Site Plan Review and Appearance Board on 09-23-2026 5:01 PM - Regular Meeting - Sep 23, 2026

We still have a few minutes. It's 5.01, right? So we start at 5.01? Go ahead. Yes. Very good. All right. Awesome. Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to the Dalry Beach Advisory Board. Site plan review and appearance for Wednesday, September 23rd, 2026. I am your board chair. Rochelle, can you please call roll? Leah Lloyd is absent. Reddy Talbot? Here. Jose Alvarez? Here. Sandra Boni? Here. Nicholas Coppola? Here. Annette Gregg? Here. Abbie Campson? Here. All right. I will turn over the meeting to our board attorney for the first addenda item, which is election of new officers. Yes. We have election of officers. We have three officers, chair, vice chair, second vice chair up for election. So for the chair, are there any nominations for the chair position? I'll nominate Nicholas Coppola. Any other nominations? I'm sorry. Can you repeat that, please? I'm sorry. We just got technical information. Somebody nominated who? Nicholas Coppola. Can I nominate to remain in the chair? Or is that an option? Yeah, you can self-nominate if you like. Okay. I'll do that. All right. So we have two nominations. We can take a vote. So you don't need seconds? As long as they accept the nominations. Okay. So the first one is for Collette with one at a time for Jose and then the next one, Annette? Okay. So for Jose, Rhett Talbot. Sorry, for Nicholas. I'm sorry. For Nicholas. Sorry, sorry. Jose, now stay safe. Okay. For Nick Coppola. And this is an affirmative vote for Nick versus Annette? Yeah, we're having an election. Yeah. Okay. So two separate. So first we're going to do... They're both running for chair. Yes. They're running for chair. Or if you just want to say who your vote is and then we can just go down. Okay. So for Nicholas, I'm taking that vote first. I think if it's in an election and there's two people, from my understanding, you can just say who you want to vote for and then we can see what the votes are. Okay. Annette Gray. Jose Alvarez. Nicholas Coppola. Sandra Amani. Annette Gray. Nicholas Moa. Annette Gray. Annette Gray. Oh, I can say yes, me. Yes, you can vote for yourself. Oh, it's weird. I love you, Camden. Annette Gray. Okay. It appears that the majority voted for Ms. Gray, vice chair. I nominate Mr. Alvarez. Mr. Alvarez, do you accept the nomination? No. Are there any other nominations for vice chair? Okay. I think you just call all in favor. Okay. All in favor, Ms. Alvarez. Yes. Aye. Aye. Aye. Passes, no opposition. Okay. Second vice chair. I nominate Nick Coppola. Mr. Coppola, do you accept? Okay. Are there any other nominations? Okay. Okay. Another all in favor? Yes. All in favor? Yes. Yes. No opposition? Passes. Okay. So we'll move on with the remaining of the agenda items? Yes. Okay, great. Can I have an approval for the agenda? Move to approve the agenda. I have a first. Do I have a second? Second. Second. Any opposition? Would you like to call roll? Rhett Talbot? Yes. Alvarez? Yes. Sandra Amani? Yes. Nicholas Coppola? Yes. Abit Campson? Yes. And that great. Yes. Okay, we don't have any minutes for review for this meeting. Can I interject there? There were minutes for the last meeting that I read. Is that right? I just wanted to correct because it showed that I was here and I was absent at the last meeting. They're not prepared yet. So once they come, then you can make the modifications. Okay. Okay. No worries. Thank you. The swearing in of... This hearing shall be conducted in accordance with the City of Delray Beach quasi-judicial rules. The applicant and the City shall be permitted to present their case. The public shall be allowed to speak for three minutes each or a maximum of six minutes if the person represents an organization or a group of people who are present but agree not to speak. The City Commission board members, staff, and the applicant may be allowed to cross-examine a witness and the City or the applicant will be allowed to offer rebuttal testimony. The decision to approve or deny an application or appeal may not legally be made upon personal views as to whether a project is a good project or not, nor may the 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. And, Rochelle, are you able to then now swear in all participants? Okay. Please stand. Raise your right hand. By the authority vested in me as a notary of the State of Florida, do you swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Thank you. Agenda Item 6, if there's anyone in the public that would like to address the board on agenda item, on items not relating to tonight's agenda, please come forth. You have three minutes to do so. Okay. Seeing none, I'll close public comments. And we don't currently have any presentations, which is Agenda Item 7. So we'll move to our quasi-judicial hearing items, the first being 8A, and will be presented by Darwin Laguerre. Yeah, I would like to reintroduce our planner in training, Darwin Laguerre. She's a planner in training. She actually handled the item last meeting, and the board decided that this is to be continued, and the item is here again before the board, because we have two new board members. They didn't see this item last month. So Laguerre, Darwin, is going to enter the item for the records. Hello. Good evening, board. My name is Darwin Laguerre, planner in training. At this moment, I would like to enter file PZ-000566-2026 for consideration of an amendment of the Master's Sign Program for the Ray Hotel and Shops at the Ray to commit the addition of two wall signs for a current tenant for a total of five types of wall signs. Okay. Welcome. Let's state your name and address for the record. Good evening, everyone. Jordana Jorgera here on behalf of the applicant, Campy. I'm also here with Jen Buse, who's a planner that worked on this full circle when she was at the city, and now she's working on it in the private sector for me, as well as the new owner of the hotel, Glenn Alba. If he has any questions, they're available, both of them for questions. So welcome to the new board members. We came at the last meeting, and this is for a wall signage at the corner of Northeast 2nd Avenue and 2nd Street at the Ray Hotel for Campy Restaurant. Some of the board members had some feedback, so we deferred it to this meeting to try to address some of those concerns. Just a quick review. Campy is located at the corner of 2nd Avenue and 2nd Street on the lobby of the most southern end of the Ray Hotel. It is the property size of the Ray Hotel is just over an acre, and it's adjoined to the shops of the Ray, which is north, which is 0.8 acres. It's the commercial core in the CBD and, of course, the Pineapple Arts District. The request that we're asking is Campy is looking for a corner sign. They have very limited signage. They have an existing sign that's located in the Civic Space, and it's very hard to see from both vehicular traffic as well as passerbys because it's set back within the Civic Space and a planter and behind the east of the valet queue, so you really can't see it. So they're looking for additional signage. The sign will be painted on the existing architectural corner column, and it's not a separate monument or blade sign. It literally wraps the corner. And this is a picture of the building, and this shows the gold signage. One of the feedback that we got from a couple of the board members, Campy wanted it to be orange because that's its color and its branding, and we also felt that it went with the colorful, vibrant area of Pineapple Grove. However, several of the board members or at least one of the board members preferred it to match the existing signage, which is gold, which I'll show you in a second. So this is a rendering showing that sign on the corner, taking from across the street so you could see that it fronts both 2nd Avenue and 2nd Street. Technically, this sign is considered two signs because it's fronting one 2nd Avenue and 2nd Street, but it reads as if one sign. So again, some of the concerns of the board members, this is the existing signage that you could see, a close-up of it as well as from across the street. Another issue that was raised was whether or not it was visually harmonious with the surrounding area in addition to the color and whether or not there was an unfair advantage to the surrounding areas that do not have numerous signage on their tenant space or building face. So just as a split screen, this was the original request on the right side showing the orange signage, which we just wanted everyone to see it since there were additional board members if there was a preference to go back to that. But obviously, our application was amended to make it gold. So just to go over Pineapple Grove Arts District, it's known for a dynamic mixed-use district where art is at full circle, colorful, vibrancy. That's what you think of when you think of Pineapple Grove Arts District, which is mainly 2nd Avenue and parts of 3rd. This is just pictures. This is the whole district. And then there's some pictures of additional signage in the area that, again, really shows the vibrant, colorful nature of Pineapple Grove Arts District. To give you some perspective of the block, not to be biased, but I believe it's one of the best developed blocks in the town because it really showcases the eclectic nature of Delray and the different types of uses that you could have in Delray. You have on the corner of 2nd Avenue and 2nd Street, one of my clients just renovated and revitalized that house, which was the old Apple Store, not as in Apple phones, but actually they sold apples out of this building, and Jen's mom worked at the store when she was little. You have Lulu's, which is just south of Delray, which is a corner outdoor-indoor dining experience. You have CityWalk, which is a mixed-use residential project, ground floor commercial. Above is multifamily condo buildings. And you could see, again, the colors of CityWalk, I think, really show, really play off of that Pineapple Grove Arts District. To the north of the Ray, which is part of this Master Sign program, is the Ray Shops of the North, which is a 1950s one-story building that, again, was revitalized when we redeveloped the Ray. And you see the different signage that has gone in there for the different tenants. This is some additional signage that we think shows the dynamic, colorful, playful nature of Pineapple Grove. You see some corner signage as well, both at Pure Life, which unfortunately is no longer there. My gym moved out. And Al Camino. This is also a picture of a mural that's on 3rd, Artist Alley, which is also part of the Pineapple Grove Arts District. So a Master Sign program. A Master Sign program is a way that large-scale developers, whether it's a mixed-use, whether it's a shopping center, could come up with their own basic zoning code for that specific to that site, and that's what the Ray Hotel operates under. Rather than going through, you know, different waivers, the city and the property owner or the applicant work together to come up with a Master Sign program, which becomes its site plan for that property. So this is one of the things that the city looks at when improving a Master Sign program is garishness. You know, signs that are not in harmony with or compatible with the building or adjacent surroundings. Obviously, signage on Pineapple Grove is going to have a different garish definition than maybe signage along the beach because they're, you know, have a different feel to them. Scale, design, and location. What is the size of the sign that you're seeking? What's the location of it? How does it mix and melt with the harmony of the building itself as well as the neighborhood? And again, the quality that how does it visually enhance the area? So currently, the Master Sign program has several types of signage. One is a freestanding sign that's on the northern side of the Shops of the Ray. It's never been installed, but that's what it looks like. The freestanding sign that is existing for Campy, which is that sign that's in the one of the planters in the Civic Space. The signage along the Shops of the Ray. The three existing signs for the Ray Hotel, one right by the valet stand, another one on 2nd Avenue above Campy, and the third sign for the Ray Hotel is on 2nd Street facing O'Connor's looking directly south. I wanted to call attention to the size of these signs. In relation to the building, 43 square feet, 43 square feet, and 19 square feet, I think it's important to point out that if you were operating under the existing code, the signage would be much larger than what's actually done at the Ray. So in terms of what they would be permitted to utilize, the same signage, in fact, one more. They would have two signs on 2nd Avenue, one on 2nd Street, and one on the western side of the property, and much larger square footage than what's existing. The third type of sign is the Akira Back sign. This is the fourth type of wall sign, which is Ember, which is where Campy is located. It originally was Ember. This sign has never been installed, and we are offering, instead of this sign, to do this corner sign that we're requesting before you. So this sign would be eliminated. This shows the building and the rendering of the gold sign on that corner. Some corner signs were brought, a comment was made by a previous board member that she was afraid that we would be giving some sort of special exception to, you know, that they would get additional signage. Generally, when there is a corner tenant or a corner property, you have signage for wayfinding on both sides of the street. So this is right across the street in City Walk, Wits, which I'm sure everyone's familiar with because there's always a line up front. You have the signage on facing, so if you're going south on 2nd Avenue, you have the Wits. And then on 2nd Avenue itself, so if you're traveling north, they have their ice cream cone. One of the new tenants, the Ray Shops, Preface Wine, has a sign facing 2nd Avenue, and then it has a sign facing 2nd, 3rd Street. Now, again, these reads as two separate signs versus our sign, it reads as one sign because it's a wrapped corner. So why this sign matters to Campy? Wayfinding. Unless you're a local or unless you are staying at the hotel, it's very hard to find where Campy is. It doesn't have, you know, it currently doesn't have a sidewalk cafe. It doesn't have an entrance on 2nd Street or 2nd Avenue. Its entrance is tucked away inside the civic space behind three very large planters. It gave great privacy to that area, but it's very difficult to know where it is unless you are a local and familiar with the hotel. When you're traveling on 2nd Avenue, you know, Pineapple Grove is a very walkable street. We walk up and down to Atlantic Avenue, down 2nd Avenue. This new signage would provide wayfinding and say, here we are. Our door isn't here, but here's our location. We believe it's consistent with the character of Pineapple Grove. We think the orange sign, respectfully, is more consistent, but we are, we very much want this board support, so we switched the goals for this presentation. Visibility, I talked about this. It's very hard to see when you're traveling down 2nd Avenue