a little bit bigger. So apologies if that orientation is confusing, but I just wanted to point out that all the sidewalks do exceed the minimum required. We worked diligently with the applicant to make sure that there was a balance of, you know, landscaping, curb zones so that we could have a street tree canopy, but also making those sidewalks as wide as was possible. It's something, as a planner, I do push for because it's an important aspect of the public realm. So all streets do have that. You can see the dimension of the pedestrian zone is 6 feet, and then the actual sidewalk proposed is larger than that. And it varies depending on what side of the street we're on. Sorry, going back quickly, you can see that there is, on the 5th Avenue, there's the lobby area, there's an amenity space, there's an exit stair at the center of the facade, and then the primary lobby entrance is sort of to the right, which is towards that corner civic space. On the 6th Avenue side, you have a separate lobby for the eastern building with a separate frontage type that meets the CBD standards, additional surplus civic space at the corner, and then the CBD streetscape requirements are provided as well. You know, as the applicant mentioned, this project is, you know, almost two years old in terms of when it was submitted. There was a significant amount of comments. We've gone back and forth with them. They've put a lot of time investment into this. We've put a lot of time to, you know, massage this and make it as good as is possible in certain areas, even though staff thinks there are some additional improvements that should be considered. But part of that was the streetscape design specifically to ensure the sidewalks are as wide as possible, the canopies, you know, a positive amenity that all the frontage types are delivering what the CBD intends, and that there is a nice integration between public space and private space. So moving to the alley, so part of the site, the southern portion, actually is a public alley, and then as you move to the northern portion, it's on private property, but there is an access easement and a utility easement. As part of this application, the applicant is required to actually expand those existing easements to reflect what we require today for alley widths, which is 20 feet. That's, you know, running vertically, and then there is that pedestrian bridge that crosses between the two structures that extends through, you know, through that what I'll call private alley. There is sewer infrastructure underneath that, so part of the review during technical advisory committee was to figure out how much vertical clearance was necessary for the utilities department to be able to repair or access that sewer easement if necessary. They required 22 feet, which is what's provided, so that, you know, shouldn't be an issue. While I'm on this, I also want to point out that there is a reliance on this pedestrian bridge to meet life safety requirements and fire code based off of the placements of the stairwells, etc. So the applicant, in moving forward, if this is approved, would have to enter into a whole harmless agreement with the city, basically stating that if, for whatever reason, this pedestrian bridge is incapacitated or inaccessible for any period of time, then some or all portions of the building may not be occupiable, depending on how that life safety plan is finally approved. So they're aware of that. That's, you know, a potential issue we hope never arises, but that is something that would have to be signed by them because of the fact that this pedestrian bridge is required to meet life safety code currently. This is a building section looking from the south, just to kind of give you an idea of how those buildings are connected through the bridge. And then there's sort of a slope that allows them to connect because the elevations on 6th Avenue and 5th Avenue are different. So that's how that works. We, you know, reviewed with them to make sure that it met all the requirements in terms of sloping and ramps, etc. So that's for reference, just so you're aware. Ground floor plan, I've already touched on the fact that there's two separate lobbies, one on each building. There's an amenity space for a gym on the west building. There's interior parking. I do want to point out, if I can highlight, something I appreciate and glad we were able to work out is the loading zone here and then the trash room accessible from this internal alley. Those that have been on the board for a while are aware that we've had a lot of projects come through the CBD that either haven't provided loading zones or have provided sort of half measures, for lack of a better term. And they've provided their loading demand statements that have been approved. But for a project of this size in this location, we thought it was crucial that they would have a dedicated loading zone, which they do. So staff has no concerns with the ability of this development to accommodate loading without creating a new sensor or any issues on the external street network. This is the second floor parking mezzanine. We require that they provide a turning radius diagram to make sure that vehicles could go in both directions at the same time without running into each other because it appeared a bit tight to us at first, but it does demonstrate that that is feasible. Moving on to the civic space, the applicant highlighted the amenities that they've included. You know, their rendering shows the landscaping. It does have the components of what's required and it has the potential to be a really great civic space. Staff does have a concern regarding the lack of an active use liner on the civic space. Specifically, what we're talking about is this red area, this corner of the building, is very passive, in our opinion. And the LDR section 4413, which is the CBD code, I don't know the section off the top of my head, but it's in the staff report. It requires that civic open space is lined by an active use. The reason why this doesn't require a waiver is because technically that hallway is an extension of the lobby area and we consider the lobby an active use for residential buildings. But when we look at the qualitative aspects of the plan and whether this is an active use in the way that the code intended when it was, you know, established as a requirement, in staff's opinion, this isn't really delivering on that. For the reasons the applicant stated, you know, activity in use between interior and exterior, having a use type that encourages people to spend time in that space is what is necessary to facilitate and create a civic space that's used and encourages people to spend time there. There's a lot of examples of civic space in the city and elsewhere that spatially comply with what code requires, but no one spends any time in them because they're not aligned by active uses. So in of itself, the civic space is designed quite well in terms of what's placed in there. We worked back and forth. There's probably five different iterations of the civic space through the technical review to get it to this point. But in staff's opinion, it could go one step further to make it a really great example of what civic space should be moving forward. So that's why we're calling this out as a concern. Regarding the landscape plan, everything that's required by the CBD code is provided. There is the shade tree canopy. I believe cathedral oaks are the species proposed as the street tree. Various other tree species are interspersed. There are, you know, significant shade trees provided in the civic space as well. And then there's interior perimeter buffering provided between the properties to the south. So staff has no issues with the landscape plan. A lot of trees existing are being removed and replaced with what's required. And I believe there is a mitigation fee required in order to account for that balance of removal versus replacement. And that's due at time of building permit. And here it is. Moving to the architectural design, as mentioned, the commission approved the use of the masonry modern style. And staff generally does not have an issue with the design. We don't feel that this is a problematic design or that it's garish or in poor taste or whatever the code says as far as 4618 for criteria for architectural design. But in terms of achieving what the design guidelines establish as required for masonry modern, yes, it does some things really well. And then there's, like, essentially one element that staff does not feel is quite being met. And that's the percentage of glass or the amount of glass that's being used. Just quickly, let's go through the elevations just so that you have that frame of reference. And then material palette as well. Sorry, I'm going out of order. But it's predominantly stucco. There's a wood veneer finish. There's a green wall proposed on the west side. And then there's aluminum accents. Two different stucco colors, a sort of white, white, beige, and then a dark gray, which is on the ground floor and then elsewhere sporadically used. Next, so looking at the masonry modern design guidelines, to quote straight from the document, it says the ratio of glass to wall emphasizes the solidity of the structure. Windows are typically recessed back from the exterior face of the building, producing deep shadows and revealing the thickness of the wall. Now, in this version of the building, which is different from previously approved, I do agree that the applicant has made improvements. The thickness of the stucco banding around the second and third floor balconies definitely reads as more masonry modern than previous. But, you know, specifically looking at the northwest corner and then elsewhere, just in sum, the total sum of glass used is, in our opinion, beyond what is typical for masonry modern. So we just would appreciate the board to consider that. And you may agree or disagree. That's totally fine. But we need to point that out if that's our opinion. And just to show some references, these are examples of masonry modern pulled straight from the design guidelines. A minute or two more? Sure. That show sort of the relationship between the punched openings, minimal glass, and then the solidity of the stucco. So that's what the guidelines are looking for. Again, it's not what staff's looking for. It's what the design guidelines are looking for. And that's why we're making this comment. Here's another example where you can see that relationship between stucco and glass. Final point on the architecture is the tripartite composition. You know, it's a traditional architectural element that has a clear base, middle, and top. It's a very important element of the design guidelines. It's like the second thing discussed in the document. So, and it states that even though masonry modern is a modernist architectural style, it is still required to provide that tripartite composition. Naturally, there needs to be some kind of element in the design that demarcates between a base, middle, and top. There's got to be a change in color or a material shift or an articulation, a recession, a protrusion, something, a mass shift, something that triggers a break between the three. And then that should be uniform or consistent across the facade. So, while the applicant showed that, you know, blue line extending that might suggest a base, middle, and top, when you look at the actual features of the design, I kind of placed red lines where you could theoretically break it. And there's no debate. There's a very clear base. That's obvious. There is a base to the composition. But the issue really is between the middle and the top. You