[This transcript was generated automatically from audio using AI and hasn't been reviewed by a person -- it can contain mistakes, including plausible-sounding sentences that were never actually said. Treat it as a starting point, not a verbatim record.]

[0:05] Good evening, everyone. Welcome to the regular commission meeting, this August 19th, 2025. If the clerk, please call the roll.
[0:15] Commissioner Marker, Vice Mayor Long, Commissioner Kassau, Deputy Vice Mayor Brown, Mayor Carney.
[0:22] Here, we have a quote.
[0:23] Thank you very much. If you could all rise, please, for the pledge of allegiance.
[0:36] national parasitین acabaevendivisable activity and assist this
[0:40] for all thank you very much and may be say
[0:57] agenda approval and other any additions subtractions to theaches
[1:03] media about like to pull item 6h-1
[1:09] And I'd like to ask for consensus to move item 7-H, which has to do with the traffic control devices.
[1:17] Further up on the agenda, I think there's quite a few folks here that are going to hear to speak about that issue.
[1:22] And I'd like to not have enough to wait several hours till we get to discuss it up here.
[1:29] Okay, so we'll make 7H1, 7, why don't we make that 7BB and allow the people that are here for that other thing to be 7AA?
[1:40] So if we can move, what was the number you said, Mr. Long?
[1:43] Got Commissioner Long?
[1:45] 7H.
[1:46] Are there any traffic control noncompliance?
[1:49] Are there any other circumstances to move that up to 7A?
[1:53] Fine.
[1:53] And we'll make six H-1-7-B-B.
[1:57] Are there any other changes to the agenda?
[2:09] Well, now you, I have the everyone's work where the everyone's ready to move, so.
[2:14] So I need a motion to approve.
[2:17] Motion to approve.
[2:18] Any second?
[2:19] All in favor?
[2:20] Aye.
[2:21] There we are.
[2:23] Approved.
[2:24] We now have presentations.
[2:26] The first presentation, I am happy to say,
[2:28] is a proclamation for Coco Goff.
[2:31] Some of you may have heard of her, you know she's actually from Del Rey, she plays tennis a little.
[2:37] Let me read the Proclamation.
[2:40] Whereas Corey Dion Coco Gough has made remarkable achievements in the world of tennis.
[2:44] Most recently, winning her first French Open Singles title in 2025.
[2:49] Whereas in 2024, she secured the French Open Grand Slam doubles title, along with partner Katrina Sinia Cova.
[2:57] Whereas Coco Gough is the youngest American female
[3:00] to win the French Open Singles title in the past decade, and whereas in 2023, she captured
[3:05] her first major Singles title at the U.S. Open, becoming the youngest American women to win
[3:10] the tournament since 1999. And whereas she has been honored with the S.P. Award for Best
[3:15] Tennis Player in both 2024 and 2025, a testament to her excellence and consistency. And whereas
[3:22] in 2024, Cocoa Cup became the youngest WTA finals champions since 2004, and the first American
[3:29] to win the title since 2014.
[3:32] And whereas beyond her achievements on the court,
[3:34] Coca-Cola fuses her platform to advocate
[3:36] for social justice, including racial equality
[3:38] and climate change, inspiring millions
[3:41] around the world through her leadership and activism.
[3:43] Now, therefore, I, Thomas F. Carnegie Jr.
[3:45] Mayor of the City of Del Rey Beach,
[3:47] on behalf of the City Commission,
[3:48] who hereby recognize and congratulate Coca-Cola
[3:51] for her tennis accomplishments and advocacy
[3:53] and extend our deepest admiration
[3:55] for her contributions to tennis, her community,
[3:58] and the global conservation on justice and equality.
[4:02] Thank you.
[4:04] Thank you.
[4:07] If I can ask my fellow commission,
[4:09] she will offer a follow-up with...
[4:27] Okay, we'll let you think.
[4:28] We'll make a presentation.
[4:30] And then we'll go sit down.
[4:44] Post that there's got to be a proper couple.
[4:47] Good.
[4:52] Sorry.
[4:52] I think it'd be just for the day and for all.
[5:06] I don't know what the question is asked for.
[5:07] Now, you know, I have to, this is my time, but I just want to say on behalf of Coco with her on her way to you, no prayer.
[5:19] And she could not be here. I want to thank kids for accompanying me here. She's like a family friend that just does everything.
[5:27] Yeah, I don't know how much Coco love them, right? Yeah, I don't know how much I love them, right?
[5:31] I got on our cocoa dairy shoes, go buy your son, but thank you, Mayor commissioners, and all
[5:39] of their array for this, because she does not do this for awards, it took a long time to get them to do
[5:49] this, because remember about the parade, she didn't want a big deal, but you guys didn't parade
[5:55] And on the half of the entire family, both sides of the family,
[6:00] because both sides of the family grew up here.
[6:02] Her mom and dad, they played terrible rocks who are going to be here.
[6:06] The mom was a cheerleader, and all that kind of good stuff.
[6:09] And y'all know how much I love Derek.
[6:11] So thank you so much on behalf of the girl family.
[6:14] And as they fly up to New York, y'all better cheer for my baby.
[6:18] Thank you.
[6:27] Thank you very much.
[6:30] Next, I'm going to be asking Chief Morton to come up.
[6:32] We're going to recognize the life-saving action by Captain James Bass at the Dory Beach Fire Rescue Department and his son Quinn.
[6:39] Let's get up.
[6:40] Here we go.
[6:41] Captain Bass.
[6:46] Good evening, mayors.
[6:47] Commissioner and City Manager.
[6:50] This evening, it's my distinct honor and privilege to present to you tonight, Captain James Bass,
[6:55] a veteran of the Del Rey Beach Fire Rescue Department with 18 years of dedicated service along with his son Quinn, age 11.
[7:04] What began is a simple family getaway to Brecht and Rich Crawl Colorado meant for rest, laughter, and bonding.
[7:13] Quickly became a moment to showcase courage, skill, and true spirit of service.
[7:21] On the morning of July 9 as the best family prepared for a fun day of hiking and fishing,
[7:28] Captain Bass noticed an elderly gentleman lying face down in the parking lot of his hotel.
[7:34] Without hesitation, both father and son jumped into action and rushed to his side.
[7:40] Through a rapid, complete, and thorough patient assessment,
[7:43] that it was discovered this man was in cardiac arrest.
[7:47] In that moment, young Quinn,
[7:50] drawing upon the guidance, example, and values instilled by his father,
[7:55] took charge, and directed his father to start CPR.
[8:07] Following following AHA algorithms, we'd
[8:10] kept in bass to ask about an AED being available. Young Quinn, again, didn't pause. He ran
[8:16] over 120 yards to a neighboring adjacent property to retrieve an AED, and this was all at
[8:23] a 9600 foot elevation, and we all know how much elevation we have in Florida.
[8:32] With steady
[8:32] delivered and the gentleman's heart began to beat again. Due to their swift and decisive
[8:38] action and selfless actions, this man was stabilized, transferred to Denver, and continues
[8:44] a path to recovery today. Tonight, we not only celebrate the life-saving efforts of Captain
[8:49] Jim Bass and his son Quinn, we celebrate the very best of what it means to serve. Their story reminds
[8:56] us of the power of early CPR and defibrillation, but also the character compassion and caliber
[9:02] of people who wear the Delray Beach Fire Rescue badge.
[9:06] Captain Bass, your professionalism and leadership
[9:08] continue to make us proud.
[9:11] Quinn, your courage and quick thinking are an inspiration,
[9:15] not just your father but to all of us here tonight.
[9:18] We'll be holding an application for you
[9:20] in a few short years in a row.
[9:23] On behalf of our city and the Fire Rescue
[9:24] Chief and our entire department,
[9:27] we extend our heartfelt congratulations
[9:29] and most profound gratitude and warmest wishes to both you and to the man whose life you have so
[9:36] profoundly touched. And I have these recognition plaques.
[9:59] Thank you guys. Thank you very much for the commission.
[10:03] It's for honor to receive the recognition and I just want to express my thanks and
[10:16] Thank you guys very much. Thank you very much. Thank you both.
[10:22] You make it proud.
[10:29] For C, this is going to be a, this is the discussion of Del Ray Rocks by city funded non profit organization and the cheerleading organization.
[10:39] So representatives from Del Ray Rocks are here.
[10:44] At this time therefore coming Mr. Mayor, so they'll be in positions off of every presentation.
[10:48] Oh, you didn't get strategic seating on the aisle, I'll see that, so. Okay. All right.
[10:53] And to be mindful for good measure, you all approve the agreement between this video,
[10:57] they're already beach and there may be drugs in organization a week ago today,
[11:01] resulting in the brief presentation from leadership. Thank you, ladies.
[11:05] Thank you. Good evening, everyone. Commissioner Mayor, city manager. My name is Clara DePickett.
[11:11] I'm a city of Del Rey Beach resident.
[11:13] I'm also currently the president and lead park representative
[11:17] for the Del Rey Rocks.
[11:19] I have been a volunteer for the Del Rey Rocks since 2006.
[11:23] Since my son was old enough and able to play for the Del Rey Rocks.
[11:28] Just a brief history of the Del Rey Rocks.
[11:31] We were brought into existence in 1966 by William Bill Smith.
[11:36] Today, this is our 59th year that the Del Rey Rocks
[11:40] have been in existence, I think we are the longest standing program within the city of Del Ray Beach.
[11:49] This could not be possible with our dedicated volunteers, our parents, the participants, and the support from our city and community.
[11:59] Moving forward, our, sorry, nervous, our organization currently have eight football teams
[12:05] and five cheer teams.
[12:07] Fast forward to the past few years, 2024, 2020 to 2024, we have won seven super balls.
[12:13] Our cheer teams have been rocking the mat, several first place championships as well.
[12:19] We recognize and we are appreciative of all of the support from the City of Del Rey Beach.
[12:24] Thank you.
[12:26] Good evening.
[12:31] Good evening. Commissioner is my name is Vicki Hill. And I have been with the Del Ray
[12:37] Robs since about 2010.
[12:43] I am a Del Ray Beach resident. And I want to get into the presentation.
[12:55] Well, Clarita was saying a little brief history about the Del Ray Robs. This is our 59th year. And we came
[13:03] In two,
[13:07] we came into Delray in 1966 by Bill Smith.
[13:15] By Bill Smith, and he named us after his squadron.
[13:25] Those are the pictures.
[13:26] If you look hard, you'll see Bill Smith to the right, and you'll also see
[13:33] rent, owed them, and a host of other people, those are just as old as it is.
[13:46] Just go to the next
[13:50] one.
[13:50] Okay, we just want you to know what, no.
[13:59] Your support helps us build confidence, provide mentorship, and open the door to academic excellence.
[14:13] We didn't want to be before you long, so our budget requests.
[14:18] We just wanted to show you things that we have to pay for.
[14:23] Our fees for the rep, referees, run a little or $15,000, or $15,750, do's to be in the
[14:39] 200, she is 1,600, you would say football dues is 750 dollars.
[14:45] Now, this is the big thing that you guys have done for Delray, our travel, because a lot
[14:53] of children can't get to where we go, we go as far as Kendall, you provide a bus for us.
[15:00] So, for a chair competition, it's going to be about 4,000. Superbow 2800, because we're going to
[15:07] Superbow again. And for our regular season, it runs about $36,000.
[15:19] Little things that we need to play, football,
[15:22] mouthpieces, girdles, helmets, shoulder pads, helmet reconditioning uniforms, knee pads,
[15:31] replacement uniforms, runs us about 46,000 a year.
[15:39] You provide, we get into the
[15:42] year trophies, little supplies. We do for AYFL rules. We do have to provide
[15:49] tent and drinks for the referees. So we have to pay for little things like that.
[15:54] We have to make sure it's a very hot outside.
[15:57] So we have to make sure the kids stay hydrated.
[16:02] We do have to pay taxes.
[16:05] So we have to pay for our CPA to do our taxes.
[16:12] Insurance, the light towers, because on the visiting side,
[16:19] there's no lighting.
[16:20] So when we play at night, we have to have those light towers and we do do front raising
[16:26] So we do ask anyone and we're still sick except in donations if anybody want to
[16:32] So we do have little dances
[16:36] We we probably don't make as much as we should but we made about
[16:41] 2000 and registrations 30,000
[16:44] So what you gave us in this fiscal year was 97,000 and I didn't want to ask, we didn't want
[16:55] to ask for much more than that because we know that you do give us a lot.
[17:00] So we were just asking for 100,000.
[17:07] OK, the list of our executive board members
[17:11] as Clarita Pinkett, Terrence Thomas,
[17:16] Merriad Pickens, myself and Michael Charles.
[17:21] Here are our coaching staff and most of them are
[17:25] Derry Beach residents.
[17:27] We have some that work for the city of Derry Beach.
[17:30] We have two coaches that also coach at Atlantic.
[17:35] Erkiss Hill, Windale, Jarrell, Edwin, Derek, Eric, Hotrod, and Blitty.
[17:44] I know you guys are accustomed to Hotrod, because he's been here with the Super Bowl.
[17:48] And also, with Eric Davis, and Coco Golf's brother is number eight on 11-U.
[17:57] He is the quarterback, okay, and then Blitty, 13-U.
[18:01] This is our schedule just in case you guys wanted to come and check us out. Our home
[18:06] games we've already had three, we have three more September 6th, the 20th and October
[18:13] 11th and we're at a secret soccer complex.
[18:22] There are some more pictures.
[18:28] You see there?
[18:30] You see how we have a team there that already got recognized by you all.
[18:40] A huge thank you to our biggest supporter, that's the city of Del Rey Beach.
[18:44] You are a live saver in your dedication and partnership, make everything we do possible.
[18:50] And we just wanted to leave a little treat
[18:55] and we're just thanking them for being live savers.
[19:01] So thank you
[19:07] very much.
[19:07] and I've been expecting to go to Super Bowl last year.
[19:10] I've been expecting to issue two of them.
[19:11] Yes sir.
[19:12] We have expectations.
[19:13] Absolutely.
[19:17] You have any questions of us?
[19:18] Are we done?
[19:20] Sure.
[19:21] I want to say thank you for the presentation.
[19:23] We haven't had this in the past.
[19:24] So when we see the amount of money you're getting, we obviously wonder about you're doing a lot
[19:29] for the community and we appreciate you and I can't believe these kids are playing in
[19:33] August.
[19:33] It is so hot.
[19:34] Yes, it's very hot.
[19:36] So thank you for the presentation and the information.
[19:39] and then we appreciate you. Thank you.
[19:42] Thank you very much.
[19:48] We have the presentation now by the downtown development authority regarding old school
[19:52] square activities and the 2025 proposed, 2025, 2026 proposed budget.
[19:59] There we go.
[20:03] Good evening, Mayor, commissioners.
[20:05] See you, manager, city attorney.
[20:07] Everyone, my name is Laura Simon.
[20:09] I'm with the downtown development authority.
[20:11] And I'm with Susie and Void, our director of marketing.
[20:13] And I think we might have some board members here, but just wanted to recognize our board of directors,
[20:22] Al Castello, Brian Rosen, a jewel Galardie Salman.
[20:26] We have also Jim Knight, Cole Devitt, Anthony Barber, and Aaron Hellyburn.
[20:33] So I feel like I'm naming my children.
[20:37] But thank you for giving us the opportunity to present
[20:42] the program and activation of old school square campus,
[20:47] which is under our preview as the Cornell Art Museum,
[20:51] the amphitheater and lawn as well as the vintage gym
[20:55] and the grounds there.
[20:56] So we're just going to share with you some highlights
[21:00] taking you through a little bit of the history.
[21:03] It's really take the opportunity
[21:05] And just share with the community really what's going on at Old School, I, the Downtown Development Authority as an organization is working closely with the city on activating a programming in this cultural arts campus.
[21:19] So in August 2021, you'll see the city terminated the lease with the Center for the Arts, which is the nonprofit on the campus managing that for over decades.
[21:28] October 2022, the City of the DDA held a workshop regarding the campus and regarding the
[21:36] necessity, the necessity for keeping that campus open and active as a center of the
[21:43] heart of our downtown and our city. So the DDA worked cooperatively with the city as a
[21:51] funding operation for us to then program and activate an interlocal agreement to open
[21:58] up first the Cornell Art Museum, which sits on Atlantic Avenue, on the Swinton and Atlantic
[22:03] Avenue, the building, which is the 1913 elementary school for Delray Beach. Now is the
[22:09] Cornell Art Museum. It's open now with exhibitions, and we, it isn't a closed building. It
[22:15] is actually open, and we invite everybody to be there. December, we opened up the Cornell Art Museum
[22:21] with a new exhibition, February, 2023,
[22:24] we signed the Inelegal Agreement,
[22:26] and then we started producing events in March
[22:29] and April, managing the campus for private events
[22:33] that are rentals, as well as creating events on the campus.
[22:39] September, we, if we started out with the entire campus
[22:43] and then in September 2023, the city to go over
[22:45] the management of the Cedar Building
[22:47] to execute the renovations and move forward there and October 2023, the DDA also acquired
[22:55] the vintage gem for management and programming. And in 2024, in September, we are now in
[23:02] our five-year term working and managing that campus. In the end, the DDA agrees to handle
[23:10] administration's set-up operation maintenance, programming activities, exhibitions and special
[23:15] for the use and enjoyment of the city residents and the public at large in order to encourage economic development and promotion of the downtown area of the city.
[23:27] So this is what we're doing when things are responsibilities with the funding provided by the city and funding that we raise on the campus is we host series of exhibitions and programs that we produce and create on our team as well as
[23:44] and with our partners and managing the campus.
[23:47] So when we have rentals or private events that are,
[23:51] like such as the Green Market or the Coco Market,
[23:54] other events that actually happen in the campus,
[23:56] our team is there to manage and execute
[23:59] and oversee the execution of those.
[24:01] And then the marketing of the campus.
[24:02] When this was closed for many years,
[24:05] it was really important for us to ramp up the marketing
[24:07] for this campus to really let the public know
[24:13] that the campus is open and open and active
[24:16] and available for use and enjoyment.
[24:20] So just a little bit about the visitor traffic.
[24:22] Just if I year, you'll see we at 220,000 of 2021,
[24:28] 228 and 22, and just growing on 23 and 24,
[24:32] we continue to grow an events.
[24:35] Just recently we had a free concert on the campus,
[24:39] host in close to 2800 people, which is significant.
[24:42] And I know the city just hosted the drone show with over 5,000 people at that event and the middle of summer, which is really when we need it here in downtown.
[24:54] So just a snapshot of the events that are produced by the DDA and on the campus, just looking at these are all a multitude of events from free exhibitions and hosting events in the Cornell art museum, as well as ticket events.
[25:09] So we had the pop 2000 with in seeing O' Town and Ryan Cabera in July, as well as yoga and
[25:17] who health and fitness events is summer.
[25:20] So I'm just going to do a shout out for the, yeah, and we finally did.
[25:24] The left hand picture is actually the Harold Codio talk, where he unveiled the portrait that
[25:32] he did of Coco Gauff and Mrs. Odom was there as well as Coco's family, about 300 people
[25:39] inside the museum that night so it's a really really beautiful night and the
[25:43] right-hand picture is full moon yoga we had about 700 people register for that but
[25:48] we had 1100 people show up so that was another free event that we produced on
[25:54] campus it's just this year. So going into this current year of 2526 as we start
[26:02] what we're calling the school year, the Delray High School which is the
[26:10] 100 year anniversary of the campus. So it's a milestone year and we're embarking on really
[26:16] set a year of Centennial celebrations on the campus and really want to focus on being inclusive
[26:23] and telling the story of old school square and our community through all of our events.
[26:30] So our goal is to obviously launch a celebration in the fall and starting and
[26:40] street from the Cornell Museum all the way through the campus making it a full tour and like travel
[26:48] through time, if you will. And then our next preparing for the next hundred years.
[26:52] Yeah, in part of the priorities and part of the 100th anniversary of the campus is the launch
[26:57] of the rebrand. As you all know, we went through a call to artists, the public voted,
[27:02] 10,000 votes, they choose the artist, Patricia Torres. She is right now working with our graphic
[27:07] to come up with the final logo and we hope to launch that when we, during one of these
[27:14] health centennial celebrations. Some of the other priorities, bringing more revenue
[27:19] generating events to the campus, bringing back art on the square, which was an event
[27:24] that was a money maker outside of the Cornell Art Museum, more family events, constant
[27:29] activations, low-impactant activations, and stronger summer programming. Some of the
[27:37] consider are just capital improvements to the campus.
[27:42] The restrooms need to be redone some facility enhancements.
[27:45] There's some flooding issues on the campus.
[27:48] And then also working with us to create a comprehensive plan
[27:51] for the entire campus, a strategic plan of what we want this
[27:55] campus to be and how we want to move forward with it.
[28:00] And then now taking a look at the numbers.
[28:03] So this is a look at the projected revenue for the fiscal year
[28:07] We are hoping for $800,000 as we got last year from the city.
[28:13] The rental income is about 50,000 program income, about 170,000.
[28:18] We get about $25,000 in donations and sponsors,
[28:21] and then you see $10,000 in museum store sales,
[28:25] which puts us just over a million dollars to run the campus.
[28:31] We wanted to break that down into buckets,
[28:33] So you can really see what we're doing with that money
[28:35] operations, that staff, is about 427,000.
[28:40] And that includes security on campus, legal,
[28:45] all kinds of administrative services.
[28:48] Then you say the marketing and advertising,
[28:50] that's really getting people to know about what's happening
[28:52] on campus.
[28:54] The Cornell Art Museum, those are the exhibitions,
[28:56] the amphitheater, those are the concerts,
[28:58] and all the activations, and then the low maintenance budget,
[29:02] which is about $26,000.
[29:04] Now, we want to break it down for you
[29:06] so you can see specific what that looks like,
[29:09] payroll, facility expenses,
[29:11] and we did want to go into the next slide
[29:14] because I think that there have been some public comments
[29:16] about the DDA making money off of whole school square
[29:23] and we just wanted to kind of lay this out
[29:25] so that we can put those inaccuracies to rest.
[29:30] This is a look at the OSS budget on your left and on the right is what the DDA pays for.
[29:36] And those services, the DDA pays for are loaned to old school square because it is in the heart of our downtown.
[29:45] And we really believe that this is an important piece of the downtown.
[29:51] So on the left is what comes out of the old school square budget, which is the city funding and the money that we make at old school square.
[29:58] on the right.
[30:00] The executive director, the marketing director, the marketing coordinator, those salaries are all paid for by the DDA, and that is not, you know, that it's not, we don't take any salary from old school square.
[30:14] As far as expenses, this is the marketing and advertising. You can see the buckets, how that breaks down.
[30:21] Let's move on. I think we're on a time.
[30:24] Then we get to the Cornell Art Museum.
[30:26] You can see what those events and activations,
[30:28] Meriska is constantly programming the Cornell Art Museum.
[30:32] So it's always got something happening new.
[30:35] And this is a look at the amphitheater,
[30:37] and we kind of break it down between winter programs and summer programs,
[30:41] outdoor games and activities,
[30:42] and then we are hoping throughout all of these programs
[30:47] to have a this antennaeal be a part of all of the programming.
[30:52] And then this is just a small maintenance budget.
[30:55] We do some painting around campus and lighting and different things to just keep the campus looking nice.
[31:03] We did want to lay out the Creative Arts School because it is a part of the campus.
[31:06] And this is part of the budget for your fiscal year 26.
[31:11] And right now you all have budgeted $426,000 for the Creative Arts School.
[31:17] That of course is under the city purview.
[31:18] it is not under the DDA, the Crest Theatre and the Creative Arts School are under the city management.
[31:28] And then we just wanted to lay out the final numbers and you can see that the Creative Arts
[31:32] School, that one program is costing the city more than half of what the entire campus costs
[31:37] in your current budget.
[31:42] So any questions, comments?
[31:43] Mr. Mayor, I like to all for a bit of clarity. I think it's proven that I do so at this
[31:51] This engagement, one of the provisions of the aforementioned agreement between the City
[31:56] of Derrie Beach and the downtown development authority is to offer an annual update in
[32:01] terms of activities, record of achievement as a release to the services being provided
[32:06] at the OSS campus.
[32:08] Separant in a part from the Creative Arts School, that's distinctively a separate operation
[32:13] of the City of Derrie Beach.
[32:15] We've updated the commission in terms of what I've had for it is in that regard.
[32:19] Additionally, perhaps more quotiently, I like to refresh everybody's attention, I hosted a meeting with leadership with a downtown development authority.
[32:30] It would have been Tuesday, June 24 of this year, for 13 afternoon to talk a little bit about revenue analysis, particularly forecast, et cetera, what the opportunities are in that regard.
[32:41] And that brings me to this specific request of $800,000 being made available for the upcoming fiscal year.
[32:49] I openly talked about the prospect of a $700,000 recommendation as part of the aggregate proposal budget for fiscal year 2025-26.
[32:58] The Commission may very well recall in some of the details of presentations haven't been offered that that was actually the recommended consideration.
[33:06] So bottom line, the current proposed budget process does take on the consideration of $700,000
[33:14] commitment towards this relationship and not an $800,000 one.
[33:19] So that is you all form a request.
[33:21] However, the proposed budget process takes on the consideration of $700,000 of which we were
[33:27] fairly open about that as we went along.
[33:30] So thank you.
[33:33] Thank you.
[33:34] Thank you.
[33:36] on that see manager that conversation was following was actually tagged on to another meeting
[33:42] that we had. So I knew we had a dialogue on that. I didn't realize that that was the formal
[33:45] request for that or recommendation by you. I know that there was going to hopefully be another
[33:51] follow up conversation and so that's why we're here with our presentation. Following our meetings
[33:56] that we've been having publicly as well with the board. So again, we have activated the campuses
[34:04] year we're working, you know, based with a partnership with the city collectively to and our
[34:11] and our residents and community to make sure the campus is open and active in the downtown,
[34:17] and it does require a lot of, and even more than what we are actually doing here, it would
[34:24] really require quite a bit more to make sure that that campus is fully operational and should be
[34:29] three hundred sixty five days of the year. So that's I appreciate your comments. Thank you.
[34:39] The commissioner Mr. Long, in the comments.
[34:42] Mr. Marker.
[34:45] I just want to thank you ladies and the whole DV18 for what you do.
[34:50] I think the downtown has been unbelievable the past year. We've had more events than ever.
[34:55] We've had paid events. We've had free events.
[34:59] We're obviously driving a lot of traffic into our downtown area,
[35:01] which is what our merchants tell me every day they want and I know I don't blame them.
[35:05] If I had a restaurant down there the more we can drive in the better our city is.
[35:10] I want to be very careful with the DDA. I think the work you're doing is really good.
[35:15] I think it's critical to the success that we've had as a community.
[35:19] And I want to be mindful of any and all cuts that we're contemplating because I don't want to go
[35:24] backward. We've worked two damn hard to get here. And we're the envy of every city in Florida and
[35:30] many around the United States and I want to stay there so the work you guys are doing is contributing
[35:35] mightily to that so I want to say thank you and like I said I want to be perfectly mindful
[35:40] of anything that we're thinking about cutting because this is too valuable to to mess around with
[35:46] thank you. Thank you. I wish it a good start. Yeah I would say thank you for the presentation and
[35:51] You know, I set up here when you weren't running the campus and it's, you're doing an exceptional job and people recognize that and we are still in our budget process. Thank you.
[36:07] Mr. Burns. Just thank you for your presentation and thank you for the work that you do in our CD and our downtown area. That's it. Thank you.
[36:20] A lot of Ruhaha was made about my doing a public record
[36:24] or a question to obtain all the financial statements.
[36:27] I do have one thing to start off with
[36:30] and that you continue to try to point out that you
[36:33] for 800,000 do all this and somehow that the city has been
[36:36] 426,000 on the article when you were told yesterday
[36:40] by this deputy city manager exactly what that means
[36:44] and that we know that money hasn't spent.
[36:47] You know it's been budgeted for teachers, you know the teachers are going to be paid out of what the payments.
[36:52] So you're trying to sit there and make this.
[36:54] Well, that's not what your budget from last year says.
[36:57] Well, you, that you can't understand and read a budget.
[36:59] And what doesn't get spent in and stuff gives you a budget doesn't mean it's spent.
[37:02] What it says.
[37:04] Well, you were told yesterday.