in a car or in, or just walking that one sign that's within the planters because of, it's behind the valley queue, it's set back, it's close to the building, and it's in some very lush landscaping. So we believe that the sign really will help visitors, non-locals, and discover the restaurant and give it visibility and location. One of the comments in the staff report is that we would have to do a maintenance plan prior to site plan certification. Of course, Camp B will submit a written maintenance plan to be approved by the city staff prior to certification in terms of keeping up its cleanliness, its color, if any fading or damage occurs. And with that, I'm happy to answer any questions that you might have. Okay, thank you. Presentation. Good evening again, board. I'd like to present the Ray Hotel and Shops of the Way, amendments to the Master Signs Program. So the property is located at 233 NE 2nd half, and on the north side of the property, of the subject property, it's 245 NE 2nd half, under the Master Signs Program for the Ray. The property to the south is at 1.09 acres, and the property to the north is at 0.81 acres. They are in the land use map of Commercial Core, and the zoning is Central Business District. The current use is hotel, restaurant, and retail to the north. It was previously constructed, it was constructed in 1954, formerly known as the Grove. The original parcel was developed for retail, and parking to the south. In 2003, the original Master Signs Program for the north parcel was approved. In 2020, a class 4 site plan for the Ray was approved. It is currently known as the Ray Hotel and Shops of the Ray. The parcel got divided into two separate parcels in 2021, an amendment to the Master Signs Program was approved, and several amendments throughout the years, before and after the conversion of the parcels happened. Last month, in August 26, 2026, Sprott voted 3-1 to continue with direction for color revision. So just a little background on that. It was previously, the color of the sign previously reflected the business logo, which is the sign sold to the right, and once again, last month in August 26, the board voted for 3-1 to continue with direction for color revision. The board request was that the proposed color match the existing, free-standing sign to create a more harmonious appearance, which is the sign marked down, the free-standing sign. Just going over some of the current Master Signs Program approved signage. So we have two free-standing signs. One is located at the shop's parking exit on Northeast 3rd Street, and the other is located at the hotel civic space for the South Restaurant Senate. We also have the different type of wall sign. The first one is type A, highlighted in green, and shown below for the shop's west facade. Type B, highlighted in blue, for the Ray Hotel signage. Two of them are on the west facade, in the hotel's west entrance, and the other one is on the south facade. Type C is highlighted in orange. It's for the North Restaurant Tenant, west facade. And type D, which is currently not being used, for the South Restaurant Tenant, west facade. The request is an amendment for the Ray Master Signs Program to accommodate the addition of two walls signed for Camp Italian or Conrad Tenant. Approval of a Master Signs Program may include the automatic granting of waiver and or adjustment to the provision of Subsection D and E, provided that the entry of the sign code is maintained and the character of the community and neighborhood is not diminished. A Master Signs Program shall be approved by the Site Plan, Review, and Appearance Board. And it shall prevent diversity and creativity of, nothing contained herein, shall prevent diversity and creativity of individual sign in the Master Signs Program. Asprime as the user authority to take action on the Master Signs Program based on those bases, the following. Visual Harmony, Garishness, Appropriate in Size, Scale, and Design, Proportionate in Size, and Scale to the Building Facade, and Professional Appearance. Those are the considerations for the board. Through the modification, it enhanced the visual aesthetic of the hotel and restaurant and surrounding area. Other proposed signages considered harmonious with building feature. Other proposed signages and good taste with the surrounding area. The additional sign necessary for identification. And here are the motions for the board. Thank you. Thank you. Great job. Is there anyone in the public that would like to speak on this particular item? If you do, you will have three minutes to do so. Okay, seeing none, I'll close public comments. And before I move to the board, is there any board member that has any ex-parte communication that they would like to disclose? Thank you. All right, that said, we'll go ahead and start with you. Let me turn on my mic. First, kudos for the redevelopment of the apple shop, but I don't think they sold apples. It was arts and crafts kind of stuff. Okay, fair. It looks great, though. I have seen the sign, and it's currently the orange color, which means you're going to have to change it, right? I like the orange color. It took a great picture that I was in. So I think it suits the surroundings. I don't have a problem with it. The small sign in the garden area is so remote to it that I don't think you'll have in a concept that there is a difference in color between those two. My one question is, is that Akira Bach is on a corner, too. So we don't have a chance that Akira would want to come in and do the same thing, right? I don't want to speak for Akira, so Glenn, I don't know if... Okay. They don't have the same issue because their door fronts 2nd Avenue. I feel like their door serves as an entrance, as a sign, versus their sign. Okay, okay. So that said, I'm in favor of the sign. I think it's attractive in the area. I particularly, personally, don't feel there needs to be a color change. Can I get a legal clarification here? What's in front of us tonight is the second sign, not the first. I think that's... That's correct. Yeah, that's as far as the application, yes. Okay. The wrapping, sorry. Yes, the color. Yeah. The golden sign is in front of the board today, so the orange one is not for action. Yeah. I'm curious how they were able to put the orange sign up without approval. There is a code case currently. Okay. Well, if I, for the board, if everyone else is in agreement, my personal feeling is that they could keep the orange. So I don't know if there's a way that that can be done through an amendment to the approval, but I think it's attractive, personally. I think we had a board that made a decision. The amendment is what we can determine tonight. So that's why I asked for the clarification. So just going back to the last, just for clarification, just off memory, I recall that you guys moved for a further direction, that if they wanted to come back with modifications, you didn't design from the bench or tell them to change a specific color. I think you provided your feedback on what the concern was with the color for clarification. I just want to double-check what staff, I believe they would have to amend. Is there a way that they could do the motion now with direction, move to approve with direction with a different color? I just want to clarify that with staff. So last month, the board provided comments, like you did not design it. You did not, like, provide instructions, like you come back with this color, specific color, so you just discussed, like, your concerns, and the outcome of this is to match the existing color to be better. Like, there is a consensus between the board. So back to Mr. Talbot after, like, the board council as well. So if you wish to go back into or approve a different color or a different configuration, you can use one of the, like, for example, option B, which is approval as amended. So, and then you can state the amendment, and if the applicant accepts that to amend as your direction, and then we see, like, if it's doable. Assuming the board would accept that amendment. The consensus. Assuming the board would go along with that amendment. That's correct. And that is important because it wasn't just the color that was the issue with the previous meeting. If I may, if I may, there was, it was a, it was kind of trying to get consensus on the board. It was a conversation about reducing the signage, and then the color came up, and I believe, for lack of a better term, maybe here is a compromise. I like writing like the original sign, the orange. So if we can, and if it's not too much of a burden, financially, or to go back to that, can we, if, again, if we have that agreement here, can we move to that? Unless, of course, we don't have a conversation. Let's have that, can we have that conversation? Yeah, maybe if the board weighs in on this concept of, I think that the way that the sign appears now, in the color that it is, and the size, and just exactly as we saw, I don't see that as a problem. It's appealing to me. If I made a motion, I would make a motion to... So before you do a motion, let's... If I were, I'm just... Before you do that, let's have everybody weigh in. Okay. We have a couple of new board members, and there is still the concern about the number of signs, whether the current sign reads as two or shows up as one, and there is also the question as to whether other members on that block could come and represent. So I am very hesitant to have a singular conversation around color before all the other items are addressed by the rest of the board members. Okay. Is that fair? Fair. Okay. So I was just going to go in order. How do you feel? Okay. Okay. I actually agree that it reads as one sign, and I believe that the orange color fits more with the already existing colorfulness of the neighborhood, and it seems to follow more closely, but overall is more attractive, and I think would be beneficial, versus a gold color that may or may not fit into the neighborhood. All right. That's true. I think my comment from last time was a little bit more towards the uniformity between the two signs, right? So that was my concern is, you know, if the idea is to present this as the main branding for the restaurant, I personally think that having something that was unified between, you know, as a strategy would be desired, because then now we're starting to look at a bunch of different signs in different colors, and that to me creates a little bit of a clash in the way that the signage is reading. My other concern was that it was a little bit – it's a new sign type, if you want to call it that, right, compared to everything else in the master sign program. So, you know, the color, I completely agree with you. It fits in the context of the neighborhood, but I do feel it doesn't fit with the rest of the signage program within the development. That was my, you know, so it depends how you're – you know, if you're looking within the context of the rest of the building and the signage program, it deviates quite a bit. You know, so that was a little bit of my reservation in terms of the color, but I think if it's going to go one direction, I would like to see both of the signs kind of go together rather than two individual signs with different schemes. Does it read as one sign or two signs to you? One. Yeah, yeah, yeah, just – I mean, it's on a corner, you know, it's kind of wrapping the column. I don't particularly see an issue in that sense in terms of the number. I could see it as an easy – as one feature. And, you know, at the same time, that's what – you know, that's one of the advantages of being on a corner on real estate, right? So I didn't have an issue with the number per se. Okay. Thank you. Did you want to add anything additional? Yeah. I – after reviewing everything, I would expect that the minimum that we would do would be to grant the color that was presented because I believe that's the message we kind of sent them. Hey, come back with that. Match that color. So at minimum. However, with the change – there's a change in dynamic. Let's be fair. There's a change in opinion. So I do support if it does not cause too much trouble, if the applicant agrees to go back to the orange and we have consensus that would pass, I'm all for that as well because it does fit. You could see it. And it actually – when the presentation was happening and they highlighted the awnings on the other side of the street, it's like, wow, there actually is a connection. So if we can make that happen with ease, I mean, I would – I think it's great. Okay. Thank you. Mr. Ray? Yeah. So from my – on my perspective, the color, I'm fine either way, whether it's orange or the gold color. I'm more concerned about the material just because all of the other signs are not painted. This is a painted sign for some reason, which I don't know why. Maybe it's a costing or something. But it says like – the actual wording here says a painted corner sign, and then the applicant must indicate the proposed maintenance for the signage. My question is why is this sign the only painted sign where every other sign is a metal sign, I guess? So I'm going to blame the client who's not here. They obviously were not familiar with Delray's process and that they had to seek approval prior to painting this. Their colors and their branding is orange. Some overzealous individuals that work for my client decided that they would do a mural-type signage. They thought it went well with the area. They thought it was very vibrant. So that's why it is painted. Additionally, the extra signage – signs are running excessively long and excessively expensive now. Lighted signage, it takes, you know, several, several months. This is an existing code violation that we have, you know, kind of put off, put off so that we could have this hearing. We are fine with whichever color. We prefer the orange, but we're fine with both colors as long as we don't have to go to another hearing because we can't keep delaying the code violation. And as far as it being a lighted or blade sign, that's a much more intense sign, both from an expense standpoint as well as from a review standpoint. And to go to, you know, Commissioner Gray's comment was we are fine with eliminating that other sign, which is illuminated, that has never been installed. It's along 2nd Avenue. So if that's the case, if it is a painted sign, I would probably prefer the brighter sign, to be honest. It's easier to maintain than a darker kind of goldish color that you might see it more often. But that would be my only concern that it's painted. But it doesn't seem like that's a major concern. Okay. Thank you. So I have a couple of questions for staff. How do staff view the count of signs for this particular property, for clarification? That's a good question, but I would like to clarify that we do not really have kind of an opinion on the numbers of signs. I'm not asking for an opinion. I'm asking for what does the current regulation allow within this master sign program for this particular property. You can approve as many as you see. Like, for example, like this is counted as one or two. If they propose, let's say, you know, hypothetically, like if they propose three more, they can bring it to the board. So the idea about