could follow the, you know, the top of the third floor balconies. You could follow the sort of cantilevered projection, awning projection on the fourth floor. You could follow the gray stripe that's added in between the second and the third. It doesn't continue across the facade. It's different. There's clearly an absence where that glass facade is at the corner. So, the staff report is not saying that the entire composition is devoid of a tripartite configuration. Just there's elements of it that aren't delivering it the way the design guidelines is looking for, in our opinion. Again, the northern facade, same thing. Between the two buildings, they're on different planes. You could pick multiple points where it could or couldn't be, you know, the middle or the top. Again, base very clearly defined, not an issue. And then this is the southern facade, which didn't get much focus in the applicant's presentation. And this is one where it is pretty clear to us that there's not a distinction between the middle and the top. So, again, just for your consideration, this is not necessarily a reason to make a final determination, but you have to be aware of what our position is on this in order to move forward. And here, again, is the rendering. It's a very interesting-looking building. Is it a tripartite composition, in our opinion? Not everywhere. I'll move on from this. Concurrency is met. There's not an issue in that regard. It's detailed in the staff report. I know I'm long on time, so I'll move through this. Comprehensive plan supports this type of redevelopment in the CBD. There is no issue of noncompliance with the LDRs. Just qualitatively, there could be some improvements in the two areas discussed. And these are your options for board action. And thank you for bearing with me. Thank you. Let's see if I forgot where I am. City Hall. Public comment. Public comment. Are there any members of the public who would like to come forward and speak on this issue? Seeing none, public comment's close. Is there any rebuttal by applicant or staff? Mr. Schilder. Just some brief rebuttal, Mr. Chair. First off, thank you, Julian, and your staff. You have been amazing to work with. We haven't made it easy for you, and you haven't made it easy for us. But we got here, right? We got here. I just want to say we heard staff's concerns. We've tried to address them as best as possible to get here. We will always continue to work to make the building better. But this is going to be a substantial improvement over what is there right now, both visually from a pedestrian standpoint. The amenities, specifically the pedestrian amenities themselves, are so much better than what is there now with expanded sidewalks and trees and benches and even a water feature. And we hope that this board will see to it to give us that approval so we can turn this into a reality. So thank you. Thank you. This is a good ending. No additional comment from me. Thanks. Thank you. All right, board members. Want to start? I'd love to start. I'll start. I'll start. I absolutely love the project. All right? That's the foundation from which everything else that I say might rest upon. Spectacular site. It's a stunning site. And I've got like five categories of stuff that I'd like to talk about. The site, the style of the architecture, maybe the bridge, the civic space, and whether or not it meets the LDR's intention of the masonry modern that circles back to style. But an amazing site, very, very dynamic site that's underutilized right now, even though it's got a relatively brand new building on it. This is going to be an absolutely stunning project that links to two properties across that alleyway for the first time ever. And it's got some really exciting things that Julian pointed out. The internal organization of the utilities. It's not on the periphery. Like the courtyard, the Marriott courtyard, a block and a half away, just didn't address a lot of these very intelligent things that staff and Julian is talking about. And so here they are. And I think they've been addressed very, very well from what I can see. The civic space, the civic space at the Marriott is woefully fall short of solving whatever it was supposed to solve. It has a drinking fountain, a drinking fountain as its water feature. And the drinking fountain is something exactly like we have in the hallway, right outside, back of Neil over here. It is placed on the outside of the building. It's not even an exterior grade drinking fountain. It's an interior drinking fountain stuck to the side of the wall. And that's the focal point of that civic space. This civic space is, first of all, I think it's on the right corner of the site, on the northwest corner versus the northeast. And so it seems to have all the right parts and pieces, a beautiful water feature. You know, I can't really get into the details of it at this point, but I'm sure they're there. It has great potential. The size of it is substantially bigger than it needs to be. Is it adjacent to activated space? It's trying to. It's next to an activated section or spine of the lobby. So, you know, this isn't a mixed-use building. There aren't coffee shops and Pilates studios and other things like that activating that lobby. It's a lobby. It's probably going to have a security person. And that's about it, you know, and high security going in and out. So how do you call any of that activated? I think it's got all the right elements to it right now that gives it the best amount of success that I think it can have. And they've said they're going to try to take some of that concept and philosophy and bring it over onto the northeast side of the corner, which I think is exciting. So in that respect, they kind of have two civic spaces. I love the bridge flying across from one building to the other. Absolutely love it. I'm sure they'll figure out all the fire and safety components that they have to abide by with the code. And then, you know, and Julie, I mean, you guys are really spot on in your architectural criticism. I mean, you're doing a phenomenal job in trying to hold applicants accountable for these styles of architecture that we seem to have deemed, you know, to be the most appropriate for Delray Beach. And so here we are, it's a masonry modern, and this tripartite business is centuries old. This isn't a modern day element of what we're holding somebody accountable for. This has been going on for centuries. So is this a traditional base, middle mezzanine setup? Absolutely not. But if you want to see kind of a contemporary interpretation of that, look at the Marriott, again, right around the corner, where they just apply nonsense to those different levels and to the cornice, especially, to try to, you know, meet the box that they have to check off to call that a tripartite. They'd rather do that than fight the fight. So I think this design has parts of the building that address the tripartite very, very well, and other parts that don't. But that's called variety. That adds to the spice of the life of the building, I think. I think it's a very handsome design. I don't think there's too much glass on the north and northwest parts of the building. Everything everybody should recognize, northern glass, northern sunlight is the best sunlight that any building can have. So it's not as if they have too much glass, maybe on the east or the west. They've got maybe too much on the north, but it's really well-placed and very handsome. I wouldn't change any of it. But I love the project and would love to hear what the others have to say. Thank you. This is Sean. So on this whole tripartite matter, and I agree with my colleague here, to me it's relative. I see it. And I guess it's just a matter of how you look at it, because I definitely see a definite base, middle, and top throughout the building. It may be a little suspect, I think you said on the south. Was that the south end of the building? Yeah, the south, which is the bottom elevation shown, and then pockets elsewhere in Stav's opinion. So those pockets, right? To me that adds to the uniqueness of the building, because you're right. You can see it where it starts off at one point, and then it kind of fades away towards certain parts of the building. But I like that. Again, it adds to the uniqueness of the building, but it still, to me, meets the qualifications. Sure. You were saying something? No, I understand what you're saying. It is a subjective requirement, which is why we didn't bring it forward as a waiver, because I feel like the staff would be overreaching, saying it's not executed the way we think it should. Therefore, it requires a waiver, because to your point, others might feel differently. Certainly the applicant certainly feels differently. So in our opinion, there are issues, but not to the extent where it's an objective fact. There is some subjectivity to it. And I can appreciate staff for doing that, because I'm glad we're not here doing waivers. I believe we had to do that with a couple of other buildings that were going around, going on in that neighborhood, especially with the alleyways and things of that nature. So the fact that you all can put this building up with the size and proportions that it has and not require waivers, I think is a plus for me. So I'm fine with it. Thank you. I'm in agreement with Roger that it's an absolutely beautiful building, and I'm excited about it. And I'm good with the outdoor active spaces as well. I think they're beautiful. So thank you. You know, that kind of had me at no waivers and no variances, because I still think those are really pretty much reserved for historic districts, which are older and smaller properties. I like it. I see some of the areas where the tripartite thing is broken up, like at that angle there. But that red cladding that goes up, I mean, that's where the elevator bank is. So to me, that's form follows function. You know, there's something here going up. I also like the open atrium going in. And again, to address the lack of activity, like Roger says, if I were living in that building, I wouldn't want to attract a lot of people to my entrance, because that's my entryway. But they exceeded the space required. My only knit is that the parapet, which is solid, makes a building look like it's 60 feet tall. And it is 60 feet tall, and they're allowed to go to 60 feet. But a glass parapet, which the Marriott has, which is one of the few features I like on the Marriott, that would lessen the impact of the height. But that's, you know, they're not getting a waiver or anything, so I'm fine with that, too. I think it's a good project. Okay. Mr. Chard. Well, I'd like to compliment my colleague, Roger, who's been after the Marriott building for at least 12 years. Terrible. Awful. And it would have been a lot worse if he hadn't started his critique on the Spradboard way back when. And I'd also like to compliment the landscape architect who has distinguished between the Sable Palmetto and the Cocos Nucifera and removed all the Cocos Nucifera, which are coconut palms and not native, and the Sable Palms, which are cabbage palms and very native. So I think that's a compliment. I'd like to ask a little bit, we have some residential buildings not so far from here, which basically have on the ground floor their parking exposed to the sidewalk. So when you walk down 2nd Avenue, for example, you're looking at cars in a garage. You're not looking at liners. You're not looking at retail. You're not looking at residential. And I'm not quite clear, particularly, I believe, on the north side, what screening there is for first floor parking. I hope somebody could address that. Yes, absolutely. I'm