[37:05] And you're continuing to, the fable.
[37:07] You're continuing to fable.
[37:10] So I have a chair.
[37:11] Mayer.
[37:12] You have a chair yesterday.
[37:13] I got the chair today.
[37:14] Mayer.
[37:17] So this is question discussion, I think the presentation is over, so I don't think you're directing questions to them, I think you're directing it to your colleagues.
[37:26] So.
[37:27] On this we have specific questions, I think you can just direct to your colleagues.
[37:29] Well, I'm only expecting to address to my colleagues was this.
[37:33] And we all received an email this morning from Gina Carter on what the true numbers are.
[37:38] And to suggest that it's a bigger number than that and how great you are,
[37:43] $800,000, how allows you to work for $426,000, and our overspending is truly just in
[37:49] January.
[37:50] But I have a lot of questions.
[37:51] You know, I'm not saying there's anything wrong, I get a lot of questions.
[37:55] You know, I want to know why the GDA budget has gone up 100 percent in five years.
[38:03] Is that a question?
[38:04] Can I answer that question?
[38:04] Can I answer that question?
[38:05] Can I answer that question?
[38:06] When you're directly asking my question that's fine, but I think if you're just...
[38:09] Okay, I'm directly asking.
[38:10] I mean, it's going up in five years.
[38:14] Our village is stayed the same, but our, so we are said, said our village based on the value of the downtown.
[38:19] So the value of the downtown is the value of the downtown.
[38:23] So the property is in the downtown.
[38:24] So what do you mean?
[38:25] Your value based on that.
[38:27] And I acknowledge that, and you love to say that you're entitled to shut your entire union.
[38:32] You're given one meal and you're allowed to spend it.
[38:34] You know, we could do 10 meals here at the city.
[38:36] We're allowed to do 10.
[38:37] We don't.
[38:38] Why?
[38:38] Because we give the taxpayers a break.
[38:40] And I might point is a million dollar increase in revenues over five years without any other cuts to me is not being very taxpayer friendly, but you've answered the question, so I understand why it, you've got it, that doesn't mean you have to spend it.
[38:55] That's my first point.
[38:56] So it's also a proof through the proper process.
[39:03] I'm not suggesting that because nobody else isn't getting the financials tonight, first point is everybody now knows.
[39:08] Okay, so I'd like to know why you administer.
[39:12] We gave all the findings.
[39:13] I'd like, oh, please don't go down that road.
[39:15] We don't see you.
[39:17] Please, please, I'm not, I'd like to know why the administrative costs are at 60 percent,
[39:25] 68 percent of your operating, 66 percent of your operating budget.
[39:29] And let me go, let me go for salaries and benefits.
[39:32] Now, I just, can I just, can I just, can I just clarify, are you speaking about the
[39:37] I'm talking about what I don't know because if I look at what your auditor says,
[39:42] your auditor, and I'm just going to be my next question, why is your auditor
[39:47] comment on they don't can't do the efficiency of your internal control?
[39:52] Can I say that?
[39:53] No, you may not.
[39:54] That's in our statement.
[39:55] Page 172 of our audit report.
[39:57] It's on page 59.
[39:59] Yeah.
[39:59] I understand.
[40:00] It's a part of our audit.
[40:02] Our internal control is a part of our audit.
[40:04] They have the same exact terminology in our audit, we have the same exact terminology in the CRA audit, I saw your email, I heard what you said yesterday, that's not accurate information.
[40:17] Okay, it is accurate information.
[40:18] Let's go back to the American, can I ask a question please, are we speaking?
[40:23] We came here tonight to talk about the old school.
[40:24] I'm talking about old school square too because I happen to think that before we give you another 700, 800, 900,000, whatever you're asking for, that we should have our auditor,
[40:33] Make sure that you're spending the taxpayer dollars in accordance with what I think I'm sure to be fine because I think we need to understand that because
[40:45] You know the first in programming our our our our shows
[40:48] There's no I don't know contract for this person. They're paid up monthly fee, but there's no contract with them
[40:54] You know he gets $5,000 a month for booking shows that are local. That may be great
[40:59] But, you know, when you speak to the booking agents and do this for a living, essentially
[41:04] we're paying him what you would be paying them, but getting a better quality show.
[41:09] Because we can go through that list, we can go through that list, happy to do that, it's not
[41:14] tonight.
[41:15] But as it relates to the salaries, which you use portion of it for, I understand that you're
[41:20] doing all that, you include in the salaries,
[41:26] you have two and a half marketing people,
[41:28] what you have three marketing people that you pay as vendors,
[41:32] you have security people you pay, the way it works
[41:35] is you're operating budget, you're operating budget,
[41:37] you can't deduct or average down your payments
[41:41] based on what you pay third party vendors,
[41:44] that's not the way it works in terms of the eternity,
[41:46] how many organizations salary construct.
[41:50] So we can look at that and I'm still looking at it,
[41:52] but all I'm saying is,
[41:53] but for the first banner is put up,
[41:55] a lot of money goes out the door internally,
[41:57] That's all I'm saying.
[42:01] And I'm troubled by the fact that when I looked at some of the statements yesterday that
[42:07] you have pages and pages of things on your bills, which are no receipts provided.
[42:15] Now, yes, you got your audit.
[42:17] But audits, as we all know, are just to determine whether he gave me a bill, I paid the bill.
[42:22] The audit says, yes, you paid it.
[42:23] I don't know whether he spent his money correctly.
[42:25] I'm not saying he didn't spend it correctly.
[42:26] But that's what receipts are for.
[42:29] And you're asking me to turn over another $700,000 to an organization that doesn't keep receipts.
[42:35] We have the receipts.
[42:36] Can she explain that?
[42:38] That's a stick.
[42:38] You're making serious accusations that their meetings in here.
[42:42] At least a lot of her the opportunity to explain it.
[42:44] I was going to know where it says no receipt.
[42:46] No receipt.
[42:47] No receipt.
[42:47] No receipt.
[42:47] I can't copy.
[42:48] Look at it.
[42:48] I looked at it.
[42:49] You sent it two minutes before the meeting and I did look at it.
[42:52] Thank you.
[42:53] Well, that's fine.
[42:53] We'll start with you.
[42:55] I assure you the auditor saw it.
[42:56] I just, can I ask, what is it you're trying to accomplish?
[42:59] I am trying to accomplish that I want to make.
[43:01] I want to make sure that the money we're giving the DDA is being property accounted for.
[43:05] I want our auditor to look at how this spending for the money.
[43:08] I want to make our auditor look at whether or not the contracts they have that we're paying money for.
[43:12] You need it.
[43:12] You need it.
[43:12] You need it.
[43:16] It's appropriate under the circumstances and has been competitively bit out.
[43:21] It's not being competitively bit out.
[43:22] So, everybody talks about transparency.
[43:26] I talk about transparency and accountability.
[43:29] It feels like you're going after them.
[43:31] I want to be on that.
[43:32] You're not doing that.
[43:33] You're not doing that.
[43:34] You're not doing that.
[43:34] You're not doing this in the CRA.
[43:36] You're going to their meetings.
[43:37] Your represent all of us is the mayor.
[43:39] You're sitting up there.
[43:40] And the members are saying there's attention and a hostility up there that's uncomfortable with
[43:45] your presence.
[43:46] Exactly.
[43:46] And I want to chime in.
[43:48] I feel the exact same way.
[43:50] I'm glad you've got any of these of information that you are making decisions on that is not strategic.
[43:57] That is being tactical. You do not have all the information. And if you went to the events that the DDA has, every Friday and Saturday, and you don't,
[44:06] we are jammed down there. That million dollars that we're spending is the best million dollars we've ever spent.
[44:12] And because you don't like what they do, does not mean for one minute that you should be driving this process.
[44:18] Mayor, I'm sorry, well I don't get mad at anybody. Ladies and gentlemen, all I'm saying to you is I
[44:24] Wanted an accountability of the money being spent with the taxis of everyone is saying this feels very
[44:30] Personal, it's not personal
[44:35] Why look at ask the people this is the most personal thing I've seen in years I've been
[44:41] Don't care whether the people paid by the organization apply well you should care about those people. They voted you in
[44:46] Thank you.
[44:47] Thank you.
[44:47] Thank you very much.
[44:48] Ladies and gentlemen.
[44:57] Have a good day to the viewers.
[44:59] Have a good day to the viewers.
[45:00] I'm happy to answer everything you want. I think Mr. Moore wants to contribute.
[45:04] I'm sorry, Mr. Moore.
[45:04] Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. So in response to Ms. Simon's expression of willingness to work with everybody involved to alleviate any concerns that might be expressed.
[45:12] I think you're amenable to that. You've expressed a general interest to that effect.
[45:17] Yes.
[45:17] And I think, thank you for all for now on a record.
[45:20] So I would suggest that...
[45:22] Let's bring it on.
[45:23] It's the Elaine Uttarajee, the first internal order to give an opportunity to engage and connect with leadership of the downtown development of the
[45:29] to help alleviate any concerns.
[45:33] I'm making a suggestion about what you have, your cold and hoarding information, you're going to the meeting with the packet of papers, but you refuse to hand them out.
[45:47] You're dropping little crumbs that are super suggestive and rather insulting the way that you're implying people that have been partners for a long time are acting.
[45:56] It's not appropriate, unless you really have information.
[46:00] A part of your information was that sheet on page 1 of the CVIS report, which is exactly
[46:07] the same as ours on 59 in the CRA, and on page 172 in our own audit.
[46:13] I think that you have something in your mind that's happening that may not be, and I don't
[46:18] love.
[46:19] I'm the first one who will go after the finances, but I don't love your approach.
[46:23] sending out letters, thousands of letters to residents, demanding they come to an event, and
[46:29] voice their concern about the village. By the way, if I may, I'm not done. The reason
[46:35] why they always got a one meal was because our city attorney presented to us at the time,
[46:41] the understanding that they were entitled to one meal. Where did you just attend?
[46:45] My Mr. Frank, I wanted to take it away. Mr. Frank, I wanted to take it away and we were told
[46:51] If you let her answer the question you brought you at you brought me to discuss forgive me for interpreting that wait
[46:57] But Mr. Frank will want it to reduce it.
[47:02] I've never said that they're entitled to one mill. Maybe that's a bad choice
[47:09] Right, so they're entitled to up to one mill. We're entitled to up to 10 but what do we do? Do we spend up to 10? No, if we measure what the texture
[47:16] you with what they're doing. Please produce the documentation because it feels like
[47:22] a lot of money. You didn't go to their meeting over 200 people showed up in
[47:27] support saying, I saw the yellow shirt. You're on the board. You didn't go to
[47:33] the event. Mayor, can I make a point of order just to clarify the record? So
[47:38] under 411 on the duties of the internal auditor, the internal auditor shall
[47:42] review. Any matter related to city business upon the request of a majority of the
[47:46] commission or the city manager. So just be clear. What's your leader? I also agree on
[47:52] wishes to do that. He has the ability to direct that. I would agree to it, Mr. Moore.
[47:57] I think the consensus should be that Mr. our mayor, Mr. Carney produces the documents of
[48:02] concern to all of us so we can all review them. And we give Ms. So before we give her money,
[48:07] you don't want to make sure they're spending the money. Not having her money till October.
[48:10] So we have plenty of time for you to put out that. That would be nice.
[48:13] I have nothing to do with it, I haven't spoken up at all, I just want to make a quick comment.
[48:18] If Ms. Simon's on board was speaking with our auditor, which you are, right?
[48:23] So then, can we just agree with that to allow her and me with our auditor?
[48:27] Which is not the judge's anniversary.
[48:28] We just do that move along, where we're just already.
[48:31] I know what your accusations are.
[48:34] Where did we touch the wall?
[48:36] So can I also just make a point of clarity here as the downtown development authority was put in this position.
[48:44] to run the campus right where we don't have to be here.
[48:48] I agree.
[48:48] I agree.
[48:49] I do not have to be here.
[48:50] We're happy to give the keys back if that's what you guys want.
[48:53] No, you rescued the campus.
[48:55] But you rescued the campus for us.
[48:58] It's just what happened to you.
[49:00] It's just that the city doesn't have the ability to run that campus.
[49:03] It's just not.
[49:04] It's just how wonderful it is.
[49:06] It's just how wonderful.
[49:06] It's just how wonderful.
[49:07] Again, here you are making a fact.
[49:09] I didn't say that enough.
[49:10] You just made an excuse.
[49:11] You're making our point of that side to show you how much is being invested in this campus is to show that this
[49:21] campus takes money to run, it takes a lot of money to run for more than we're investing at all.
[49:27] And I think a lot of people invest money in this town for this campus to be alive.
[49:31] And we all have to take responsibility and passion for this.
[49:34] So I appreciate that and we honestly, we don't have to be doing this.
[49:37] Our team has got a lot to focus on and I know that they've given a lot more of what you
[49:43] see on paper than that they're being paid as a lot.
[49:46] Blood sweat and tears to this place.
[49:48] I acknowledge that you don't have to be doing this.
[49:51] Mr. Mayor, thank you.
[49:52] So once again, I'd like to support the professional mayor's for Miss Simon and her team being
[49:57] able to engage with the city's internal auditor, Yelena Drugio, who's actually standing right
[50:02] behind Miss Laura Simon at this time, ready to make a connection as well as to proceed accordingly.
[50:07] I think that's the cogent structure that approach there's an agreement to proceed in that regard and part of Miss Simon
[50:13] I appreciate Miss Jellin for offering the clarification in terms of what the city managers keep a building in authority is but respect to
[50:20] questions are concerns in this regard. However, I would like for the commission to offer their support as well
[50:26] Which I like to think is fair considering the fact that Miss Simon expressed the interest and willingness to
[50:35] That's not what I'm talking about
[50:37] for consensus because we need to move.
[50:39] Yes, ma'am.
[50:40] So I would just like to say that we don't want another old school
[50:44] square of the art situation here to happen.
[50:48] So in light of transparency, accountability for everyone,
[50:53] you are agreeing to sit with our auditor.
[50:55] Let's do that.
[50:56] And so I'm in favor of that.
[50:57] All right, we have concerns to say here.
[50:59] Thank you.
[50:59] So that's that.
[51:00] Otherwise, the budget process continues.
[51:02] The recommendations have been made known.
[51:04] And I'll appreciate your willingness, Miss Simon, so Miss Yelena Georgiev be kind and up to engage in connect and you make arrangements accordingly.
[51:12] Thank you.
[51:14] Thank you.
[51:14] Thank you, Miss Simon.
[51:16] I think you're welcome.
[51:23] Follow the clarity direction and trajectory regarding downtown parking plan implementation, Miss Yvartletho, you have the stage for the platform or the table or the floor.
[51:48] Good evening, Mayor of Commissioner Sonsivar Letta, Director of Public Works.
[51:56] Very happy to be here this evening.
[51:59] To talk to you about follow-up direction from the July meetings presentation on,
[52:09] Look at that too.
[52:20] On the parking.
[52:29] There we go.
[52:32] They give me all kinds of tools up here and I can usually get one of them to work.
[52:38] Okay, so in July I gave you a very long and exhausted presentation on implementation of the
[52:49] parking and curbside management plan. Tonight there are a few items of clarity following
[52:55] the meetings in July where there was not a complete consensus on some of the items.
[53:04] So, what we talked about was, was the various tiers in the performance phase parking plan tier 2 is the side street parking, tier 3 is surface lots and potentially changing the rate structure in the parking garages.
[53:25] we also talked about a establishment of a parking benefits district and a centralized ballet program
[53:32] neither one of those issues are on the agenda tonight. Tonight we're just going to talk
[53:37] about you're welcome.
[53:43] We're having a workshop on that next week. I'm kidding everyone.
[53:49] I have a two-hour presentation on that for tomorrow, not fitting.
[53:55] So, from the initial meeting, we talked about the City Manager by Resolution has the authority
[54:03] to raise the parking rate on side streets from $2 to $3 that met approval from the board.
[54:11] The surface lot, the surface lot metering, generally the board seemed to be in favor of that,
[54:20] but the hold up for giving full favor toward metering the parking lots, depended on finding
[54:26] a solution to employee parking in the downtown area and then by the time we got to the
[54:34] right structure in the garages, we did not come to consensus.
[54:39] So tonight we're only going to talk about the performance-based parking program and the employee parking permit
[54:46] and because the tier 3 parking is dependent on arriving at a viable solution to the employee parking program, we're going to talk about that first.
[55:01] So, the parking and curbside management master plan does, does lay out a recommendation to provide a month a month permit for downtown employee parking.
[55:14] Staff has tentatively offered $15 a month that would be an available online permit just the same as the other parking permits that we have.
[55:25] you can buy it online or you can buy it at the one parking office that's in the old school
[55:32] square parking garage on the first floor. There are two options for this for this permit. The first
[55:39] one is the one that was already on the table to utilize the top floors of the old school square and
[55:54] That option has not received a favorable response from the DDA in the past because there's
[56:01] a very limited number of spaces and it's pretty far away from most of the places where
[56:08] the people work.
[56:09] So walking back to their cars at 2 o'clock in the morning or 3 o'clock in the morning was problematic
[56:17] for that.
[56:18] What staff has proposed for this evening is to have an employee parking permit that is structured similarly to the city resident downtown parking permit
[56:34] where employees can buy the permit for 15 dollars a month.
[56:38] They can park in any available parking space in the downtown area for free other than Atlantic Avenue.
[56:45] So, only the premium parking would be off limits to them, and we're also, we're going
[56:54] to recommend opening up both the Orange Grove Lot and the Sandway parking lot on the
[57:00] barrier island later in the evening to provide with additional parking in that area.
[57:08] Yes.
[57:09] You're saying they could get a pass the same way we residents get the pass at the garage.
[57:13] The past would would allow them to park in any meter parking in the city, but not on Atlantic Avenue, so any, and that would be for $15 a month.
[57:23] Yes, they can park in any available parking space.
[57:25] That would, that's, I feel like we're going to lose money in the long run, because if I had a pass, I mean, I'll be down there every night.
[57:36] I'm not going to be pushing that point. I mean, I think people should pay for their own parking like they do in every other city and we're leaving.
[57:43] We need a program, but I don't see how we can, I don't see how we're going to regulate this.
[57:49] What will people bring to the garage to show their employee how will we know?
[57:55] So they will have to renew their parking pass every month.
[57:59] Part of that renewal process will be a letter from a downtown employer saying that they are indeed employed.
[58:06] And those are going to be, I would have a letter tomorrow for myself if I were to leave it again.
[58:11] I'm concerned, Missy, I'm being very honest, I'm being, but I feel like we will just have a bunch, I don't know how this, I don't think this works, no offense, I think you'll have, I would have an employee letter from somewhere somewhere, I would bring it over there, if I were kid, no, not now, and I would get that pass, I would be downtown, right now.
[58:37] Missy, if you guys modeled this after other programs and other cities, have you, do any sort of data that shows an approach that's worked before it's similar to either of these?
[58:46] We have looked around at other cities. There are very few employee parking programs available out there. We have tried to, everything we can possibly think of.
[58:59] We have tried and and so far nothing that we've brought forward has has passed approval so I'm sorry. I am I'm at a loss
[59:14] Honestly, I appreciate your effort. Is there a there's a parking board isn't advisory board there used to be we no longer
[59:24] So this is because in the process of being a little more in the last meeting
[59:29] Because I would think that they would be where we would get advice from residents and from the businesses to get from a parking advisory committee on, you know, trying things and not being able to come to it because I don't think you said to it run down, we can get a city pass, but cheaper than that. So why would that be something that city pass you pay, but you.
[59:50] You can't use it.
[59:51] You can use it.
[59:51] This city path.
[59:52] This city path is actually $12 a year.
[59:54] This is $15 a year.
[59:55] This is $15 a year.
[59:57] They're marking for free.
[59:58] When I park with my city pass, I'm...
[1:00:01] Part 2s how are they parking for free of the 15 to $151?
[1:00:05] They're not parking for free. They're not parking for free. They're not parking for free.
[1:00:08] They can't get $151 a month. It's $100 a year.
[1:00:13] They're a family party.
[1:00:15] They're only worth $2. That's $8.
[1:00:17] As you recall, when I was $5, and I paid $12 a year.
[1:00:20] As you recall, my idea was to have the meter be to parking because in my opinion, I do understand the importance of patrons to restaurants and shops in every street.
[1:00:29] everything, but all of these businesses downtown don't have parking
[1:00:33] requirements and they, in this special little area here, and I really
[1:00:40] believe that it's up to the restaurants and the stores to make sure
[1:00:46] that they're, that to pay for their employees parking as they do
[1:00:50] everywhere else. And we keep trying to say, you know, the rest of the
[1:00:54] restaurants saying, we can't get people alive. We'll tell you in
[1:00:57] from a tone, you know, they did provide in their garage and free parking that was pointed
[1:01:02] out and I actually checked it and it's correct. But on all their surface slots, all
[1:01:06] their surface slots, if employees park there, they put in a reimbursement to the restaurant
[1:01:12] and they get paid back. That's part of their part of the deal and so that the city can generate
[1:01:17] the revenues. And that was my proposal, nobody liked it, but my proposal is that everybody,
[1:01:25] It's a user fee. People that pay people that use the parking lot should pay for the parking lot.
[1:01:30] Someone's got to pay to have a striped. Someone's got to pay to make sure that there's the patrols there.
[1:01:35] Someone's got to pay for all that. And it should be the people using it.
[1:01:39] I think that having a program for employees is a good idea.
[1:01:45] How it gets monitored is a separate issue, but whether or not 15 to 15 dollars is very, very generous.
[1:01:55] 15 dollars a month, 15 dollars a month, but a hundred eight dollars a year is still very generous in a spot that that spot could earn that in a day
[1:02:05] So we're giving up that daily for someone else to part there for 30 days and I think that that's not fair to the rest of the residents who don't do that
[1:02:14] And who yet we go to when we need a village change because we have a union problem we have a this problem or a road problem
[1:02:20] We just go to the taxpayers when we're not maximizing our own assets
[1:02:25] Like everybody else. So I'm more concerned about the actual rollout execution of the program than I am about losing money on it
[1:02:33] That's the point I'd like to hear more about Missy if you don't mind you you and your team of Doug into this and this is these are solutions you came up with
[1:02:41] Now, do you think from your opinion based on you know the work you've done that this is going to be possible to actually monitor this because my colleagues raised some real issues here
[1:02:52] like how do we enforce this?
[1:02:53] How do we make sure that someone this in an employee
[1:02:56] is a real employee when they're getting one of these permits?
[1:02:59] So they will be required just like we require city residents
[1:03:03] to provide proof of residents within the city boundary
[1:03:08] so that residents in West Del Rey,
[1:03:10] even though they have a Del Rey beach address,
[1:03:13] they are not entitled to the city resident discount
[1:03:16] on parking, so they have to live within the boundary.
[1:03:19] Just very similarly to that, we will require them to provide proof of employment, whether that be a letter or whether...
[1:03:28] W9 or 1099 or something like that, maybe.
[1:03:31] So thank you.
[1:03:31] Whether, I mean, I don't...
[1:03:34] We can double-check with the employer on the letter to make sure those people are indeed employed.
[1:03:40] we can require it to have that delay and verification time so that we can double check
[1:03:53] with the employer and make sure that that person is indeed employed. Their permit will
[1:03:58] be just like all the other parking permits that will be tied to a license plate for a
[1:04:05] particular car so they can't, you know, they can't share with, you know, it's not something
[1:04:12] that they can hand someone else and say, hey, throw this on your dashboard,
[1:04:18] if we will
[1:04:19] do our level best, am I going to guarantee that there won't be any cheating?
[1:04:25] Nope.
[1:04:26] That's right.
[1:04:26] I think that cheating happens, but we can do our level best to patrol that and make sure
[1:04:34] it's as minimal as possible.
[1:04:37] Why don't you finish your presentation?
[1:04:39] We've interrupted you.
[1:04:40] Well, really, this is where I was going to pause
[1:04:42] and I have this-
[1:04:44] I don't want you to-
[1:04:45] This is a question-
[1:04:46] It's a question-
[1:04:46] It's a question-
[1:04:48] But I didn't want to address
[1:04:51] that Pewdiepie's Mayor Burns' statement
[1:04:53] that we really need to go back and talk to the public.
[1:04:57] We have talked to the public so much on this topic.
[1:05:00] And this is probably the fourth iteration of an employee parking program that we've brought forward.
[1:05:10] So far, there has not been any interest in actually buying the permit.
[1:05:20] We offered initially, we offered a permit where we had a special trolley that ran at night
[1:05:27] and the employer actually bought the parking permits and handed them out to their employees
[1:05:34] and the trolley would drive them back in the middle of the night directly to their parking space
[1:05:40] and that sold zero permits. So we've tried so many things.
[1:05:48] Does your plan, and I know you're not finished with your presentation, does it include
[1:05:54] the parking garage is having pre-parking after 4 p.m.
[1:06:01] If you approve the employee parking permit program tonight,
[1:06:07] then they can park in any available paid parking space or free parking space.
[1:06:12] They don't have to pick a paid parking space,
[1:06:14] but they can pick any available paid parking space
[1:06:18] and park there for the duration.
[1:06:21] Before the free parking spaces.
[1:06:23] There are, there are, there are, there are time limited spaces on the side streets, there are just the only paid spaces are one block north and south of Atlantic and there are plenty of
[1:06:36] Ask the natives that go down in the evening.
[1:06:40] I don't want to give away all the secrets, so there are places.
[1:06:45] Mayor, may I ask a question?
[1:06:47] Would you tell us later, though, just a second?
[1:06:49] you know. You know where they are. If I, so I'm sorry, I'm sorry. So what I'm saying is when I
[1:06:54] said freight meaning, there's no meter charge. Once you hit the meter, you enter your number
[1:06:58] and as you would, your pass is registered. It's a $15 month charge. But what about the limited
[1:07:04] lots where you can only be there so many hours? What happens to the individuals who stays in
[1:07:08] those in extended time? So there won't be time limits associated with it either. Otherwise,
[1:07:13] they're going to have to leave halfway through their shift and move their car. The problem is,
[1:07:18] But though, Missy, and I had a gentleman approach me from my neighborhood as property down in Pineapple Grove, they can't find places to park, so even with this, I don't know, I mean, I suppose if you're coming to work during the day, this is a great incentive, but if you're coming in the evening, it doesn't necessarily help.
[1:07:40] I mean, I like it better than I mean, because they can still use the lots that we now call free lots, they'll just be made or then they can pull in there.
[1:07:48] They can really go.
[1:07:51] I would say that what the industry standards would answer how they would answer that is that if the tiered parking, if it is paid parking, there should be more spaces available for them to park in,
[1:08:07] than it would be a free time-limited parking
[1:08:10] as our surface lots are now.
[1:08:12] Our surface lots are the first to fill up
[1:08:14] because it's free and they have nine hour time limits.
[1:08:19] That's what the study, you had that study done
[1:08:21] that you presented six months ago.
[1:08:24] Can we just put a little thought into this?
[1:08:26] Do we have to decide this evening?
[1:08:27] I just want to, I think, I don't know.
[1:08:30] I want to do a little looking, all right.
[1:08:31] We consider like a pilot program version of this,
[1:08:34] so we can actually see how it's rolled out in real life,
[1:08:36] We're not going to know until we sort of try some version of this frankly we're not going to how many people actually sign up for it
[1:08:42] We're not going to know if you're able to implement it based on all these different variables
[1:08:46] I'd be open to trying some version of it for a limited time and then coming back to it and see how how it worked and how we can potentially tweak it
[1:08:53] Is that like an option of that be something we'd be amenable to up here because like you said how many times have we talked about this?
[1:09:00] I don't want to kick the candy on the road anymore
[1:09:02] three years. You're right. Like forever. Well, this is three out of four of me, because
[1:09:06] last two months. I know, I'm sorry, Missy, and I'm really busy with the finish
[1:09:10] two. I mean, the old school square, they're Irish. When we had next time, by the time
[1:09:14] we decided to be like three more parking garages in Delray. That's just, that's another
[1:09:18] time. I let's have, that's up to discuss. I mean, I'm getting more parking garages. The
[1:09:23] one thing, Missy, that I know we, you know, I've talked about this. I heard loud and clear
[1:09:26] from all the meetings, and I've been to way too many on parking.