master sign program is you can actually review whatever is proposed. You can, like the applicant mentioned in her presentation that you are allowed to write your own code with the master sign program. Whatever number does not apply, like, and there are no waivers. Because the master sign program itself is a mechanism to actually approve any numbers of signs and sizes that are different than the regular or standard requirement of the code. I hope I answered the question. I believe you have. There is more than one way to create an unfair advantage. There is a way in the color, that current color, because of the visibility and the distance and the attract, can also create an unfair advantage, in my opinion. And that's my primary concern, because of the question you asked. There might not be a plan at the moment for the current tenant to put a sign similarly, but there is no way in the future to decide if that's going to happen. So we have to create a situation that is not unfair. As to it being painted a brighter color, when any woman knows when you paint your nails a brighter color and it chips, it's more obvious. So the muted tones, when it chips, your maintenance goes a little bit longer, right? So I don't disagree that the brighter color goes with the neighborhood. But when the master sign program was approved for the property, what was presented to us, and no evidence has been presented otherwise so far, that the orange is the brand color. We've been presented the gold color on several occasions, and this is the only time. The examples that have been shown are examples of the community, which is fine, but it doesn't address the uniformity of the signage for this particular property, and that's my concern. Could either staff or applicant describe for me what the amendment to the existing master sign program is? What is it that is being deviated from or being done that the master sign program is just not allowing you to automatically do this? I would like to clarify, like, master sign program, as I said, like, it's a mechanism for large-scale projects to create your own kind of code to deviate from the requirement of the current sign code. Once a master sign program is established, that's a key point in the history of a project, because any changes to this amendment, addition, remove, or whatever change in the configuration of the signs must be an amendment to the master sign program and come before the board. So if you want to add anything, you need to come back, even if, like, also the applicant mentioned earlier that the current code, for example, if you apply the current code, you can get, for example, larger signs or whatever. It doesn't apply here. We already established the master sign program. That's a path. There's no way out of this, as far as I know, unless if you are going to redevelop. So that's something different. So master sign program is established. Amendment is required. So under their master sign program, what are they allowed? This sign is not included in the current sign program. However, there is another one, can you show it on the screen, which is not installed yet, this one. So they have the opportunity to install this one, which is not installed, and the discussion last month was about this one. Can you do a tradeoff, for example? Like, the board mentioned this. That was Ember. That was supposed to be Ember, right? So Campy is allowed to do a sign there. Yeah. Or we're asking to do this sign instead. Instead of that. Yes. Would they have to come for approval to do a sign there, or no? No, that's already approved. So if they want to install this, you can go straight forward to the building permit. Okay. So let me just bring this back together a little bit more, and thanks for the clarification. I think that was my comment around the unfair advantage. They already have a sign that is approved within the code. We're here because they're looking for an exception to that code, which is their right and their privilege to do so. So that particular sign, because it's already approved, is more in line with the project and does not cause an unfair advantage, in my view. Since the applicant said we've given direction and they're okay with the gold, and staff has said that the number, whether it's two or reads as one, is inconsequential, then in my mind, we keep the gold. In keeping the gold, we keep the maintenance at a lower minimum, actually, because a brighter sign, as it chips faster, it requires more maintenance. And it sounds to me like the client representative is in line with that. Those are my comments. Now, are there any additional comments? Before I ask for a motion? I would just like some clarification on can, how, if we would like, somebody would like to make a motion, can we go back to that orange sign without causing, again, as the applicant preferred not to come back for another hearing? Or if we just, to move it along, just vote on what was presented this evening? I think we discussed before that if you move to approve as amended and state what your amended is, but for clarification, you know, one thing Ms. Gray said is if that's, it sounds like the applicant said they're okay with either color, but I don't recall specifically. We would prefer the orange, but our goal is to get this approved tonight. So if, going back to orange, we would require another hearing, which I don't believe it can. I think under option B, your motion, you could prove it with as amended. It seems like there is consensus for the orange. That is our preference. We only did the gold to appease the board member's direction at the last meeting, but obviously the board has changed, and, you know, we would like to follow the direction of this board. It seems to be that there is a consensus. So to your point, I think your concern is that that corner sign, whether it's gold or orange, it could be an unfair advantage. Is that your position? That is actually one of my positions. I'm so sorry. May I just have a clarification because I know we have new board members. I just want to make sure that we are making opinions based on the standards. Could you go to the slide for what they're supposed to be considering? Thanks. Thank you. I just think it might be helpful for the discussion. I'm just curious as to, given you had another sign that could be a metal sign, that could be a lit sign, that would be visible from the road and create the wayfinding that was needed, why the choice was to do this. And I do believe it's because it creates an additional advantage beyond what is already approved. And that is my concern about the rest of the tenants on the street or potential tenants on the street. Because they could have been achieved with the approved sign, lit metal sign, visibility wayfinding. I'd like to make a motion. I think there's some other comments before you. Go ahead. I would argue that a lit sign is a lot more visible, especially at night and from farther away. It's easier to read all of us older people in the community who are not from the area. And I think that if they only have a sign on that side and that little garden sign, that they're at a disadvantage right now. So if someone sees the orange sign from far away, it's bright, it's colorful, will draw them to that area where maybe they don't know they're a row of restaurants. Maybe they don't like Italian and they want to go across the street and eat at Joseph's or Brulee or whatever's right on that block. So I think that the argument could be seen from both sides. Can you go back to the slide where the sign date that is approved currently in the master plan? Because I want to make sure I understand and I'm not confusing. So that sign is visible from both directions and wayfinding? No, it's only on 2nd Avenue. It's only on 2nd. Okay, then I misunderstood. Thank you. Before the motion. Yes, go ahead. Maybe those four questions. So just going through the list, does it enhance the visual aesthetics? I mean, I believe yes. The only concern I have is the harmonious because it is painted where everything else is not painted. But it's okay. I guess because there's no rule saying they cannot paint it. The good taste, right? It seems like we're all in agreement with either option. But the orange seems like that's what the tenant wants and we're okay with that. But the last one, the additional signs necessary for identification. I guess my only concern is it's a tradeoff, right? So if we allow this sign and then they come back for the one that's approved, that would be more of an unfair advantage, I believe. So are we just saying that if this is the sign they're going with, that sign goes away? And if that's the case, I would say yes. I think that's the intent, correct? Yes. We would like this sign in lieu of that sign. If I can make a motion, sure. So, Ms. Warren, just so, because of the second motion, Moverpool, as amended. As amended, how do I insert that the amendment would be that to go to orange, the original color? You can state that the original color, I believe they said it was Hermes orange. I don't recall from the presentation. I know it was orange. Just, you know, you can say originally submitted by the applicant. Will you make a motion? I have a quick question for the applicant. Do you guys have any objection to whatever color it ends up going, making both signs in the same strategy, or is the smaller sign that staying how it is no matter what? So, we, I totally understand what you're saying about the matching. If you look at all our branding, if you've been inside the restaurant, all the menus are orange, the writing is orange, the font is orange, the cocktail napkins, it is the color. That original sign was Ember's sign, and because of, you know, costs and time of how long these sign companies are taking, they retrofitted the sign. So, if you remember, if any of you remember Ember, the colors were gold and green, which is why that sign is gold. We prefer, you know, and it's so, it's such a small sign, but, so, that's why they don't match. I wish we knew that last month. Huh? I wish we knew that last month. Well, I wasn't, I wasn't, I was hearing another item last month. So, is that sign there necessary now, or is it now redundant? I mean, the reason why that sign is important is because the entrance to Campy is inside that courtyard. Like, unlike Akira, which has the frontage on 2nd Avenue, there is no door on 2nd Avenue or 2nd Street. So, people don't, a lot of people, again, all of us are local, so we know where the entrance to Campy is, but a lot of people have complained that they couldn't figure out where the entrance was. So, for that purpose, even though it doesn't provide any wayfinding off of the street, for trying to find the entrance, that's, you know, other than having a big directional sign that says entrance here, we think that serves its purpose for that. Appreciate it. Thank you. I'd like to make a motion to approve, as amended, to go to the applicant's original color of Hermes, or however they describe it as orange, of the amendment to the Master Sign Program PZ000566-2026, the rate to accommodate the addition of two signs for the corner tenant, Campy Italian, by finding that the request meets the criteria set forth in the land development regulations. Before you move on, just a clarification, because you mentioned that you want to eliminate the other rule sign that is approved, so is this going to be added to your motion as amended? That's what you mentioned. I thought it was just an understanding that it happened, so that needs to be added? That's it, because it can come back and install it. I would suggest, sorry, I know you were in the middle of the motion, but I would suggest that you add that language in lieu. Okay, so it's in lieu of the ember sign to be replaced. No, the one that's already on the master, I believe it was already on the master sign, please. In lieu of the priest, okay. So it's not installed. But it's not installed, but it's the one on. That's approved and in the master sign. Correct. Okay, so I motion to approve as amended to go to the applicant's original color of the sign and also to remove, as an option, the ember sign of the amendment to the master sign program, PZ0005662026, the ray to accommodate the addition of two signs for the corner tenant, Campi Italian, by finding that the request meets the criteria set forth in the land development regulations. I have a motion. Do I have a second? Second. Second. The second, then, Mr. Talbot? He can have it. He can have it. He's the rookie. Call roll, please. Talbot? Yes. Jose Alvarez? Yes. Sandra Amani? Yes. Nicholas Capola? Yes. Annette Gray? I'm sorry, Abby Campton? Yes. Annette Gray? No. Passes. Thank you. Congratulations. I believe the clerk for the second item, Mr. Alvarez wanted to excuse himself and follow the form. Thank you. We still have a quorum? Yes. We still have a quorum. Awesome. Thank you. So that moves us to Agenda Item 8B, as in PUE, and that's being introduced by staff. Good evening again, board member. This is Rafiki Ibrahim, principal of current planning. This item is actually the project planner for this is Ms. Rodriguez. She's not here today. Unfortunately, she had a car accident today, and we wish her a quick recovery. So I'm going to present and handle the item today on her behalf, she's one of my team as well. So I would like to enter into the records, PZ-2026 for 2800 Florida Boulevard, and the application for consideration of a level two site plan to construct a six-unit townhouse development, architectural elevations, and landscape plan with a landscape waiver. And the applicant is here to present. State your name and address for the record, please. Jeff Costello, JC Planning Solutions, Dory Beach, Florida, 33444. Thank you. Good evening, chair, board members. On behalf of the applicant, 2800 Florida Boulevard Partners, this property has been to this board a few times in the past, as indicated in your backup. This property is located at the southwest corner of Florida Boulevard and Lamont Avenue in South Delray, a little over half an acre, vacant. Currently, it's vacant, transitional land use, RM zoning, and it's surrounded by RM zoning and multifamily with a single-family residence to the south. So back in 21, there was an approved site plan, seven units, two stories. In 2023, seven units, three stories, and different architectural style. And so at that time, the single-family residence, well, single-family home on the property, was demolished. It's currently vacant. To the east, we have a condo, a five-story condo. To the west, we have two-story townhomes. Same family to the north and south, heavily landscaped. So the proposal is now we're reducing it from seven to six units, two-story, fee-simple townhouse development, three-bed, three-and-a-half bath, two-car garages, as well as two-car driveways. And with each private swimming pool, installation of associated landscaping, site lighting, and privacy walls with gates. This proposal does include a waiver to the street tree requirement along Florida Boulevard. Basically, it didn't allow it to be relocated to Lament Avenue due to some utility conflicts. Positive findings can be made with regard to the site plan. LDR section 3.1.1, consistency with the land use