going to bring up our architect, Peggy Fitzgerald, from Net Architects. I was hoping Peggy would answer that. Hey, show up, Net Architects. Good evening. So specifically, which one makes it shine? The pointer. The pointer. Right here. Yeah. So in this particular garage, and this is the north secondary street, you know, we have the loading zone and the bicycle room. There's pretty much sort of more utility spaces, but all the parking is down along here. This parking, and it's all interior. So on 6th, you have the lobby. That's the liner. So you won't see the parking. As well as here, you have the gym area down here, the lobby space all along here, which screens all the parking, which is interior. Here does not particularly have a liner, which is not required on the north, but if I could go back to, I don't know where we have the rendering. Oh, there, wait. Yeah. So that's what you're seeing here. Yeah, that's what I was particularly concerned about. So it's sort of a metal grid sort of thing that will have sort of this – it's hard to see at this distance, at least for me, because I don't have my glasses on. The greenery that will be along this metal on this portion. On this part of the building here, we are required to have some glazing, which is – we have a certain percentage of glazing that's required on the first floor. And then on the last one will probably be some greenery as well. So that's pretty much what's screening this portion of the garage. Excuse me. I think I heard what you said, but that is not a living wall that is greenery, but it's green metal. Is that – No, it will be a live plant material. Oh, it will be live. Yes. Okay. That makes me feel a lot better. You feel better, we feel better. I'm also wondering – I agree with staff about how do you enliven public spaces or open civic space. And unfortunately, we have some examples in that neighborhood on Fifth Avenue of civic space that is very underutilized. And I would point to Aloft, Caspian, Columbia Coffee, Big Al's, et cetera. And part of the reason is they don't make it amenable in a good part of our year to sit out there. Some of them do have some flimsy umbrellas, but that's about it. And I'm just wondering – I don't want to design from the dais, and I'm not an architect – but what about some sort of sailcloth or shadecloth out there that is used in a lot of public places? So interestingly, on this project, probably a year and a half ago, when I got involved, we did have actually a metal frame structure that was, you know, more like almost a gazebo type thing. But here, there are requirements for the amount of trees that need to be in the civic space. And so we tried to put them, you know, within the space with the benches to, you know, provide a good amount of shade so that if you enter and you sit on this square bench here, these little white squares are benches. These are actually the squares that the trees are planted in. So they should create shade. There's a great deal of also the trees up against the building, which will provide shade over the bench area at the water feature. And please don't forget to poke holes in each of these. Are those open to the public? That's what they are. That's what they're for. So will those trees have enough spread when they are planted to provide the shade that would be required? Time of planting, probably not. But I think they're required to be planted at 16 feet in height. And then I don't know what the corresponding canopy spread to that is. But over time, they will create a thorough shade canopy. A couple of years. Yeah. Max. I think they're going to provide some significant shade on day one. But I'm not a landscape architect. Well, that worried me because we have experimented quite a bit on that avenue without a great deal of success. Well, you also have street trees as well that, you know, will protect you somewhat from that northern sun. Mr. Chard, with your permission, I think, you know, obviously we have our landscape plan that is code compliant. And we feel like we're going above and beyond with some of these trees in the civic space. We'll be happy to go back and look at sales or shades at the appropriate times of year. We don't want to do anything, obviously, that's going to detract from the beauty of the building or the function of the building. But if there are ways to create additional shade, we can investigate those before building permit. Okay. Okay. I'm also wondering about the parallel parking on Fifth Avenue. It looks like there are three spaces. Three spaces. So there's two existing spaces, and then we've added two additional spaces here. Is that a staff request? Yes. Yeah, on pretty much any corridor in the CBD, we request inclusion of on-street parking where feasible to help buffer the travel lanes from the sidewalk. And this location where the new ones are, that's where the existing curb cut is. So there's no need for the curb cut anymore because there's no longer vehicle access. Well, the reason I'm asking is that in that particular neighborhood, there's probably an excess of parking. And to put in three parallel spots and take it away from sidewalks reduces the pedestrian and walkability aspects. So we ensure that the sidewalks are fairly wide there. So in my opinion, I think there's a balance. I think that the additional two spaces are a positive. I agree. Well, you're supposed to agree with me, Roger. No, but they're eliminating curb cuts around the site. Well, the other reason, Julian, that I worry about it is when we narrowed Federal Highway, we put a lot of parallel parking in. And when you're pulling particularly from the east side of Fifth out onto Fifth Avenue, that's an accident waiting to happen because you just can't see cars. You just can't see cars over that parallel parking, particularly if there's a big SUV or something. And in my particular corner, I must have seen four accidents there. And I'm not saying that's always the reason why. But if you pull out from the city parking lot just south of where Starbucks used to be, you're taking your life in your hands when you pull out into the closest lane because the parallel parking, not the trees, the parallel parking blocks that. And I would just like to raise my hand on that to see if that's something that needs to be rethought. I have no problem with the tripartite. I have no problem with the glass. I would like to say that in our strategic planning sessions, and I think Judy Mollick was one of the people that talked about this, was that we are losing a lot of our commercial space downtown. I fully agree with work, live, play, and residential in downtown, but if we have nothing to play at or nothing to work at, who's going to live there, so to speak? And if there was some way that that corner could be activated so that there was a reason for pedestrians to come there and sit and drink their drinks or their coffee, I think that would really help pull pedestrian traffic off of Atlantic Avenue and to that because Atlantic Avenue is too crowded. Let me just take one more of mine, and I am done. There are quite a few plants that are being planted that are not natives, and I realize that our LDRs do not require more than 50%, but I was glad to see you using gumbo limboes. There are too few architects who use that. That's fantastic. But even the palms that are being proposed, like the Montgomery and the Alexander, are not native. And if we want to say palms are iconic to Florida, I understand that, but those do not attract birds or woodpeckers or squirrels or anything because they're not native. Vera Wood is not native, and Bridal Veil is not native. Now, I know we put Bridal Veil on the north side of Sunday Village on Atlantic Avenue as opposed to continuing the oak trees, and they do have pretty blossoms, but they're not shade trees, and they're not pleasant to walk under. Well, first off, as far as the White Veil, Bridal Veil, same thing. I think staff asked for the White Veil, Bridal Veil, Veil. Why don't you come up here, Peggy? I believe the Bridal Veils were requested by staff as the street trees. Really? So, David, you can elaborate if I don't answer the question, but Bridal Veils are used in certain areas when there are overhead power lines that prevent taller species. And then in certain contexts, I don't recall if it applies here, but I know on other projects it has, on FDOT right-of-way, there has been a back-and-forth issue that we've been kind of having with the Department of Transportation where if trees are planted within a certain distance to the right-of-way line, they will not authorize or approve trees of certain thickness. So, the Bridal Veil, because of the way the trunk grows and spreads, it kind of gets around that requirement so that we can plant trees closer to the curb, which is better for pedestrian environments. So, again, I don't know if that's applicable here, but that's just too. I don't think it is. I don't think there's any overhead wires there. And it's not an FDOT street. Yes. 5th and 6th are. Yeah, 5th and 6th are. Well, I was talking about 1st Street. But no, the choice for staff to use Bridal Veils is because of the overhead power lines. On 1st? Yeah, right there, yeah. Yes. The first choice that the architect had chosen were silver buttonwoods, and I thought that would be less of an upright tree and more of a wide tree for that area. So, that's why I asked him to change to the Bridal Veils so we'd get more of an upright canopy, also consistent with having a shaded area for a shaded area. Okay. And as I explained to you, and I'll put on the record, we will go back to our landscape architect before construction plans are submitted to see if we can swap out any of the non-natives for more natives. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Mr. Katz. Thank you. First of all, it's funny. I think I'm the only person here that was a no the last time this came in front of us. And the reason being, it was not one of the guidelines. It was not part of the guidelines. And so, the fact that the Commission wanted the Modern Race Theory, I think you did a great job in meeting the guidelines that they requested. So, I'm very happy with that. Extremely happy that you're not asking for any variances or changes or any special exceptions. I will respectfully disagree with my colleague about the extra on-street parking. I never say no to extra parking, especially right now. And when I talked to Mr. Schiller, the developer, about, you know, a lot of these buildings are going up. We just had right across the street is another building that was approved, which, by the way, I'm better that this is Modern Masonry knowing that the other project across the street is not. So, it won't be Modern Masonry or Modern Masonry. So, thank you. I think that was Mr. Costello who brought that one to us. Well, my biggest concern with that project was deliveries. And that's what I'm seeing now is, and I told him to show this, I sit in my home office, you know, in a day, and I'll see 20, 30 vehicles of deliveries. You've got Uber, you've got Uber, you know, Amazon doesn't come once a day. They come 20 times a day. You know, and they just park wherever they can find it, whether it's in the middle of the street. So, anywhere you can get an opportunity to get these drivers, and there's so many of them off the street. I think that's a plus because they don't, some are going to go to the alley, some are going to go to that street. I would bet you that a lot of the drivers that end up delivering to that project across the street will end up in their own street parking because there's now somewhere for them to park, and they'll run across the