[1:09:31] I do feel for the restaurants and the bars that have, you know, workers that don't make
[1:09:36] a lot of money, and most of them don't live in our city, and they come into our town to
[1:09:40] work as servers and bus boys and cooks and other low-paying jobs.
[1:09:46] I've heard the restaurants and the bars over and over again, say, look, we really need
[1:09:50] to find a place for them to park, and it really needs to be free.
[1:09:53] So, I know we're talking about a compromise plan here.
[1:09:55] But I'm empathetic to what I've heard as a former market researcher, the bars in the restaurants are all in unison that these are people that we have to attract to keep our restaurants in bars opening and if we don't provide them with parking spaces, they're going to go work in the suburbs.
[1:10:12] We don't want that.
[1:10:14] So I know we're talking about compromise here, maybe $15 a day.
[1:10:17] I think I'm kind of a Julian that maybe we should run that by a few of the restaurants and the bars just to see if that's an acceptable alternative
[1:10:26] I also am an agreement with what Rob is saying, Commissioner Long sorry.
[1:10:31] Maybe we should pilot something and do it for six months and see if we got it right and if we did grade and if we didn't well then we can redo it.
[1:10:39] If you do six, I won't be here. So it's not my problem anymore.
[1:10:42] Perfect. Oh no, no, no, we can blame you because you don't be here.
[1:10:47] But you're a good man. Let's do forget.
[1:10:49] Yeah, but would you, but would you consider also that in in in trying to do this?
[1:10:55] That don't do you think the restaurants have any responsibility to provide parking for
[1:10:59] there's. They do but I'll tell you what they told me.
[1:11:03] It's going to be reflected in your in your menu process.
[1:11:06] Somebody's got paperwork. No, but that was our fault for not. I don't know if you look at the many prices recently down there
[1:11:12] I don't know if you're the one $80.
[1:11:13] They're pretty high, but you know, I've owned bars and restaurants. I know we're the ones saying that I'm just I just pointed to what they did in Booker
[1:11:20] There would have had this exact same complaints in Booker account and you know those restaurants are all full those restaurants
[1:11:27] And they're making a heck of a lot of money off there off there off their paper parking program and you know
[1:11:34] I will say that the problem with restaurants keeping personnel is not a delirate problem.
[1:11:40] I mean it's an industry problem so I think I obviously understand the thing which is why I'm saying if we're going to have a compromise,
[1:11:50] I mean I want to them to pay or have the GDA pay for all the employee parking and that would be fine too.
[1:11:59] If they care about people going down town and supporting restaurants.
[1:12:05] So ladies and gentlemen, I would like to have some sense of consensus because again, there's been numerous discussions about this.
[1:12:16] We've also clarified what the administrative abilities are and are not as a relates to
[1:12:21] parking plan implementation features.
[1:12:23] We are proceeding in that regard as misrelevel communicated in her early part of the presentation.
[1:12:28] So, a couple of you all, as I recall, maybe even several of you all talk, seems to support the observation of a test case program so that we can bring back appropriate data with that be an appropriate approach so that we can have some sense of direction.
[1:12:42] How about a three-month pilot where we try both options? Is that possible? Can we do both concurrently or is it like one or the other?
[1:12:49] What's your, how does it, is there a set of people?
[1:12:51] To be one or the other, just to cut down on confusion.
[1:12:55] Which would you suggest is the more viable option?
[1:12:58] I believe that downtown parking permit is the only
[1:13:00] actually viable option, simply because of the limited amount of
[1:13:05] spaces available in the garage.
[1:13:07] Even though the garage is underutilized right now,
[1:13:09] we don't have a trolley system.
[1:13:11] We don't have the, we would have to add free
[1:13:16] be into much later at night than what it is currently offered in order to get people safely
[1:13:22] back to their cars and if we don't do that then that's going to be the objection.
[1:13:27] That case on the rich, I understand.
[1:13:29] I agree with Commissioner Long and Commissioner Morgan, I think I'd rather get started and
[1:13:33] listen and say to kick it down the road again, at least get something or to get started.
[1:13:37] And as it doesn't work we'll obviously have ample time to address this issue again.
[1:13:42] Okay, so what I'm hearing is that we want to do a three month pilot project.
[1:13:47] What do we want to charge if anything?
[1:13:51] Three months five, I mean,
[1:13:52] Doctor shouldn't we try to have a pilot program
[1:13:53] like three months takes us to,
[1:13:56] I would say it's like a be here whenever it comes back.
[1:13:58] Okay, well, we'll invite you back.
[1:14:00] Yeah, I'll just come sit out.
[1:14:01] But I think three months is really not a, I mean,
[1:14:04] I mean, six months is kind of really a picture.
[1:14:07] It's enough time.
[1:14:08] Yeah.
[1:14:08] To really see how it goes because you're going to get into season,
[1:14:11] you're going to have the summer,
[1:14:12] and then you're going to have a season,
[1:14:13] and you're going to see how it all plays out.
[1:14:14] 3-1 update and then a 6-1.
[1:14:17] Yeah, you can update it in 3-1.
[1:14:19] So if we proceeded with a 6-1, this round can participate in the update.
[1:14:23] So if we were to proceed with a 6-1 pilot program set of effects,
[1:14:26] so I will suggest beginning early September.
[1:14:29] So Tuesday September 2nd roughly.
[1:14:31] So that will take us until March.
[1:14:33] That's coming up in the next couple of weeks.
[1:14:34] You a little bit of time, that's a little bit ambitious.
[1:14:37] I apologize October.
[1:14:39] October 1st.
[1:14:40] That would be Wednesday October 1st.
[1:14:42] They give us several weeks in which to prepare.
[1:14:43] So, between October 1st, 2025 and let's say April of 2022.
[1:14:50] So, in April 2022, we'll come back before the City Commission, or for you all the update
[1:14:54] reports.
[1:14:55] Perhaps we can offer a three month update circuit January in terms of progress thus far.
[1:15:00] That's the beginning of our fiscal year. Works fine. It's good day. Yeah, they're on.
[1:15:03] Can I suggest starting out with a lower rate? I don't even know if I'm like embracing this to be honest with you.
[1:15:10] I appreciate, again, Missy. I know you've worked tirelessly to try and bring us options.
[1:15:15] I'm not, I know we can sit up here and say $15 is to, you know, drink set. It's Starbucks, but for some of these kids, we're aiming at a one hour salary.
[1:15:25] Yes, where I aimed at so I'm just
[1:15:33] how bad if we try ten dollars a month to begin with
[1:15:38] It's ridiculous. It's ridiculous. It's based in the space of generally $50 a day. You didn't want to do I mean come on there 1499
[1:15:45] Do I hear
[1:15:49] I can't I can't I can't multiply that fast without a number of hours. I'm sorry
[1:15:54] I mean I can take my I know but they're going from paying nothing to another paying 15 dollars a month a lot
[1:16:00] go down on the avenue see who's working in these restaurants 15 dollars a month is
[1:16:06] one hour paid over a 30 day period and you're really saying that they
[1:16:13] I mean we really 15 dollars a month so to so does the city they have taxes
[1:16:19] they're paying they have to strike the stuff they have to they're a city we have to
[1:16:23] ensure the lots we got cost to given that we're talking about a pilot though we
[1:16:28] want people to sign up so we can test it out maybe starting out at a lower rate makes sense
[1:16:34] and then if you get buy in you raise it after six months.
[1:16:38] I don't know if you can do it.
[1:16:40] I don't know if you can do it.
[1:16:42] Right now it's better than free so fine.
[1:16:46] It doesn't really matter if it's for six months.
[1:16:47] It's just a test.
[1:16:48] Okay, so you're going to try it out for ten dollars or whatever it is.
[1:16:52] Okay, we have consensus.
[1:16:54] Six month pilot program.
[1:16:56] For the employee parking permit, Commissioner Solomon says,
[1:17:00] split the baby at 12.50.
[1:17:02] No, no, he doesn't.
[1:17:04] Yeah, I'm for 12.50.
[1:17:05] Well, 50 a month.
[1:17:06] Come on, the park, down to us, but the baby.
[1:17:09] Really?
[1:17:10] We're fighting about this.
[1:17:11] For kids working and young adults working.
[1:17:14] I understand their kids and young adults working.
[1:17:16] You know, I'm not here yelling about how everything's expensive.
[1:17:19] Well, I'm talking about the park downtown.
[1:17:23] And this is like a custom to pay.
[1:17:25] It's a customary.
[1:17:27] A dollar value, please, so that we can move forward.
[1:17:29] So, I appreciate the consensus.
[1:17:31] Six-month pilot program.
[1:17:32] On the 10.
[1:17:33] On the 10.
[1:17:35] 10 it is.
[1:17:35] 10 dollars it is.
[1:17:36] Thank you very much.
[1:17:37] Get it started.
[1:17:41] Get it started.
[1:17:43] 10 bucks.
[1:17:44] What then?
[1:17:44] And life is a big bit.
[1:17:46] A board.
[1:17:47] Oh God.
[1:17:48] Be careful with it.
[1:17:49] Oh.
[1:17:50] Be careful with it.
[1:17:50] Okay, so.
[1:17:52] Now we're going to talk about surface-class prices.
[1:17:55] Okay, so I want to remind you all what our current parking program is on Atlantic Avenue.
[1:18:01] It's four dollars an hour.
[1:18:06] The second tier parking, the side streets is two dollars an hour.
[1:18:11] Commission is already approved.
[1:18:13] Moving that to three dollars an hour.
[1:18:15] The third tier parking is the surface lots.
[1:18:19] Right now it's free with time limits.
[1:18:22] nine hours in most of the lots and then we have the periphery parking
[1:18:28] parking garages which is free until 4 p.m. and a flat five dollar rate after 4 p.m.
[1:18:38] What we proposed last month was to leave our premier parking rates alone at
[1:18:43] $4 an hour to move this second tier parking to $3 an hour we have a
[1:18:52] the surface lots in charge $2 an hour with a 4 hour time limit for people paying at the
[1:19:00] meter, but not necessarily for permit parkers, and then changing the rate structure
[1:19:08] at the parking garages to a $1.50 an hour 24 hours. This does a couple of things for us,
[1:19:15] and one of the things that does is limit the amount of people who are parking overnight
[1:19:21] our parking garages in using that as shelter.
[1:19:28] So what I did not have to share with you prior
[1:19:31] was revenue projections that are associated with the changing in the performance-based
[1:19:39] parking program. So if we were to do the changes that we suggested, including moving
[1:19:48] the parking garages to $1.50 an hour that actually brings in 1.5 million dollars of additional revenue into the city, which brings our total revenue for our parking program to just over $8 million.
[1:20:03] The side-streak parking that literally impacts 150,000 transactions annually, which means that there's still capacity on the side-streets to park.
[1:20:18] So, the tier 3 changes at the surface parking lots, that will increase the revenue for
[1:20:27] to the city by about $364,000 annually, and that's based on an average ticket price
[1:20:36] of $4 and two turns per day.
[1:20:39] Two turns means that two different people will park in the same space during a single day.
[1:20:44] that would be two different people parking there for two hours each. So just running through
[1:20:50] the lots the railroad lot has by far the largest amount of spaces at 162 spaces. The current
[1:20:58] occupancy rate at that parking lot is only 57%. Gladiol a lot has 74 spaces with a 30%
[1:21:08] occupancy rate. So it's full during particular times of the day empty a lot of the rest of the day.
[1:21:16] Village law has 40 spaces in a 44% occupancy rate and the Veterans Park law has 79 spaces but right now the average occupancy rate is only 50% because a good deal of that parking lot is being affected by an adjacent construction project.
[1:21:35] So, not all of those spaces are utilized on a daily basis.
[1:21:43] The periphery parking garages,
[1:21:48] changing that rate structure to $1.50 an hour,
[1:21:53] actually brings in about $390,000 of additional revenue to the city per year,
[1:22:00] also based on two turns on each parking space but what's interesting about changing this
[1:22:08] rate structure is right now everybody comparks in the parking garage after 5 p.m.
[1:22:14] pays a flat $5 fee. The average ticket price for parking in the garage at $1.50 an hour lowers
[1:22:21] the average ticket to $3 per person parking in the parking garage so actually what will come
[1:22:29] out of an individual's pocket would be less, and we would also see increased revenue.
[1:22:40] So just a reminder, our goal before we start having to add additional parking areas in
[1:22:48] the city is that our total parking occupancy gets up to 85%.
[1:22:54] We have the ability to adjust the rates and hours as needed.
[1:22:58] We monitor the occupancy rates constantly, and we can bring those rate adjustments.
[1:23:03] estimates back to commission as needed and that is the end of the presentation.
[1:23:16] Do we have any more questions?
[1:23:19] I think we have kind of exhausted it.
[1:23:21] We did and ladies and gentlemen, I appreciate the direction to proceed forward.
[1:23:24] Again, much of it is administrative.
[1:23:26] Over your policy guidance relative to the six month pilot program is valuable.
[1:23:30] So thank you very much and we proceed with all of you.
[1:23:35] And based on the six based on the employee pilot program, we will be moving forward in the beginning of the year with metering the surface lots.
[1:23:47] That will probably not happen until November because we need to order the meters at the beginning of next fiscal year.
[1:23:57] It's hope this keeps us orderly in the parking lot and we have consensus on changing the parking rate structure at the parking garage is to a dollar fifty
[1:24:06] Yes, we do have consensus
[1:24:08] That's what we do
[1:24:10] Thank you very much great work miss you
[1:24:13] Thank you
[1:24:15] We have
[1:24:25] to be here. We're gonna have to be with all the support. We're gonna have to hand out play bills here. So people can you know follow along with dialogue
[1:24:30] Anyway
[1:24:34] So Mr. Mayor we're now in the city manager items. Yes, we are
[1:24:41] So, I have one.
[1:24:45] Mr. Linn, can you have comments for a couple minutes?
[1:24:47] No.
[1:24:48] Maulie item is decided, and we'll be brief about this, and this is being added for today's
[1:24:52] discussion simply because I did have a dialogue with a couple of you all regarding the
[1:24:57] existence of the West Atlantic neighborhood improvement district, how authorities are involved
[1:25:02] in a review process in terms of performance activities, et cetera, and a principle basis
[1:25:07] for this update is to remind the commission that this actually does exist as a league
[1:25:13] entity. So for that reason working closely with leadership of the Department of
[1:25:18] Neighborhood and Community Services we thought to be a proper to offer
[1:25:21] pre-fut data in terms of what this looks like, why we are, where we are, and
[1:25:25] potential direction moving forward. Ms. Prior if you would please.
[1:25:30] Thank you, sir. Thank you, Mayor, Commissioner, City Manager, City Attorney. Thank you
[1:25:34] everybody for hanging out with me for a few minutes. I won't take too much of your time.
[1:25:38] I'm Jerry Pire on the Director of Neighborhood and Community Services. So the
[1:25:43] improvement district was created in October of 1988. It's been in the
[1:25:49] ordinances since 1988. The purpose was to be able to apply for
[1:25:55] grant money. This is a special taxing district that's under our
[1:25:58] ordinance to participate with the Florida Department of Commerce to use the
[1:26:04] revenues generated from this authority to get grant money to do community
[1:26:08] in the redevelopment. So here's the footprint that's in the
[1:26:13] ordinance. It's a 236 acre footprint. It is I-95 East, just
[1:26:17] Winston Avenue, Southwest Second Street, north to Southwest
[1:26:22] Second Street. So you can see it's a big rectangle in the
[1:26:27] downtown area. So shortly after my employment here started in
[1:26:33] January, the first phone call I got was from an auditor from
[1:26:36] Maldon and Jenkins who was hired by the state to audit all the special taxing districts.
[1:26:43] And he audited through October 21 to April of 25 and there's been no activity in this program for years.
[1:26:54] There is no revenue collected, there's no programming, there's nothing in this program.
[1:26:59] So, recommendations from the audit, from the auditor, is what's the statutory purpose of our ordinance?
[1:27:09] And it's generated from approved community districts or improved districts in the community and address the needs of the community served by the district.
[1:27:18] The recommendation is, do we keep this in the current form with nothing or do we introduce programs
[1:27:26] and activities I.E. activate this area and then what does that look like?
[1:27:32] The biggest thing that I want to portray here is, as you can see, there's overlap.
[1:27:37] There's overlap on CRA and there's overlap on DDA and then those are special taxing districts
[1:27:43] as well. And so, as we're talking about, do we activate or do we dissolve this North, the
[1:27:51] West Atlantic district? That's a consideration. If we activate, then we have to consider
[1:27:57] the overlap on the other taxing districts. The second recommendation is if the city decides to
[1:28:03] move forward to activating this district, you have to develop a strategic plan. Clearly, and we
[1:28:09] to decide through the community and community input is to what are we going to do if we do
[1:28:16] as special taxing or special assessment through the ad below or I mean I'll get to that side
[1:28:20] is that what do we do with the funding and how isn't going to be spent in this district and of
[1:28:26] course that's all community input you as the board of directors of this West Atlantic neighborhood
[1:28:33] improvement district you would be required under the ordinance that if you activated then you will
[1:28:38] to appoint a committee or board, an advisory board, no less than five members of the community
[1:28:46] and representative of the folks who live or in businesses in the district. So, as you're thinking
[1:28:52] about these things, if we activate or if that's what we're going to do move them forward, that's
[1:28:57] going to be one of the first things that is going to be required is to activate an advisory board.
[1:29:03] And then here's a couple of the other recommendations, of course, included in our financial
[1:29:07] to report and then put everything on a web page so it's transparent to the public as Florida
[1:29:14] statute. So, where's the funding? So, it's under the code of ordinances, it's through
[1:29:20] Advalorum of a tax-living up to two mills or special assessment for any real or personal property
[1:29:28] within its boundaries. And then the district would be authorized to apply for and receive grants
[1:29:34] through the Florida Department of Economic Opportunities
[1:29:37] and the Department of Commerce, what it used to be.
[1:29:40] So in a nutshell, that's what I'm asking for you all.
[1:29:43] You have the backup in here in your commission agenda item.
[1:29:48] Is what are your recommendations
[1:29:49] and what are your thoughts and feelings
[1:29:51] about maybe exploring?
[1:29:53] Do we want to activate this district?
[1:29:57] Keep in mind, it was set up for,
[1:30:00] In the event of CRA dollars, we're no longer available, or if there was no other revenue available, this district
[1:30:07] was set up to help the community within those boundaries. So my question and through city manager
[1:30:12] and through Jeff Ours is, where do we go from here? Because the state is asking us the city to let them know
[1:30:22] what we're going to do moving forward.
[1:30:23] And if I may contribute Ms. Prior, we are not in position or at liberty to give an immediate answer today.
[1:30:31] However, at some point soon enough, we do have to respond to the state of Florida to the point that Ms. Prior just offered relative to the continuation
[1:30:38] thereof or some other direction pertinent. So we thought it was appropriate that we get together with you all as soon as possible.
[1:30:53] answer from the city commission with respect to what our response to the state of Florida shall be.
[1:30:58] However, there will be a requirement that we offer enough state to the state of Florida as to the
[1:31:04] path for it or no.
[1:31:06] So, do you want any thoughts from us now?
[1:31:09] I have a question.
[1:31:11] What is a timeline for responding to the state?
[1:31:13] So I believe we have.
[1:31:15] So in the audit response, I'd ask the auditor if we can have 60 to 120 days from to allow
[1:31:23] from the date of the audit which would have been in July so that would give us the
[1:31:28] end of the end of November yeah and they're pretty amenable they're very very kind
[1:31:33] so if I needed to call to have an extension as long as we put that writing and is working
[1:31:38] towards a resolution then I think they would be okay with that.
[1:31:41] Okay, can we check us all in the comments?
[1:31:44] No, I'm not done.
[1:31:48] Yeah.
[1:31:59] I don't think we should make any decisions about this until we can get the community input.
[1:32:05] And especially considering the area that this is supposed to serve,
[1:32:09] How soon can you set up community meetings so that we can have some input prior to this this timeline?
[1:32:17] So upon consensus being offered by the Commission to that effect, we can proceed within the next few weeks.
[1:32:21] So today is August 19th. So perhaps by a month or so from now we can engage a community visit
[1:32:27] No later than a early part of October.
[1:32:30] Offer a presentation to the city commission and the aftermath of something to that effect and that will enable your consideration process accordingly.
[1:32:38] I would actually encourage probably the beginning of the new fiscal year this fair enough so early October
[1:32:45] So this plenty of time
[1:32:47] To help respond to both the commission as well as the state of Florida. Thank you. You're welcome. I would probably say just knowing what I know now
[1:32:55] That we should not continue. It's just going to require a lot more resources in what have you. It was was implemented
[1:33:02] because we were thinking that the area was going to go away. Now we know at least we have the
[1:33:08] CRA to appear at a time. I think look we hope by the time the CRA is sundown I think we'll
[1:33:15] have done our job and those who serve beyond us in terms of getting rid of the slump and blight
[1:33:22] and addressing the issues with the development of the West Atlantic. So I'm concerned about
[1:33:28] If this is going to create a scenario that we are using resources and we would be duplicating
[1:33:35] the efforts of the CRA and the process I don't know that we should continue on.
[1:33:41] Thank you.
[1:33:41] Do you want to share a little?
[1:33:43] Yeah, if this was created, it's kind of a backup.
[1:33:47] In case we lose the ability to fund our CRA to be functional, I think now it might be more needed than ever
[1:33:56] because I don't think we're out of the woods
[1:33:58] in terms of threats to our CRA.
[1:34:01] You know, we whistled past the graveyard, this session,
[1:34:05] with that bill, that the threat and to more or less
[1:34:08] dismantling, and there were different iterations of it
[1:34:10] that were less intense, but we don't know
[1:34:12] what's going to come back next session.
[1:34:14] So until we're out of the woods with that,
[1:34:16] I'd be inclined to keep this in place,
[1:34:19] so we have it as a sort of a backstop,
[1:34:23] but if we get to a point where it bill does pass,
[1:34:25] regarding CRA's next session, and it's what we're safe,
[1:34:29] then I would certainly be on board with discussing,
[1:34:33] sort of dissolving this, if it's unneeded.
[1:34:36] Commissioner Marker.
[1:34:38] Well, I think this is another one of these big issues
[1:34:40] that our community is facing,
[1:34:41] and I don't think we should take our feet off the gas on this one.
[1:34:44] I think we should plow forward and try to come up
[1:34:46] with a plan that's acceptable to your point.
[1:34:50] We don't know what's going to happen in the future,
[1:34:52] we don't know.
[1:34:53] But this has been on the docket for a very, very long time,
[1:34:57] hasn't gone away.
[1:34:57] It's not going away.
[1:34:58] So I think we need to get some resources behind it.
[1:35:02] Huddle, come up with a plan and have something
[1:35:05] that we can show.
[1:35:09] I think that having, are you finished?
[1:35:11] Yes, sir.
[1:35:13] I think having a statutory enabled district is something
[1:35:17] we don't should not give up lightly.
[1:35:20] All right?
[1:35:20] It's hard to get.
[1:35:21] And whether it was related to the Sierra or not, you know, the DDA did a great job in developing
[1:35:25] downtown.
[1:35:27] And this, I view this really as kind of like what they did for West Atlantic.
[1:35:33] And I think it was long overdue to have an agency that's with some ability to raise some
[1:35:38] cash to redevelop that portion of Del Rey Beach that will be their sole focus.
[1:35:45] And I think that it's an opportunity.
[1:35:48] And I've often thought that maybe you split the DDA over to this side and maybe use this as the west of Swinton to be the taxing district because they would say are so focused would not be downtown.
[1:36:01] They're so focused with the redevelopment of this.
[1:36:04] And as we develop properties along there in the 600 700 700 800 block this can be revenues.
[1:36:09] And I think that there is a way to create a vibrancy on west Atlantic.
[1:36:13] I don't think we should give this up.
[1:36:16] I mean, I'm hoping we can actually try to figure out a way to use it and try to help with that redevelopment.
[1:36:23] Regardless of whether the CRA stays in business or not, I think that there's two separate functions,
[1:36:29] because this function could also be after it's there.
[1:36:33] It's not the slamming bite, but also to help keep with the redevelopment and bring exciting stuff to this neighborhood.
[1:36:39] And that's why I don't want to give up our special special taxes with that easily, it's not that easy to get.
[1:36:45] So I think we want to at least see where we are and see whether or not we can fashion something and put together some kind of a board to say,
[1:36:52] what can we do here, what are your ideas and get community engagement on how they want that neighborhood to look.
[1:36:57] And that's with some cash behind them because of the taxing capability.
[1:37:02] And I can tell you I'm spoken to quite a few folks already about this that are impacted in this district.
[1:37:08] they live here, they have businesses,
[1:37:11] and they're overwhelmingly in support of this.
[1:37:14] I was that they are.
[1:37:14] And I have 100% behind that.
[1:37:16] Absolutely.
[1:37:17] Can I also say, I was going to talk to you about this later on,
[1:37:21] but open to the public is fine.
[1:37:22] I talked to Renee Jadis saying this afternoon,
[1:37:24] who's the executive director of the CRA,
[1:37:27] and I went to the meeting at the library last night,
[1:37:29] and that there's a lot of really good input
[1:37:31] in terms of ideas for West Atlantic.
[1:37:36] Maybe I'm coming out this from the corporate side again,
[1:37:38] I apologize, that's my background, but one of the things that I think would be really helpful
[1:37:42] to us as we figure out the West corridor is to get some idea of what businesses we might
[1:37:50] be able to attract to the West corridor because you know we had this conversation just because
[1:37:55] we want a grocery store does not mean a grocery store wants us and I think it would be really helpful
[1:38:00] for everybody who's making decisions if we could iron out like what are the types of businesses
[1:38:06] we have a good chance of attracting as we rebuild this and I think we've never gone that way.
[1:38:12] We've always just sort of spitballed it and I think it's time now that, you know, we see what
[1:38:18] businesses might be a fit and then we can contact them. So it's a little bit of a different path
[1:38:23] than we've been on, but I said to Renee, I think it's exciting. I think it's a way to go.
[1:38:28] So ladies and gentlemen, just to take us forward, given the feedback being provided at this
[1:38:33] I would like to work with all involved to schedule a public engagement to this effect.
[1:38:38] I'm contemplating tentatively Tuesday, September 30th.
[1:38:42] So, the last day of the current fiscal year, and that will enable us to provide a follow-up
[1:38:46] but day to the city commission via the October 21st, regular city commission meeting.
[1:38:52] So, that would be ample time for us to offer response to the state of Florida.
[1:38:56] So, your city commission meeting schedule for the month of October is the 14th and the 21st
[1:39:02] to two states consecutive back to back to one another.
[1:39:05] So a couple weeks in advance,
[1:39:07] two states of September 30th, Ms. Prior,
[1:39:09] UNI will work collaboratively to offer a path forward
[1:39:12] and we'll facilitate that meeting,
[1:39:14] offering a presentation of that experience via the October 21st,
[1:39:19] Regalistris City Commission meeting,
[1:39:20] enabling the commission to offer its direction at that time.
[1:39:24] So thank you very much for your time, Ms. Prior.
[1:39:26] Thank you. With that, Mr. Mayor, ladies and gentlemen,
[1:39:28] I yield at this particular moment at this time.
[1:39:36] Thank you very much.
[1:39:37] We finished with the executive manager.
[1:39:40] I yield at the staff.
[1:39:41] We are now this meeting is now open for public comment.
[1:39:45] Anyone wish you to speak on any topic or agenda item other than a quasi-judicial or public hearing
[1:39:50] item.
[1:39:51] We would be welcome to come to the electorate, give your name and address for the record,
[1:39:55] and you will each have three minutes.
[1:40:00] I want to thank Commissioner Markard and Commissioner Burns for showing our last night to the
[1:40:05] of the media.
[1:40:06] I'm sorry if anybody, if we just keep it down on my road so we can hear people that
[1:40:10] would be great.
[1:40:11] Thank you.
[1:40:14] As we know, this special text in District will begin to fit the community that said the
[1:40:18] neighborhood has a whole, some guys met with the early New Year about a special text
[1:40:23] district if you remember.
[1:40:28] If you go downtown, I use the word downtown for several years in the
[1:40:35] we used the hate pan for parking. I work the burger fire and I pick. But I would suggest that
[1:40:43] that railroad parking lot should be beneficial to employees. Maybe put a gate there in a keycar
[1:40:50] so that just employees part of that and not other people.