map, arm zoning is compatible with the transitional land use. Multifamily structures are allowed as a principal use, permitted use. And the six-unit townhouse development will have an FAR of 0.77, where one is allowed, and a density a little over 10 units to the acre, where 12 max is allowed. Staff's report confirms positive findings can be made with regard to concurrency, as well as the comprehensive plan, specifically neighborhood districts, corridors element, and housing element. There are applicable comp plan policies. I'm not going to go through them all. You have some detailed backup, detailed staff report, and appreciate staff's coordination through this whole process. In addition, standards for site plan actions, positive findings can be made with those standards, 3.2.3.A through L. The development proposal meets the applicable standards, and there are no identified areas of concern with regard to the impact from the overall site configuration and building design on the surrounding area. Again, compliance with the LDRs indicated in the staff report. Those sections are just highlighted, the townhouse regs, performance standards of the multifamily, parking, lighting, setbacks, open space, et cetera. And again, the performance standards, there's some detailed analysis in your staff report. Positive findings can be made that complies, that the proposal complies with the provisions of 4.3.3.B. A landscape plan, it's in your backup. Depositive findings can be made with regard to compliance with the landscape regulations. As you can see, there are some additional trees, basically relocating the street trees that would be located here to La Matte. There are overhead lines in this area as well, and on the east side. The difference is the overhead are on La Matte, and the underground utility conflicts are along Florida Boulevard. But positive findings can be made, and staff has reviewed, that this complies with the landscape regulations. Except for this particular provision in 4.6.16. H.6 regarding street trees for new residential development. As I indicated, you know, the west side, there are conflicts with the water main along the west side of Florida Boulevard. And then we have the driveway aprons, the way the city's designs are, they flare out. And then the utility services, as you can see along here, those are the locations where you have those connections, as well as transformers in that. So it's, there is a utility easement there. That's, that's where all this occurs. And within the front yards, though, there are some nice trees, as we indicated, along the, and with the landscape plants, some gumbo limbos, yellow tababouya, some sable palms. And the required street trees are now located along, along Lamont Avenue, silver button woods, because of the overhead lines, and, and Spanish stoppers, as well. Overall design is sensitive to the skill, the character, or the neighborhood, and will enhance the property and the neighborhood. Therefore, positive findings can be made with regard due to waiver. However, it will not affect, have a negative effect on, on, on the area, will not diminish provision of public facilities, will not create an unsafe situation, will not result in a special privilege. With regard to the architectural elevations, the proposed architectural style is contemporary, and positive findings can be made with the criteria 4, 6, 18, E, 1 through 3. It's a few more elevations that we have here, just a few renderings. These are the two-dimensional, which I like the renderings a lot better, but, and so, but we have to provide these, and then, that's all. Thank you. It's a little effective. I know, I just kind of forgot to delete that. Did you hire a Zen G, a Zen Z? So, good evening again, board members. So, this is Rafiq Ibrahim, and we are in front of level 2 site plan application for 20A Florida. So, the project is surrounded by a residential RM zoning district, and the land use is transitional. The floor area ratio is matte, and the density is matte. So, they are allowed to do 12 dwelling units per acre. They are under that, just 10 dwelling units per acre. Project history is important here, because this started 22 years ago in 2004, where SPRAB approved three lots, the three to the south. And, in 2021, SPRAB approved a class 5 for seven units. But, what happened in 2023 is actually SPRAB approved this project, which is more intense. So, you heard the applicant mentioning, like, positive findings, positive findings. That's true. The original approval was more intense and had more density than the current approval. So, they had seven townhouses that's approved. And, by the way, this approval is currently valid until 2027. So, they have the opportunity, if tomorrow the applicant decided to proceed with this approval, they can. But, for, you know, they decided, for market reasons or other reasons, to come back to this SPRAB with six units, one unit less. And, instead of three storeys, it's going to be two storeys. So, it's less intense and less density. The request is for a level two site plan application to construct two-storey, six-unit townhouses. The six-unit townhouses, all are three bedrooms. And, each one has a private car garage, two cars. Each one has a private. With this request, there is a landscape waiver. I will go through it in details. So, there are positive findings. So, they meet the requirement of LDR section 3.1.1. A, land use map is consistent. Concurrency requirement is met. It's already met originally and it's met again. Like, there is a reduction in intensity. The staff report has actually detailed analysis of the relevant comprehensive plan policies and performance standards listed in LDR section 3.2.3. It's all positive findings. The lighting, staff report has a lighting-like direction. The cardinals, I just like, would like to make a correction because the photometric plan cardinals, the north arrow was incorrect. So, just like, to make this correction because the report mentioned that there is adjacent to the north residential. That's not correct. That's to the west. It's just like a matter of correction. And the LDR section 4.3.4.K. detailed analysis in the staff report. So, in terms of parking, they meet the parking requirement. They need 15. They have 24. Bicycle, there is no need for bicycle. The pool setbacks are met. And the varying type, unit type. So, the comp plan policies and the performance standards, they encourage, when a multifamily development is coming, to give us a variety of different unit types. Like, for example, two bedrooms, three bedrooms, four bedrooms, one bedroom. Here, the application is for all six units, three bedroom unit type. Now, the question is, this is only six units, and what are the opportunities there? That's to the board to decide. And the townhouse standards are met. When it comes to landscape, there will be a removal of 22 trees, 12 invasive, and 18 palm trees. Remaining one tree, 21 new trees, 36 new palm trees. And then I will go to the landscape waiver. All right, so, the applicant mentioned this. There is currently a utility line, a water line, just passing. You can see it marked WM. I'm just going to try to point to it here. Now, the landscape code requires one tree, street tree. Now, this is important. Street tree per 40 linear fee or one per unit. So, we end up with one per unit, which is six trees. Now, street trees cannot be placed here because of the utility line. An additional reason is the corner, like the side visibility corner. You see this, the X here? It looks like an X. That's a side visibility corner. Like, if you're driving out, basically out, you really need to see. And this is a requirement by engineering. So, there is kind of almost impossible. I don't want to say impossible, but that's a difficulty in the side to actually place street trees with this current configuration. Unless if the water main is removed or replaced or moved somewhere else and the configuration of the driveways are changed, then we can have street trees. Now, the applicant understand this and they provided more trees in different locations. But why we have the waiver? Because the code requires street trees in a certain configuration. If they don't provide it, then the board need to look at this and then look into consider the circumstances in the site that is not really allowing them to put the trees. But in terms of trees, they added trees towards Lama 3 to the north and they added trees within the lot, like the, sorry, in the lot. Those are not counted as street trees. That's additional trees. That's good if they can do it, but that's not what the code requires. So, the waiver findings are A, B, C, and D shall not adversely affect the neighboring area, not significantly diminish the provision of public facilities, not create an unsafe situation, nor result in the granting of a special privilege. So, consideration to the board, does identified site conditions support the requested waiver? Does the proposed landscape and relocation of trees to Lama Avenue satisfy the waiver findings? That's to the board to decide. Now, moving to the architecture, like this is more of a contemporary, like of a masonry touch. There is no requirement for the RM zoning district to have a specific architectural style by the opposite to the CBD. And then next item you will see that's in the CBD. There is a requirement style. That's not. So, there is no requirement. You just need to look at it. And then there are criteria for, to evaluate the architecture for the board, like staff report. Goes into the analysis in details. And there are no kind of negative impact, except for, like, we have discussions with the applicant about the garage door, like a townhouse and the garage door. Or what else you can do. That's also difficulty because of the configuration and the unit types that were selected. Those are the elevations. And the board has three criteria to actually examine and test this architecture towards good taste, good design, beauty. Materially, does it material depreciate in appearance and value? Is it in harmony with the proposed development in the general area? And those are the board options in front of you. And I'm here for any questions. Thank you. Thank you so much for that. Is there anyone in the public that would like to comment on this particular item? If you do, you have three minutes. All right. Seeing none, I'll close public comments to the board. Are there any ex parte communication that you'd like to disclose? I have visited the site. Okay. So would you like to start us off? Yeah. So you have quite a few questions. The first one, with the street trees, the previously more dense project was approved with street trees. Why is this less dense project not able to provide that? Because of the utility mean. I don't really know about the previous process, how was it reviewed, but the current utility and civil plans shows a utility mean, water mean, which is verified by our utility reviewers. So when a project comes, it goes into a technical advisory committee. This committee has members of different departments. Utility are represented in this committee, and then they verify that this is correct. So with regard to the previous development, we had a very similar situation, and we still had a conflict with the main. Now, whether or not, because at that time, it was looked as a mod, the class four was a modification to the one that was approved in 2021, 2023. But there were no trees within that right of way. And I don't believe there were any, even with the previous, that 2021 approval. So whether it was an oversight or the fact is the code is the code, and we're applying for the waiver, we want to comply. And so that's what we do. So that was my question for the landscape. Regarding the architecture, I'm a little concerned with the longevity of the building for just a couple reasons. In particular, it's a flat roof. So how are the middle units going to be drained when there's barely anywhere to put the water? I guess, and so I'm concerned, like, are we just going to run gutters along the whole side of the whole building, or has that been thought about? Because that's something I am concerned about, I guess. Like, how are we going? I think the, over time, the architecture of the middle units will deteriorate if we haven't thought of a way to drain properly. So these are designed with not necessarily scuppers, but downspouts. And so the drainage has been incorporated with this. The roof plan I don't have to show you. But when you're dealing with these flat roofs, then they're slightly angled above, so they don't just sit. But, I mean, there's a little bit of a parapet there. But, no, I mean, you're of a feasible townhouse, so you would not want your client, whoever you sell to, will sue you if you do not, you know, provide the proper drainage, and that they would deteriorate over time. So, no, those details have been worked out. Again, I don't have that. But all these flat roofs, and you'll see in the next presentation, there's a flat roof. You see a lot of commercial and contemporary architectural style have these flat roofs. But those are all accommodated for through the design process and in permitting. Yep. And that's why I guess that's my biggest concern is it seems like the project is less dense, but we don't have space for landscape, which means the buildings are just bigger, I guess. The units are just larger. Well, yeah, I mean, look, so you take the square footage from the third floor, you redistribute that on two floors, and you'll have wider, you'll have a more livable home is really more like it. And a lot of clients don't necessarily like a three-story. Yeah. And, look, they examine it in the pricing and so forth. So they are a little bit wider. These are basically attached single-family homes. They are a little bit wider than your normal with that. So, yeah, there's 25% open space. We comply with the minimum open space requirements. I think the – I'll look at the staff report again. They proposed 25% required. They proposed 30%. And so you figure the rear yards, that's all open space. There's an easement between – a 10-foot utility easement between the rear yard. Then you have the pool areas with the decking. So thank you. Thank you, Rafiq, for saying that. So, yeah, it's a 30% we provide. I also have the architect here to answer any of your questions. Alex DeAngelis with HCA Architects to answer your question. If you could just say the address for the record. 