street with their package. So, I'm appreciative of that, adding that. And the percentage of the glass, too, I, again, I'm not a big fan of modern masonry, so this helps, actually, the balance. I think it makes it, I think the glass, there's, to me, there's enough masonry. There's plenty of masonry there. So, I like the glass. It really, it kind of breaks it up a little bit. I also, I agree with staff what you're saying, but I don't think there's a way around it with the elevator shaft of changing that part of it. And then I think it was the south elevation that's playing, that's, isn't that, the elevation that, the biggest problem with faces, like, is not facing public view pretty much, right? Yes. Correct, it's not, although this building, at least the building that's adjacent to this on the east side is also fairly tall, so it might not be that visible, but the building on the west side is not tall, so that facade will be visible from the right-of-way, at least if you're walking northward on 5th. But compared to the other facades, it's definitely less visible. It's the least seen, so that makes me happy as well. So, yeah, I'm really pleased with the changes that you made and come back to us with. Again, I personally would love to see a mixed-use project here. Again, I agree with my colleagues about the lack of commercial space, but that is not what was in the code. I think that's our issue as a city. We need to address this whole CBD of you can just, without doing anything, you can get rid of our commercial industry, our commercial businesses, and replace it with residential. And then if the governor takes away that taxes, it's going to hurt us eventually. But that's not their problem. They followed the rules that we set. So I think us as a city needs to look at those rules in the future to help mitigate that, and we did some of that on Saturday. But I am happy with it, and I'm looking forward to making a motion to somebody. Thank you. One of the things about being the last one to speak is pretty much everything's already been said. I have to say that I 100% agree. Mr. Cope expressed my thoughts, only much more eloquently than I ever thought. I think there's plenty of tripartite. I think the glass is fine, and I don't think you can really make a more active use next to the civic space, to the extent that it's not a mixed use. A mixed use would make that whole thing work. But with a residential, the lobby is as active as you're going to get. I'm not happy with the southern elevation. You're not probably going to see much of it at the moment until somebody tears down what's next to it, and then it's going to be, depending on what they want to build, now what are you going to do? That's my concern. But I don't think that's significant enough to deny the, you know, or to make a big thing out of. And I think, I just really think it's a great building. I think it looks good. I think the glass is not a problem, and I think we should get a motion. Move approval of a Level 3 site plan application request for 109 Southeast 5th Avenue, including architectural elevations and landscape plan to construct a four-story, 26-unit residential development, finding that the request is consistent with the land development regulations and the comprehensive plan. Second. I have a motion by Mr. Katz, seconded by Ms. Mollica. Miller, would you call the roll, please? Price Patton? Yes. Mitch Katz? Yes. Mr. Strong? Yes. Jim Chard? Yes. Roger Cope? Yes. Judy Mollica? Yes. Gregory Snyder? Yes. That motion passes 7 and others. Thank you so much, Mr. Chair. Thank you. And I would like to just put on the record or whatever that I hate to disagree with Mr. Gadanek on anything because his analyses are so thorough and to the point, and they're really good. Thanks to Julie, and this project is much better than when it started. Thank you, everyone. I will tell you, staff does a great job in making these developers push the limits of what they really want to do. Yeah, absolutely true. And while Mr. Gadanek is still here, I do feel like it's in order to note that this is his last meeting with us. He's moving to Orlando, so we need a new Julian. Julian, you're an asset to the city. Oh, appreciate it. Thank you. Wow. Sad to go, but I'm happy with the, you know, the work that we did on. Yeah, yeah. Very good for you. Do you realize there's no breeze in Orlando and you're dying of heat? It's the wife's choice. Well, best of luck and congratulations. Do you want a break? Miss him. Come on. Yes. Let's go. Nah, come on. We'll take it. Go to the bathroom. We'll wait for you. We'll take it. Let's – I'm happy to take it. Let's take a quick break. Three minutes. Okay, three minutes. Satisfied minutes, you guys. We'll take a three-minute break and we'll reconvene at 7-08. Good evening. Whatever you do. Board members, Grisel Rodriguez, senior planner, introducing file 2023-207, use, and file number 2024-126 SPR. Hello. Good evening. Okay. Chair – Oh, yeah. Let's say ex-parte this. Zero. None. I'm going to wrap it right now. I drove the property. Yeah. I only go back when profiles and my concrete was established way back when, so – because they produced architectural stuff, so that's about all I know of the site and the property. How do you have it? Chair of the Board, Jeff Costello, JC Planning Solutions, Delry Beach Floor 33444, representing the applicant from ABC Supply Company. This property is at the intersection of Poinsettia Drive and Lime Lane. I think I skipped the slide. But anyway, some photos of the property. Existing development. There's extensive background in the staff report. It goes back to, as Roger said, about 20 years ago, there was a conditional use – 25 conditional use requests that was approved for a stone manufacturing facility, and then there was an approval for expansion for an adult door storage area. The proposal is a conditional use to establish a lumber yard. This is a roofing supply company, but it kind of fits into the box of a lumber yard, pursuant to 4419D2A, with outside storage and materials and truck parking. You see in blue on the top side of the slide is where the post-chucked parking area will be. And then on the east side is an existing about a little over 10,000 square foot outdoor storage area. That was originally approved with the stone facility about 20 years ago. And then this proposal includes 6,500 square foot outdoor storage yard on the west side of the building, as you see that long rectangular area. And then, of course, there's associated parking, existing dumpster areas, site lighting, et cetera. The hours of operation are on the screen, primarily the daytime hours, Monday through Friday, 7 to 5, and then Saturday, 7.30 to noon. This here, to the left is the site plan. To the right side is the landscape plan. And just to note, you know, there was an approved plan and approved landscape plan, and we're kind of supplementing the existing landscaping with missing materials. And also, there was a driveway that was, and this area was kind of overpaved. This retention area was kind of eliminated. But we're reinstating that drainage area and eliminating that cut. However, we're providing a new driveway cut here on the west side, just on the Royal Palm. Of course, Lime Lane's on the west side, and then, again, Poinsettia's on the south. And so, with that, I did want to mention, and that's why that landscape plan you see doesn't, it's not like all totally trees like you see on the other presentations, because we're supplementing those. However, I do want to note that in the staff report, I mentioned the areas on the east and north side, basically this L portion here. I just want to note that our intent is to reinstate landscaping there with trees, actually, trees every 25 feet adjacent to the residential, existing residential uses, and includes, so that would be pigeon plum along with red-tipped cocoa plum. And so, required findings can be made with regard to LDR section 3.1.1, land use map, consistency, mixed use, mixed industrial and commercial is the preferred zoning for the commerce land use designation, and within the MIC, the lumber yards are allowed as a conditional use, and includes their accessory uses related to that. Concurrency stats report confirms that the project meets applicable, adopt the letter of service standards, and then there's consistency with regard to Article 2, as well as the comprehensive plan, specifically in the neighborhood districts and quarters element, economic prosperity element, conservation, sustainability, and resiliency elements, compliance with the LDRs. LDR section 246A5 includes in conditional use findings. In addition to those provisions of Chapter 3, findings can be made that the proposal will not, the conditional use will not have a significantly detrimental effect upon the stability of the neighborhood within which it will be located, or hinder the development or redevelopment of near-night properties. This has co-existed with the, in that area for over 20 years. It's internal to the industrial district, the existing residential or existing non-conforming uses. As you've seen, some of those homes have been converted to office or contractor's offices. This is just, it's just one of those situations. Eventually, as you see there, that, that whole strip could just be redevelopment, and hopefully for the industrial that we've been looking for. To the north is all-county paving. It may be familiar with you all, just not too long ago. That's industrial. Recently approved that one. And then to the west, south, and east is MIC. Again, property coexisted for many years. Storage areas are not located within building setback areas. They'll be properly screened from adjacent property and rights of way. Extensive landscaping will be installed along the perimeter. And there have been new development, industrial development in this area since this use is, or that building has existed. So, with regard to the outdoor storage areas, really it's roof material on prepackaged pallets. As you see there, this is to the east. So, that's this area here. And then this truck, which has some of the materials and rolled tar paper and so forth, that was parked in this area. This will then become an outdoor storage area, and then the trucks, again, will be parked there. Again, those are the trucks that are proposed to be parked in that area. And they're an essential aspect of this operation, as well, you know, many other trucks are with these industrial types uses. And, again, this park will be screened from adjacent rights of way. There are hedges proposed along this north side, and there's existing trees, and then we're supplementing with some additional trees. Site plan, which is also before you, positive findings can be weighed 2-4-10-A-3. The standards for site plan actions, the applicable standards are identified in the staff report, and the staff report notes substantial compliance with all those, or compliance with all those. It meets the applicable standards, and there are no identified areas of concern with regard to the impacts from the overall site configuration. This exhibit, which was provided, relates to the trucks parking on the north side, and that maneuvering area was, of course, by a certified engineer, these designs, and it all accommodate without the maneuvering into the public rights of way. Compliance with the LDRs, the development proposal complies with the applicable development standards. There's extensive detail in the staff report. Appreciate staff's assistance through this process. I think you've seen it's been before or in the process for a while. We're heading to the finish line. With regard to landscape findings, the