[1:40:57] Furthermore, I would like to talk about how all these
[1:41:00] camera systems was placed within the set around schools.
[1:41:05] However, I believe I was right through the city.
[1:41:10] They have not been placed on secret shit or lack of a rural
[1:41:13] by Plamosa or Spadey.
[1:41:16] So I would like to know what's going on with that.
[1:41:19] Nets with the one that's on North right here on the corner right here, it's in the wrong spot in my, I view, it should be right there by the school.
[1:41:29] Those are the daughters of Zion's because those calls, my son, but start right there in all cars, repeatedly almost about to run that stuff, all the time, and they should catch those calls that's driving directly past the school and not up in.
[1:41:42] Okay, um, and I don't want to agree with Penn the park at vegians park if I don't take my
[1:41:50] child to the park. I got to pay $1.50. I want to take my child to the park. Furthermore,
[1:41:55] it ain't an it's all that construction over there who want to pay the park next to all
[1:41:59] that construction at least right now. And if I have an event that I'm gonna have to charge
[1:42:04] all my guests to $1.50, I will the park to come to event to use the event space. I don't think
[1:42:09] that's accurate. I'm already got to pay to use the event already.
[1:42:19] And with this street,
[1:42:22] if the city don't remove the pan, what would be the issue from the state side? That's
[1:42:30] funding. What would be the budget benefit or the budget? I'll say, we lose state funding
[1:42:37] to this beautiful city. That's what I want to know about that. Because me is deeper than
[1:42:41] us to street. We all trying to let it feel we already have budget restraints in the city of
[1:42:46] Derrick Beach. So why do we want to risk more budget restraints? Yes, I get power. Yes,
[1:42:53] I get we want to control but do we want to risk to pay more taxes from residents? Thank you very
[1:43:01] much, Montrey. I wasn't cutting you off.
[1:43:08] I would like to start with a question. What's the
[1:43:10] The name is addressed for the record for you.
[1:43:12] Oh, Lucika Suarez, 115 South West, 11th Avenue, I guess I want to start with a question
[1:43:18] like what's your position on ice, because they are in our neighborhoods and I just want
[1:43:24] to know like the commission's position on.
[1:43:29] We actually don't answer questions from comments.
[1:43:31] This is your comment.
[1:43:32] You can tell us what you think and what we should think and all that's all.
[1:43:37] I just want to bring to your attention that they are targeting certain areas only, specifically
[1:43:43] on 10th where Presidente is and another plaza where there are known to be immigrants heavy
[1:43:52] heavy population there, and that's where they're hanging out at, and so I want to bring
[1:43:56] that to your attention because if we're talking about crime and some of this other propaganda,
[1:44:02] then it shouldn't just be concentrated, it shouldn't just be concentrated in one area.
[1:44:05] It should be all the crop, they should be at trade of jose, they should be at whole food, they should be everywhere.
[1:44:12] If we're talking about climate and everything else.
[1:44:15] But no, they are only concentrated in one place and that's a problem.
[1:44:20] And I know I'm not even going to build a humanity.
[1:44:22] What I am going to build is who's your dollars, right?
[1:44:26] So black and Hispanic donations make a lot.
[1:44:29] Not just in Caribbean period, like we are a diverse, we'd like to say where diverse city, right?
[1:44:35] and it's a heavy tax base here. So once they are targeted and you lose bread
[1:44:42] winners, we lose contributors to households, we lose owners. What's going
[1:44:47] to happen to that tax base? We're still concerned about budget and we're
[1:44:52] cutting here, cutting there and talking about charging for parking. When these
[1:44:56] people are removed from their households, what do you think is going to happen to
[1:44:59] See you next week.
[1:45:00] What is going to happen with crime? What is going to happen with homelessness? All of these things that we're so passionate about and Valerie Beach. If we allow these folks to come into our neighborhoods and snatch up tax paying residents, take them out of their areas, wouldn't it be going to happen? Right? And another point, we already are our police of forces already strained. We have all the 12 police officers. Do you think they can afford to actually support ICE here?
[1:45:30] What's going to happen to Atlantic Boulevard and we're talking about these great restaurants and all these great events?
[1:45:35] Who do you think support? Who do you think make the show around you? We have organizers? Yes, but who do you think are the boots on the ground to make things happen here?
[1:45:43] And there's snatch in the mud. How how how how was that going to benefit us having them gone?
[1:45:49] We're gonna lose a labor force. We're gonna lose taxes. We're gonna lose all break up families. We love to blame break up families for other things
[1:45:55] But then we're not talking about what perpetuates what breaks the families in the first place
[1:46:00] and so as a tax paying patient, I would like the commission to make sure they take the same energy
[1:46:08] that Broward had, take the same energy that we wanted this vanity DA and do direct that same energy to us,
[1:46:16] because they are not welcoming you. Thank you, Emma.
[1:46:26] Just to let you know your child is
[1:46:28] looking at the room. Just to let you know your child is the best looking at one of the room.
[1:46:36] Good evening. I'm here to talk about the Rainbow Crosswalk.
[1:46:43] Your name on a dress name is Robin Ponds. I was going to say that. My name is Robin Ponds.
[1:46:51] I live at 801 Southwest 141st Avenue in Pembroke Ponds.
[1:46:59] My name is Robin Ponds and I'm a native Floridian.
[1:47:03] Living in South Florida for 66 years, I live in South Broward, and I've driven up here to speak to you all about voting in favor of keeping your rainbow crosswalk in place.
[1:47:21] I am standing here as the extremely proud mom of a gay son, my only child.
[1:47:30] My husband and I raised him to live his best life to reach for the stars and to never let anyone or anything stop them.
[1:47:43] He's grown up feeling loved and respected, which is the way all of our children should grow up.
[1:47:55] The rainbow sidewalk that you have here in beautiful Delray Beach stands for your city's commitment to equality.
[1:48:06] Much like Delray Beach pride, which I have been at.
[1:48:11] And as a welcoming sign to our son and the incredible LGBTQIA plus community,
[1:48:19] to their allies, their family members, their friends, and all who walk across its calf.
[1:48:27] By voting, yes, on keeping the rainbow crosswalk, your city sets an example, and inspires
[1:48:34] other cities and towns to do the same, not only here in the U.S., but around the world.
[1:48:41] The Florida government in Tallahassee has nothing to offer its citizens, except hate and division.
[1:48:54] Persecuting any population, especially minority groups, is the only done as a distraction to the nothing burger they have to offer us.
[1:49:08] Erasing the sidewalks will never, ever erase all of us.
[1:49:17] We will never give up our fight for equality for our children, for your children, and for future generations.
[1:49:27] We all come from different walks of life, different backgrounds, different religions.
[1:49:32] But in the end, we are all humans.
[1:49:38] We all deserve to live our best lives and love who we want to love.
[1:49:43] Thank you very much.
[1:49:45] Thank you so much for your time and consideration.
[1:49:48] We appreciate you being in this fight to stand with us for what's just and what's right.
[1:49:53] Thank you very much.
[1:50:00] My name is Echo Moore.
[1:50:01] I am a resident at 21-0-47.
[1:50:05] Russell Wood Avenue in Bocavertown.
[1:50:07] Thank you for the chance.
[1:50:08] I would like to also talk about the rainbow crosswalks.
[1:50:10] So, the rainbow crosswalks were unveiled in 2021 as many of us know as an all way to honor the pulse night club victims.
[1:50:19] I myself am a transgender gay man.
[1:50:21] I have come in to both, which I've come in to Del Rey multiple times for the pride for the events in Old Times Square
[1:50:30] and it has always been one of the most welcoming places in Palm Beach County, a very beautiful place, and I have never once felt unsafe here.
[1:50:39] The crosswalk has served as a way, as well, to remind drivers to slow down around that intersection, making it safer for pedestrians, for bikers, and drivers alike, especially in the arts district that is important.
[1:50:54] Since her ship as well, that is something that is being pushed on us by the governor.
[1:51:00] Since her ship is just a way to fully people into listening, into hiding away.
[1:51:07] It does nothing to stop people from being themselves, from being queer.
[1:51:12] It does nothing but just make them wonder if they're the only ones around.
[1:51:17] The mural has served as a reminder that it all raised beaches one of the most welcoming places.
[1:51:21] It has served as a reminder that it is safe, that it is beautiful, and it makes me want to come down here often.
[1:51:28] Along with that, Street Art has a deep rooted history in Florida.
[1:51:33] It is celebrated in many towns like this, such as Pompano, such as Miami, and Boca Raton, even.
[1:51:41] Fort Lauderdale as well, also has such an amazing amount of street art.
[1:51:46] By raising it and covering it up, you would be covering up history, you would be covering up a mural that is in a way to honor victims of our community that are no longer with us.
[1:51:55] You would be covering up something that is known to make the streets safer, all for what?
[1:52:00] Because one person does not want a rainbow on the streets.
[1:52:05] I am urging you to vote yes to keep it.
[1:52:08] And to not follow this bullying.
[1:52:12] Thank you very much.
[1:52:22] Hello, my name is Janet Cohen.
[1:52:25] I own a home at 85 Flanders S and the Kings Point community in West Del Rey.
[1:52:32] Mr. Mayor, commissioners, and most importantly, the distinguished guests here in the chambers.
[1:52:40] I especially acknowledge you for being here to observe and witness what's happening.
[1:52:45] I need to give you a fair warning.
[1:52:49] I used to be the public information officer for a city that relied heavily on tourist dollars.
[1:52:56] I know a little bit about how city governments work and about how budgets work.
[1:53:00] So I can really appreciate everybody who's been witnessing all the tap until tonight.
[1:53:06] Tonight I want to, and I should mention that the city that I worked for relied very heavily
[1:53:13] on what they lovingly called the Homo Tax. It was the Hotel Motel Tax that it received
[1:53:20] from tourist dollars. Now I live in Del Rey. My mother lived here. My aunts and uncles have
[1:53:27] lived here. My sister owns a home here. I have a number of friends here. My daughter is a 26-year-old
[1:53:34] black Jewish artist who's moving to Del Rey in a couple of weeks. She and before I worked for the
[1:53:41] I worked as a social worker, so I know a little bit about human development and adolescent development, particularly.
[1:53:50] I'm watching my time here.
[1:53:53] I happen to be of disabled woman. I happen to really like art.
[1:53:58] Because I'm disabled woman, it's really hard for me to walk around.
[1:54:01] I went to more calmies Sunday and prayed to get a really good parking spot.
[1:54:06] I like being able to drive through places and find art.
[1:54:10] Now, you might think we're here to discuss number 7-H to talk about art in the sidewalk.
[1:54:17] Many of you might think it's a gay, lesbian, trans, by-trans, you know, QIA business.
[1:54:23] The reality is, it's about art.
[1:54:25] So the question is, do we want to spend our tax per dollar spending money to remove art?
[1:54:31] Does actually bring pleasure to people?
[1:54:33] And I just want to ask you if you're sitting in the cheap seats over here.
[1:54:37] If you believe...
[1:54:39] And she took her just thought of it.
[1:54:40] She took her just thought of it.
[1:54:41] Oh, she took her just thought of it.
[1:54:41] Oh, she took that.
[1:54:41] Thank you.
[1:54:43] And if you believe that art is a good thing,
[1:54:46] because art sells tourist dollars.
[1:54:49] If you think artists are good things, just stand up.
[1:54:52] You have to say anything, just stand up.
[1:54:54] Be with me at once.
[1:54:56] Thank you.
[1:54:58] Thank you.
[1:54:58] Thank you.
[1:54:59] I appreciate that.
[1:55:00] So, now here's the deal, if we, if Council votes to remove the art, where's the money coming from?
[1:55:08] Are we going to stop doing Christmas lights during the spirit of the season?
[1:55:12] Are we going to stop doing fireworks?
[1:55:15] I took my friend from Nigeria to see the fireworks this past July 4th.
[1:55:20] The bottom line is art cells and art cells tourism.
[1:55:25] And I have just, if you indulge me a couple of minutes.
[1:55:29] A couple of minutes.
[1:55:31] I'll just give you like 30 seconds.
[1:55:33] All right.
[1:55:33] So here's the deal.
[1:55:36] Bullying is a tactic.
[1:55:37] I have to refer to everybody.
[1:55:38] Thank you.
[1:55:39] Thank you.
[1:55:39] I appreciate that.
[1:55:40] The tactic of trying to get us as a city to remove the art from downtown Del Rey.
[1:55:46] It's just a bullying tactic.
[1:55:48] It's political pandering.
[1:55:52] So, and just a couple of statistics here, LGBTQIA youth are three and a half to four times
[1:56:01] as likely to attempt suicide as their heterosexual peers.
[1:56:06] Hate speech converts into hate acts, and that converts into hate crime, and I was helpful
[1:56:12] in getting the hate crimes law passed in the state of Texas.
[1:56:16] Half of the youth who have been intimidated by these bullying tactics did not have access
[1:56:22] to mental health care in the past year, according to a study by the Trevor Project a couple
[1:56:27] of months ago, 40 percent, 45 percent of trans are non-binary, non-binary youth and
[1:56:34] their families considered moving out of state because they're so intimidated by what's
[1:56:40] going on.
[1:56:40] So, the political attacks that are happening right now on these families led to a 90% of young people reporting negatively being impacted by what's happening politically.
[1:56:54] Thank you very much for your time.
[1:56:56] Thank you very much.
[1:56:57] Thank you very much.
[1:57:11] Good evening, Commission.
[1:57:14] Greg Weiss, board member, co-founder, friends of Del Rey,
[1:57:17] 117 Northwest Fifth Avenue Del Rey Beach.
[1:57:21] Let me preface my remarks by stating that I'm not an attorney like the good mayor, but I do play one on chat GBT.
[1:57:29] I do do a great job, by the way.
[1:57:32] Thank you.
[1:57:32] Thank you.
[1:57:33] My mother's proud that I least I chose some of them.
[1:57:35] I don't know.
[1:57:36] I don't know.
[1:57:38] So please, you know, fact check anything that I'm putting up here, but I did all the fact
[1:57:42] checking over and over before I committed to coming up here.
[1:57:46] My comments tonight mostly reflect the legal aspect of the Pride Crosswalk situation we're dealing with now.
[1:57:54] Regarding FDOT's directive under Senate Bill 1662,
[1:57:58] as of today, Key West, Miami Beach,
[1:58:01] have announced intentions to legally challenge the validity of 1662,
[1:58:08] while St. Peter's Bergen Fort Lordel are contemplating legal defenses of their painted crosswalks and streets.
[1:58:14] Why the challenges and how do they pertain to Delray Beach?
[1:58:21] Florida statute 316 006 defines jurisdiction as FDOT state roads, but municipalities all
[1:58:31] streets and highways within their boundaries except for state roads.
[1:58:38] The only exceptions in the states are funding grants, the obviously from federal governments,
[1:58:42] access management permanent use for a rights of a way, but the one that really is the focus
[1:58:48] of where we hear tonight is Senate Bill 1662, traffic control devices. Traffic control devices
[1:58:56] are basically defined as four things, signs, signals, markings, and devices. SB 1662, a men's
[1:59:06] 316 uniformed sign devices to explicitly allow FDOT to direct the removal of any traffic control device that fails to meet
[1:59:18] statutory requirements wherever it's located without any regard to which agency installed it.
[1:59:26] While 1662 attempts to create uniformity across the state under the guise of markings of these existing statutes,
[1:59:34] The cities right now are contesting that, and considering contesting that for four key reasons,
[1:59:43] and they're really critical for Delway to understand the home-ruling local self-governance.
[1:59:49] The crosswalks are not merely paint.
[1:59:53] They're viable expressions of local culture and identity.
[1:59:57] See you leaders argue, the one
[2:00:01] They argue that the state direction to remove them in fringes on constitutional, homoral rights.
[2:00:10] If you please give me an additional, just to be the other two comments, it will be very quick, I promise.
[2:00:17] Cultural expression in uniform state controls. The crosswalks represent.
[2:00:23] If you could wrap it up, that would be good.
[2:00:24] I don't get two more points that the other cities are in the system.
[2:00:30] I'm trying to be fair to everybody.
[2:00:31] I'm not fair not totally.
[2:00:33] So basically, creativity for the LGBT community leaders
[2:00:36] are emphasizing the symbols value
[2:00:38] beyond traffic safety and regulation.
[2:00:40] Push back against state preemption.
[2:00:42] For the crosswalks, the cities basically have invoked,
[2:00:46] and this is really key for Del Rey Beach.
[2:00:48] They have invoked administrative hearing under chapter 120
[2:00:52] of Florida statutes, preparing documentation, safety data, tourism value, accidents, statistics
[2:01:00] to argue that the crosswalks are safe, culturally meaningful, and should remain in place
[2:01:05] despite the FDOT's directive. Delray Beach is, and has always been culturally rich,
[2:01:13] culturally diverse, and culturally an welcoming community. Every Delray leader is the need
[2:01:20] and five four and five on behalf of the members of our community that make up the fabric of the rich
[2:01:27] culture and diversity of this city. Thank you very much. Thank you.
[2:01:35] If we could try to keep this in
[2:01:36] three minutes, that would be great. Mayor. Thank you. And just a reminder, we have a one hour time
[2:01:40] limit on public comment. Yes. But what is that? We're almost a half hour in. So we have a one hour,
[2:01:50] Yeah, but I don't look like that.
[2:01:51] So, I'm possibly 30 minutes remaining.
[2:01:55] Hi, my name is Alex Andrews O'Lawi,
[2:01:58] and I'm a resident at 30 1100 Boulevard,
[2:02:00] and I'm here today to talk about the rainbow sidewalk, as well.
[2:02:03] Minor religious asseries of questions
[2:02:05] I would like you all to just really consider and contemplate
[2:02:07] as I know our city is struggling and sort of grasping
[2:02:10] the realities of what it can mean if we kept it
[2:02:13] for our citizens.
[2:02:14] Is the city of Del Rey Beach planning on sending an attorney
[2:02:16] to their F.D. meeting comes September 3rd?
[2:02:18] I also just want to point out and really say thank you for not giving in at the first
[2:02:23] site of the memo, which I know that our Vice Mayor Rob Long has talked a lot about and that
[2:02:27] it's not just a safety concern, it is very much a political move. I'm also concerned about
[2:02:32] what this would mean for our city. Our people are incredible community who's out here showing
[2:02:36] up day in and day out if it means that we give into this concern quote unquote, at any sign of bullying
[2:02:44] and what it would mean for future consequences for our city as well.
[2:02:49] Has that really be requested in an administrative hearing to challenge the order?
[2:02:52] If the street has to be destroyed, will a mural be moved to a wall or to still represent
[2:02:58] and recognize the LGBTQIA plus community that lives here that are strong, that are present within
[2:03:04] our community?
[2:03:05] And if the issue is that it doesn't comply with official traffic control standards,
[2:03:09] is there a way to have it comply while still keep it?
[2:03:12] and those are just the questions I will leave you with. I want to thank you everybody all for showing up for this. Thank you so much.
[2:03:18] Thank you. You said a record.
[2:03:24] Hello, I'm Marcy Hall and I live at 1400 Del Lane in Del Ray Beach. First, thank you to the mayor, the commissioners and city staff for your service to Del Ray Beach.
[2:03:37] I appreciate the time and effort that you give to your community.
[2:03:41] And thank you to Randhought, President of the Palm Beach County Human Rights Council,
[2:03:46] for his continued advocacy.
[2:03:49] I'm so nervous, but I feel that it's important that I stand up here as a resident,
[2:03:58] that has lived in Del Raisins, 1989.
[2:04:02] and my spouse and I were married here when marriage quality became law.
[2:04:11] Delray is my home.
[2:04:13] I served in the U.S. Army, and I worked to now cure fundraising,
[2:04:22] and I was supportive of the arts here in Delray.
[2:04:25] My spouse was a nurse here for 20 over 20 years.
[2:04:29] We paid our taxes, we felt our neighbors, and we've done everything possible to be good citizens,
[2:04:34] that the Florida Department of Transportation is now demanding the removal of a rainbow painted
[2:04:42] intersection.
[2:04:45] Simple, a symbol of welcoming and inclusion that this city chose to install,
[2:04:53] and some people asked why should anyone care about this and I say because marginalized
[2:05:00] people sometimes need a symbol to show the matter
[2:05:13] and taking away that symbol says they don't.
[2:05:17] But is this really just about a painted intersection or just an easy target and a broader effort to control who gets to be seen and heard?
[2:05:27] I'm 167 years old and I'm tired of having to fight to say I belong.
[2:05:36] And I'm okay, I'm a decent person.
[2:05:40] This is really what matters most to state leaders to all of you, a rainbow on the pavement.
[2:05:47] The real question is how power is being used not to protect people but to punish visibility.
[2:05:54] Let's not pretend this about safety if at word we be talking about pot holes or dangerous intersections not paint.
[2:06:02] Del
[2:06:07] Rey Beach made a choice to say everyone belongs here now. We're being told to take that back and I understand the city may have to comply with the state
[2:06:15] But you how
[2:06:17] But how you respond still matters. You can remove the paint, but that doesn't erase what it represented and if we're quiet
[2:06:24] Don't mistake that for us surrendering even if your hands are tied your boys and your leadership are not
[2:06:31] I'm not here to ask for division
[2:06:33] And I'm here to ask you to stand up, not just for a crosswalk, but for what it represents
[2:06:38] the right to feel safe, to belong, and be part of this city.
[2:06:43] Thank you.
[2:06:55] Good evening, Commissioner.
[2:06:56] My name is Chris Rhodes.
[2:06:57] I have lived in Palm Beach County for now 20 years, and I'm an active member of the Palm Beach
[2:07:01] LGBTQ community, and I'm an proud member of the Equality Florida State Board of Directors.
[2:07:07] Equality Florida is the largest LGBTQ Civil Rights Organization, and on behalf of our 1,086
[2:07:14] supporters who are residents of Del Rey in Beach.
[2:07:17] I am here to ask you to defend the value of inclusion, defend Del Rey Beach's long history
[2:07:22] of being a welcome place for the LGBTQ residents, and defend LGBTQ visibility in Del Rey Beach
[2:07:29] by rejecting this power grab from Tallahassee.
[2:07:33] Let's be abundantly clear.
[2:07:35] This has nothing to do with public safety.
[2:07:38] Governor DeSantis is once again injecting his politics into local communities to silence,
[2:07:44] censor, and race, our LGBTQ community.
[2:07:48] What's particularly disturbing is that the F.D.
[2:07:50] New Directive contradicts actual research on crosswalk safety.
[2:07:54] A Florida-based study found that artistic crosswalks improve safety, contributing to a 10% decrease
[2:08:00] in drivers running stop signs and a 6% increase in drivers coming to a full stop at intersections.
[2:08:07] Again, this is not about traffic safety.
[2:08:11] This is a brazen viewpoint censorship from an administration as antagonized and attacked
[2:08:16] the Florida's LGBTQ community and it's a blatant violation of the First Amendment.
[2:08:21] Del Rey Beach isn't alone in resisting the censorship.
[2:08:24] You should know this.
[2:08:26] The vast majority of cities where Pride Street art have been resisted this power grab.
[2:08:31] The city of Key West and the city of St. Petersburg have publicly voted not to comply with
[2:08:36] and to pursue legal ventures.
[2:08:39] The City of Gainesville Committed to replace the crosswalk
[2:08:43] with public art that would be of equal or greater value
[2:08:45] visible for the LGBTQ presentation.
[2:08:49] Other cities like Orlando where the pulse memorial
[2:08:51] has taken no action.
[2:08:53] For our members in Del Rey Beach,
[2:08:54] these crosswebs represent more than a decoration.
[2:08:58] They are a visible reminder that they belong here,
[2:09:01] that they are seen, and that the Del Rey Beach values
[2:09:03] of inclusion are important. Please do not rush to comply with these political bullying
[2:09:08] packets. They are in several steps so you can do and you should take. Exercise or
[2:09:13] legal right to an administrative hearing. Make them defend why our visibility is unsafe
[2:09:19] when the data proves the opposite. Demand a waiver for this crosswalk and for our community
[2:09:24] because this visibility is a priority. Make them put their bigotry in writing.
[2:09:29] challenge this in an unfunded mandate. Regardless of the outcome, commit to the LGBTQ
[2:09:36] visibility that is of equal or greater visible value. Cities show pride with their LGBTQ
[2:09:43] communities in a lot of ways. Crosswalks, sidewalks, street lamps, street signs, murals,
[2:09:49] public art installations, and brand ban shows. What matters to our members is that they
[2:09:54] seen and valued. Commissioners, this vote is about more than pain on pavement. It's about
[2:09:59] whether we stand firm in the values of inclusion and building a welcoming city. Please vote today
[2:10:04] for visibility for LGBTQ community. Again, thank you so much for your presentation.
[2:10:10] Thank
[2:10:17] you. Shvong Barrelian, 339, East Atlantic Avenue. I only planned on speaking about parking tonight,
[2:10:23] but I just want to share my support for everybody who is spoken. I'm blown away. This is the most
[2:10:28] moving commission meeting of ever attended and I have attended many. So I implore the commission
[2:10:34] to keep the crosswalk and really listen to all of your constituents are saying. Having emailed
[2:10:40] the whole commission following the last meeting, I just wanted to thank the WVICE Mayor Burns
[2:10:45] and Commissioner Casal for corresponding with me taking the time to meet with me. I look forward
[2:10:49] to updates on the parking plan and I appreciate the Office of the City Manager for putting
[2:10:53] together the presentation and the plan. I just wanted to say that I am honestly disturbed by
[2:11:00] what I witnessed following the DDA presentation. Laura Simon is the heart of Del Rey Beach.
[2:11:05] She buys clothing from downtown stores. She has dates, nights, and birthdays celebrations.
[2:11:10] At downtown restaurants, I've worked in the city since I was 16 years old. I've known her since
[2:11:15] I was 16 years old. She attends every single event. She is the reason why this town is known as the
[2:11:20] small town in America, it is very disheartening to see the tension between the city and the
[2:11:26] DDA when she gives her entire heart and soul to what she does. So I just wanted to share my
[2:11:32] support for her for the DDA and reiterate that as someone who attends DDA board meetings,
[2:11:37] that I agree with the assessments expressed by Commissioner Markert and Commissioner Kassal,
[2:11:42] this feels personal and it's really disappointing and honestly very uncomfortable for all of us
[2:11:47] to witness.
[2:11:48] So I really hope that this can be sorted out with stability and respect.
[2:11:50] Thank you.
[2:11:51] Thank you.
[2:11:51] Thank you very much.
[2:11:57] Good evening, Mr. Mayor and members of the City Commission.
[2:12:00] My name is Brigida MacTig.
[2:12:01] My address is 2821 South plus 13th Court in white and beach and I've lived there for 33 years
[2:12:08] and I'm here also to speak in favor of retaining the LGBTQ Crosswalk and Del Rey Beach.
[2:12:14] The federal and state directives that demand that all communities paint over their rainbow
[2:12:18] crosswalks are simply examples of government-sponsored
[2:12:21] bigotry and hatred, and it's a way to demean and discriminate against our LGBTQ residents.
[2:12:29] I'm aware that cities refusing to comply are threatened with removal of the crosswalks
[2:12:34] by the Florida Department of Transportation, a charge for the removal costs, and also, you
[2:12:40] know, possible withholding of state funds.
[2:12:42] Despite these threats, I feel that it is important for the City of Del Rey Beach to show support for our LGBTQ community and for diversity and inclusion in general by defying this hateful law and to set an example for the rest of the country by demonstrating the courage to stand up for what is right.
[2:13:02] There's a famous saying that if a law is unjust, man is not only right to disobey it,
[2:13:09] he is obligated to do so.
[2:13:11] Or in the words of the late congressman John Lewis make good trouble.
[2:13:20] Thank you in advance for having the courage to say no to this hateful, directive, and
[2:13:25] for standing up for our community members who are being targeted by both our state and federal
[2:13:30] governments.
[2:13:31] Thank you.
[2:13:33] Thank you very much.
[2:13:40] Melody Douglas, I met two three four Southwest 28 Avenue here in Delray Beach.
[2:13:47] The federal Secretary of Transportation reached out to people and cities in all 50 states and the city of DC instructing us all to remove rainbow crosswalks from our communities citing safety concerns.
[2:14:01] Unfortunately, it was unable to provide any data that support that concern.