95 South Federal Highway, Boca Raton, Florida. How the units end up draining, especially the middle units, they have internal drains. So when you look at a roof plan, when it's flat, you'll have drains in the middle that scupper outward into the property itself. So you wouldn't have water going from one roof onto another or spilling off to the side or the front edge of the building. It all happens internally. How's that – I'm just – can you maybe point where they're going? Because I don't see much landscaping between the buildings. They go into the normal water collection that the site will have. So civil engineering drawings will show, like, water retention. They go into that water retention. Has that been thought about yet or not? I'm just asking just in general. Yeah, in the conceptual civil drawings, they should be reflected. Once it goes into building permitting, those details get reflected. You have to submit to the village of Del Rey a water collection tabular information of the roof drains. So it's based off of the 100-year flood, how much water is held on those roofs, and how they drain based on a certain amount of hours, and how that water is retained on site prior to it going into the sewage system. Okay. And to piggyback on that, so the drainage for the site, the engineering plans are probably included in your backup. But you'll see there's – it comes along here, and then it has a diagonal. So there's a structure there, right there, a square, and then it comes down, and there's one here. So – and then those drains go straight to that – those pipes, that pipe within that drainage structure. So there's that connection. Okay. And my only other question is, because we're going from 7 to 6, is – I'm assuming there's a new plat waiver or something that's going to be done? There should be. Okay. Go ahead. So actually, the client, we were just talking today, the sort of plat document is being finalized, and so we should be submitting that. All right. No other questions? That's correct. Thank you. And I'm sorry. To the drainage question, the staff report, that's a concurrency requirement reviewed by engineering. There is a catch-basing, and then there are two areas for exfiltration to maintain the drainage water, storm water, and within the site. I'm sorry. Thank you. My only – my two questions. The waiver – what does the $2,700 represent to the tree fund? There are – trees are removed, and there is a balance and a calculation. I'm not very well versed into this calculation. The landscape architect, our landscape planner, is calculating it. But there is a balance between what's removed and what's added, and this amount of money goes to the trees fund. Okay. That is required at the time of building permit, not now. And then the only – does an approval of this void that project that was approved prior? Do you want me to answer this question? Do you want to answer this question? No, you can. You can go ahead. The previous – to my knowledge, all right, the previous project is a development order. A development order, that's an entitlement. That's a right to develop. Now, when you come and you have a new development order, that's over – to my knowledge. Again, I will run this by the board attorney. The new approval, override the old approval. That's basically a new development order, a newer date. Now, do you have this and that in your pocket and then do a tradeoff or something? I don't think so. Yeah, I would say that it's the most recent in time. It's not an amendment to the last one. This is a new one. So this would take precedence. This is a formality question. But I'm in favor. I think it's nice. I think the trees – there's a nice filler for the trees. And we've had it before where – I know we can't refer to, but where the water mains have been a problem when planting trees. So I think it's a fair compromise. Thank you. Ms. – oh, I'm on. I'm on. Comments? I don't have any comments. Okay. I could get on the waiver a lot better if this were the Anglo-Caribbean architectural style. I have concerns over not screening this contemporary mass. Jeff, is there – maybe if staff could educate or you know, is there a list, a specific list of what we call street trees? What – is there a specific – to be qualified as a street tree, this is what we would have to put in that area? Yes. I actually think it's in – is it in the justification letter? The – so there's – in the narrative letter, there's like four different trees. One is an oak, of course, a gumbo limbo. Yeah. And so, as I stated previously, there are some gumbo limbo in the front yards. And then there's a Royal Point Siena right at the corner – at the intersection where you have a nice big – that open space area. So what are those green – green, green, green, green, green? What are those – These are the – I believe those are the – I tried to figure that out on the plan, and I couldn't. A-O. Gumbo. Gumbo. They're not oak. The parts – what are they? Alcantreia ordonta. It looks like an – is it A-A-O? That's a vermilion, right? Green? Are you sure that's – Because that's a larger head. A-O, E-L, 20 – maybe it's 21. So there's a tababouya down here at the bottom. But then I can't figure out on the plan because I'd just like to know how much screening those are going to provide. I mean, I think you've got to get – if you're going to go with this contemporary style, you've got to figure out something to soften that. Well, there's also – well, it's kind of – when you have the two-car driveway, I mean, again, you're limited. If you look at the previous – so you had these small landscape areas, as it is, between the driveways. So within that area, you're going to have the garage door. And whether or not it has an Anglo-Caribbean look above the garage door or if it's contemporary, it's really hard to soften that. Yeah, but in context with that neighborhood, in comparison with that neighborhood, that – It's a five-story condo of the 19-670s that's a box. But you're not making the neighborhood any better by adding that. Okay. Asked and answered. Is there another question? You should be a preservation board. I just – I wish I could figure out what – are those gumbos that we're putting in, those three trees in front of the – The green? Yeah, the green. I believe the green are really the gumbos. And then there's the tababouya. And then there's also the Alexander palms, too. There are also palms in that area. Or the sable palms. I'm sorry, Jeff. I have a legal question. Given that the landscape architect is on the client's team, is he allowed to testify as a client witness to answer these questions? Yeah. Because he is – I don't know where he went. I wouldn't – I don't – Well, he's excused himself from part of decision-making. But if we're having landscape questions and he is the client's – Well, did he offer – did the client offer Mr. Alvarez as a witness or – No. Are there any additional questions for you? Because I have some similar questions about how much shade trees they – I understand that it does not replace the street trees. But in previous projects, the trees that were placed in would substitute some of the shade, maybe not all of the shade. And we weren't calling them street trees. But in fact, the outcome was similar or diminished, you know. So I had similar questions about what type of trees those are and were they good enough substitutes. And that's the – that's not my area of expertise. The other questions I have – and I understand that this is market-driven, the two-car garage with the pool. But did that impose, self-impose, this particular hardship? Because I see trees on the other ones. Were there pools on the other ones? Yes. Okay. All right. That's a question. In fact, those required an internal adjustment because they were zero setbacks. Yeah. They had an internal adjustment because of zero setbacks. This current proposal eliminated this, so they did not need any relief from this code section, which is pool setbacks. Okay. So the garages and the change in design style and the pool did not impose this hardship. I would say, no, it's just like two things, which is the water main, mainly the water main. If it is the only reason, it's enough reason for the applicant to not be able to put trees on top of the main line. No, I'm aware of that. Yeah, yeah. I'm aware of that. So in staff's opinion, do you have the trees that are not street trees but are in close proximity in the front, I am now going to have to rely on staff expertise as to whether those are satisfactory in providing some shade? The intention for street trees is not met, let me just be clear, because street trees are supposed to provide shading areas for those who are actually walking outside of the site, not the users of the units or the owners of it. So the intention of this code section cannot be met because of this water main, so the applicant may be able to add more trees as they can or as you wish them to do, but this will not replace the… Hold on, let me just clarify my question. What type of trees are in the front at the moment? They're gumbo limbo. I just found it. Thank you very much. Yeah. Okay, and do you have any expertise with landscape? It's not other than… It is not my area of expertise. I have no formal training but a lot of practical experience. The size and capacity of those grown trees. So yeah, and we can… The size of a gumbo limbo, the spread, is it a 30-foot spread? A 30-foot spread. Okay. So we have multiple gumbo limbo's in those wider areas. One, two, three, four. Those are… And three of them are in front of the townhomes. The Royal Point Sienna, is that a 50-foot spread? Oh, yeah. I'm aware of those. A 50-foot. So that's at the corner, which we do have overhead lines along La Matte. Right. That's why we went with the Simpson Stopper and the Silver Buttonwood. So those that would have been required along La Matte were put… I mean, on Florida were put on La Matte, so you didn't lose any of those street trees. And if you've seen the median out there, on La Matte, there's a huge oak, which almost comes over to those overhead lines, too. Oh, on La Matte. Yeah, yeah. On La Matte. So you're limited because there's overhead lines also on the east side of Florida. So you're limited with what you can do there. And so, again, it's never came up on the previous proposals because, you know, they focused putting the landscaping on site between the drive-outs. Those were seven units. And then these are actually wider landscape areas in the front. And then along Florida, there were never street trees. Okay. All right. So that clarifies it for me because my questions were, were they self-imposed by the new design? The answer is no. The trees that are within the project does in scale and size grow to provide some shade and the hardship of the water main, it's a fair adjustment. So my questions are answers as it relates to that. Do we talk about the architecture now or later? Give me one second. I got one more thing on the gumbo. Give me one second. Let me just finish. Yeah, now this is in discussion. I think we started to talk about the architecture with Mr. Abbey. Okay. All right. I think you were first. Real quick on the gumbos. So there's one, two, three gumbos in front of the three middle ones. Would it be a hardship to add a gumbo on either end? And so you end up with one, two, three, four, five gumbos in the front of the house, in the front of the. So they diverse. So that's where I think that's where in order to provide a mix, that's where you have the tababouyas and the palms. The tababouyas, I believe they're the yellow tabs. Okay. And the palms. I mean, have we tried to provide a diversity in tree types? I understand. So as long as we don't get into an issue with those. Okay. I mean, try. It just. What is your concern? Again, if they're going with this harsher, in my opinion, harsher architectural feel, I think something needs to be done to soften and shade the front of that building from Florida Avenue. So, like I said, when I started my comment, I'd be a lot easier getting on board with, you know, the tree reduction if I had a more interesting architectural visual. All right. Go ahead, please. And I do agree with that statement that it is, you know, the whole intent of the street tree code is to provide shade, and we're not really providing as much as we could. Some of it is not, like, some of it is a hardship because of the mains. I think my other question is, like, I know there's right-of-way dedications that happen throughout the city. Has that been explored here? Do you need to do one off of Florida Avenue? No. Okay. There's no, right, this was previously platted, and then there was the dedication of the radii previously with the replat. We'll mirror that, just adjust the lot one. So, just real quick on landscaping, I'll stop. So, the tababouyas, you know, they get very lush, the heads. And then the character sable poems, and that's where, if you saw the rendering, they kind of, they have that look where they kind of, they don't just go straight up. They kind of have some character. The Alexanders. No, actually, my apologies. They're character sable poems. Oh, okay. Okay. So, it's like a double. They have this curvature. I think it was on the rendering previously. It had it in every island, but it's not. Those look like, okay. So, it has a pretty cool look, which then provides that softening of that entire facade with the combination of the tabs, the character poems, and then the, yeah, like, those are coconut, but these are sable. These are actually sable. These don't represent the, exactly. But that's sort of that, that curve look. So, where are those sables? Again, I'm trying, I'm trying to sort out the landscape plan, and I figured out how the, the, the gumbo limbo's were labeled, but I'm, I'm not seeing these poems that you're talking about. So, if I can just interject, I think that's the challenge, Jeff. It is in writing, but it's not incorporated into the rendering. So, it's difficult for us to visualize, and it seems insufficient based on what we're looking at because of the new modern design. So, these, these are the character, these two together like that. Those are the character, and they have a couple here, and then here as well. Okay. So, that's why I can't, because I don't, because they, see how this comes out into the driveway? There's, there's these heads? Yeah, that's what's not on this landscape plan. Yeah. So, or at least that I can interpret, sorry. I mean, I'm not, I'm, I'm not saying that it's not there. It's just that for me to. Okay. So, in the interest of moving forward, while you formulate your thoughts a little bit more. Okay. While you formalize and, and you asked your question. Oh, yeah. What, yeah, it was about landscape. Are we talking about architecture? Architecture. I would like to have a conversation about the new architecture, but I felt that we need to get to a place on the landscape plan first. If we could just have a moment, I'm not. Okay. We're good. You want to lead off the conversation about the architecture? Yeah. Design. I'm looking at the criteria. It says good taste, good design, the image of the city as a place of beauty, broad vistas. You know, I think the architecture, there's nothing that says we cannot have this style. So, it does, in my opinion, it doesn't really matter the style as long as you're making the character of the city come, you know, alive. But, I guess, see, these modern types of buildings, what happens is you end up having large masses. And, we can add little elements to it to break it up. And, I notice there's glass, there's materials. It just, it doesn't seem, like, it doesn't seem as different. Like, it seems more uniform. It could have a little bit more variety, in my opinion. But, that's just my opinion. I think that, like, the, this, it's hard to see what this is going to look like in five to, like, six years from now, because we're looking at images that may not clearly convey what they're actually going to look like, I guess, is my concern. Like, the