proposed landscape plan is consistent with 4-6-16, and, as I stated, we'll add the trees every 25 feet adjacent to the residential use zone, as well as the hedge, which will grow up to 6 feet. With that, that concludes my presentation, and I appreciate your support. Thank you. No, but you'll forget it later. Whatever. Say it. ABC Supply Company, they are a looping supply warehouse. This is a conditional use for lumber yard. Lumber yard is situated, as the applicant mentioned, on Northeast Court, Moinsettia, and Line Lane. The request is a level 4 site plan with a conditional use for a lumber yard with outdoor storage materials and truck. The proposed intent is to provide a mix of industrial, commercial, and office use in a single zoning district. So it's a little combination of things. Lumber yards are permitted by Section 4.419-B2A. Outside uses are allowed as part of the conditional use process for Section 4.66-MDR. Conditions may be applied to mitigate visual and other impacts. Materials and equipment stored outside must be screened from adjacent public rights of way. Storage areas are in green. New outdoor storage area is the existing outdoor storage area. And this is where the truck parking is going to be. The conditional use is for the green areas. And they are properly stored because you can't store material outside unless it's appropriate to store. And that's what we ask us for. The existing development is a warehouse. It's 21,600 square feet with an office of 4,000 square feet and existing storage of 10,750 square feet. The FAR is .29, .60 is the maximum. So it's well below the FAR. The proposed modification is additional outside storage of 5,500 and 18 square feet on the west side and the parking of four vehicles on the north side. Landscape improvements have resulted in an increase of 25.7% open space. This was a previous waiver from the previous application. So that's been improved. The truck parking on the left illustrates how the trucks are going to move in and out. Trucks will move parking for the night from Line Lane into their area here. They're going to be four trucks, part tandem style, two roads. And they will leave in the morning from here through Royal Palm and then go on their route, load, and leave. The loading area is from here. They start on Poinsettia and they exit through Royal Palm and then they go off on their deliveries. LDR level 4. The reason they're level 4 is because it is part of the conditional use. The LDRs say that when you have a site plan that has an attachment with a conditional use, it becomes automatically a level 4. And it is final determination of the City Commission. Your recommendation and the site plan go to the City Commission. Establishment of a conditional use. Conditions may be imposed, so it's R2.2.2. In addition, limitations of the operation and longevity of the use may be imposed. It's an ingredient to any development application. The granting body may impose conditional use. It means that the compatibility, it interferes with the compatibility. You have to mitigate it. The consistency of the requirements with the land development regulations and the consistency of the comprehensive. Findings are the land uses are industrial to the north and MIC surrounding Carson. The MIC district is the preferred implementing district in a commerce land used in the nation and a lumber yard is allowed as a conditional use. Current findings, most of the findings are met, but two that we want to highlight are the traffic. A letter from an engineer submitted almost a year ago indicating that the proposed conditional use will not produce additional traffic to and from the site, but the letter does not meet professional standards for a traffic statement. However, the previously approved use was a warehouse with a distribution use, so the board could consider whether the use is similar enough to the proposed lumber yard to proceed without a full traffic statement. The other issue is that it is within a level four wellfield protection area, and it has been reviewed for compliance with that. And it has filed forms with the county indicating the materials will not interfere with the protection of the wellfield. Required findings of consistency. The overall finding may be made, even though the action may be in conflict with an individual performance standard contained in Article 3.2, provided that the approving body specifically finds that the beneficial aspects of the proposed use outweighs the negative impacts. So the following standards in Article 3.2 are applicable. The basis for determining consistency with the comprehensive plan and the land development regulations, the standards for site plan and the plat actions are discussed below, and the standards for specific areas or purposes it complies, which is the wellfield area. This is a little hard to read, so these are the neighborhood districts and corridors elements that apply to this. Basically, they say similar uses should be together, compatible with adjacent land uses, and the examination is adaptive reuse consistent or complementary with the adjacent development, and does it have a role in preserving the commerce land use so that it encourages development and prolonged use of that area. The economic prosperity element tells us does it provide jobs in economic development. It discourages the reduction of the commerce land use by having that parcel be viable for industrial, and it encourages commercial services in a cluster. Perhaps more development may occur on that block. Section for site plan action. The building landscape and design and glare shall be such that they do not create unwarranted distractions or blockage of visibility. The engineer, the city engineer, has reviewed the traffic plan and determined that it does not find the entrances to create unwarranted distractions or blockages with visibility. That includes the new one that's being formed as well as the other three existing entrances. All development shall provide pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicular interconnections to adjacent properties and that they be accessible. The site has sidewalks on all three sides and provides accessibility within the parking lot. Required findings for this, for 2.4.10 A3 are that the site plan applications must demonstrate consistency with the comprehensive plan, compliance with the applicable provisions of the land development regulations, and the following shall apply. Level 2, Level 3, Level 4 site plan must comply with the findings of Chapter 3. Landscape plans must comply with landscape code regulations. Standards for site plan action. The property shall be developed or redeveloped in a manner so that the use intensity and density are appropriate in terms of the soil, topographic, and other applicable physical conditions, and are complementary to and compatible with adjacent land uses. The site is an existing roofing material storage facility. It's being expanded. This is what they're asked for, an expansion of the use and the parking of the trucks. They'll add additional outside storage that will be placed and buffered in accordance with the landscape regulations. Consideration shall be given to the effect of development we'll have on safety, livability, stability of surrounding neighborhoods and residential areas. Factors not limited to noise, odors, dust, and traffic volumes and circulation patterns shall be reviewed and if found to result in a degradation of surrounding areas, the project shall be modified or denied accordingly. That is something for the board to review. The applicant states that the traffic volumes and circulation patterns are expected to be equivalent to the already existing activity in the distribution warehouse. The applicant states that the volume of the pattern of traffic will not change. The delivery trucks will be parked on the site and the business is open from Monday through Friday from 7 to 5. Saturdays from 7.30 to noon and Sunday will be closed. Development shall not exceed the maximum limits established in NDC Table 1, Land Use Designation, Density, Intensity, and Implementing Zoning Districts. The FAR for the warehouse, as we previously mentioned, is well below the 0.60 allowed for FAR in this district, so it complies. The perimeter landscape buffers. On the north in Royal Palm Drive, there will be a six-foot Clusia hedge. On Poinsettia Drive, directly opposite to the south, there will be more red-tip Cocoa Plum, New Dwarf Natal Palms. There's also going to be an oak tree on the southeast corner entrance. They're adding an oak tree there, and they're adding an oak tree to the other entrance. They are going to have three Brazilian Beauty Leaf trees, one live oak tree, and new sod. That is what's happening directly opposite the east side storage location, on the street side. This is the outstored storage buffers. On West Lime, it's a Clusia hedge of five to six feet in height, next to a six-foot chain-link fence. The southeast side is a red-tip Cocoa Plum hedge, growing to four to five feet, next to a six-foot chain-link fence, with dwarf Natal Palm in the front, and one Gumbo Limbo tree that is replacing an existing tree. The southeast side is, along Poinsettia Drive, is going to add pigeon plum trees and liriope shrubs. Considerations for board for landscaping. As the applicant has stated, that they're going to add those trees directly opposite here. They're going to add trees here, where they were none before, in the brown area. So that will provide an additional buffer to the residential area, because currently the area is just mulched in the site plan. Green area has new sod, two pigeon plum trees that will grow to a 16-feet height at maturity. So they will provide some screening in that direction. The summary of considerations for the board is, is the use appropriate for the location, whether the landscape buffer is sufficient to shield the residential use to the east, or if enhanced landscaping should be provided. The truck storage on the north side of the building is sufficiently buffered, whether it is from Boyle Palm Drive, or if enhanced landscaping should be provided. The conditional use is that it will not have a significantly detrimental impact upon the stability of the neighborhood within which it is located, or that it will not hinder development or redevelopment of nearby properties. These are the motions for board action. Your considerations. Thank you. Public comment, is there any member of the public who wishes to speak? Seeing none, public comment is closed. Is there any rebuttal by either applicant or staff? Staff welcomes to change the addition of the trees adjacent to the residential property. Let's say that again. Staff welcomes the addition of the trees. Oh, okay. Thank you. On the west side of the property. All right. Who wants to go? I'll go. Please. Go for it. I would be absolutely in favor of this. It's great. Do we have anything more to say? No, I don't. No. This is strong. You don't need to say it. We just don't say it. It's already being used for our roofing materials, so I think the only change is the storage area for the trucks, right? Yeah. Mr. Cope. I'm in favor of all of the three different areas of concern. It's a beautiful site. Great piece of property. I mean, really, it is. No problems here. Okay. Mr. Schardt. I was wondering, I did not see any photometric plan, and I did not see any landscape plan, and obviously the traffic statement is somewhat. There is a landscape plan in the submittal set? Well, there's. Oh, I'm sorry. We did not upload it, but it is there. Sorry. It was a last-minute addition. They revised the site plan for the landscaping. Yes, what