[2:14:07] As a matter of fact, our traffic fatalities in the United States dropped 3.8%
[2:14:13] between 2024 and its previous year, 2023.
[2:14:18] Without any proof, we should not assume that these crosswalks cause accidents.
[2:14:23] And if the city of Delray Beach has recorded an increase in accidents at that intersection
[2:14:27] since it was painted, we need to consider that study it and present it to the public.
[2:14:32] While we investigate that data, we should not waste taxpayer money on unnecessary removal.
[2:14:38] Rainbow Crosswalks are powerful symbols of inclusion in our communities,
[2:14:43] for groups of people who too frequently experience hate and discrimination,
[2:14:47] Rainbow Crosswalks enhance the vibrant artistic, fun atmosphere of our downtowns,
[2:14:52] and we should keep our Delray Rainbow Crosswalk and the flavor of our local culture.
[2:14:57] We have a bunch of...
[2:15:00] In our beautiful state and abundance sunshine. In tolerant folks may try to remove all the rainbows in all our cities and towns, but they can't remove the rainbows from the sky. Just like queer and trans people, they have always been and will always be here.
[2:15:19] bring children and beauty to everybody.
[2:15:24] Thank you very much.
[2:15:32] Lauren, Dawn, on my Anders' 12th Welsley Drive and Lake Worth.
[2:15:36] And in 2005, I opened a hair salon right here at 25 Northeast Second Avenue and
[2:15:43] Sweet 12.
[2:15:45] So we just celebrated our 20-year anniversary.
[2:15:49] And over the last 20 plus years now having opened that space with
[2:15:55] baby and a dream. I've parked in the same view lots and I've walked at the same sidewalks
[2:16:02] and into the same doors and out those same windows for the last 20 years. I've got to witness
[2:16:07] this evolution of Del Rey Beach. I'm going from this like charming exquisite hitting gem into an
[2:16:15] more charming and even more exquisite global destination that invites families and
[2:16:22] foodies and dog lovers and coffee drinkers and smile seekers and artists and
[2:16:30] art lovers and it invites all these people in an effort to experience the magic of
[2:16:36] this inclusive city and so when one of my favorite things about being here and
[2:16:43] in Del Reyfí, just being able to experience the events and the festivities and the festivals
[2:16:48] and the parades and the celebrations, the music, the theater, the art and all in an effort
[2:16:55] to just celebrate people of all kinds.
[2:17:01] And I think that the rainbow crosswalk is nothing more than a simple extension of those expressions.
[2:17:11] And anyway, it turns out I'm getting.
[2:17:15] And my 25-year-old son is also gay, and shout out to my partner, I love you.
[2:17:22] And so, you know, my heart melts every time the menor lights on the first day of Hanukkah.
[2:17:26] And my heart sings every time I cross this for corners.
[2:17:31] And so, I'm just here to ask that if my lot has to be taken down,
[2:17:36] that we just continue to have these permanent syllables of welcome that Del Rey has always been the huge part of.
[2:17:44] Thank you for letting me speak.
[2:17:47] Thank you very much.
[2:17:52] Good evening, Mayor commissioners.
[2:17:54] I'm Stephen Gaskill, 3650 Aladdin Avenue in Boing Beach.
[2:17:58] I'm president of the LGBTQ Democratic Caucus of Palm Beach County and a past president of the Florida LGBTQ plus Democratic Caucus.
[2:18:07] You know, when the grand scheme of things this crosswalk is just a spec, but we know and we've heard the symbols matter and visibility matters.
[2:18:16] Respect flows from symbolism and visibility.
[2:18:20] And that was a purpose of pride, and that was the point of the Stonewall Riot, which pulled the LGBTQ community into the streets to demand, to respect and visibility.
[2:18:29] The governor has a well-documented disdain, some would say hatred for our community.
[2:18:36] He has spent his time in office marginalizing our people, erasing us from public life,
[2:18:41] and insulting LGBTQ adults and kids, and he's currently backed up by the administration
[2:18:45] in Washington.
[2:18:47] There is a sizable LGBTQ community in Del Rey Beach, in Palm Beach County, and throughout
[2:18:52] Florida.
[2:18:53] We are nearly 10% of the U.S. population, according to a national Gallup poll from this
[2:18:59] and the size of our community grows larger as a demographic groups get younger.
[2:19:06] That is why there's a rush to eliminate our visibility now.
[2:19:10] The other side has seen weak and make progress, and that progress is accepted by the larger community throughout the country.
[2:19:17] Acceptance and visibility paved the way for our community to ensure our civil rights to be treated equally in all aspects of society.
[2:19:25] We all know the famous poem first that came for somebody I didn't say anything, et cetera, et cetera.
[2:19:31] But we've been first for a while.
[2:19:34] And capitulating now, just giving up and letting an overbearing,
[2:19:37] unrestrained government, which reports to support local control,
[2:19:41] but pulls home rule whenever a can over the most picky union issues.
[2:19:44] Letting that government tell Del Ray Beach, who we can recognize on its own streets, is absurd.
[2:19:54] You are voluntarily giving up your power as a governing body.
[2:19:57] We don't give up our power as a community and yet you are willing to.
[2:20:02] So this discussion about a crosswalk is just not about a crosswalk.
[2:20:06] It's not about public safety, it's not about special rights.
[2:20:10] It's about being seen, it's about being heard,
[2:20:12] and it's about being recognized as members of this community with agency over our own actions.
[2:20:18] My community knows how to fight for our beliefs and what benefits us.
[2:20:22] The shame that Delrey Beach is walking away from similar principles.
[2:20:27] Thank you very much.
[2:20:32] Good evening, commission.
[2:20:33] Before I start, I'm running over a little bit of three minutes, but I had six very kind
[2:20:37] people who are willing to give me their time as deal.
[2:20:40] I'll get a little over.
[2:20:41] More, you know the rules, don't you?
[2:20:43] I do.
[2:20:44] Okay.
[2:20:45] Okay, that's right.
[2:20:46] You're going to say the six we're staying in the audience.
[2:20:48] We're not going to get up and speak.
[2:20:50] You're going to go.
[2:20:51] Fine, you've got your time.
[2:20:53] I appreciate that.
[2:20:54] So the clock needs to be set for six minutes of believe for Mr. Coppola, and after that
[2:20:58] Mayor does only a few more minutes remaining for the hour a lot of four public engagement.
[2:21:04] Okay, thank you. My name is Nicholas Kofola.
[2:21:07] 3930, low symbol of our gallery, beach florida, 334445, 5656250071.
[2:21:15] I am currently a board member of PBCHIC and the former board chair of the Campus Community Center.
[2:21:21] For me, the simple act of stepping on to the painted rainbow crosswalk in Del Rey Beach feels
[2:21:27] like more than just crossing a street. It feels like crossing a threshold into belonging.
[2:21:32] My partner David and I found a welcoming in Del Rey Beach that went beyond words and
[2:21:36] smiles. It was reflected in every gesture and in the very colors beneath our feet. That
[2:21:43] symbol is not just a mark on the pavement, but a visible reassurance that our differences
[2:21:47] was not a secret to be hidden, but a story to be honored.
[2:21:52] There have been times when I felt that courage was necessarily simply to be seen.
[2:21:56] That courage was necessarily simply to be seen.
[2:21:59] In the very beginning, the presence of the rainbow crosswalk became a promise.
[2:22:04] A declaration that the city's heart was big enough to hold stories like ours.
[2:22:08] In moments of uncertainty, when debates flare and decisions hanging the balance,
[2:22:12] I've learned how easily symbols can shift from comfort to controversy.
[2:22:18] As Delray Beach stands at a crossroads, figuratively and literally, each decision reverberates beyond asphalt and paint echoing in the stories and hopes of its residents.
[2:22:29] For some, these symbols offer comfort after a lifetime of feeling invisible, for others they spark conflict or confusion.
[2:22:38] At the heart of all this is a question, what does it truly mean to be seen?
[2:22:43] For many it is a quiet reassurance of knowing that this story is matter.
[2:22:47] Their presence acknowledged not just in policy or public record, but in the very fabric
[2:22:52] of shared life.
[2:22:54] Symbols, whether painted on pavement or flying from flag poles, can offer that reassurance.
[2:23:00] They are not just marks on the landscape, they are invitations together to listen and to
[2:23:06] member who we are to each other, but symbols by their nature spark controversy. They
[2:23:12] summoned forth the unseen and unheard, forcing a reckoning, with histories that have
[2:23:18] often been silenced. And so, when these gestures come on the threat, the community is called
[2:23:23] not to retreat into silence, but to engage with better and greater empathy and resolve.
[2:23:30] The discussions that follow are messy and sometimes painful, but necessary opportunities
[2:23:35] for growth are always rooted in honesty and care.
[2:23:39] To understand this symbol is not simply to preserve its physical form, but to carry forward
[2:23:44] the spirit that inspired it.
[2:23:46] It is to choose repeatedly to stand with those for whom belonging has always been conditional
[2:23:51] and to shape a city where acceptance is not a slogan, but a practice woven into daily life.
[2:23:57] Only then can a community is welcome ring true,
[2:24:02] transcending the boundaries of pink and policy.
[2:24:06] This is why moments that seem small on the surface of
[2:24:09] Voting City Hall are be painting of lines,
[2:24:11] stand as a catalyst for reflection far beyond
[2:24:14] the immediate controversy.
[2:24:16] They compel each of us to confront not only the values
[2:24:19] we publicly profess, but also the quiet convictions
[2:24:22] that shape our interactions with our neighbors and strangers.
[2:24:26] It is easy to take for granted the sense of belonging when it has never been questioned.
[2:24:32] Just as it is easy to overlook the pain of erasure when one's place has always been assured.
[2:24:38] Yes, for those whose histories are marked by exclusion, the removal of a symbol is not just an administrative decision.
[2:24:47] It's a gut punch felt in the soul, in the daily calculus of safety and self-expression.
[2:24:53] We all need to be reminded that the city is not only streets and statues, but the daily
[2:24:59] choices made in the open and in quiet, to welcome, to stand in solidarity, to extend grace
[2:25:06] when understanding folders.
[2:25:09] As these debates unfold, they lay bare the unfinished work of community, how inclusion is
[2:25:14] not a destination, but a practice, and perhaps amid the noise and uncertainty there is
[2:25:19] change for something deeper, for neighbors to learn how to hold disagreement without letting
[2:25:24] go of care, to seek accountability without sacrificing compassion, and to create rituals
[2:25:32] that welcome and endure beyond the crosswalk or commission decision. I think it's sad
[2:25:38] to see our neighbors divide it sometimes bitterly over what should be a simple gesture of inclusion.
[2:25:44] But that sadness is not the end of the story.
[2:25:47] It is, in fact, the beginning of a deeper conversation about what it means to truly welcome
[2:25:52] someone, not just in words or in symbol, but in action and in tent.
[2:25:57] Some may argue that symbols are fleeting subject to the whims of politics and budgetary
[2:26:01] constraints, yet their power lies less in the permanence than in the spirit they represent.
[2:26:08] Removing paint from a payment, there's not erased the live realities of those who walk
[2:26:13] there, nor does it undo the longing for dignity and recognition.
[2:26:18] It asks instead how we move forward.
[2:26:20] How we recommit to the promises our community has made,
[2:26:24] even when those promises are tested.
[2:26:26] So as we consider what is that state,
[2:26:29] let us remember that the measure of a city's character
[2:26:31] is not found in its ease with consensus,
[2:26:35] but in its courage to listen,
[2:26:37] adopt and uphold a dignity of every resident.
[2:26:40] The conversations we have now,
[2:26:42] The decisions we make will shape not only the physical landscape, but also the emotional terrain for generations to come.
[2:26:51] Please.
[2:26:52] Fight for us.
[2:26:53] Thank you very much.
[2:27:00] How much time do we have left?
[2:27:06] Okay.
[2:27:09] Good evening.
[2:27:11] Commissioners.
[2:27:12] Members of the public.
[2:27:14] Quickly, someone let their glasses at the stand.
[2:27:17] So if you did.
[2:27:20] There they are.
[2:27:20] I am Mavis Benson.
[2:27:23] I have resided 800 Greenswood Court.
[2:27:25] I want to thank those of you, specifically Commissioner Markert and Commissioner Kassal.
[2:27:32] And any members of the public or anyone viewing who attended our Town Hall last Wednesday.
[2:27:41] In my humble opinion, it was one of the best town halls since I've been actively involved with the DDA.
[2:27:47] We were thrilled to welcome over a hundred guests, a wonderfully diverse group that included
[2:27:53] both residents and business owners.
[2:27:55] The number of residents in attendance was substantially higher than the merchants, meaning
[2:28:00] we heard directly from a large portion of our district's taxpayer community, people who
[2:28:06] were genuinely invested in our downtown.
[2:28:09] It was a really great format, a survey went out earlier asking specific questions, which helped
[2:28:17] shape the format of our discussion.
[2:28:21] We did cover things as beautification, parking, events, crowding, and overgrowth.
[2:28:29] Also presented at the beginning of the meeting was information about the DDA, what the DDA
[2:28:38] and it went through their budget. So for those of you who weren't there, I believe it is available online at the DDA's website.
[2:28:47] You can see it there. And you should know also that they have the first budget public hearing on Monday, September 8th at 5 o'clock.
[2:28:58] And then a second and final budget meeting Monday, September 12th at 5 o'clock. Both of those will be held here at the City Commission, I believe.
[2:29:07] I encourage you to do your due job diligence to go and watch the video of the town hall to
[2:29:15] see the discussion by the residents that we had there and after that go through the
[2:29:25] DDS website, look at what they've done, what they do, you'll see more information about
[2:29:31] budget, do your due diligence, go here first, and then attend these meetings. One, or
[2:29:38] both be there, ask the questions that's the only way you as a citizen can feel satisfied
[2:29:47] and you will walk away feeling satisfied. If you take the time and learn for yourself,
[2:29:54] don't rely on social media and comments that are out there. Take it upon yourself.
[2:30:00] I hope to do the research. The DDA is what added to my success for being in our downtown for 20 years. I felt like they were a second partner for us and they helped me to succeed in my business. So, for that, I'm forever grateful.
[2:30:21] Thank you very much.
[2:30:31] Hello, my name is Rose Jackson, 318 Northwest, 12th Avenue.
[2:30:36] I believe I'm here on a whole different subject as I were planned to.
[2:30:41] I had to change it because I have a situation where my property was vandalized.
[2:30:46] And by city employee, by the name of Anthony Kirk, I have an iron gate and my backyard
[2:30:56] and Anthony proceeds to put up the white gate cut a big hold in my
[2:31:02] back gate on the only way we found out was that particular evening we went
[2:31:06] to walk the puppy and it's just been a nightmare and I just just I'm reaching
[2:31:13] for straws and I I know it's a legal issue but I feel that employee should help
[2:31:19] be held at a highest standard you just don't go around cutting people's property
[2:31:24] You can do whatever you want in your yard, but when you come in my yard and damage my property
[2:31:30] Without communicating to me, that's a problem. That's a problem. And I can't get any help
[2:31:37] And I believe the police department does a little bit more than they can actually do with this
[2:31:41] I've had the police called on me twice by them
[2:31:45] In the content that I threatened him now if you want to say stay out of my yard is a threat then it's a threat and I mean what I said
[2:31:55] I pay for that fence. I pay property taxes where I live. I keep my property up. You do your yard and stay out of mine and that's one of my apps and I think I put a fall into
[2:32:06] The mayor's office and I'm still waiting on a call back from Captain Martinez. I believe and that's been like it with three days now and I just
[2:32:15] I just wanted to come here to let you know that you have a city employee. That's actually not a
[2:32:21] standard and my view of the work ethic should be better. It should be much better. I just don't
[2:32:30] understand how many think it's okay for them to walk into my backyard and just cut a section
[2:32:35] out of my gate. A huge section to put up a fence that they didn't even get a permit for. And I didn't
[2:32:42] cross those lines that I'm going deeper when I get a chance. Thank you all from this. Thank you very
[2:32:46] much more of the information.
[2:32:53] Towards law, 46 in Norse Latin.
[2:32:55] The question is, is the F-D-O-T-W-R-O-N-G?
[2:33:02] That's wrong.
[2:33:04] That's wrong.
[2:33:05] Anyway, I was wondering if they were not
[2:33:08] so I did a little research for a whole hour.
[2:33:11] And one thing that's very obvious, and I would give you a reference
[2:33:14] if anybody wants to Google this,
[2:33:16] Asphalt Art Safety Study, I Bloomberg Professional Services, it was mentioned earlier that
[2:33:23] was a study done in Florida that said that these crosswalks actually increased safety.
[2:33:29] This one goes further.
[2:33:30] They do 17 different cities all throughout the United States, and if found this is just
[2:33:35] actually even better than we're quoting earlier.
[2:33:38] Also there's an article that just came before they saw in the Washington Post and Delray,
[2:33:43] period and there we got a nice picture of our prior section and the thing that the
[2:33:50] article that I thought was interesting was that it pointed out that this is a
[2:33:54] federal and this mentioned before a couple of times I know that it was going to
[2:33:58] mention the night this all began in Washington with a federal directive and I'm
[2:34:04] pretty sure some state governors not ours of course are probably
[2:34:09] objecting to the suggestion from the federal government.
[2:34:14] So let's put some blame up there also if we're doing blame.
[2:34:19] The one thing that was brought up was kind of interesting that people were looking for
[2:34:25] some reason to say it's not safe.
[2:34:28] And a couple of people, at least one, has mentioned what about these autonomous cars.
[2:34:34] driver driver this car is going to get confused. I'm really. We've got a four-way stop and you
[2:34:42] imagine a driver is car stopping and then waiting for somebody to walk in front of it and
[2:34:47] run over it. I don't see it, but if this is a concern, I believe it would be up to the
[2:34:53] manufacturers of these cars to take on the responsibility and assure us we're not going to
[2:35:00] be run over in the Pride Intersections,
[2:35:05] because what's this, this applies to a lot.
[2:35:07] These things will stop, I would call very early as this, and it's in such a floor to
[2:35:14] where one of these Jarvis cars ran across some checker plate on the road, and they just
[2:35:20] stop people crushed into them, but anyway, and also there is a big difference between
[2:35:26] the asphalt art as, well, this is more important
[2:35:32] actually the cultural aspect.
[2:35:35] But painting a, I think if you look real hard
[2:35:37] and that I couldn't find it when I came back
[2:35:40] and that chapter 18 of the Green Book changes,
[2:35:45] there was some warning in there about if the art,
[2:35:50] possibly, and this is probably not right,
[2:35:54] If it's increasing the safety, then it's not really all that bad, it's actually good.
[2:36:02] So I'm just wondering about exploring what you could put in the actual crosswalks if you have
[2:36:08] to take out the intersection.
[2:36:11] And I say, I think the intersection in there, like it is, but I mean, it's also a good
[2:36:15] situation.
[2:36:16] Thank you.
[2:36:16] Thank you Mr. Long.
[2:36:23] My name is Irene Slovan, I live at 1325,
[2:36:26] Fischtel Pland Court, Del Rey Beach.
[2:36:30] I've had my place for 20 years,
[2:36:33] first it was my second home,
[2:36:35] and now it's my primary residence.
[2:36:37] I'm a lesbian woman, and I was at the ribbon-cutting
[2:36:39] ceremony for the Rainbow Crosswalk in 2021,
[2:36:43] and I even saved a piece of the Rainbow Ribbon from that ceremony.
[2:36:47] Every year my partner and I take pictures at that crosswalk.
[2:36:50] I've traveled the world and I take pictures of rainbow crosswalks everywhere we go.
[2:36:56] It makes me feel welcome and included.
[2:36:59] Also, the rainbow crosswalk here in Del Rey is probably the most beautiful I've seen anywhere.
[2:37:06] If you choose to erase our crosswalk, you will never erase our memories or who we are.
[2:37:14] I ask you to fight and if we lose, find an alternative.
[2:37:18] It means too much to too many people.
[2:37:22] Thank you very much.
[2:37:29] Good to see you again, Rand.
[2:37:30] Good to see you.
[2:37:31] Hope everything's been going well.
[2:37:33] Oh, another day in Paris.
[2:37:36] We're currently commissioners.
[2:37:37] My name is Rand Hawke, and I serve as president of the Palm Beach County Human Rights Council.
[2:37:42] We are Florida's oldest independent nonpartisan political organization dedicated to ending discrimination based on sexual orientation
[2:37:51] and gender identity expression.
[2:37:55] Local government is closest to the people,
[2:37:58] and I commend you all for your public service.
[2:38:01] The actions you take affect your residents
[2:38:04] much more than the actions taken by state and federal government.
[2:38:09] Yet, state officials continue to chip away at home rule.
[2:38:14] This administration's directive to destroy the pride streetscape
[2:38:18] is one more unfunded mandate infringing on your rights to determine what is best for the city of Del Rey Beach.
[2:38:28] The streetscape was not the initiative of the LGBTQ Plus community.
[2:38:34] Former Vice Mayor Ryan Boyle and former Mayor Shelley Petroleum wanted to create a permanent display of public art to memorialize the queer community.
[2:38:47] And they made sure the streetscape was paid for by the PBCHRC Foundation and the AIDS healthcare
[2:38:55] Foundation, not the taxpayers of Del Ray Beach.
[2:39:01] Florida has serious problems such as the high cost of housing and insurance, low teacher
[2:39:07] pay and the lack of access to healthcare.
[2:39:10] So why is this administration focused on marginalizing minorities?
[2:39:14] Del Rey Beach and other Florida cities are being extorted.
[2:39:21] You have been told that unless queer art is removed at your expense, the administration
[2:39:27] will withhold millions of dollars in transportation funds needed to repair our aging infrastructure.
[2:39:36] Florida law prohibits individuals from defacing Confederate monuments so that our horrific
[2:39:44] part of our history will be preserved. At the same time the state is requiring municipalities
[2:39:53] to destroy queer public art in attempt to erase our community. That is not going to happen.
[2:40:08] We are here, we are queer, and Tallahassee get over it.
[2:40:17] We greatly appreciate,
[2:40:22] we would greatly
[2:40:22] straight of hearing on September 2nd to uphold home rule and preserve the Del Rey Beach Pride
[2:40:29] Intersection. While West Palm Beach will now power-wise its Pride Crosswalks, and
[2:40:37] tells you for two maybe 30 seconds great. While West Palm Beach will power-wash its Pride Crosswalks,
[2:40:43] its refurbishing a park using bricks in pride, flag, colors to memorialize the gay community.
[2:40:51] While Boing Beach has already painted over their private streetscape, the city has stated
[2:40:56] that it is committed to finding ways to honor our community and will consider other memorial
[2:41:02] options.
[2:41:04] In the event, you decide not to move forward with the administrative hearings to protect
[2:41:09] home rule and the pride intersection.
[2:41:11] We ask that you join the other Palm Beach County cities to find a way, perhaps a mural.
[2:41:20] To utilize local artists to permanently memorialize the achievements of the Del Rey Beach LGBTQ plus community.
[2:41:28] Thank you.
[2:41:29] Thank you very much.
[2:41:30] You're welcome.
[2:41:36] Good evening everybody.
[2:41:38] Thank you.
[2:41:39] Sandy's elder 209 Northwest 12th Street, I didn't intend really to address any of these issues,
[2:41:46] particularly the crosswalk issue until I came here and heard all of the comments which are
[2:41:55] very moving. My question to the commission is, what if the state, what if the
[2:42:06] trust said to Delray Beach, we don't like your Christmas tree, we think it's too high, we
[2:42:12] think it's a non-safe physical barrier, we don't like your menorah people could get burnt by
[2:42:20] the candles or the lights or whatever else. Would you even consider the stupidity of that request?
[2:42:27] But that's where this falls as far as I'm concerned.
[2:42:32] So I think this commission, if it means fighting the state on an issue, this is an issue that's worth fighting and standing up for,
[2:42:44] as would be the elimination of that Christmas tree, the elimination of the maneuver.
[2:42:51] and if they said that they didn't like the 4th of July celebration you need to eliminate that I think that would be worth
[2:43:00] standing up for so let's just do what's right thank you
[2:43:11] public comment is now closed the time having
[2:43:13] expired for
[2:43:18] a little bit or done that before and then we found out that this is great.
[2:43:28] We now have to be on an emotion to approve the consent agenda as well.
[2:43:33] It was been amended but I need emotional approval.
[2:43:35] Some of.
[2:43:38] Second.
[2:43:39] The great all in favor?
[2:43:40] Aye.
[2:43:40] Any opposed?
[2:43:42] Okay.
[2:43:43] We are moving on to seven.
[2:43:45] A A which is the trap control device not compliance. We moved them seven H to now
[2:43:53] the
[2:43:53] Seven A A and I'm gonna turn this over to Mr. Moore is your list should hear as the person doing the intro
[2:43:59] So yeah, you're on. Thank you. We want to wait 20 seconds while everybody leaves. Yes
[2:44:07] For those of you who came to speak about this issue, we're gonna be talking about it and a few seconds
[2:44:13] That's why I moved it up so you guys could stick around for it
[2:44:17] Okay, so that was confusing.
[2:44:20] Just so it can
[2:44:26] be, how fine.
[2:44:29] For a little game to talk about the, the pride intersection we will.
[2:44:34] That's what we're going to be discussing right now folks.
[2:44:36] There won't be any comment.
[2:44:37] There won't be any more comment.
[2:44:41] Okay, let's go.
[2:44:42] Item seven.
[2:44:43] A.A.
[2:44:45] Mr. Mr. Moore.
[2:44:46] Thank you.
[2:44:49] Ladies and gentlemen, my interest is to offer a summary in terms of why we are,
[2:44:54] where we are specifically as a relates to the city of Bayre Beach, Florida.
[2:44:57] as well as some context in terms.
[2:45:00] So what issues and potential impacts that might be experienced as a result? First of all, I think it's important to
[2:45:08] underscore that the overall goal and objective, I think, is to not only offer that background and
[2:45:14] clarification, but to also enable the city, the city commission to offer a path forward in terms of other
[2:45:23] opportunities in which we can make available to offer gestures and expressions of being a
[2:45:30] welcome community as a city of Del Rey Beach has for quite some time, because quite frankly,
[2:45:36] given the directives at the state of Florida level, we are in an environment whereby we do have
[2:45:42] to take due consideration relative to the directives having come down the pike.
[2:45:47] Interestingly enough, I've been questioned about this by a couple like the officials
[2:45:53] individually, however I did, but I could to update the Board of Directors as the city
[2:45:58] commission as to why we are where we are with respect to the need to address the crosswalk
[2:46:06] intersection. Interestingly enough, a principal specific question that I experienced was
[2:46:12] The very first written communication at the city of Derray Beach received with respect to any direction to
[2:46:19] Proceed with the removal of the crosswalk.
[2:46:23] The city of Derray Beach did not actually specifically receive its own direct communication until four days ago,
[2:46:30] that being Friday, August 15, 2025.
[2:46:34] However, on Monday, June 30,
[2:46:39] 2025
[2:46:39] The Florida Department of Transportation did distribute a warning communication, if you will, to all cities in general,
[2:46:49] outlining the direction to remove colored intersections, colored right-of-way areas, etc.
[2:46:57] However, that was not specific to any particular city. It was to all municipalities.
[2:47:02] soon thereafter that did necessitate a administrative and legal review as to what our
[2:47:08] obligations are in this regard. Initially, the thinking was because it was a local intersection
[2:47:16] and not a street designated intersection. There may be some ability to be that have that under
[2:47:23] consideration and not necessarily having to respond. However, further analysis indicated that we
[2:47:30] obligated to achieve some sense of compliance in that regard and soon thereafter I did share
[2:47:36] with the city commission about thoughts and strategies as to how we were respond accordingly.
[2:47:43] So of course last week the discussion was offered by the city commission with respect to any specific
[2:47:49] formal notification from a Florida Department of Transportation,
[2:47:53] meanwhile less sit tight in terms of proceeding with any direction so that was the outcome
[2:47:59] we could go three days later as I stated a little while ago, August 15, 2025, a order
[2:48:05] was sent directly to the office of the city manager, essentially mandating when we're
[2:48:10] directing that we perceive with the removal of the crosswalk color, as well as the fact
[2:48:16] that we have a deadline of September 3rd in which to do so. So, of course, I immediately
[2:48:21] shared that with the city commission because that being again, the direct immediate
[2:48:26] communication to the city of Derray Beach regarding expectations being made available in every
[2:48:31] guard.