landscape is not exactly what's shown. I'm looking at the plan. It's, they're not all correlated. Some looks a little different than others. So, I'm going by what's being presented. And, I can't, I can say, yes, it, it, there might be unified, they might not. It's just what's presented, not everything is completely correlated, I guess, is my issue. Do you mean between renderings and? Renderings, plan, landscape plan, even site plan, compared to landscape plan, there's some things I noticed. Nothing major, but, I mean, I, I have no problem, like, approving the project. I would just like things to be more cohesive. Yeah, no, I understand what you're saying. I think that when we undertook this assignment and this project, the original, the original owners of the project had designed this Anglo-Caribbean style building. They were three stories in height. They were exceeding the FA, or not exceeding, but hitting FAR, hitting, maximizing their density. But what they were doing was really creating a very uncomfortable interior unit. So, they were very small, very tight, and, frankly, not a very livable space. So, when we were hired and tasked to do this project, the first thing that needed to happen was we need to remove a unit and make the living space of these units livable. Have a space that someone who's going to live here actually can enjoy a nice kitchen, a nice bedroom zone, and so forth. So, architecturally, and I will stand in front of this board and agree that I hate garage doors. The day that Florida allows a garage door to be flush with a wall and we can hide it will be the best day of my life. That being said, it is a limit and a condition that we have, right? Most houses have garage doors in the front. We had looked at the possibility of creating an alleyway in the back and rear-loading this. However, we don't meet any of the setbacks. We would have to require all these waivers. That really, ultimately, was not going to happen in our favor, either. So, the first challenge in any design is the garage doors and how do we hide them or make them look intentional as part of the design of the building. And then, goes into the character of architectural styling and what we consider or not consider an accurate or appropriate architectural style. You are correct in stating that in this zoning, there is not a defined architectural style. We can do modernism. We can do Anglo-Caribbean. We can do Mediterranean. We can do a pyramid if it meets the high restraints. That being said, there is a responsibility when creating these units and creating what the streetscape and how the feeling is within the neighborhood. To your point, and I'm sorry, I can't really see your name. Rhett. Rhett. This neighborhood and this part of Del Rite doesn't really have a character. True. You have next door a house that's kind of a Mediterranean. My business partner calls it the Olive Garden house, right? You know, they built them in the early 2000s. Across the street, you have a condo building. Behind this, there's a modern building. So the character of this neighborhood is defined by not having a character. So I don't think, architecturally, we are disrespecting the identity of this area because there is no identity to respect. Del Rite is unique in that sense. It's one of my favorite cities to work in. We do a lot of single family houses because, for example, Lake Ida, you can have the classical house next to a modern house and it all coexists and it works well. Actually, one of the most historical buildings in Del Rite is Docks, which is a box. And we love it and when they were going to tear it down, people protested it. So modern architecture has a place when it's built the right way. I think the challenge we've seen in South Florida is we've had developers that are irresponsible and develop badly and therefore we see buildings after four or five years that look not the best. But that all comes down to how they're planned out. So, for example, to your earlier point about the roof drains, we don't want gutters. We have to preserve the massing and the volumetric modern design. So you do pay a little extra to have interior gutters and you hide those elements to create a nicer facade. We introduced elements like the wood cladding, which is a light color, just soft in the design and kind of create more of a warmth. But ultimately, it's still a modern design and a modern look to the buildings. Okay. Is there a question? Yeah. That's it. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Mr. Kavanaugh, did you have an additional question? I just wanted to offer that I have finally, I kind of sorted out the landscape plan. And yeah, they do have a substantial amount of vertical elements in terms of Alexander Palms and Sable Palms. I could argue that it would be nice to have another gumbo down on that south end, closer to that tab of booyah. I mean, because they've clung, it's an architectural design thing, it just, or a landscape design thing. It just, you know, I would, I can support the waiver at this point, is what I'll end by saying. Okay, thank you. That being said, do I have a motion? I'll make a motion. I'd like to move for approval of the Level 2 PZ0003872026 Site Plan, Architectural Elevations and Landscape Plan, with a landscape waiver to construct a six-unit townhouse development located at 2800, 2802, 2804, 2806, 2808, 2810, and 2812 Florida Boulevard, by finding that the request is consistent with the comprehensive plan and meets criteria set forth in the land development regulations. I have a motion. Do I have a second? Yes. Second. Second, yes. Can you call a roll, please? Rick Talbot. Before I vote, I just want to make one comment to the client that, yeah, this doesn't, there is no design feature around here, but also my opinion is this doesn't do anything to elevate or enhance the neighborhood. This just adds to, you know, kind of this, I just think you could do more, make it more elegant than what it is and would help the neighborhood overall. But having said that, I'll say yes. Jose Alvarez is recused. Sandra Amani? I'm voting yes. Nicholas Capolo? Yes. Avi Camden? Yes. Annette Gray? Yes. Thank you. Thank you. Two minutes. We have a request for about a two-minute pause. Thank you. My bill? Of current planning, I would like to enter into the agenda today. Records. Item 8C, the Gramercy Del Rey, file number PZ-00376-2025, consideration of a Level 2 site plan, application with architectural elevations, and landscape plan for the Gramercy Del Rey, a two-story, two-unit multifamily residential building at 102 North East 6th Ave, associated with a landscape waiver and a loading demand statement for adequacy, and the applicant is here to present. All right. Thank you. Chair, board members, Jeff Costello, JC Planning Solutions, Del Rey Beach 33444. This property is located at the northwest corner of Northeast 6th Avenue and Northeast 1st Street in the central core of the Central Business District. It's about almost 8,000 square feet. It's surrounded by CBD zoning. Existing use was office. Well, now it's vacant. And a proposal, as Rafiq mentioned, mixed-use office and two residential units. This is the property. It used to be, I think, an auto insurance recently. These are some of the surrounding properties with Town Square to the south. You've got the restaurant to the north. Some other businesses to the west. I think that one's vacant to the west. And then you have Anthony's. So this is the proposal for just another 10,000 square foot, two-story mixed-use building, 2,500 square feet of office. This will accommodate a corporate office moving from the northeast and two residential units with a rooftop terrace. We have a two-car garage in this location here. We have parking, two parking set, a handicap and a standard, and then here's the driveway. We are proposing streetscape improvements along Northeast 1st Street. There are existing streetscape improvements on Northeast 6th Avenue. We plan on, so with the Federal Highway Beautification Project, we plan on enhancing that. This, and we also propose right-of-way dedications as required by code. With some background, we, the dedication includes a two-foot lawn of the alley, the corner clips here at the alley intersection as well as Federal. There was a reduction in right-of-way here to allow a utility easement. Again, positive findings can be made with regard to 3.1.1, the land-use map consistency. The FAR allowed is 3.1.08 is proposed. Maximum density, 30 units to the acre, about 11 units per acre. Two units are allowed. This is a 50-foot-wide lot, and so, you know, there are constraints to this particular property. Concurrency, positive findings can be made, as well as the comprehensive plan, the neighborhood district's corridors element, housing element, economic prosperity element, including the downtown Delray Beach master plan. Site plan, standards for site plan actions, the applicable standards, positive findings can be made. Again, this is a redevelopment proposal, adheres to the CBD form-based regulations, encourages development that are consistent in scale with the existing development pattern throughout the downtown area. Now, in compliance with the LDRs, staff has this detailed report in every aspect of the LDR. It's in your backup. I'm not putting all that up on the screen, but it's very detailed, and as stated in the staff report, positive findings can be made with regard to the loading. Oops. Oh, yeah, loading. So, landscaping, but I'm going to talk about loading here. So, here is the loading demand statement. You may have seen this before come before you. You know, in this particular case, the guidelines require a loading bay. This does back up to the alley where the alley we're dedicating right away, basically widening the alley. This will have short-term deliveries, whether it be the amount for the office or the supplies for the office, as well as the rare move-in, move-out situation that you have for two units. So, but with regard to the landscape plan, positive findings can be made. With regard to 4-6-16, we have our landscape architect here. If there are any questions with regard to the details along the street, along 1st Street, we're providing the hallways. And along, right there, there's a live oak that's proposed along Federal Highway. We'll have to go forward to DOT to get the permit, the amendment to the MMO. It's just a process to do that, but we're moving forward with that. With regard to the waiver of the landscape, there is one waiver, and that's to the landscape islands. The requirement in the CBD is 7 feet wide. As I stated, this is a 50-foot-wide lot. We're trying to maximize the parking, as well as the driveway to the two-car garage. So these are 5 feet wide. The tree has been provided in this island. With this situation, though, due to the location of utilities, there's conflicts here, too. So we have the water and sewer coming in here. However, we do have a street tree adjacent to this location. So if we were to provide a tree there, it could have been a conflict as well outside of that area. However, given the utilities, the water and sewer service conflicts, positive findings can be made with regard to 2411B5, as well as the additional waiver findings in the CBD. It will not affect the pedestrian experience, the creation of significant incompatibilities with nearby buildings, shall not erode the connectivity, and will not reduce quality of civic open space, which is not really required for this small of a lot. Architectural elevations. The findings can be made with 4618, architectural elevation and aesthetics, as well as the CBD architectural standards. This is a Main Street vernacular style, one of the styles that are outlined in the CBD requirements. Very well done. Our architects are here if you have any questions. But positive findings can be made. And here are the renderings of this very attractive building. And with that, thank you. I'll try not to repeat what the applicant mentioned. It's a level 2 site plan application with a waiver and a determination of adequacy for a loading demand, one space. So this is different than the other item. This is in the CBD. Lot size is 0.18 acres and commercial core land use and the CBD central core. The floor area ratio is met below the maximum threshold. That's 1.08 and the maximum allowed is 3. The density is they are proposing 2 units. So based on the CBD allowed density, which is 30 dwelling per unit, they can actually have 5 units if it fits and it meets all the requirements. But they choose to do 2 units that proposes a mixed-use development. So the request is construction of 2-story mixed-use building containing office space and 2 residential units with architectural elevations, landscape plan, landscape waiver, and loading demand statement. And those are like photos of the currently existing 1926 structure. This was developed like 100 years ago as a single-family dwelling. And in the beginning of the attack process, we invited the applicant into a conversation with our historic team in case if they are willing to preserve or maintain this. And of course, like not pursuing with the development, but this did not result in maintaining the current one. So here we are. And then across the years, the use has changed from residential into commercial. And it's in a central area in the CBD. And you see how it is surrounded by what is coming now, implementing more into the CBD form-based code where developments are lining or bordering the lots, active frontages and a mass. So this is coming, moving towards this vision as well. The proposal, as I mentioned, for 2-story mixed-use office and 2 residential units is slightly below 10,000 square feet of gross area. And then a quarter of this is the office at the ground floor. There's a rooftop terrace and lounge for the residents. This is how we review this level 2 application. So we start with LDR section 2, 4, 10, A3, which actually tells us that we need to meet the requirement of Chapter 3, A, B, C, D, A, B, C, D, E. And then we need to test the proposal against architectural elevation for 618 and the CBD guidelines and the landscape plans. And then we have a landscape waiver and loading determination. We'll talk about it. And then I'm going to go in details into the code sections that are on the screen. So this is the site plan and northeast first to the south and federal to the east. And there is an alley to the west. And what's in light purple color is actually the dedication. So the applicant is dedicating what's in the light purple color to the city. That's a requirement from engineering. The corner clip and the corner clip are at the alley. And 2 feet along the alley to make the alley like all other requirements like 20 feet. The floor plans, I put the floor plans here, even though it is in the attachment, just to explain one concept. The top left is the ground floor and the one with orange and border line is actually the mezzanine. In this proposal, we'll see a mezzanine. And this is very important. I'm going to explain it in the next slide. And then the second story, which is in the top right, has also a mezzanine. So every apartment has another mezzanine, which is highlighted in yellow. Now the cross section here explains