was presented. And with regard to photometric, it's an existing site. So there's existing site lighting, and so we weren't modifying that. And the residential neighbors to the east don't have a problem with the lighting as it is now? Well, we don't have it along their property line, so no. If you, I didn't put up a photo of that area in between. So the lighting is towards the parking, towards the vehicular use area. It's not adjacent to the residential. And was there any notification to the neighborhood? Do you have 500-foot radius? Yes, mailers within 500 feet. And a sign on the floor. And placards. Okay. I'm good. Mr. Gatz. I'm good. Well, actually, I have a couple things. Leave that up. That's good. I have a couple things about traffic. One thing is, the way the traffic flow of those trucks appears to me is that they have to, when, yeah, that's perfect. When they get, come out of the, where they're parked in the morning and want to leave, they have to back down through the storage area to get turned around and go out the north? No, so there's, there's a. What I think is I don't understand the flow of the truck traffic. So they're stored in the evening, right? They come in on the green part, right? They come in from, and then they park. Yeah. And they back out. When they leave, they go through, there's enough space where they can back out and they maneuver out. So that's down in this. Oh, so they can back straight over to Lime Lane without going into Lime Lane and then make a left out. Right. Okay. And then, and then there's also the ability here where trucks can come in. Yeah, but that's a storage area. Yeah. But then, right. And so, and with the applicant, well, you have to be, you can go into that area and then they'll load up the pallets onto the truck. And then they, they go sort of like a drive-through way. Okay. It just looks like you're going to store a bunch of stuff there and then try to drive trucks into it. No, it's just like they're on either side, you know, and then they have four trucks to come in. Okay. So that's why that picture of the truck was, was relevant in how they, because they have to load them. And then they, and then there's also the warehouse of storage as well. So they, there's overhead doors that go out into, into this, this area here. Okay. Yeah. So. And then, okay. So, and, but, and then traffic itself is a thing was mentioned. It's not going to be any different than it is. No. Because it's going to be four trucks and the people that work there. Right. There's no public access to go buy lumber. It really doesn't generate any additional trips. Right. Right. Okay. Um, and then the final thing is I looked at the landscaping in between what exists by the residential area and it really looks horrible. Yeah. It needs, and I don't understand exactly on your diagrams. Are you going to, there's going to be mulch put down? Well, there's already mulch. Okay. And so the, what's going to happen is, and, and you, it, there's some, there's a couple trees that are kind of very stressed. Yeah. But what we're proposing is just to install the, the pigeon plum and then a, and then a, a cocoa plum hedge. It's six. Okay. It'll be maintained at six feet in height. And then here and here. It will fill in the gaps. Oh, okay. Thank you. That's what I was looking for. All right. In that case, thanks very much. You're welcome. Do we have a motion? Move a recommendation of approval of a level four site plan application with landscape plan, including requests for conditional use, approval of a conditional use, request to allow the lumber yard with outdoor storage of roofing materials and accessory outdoor truck storage at 1127 and 1107 Poinsettia Drive, resolution number 22-26, by finding that the request and the approval thereof is consistent with the comprehensive plan and meets criteria set forth in section 2.4.6 A-5 and the land development regulations. Second. Do I hear a second? Second. I'll second. Okay. Motion by Ms. Malika, second by Mr. Cope. Ms. Miller, would you please call a roll? Price Patton? Yes. Mitch Katz? Yes. Dietrich Strong? Yes. Jim Chard? Yes. Roger Cope? Yes. Judy Malika? Yes. Gregory Snyder? Yes. That passes seven, but I think. Thank you so much. Thanks, Mr. Coteville. Thanks to staff. Thank you. Good luck. And, again, I want to echo what the previous happened. They said staff has been excellent so far across all our days. Thank you very much. Glad to hear it. Very nice. Great. I was not expecting it. All right. At this point, Mr. Patton is leaving the dais, and I guess Ms. Pinkston, who we're honored to have with us today, would you please read the, or this is a legislative, I guess, number 9A, so please, you have the floor. For the record, Barbara Pinkston, senior planner. I would like to read into the record, item 26-418, a city-initiated request to amend the land development regulations to include provisions for accessory dwelling units. So I tried to keep the presentation short, because I know the staff report may have been long, and I know you all read it. I did. Okay. So the request is to provide a recommendation to the City Commission on Ordinance Number 12-26, a city-initiated amendment to the land development regulations, amending the following. Section 4.3.2, determining use. Section 4.3.3, special requirements for specific uses. Section 4.4.3, single-family residential districts. Section 4.4.6, medium-density residential district. Section 4.4.13, central business district. Article 4.5, overlay and environmental districts. And that would be adopting a new section, 4.5.23, called the Northwest-Southwest Neighborhood Overlay District. Article 4.7, family workforce housing. So adopt a new section, 4.7.9, accessory dwelling units. And Appendix A, definitions. So this whole wonderful thing is a collaboration between the CRA and the city. In June of 2024, OptiCoast was contracted to study the northwest and southwest neighborhoods to determine if missing middle housing could be accommodated in this area to address the need for affordable housing in the city. The study included an analysis of lot sizes, parking considerations, alternative housing type proposals and configurations, recommendations for land development regulations, and height suggestions and limitations. In January of 2025, the first draft of the document was presented at Burning Conversations Community Meeting. In April of 2025, staff began drafting regulations using the completed study and input from the community as a guide. So this is just a copy, the cover of the study, with some of the items that were included in the study. A lot of this was definitely community-driven, some of the items and things that the residents have worked on for I can't tell you how many years. And so it's a good thing to see some of these things finally come into fruition. So the proposed amendment to add ADUs to the land development regulations as an accessory use in the R1, RM, and CBD districts is consistent with the city's comprehensive plan and the set transformation plan. So what is an ADU? So according to Florida statutes, an ADU means an ancillary or secondary living unit that has a separate kitchen, bathroom, and sleeping area existing either within the same structure or on the same lot as the primary dwelling unit. And a lot of times people get confused between ADUs and guest cottages. So just to clarify, the main difference is that guest cottages cannot have a kitchen, they cannot be leased, or they cannot have a separate water or electric meter. As a part of this, we established an overlay district. It's called the Northwest-Southwest Neighborhood Overlay, and it's created to establish the boundaries to identify the area where ADUs and other missing middle housing types will be located pursuant to the Opticoast study. So these are just some of the rules that we've put together for ADUs. They all must have an independent entrance. ADUs located in front of the primary structure must have a porch facing the street. The property owner or family member must reside on site in either the principal dwelling unit or the ADU. A lease term shall not be shorter than six months. A detached ADU may be located in the front, rear, or side yard of the principal structure subject to setbacks. The ADU may only be leased as workforce housing. However, a family member may occupy the structure without being subject to income limitations or restrictions. And ADUs are not included in the calculation of density. And these are some of the standards that we have. So ADU parking and development standards. So the maximum floor area is 750 square feet, so it can be up to that size. The minimum is 220 square feet. The maximum number of bedrooms is two. And then we have the setback requirement. So minimum front setback will be whatever the setback is for the principal dwelling unit. So whatever the setback the house has to meet, the primary structure, the ADU would have to meet it as well if it's located in the front of the house. Okay, side street is 15 feet. If it's coming from an improved alley or just the rear setback is going to be 10 feet. And the side interior will be the same as the principal setbacks as well. Okay, so and the thing too to understand, a lot of the lots that are non-conforming that came before you already, you can see some of the reductions that we put in place for some of those setback requirements. So this would also apply to these ADUs to give them a little bit more wiggle room so there's more space available. And for an attached ADU, we would look at that as an addition to the house, so it would have to meet the same setbacks as the house. And as far as parking, they would have to provide one parking space or identify how that could be accommodated on site. In some cases, there may be enough room in the front for an additional parking space to be there. In some cases, they may already have enough space to accommodate that. Or they would be able to come off the alley and park in the rear as well. So it could be parallel or however that could be accommodated. And one thing that we want the board to consider, this kind of came up a little bit, should ADUs be limited to properties where the principal structure does not exceed two stories? So just something to kind of, pardon? Say that again? Should ADUs be limited to properties where the principal structure does not exceed two stories? So we don't want to have like a huge, some huge structure, residential structure, and then an ADU that's two stories. So it, you know, you have to look at the amount of massing that that would cause on some of these lots. Okay. So we put together a new section, 4.7.9, and the purpose is to address the need for workforce housing in the R1, RM, and CBD districts within the Northwest-Southwest Neighborhood Overlay District. A restrictive covenant is required to ensure the ADU is leased to very low, low, and moderate income families. A family member can occupy an ADU without being subject to income limitations. The principal structure associated with an ADU must be homesteaded. The property owner or family member must reside in either the primary dwelling unit or the ADU, and ADUs must be marketed as workforce housing. So this is a table just to kind of show you what the percentages are of the median income that one would have to meet. And here's an additional table that just kind of shows you what the rent maximums would be based upon where someone would fall, what income range they would fall in, the size of their family, and also the number of bedrooms. So for example, someone in the very low range, that's going to be the thing that's highlighted there at the top. The most that a family