[2:48:33] So the inclination at that point was to proceed with some form of follow-up review and analysis in terms
[2:48:38] of what the impacts might be to the city of Derray Beach if we were proceeded in this regard.
[2:48:44] A big part of that analysis or thought process, ladies and gentlemen, incorporated any considerations to offer other
[2:48:51] gestures of appreciation and welcome. And frankly, I would like to ask us to focus in every
[2:48:58] guard because I will be prepared to offer some considerations at the very next city commission
[2:49:03] meeting in terms of what that might look like. The next regular city commission meeting will be
[2:49:08] September 3rd, 2025, which is two weeks from tomorrow. So working closely with the city commission,
[2:49:16] I think that would be an appropriate opportunity to come up with ways in which we can get to the
[2:49:21] place possible without having to be subjected to any issues or challenges being directed at the state
[2:49:28] level. Of course, part of the communication of August 15, 2025 touched on potential financial impacts
[2:49:36] to the city of Del Rey Beach if we were to remain non-compliant if you will. Likewise, I work with
[2:49:44] all departments to the Department of Finance, notably the Department of Public Works to evaluate
[2:49:48] what that looks like. And so this, ladies and gentlemen, the city of Derray Beach over the
[2:49:53] last several years, at least, have enjoyed a very productive working relationship with the
[2:49:58] Florida Department of Environmental Protection and the Florida Department of Transportation
[2:50:03] relative to securing various funding agreements for the implementation of numerous projects and
[2:50:08] programs that are currently underway. The city of Derray Beach has existing funding agreements involving
[2:50:15] the state of Florida totaling 60,266,000,000,000 and 50 cents.
[2:50:22] We're very accurate in our calculations.
[2:50:25] Grants and allocations to the fact are divided among a variety of programs with the Florida
[2:50:29] Department of Environmental Protection and the Florida Department of Transportation.
[2:50:34] Up this 60,000 dollar and change amount, Florida Department of Environmental Protection
[2:50:40] grants provide $39,190,744 in 50 cents that are utilized as part of our beach shore protection
[2:50:49] projects and funding assistance, as well as stormwater management projects through the resilient
[2:50:53] floor of the program and the water and spring restoration program. As far as the floor of the
[2:50:59] Department of Transportation grants in the amount of $21,075,282 for mobility improvements including
[2:51:07] roadway sidewalk, lighting improvements through the local agency grant program, and
[2:51:12] minister in coordination with Palm Beach County Transportation Planning Agency.
[2:51:18] These dollars, which are very significant to the city of Diori Beach, are passed through via
[2:51:23] the Florida Highway Administration.
[2:51:25] So there is a direct connection at the federal level in terms of how this work and why we
[2:51:29] are where we are.
[2:51:32] Part of the analysis, ladies and gentlemen, did take on the consideration, will Terrence
[2:51:36] set to myself. And what way would the city of Derrey Beach have the ability to offset or make up
[2:51:42] for any potential loss of funding or any other adverse impacts that come down the pike? And
[2:51:47] answer to that affect ladies and gentlemen to the commission. And quite frankly to the public,
[2:51:53] it's none. That is nil. Therefore, professionally, I don't believe the city of Derrey Beach
[2:52:00] has much choice at all. What you do have a choice, and I look at the City Commission, as well as
[2:52:06] we're going to close with staff, is the think of ways in which we can offer some other form
[2:52:12] of a welcoming gesture and appreciation for the diversity of community that has been made
[2:52:19] available here in the city of Derrie Beach, Florida. So likewise, ladies and gentlemen, that is where we are.
[2:52:25] Where do we go from here? The capacity to proceed at administratively
[2:52:30] does exist. As referenced in the top of my PowerPoint presentation, it is an approximately
[2:52:36] $12,000 project for a Sam blasting alternative, which can actually be initiated sometime
[2:52:42] next week and it will take about one to two days to complete. Again, we have to prepare accordingly,
[2:52:48] this is where we are, and given the current momentum relative to numerous projects and programs
[2:52:54] in collaboration with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection and the Florida Department
[2:52:59] of transportation of which all involved has worked extremely hard to cultivate those relationships
[2:53:04] and yield significant outcomes that otherwise may not have become possible is something
[2:53:10] worthy of consideration and serious thought. Likewise, I will be happy to offer recommendations
[2:53:18] or suggestions as to how we can keep offering gestures of support. A physical presence of
[2:53:27] welcome without compromising ourselves in our manner that we
[2:53:30] had currently face. So with that ladies and gentlemen,
[2:53:34] specifically, Mayor and city commission, that is where we are,
[2:53:37] and I hope that does provide a great deal of clarity and context in
[2:53:40] terms of why we have to take the matter seriously. Thank you.
[2:53:45] Mayor, if I may. Yes, thank you, Mr. Law.
[2:53:49] Thank you, Mr. Moore. But respectfully, I'm not going to focus my commentary on
[2:53:55] Consiliatory gesture at this point given that there is still an option in front of us and an option offered to us by the FDOT to go to an administrative hearing.
[2:54:05] I think we would be remiss to not have a discussion, we'd be remiss to not have a discussion about pursuing that option before we pivot to a Consiliatory gesture.
[2:54:19] So first of all, I don't think I've ever seen this many people show up to Adobe Beach Commission meetings.
[2:54:26] So, and for those of you who came from out of town or don't tune in often, welcome to the jungle.
[2:54:31] You came on an exciting night up here.
[2:54:34] And so I hope you weren't bored.
[2:54:35] I don't think you would be.
[2:54:37] So, I want to thank you guys.
[2:54:39] I want to thank everyone who came out tonight and had the courage to speak on this issue.
[2:54:48] Hearing your words reminds us isn't just about paint on pavers, it's about people, it's about
[2:54:55] the longing, and the kind of community we choose to be in Delray Beach.
[2:55:01] So have we get here, and terrorists provide a great sort of review, but I'm going to still
[2:55:05] go into it a little bit.
[2:55:07] So on June 30th, F.D.A.A. issued the statewide memorandum warning cities that painted intersections
[2:55:13] and decorative crosswalks were out of compliance.
[2:55:17] But let's be clear.
[2:55:19] No law was changed.
[2:55:21] No bill was passed.
[2:55:23] F got simply decided to interpret, reinterpret the rules,
[2:55:28] and suddenly declare our pride intersection as a legal.
[2:55:32] Despite the fact has been in place for years without issue.
[2:55:35] And while the legislature did pass,
[2:55:37] Senate Bill 1662, which is alluded to earlier,
[2:55:40] this year, that law didn't ban decorative intersections.
[2:55:42] or change the federal standards.
[2:55:46] At DOT is acting entirely on its own reinterpretation.
[2:55:51] So then on July 23rd, our city manager informed us that an administrative decision had been made to remove the intersection without this commission's approval.
[2:55:59] And I don't blame the city manager or our staff.
[2:56:02] Their job is to protect this city from risk and they do a great job of that.
[2:56:06] But our job is different.
[2:56:08] Our charge is different.
[2:56:09] We're here to represent Del Rey Beach residents.
[2:56:19] So at a meeting here last week, I asked for a consensus to hold off and to left dot gave us formal notice.
[2:56:27] For days later, on August 15th, we got that notice in writing from F.D.S. District Secretary.
[2:56:34] And we should all up here and out here be outraged at what it said.
[2:56:40] Quote, if the pavement markings are not removed by September 3rd, 2025, the Florida Department of Transportation will remove them by any appropriate method necessary without further notice and quote.
[2:56:54] So, if we don't comply, the state says it will march into our city onto our city-owned and city-maintained streets, and destroy one of our symbols of community, then bill us for it.
[2:57:06] And if we resist, they'll withhold state funds.
[2:57:11] This isn't a notice. It's an ultimatum.
[2:57:14] For state agency to announce they will destroy something,
[2:57:18] we lawfully installed.
[2:57:21] Without our consent, isn't just government overreach.
[2:57:24] It's trespass, destruction of property,
[2:57:27] and an unlawful use of the authority we as elected government
[2:57:31] were elected to exercise.
[2:57:39] This is one of the most extreme abuses of power I've ever faced up here.
[2:57:46] So why does this matter?
[2:57:48] You guys said it pretty well, frankly.
[2:57:51] It's worth remembering we didn't go looking for this.
[2:57:54] We didn't go picking a fight with Tallahassee.
[2:57:56] We're down here on my own business.
[2:57:59] Our intersection has been federally compliant for years,
[2:58:01] and it still is by the way.
[2:58:03] And I'll get to that.
[2:58:04] And now the state is threatening to erase it.
[2:58:07] That's not just heavy handed it's intimidation.
[2:58:10] I understand why some might say we should just comply and avoid the risk to our funding.
[2:58:16] It's a fair point, but how much are we willing to be pushed to stray away from our city's values?
[2:58:23] What if next time, it's our historic districts.
[2:58:26] They're already threatened by the Live Local Act,
[2:58:29] which overrides local zoning and strips away our ability to protect our neighborhoods.
[2:58:33] What if they decide to shut down our MLK March?
[2:58:37] We're saying we can't light them in aura or put up 100 for Christmas tree anymore.
[2:58:42] It sounds outrageous, but the legislature has already tried to dismantle our CRA,
[2:58:47] attack public arts funding, and limit our ability to regulate sober homes.
[2:58:53] All these bills nearly passed last session and they will be back.
[2:58:57] In today's climate, even discussing diversity and equity has become so charged,
[2:59:02] we haven't been able to talk about the disparity study we've paid to conduct.
[2:59:06] And that's the kind of chilling effect that we're up against.
[2:59:12] So I'm going to take this a step further.
[2:59:14] FDOT's directive isn't just overreach, it's contrary to federal law.
[2:59:19] The 11th edition of the Federal Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices Effective January
[2:59:25] 1824, explicitly allows decorative pavement markings in intersection art, as long as they
[2:59:31] obscure official controls. By law, under Florida statutes, 3-16-0-745, FDOT must adopt a
[2:59:40] uniform system of traffic control devices, called consistent with the system, adopted by the
[2:59:45] Federal Highway Administration, M-QOT, and contained in the M-UTCD. That means under Federal
[2:59:50] Rule, which is a controlling rule, and it supports us. Do not obscure official signals. Do not
[2:59:58] Create Driver Confusion.
[3:00:00] FDOT's stricter position is an overstep of their authority and an unlawful attempt to impose a standard beyond what federal law requires.
[3:00:08] This is exactly why we need to pursue an administrative hearing. FDOT's own letter outlines that right, though it also makes very clear, won't allow exemptions or waverstacking the deck against cities.
[3:00:20] That makes it all the more important we take this challenge as far as it can go.
[3:00:27] Then we'll discuss all four minutes.
[3:00:34] So what's its stake?
[3:00:35] The Pride Intersection is not a safety risk.
[3:00:38] We know that.
[3:00:39] It's not a driving hazard or danger to anyone.
[3:00:42] It's simply a symbol of love of belonging.
[3:00:45] And remembering those we lost after senseless violence
[3:00:48] at a pulse nightclub in Orlando.
[3:00:50] It's a joyful reminder that love is love
[3:00:53] and that in Del Rey Beach, you are seen and accepted.
[3:01:00] This state's demand has no grounding in safety, law, or fairness.
[3:01:05] It's rooted in culture wars that do nothing to make our city stronger, safer, or better.
[3:01:13] Almost not.
[3:01:16] And it's bigger than one intersection.
[3:01:18] It's about whether Del Rey governs itself, or whether Tallahassee can invade our streets,
[3:01:23] erase our culture and dictate our future.
[3:01:26] Other cities, Orlando, St. Pete, Key West to name a few have said enough is enough.
[3:01:33] We've led before, in Del Rey Beach, when we took on PFAS, for instance, our leadership
[3:01:39] along with a rock star city attorney helps secure billions in settlement, statewide, and
[3:01:44] windfall for our residents.
[3:01:46] This is another moment to lead.
[3:01:49] Other cities are watching what we do.
[3:01:51] Key West got the same notice we did, and they are already pursuing the administrative hearing.
[3:01:58] The decision before, as a simple, my opinion,
[3:02:02] do we quietly comply and allow the stage to erase a piece of our culture
[3:02:07] or do we hold the line against this incursion?
[3:02:16] This is about standing up for our residents, our values, and our right to self-govern.
[3:02:21] I'm asking this commission for consensus to request an administrative hearing
[3:02:25] hearing per the option outlined in the F. Dot letter. Thank you.
[3:02:35] Commissioner Cassal. Thank you. And I appreciate what you're saying, Rob, and I, and I, and I,
[3:02:42] I assure your view and a lot of what you're saying, but when I look at the number, 60 million,
[3:02:49] 266,000, 26,000, 26 dollars, and 50 cents. And that doesn't include, excuse me, money we may need
[3:02:57] from FEMA. That's just what we currently expect to get, not what we may need in the future.
[3:03:03] Now,
[3:03:06] Julie resident, grab your sign and fight. Julie commissioner has to look out for the
[3:03:13] entire city as a whole. And I sat up here, Mr. Franklin as well. We implemented the crosswalk,
[3:03:21] Adam Frankl, Commissioner Frankl was here, Mayor Shelley Petroleum, Julie Casal, Shirley Johnson, Ryan Boylston.
[3:03:31] We did it and we were very proud of that moment. It was exciting for everybody.
[3:03:36] We are an inclusive city that doesn't change. If we move the Pride Crosswalk to the sidewalk,
[3:03:43] It old school square. That's our property. Maybe we can do that paint the whole old school square in a rainbow and
[3:03:53] Because listen we know we could sit here and say well
[3:03:58] If we poke the bear, are they going to take the money? I would say to you. That's a really good chance
[3:04:05] And you've resigned. You're not going to be here next year. I still live in this city and it's going to be part of my district
[3:04:11] So that's not it. Okay, but you, you're reviving and we'll be taking care. Thank you.
[3:04:17] We'll be handling the budget shortfall of over $60 million if that happens.
[3:04:23] And I want to remind people of something. If I may, there are other things to consider that are critically important.
[3:04:32] We had a very quiet situation going on in Del Rey.
[3:04:36] We were protecting our Haitian population, and now we do have reports that ICE is in town, a friend of mine sent me a photo from an area off of Lenton Avenue, because we've drawn attention to ourselves. Instead of flying under the radar. Yes, we have.
[3:04:54] That's a reach.
[3:04:54] That's a reach.
[3:04:56] That's a reach.
[3:04:57] We're all over the news.
[3:04:58] Over the United States.
[3:05:01] Order.
[3:05:01] Thank you very much, Mayor.
[3:05:03] We have also other people in the community that we need to protect.
[3:05:09] All of our nonprofits.
[3:05:11] The Arts Garage does a ton of programming.
[3:05:14] They have lost their funding.
[3:05:16] They are looking to us for funding.
[3:05:19] If we don't have money, we can't give it to our nonprofits.
[3:05:23] profits. I think it's critically important that we keep the inclusion. I think the idea of moving
[3:05:30] it is a great idea so that we don't lose unnecessary funding of over $60 million. I'm not happy
[3:05:39] about this. This isn't a great decision. This is a hard decision. This is a challenging job you
[3:05:45] to do when you sit up here, but our general fund budget is about 180 million dollars and that's
[3:05:53] half of it. So where are we going to get the money? And that's just the bottom line question.
[3:06:00] I'm going to add something real quick. So by taking the option that the F DOT has offered us as the next
[3:06:12] $60 million from us for simply requesting an administrative hearing.
[3:06:17] It's not $60 million, guys.
[3:06:19] I mean, or $439 million, whatever the number of it.
[3:06:22] As an all-up, baby, it's way north of there.
[3:06:26] Regardless, there's no evidence.
[3:06:28] There's no evidence.
[3:06:29] There's no evidence.
[3:06:30] There's no evidence.
[3:06:30] There's no evidence.
[3:06:31] That by simply going to the hearing, the option that they offered us to make them explain
[3:06:37] their position.
[3:06:37] It strictly says if we're uncooperative, why I'm not suggesting we go
[3:06:42] set up barricades in the intersection, right?
[3:06:45] I'm suggesting that we take the next step of the process
[3:06:49] that they offered us.
[3:06:51] Period.
[3:06:52] As a lawyer, as a lawyer, and not one who is please one
[3:06:58] on TV, Mr. West, but as a lawyer.
[3:07:02] My question is, I've always believed in exhausting
[3:07:06] administrative remedies first.
[3:07:10] What is the, if we opt for the administrative hearing, we're essentially say we're trying
[3:07:17] to withdraw administrative remedies prior to our making a decision, I don't believe
[3:07:22] they would act to do anything as long as we're within our rights to do an administrative
[3:07:28] hearing.
[3:07:28] Now, if we lose that hearing, we're going to have to face a situation of what we're going
[3:07:31] to do, and maybe we adopt a vision of a solid thing, we find a sidewalk, or we sign some
[3:07:36] the method to do as Mr. Hawke had mentioned and do it that way. I mean nobody wants to lose
[3:07:45] the funding. And these are largely capital and proven funds which we certainly don't want
[3:07:49] to lose capital and proven funds. But what is the issue, I mean I'll ask our city attorneys,
[3:07:54] what is our legal risk and I'm not seeing it, that's why I'm asking generally. If we decide
[3:08:01] to pursue our administrative remedies first and wait to those are exhausted and then we would
[3:08:06] say we would have to maybe implement what the city manager says we have to do in order to protect
[3:08:10] our money, which everybody wants to do, and then we sit down and we figure out what's
[3:08:14] plan B and then you know I'm a plan B person to see where we could adopt, you know, whether
[3:08:20] it's a paid, it's a sidewalk, they say payment in English, say a sidewalk or some other mechanism
[3:08:29] to address this and then to as a compromise so to speak.
[3:08:33] So, if we go through the administrative route as we suggested before we make the decision, what are we risking?
[3:08:41] I mean, you have a right to exhaust your administrative remedies.
[3:08:45] You have to exhaust your administrative remedies before you could ever go to court as you know.
[3:08:49] So, you know, I would assume that unless an administrative court judge makes a ruling
[3:08:55] on September 2nd, the deadlines would be told until, you know, decision is rendered by the court,
[3:09:01] And then they would have to give you time to come into compliance.
[3:09:04] And so I don't see a legal.
[3:09:08] Because that's not really the idea.
[3:09:10] We're not doing litigation at that point.
[3:09:11] We're not suing the state.
[3:09:12] We're not pursuing a administrative thing to allow.
[3:09:15] And that could take a 30, 60, whatever.
[3:09:17] I don't know how many day process it is.
[3:09:19] But it certainly seems to be told there
[3:09:23] their enforcement provisions
[3:09:25] because we're pursuing the administrative revenue.
[3:09:27] And I think that that is my understanding, looking at that with their coming in.
[3:09:33] When is they hearing September 2nd and 10th?
[3:09:35] And they wanted out by when?
[3:09:37] The next day, September 3rd.
[3:09:39] But I don't think that's, I think that would be if you didn't.
[3:09:42] I think I think they would have to stay that action,
[3:09:45] and depending the outcome of the treatment.
[3:09:46] We have two weeks from the date of the letter to essentially put them on notice
[3:09:51] that we are seeking the administrative armory.
[3:09:53] Yeah.
[3:09:54] We have to submit information.
[3:09:55] They've already indicated that there's two types of administrative harmonies. There's a formal and there's an informal if you if you if you just agree on the facts
[3:10:03] Then you would go forward with a formal hearing which is you know, it's much more complicated
[3:10:08] They've indicated of course upon us that they believe this is an informal hearing meaning that the only there's only legal issues at stake and so it it's a much more
[3:10:20] Compact hearing
[3:10:20] a big question has anyone gone to one of these hearings have you seen hearing we have no idea
[3:10:25] what this hearing he was voted to go to the hearing but I just don't know why it's scheduled for
[3:10:32] the second and third those are the days that the hearing is going to go to one of our cities
[3:10:35] have a good idea. I'm saying that they're all scheduled for the same day in one of the other.
[3:10:40] Mike, Mike, Mike, Mike, surprise is that if we decide to exhaust the administrative route with
[3:10:48] be it formula or informal, and I think it's probably, I don't think the facts really are
[3:10:52] an issue here.
[3:10:53] I think it really is a question of law and it's to whether or not the state has the right
[3:10:57] and whether or not federal law preempts or all these other questions that are raising here.
[3:11:03] Yes, I think that, because it means so much to so many, we should at least go through the
[3:11:10] process of doing the administrative.
[3:11:15] The only thing I'd like clarification on, I don't know if we can get it, are we out of the woods
[3:11:21] if we do this?
[3:11:22] I mean, there's 60 million, there's no risk to us if we decide to go further.
[3:11:26] So the letter is daunting, it's threatening, however, there is a prescribed procedure in Florida
[3:11:32] statute.
[3:11:33] They simply can't just withhold the money, so you essentially have to not comply, will
[3:11:38] fully not comply, and then they would send notices about the withholding of money.
[3:11:43] But pursuing a administrative hearing is not willfully not comply.
[3:11:45] No, no, no, it's pursuing your administrative remedies that are given to the law.
[3:11:48] Which they outlined in which they gave us an option in the letter.
[3:11:51] Can we verify with them that our assumptions are correct?
[3:11:57] Okay, so legal, I mean, I think it's a legal process or same.
[3:11:59] I understand that.
[3:12:01] But again, you also have to be mindful that the governor does have veto power.
[3:12:06] And so that's not going to be in the forest statute.
[3:12:09] And we've seen that with many of our funding requests.
[3:12:12] To be fair, the governor veto's most things have come to doubt.
[3:12:14] I understand. I understand. I'm just saying just because it's not listed in Florida statute there is another mechanism
[3:12:22] or request might be denied. So we we will be ready to go forward on some time or second. It is in Orlando.
[3:12:29] I don't believe that there would be witnesses or anything because it's strictly going to be a legal issue.
[3:12:33] Does Florida Department of Transportation have a legal right to mandate this from a municipality and there are home rule questions.
[3:12:40] It's a very complicated, legal issue, but what it boils down to is whether or not
[3:12:45] talent has to know what's best for your city, and that's in it's a far reach, and that's
[3:12:50] really what the argument is.
[3:12:50] And we cannot control that, but what we can control is at least our approach back, which
[3:12:56] is saying, OK, we're going to follow the law.
[3:12:58] We're going to follow the option that was given us, and exhaust our administrative remedies.
[3:13:03] And if we lose that, which we may lose, we can then decide, and then we know when we lose,
[3:13:08] we can then decide whether or how we would next,
[3:13:13] whether or not the way the commission or the solid suggested
[3:13:16] or some other sort of suggested whether there's another avenue
[3:13:21] that we could pursue to address, you know, the removal of it
[3:13:26] and do we have to do something else and do a,
[3:13:29] whether it's a sidewalk or something, I don't know.
[3:13:31] But we could do something amazing.
[3:13:33] I mean, I just think there's other options there,
[3:13:36] But I think that because there are so many people
[3:13:39] that are, I just always believe we should
[3:13:42] exhaust Administrative, or even if it was something
[3:13:43] I wanted to do, I would still say we want
[3:13:45] to exhaust Administrative, but I just think
[3:13:47] that that's always the way to go and make it final.
[3:13:50] And then we can deal with, then we can deal with what
[3:13:56] are plan B should be.
[3:13:57] That would be my recommendation.
[3:13:59] So I don't know where everybody said about this.
[3:14:02] I didn't speak.
[3:14:03] I worry about the repercussions.
[3:14:05] I mean, you're, listen, I mean, look, the governor can, the governor can probably do whatever he wants to do, but my wife
[3:14:11] We've been seeing it every much, making noise, but we're seeing it here every single day.
[3:14:15] But what I'm saying is, generally, we're seeing it every single day.
[3:14:20] We should be, to stand on, we to stand on SB1.
[3:14:23] What I'm saying is generally speaking, we're going to do an administrative, generally speaking, if you pursue an administrative process which they allowed in the letter.
[3:14:32] They're enforcement would be told until such time as that administrative process is over that is typically the way
[3:14:39] Works it with the state it worked with the Department of Environmental sir. It was all of the state
[3:14:44] The finance service all of them if you exercise the right to go to to that process
[3:14:49] That is usually the way it pursues now whether it's a governor decides
[3:14:52] You know, you know all of you know
[3:14:55] The hell with it. I'm gonna go all speed this way. I don't know, but at least we
[3:15:00] We'll be doing. We will be following all.
[3:15:03] And in the meantime, can we direct Mr. Mortar, start looking at other locations, because I'm in
[3:15:08] it soon that we know. I think it's a long check that we win, but I don't think it's just
[3:15:12] because I think it's a long shot of winning, doesn't mean I don't think we should
[3:15:15] at least.
[3:15:15] Listen, we should do it. I think there are no repercussions to the residents financially.
[3:15:20] And in the meantime, if we locate another spot, then we can transition quickly.
[3:15:24] All right, I'm Commissioner. I didn't know Commissioner Burns is so here. Sorry. You know, I try to be quiet.
[3:15:30] You are. I mean, but it only lasts forever.
[3:15:34] I just want to thank everybody for coming out to who came out and spoke.
[3:15:39] It's so passionately about this.
[3:15:41] And I know that this is.
[3:15:44] This set will cast become a meaningful symbol of inclusion in our community.
[3:15:49] We are a welcome city.
[3:15:50] I understand being marginalized, I've come from one of those communities where I've been marginalized.
[3:15:57] And I know this is not an easy decision, however, we have to realize the consequences of this $60 million.
[3:16:07] However, I am prepared to support exhausting that.
[3:16:16] I mean, you know, it's about home ruling as the Zellon said, you know, what's next?
[3:16:22] This is just, you know, the excuse this time is the, is the, is the prior side?
[3:16:27] Well, what is it going to be the next time?
[3:16:29] You know, so I am for supporting going through and taking it to the, to the end.
[3:16:35] I am, I am also in support of another location.
[3:16:38] However, we need to exhaust this, this first option for success.
[3:16:42] But we want to be sure to address Commissioner Cassandra Commissioner Marker's position that we should verify.
[3:16:50] I mean, I don't know, as I said, the governor can do what he wants to do anyway.
[3:16:53] He can order people in here to do it today without even asking us.
[3:16:56] And that's the way he operates.
[3:16:58] And that's the way the state's generally up.
[3:16:59] I mean, governors have that power.
[3:17:01] Regardless of the state they're in.
[3:17:04] So, but all I'm saying is how it typically works in the state of Florida.
[3:17:07] if you exhaust, if you invoke your right to go through an administrative hearing, the other aspects
[3:17:15] they said, they said, they told him, which means they sit back and they don't do anything
[3:17:18] until such time as a decision rendered. And typically after your administrative hearing, they would say,
[3:17:22] you have five days to comply. You have one week to comply. You have two days to go, I don't know,
[3:17:26] whatever they say. But at least it would allow us to go through that process and have them tell us
[3:17:31] once and for all, which is stronger than a letter, once and for all, okay, you got to move it.
[3:17:36] And at least we'll have a chance to have legal arguments.
[3:17:40] And frankly, I think there's going to be a lot
[3:17:41] of other communities developing good legal arguments, too.
[3:17:44] So there may be strength in numbers, so to speak.
[3:17:47] So they're waiting on their way.
[3:17:50] They're doing it on their way.
[3:17:51] Many are.
[3:17:52] So do we have, I mean, with the caveat that you're
[3:17:55] going to double-check that, by understanding
[3:17:57] of the way the administrative process works in Florida,
[3:18:00] do we have a consensus to try to go forth and do the administrative
[3:18:04] if they're here first?
[3:18:05] If Ling gets yes, I'm unborn.
[3:18:07] If Ling gets a no, I'd like us to reconvene.
[3:18:09] Well, the problem is our next meeting.
[3:18:11] That's also temporary.
[3:18:11] No, no, we can't.
[3:18:13] I can do that.
[3:18:14] I can do that.
[3:18:16] I'm not concerned about the tolling provision because-
[3:18:19] It's great.
[3:18:19] I believe that's the point.
[3:18:20] Then it would render the whole administrative process meeting list, so I'm not worried about that.
[3:18:25] So if I'm comfortable moving forward with our, with our attorney's expertise.
[3:18:29] So I'm not really.
[3:18:29] Which would you turn it?
[3:18:36] Thank you so Mr. Moore. I think what we're asking is to this list, the letter gave us the ability to add have an administrative hearing.