the concept of the mezzanine. Every floor has a mezzanine. And the mezzanine rule is actually dictated by the Florida Building Code. So the LDR takes us to the Florida Building Code and tells us like the Florida Building Code decides what is a mezzanine. A mezzanine should not be more than one third of the area of the room below. So that's a threshold. And if you see the table in front of you, so the office that proposed the 779, for example, I'm not going to go through all of it. But the maximum allowed based on the area is 780. So they are below. So they are meeting, the applicant is meeting, and the designers are meeting the requirement of the mezzanine in terms of height, in terms of area. And you can see like this is how the field, it looks like three or four stories, but it's actually two. And why they did this? Because of another constraint. The site itself, the lot is 61 by 130 feet. It's too narrow. And there is an exception in the LDR. If you are a lot less than 65 feet and no more than two stories, you are exempt from parking regulation. So you do not actually have to provide parking. Why is that? Because the code recognizes the narrow lots. So if you have to do this and that, you cannot, you can end up not developing it. So the LDR allows this flexibility subject to two stories and not a restaurant, for example. Like if there is a restaurant you have to provide. So this is why you have office. So this is why the mezzanine concept is important here. And the request satisfies the LDR section, L3.1.1a. The CBD zoning implements the commercial core land use designation. The proposed uses are permitted. And the project remains below under the FAR and the density. And I have the numbers on the screen in case if we need to come back to it. Again, any project that is a level 2, 3, or 4 needs to meet the concurrency requirement, which means that any must not exceed, the public facility needs must not exceed the ability to maintain adopted levels of services. The Florida adopted this rule since 1985. So all the projects coming needs to meet the concurrency, and concurrency means public facilities, solid waste, drainage, parks, and wrecks, transportation, and public schools. So the project meets all the concurrency requirement, and the applicant contacted SCAD. The SCAD letter is attached with the attachment, and we're waiting to hear back. So the school concurrency item remains a certification note. The project also is consistent with the comprehensive plan, and there is overall consistency with performance standards in Article 3.2. On the screen, in the staff report, there are detailed analyses of the comprehensive plan policies that are relevant to the project, that are also tied to the Article 3.2. The numeric values are met. So the project complies with the LDR requirement, except for the requests, the waiver and the loading determination. Let the urban design logic of the project, we're talking about a project in the CBD. So the designer made the urban design logic that is in the CBD code to protect the primary street and have an active frontage and place the functions where they belong, at, for example, the back of the house, where the loading or the garage and the waste management and the garbage is collected. The street, there is an important detail here. Along north-east first, where you see the orange color and the green trees, the streetscape arrangement, the code requires the trees to be closer to the street. However, the LDR gives the director the authority to flip this arrangement and push the trees towards the building and have the pedestrian adjacent to the street if there are restrictions. And in this case, there is a drainage line that is actually going along the orange color where you see, like the pedestrian, there is a drainage line. And this drainage line was identified earlier in the process. This project, this project, this project went to the DSMG, like the staff report, gives you lots of analysis and details that went to the DSMG to have a right-of-way reduction. And in this meeting, also, this was discussed. So in this case, the director granted this new arrangement. And it's not a waiver, not in front of the boat. This is kind of an administrative arrangement based on the director authority. The CBD architectural design guidelines tells us how we really look into the main street vernacular. On the screen, this is direct extraction from the CBD architectural design guidelines. This is what exactly in the booklet. Flat roof, circle, simple base, storefront windows, limited palette, color, the corniche and the ornamentation. The simplicity and the two images, like black and white, are from the CBD architectural design guidelines itself. So what the applicant proposed, this is basically the proposal, a rendering on the top and then the current elevations, the lower of the screen. And parapet, the top opening, there's the rhythm, the color palette is light. We can go through the architecture further. So the storefront front base is there, the vertical bay rhythm, the base, middle and top, the flat roof, the pedestrian shade, the material discipline is there. The criteria for architectural assessment, you saw this in the last item, and that's again the same three criteria, like good taste, good design, material, does not material depreciate, the appearance or the value in harmony and general, of the general area. Now we go to the landscape, we did this in color, so that it should be like green, but all green, you know, won't be able to see it. Except for the requested rear parking area landscape island waiver, the submitted landscape plans demonstrate compliance with the applicable landscape requirement review through TAC. The loading, now we move into the loading demand, and then I will go through the waiver. So the loading demand, the code requires one bay for this area of the size of the development, we need one loading berth. The request is for no dedicated loading berth. The applicant provided the justification, which is an attachment to the agenda, explaining about, and he may elaborate more during your discussion, explaining how loading is being done. I have a table, like just summarizing the applicant justification, we can go to it when we, if required. To the waiver, the landscape waiver, I have two, like depiction from the plan, the one to the right is actually the landscape island to the north. So standard landscape islands are required to be nine feet, but the CBD code reduces to seven, and the waiver request is to make it five from seven. So the required is seven, the request is five, and we know the lot is narrow, that this applicant justification and how the analysis is going through the ad, the lot itself is narrow. And there is kind of a trade-off the applicant started to explain, which is they have, they provided parking at the rear, that's not required, but it's important for them for the operation. So if they provided zero parking, so if they provided zero parking, it would be acceptable by the code, but operation, market of the, what they are trying to do, that was important. So there are some trade-offs here that the applicant might go through if you request more clarification. The island width is the waiver, and the island towards the street to the south, where the two red lines are shown here, it requires one tree. A landscape island must have a one tree, and now they cannot put a tree, again, on the top of utility line. That's part of the waiver request. So the waiver request is to reduce the islands from seven to five, and not having the one tree at the specific island. The waiver analysis is in front of you. We saw the first four criteria in the previous application. On top of this, I'm going to go through it also. Shall not adversely affect the neighboring, shall not significantly diminish, shall not create unsafe situation, does not result in the granting of special privilege. On top of this, within the CBD, there are more four requirements. So in front of you are eight requirements to evaluate the waiver. Shall not result in an inferior pedestrian experience, shall not allow the creation of significant incompatibility, shall not erode the connectivity, shall not reduce the quality of civic open space. And in front of you, the board options. I'm here for any questions. Thank you. Thank you. Is there anyone in the public, the audience, that would like to comment on this particular project? You have three minutes to do so. All right. Seeing none, I'll close public comments. I'll go to the board and ask, are there any ex-parte communications that you'd like to disclose? No, I visited the site. Okay. Can we start the discussion with you? Sure. So I was trying to understand the mezzanine concept when I was reading this. So am I correct in what I gather is that by incorporating this mezzanine concept, it's reduced their need to provide parking? Or what have they achieved by providing this mezzanine concept? Okay. That's a good question. So the mezzanine is not required. Right. So they are trying to add more area, more square feet into the product. So they have only two floors. But there is an option of a mezzanine restricted to a specific area, one-third of the floor below. Okay. They used it. That's the only reason. But I would like to invite the applicant, designer, perhaps, to add more to that. So is the mezzanine functionally useful, or is it an open space? I'm trying to figure out what it actually is. Because it is useful, but it doesn't, the parking, it doesn't kick in the parking because it is with it a lot. Okay. So, but it maintains the floor. It's not considered a floor. Okay. It's a small area, but it is usable. Because these are, admittedly, I would think, these are small units. Yeah. 400 square feet, some odd, right? And, you know, as I was looking at it, my first thought is, man, we're trying to cram a pound of sausage into a half-pound casing here. My primary concern. To clarify. Yep. So that yellow, which floor is that? The second? That yellow area is part of that second-story unit. So the story, the floor-to-ceiling, there's a volume here from floor-to-ceiling here. So now if you look at the, I think he had the cross-section up there. Right. This small area is part of the residential unit. Sort of like a loft look. Okay. But it's, so it's, you could use it up there. Okay. But it's not considered a floor. It's not a floor. Okay. But it has floor area. I mean, it is a useful area. Yeah, you could put a chair or a bed or whatever. Right. Or a sitting area. Okay. And then, and the same for the office, there's limited, again, it's tight site. So it's the same situation there. Correct. And it's very, very limited with what you could do. Well, aside from the, you know, how much is being, and I am empathetic with the size of the site. My, my, my largest concern was the north elevation. And because it is overlooking a historically significant property, I'm surprised that, you know, our HPB or somebody didn't, you know, kind of look at the elevations. I think that the provision of the hollies, the Eagleston hollies along there makes sense. I, my, my thinking is it'd be nice to kind of screen that north elevation a little bit more from Falcon House, right? Maybe could they be set, you know, I'm, I'm just throwing ideas out to you that I, I mean, I'm, it just, it just, I'm, I'm really sensitive to that north elevation. Um, and because of the, the starkness of it and its impact on, uh, Falcon House, um, one question on the plant list, when I read, um, uh, the specs, those are installation specs. So those Eagleston hollies go in at 16 feet high with a seven feet spread, or that's what they're expected to grow to. That's, that's installed. That's installed. At the time of installation. Okay. Um, so an Eagleston will go to 20, 30 feet? Yes. Okay. Um. To, Mr. Talbot. Yep. To clarify on the north elevation. Yeah. There is a requirement because of that house is so close to the property line and, and they're going to have a window, even though it's been boarded up because I think it's a kitchen area, um, you have to maintain a 10 foot distance from that. So technically in, in, in other situations, that building could have been a zero situation, but because that building was so close to the property, you have to, and it had a, a window on the south side. That's the Falcon house. Yeah. We had to maintain a 10 foot separation. So we have a building setback of about seven and a half feet. Okay. And then on that though, we can provide, that's why the windows are on the north side as well. Okay. So it's, it's, it's not like a solid, what like. So the rendering just looks really stark to me. When I, when I look at it from. The two dimensional order. Maybe so. Do we have the 3D? We can, do you have a 3D? Can you, can you, can you show the, the, the view from 6th Avenue? Like if you were standing at, you were sitting in the parking lot over. I thought I had a north. Yeah. There is a north view somewhere. I'm at the landscape plan right now. Far left. There it is. Top right. Top right. There you go. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. So it's, I mean, I, I think there's some relief with those two windows that, that one, I don't know, I just, when I first looked at it, it looked like, man, this is just one of those large flat facades that's overlooking, you know, a, you know, a, you know, some, a whole house that we think is pretty important or, you know, historically. And, um, uh, I, I don't know. I, um. And then, so to that point, the landscaping there, if we could, I don't, if we could shift back to you, yeah, there's windows on the first floor and let me go. Oh, I'm going the wrong direction. Sorry about that. Right. So it's solid. And then, so you figure it's a one story building to the north and those trees there are going to grow there at the time of planning, they're higher than the building to the north and they'll grow. So it's really the first floor will be obscured with the hedging and the, and the trees. I think there's a wall there too. Isn't there, there's an existing wall, right? A wall, right? I mean, we're proposing a wall, a fence. Yeah. There's a fence now, but there's a wall going in. Yes. Okay. If we, if we could, if they're going to testify, if they can, I don't know if they're sworn in. I mean, we're kind of talking across the room. Well, I mean, part of, part of my, you know, part of my struggle with voting on this is going to be just how large that mass is, uh, compared to that property to the north. Um, as far as the waiver on the, um, uh, the, uh, the, the five down to seven down to five feet. Um, I mean, I, I get that in the fact that the tree is there, but I mean, maybe you could stick in the little, you know, silver button wood to kind of screen, you know, silver button wood standard to screen that, uh, office parking area, because that's going to be pretty visible as you walk along, uh, Northeast first Avenue. Um, so those are my, my concerns and questions at this point. I just want to see something. Yeah. So the building itself. So what you building itself. So you have to that landscape. So there is, there's a hedge there that, um, and, and then there's that tree, the holly there. You see it right there, there's the holly in there. So the building itself, those are, those are all eaglestons along there, aren't they? Yes. Okay. Yeah. And so as you, you see where it's located. So we're, here's the head of the handicap space. Right. So it's right there. So this back area, here's the site visibility triangle. Right. Right there. So it's, we have the, the catch bait, the drainage structure, the service lines here. So it's, it's, and hedging. So here, here, with this tree has a, what they call a root barrier at this low angle, because you can't be closer than four feet. You need to have a root barrier when you're at four feet. You can't be less than four feet from the service line. And then when you're there, you need a root barrier. So, so we've provided that. Is the yellow box? That's just my, say, this is the area for the, from seven to five feet. And to, to Rafiq's point, so here's the two car garage. We, you're required a handicap space. Yeah. And we felt it was important to provide elite and maximize the parking the most we could. So we had, there's two, two there. So, it is, it is really, yeah. So, it's, this is the constrained site. Okay. All right. Can we move on? Yes, I'm done. I think I heard you correctly. The two yellow boxes are the areas, are the only areas in which you're talking about. Yes, seven to five feet. Okay. I mean, in terms of the, the landscape waiver, you know, I think it's pretty standard. And when you're working in the CBD, you know, and this is especially a narrow lot. So, understanding the constraints that, that doesn't bother me, you know, given that there's a tree right next to where the tree would be anyways. So, in that, in that sense, it's, it's okay in terms of the waiver. I think, I think the architecture is really nice for that corner. I could agree, I could agree with, in terms of the, the north side of the building. But, you know, I mean, it's, it's kind of the, I feel it's a little bit of the nature of where the CBD is going, right? So, you know, I don't know if in the future, you know, something got developed in that site, then you would have something right, right on those windows, right? But, you know, other than that, I mean, I, I appreciate that you guys didn't make it like a blank wall, right? So, it actually kind of like, has like a nice, really big open windows on that side, which, which I think is different to what most people would come in and do in these scenarios. So, that, I think it's, I think it's a nice, nice addition to, to, to downtown. If anything, I, I think that the one comment I would have liked to see that, I love the, the draping vines. I would have loved to see those just continue to wrap around on the, on the roof. So, yeah, I mean, I, I know, I know on, on the west side, right, you're kind of stopping it where your mechanical equipment is. Um, but, you know, on the north side, I think it would have been nice to, to just kind of have those. That would, you know, that would, that's a good point, because that would really soften, that would soften that north, that north elevation a lot. I agree with that. Yeah, so, so where you, where you see, like, the vines are kind of draping over the, the rooftop. Um, and, you know, we have it, so we can, it happens, like, on the, on the south corner and a little bit of the west corner, if I'm reading that correctly. But, yeah, I think it would have, if it would have just kind of kept going, um, I think that would have been, like, a nice, that's a really good point. That, that. Okay, mister. Can we? Yeah, you can share. So, so, so, so, so you get a, the perspective from the roof. Sure. If you could pass that down. If there's a really landscape on that area, we could. We could, we could drape it over. So you would continue the same treatment of our, of landscape around to the north side, is what you're saying. On the other side of the roof. So, you would mirror what's going on on the south. I think it is. Right. The south parapet, the north parapet could get the same treatment. Yeah, I think that would help a lot. Yeah, there's already a landscape in there. Okay. I'm getting the eye from legal, so if you're going to comment, you do need to come to the microphone. Yes, I'm going to have to have Corbin, Aid Architecture, 4301 Northeast First Terrace, Oakland Park, Florida. Affirm with Madam Clerk that he was sworn in. Did you come in after? After. I thought so. Okay. Thanks. Raise your name by the authority vested in me as a notary of the state of Florida, you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give to the auction. I do, yes. Thank you. Thank you. And what was your contribution regarding the – Also, I was saying on that north side, it's already landscaping in that area, so we can definitely accommodate to mirror what's on the south. Okay. On the – yeah. Thank you. Go ahead. Thank you. I think this question has been answered, but specifically the five trees that were removed, can we find a place for those? It sounds like no, because it's such a tight space. The only question I have, too, with the reduction from nine to five feet on the island, what is the square footage reduced to? Sorry, seven to five. Seven to five. Right, but I noticed like on the nine – when it's nine feet, they say it's 135 square feet and then goes down to 705. Seven is the rule for the CBD, which makes it 105. Okay. So the reduction is actually to be five feet. I don't have the final square feet because that's basically what will fit in this. Okay. So no impact? Because that's why I was trying to see if there was any kind of impact with the reduction from the seven to the five or – except the tree, obviously. You know, I would let the applicant – It's a linear feet, not actually square footage. We're talking about two linear feet, not square feet. Yeah, so two by whatever the length of that is. Like 28, like – Yeah, yeah. No impact. Okay. That's where I'm at. Again, tight space. And I appreciate the explanation, again, with the mezzanine. So I'm good. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Yeah, I actually really like the architecture. I think it's nice that you're bringing something like a nice character. It's a tough site. We can tell there's a lot of thought put into it. So from one architect to another, great work. There are some things I noticed I just want to ask. There's some like non-accessible spaces on your sections. Oh, correct. I guess – and I don't know. Maybe there's a reason, but there's two things I noticed. Why non-accessible spaces? And then the mezzanines are elevated 13 feet above the ground. Why not 12 to give yourself a little more room because it's kind of tight? So I'm just little things, but – Yeah. So the first question actually is a mezzanine is because of the one-third. Otherwise, we'll count as a story. So now this is actually a two-story building. If – I would love to have the mezzanine more, but we can't. Otherwise, we'll count as a story. Or could you just remove it and make it a double-height space? Residence, fitness, make it taller? Like why just close off a room by itself? Like can you just make it like a high-volume space? I mean on one side is the garage. On the back side is really – Well, it's a lot. It's almost like 1,200 square feet of just space you can't use. We can't use, right. Yeah. So it's almost like just make it double. Like in other words, you're building a floor for space you can't use. Just keep it open. There's no reason why you couldn't. I mean it might feel weird. But let's put it on the gym area, for instance, would be like – it would not feel right, again, in my opinion. Okay. Just a thought. Just something to keep in mind. I'd love to add, but yeah. Yeah. It's just there's not a code requirement to build an empty floor. So it's more of a design. Can I just interject? So we have a guideline about designing from the dais. Oh, I'm sorry. And giving specific recommendations. I know it's your first meeting. Yeah, I'm sorry. It's my first meeting. I've got tapped out for the first five years. I've got chastised last. It's just one meeting. You're good. It's okay. I've got hit the same thing my first meeting. Yeah, it's okay. Yeah, it's just a thought. No, it's hard. Okay. So that was the only other thing. And then going along with the other comments, yes, I think we found a solution here. I had the same comment as the two. I think that facade could be lightened up with landscaping. Yeah, yeah. And there's no reason why it couldn't be. Yeah, so it was already landscaped behind that wall in there. So we just – basically the type of plant will need to be – Yeah, exactly. So I agree with the same comments they said. Excellent. Thank you so much. So we haven't – We've got one quick question. The parking – the reduction of the – from five to seven, it looks to me like they're putting – you're putting cocoa plumb in there. Does that sound right? Yes. Okay. All right. Fine. Okay. I think that's a good choice there. Are we going to have a conversation about the loading? We have not had a conversation about the loading area. Come over. So it wasn't a – in my rebuttal I was going to mention more about that. Okay. But I didn't get a rebuttal. So I just want to do – the reason behind that and the fact that these – there is an area where you can pull off in the alley. And typically alleys are used for loading. But we see they get – they get utilized. But to have back-out parking on the alley, you're required to have 42 feet from the head of the parking space to the west side of the alley. The alley currently is 16 feet. Actually, it may be more because it's paved all the way up to that facade of this building. And there's an overhead door there. We're dedicating the two feet. And so this is all paved areas. So if you kind of see the – you see this outline of this parking space, of this car. So there is the ability for, let's say, your Amazon truck or your – the USPS to stop there. There's – and then here's the lobby area has the – like the mailboxes over here. So there's that ability. And our justification and the fact that it's only a 2,500-square-foot office. There's – there's periodic deliveries. Those are usually smaller trucks. It's not like you're dealing with anything huge. And to provide a loading space, a designated loading berth or space on a site this type, then really eats up into what we are – now, even though parking is not required, you still need to get that handicapped space in there. And so, as we stated, when you have a move-in or a move-out, it's a very short-term occurrence that, you know, coordinate. You cannot – and the city will not allow you to stop on the street, on 1st Street, or here. So it's – the alleys, the perfect situation. Where's the garbage – There are roll-out carts on the north side. There's four right there. See those little arrows there, pointing there? There's four, and those get wheeled out right here. Okay. And the garbage truck has enough access there? Yes. Okay. Yes, actually, they go through there now. To the north, there are townhomes that back out. And then there's a four-story mixed-use building that's being renovated north of – just north of – that used to be a furniture store or something. Okay. So those are – that's getting access by waste management on a regular basis. Okay. And if you go back to the Amazon truck mention, what kind of impact in terms of blocking – I know you said it can pull off. Well, they would – they could pull off on this side. Look, I mean, here you do have – they're very short. They're quick. And so we don't see it as though you're blocking somebody from backing out of the garage or even out of a parking space. If you notice, they'll pull up right in front of your driveway, drop off, and then they'll get back, and they're gone. So it's a very short turnaround. Even delivery dudes or whoever they are now, Uber Eats, they're pretty quick on their deliveries. Okay. All right. Thanks for that, Jeff. Does anybody else have any questions about the – The loading. The loading. Yeah, the loading triggered something about the parking in that I understand these are two very small spaces, probably a single inhabitant. But, you know, you would expect probably there's very few situations where only one car is required for the residents. So when they have guests, when they – if they have a roommate that's going to join them, what's the game plan for parking for this project elsewhere? Yeah, again, there's really no requirement, but we're providing it. But, you know, if there is the ability, even though it's not per code, I mean, somebody could pull in that driveway. I mean, it fits. Okay, yeah, double parking. It fits. I mean, you could do a tandem situation. Yeah. So it fits. It's just a matter of, you know – and they will not stick out into the alley. It's almost like a townhouse. So they could double stack in front of that garage space. Correct. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. And when these aren't occupied, there's some on-street parking on the west side of Ferro. Yeah. And then on the south side of First Street, in front of those townhomes, there's some Ferro. Okay. Okay. Okay. All right. They can use that, too, at night, you know. Okay. Do I have a motion on this item? I would like to make a motion to approve a Level 2 site plan with architectural elevations, landscape plan, landscape waiver, and loading demand statement. For the Grand Mercy Del Rey, file number PZ000376-2025 for the redevelopment of the property at 102 Northeast 6th Avenue with a two-story mixed-use building containing office space and two residential units. by finding that the request is consistent with a comprehensive plan that meets the applicable criteria set forth in the land development regulations. I'll make a second. I have a motion and a second. Can you call a roll, please? Rhett Talbot? Yes. Jose Alvarez? Yes. Sandra Amani? Yes. Nicholas Coppola? Yes. Abhi Kantham? Yes. And Nick Gray? Yes. Congratulations. Thank you. Thank you. Approved by Manit. My job. Good night for you. Good night. Got to play the lotto, Jeff. 2-0, Jeff. 2-0. It was pretty good. Good night. All right. Are there any staff presentations? Attorney presentations? No. No comments. No, just a reminder of the upcoming meeting. October 28th is the fourth Wednesday. We usually meet on the fourth Wednesday, except for November and December. We shifted because of the holiday season and Thanksgiving, Christmas. So, November 18th is the third Wednesday, and then December 9th, that's too early, which is the second Wednesday. Next meeting, we'll be distributing the entire schedule for 27. It's being approved right now. If the board would like to have, maybe we can also have a presentation on this PRAB authority, what does it cover, what are the levels of site plans, what do we examine. If you wish, we can also have, like, next meeting or a meeting after. Depending on the agenda, just let me know. And feel free to contact me at any time, like, if you require any clarification on items in the agenda or any specific code section. Thank you. Thank you. Any board comments? Welcome. Welcome? Oh, yes, welcome. Welcome. Great job. All right, I move adjourn. Have a good night, everybody. Good night. Thank you, everyone, for your patience. Thank you.