consisting of three people wanting a two-bedroom, they could not be charged more than $1,578. That same unit for someone considered a low range, the max that they could be charged is $2,104. For a family in the moderate range, they could not be charged more than $3,156. And so these are just some of the findings, some of the goals, objectives, and policies of the comp plan that are applicable. So innovative housing strategies and the ability to protect the long-term viability of workforce housing just to ensure that we have this type of housing in the city that's available for a lot of our people that work here, police officers, teachers, so they have some place to stay. And also, it expands the housing supply and to support, again, innovative housing types. So those are the types of things that we're looking for and looking to accomplish. And there will be more things coming, different housing types again in this area. So there'll be a few more MNMITs coming forward. And here are the options for board action that are available for you. Thank you. So, who wants to say something? Anyone want to start? Ms. Monica? Yeah, please do. I'm feeling a little shy tonight, so I'll just get it out. So I'm super, super excited about this accessory dwelling coming finally to Delray. We need to solve the housing crisis. I'm a little confused why we're only looking at the northwest-southwest. Yeah, so our comprehensive plan says that prior to any big changes, it has to come as a result of a neighborhood study. So this neighborhood, the CRA, had the funds and the interest from residents to try to start it in this neighborhood. So for any other neighborhood to be able to do the ADUs, unless we have some kind of a state overreach and it forces us to have them everywhere, we would do it on a neighborhood-by-neighborhood basis based on the studies. It's just, every neighborhood is so different in Delray, and so in order to actually adopt regulations that are suitable for the neighborhood, like whether the lots are big enough, where they should go on the lot, how they should be designed, things like that, on a neighborhood-by-neighborhood basis is how the comprehensive plan has always approached us. Okay. Can I ask? Yeah. Right now, does Delray allow an ADU anywhere in the city? We do not, and you probably are all aware of some ADUs that exist in many neighborhoods. So for those that are within the northwest-southwest, this would provide them a path to become legit where they can come off the radar and rent. But for the other neighborhoods, no. The only thing you would be able to do would be a guest house. So, correct me for a moment, they've been doing this in Miami-Dade for years, correct? And we're just... Yes, so all over the country, it's been something that municipalities have found to be a really effective way to add to the housing inventory in a way that's really compatible with the scale of the neighborhoods. We're just getting to it now here. So it's definitely a proven strategy to expand the housing supply. Just a couple of questions. So how do you all plan to monitor whether or not the owner of the dwelling is charging the appropriate rents? So we would place a restrictive covenant on it, which would have to be submitted at the time of building permit. A restrictive covenant would have to be applied to the property, saying that it could only be rented at that certain level. And then all of our workforce housing units in the city are monitored through neighborhood and community services, where they would have to provide copies of leases and annual reporting. Then finally, will these units be subject to... And you may not be able to answer this, but Section 8 vouchers? Yeah. I mean, if an owner was willing to take them, I'm not as familiar with how the program works as a whole. But yeah, anyone with a Section 8 voucher could do that if the operator of the unit was willing. Or if it doesn't affect the density of the site, I find that awesome. In other words, if it's a duplex, if it's a legal duplex, and a detached ADU wants to be developed off to the side of it, it's still going to end up a duplex. The property is still a duplex. It doesn't become for some... I mean, it's not a triplex at that point. And that's also... It's locked into the comprehensive plan, and we also added it here just to make sure that it's abundantly clear for everyone who may want to have an ADU. I think it's going to be wildly successful. And all the... I mean, I think other neighborhoods are going to want to jump on the bandwagon and have the same opportunity. That's my opinion. If they find out about it. Well, yeah. Okay. Mitch. I have nothing to add. I agree. I think it's... We've talked about this for 100 years, and we're getting here. So, but nothing good comes easy. It's all over, too. We're here. A couple quick questions. Did I hear you say that the person in the ADU has to be related to somebody in the principal? No. No. No. If you may have a child, grandchild that's having a hard time finding some place to live, and you may say, you know what? You can come stay here. So they could stay there, or you can rent it. So it's up to you. So you don't have to rent it. You can rent it to anybody. Yes. As long as they fall within those income limitations and those guidelines. So for people who are house poor, this would be a revenue source for them. Exactly. And so, yeah, the one important thing that we thought we needed to build in was that the income limits don't apply to the tenants. So let's say in that example where you rent it to your grandchild, even if they make more than the max for that workforce housing limit, you would still be allowed to rent it to them. So, yeah, we felt that was a good way to help families to diversify and support their own. Or the mother-in-law suite. And there's no minimum, just a maximum. And you can only do one per parcel? That's correct. Do you both agree on that? Well, so, I mean, that is what is proposed now for this, based on the lot sizes in that neighborhood from the Optico study, which was attached. They do go over different types of housing or different scenarios. But for now, we're proposing this based on the lot sizes. But certain jurisdictions do allow more. There's a lot of options. But there are a lot of properties that may be 100 feet wide. So you could put two or three in there. Right. But for right now, this is an accessory. So it doesn't matter how large the property is. So if it's single-family zoning, you can have one principal unit, regardless of how big your lot is. So this is accessory to that. And it becomes multifamily at that point. I'm all for it. I think there's going to be parking issues. There's already parking issues in Northwest, Southwest. But it's a cost of moving forward. I think, if I can add, I think it's great. Like, if you have, I mean, the biggest problem has been these generational trying to keep the houses. So they have the children can move into the house. And then potentially the parents or the mother that's, they're going to end up in the mother-in-law. They're going to swap. Essentially, I think you're going to see that. So they can keep the house within the family. And I think that was the part of this, is being able to keep these properties that have been generational within those generations. And let the families have an opportunity to keep it, whether it's renting it out and making income so they can keep it, or keeping family members close by. And we do have the CRA here. If you all have any questions, it's specifically related to ADUs and what they may be planning to do with them. But we do, there's a project, I think, that's public. Yes. There's a townhouse project within the CBD that they are actively in the process of designing. And hopefully, now that we are passing this, get started. It would be townhouse units within ADU over a garage in the back. So there's a lot of things already happening as a result of this amendment. Well, since Renee is still here, we should ask her a question. Should we? I just wanted to say thanks for coming. Hi, Renee Jadasing, Executive Director of Delray Beach CRA. So Christine and I are both here to support this item. As I mentioned, we do have a project that's coming up. It's already going through the review with development services. You may have seen it, but it's on Northwest 7th on an Atlantic Avenue. It's a strip of townhouses. So on 7th is where the main townhouse will be. There's a courtyard in the middle, and behind that is the accessory dwelling unit. On the second floor and the ground floor is a parking, a little parking. So it's very cute. It looks like two buildings, but it is the primary building, then the accessory with the parking underneath off the alley, and with the courtyard in the middle. So it's going to be really nice, but we would need this study in order to implement that. So we definitely do support it. Obviously, everywhere in the Northwest Southwest, I want to thank Development Services staff and OptiCose. They did an amazing job with this study. It's very detailed. We were there along the way, and as we were doing that, we were working on this housing development. So hopefully it's a model for others to come and see that it's possible. It really is possible. Will CRA be providing financing for people who want to do this? We don't know yet. We haven't gotten that far. We'll be paying to build these townhouses for sure. Yeah. Yeah, but as far as the financing mechanism, we haven't really discussed that. It's come up in conversations. It came up during the SET transformation plan meetings as well. But we haven't quite gotten there yet. So we'll see. Well, just picking up from what Mitch said, if we're trying to preserve generational wealth and give them an opportunity to add to a cash flow, that I would think financing would be in order. All right. Noted comment. Yes. I'm sorry, before you- No, Mr. Sean, please. So these are considered accessories. So do you all, could anybody tell me, how does this work in terms of property taxes for the property owner? Is this a- They're going up. I figured this way. But it's being appraised as a separate dwelling? It's accessory, just like a garage would be, just like a shed would be. So how the taxes are assessed, I don't think that we can speak to that part. The value would go up. But not as much as it would be if it was considered. It's not considered a unit. Right. When you add a garage, is it affected by your homestead? Good question. Yeah. I don't know. I did know that question, but I don't know. Yeah, that's a good question. It doesn't. I don't think that affects the homestead. And then if the governor has his way, it's not going to matter anyway. Yeah. We're not going to have property tax. So there is one historic district in Northwest Southwest, and maybe there will be two. Frog Island. Frog Island. Does the ADU have to comply with the regulations from historic preservation? Yes. Right? Yes, it does. Everything else remains. That's in the study. I read that. Yeah, so just like if you were to do an expansion of your house or an addition, it would go through that same process. And from serving on HPB. It couldn't be masonry modern. No. So as you know from serving on HPB, like some of these things can be approved administratively. Some require board review. So there are a lot of benefits to owning a historic home. And if you were to develop an ADU on historic property, that would be something that an owner would realize. So like if they're not in the historic district, you can build a garage with a dwelling above. But if you were in a historic district and it was a one-story house, they couldn't