[3:18:46] I think we want to be able to present our cases to why we think, you know, as I said, I think it's a long shot.
[3:18:51] But not to do it is, you know,
[3:18:54] So ladies and gentlemen, we're operating a good faith here, so let's just, on that no ladies and gentlemen,
[3:19:01] there will not, and I'll likely that there will not be a presentation during your steps in
[3:19:05] the third meeting relative to all turn to this and that because we'll still be involved more and
[3:19:09] likely in this administrative proceeding process because that may take coming days,
[3:19:14] whatever the case may be, so until the results of that come back, the very next city commission
[3:19:19] meeting will have an opportunity to proceed accordingly. But I would just say we should plan on it,
[3:19:24] I guess that's where I'm going.
[3:19:26] We're going to lose.
[3:19:28] And if I made ladies and gentlemen, I will be pleased.
[3:19:34] I will be prepared accordingly.
[3:19:36] Much like I was prepared this evening.
[3:19:38] We'll simply pivot for the time applicable.
[3:19:40] Maybe we'll win.
[3:19:41] So who knows?
[3:19:42] I mean, let's give it a shout.
[3:19:48] Got a call.
[3:19:53] Anyway, so
[3:19:54] So we've got consensus, right?
[3:19:57] So we're done with 7AA.
[3:20:00] We're now doing with the 7BB, which is formerly 6H1.
[3:20:03] The approval of Result should be 187.
[3:20:05] I want a 178-25 award agreement to architects design.
[3:20:11] And this has been pulled.
[3:20:12] I told this one.
[3:20:14] Mr. Barlett, why don't you, you,
[3:20:19] we're going to wait a second
[3:20:20] to you all leave because you're.
[3:20:22] It was six, six, six, six, one.
[3:20:26] Oh, the quicker we're going to have a quick meeting.
[3:21:28] That was you
[3:21:30] All the municipalities get federal funds through various sources of revenue sharing and things such as that. I'm not
[3:21:38] It the issue is it's a very complex issue. It's a very complex issue. I
[3:21:43] So, but you know, let's go. I want to get to the administrative hearing first, and then we can
[3:21:58] Get somebody in the audience. I want
[3:22:01] This isn't your complaint the meeting's going too long. Oh, you know, no, not you're not that lucky
[3:22:06] We're not going to remove you.
[3:22:09] You're planning about how long things are taking place.
[3:22:13] We had an hour of public comment, you know, people are allowed to speak.
[3:22:16] I don't know what I'd say before you democracy's a bitch.
[3:22:20] Anyway,
[3:22:25] so I'm on the pull this.
[3:22:26] I'm happy to just quickly go over why before we make Missy do a whole presentation.
[3:22:33] So I pull it because as we know, this is part of the $100 million bond referendum
[3:22:37] That are residents approved for the new police headquarters. This is a design of that facility
[3:22:42] I think it's one of the most significant projects that we will see up here as a commission. Certainly I will
[3:22:48] So I just as we've gone over before with bigger projects like Palm Pay Park. I believe for some of the of this scale and importance
[3:22:54] the public should see
[3:22:58] How we're making our decision and they should see the presentations. I think from all four applicants that went before to selection committee
[3:23:04] rather than us just accepting the committee's recommendation.
[3:23:08] And I do just want to note, and this is not a critique on anyone or
[3:23:14] any of the committee members, but this was a very small committee.
[3:23:17] There's only three people.
[3:23:19] Two folks from public works and a lieutenant from PD.
[3:23:23] And I just think for a decision this magnitude,
[3:23:26] a selection should involve director level leadership,
[3:23:29] and ultimately should still come before the commission,
[3:23:32] But maybe a more useful reference point if we had a larger committee with more director-level
[3:23:38] leadership. I only say this because I know we're going to have the GC for this coming through soon.
[3:23:44] The build I probably wouldn't be here by then, but I would just recommend that for that.
[3:23:48] Maybe it's already planned that way that it's more senior staff and it's a larger committee.
[3:23:53] But regardless, if I am so there, I'll still want us to make the final call on that, too, frankly.
[3:23:58] I just think in terms of our reference. It's more helpful.
[3:24:00] But in any case, point is, for some of this scale, I just think that we should see the presentations.
[3:24:07] I am just going to jump in here because for the same reason I thought we should do it.
[3:24:12] If you mentioned Pompeii, Parker, I know I've mentioned it.
[3:24:15] And I, with the water plant and everything like that, this is to contract to build like a hundred million dollars.
[3:24:21] I mean, it's a big project.
[3:24:23] And I think that, I mean, I'm sure all these, I don't know, you know, who's, I don't even know who's on the list quite frankly.
[3:24:28] But I do think that we should have the opportunity to talk to the architect being selected that's going to be building this project.
[3:24:38] So, I mean it just all we're really asking is to see whether or not you can orchestrate, I know you can.
[3:24:43] Some kind of, where they could come to a site they've done before for other projects and just give their pitches to why they want to be the chosen architect and what they've written to the table,
[3:24:53] obesity, what somebody else might bring to the table. And I think they're probably all qualified
[3:24:56] and I'm sure the selection process was not easy. But, you know, that's all I'm saying.
[3:25:02] That's all I'm saying. I'm going to conclude. I'm just twice like a herd with you tonight.
[3:25:05] It's getting worse.
[3:25:07] So, similar to what we did with Pompeo Park, is that we were asking for you'll have the presentations
[3:25:10] come before you.
[3:25:11] Yeah, you give it whatever it was.
[3:25:12] 10 minutes, whatever it was, the community, the pitching construction is a little different
[3:25:16] than pitching architectural services. But I still want to know what methodology is in their architectural
[3:25:22] services and how much, because a lot of this is going to depend on these architect firms,
[3:25:28] whoever is chosen, interfacing with our police departments, what the police department wants to see.
[3:25:35] And I want to make sure that everybody is kind of on the same page in that development,
[3:25:40] because ultimately, we'll all benefit by that. I'm not going to dominate here, but that's just my view.
[3:25:45] So I think four-ten minute presentations. If I could interject, we're a little bit further
[3:25:52] down the road than selection. What it is before you tonight is an negotiated contract with
[3:25:59] the top ranked firm. So, had we been given this direction earlier in the process, then we
[3:26:07] would have brought you the presentations from the three or four top ranked firms. I can tell
[3:26:15] you that the firm that was selected by the committee has a wealth of experience in designing
[3:26:21] Public Safety Facilities. They've done many, many, many of them in South Florida and they are a very well-respected firm.
[3:26:30] We will have an opportunity to interact with them.
[3:26:34] At the end of the first phase, the first phase is what is before you tonight,
[3:26:40] which is where they will actually go back over this space needs analysis that was done in 2019.
[3:26:47] for the police department, we will update that to what today's vision is for the police department.
[3:26:54] They will develop a number of different concepts and they will bring those back to commission.
[3:27:00] And you'll have an opportunity at that time to interact with them if at that time you do not like what you see
[3:27:07] or what they've brought you then you have the option to not go forward with that firm.
[3:27:13] And we can pick up with the information that they've gathered at that point and we can move forward with a different firm and bring the new firms to you to any of you.
[3:27:26] Yeah, why was it the first time we're seeing this on an agenda?
[3:27:30] This is how all of our contracts have been brought forward to you.
[3:27:35] Is it?
[3:27:37] It is.
[3:27:38] We've usually it's on consent.
[3:27:40] We approve it.
[3:27:41] right this was on consent that got pulled right but usually it's while we still have
[3:27:46] a chance to see presentations I thought it's not it's we bring you my missing something I mean
[3:27:56] but the solicitation does allow almost like a release valve for the commission the city
[3:28:01] of Delver Beach Reserves are right to accept your reject any role proposals and whole or in part with
[3:28:05] it without cause to weigh in irregularities or technicalities into a ward on such coverage in terms of
[3:28:11] that we will best serve the interest of the city.
[3:28:13] Well, my apologies, I, for misunderstanding the process, Missy.
[3:28:17] I think given that this is a bond funded project and given the public nature of it,
[3:28:22] I do think that we should exercise that right and see presentations.
[3:28:26] It's, again, I think this is too high profile.
[3:28:30] Is this part of the project?
[3:28:32] Oh, okay.
[3:28:33] Yeah, this is the design of $100 million bond funded project.
[3:28:38] And my apologies for doing this late in the game.
[3:28:40] I didn't realize I would have brought this up earlier in the process, but that being said, I still think that we should be seeing presentations.
[3:28:49] I'd like to move ahead with this project to slow down for a long time.
[3:28:53] The last time we talked about this, what we can do when we see it, if we want to, is pull it and then request a presentation.
[3:29:00] I do not want to do that at this time, and I think that practice has always worked.
[3:29:04] When there's things of concern, you pull them, we see the presentation.
[3:29:08] I'm sorry, we have three people making this call for a hundred million dollar police station.
[3:29:13] I just want only one lieutenant from the police station was involved in the selection committee process.
[3:29:19] I just don't think that's enough oversight in my opinion to make this decision.
[3:29:23] And again, I would have brought that up earlier had I known that we weren't going to have a chance to see this.
[3:29:28] You know, people went out and voted for a hundred million dollar bond for this project.
[3:29:32] they deserve to see how this decision being made.
[3:29:36] I don't want to be stuck with something
[3:29:37] and then have to tell people,
[3:29:39] we never really got to say in it.
[3:29:41] I'm sorry, but I think this is a big deal.
[3:29:44] I think we need more of this process.
[3:29:46] Do you mind me asking Mr. Long and apologize?
[3:29:48] I stuck down out for some reason.
[3:29:49] I thought you were talking about Pompeii Park
[3:29:51] for some reason, but excuse me.
[3:29:54] With the question does make sense if Mr. Long
[3:30:00] Correct. That is that the case that there were three lower level employees. I mean, I would assume if you're in charge that this was done correctly.
[3:30:09] With respect to the selection.
[3:30:11] But it is.
[3:30:12] We're reading departments or we're you.
[3:30:13] We're not department directors. They're engineers.
[3:30:16] Okay. Well, that's better.
[3:30:18] That's the department director.
[3:30:19] Thank you.
[3:30:20] Thank you.
[3:30:22] Yes.
[3:30:23] No, I know. I realize that.
[3:30:25] I was going to go to the bathroom.
[3:30:26] To me, I think that for something of the size and scope.
[3:30:30] It requires direct or level oversight and knowledge.
[3:30:36] And frankly,
[3:30:40] I think it requires our oversight in knowledge as a commission, where this is something that is going to be public facing.
[3:30:49] This isn't just a lift station or something technical.
[3:30:53] If that was the case, let the engineers make the call.
[3:30:56] You know, my background's an engineer, I have an engineering degree, I understand when engineers are better suited when we should defer to their expertise and I respect that.
[3:31:03] But this is our police station.
[3:31:06] And it's something that people voted to spend their money on.
[3:31:10] We as their representatives need to be involved in this process.
[3:31:14] And you're talking about what it looks like in our community and how we're going to interface with the team that ends up building it.
[3:31:20] I just think it's critical that we have more of a say in that.
[3:31:24] Again, I apologize for screwing up the process here and making your life harder.
[3:31:28] I wish I'd have known earlier, but that being said, I just think we need to be involved in this selection.
[3:31:35] Give me the timeline if we were to say we would like to have presentations between the time of those presentations,
[3:31:42] because there is a period of negotiation period takes a considerable,
[3:31:47] how long have you been negotiating this contract?
[3:31:49] You've been negotiating this contract for several, several weeks, a couple of months.
[3:31:57] The other proposals have been notified that they did not win the contract.
[3:32:04] And we can go back to them and see if they're willing to come and give a presentation.
[3:32:11] Sure.
[3:32:12] I, this scale, when you do these, there's a scale.
[3:32:15] we have called people in front of us when there's like when it's one point off because we say well
[3:32:20] that's remarkably close and what was the factor because sometimes it's community engagement in
[3:32:25] you think well that's irrelevant I mean it's not irrelevant but irrelevant to the design
[3:32:31] for instance where's in the firms that were involved around the agenda covers she can you
[3:32:45] GLC was 273 and want to make urgency in architects 266, Harvard,
[3:32:52] Jolly 266 and Neta 257.
[3:32:55] So there was a 7 point difference between the first and the second.
[3:33:00] And then how much from the second to the first?
[3:33:02] The first and the second to the fourth.
[3:33:05] 50.
[3:33:06] 16 points?
[3:33:07] 16 points.
[3:33:08] Between the first and the fourth.
[3:33:10] Which is less than 10%.
[3:33:14] So it's six, six, six, six, six, six percent bearing, or seven, seven, seven.
[3:33:18] And we've talked about ten minutes, well, we're not just watching all four.
[3:33:20] We're going to do it.
[3:33:22] All right.
[3:33:22] No, I wouldn't tell when it's fixed.
[3:33:23] I mean, you have to have all four and two.
[3:33:26] You have to have all four and two that you could have to have four and two.
[3:33:27] Yeah, you can't do two.
[3:33:29] But I'm also conscious of Commissioner Kassal's point about not delaying this process too long.
[3:33:37] On the other hand, I mean, again, I think, it's a fair question about
[3:33:42] that the commissioner won't brought about the process of when the commission is engaged in
[3:33:49] something or not. And regardless of this usually a way to do it, I don't believe the city
[3:33:55] negotiates or heck of a lot of a hundred million dollar contracts. This is for a hundred million
[3:34:00] dollar construction fees.
[3:34:01] Lately, you'd be amazed.
[3:34:03] I'm amazed, okay. I would be amazed.
[3:34:05] All right, look, it sounds like...
[3:34:07] Well, I'm, I'm, I, I, I just just so you're, if you, if you reveal the agenda cover,
[3:34:13] Mo, it looks like staff started the process just of issuing the RFQ on December 2nd.
[3:34:19] So that's how long it's taken just to get to this point.
[3:34:22] So December 2nd. December 2nd, 2024.
[3:34:25] Yeah. Well, that's what they have, but we have them.
[3:34:26] That's when the RFQ is issued.
[3:34:27] Yeah, but we have them.
[3:34:28] What are we doing that to mean we have?
[3:34:30] There are eight, and then they're already down to four, four firms for presentations.
[3:34:34] And then they went from there.
[3:34:37] Well, I'm just going to say that I was aware of the process and the only reason that we saw the one from Pompaport was because they were one point different.
[3:34:45] That was the only reason that came to us.
[3:34:47] So this has been the process all along.
[3:34:49] So I'm for moving forward with it.
[3:34:52] Because this is just a design.
[3:34:55] Okay.
[3:34:56] Missionic herself.
[3:34:58] I'm looking for this document.
[3:35:00] Well, back at the risk.
[3:35:02] I will pull two.
[3:35:03] Okay.
[3:35:04] I
[3:35:08] would remind you that this is phase one of this effort.
[3:35:13] There is a stop-go point before phase two.
[3:35:16] If you are unhappy with the product that's presented to you,
[3:35:20] I feel very confident that you will not be.
[3:35:23] But if you are unhappy with the product that's presented to you,
[3:35:27] you have an option at that time to go back out to market.
[3:35:32] I knew all about one of those names and they're all quality, I mean, they could, they're all
[3:35:38] quality groups, so that's your competence, any of them did it frankly good.
[3:35:46] I'm just surprised by this.
[3:35:49] Let's see it.
[3:35:49] Are you a Let's see it or a movie?
[3:35:51] I mean, I think I don't want to delay this, but I do think that if we can have a, you know,
[3:35:58] I'm of two minds, I just think this is such an important project that I would have liked to
[3:36:03] kind of figure out who's going to design it. That was all. But, you know, whatever the commission is, I'm not, you know.
[3:36:09] Well, you, you have to say one away. Well, I, I think I'm, I think I'm going to probably side with, see if we could have a, have a presentation, because I, that's falls in line right.
[3:36:20] Yeah.
[3:36:21] Mr. Transparency.
[3:36:23] I know everything.
[3:36:24] Mr. Transparency.
[3:36:26] I do think that this, it's bond funded. That's not a typical thing. So I understand this is a typical way we do it,
[3:36:32] that are funded by a general obligation bond that get people out of the chart for one moment
[3:36:37] please remember having this discussion. I just think we should have an additional layer of
[3:36:42] tree order and see maybe we should have made that clear up front. I'm looking for the great
[3:36:46] that clear up. You're looking for the grading student. It's in the I don't want the full number. I
[3:36:51] want the breakdown of the number of the grading scale. Do you know what I'm saying? You're looking
[3:36:57] for how they scored? Yeah. I don't think that's wrong. That's what I'm looking for because the total
[3:37:01] The RFP has attached also to the agenda item, and it has the score sheet in it.
[3:37:08] No, but the completeness.
[3:37:09] You have the matrix so that we know what the each one of the category rules it might score sheets by each of the committee members is not.
[3:37:22] See, that's somewhat relevant because there are some factors in those that I would think are not
[3:37:29] persuasive for me individually, right?
[3:37:32] And that's so just for to with Pompey part that was for construction, right. So that was that was different.
[3:37:40] The in I understand commissioner laws concerns, but any design that comes out of this is not going to be decided by staff, right?
[3:37:49] So the designs will always come before the commission they'll go before the public that that's not going to be done.
[3:37:54] This is really just your subject matter experts determining which architect is best suited based
[3:38:03] on their qualification.
[3:38:04] So it's really all that this is.
[3:38:06] So I see both sides of it.
[3:38:07] Pompey Park was a little different because it was just to accept the rankings and negotiate
[3:38:11] an agreement.
[3:38:13] This one, there is actually an agreement.
[3:38:15] So I think I'm comfortable that our RRFQ protects us that you don't necessarily, you're
[3:38:19] not putting a position where you have to accept this because the agreements would negotiate
[3:38:23] and partially executed, but we are pretty far down the timeline that, and I guess that's
[3:38:30] why I guess you need to hone it on what the concern is, because if it's, you know,
[3:38:33] what it's going to look like, number one, you're going to have to input on that, the community
[3:38:37] well, and those designs always come before the city commission.
[3:38:40] Yeah, I guess, you know, because some of the, when I see these selection things, which, you
[3:38:43] know, the matrix with, you know, the commission that I'll refer was, you know, like, I like
[3:38:51] local is supposed to, I mean, foreign.
[3:38:53] I like, you know, this, I mean, depending on what, I give those
[3:38:57] higher creative, if you're depending on what it is.
[3:39:00] I absolutely do, we're not allowed to do the local
[3:39:02] provides section.
[3:39:04] So let me as didn't, didn't they present design concepts at all
[3:39:07] during their presentation?
[3:39:08] No, they did not.
[3:39:09] They were chosen specifically on qualifications.
[3:39:13] This is an RFQ.
[3:39:14] The criteria was experienced method, methodology and work plan,
[3:39:19] organizational structure and capacity.
[3:39:21] That 50 points was awarded for methodology and work plan and the other two received 25.
[3:39:26] We got two and two. You'll up to you. What's your pleasure?
[3:39:34] You love that word consensus?
[3:39:35] I'm giving you, you know, letting it be consensus.
[3:39:39] I think I'm going, do you mind to all entertain the gentleman on that?
[3:39:44] Because I'd like to see the matrix and here's why I'm just recalling a conversation I have with somebody.
[3:39:49] They said that there was something involved in this discussion that they felt they did poorly on and now it's coming to me
[3:39:58] And it would related to something unrelated. Do you want to comment on that?
[3:40:01] I would very much like that. Thank you, because that's that just came to me
[3:40:06] Because I heard anything. I thought that's a big deal. We need to be mindful. I know I'm sorry.
[3:40:11] On the day, I listened to the audio and I didn't have concerns.
[3:40:15] Okay, then if I'm gonna go with the I'm we're gonna move forward as you've selection selection
[3:40:20] if you feel like that's my sense. Thank you, Ms.
[3:40:22] We have to put on the contract.
[3:40:24] Okay, then I need someone who would give me a motion.
[3:40:29] I'd always draw sure that motion.
[3:40:30] Pollution number 1725.
[3:40:34] 1708-25.
[3:40:36] 1708-25.
[3:40:37] That's what I just said.
[3:40:38] I don't know. Thank you.
[3:40:42] Do we have a second?
[3:40:43] I'll second.
[3:40:46] All in favor.
[3:40:47] Aye.
[3:40:48] Aye. Any opposed?
[3:40:50] Yes.
[3:40:50] I'm in no. So there we go. Oh wait. Why don't I stand up there? They're going forward.
[3:40:56] Oh wait a minute. No go. What are we agreeing with?
[3:40:59] Yes. You're saying you want to go right. You're going to want to go to this contract.
[3:41:03] That's what you said.
[3:41:04] Yes. A busy answer to the question that came to mind.
[3:41:07] All right. So then you made the motion that you were going to accept.
[3:41:10] The past this resolution.
[3:41:12] I think that was.
[3:41:12] Yes. But then Missy addressed the question that.
[3:41:17] So I was confused.
[3:41:18] Okay.
[3:41:18] Okay. I'm in the affirmative for going forward.
[3:41:22] We do do over. Okay. I need a motion to approve resolution.
[3:41:26] One seven eight dash two five, which is going to do the contract.
[3:41:30] Two two thirty nine six three two.
[3:41:32] Resolution number one seven eight dash two five.
[3:41:35] Do I have a second? Second. All in favor.
[3:41:38] Aye. Any opposed? No. No. Good. We got three to two.
[3:41:42] We're going to. So, Missy, you got your marching orders.
[3:41:45] We have consensus.
[3:41:47] We have a vote.
[3:41:49] Sorry.
[3:41:50] I'm just, I'm just, I'm just, I'm just giving the commission a gazelle.
[3:41:56] Item 7A.
[3:41:57] The resolution to, well, you can be, you want to do the resolution.
[3:42:00] Resolution number.
[3:42:01] One, six, six, seven, four, five.
[3:42:03] Resolution of the City Commission.
[3:42:04] The City Council.
[3:42:05] The City Council.
[3:42:05] The City Council.
[3:42:13] The City Council.
[3:42:14] to the request for qualifications.
[3:42:17] 2025-019 authorizes in the city manager to execute any amendments and renewals there too,
[3:42:22] and to take any and all actions necessary to affect you at the intent of this resolution
[3:42:26] for about the ineffective date and for the purposes.
[3:42:30] Thank you very much.
[3:42:31] Missy, you're still up.
[3:42:33] I am still up in a similar situation.
[3:42:36] We are talking about the award of the architectural design contract
[3:42:43] for the Crest Theatre.
[3:42:47] So the contract components in this are to initially evaluate the ability to accommodate
[3:42:55] a variety of performance types and community uses to provide a set of options for
[3:43:06] the architect has agreed in this contract to bring a base option, the much talked about cheap
[3:43:15] and cheerful option, and then with two additive options, which would be an upgrade from
[3:43:23] cheap and cheerful, and then the final option would be all the way to the refined and elegant
[3:43:29] option.
[3:43:30] And that's what I call it, but I don't think it depends on how that here goes.
[3:43:36] Just saying.
[3:43:38] So once this initial phase of this contract is done, the architect will be bringing
[3:43:45] forward all three of those designs for commission to look at and to choose between and
[3:43:54] improve moving forward with the second phase which would be the actual design of the chosen
[3:44:00] alternative. The conceptual design for this project, it's confined to the interior of the
[3:44:08] auditorium, the stage, the dressing rooms and related restroom facilities, and the rooftop
[3:44:15] mechanical units.
[3:44:18] The first phase of design for this, the design cost is 236,862 dollars,
[3:44:25] And the final design cost will be determined once the commission has chosen the alternative that they want to move forward with.
[3:44:36] I love to put these fancy charts in here to show you how much work goes into between the notice to proceed, which we expect to happen on or around September 1, which I think is Labor Day.
[3:44:50] So it'll probably be September 2nd and when we expect to be back before Commission to bring you the three alternatives to choose from in January.
[3:45:01] I just want to say thank you, because I was the one complaining at times that we hadn't looked at all the alternatives.
[3:45:07] So I think this is great that we'll have three alternatives to choose from as a city.
[3:45:12] And let the chips fall really well. I think this is great.
[3:45:16] Thank you.
[3:45:16] Were there any public meetings for this?
[3:45:21] There have been a number of public meetings for the use of the Crest Theatre.
[3:45:27] We don't normally do public meetings before choosing an architect to design something.
[3:45:34] We've taken most of our most of our direction directly from commission during public commission meetings.
[3:45:41] How is this different from the one that we just moved forward?
[3:45:48] The scale of it for one thing.
[3:45:50] The scale of design for the Crest Theatre is very small and limited.
[3:45:55] it's just the auditorium area and there has been a lot of commission discussion on exactly
[3:46:03] how much is this renovation going to cost, what is it going to look like in the end, but
[3:46:09] there's not been a lot of consensus that was provided back to us.
[3:46:13] So it's different in that way, the initial design dollars are smaller,
[3:46:25] the police department is a public safety government obligation bond that was approved by the voters, and it's a much bigger project.
[3:46:40] I mean, I just want to make sure that we have a great, you know, it was a lot of options.
[3:46:45] We have a small theater that I wanted to be the best you can be for its size and what kind of shows us capable of getting.
[3:46:52] And, you know, because it is on main and main and, you know, when I remember the crest was first done, it was a very high quality, you know,
[3:47:00] thinking they were very successful over the years. And I just want to keep ourselves having options to do all different kinds of stuff.
[3:47:05] So we'll have a look at that when he comes back.
[3:47:08] Yeah, I would say that this architectural firm has done has renovated historic theaters all over the country.
[3:47:16] Right.
[3:47:16] It's really their primary thing.
[3:47:19] And they were very complementary of how great our theater is.
[3:47:22] They're very excited about doing the design for us.
[3:47:27] Well, if you're doing the questions, I need a motion to approve.
[3:47:30] Seven eight.
[3:47:31] Right.
[3:47:31] Almost one six seven dash 25.
[3:47:33] Second.
[3:47:33] All in favor?
[3:47:35] Aye.
[3:47:35] Any opposed?
[3:47:37] Okay.
[3:47:37] We're good.
[3:47:39] 7B.
[3:47:40] Now, 7B.
[3:47:41] 7C and 7D.
[3:47:42] If anybody's here for those meetings, I'm going to be asking you all to stand up and
[3:47:47] these sworn, but I'm going to first read you the Quasadjudicial Rules.
[3:47:52] These three will be Quasadjudicial hearings.
[3:47:55] These hearings will be conducted in accordance with the Quasadjudicial Rules.
[3:47:58] The applicants in the city shall be each be allowed 15 minutes to present their case.
[3:48:02] The public will be allowed to speak for three minutes each or maximum of six minutes if a person represents an organization or a group of people who are present but agree not to speak.
[3:48:12] The City Commission and staff and the applicant may be allowed to cross-examine a witness. The City or the applicant will be allowed to offer a rebuttal testimony.
[3:48:21] The decision to approve or deny an application or appeal may not be legally made upon personal views as to whether a project is a good project or not.
[3:48:28] Normally, a decision would be based on the numbers of citizens who support or pose a particular project.
[3:48:33] The law requires that all decisions must be made on the basis of whether the project meets the requirements of law,
[3:48:38] the comprehensive plan, and the land development regulations.
[3:48:42] All of you, if anybody is going to be speaking on this, if you could please rise and be sworn by the clerk.
[3:48:47] By the authority, back to the only thing, as a member of the State of Florida,
[3:48:50] that you see the law in front of the cast of the morning, about to get out of the truth, the hall of truth, and nothing but the truth.
[3:48:57] Okay, I'm going to be asking for expert communications as it relates to each individual one to when it
[3:49:02] When it called so I'm going to be we're going to be starting with 7B resolution 150-25
[3:49:09] Has it has already any expertly conversations
[3:49:13] Not that I'm aware of that
[3:49:14] I'm okay hearing none if the
[3:49:18] That the
[3:49:19] Santhi, do you want me to read the caption?
[3:49:21] Oh, yes, please read the caption a resolution the city commission the city as I read
[3:49:25] I'm very much forward to approving a waiver to table 7.1.7D of the land development regulations to allow C1 to be constructed above the base flood elevation.
[3:49:34] For the property located at 1019 Lakeshore Drive is more particularly described here in providing an effective day and for the purposes.
[3:49:41] Thank you very much.
[3:49:42] If you could enter the project file into the record.