do that because what I read, it has to be at the same. It can't be higher. It can't be higher than the primary house. I read the book, right? Isn't that what it said? The secondary and subordinate has been a rule, but there's, I mean. It's got to be subordinate. Yeah. So. Subjective. It can't be higher than the. Listen, with this little development that we've seen in the West Settlers Historic District, I mean this flyer that we all had today when we got here, 40 COAs from last year, 19 of them administratively approved. So 21, if my numbers are right, 21 COAs throughout the entire city in the historic districts last year, that's nothing. I think one of them was in the West Settlers Historic District, just one. So we need a lot more stimulation in the West Settlers Historic District, and maybe this will be, in a little way, this will be an incentive for people to go that route. But I think it could, a two-story piece. Yeah, to Mitch's question, it could go two stories. Yeah. But the primary house has been two stories, right? No. Wow. You just can't see. That's a good number. The secondary. Oh, when it was done, you mean? The sighting. Oh, wow. Okay. What? Misread. Well, it may say something different. And maybe it was in the study I read that. No, so, well, for the regulations we have, and I think this came from commission feedback when this was presented to them in a workshop, they were only interested in seeing a two-story ADU if it was for over a detached garage. Yeah. So that was the ground rules we were given when we started to bring the actual amendment forward. Which is what we have with the townhouse. I don't know. So a total of two stories, the first ground floor being the garage and the top floor being the ADU. That'll solve your parking issue, too. That's with our townhouse development. That's what it is. It's that two-story in the front and behind. So now I've totally confused me with the height thing. I don't have the ordinance in front of me. Does it say in there that the ADU cannot exceed the height of the primary residence? No, it doesn't say that. It does not say that, so it could. Yes. It can't be more than one story, but it can be taller than the primary residence. Right. So the unit itself can be one story, but it may be on top of a garage. Understand that part. What I'm talking about is not on top of a garage. I got a house that's one story, and it's low, and I can build an accessory dwelling unit that's one story that's taller than my house. Other than the garage scenario, we did not specifically address that. I think even in the study itself, it didn't necessarily find that limiting, requiring the ADU to be smaller was not really something that they indicated was important. We can talk about that just to make sure that we are sure that we have it right, but the only limitation that we had was, again, the garage and unit above scenario. My concern is if there's a loophole, somebody will use it. We can discuss to make sure we didn't let something slide. And my other question is on one of your slides, you talked about the possibility of only allowing an ADU if the principal residence is two stories or less. Are there some three-story residence, principal residence? Not in this neighborhood right now, but I think as you're seeing, there's properties throughout the city that are having single-family three-story homes popping up. And so I think the idea was that... This doesn't apply throughout the city. No. So like on the chance that someone would come in and start to try to build a three-story residence, I think that would already be vastly different in form from the neighborhood. So to say, sure, you've got your three-story house. Now let's pop an ADU on the back. We thought that that would be too much for the neighborhood form. I agree. So proactively, we were just saying, we were considering whether we should just across the board say no ADUs if you go above two stories. Sounds like a good idea to me. Can I add something? I'll just add that part of the time that went into this process was considering things like that because what we don't want is to exacerbate gentrification where people see an opportunity to buy. Yes. Even if they are living there and it's their homestead, they're like, great, I'm going to knock this down. I'm going to build a three-story square and then I'm going to build a two-story square. And then you start to see the neighborhood change over. So all of these things, even with the workforce housing, there was a lot of discussion that went into every single point to make sure that we were catching all of those things that we didn't have that situation that nobody obviously wants that, but it could happen. So, well, my personal opinion is I think that's a reasonable addition to the ordinance to include that restriction. And I would say, personally, I'm in favor of the whole thing with that amendment, which I believe is the way that we do this. Are we amending it? Yeah, we vote as a recommendation. Can I make a motion? Yeah, please. I move to recommend. I'm going to amend it and put that two-story thing in there. Okay, okay. We'll do that. I think the two-story... It's already in there. No, only as it relates to the garage with the unit above it. So we didn't specifically, in the draft that you have, add... We didn't have a back area. We have this limitation here. I want that in it. Okay. I think that should be in it. Okay. I'll try to word it. Or I can give you the gavel and I'll read it. Since you feel that way, I think that's a good idea. Okay. I move to recommend approval to the City Commission of Ordinance No. 12-26 as amended, the City-initiated amendment to the Land Development Regulations amending Section 4.3.2, Determining Use, Section 4.3.3, Special Requirements for Specific Uses, Section 4.4.3, Single-Family Residential R-1 Districts, Section 4.4.6, Medium-Density Residential RM District, Section 4.4.13, Central Business District, adopting Section 4.5.23, Northwest-Southwest Overlay District, Section 4.7.9, Accessory Dwelling Units, and amending Appendix A definitions to add regulations relating to the Accessory Dwelling Units, finding that the amendment and approval thereof is consistent with the comprehensive plan and meets the criteria set forth in the Land Development Regulations with the inclusion of a statement that addition... Put that back up. Accessory Dwelling Units are only allowed if they are limited to properties where the principal structure does not exceed two stories. Second. You've got to call the roll. Oh, yes. You have the gap. I don't have the back end? I can't do it after the... Yes. Okay. Diane, please call the roll. Price Patton. Absent. Oh, absent. I'm sorry. Mitch Katz. Yes. Deidre Strong. Yes. Jim Chard. Yes. Roger Cope. Yes. Judy Malica. Yes. Gregory Snyder. Yes. I'll have it back. I'll have it back. All right, thank you. That passed six to nothing as we lost the person. Hey, nice job. Very nice. Again, you know, just keep coming here and I'd compliment you, but you deserve it. Okay. Reports and comments. Staff comments. Okay. So my only comment is that the meeting, the extra meeting we polled you all about on February 9th, it's actually still a little bit tentative at this point. So I know that you all are waiting with your schedules for the 6th as well for the pre-meeting meetings. So by Wednesday, we'll be able to give you an answer on whether that meeting will continue. Otherwise, you definitely will have the meeting on February 23rd. Is that a one agenda item that we're looking to have that meeting for? Is that why? Correct. We may, I mean, if there were other items that are ready, we may add them to it just to help balance it. But so far, the February 23rd agenda doesn't look too heavy. So it should be doable. You say that all the time. I try. Hey, can't control it. Necessarily. Miss or Bennett, any comments for us? By the way, I think I got through the whole meeting without you stopping me except for the X-part case. No, you did not make me work very hard tonight. I appreciate it. Well, the first time, but that was it. No comments here. Just good to see everybody again. Thank you. All right. Board comments. Just thank you, staff. Again, it's great when the applicants come in and they're so appreciative of the work that staff does. And just I want, first of all, thank the city. We had our divisions meeting. I know a few of us here participated in that. It was very productive, I think. Overall, I know that you can critique anything, but it was, I think it was good for the future of the city. But I did get a chance to talk to some of the staff. And one of the things that some of the senior staff in this department pointed out was what a great board this particular board at this time is. And I agreed with them. They really are noticing that I wanted to point that out. So I think you all weren't there getting to share that, the feedback I got from them, that they really think that this board is dynamic and we got a great diversity on this group and opinion. So I was glad to hear that. Well, I would like to second Mitch in terms of the value of the Visions 2035. I'm anxiously awaiting to see what the written report is going to be. And I want to express disappointment in Bill because he didn't interrupt me once tonight. We're better next time. All for your good work. Roger. I'm sad that Julian's leaving. We're going to miss Julian. Yeah, he's good. Yeah. What a loss. I agree with that. He's done a phenomenal job. Yes, if you know of any talented senior planners that have an eye for design when you send them along, we have an open position. How soon? Is he leaving soon? February 5th or 6th is his last day, yes. You made it sound like it was the wife's decision so he didn't have a choice so we can't blame the staff. Yeah. Yes, we would have been happy to keep him but he has to move on to new opportunities that are good for his family's future. Yeah. All right. Yeah, I just second the thing about Julian leaving. His architectural analysis is phenomenal. It's going to be hard to replace. Fortunately, we have Mr. Cope here to keep us on our toes. The subject came up during the meeting tonight that I think is important and it was about loss of commercial space downtown. And as we saw with the 109 Southeast 5th, there's nothing that says right now you can't put a purely residential building in CBD, in Central Core, or any of that. And I think the point was made kind of quietly, but it should be made strongly that we need to look at maybe changing the zoning rules to further encourage commercial or mixed use as opposed to purely residential. Especially with the potential of state laws coming in that are going to impact that taxable income. So, yes. So, there are some streets that do require retail on them, not all of them, and that's where you're seeing these only residential, but we had this exact conversation with our internal staff today about the competing residential demand versus the commercial tax base. So, I think we're going to be looking at how we can come up with some solutions for that in the future. There will be a study involved, but, you know, that's on our radar as well. I should have known you were on top of it. It also definitely goes against kind of the original vision of that where they narrowed the Federals for pedestrian traffic. Well, if there is no commercial use, there is going to be no commercial roads. That's right. Right. So, that's, it's really defeating the purpose of that millions upon millions of dollars that was spent in narrowing those roads if we don't put a handle on this soon. Yeah, great. Okay. And that's all I have and we're adjourned. Huh?