[3:49:45] Yeah, Sam, the Agenitis Development Services Director, and I'd like to enter a file 2025-210 into the record.
[3:49:53] And Ms. Gonzalez is here with an overview of the request.
[3:49:56] Thanks. You're welcome.
[3:49:57] Hello. My name is Eileen Gonzalez. I work with C-Side Marine Construction.
[3:50:01] I'm here with your billbow, and we are representing Paul's Dad Feld, which is the homeowner for 1019 Lakeshore Drive.
[3:50:08] We are currently in contract with this client to build a new C-wall at this property.
[3:50:12] And we are seeking a waiver to section 7.170 in order to raise the C-wall above the current base blood elevation.
[3:50:25] Do I click it myself?
[3:50:26] Yeah, I'm not the only one. I'm a low-tech person.
[3:50:30] Okay, so for this request I just said it's to raise the wall above the base blood elevation.
[3:50:35] The current.
[3:50:37] Do we not have presentations on the screen?
[3:50:42] We're fixing standby.
[3:50:44] We'd like to be able to, some of this can't read that far.
[3:50:47] We have to look at the screen and just we're old and we're kind of...
[3:50:58] You can't go on.
[3:50:58] You may have to go watch your show.
[3:51:01] So basically, section 7.170 limits the height of the C-wall to the base load elevation of a property.
[3:51:09] The base load elevation for this property is 9.
[3:51:13] The existing C-wall for, yeah, the existing C-wall for this property is already at about 10.
[3:51:19] It ranges between 10 and 10.65 and ABD.
[3:51:22] So it is already above this baseline elevation.
[3:51:25] It is in poor condition.
[3:51:26] So we are seeking to get away before it.
[3:51:29] But this is a breakdown, essentially, of everything.
[3:51:34] Existing site condition.
[3:51:35] So existing C-wall is between 9.67 and 10.10 and ABD.
[3:51:40] The adjacent plan is higher than that.
[3:51:44] I love 11.6 to 11.93, meaning that when you look at a property,
[3:51:49] it has a pretty significant downward slope, which creates an unsafe drop off from the yard to the
[3:51:56] waterway, reduces flip protection, a resiliency, and this particular homeowner does have
[3:52:01] young children, which creates an unsafe environment when they are in that backyard.
[3:52:07] Here you
[3:52:08] can see the drop off, the slope, you can see the properties, slopes down, cissing c-wall.
[3:52:16] So we are
[3:52:16] posing to raise a C-wall to 12.6 NABD, which is slightly above the planned elevation, and
[3:52:24] this will avoid any extreme drop-offs, create a sacred by-rip of the young children, enhances
[3:52:31] store protection, a lot of municipalities in Palm Beach County are actually taking away their
[3:52:36] maxes and making it so that you can raise your C-wall up to whatever height you'd like as long
[3:52:46] main concern with it is just the fact that the C-wall slopes off. Everybody around Palm Beach County
[3:52:51] is wanting to raise their walls, see what ties are rising, and it is an inevitable fact. So
[3:52:58] that is why we are proposing that, and it would be approximately 2.5 to 2.93 feet higher than
[3:53:05] what existing C-wall elevation is. We do have approval from the state, that the AP, we have approval
[3:53:12] army force of engineers and we also got approval from Palm Beach County. They reviewed our
[3:53:18] plans and they said they had no objection toward design.
[3:53:23] So basically, with this installation
[3:53:26] of this new C-wall, there are no adverse effects on neighboring properties. We are actually doing
[3:53:31] both the C-walls at the end of this road together and we're putting them at the same elevation.
[3:53:37] There are no unsafe conditions created or anything we are making a safer environment.
[3:53:45] No special privilege conferred relief is based entirely on existing site-specific elevation conditions.
[3:53:51] And any similar property facing the same great disparity would require a similar relief.
[3:53:56] And no in a munition of public facilities.
[3:53:59] All workers within private property boundaries and does not interfere with utilities, access or public infrastructure.
[3:54:06] Here you can see this is the neighboring property and you can see that there are wall, the existing
[3:54:12] C wall for this particular property, 1019-litre drive, is that about 10 ranges, but around
[3:54:20] 10, NABD.
[3:54:21] You can see that the property right there is significantly higher and I think even a little
[3:54:26] higher than what we are proposing, we didn't shoot the elevations for that property because
[3:54:30] is in our property but you can see based on what the existing elevation is that it is
[3:54:36] significantly higher.
[3:54:40] This is kind of just elaborating on what I just said that it
[3:54:44] by as raising a C wall to the elevation that we are proposing. We are protecting the property against
[3:54:52] any storm, surge protection, a lot of properties down here in Palm Beach County. Whenever the
[3:54:57] The king tides come, the whole backyards are getting flooded, it's a fact, it's coming all
[3:55:02] all the way up to the sea wall with a lot of properties, and that is why universally
[3:55:06] a lot of municipalities are raising their codes, so these unique great differentials make
[3:55:13] strict compliance and safe and impractable, and as I mentioned before, it's just creates an
[3:55:18] unsafe environment when you are in the backyard of your residents,
[3:55:24] it by completing this
[3:55:25] project. We are creating a long term shoreline protection, which reduces erosion, kind of just
[3:55:32] building all into everything that I was just saying. But everybody, there's a lot of
[3:55:37] seawalls in Delray Beach that need to be replaced and repaired. And a lot of people are doing
[3:55:43] either seawall capitalizations or brand new seawall replacements. And by raising the seawall,
[3:55:49] And of course, like, just you're just protecting your property against a storm surge in a bunch of type of flooding.
[3:55:59] So essentially, the proposed D wall elevation of 12.60 and ABD meets all waiver criteria on their section 2.411B.
[3:56:08] It's necessary to address unique site conditions in your safety and enhanced storm and type of flood protection.
[3:56:14] fully consistent with modern and coastal engineering principles and supported by state and federal
[3:56:18] approvals and we respectfully request the city to approve the waiver as submitted.
[3:56:25] I don't know if Peter would like to add anything.
[3:56:27] I'm pretty much, you know, what I was like this, I want to bring it up pretty even for a
[3:56:32] safe place for the kids.
[3:56:33] And even if we did confirm or comply with the base blood elevation, we'd be bringing the
[3:56:39] sea wall down, creating even more of a slope with the property, it's already above the base
[3:56:43] in elevation as it is, and that's essentially a great, thank you very much.
[3:56:49] Very welcome.
[3:56:49] To the city.
[3:56:50] Okay, so the basis of waivers are on the individual condition, and I think that we permit
[3:56:58] seawalls that are being raised all day long, but don't require waivers.
[3:57:01] So the code is not necessarily the issue, it's the application of the code,
[3:57:05] for you to consider on this specific property.
[3:57:09] And I think just to provide a little of it a little bit of visuals and I would pay attention to this property as well for the next item
[3:57:18] So in this specific area of like Ida
[3:57:23] You know ultimately
[3:57:25] The the section of the code we have
[3:57:27] Is meant to apply the rules consistently to everyone but not everyone is at the same starting point
[3:57:32] So the base blood elevation and I'll just remind you of some of the fences and walls
[3:57:37] we've had to deal with when people fill their entire yard instead of just lifting the house.
[3:57:43] And so you can see the house should be here and the yard should slip away from the house
[3:57:49] of the water is going to the house and then ultimately there's a sea wall.
[3:57:53] The issue with this one is that the existing conditions on the site do not work at all for
[3:57:58] the rules that we have, right?
[3:58:00] They are in the A.E. zone, which is a nine-foot elevation, which means you should be at
[3:58:04] The sea wall that is there is that 10, the finish floor of the house is at 15, so that's why you're seeing that drop off down to the 10 feet.
[3:58:14] It's hard to see pictures sort of flatten them out, right?
[3:58:18] So they're simply asking, you know, we don't want everyone to fill every part of their yard typically.
[3:58:24] It interferes with the floodplain and things like this.
[3:58:26] But the condition here is more that there's the slope.
[3:58:29] It's a very short steep slope.
[3:58:30] And ultimately, they're asking to replace the C-wall at a 12-bit 6-inch, sorry, there we go, 12-bit 6-inch NAVD.
[3:58:47] So you can see here the yard as it exists now is this line, so it's coming down.
[3:58:53] The existing C-wall cap is lower, they're having to fill a little bit behind it, but not a lot.
[3:58:58] So based on the existing conditions of this lot,
[3:59:01] the existing conditions of the property that floods on that
[3:59:05] they're in and the improvements that they want to make
[3:59:08] to ensure that the property is resilient over time,
[3:59:11] the request that you're seeing in this particular condition
[3:59:16] is reasonable.
[3:59:17] It has the EV approval with the caveat that it
[3:59:20] meet our local rules.
[3:59:23] So, and then this is something else as well.
[3:59:29] There's a approval of a marginal dog.
[3:59:32] And Palm Beach County, in the last recent year,
[3:59:35] has begun to repeatedly tell staff that we cannot permit dogs
[3:59:41] in the water parcels that are under their control.
[3:59:43] I've taken this all the way to the Assistant County Administrator.
[3:59:48] Mr. Rutter, I understand obviously they're under different leadership now.
[3:59:51] I'd like to revisit this again.
[3:59:55] This has been an ongoing issue not just for this property, but just as a side note, we have plenty.
[4:00:00] We have Dr. Ruby, residents playing waterfront taxes, many of their neighbors have docks and seawalls, and they expect to have the same.
[4:00:07] So I just wanted to throw that out to make you all aware of it, because at this point we're telling them to call their county and city representatives.
[4:00:17] But I shall take a run with Mr. Bruce or something to see if I can't get some movement on it.
[4:00:24] For this particular case, though, that they're asking for is a two and a half, but waiver.
[4:00:33] So they want to build the new, the highest point of the CWB would be a 12 feet six inches.
[4:00:41] The resolution that was posted online said 12 feet five inches.
[4:00:44] I know none of you are going to go out there and double check it for the edge, but we do want the document to the accurate.
[4:00:49] So I don't just want to say it's at the overall 12, it's 12 feet, six inches, and the waiver's
[4:00:56] standards, I think you've gotten a good overview from the applicant, so I'm here if you have any questions.
[4:01:02] Thank you very much. This is a public, this is a, unfortunately, this is a public hearing,
[4:01:07] anybody who wishes to speak on this file. Please come to the lectern, give your name and address.
[4:01:12] You will each have three minutes. Seeing none, public comment is closed. Is there any cross-examination
[4:01:18] between the city and the applicant,
[4:01:26] this is it, I mean, you got that, if you already missed
[4:01:28] on that one inch, I mean, if it could be, if there could be other stuff there. So, to
[4:01:34] the commission, Mr. Law. I mean, this seems super reasonable to me. I'm going to be in favor.
[4:01:41] Mr. Mark, in favor. Commissioner Casal, Commissioner Burns, in favor. I mean, you're
[4:01:50] going to be seeing more of this as these houses having to be built up and you know this is just
[4:01:54] going to be a fact of life I mean when the other people are doing their sea walls are going to
[4:01:57] want the same thing because of the same slope I mean because FEMA has already said 9 feet and
[4:02:03] maybe next year is 10 feet and you know who knows so I'm in favor of it well so I need a motion
[4:02:10] to approve second I need a roll call vote commission marker yes I'm here alone yes commission
[4:02:18] because they'll definitely buy some more burns.
[4:02:21] Yes, Mayor Carny.
[4:02:22] Yes.
[4:02:22] Motion pass.
[4:02:24] OK.
[4:02:27] 7c.
[4:02:28] None of us are living.
[4:02:28] Well, you're still there.
[4:02:30] This is the same presentation.
[4:02:33] Same thing with different house.
[4:02:34] How about the presentation?
[4:02:35] Different house.
[4:02:36] OK.
[4:02:36] I need to be formal here.
[4:02:38] Were there any expectations for anybody on this file?
[4:02:42] No, no.
[4:02:42] Seeing none.
[4:02:44] Please touch the file into the record.
[4:02:46] I'm sorry.
[4:02:46] This is file 2025.211.
[4:02:50] I'm going to read the caption.
[4:02:51] Please read the caption.
[4:02:52] The resolution of the city commission of the city has already reached Florida, approving
[4:02:55] away over the table 7.7D of the land development regulations to allow sea wall to be
[4:02:59] constructed above the base flood all Asian for the property located at 1020.
[4:03:03] Lakeshore Drive is more particularly described here in providing an effective date in further
[4:03:07] purposes.
[4:03:08] Mayor, because it's essentially the neighbor, if both parties agree to the previous presentation
[4:03:14] with the modification that it's going to do the same thing, because the meeting's going so quickly
[4:03:20] that we don't have a second. We just need to put it up for public policy.
[4:03:24] This is a public public meeting. Are we both in agreement that we're just a good, okay?
[4:03:28] Yes, and that's resolution would also be 12 feet, six inches, just to be a hundred,
[4:03:33] that last inch. Not five, okay, just want to make sure it's correct.
[4:03:36] The house is tad lower, but it's otherwise almost identical.
[4:03:40] I'm going to trust staff on this yeah. This is if there are any members of the public wishing to speak please come to the
[4:03:46] Electron give your name and address you will each have three minutes seeing none public comment is closed
[4:03:51] Is there any rebuttal? I can fourth I'm going through the list I give in this list. I got to go through the
[4:03:56] Okay, to the commission
[4:03:58] Motion to approve
[4:04:00] Second
[4:04:02] The roll call for the place by tomorrow long. Yes commission. Kathal. Yes. Deputy Vice Mayor Burns. Yes mayor
[4:04:08] Yes, to Mr. Marker. Yes, motion pass. Okay, are there any more of these on there be great the same
[4:04:17] Nice one this agenda be over
[4:04:23] Item seven D. This is like quite a judicial hearing as well
[4:04:27] So I'm going to ask because there was a little lull between the times is anybody here anybody here who's wishing to speak on this who has not been sworn
[4:04:34] Could you please stand and be sworn
[4:04:37] Seeing that everybody has been sworn, I'm going to ask the city, has there been any, well, this is a rhetorical question, has there been any
[4:04:46] expertly conversations on this matter?
[4:04:48] Yes, this is 46 greenway.
[4:04:51] Yes, that's what with the attorneys.
[4:04:53] I spoke with the, okay, the division of the song.
[4:04:56] Oh, I spoke with Mr. Charred a long time ago.
[4:05:00] I spoke with Ms. Van, as well.
[4:05:02] on this sort of more on not specific project as much as maybe procedure but about the project
[4:05:08] I mean.
[4:05:09] I don't think expertic includes people from the public right we're allowed that I think
[4:05:12] expertic is.
[4:05:14] Oh it's anybody.
[4:05:15] Anybody you've spoken to?
[4:05:16] Oh anyway you're taking it.
[4:05:17] Okay that's fine.
[4:05:19] I'm trying to think I've got an email from preservation trust and at some point might have spoken
[4:05:24] to somebody I think that I've gotten everyone and the email server communicates.
[4:05:32] were attached to our email this evening.
[4:05:35] Commissioner DeBurn.
[4:05:36] Yes, I want to add Mr. Patton to my conversations and then I have got a couple of emails as well from neighbors.
[4:05:43] Commissioner DeBurn.
[4:05:44] I think I spoke with Mr. Schiller, or maybe Ms. George Euro briefly about it when you were the Neil Strattling or something.
[4:05:52] I think that's it.
[4:05:53] There's already a bit of a talk.
[4:05:53] Commissioner Marker, Mr. Schiller, and I did have some email communications as well.
[4:05:57] Well, if you email communications as well, I spoke with Mr. Schiller.
[4:06:00] I spoke with Mr. Miller.
[4:06:02] I spoke with Mr. Charred.
[4:06:05] I spoke with staff doesn't count.
[4:06:08] I'm allowed to tap the staff.
[4:06:11] I spoke to several members of the historic preservation
[4:06:15] trust couple of them are here.
[4:06:18] I don't need to mention names, right?
[4:06:20] Do you know what I mean?
[4:06:20] I mean typically yes.
[4:06:22] OK, then I spoke with Anne Whitehead.
[4:06:24] I spoke with Gil.
[4:06:25] I spoke with
[4:06:29] Hoop.
[4:06:31] Roger Coop.
[4:06:32] That's right, I spoke with him.
[4:06:34] Oh, you know what, man, I think I have to.
[4:06:36] You're allowed to amend, this is just, you know.
[4:06:38] I'm trying to think, who reached out to me, I'm not going to be.
[4:06:40] I spoke with Sandy Zeller, who's, I saw her earlier, I guess he's still around.
[4:06:44] I spoke with Jim Chard too, I just remember seeing him here.
[4:06:48] Not speak with Mr. Patney did send me an email, but that's on the server.
[4:06:51] We've mentioned that.
[4:06:52] So, let me go through the whole year, right?
[4:06:56] I spoke with a lot of people, I think I covered them all.
[4:06:58] Do you want me to read the resolution, caption?
[4:07:00] Yes, would you please read the caption and shut me up.
[4:07:03] Thank you.
[4:07:03] Resolution number 135 does 25.
[4:07:05] Resolution the City Commission of the City of Saudi Arabia, Florida, affirming the historic
[4:07:08] Preservation Board's approval of a certificate of appropriateness relocation,
[4:07:11] variances, and waivers for the property located at a 46th Marine Way is more
[4:07:14] particularly described here and improving a vertical relocation
[4:07:17] pursuit of Section 4.5.1, E6, B1, of the land development
[4:07:21] relations, LDR, approving variances to LDR section 4.3.4K to reduce the
[4:07:26] side interior reverse step-ax for the structure and to LDR section 4.6.15 to reduce the
[4:07:32] side interior step-ax for assuming approving waivers to the visual compatibility
[4:07:36] sooners and LDR section 4.5.1 E7A14.5.1 E7J2 and 4.5.1 E7M6, providing an effective date
[4:07:46] and further purposes. Mayor, because of the number of variances and waivers I did
[4:07:51] We chat to Mr. Schiller and staff and they will have 40 minutes each to present.
[4:07:57] 40 minutes each?
[4:07:58] Yes.
[4:07:59] It's because of the volume.
[4:08:00] Anyone for death by pizza in the room?
[4:08:03] Checking.
[4:08:04] You want to five minutes per hour?
[4:08:04] I'm going to make a wish.
[4:08:06] I'm not going to make a wish.
[4:08:07] I'm not going to make a wish.
[4:08:09] All right.
[4:08:10] Well, I'm hoping that we don't need it, but okay.
[4:08:12] So each side has 40 minutes.
[4:08:15] Okay.
[4:08:15] I'll do my best to cut it down this way.
[4:08:17] Well, please have a good evening.
[4:08:18] Thank you.
[4:08:19] Please enter the case file into the record.
[4:08:21] Good evening.
[4:08:22] The agenda is to development services director.
[4:08:24] It's your file 2024-133 into the record.
[4:08:29] Mr. Schiller is here with an overview of the applicant's request.
[4:08:34] Thank you.
[4:08:35] Maybe again.
[4:08:36] You may be good.
[4:08:37] Thank you so much, Mr. Mayor.
[4:08:40] Honorary.
[4:08:41] Honorary.
[4:08:42] I can't even talk right now.
[4:08:44] Honorable City Commission.
[4:08:45] And then it's very late in the night as I'm sure you guys know and experience too.
[4:08:50] Before we start, my presentation, I do have to do one thing to preserve the record of this
[4:08:59] preceding on July 15th, I sent the city attorney letter asking that Commissioner Casal be
[4:09:06] recused from this hearing based on comments that she made on the June 17th, 2025 meeting
[4:09:13] where it appeared that Ms. Commissioner Casal
[4:09:17] could not be objective and therefore be violating
[4:09:21] might do process rights.
[4:09:23] Making this request to preserve the record,
[4:09:26] I'm not expecting any action on this request,
[4:09:28] but it is here to preserve the record in case we need
[4:09:30] in the future.
[4:09:32] That's all we need to do to be the what all you need to do.
[4:09:34] Can I speak on that?
[4:09:36] I mean, technically, should have been done
[4:09:37] when the next party of the school is just made
[4:09:38] because we've now started the hearing,
[4:09:40] but I think my letter is self-explanatory,
[4:09:43] but of Ms. Casal wants to, or Ms. Casal wants to.
[4:09:46] Okay, should I have a right to for this case?
[4:09:49] I think this whole thing, look, first of all,
[4:09:53] I think we should look at bias as, as does it go both ways.
[4:09:56] And I like you know, we'll be talking tomorrow.
[4:09:58] Everything's perfect, but you know, it's about avoiding the appearance of impropriety.
[4:10:05] I pulled it, I read from the 103 page report,
[4:10:10] A project of that size should come before the commission, it should not end with a historic preservation board, which is an advisory board.
[4:10:18] But if we're that concerned and this is no disrespect mayor about appearances of impropriety and biases, you've got emails from the architect to the mayor on the project, both his personal email and also his city email.
[4:10:34] You have no disrespect. I met the applicant. He's a lovely gentleman
[4:10:39] $15,000 into the pack that you were utilizing during the election. That is 100% true because I
[4:10:47] I spoke to him. Okay, it's not illegal. I don't know. It's not illegal, but we're talking about who can be biased and appearances of impropriety.
[4:10:54] You have a seasoned developer in our city. Maybe you can be bothered. No, I can't. But you have a seasoned developer in our city
[4:11:02] who never used your title services, who after the election began using your Crystal Title Company,
[4:11:10] the applicant. You have a letter in opposition that came to the city of Del Ray Beach to us,
[4:11:18] and within moments, the applicant was threatening the individual who sent the letter. So someone told
[4:11:24] the applicant, told the applicant that that letter came in via email, and you have a text out there.
[4:11:30] And there has been multiple conversations like this where people are saying, and here's
[4:11:34] a quote in the text, he controls enough of the city officials to influence them.
[4:11:42] You're applicant.
[4:11:44] So I don't know if you're accusing me of something else, I mean, I'm not accusing you, but
[4:11:48] I'm saying if we're all concerned.
[4:11:50] I did, because I knew what you're saying.
[4:11:51] I did go to the ethics board and the board itself, not just surrender to the board itself
[4:11:55] voted.
[4:11:55] They said you don't have a conflict, but you know what someone called me from the county
[4:11:59] and said that it's not about a conflict.
[4:12:02] It's about the appearance of him providing
[4:12:04] and how that affects, I disagree based on that list.
[4:12:07] I would say to you.
[4:12:08] And how that affects the tax payers trust.
[4:12:12] Okay, I'm so happy.
[4:12:13] I'm not going to let you accuse me of that.
[4:12:14] I mean, I'm not accusing you of anyone.
[4:12:16] I'm saying there is a clear answer.
[4:12:18] A clear answer.
[4:12:19] A clear answer is a appearance.
[4:12:20] It's subjective.
[4:12:21] What is it?
[4:12:22] Okay.
[4:12:22] So back to Commissioner Housel.
[4:12:25] Can you be fair and impartial in this matter?
[4:12:26] What's for you?
[4:12:27] Okay, so the mayor he did secure an opinion dated July 29, 2025 from the commissioner on ethics which went to their board and he's correct
[4:12:36] It was ratified and it basically allows him to vote today. So I think we just need to vote move forward and allow the applicant the opportunity to present there
[4:12:45] Thank you so much. And again, no, just just connect to anybody. I have a job to do to represent that way. Thank you so much
[4:12:51] I appreciate that and thank you so much
[4:12:55] everybody's awake. We're here to talk about the appeal of 46 marine
[4:12:58] white. This is the project location highlighted in yellow south of Atlantic
[4:13:05] Avenue right on across from the intracosal on marine white. Here is a sort of a
[4:13:11] streetscape view that I took from across the intracosal canal. You can see the
[4:13:16] subject property outlined in yellow.
[4:13:21] This is if you haven't been in marine
[4:13:22] I think many of you have been, this is the street of Marine Way 18 feet wide, which I do
[4:13:29] have to say is a substandard street in this city, alleys for instance are 20 feet wide,
[4:13:36] other local streets are 22 feet wide, and all other streets are 24 feet wide.
[4:13:42] I bring this up because this affects the perception of streetscape, and we'll get to that.
[4:13:47] just some other additional photos of the property and the surrounding properties, beautiful
[4:13:55] car there. This is the front of the property and I have this slide here to show you how
[4:14:04] the street, Marineway is higher than the great, the tire than the great of the property.
[4:14:11] This gets into discussions that are important about elevations and the proposed elevations
[4:14:16] of this project. And the reason that there is a nine-foot elevation requirement is because
[4:14:21] of this, the significant water damage that is in the structure that has the structure of
[4:14:29] experience through the years. This is the foi. I don't know if it's a foyer, but it's a bonus
[4:14:36] room with a patio. That front door is really a patio door. You can see the step up inside.
[4:14:42] and I do want to make the point here that the applicant is seeking to protect and preserve
[4:14:47] this property. They're not seeking to demolish the property. They have invested a significant
[4:14:52] amount of money into the property to preserve and protect it. Here's another photo of inside
[4:14:58] at the home, it's a two.
[4:15:00] About a two-foot, maybe two a little bit more, foot step up into the main floor of the house.
[4:15:07] And this is the main floor, the living room of the home, beautiful stone, fireplace.
[4:15:12] Again, that will be protected and preserved along with some of the woodwork.
[4:15:17] And here is the rear of the property, and I pointed out the steps here, because you can see the steps up into the property.
[4:15:25] The house isn't sitting at grade.
[4:15:29] It's important to know that, which is why we're not elevating the house nine feet.
[4:15:36] It has to be elevated a little bit higher to protect and preserve the house and our architect is here to explain that.
[4:15:44] Oh, sorry. This is, oh, here we go.
[4:15:47] This is another view of the rear of the property.
[4:15:50] You can see the pool house, the accessory structure,
[4:15:52] which recently in public hearing said there was a very little of any historic value of that
[4:15:57] pool house. The same one here, and this is the rear of the main structure and you can see the pool structure.
[4:16:06] This is the proposed site plan, and I've put this together to show you how small and tight the property is.
[4:16:15] You have 53 feet of width and about less than 100 feet of length on this property and remember we have this requirement to go up 9 feet.
[4:16:29] I think it's also important to note that this property based on its size does not meet today's standards.
[4:16:35] If this site were vacant in a different district,
[4:16:40] we a developer apt to come in to seek special permission
[4:16:44] to develop or build on the site.
[4:16:48] Here is a proposed rendering of the new structure,
[4:16:52] the preserved structure with the addition.
[4:16:55] You can see the structure very clearly up front,
[4:16:58] some terracing on the front to mask some of the height.
[4:17:04] The third floor, where you see the pool structure towards the back, and this is looking east.
[4:17:12] This is looking somewhat southeast.
[4:17:15] You can see the driveway and the entrance to the garage and get a little bit different perspective here.
[4:17:22] So how we got here.
[4:17:24] We took, we were at the March 5th historic preservation board meeting and took significant direction from their concerns.
[4:17:31] They are concerns about the appearance and scale of the race, porch, and patio, and relation
[4:17:36] of the front facade.
[4:17:38] When we revise the front facade, you'll show you in the rendering.
[4:17:43] The visual impact of the third floor, we revised that front facade and the visual impact
[4:17:48] of the third floor, the structure and the street scape were revised as well, applicant further
[4:17:55] revised the front facade to reduce the front variant front variant saw.
[4:17:59] So, from March to June, you can see the changes that were made, especially on the front,
[4:18:06] you see now you can see a tiered terrace, instead of a straight forehead wall, as I called
[4:18:12] it.
[4:18:13] And the third floor has been significantly reduced as well as the overhangs where the
[4:18:20] roof structure on the addition have been reduced a little bit.
[4:18:24] From June to July, you again see the change what we made from June to July, where we took out a portion of that front facade to basically,
[4:18:38] it was at the neighbor's suggestion and request that we take that out so they would have a view corridor of the water, we were happy to do that.
[4:18:46] This is the FEMA flood map that is causing all of these problems and concerns.
[4:18:51] You see that the zone AE has an elevation of 8 feet.
[4:18:56] However, the Florida building code requires you to go up an additional foot from the 8 feet.
[4:19:04] So now the new base floor elevation is going to be 9 feet.
[4:19:10] This is some documentation that shows something really interesting.
[4:19:14] The annual flood insurance premiums decrease every foot above the base floor elevation.
[4:19:22] So, four feet above base floor elevation is estimated to receive a 50% discount and annual flood insurance premiums.
[4:19:32] Why?
[4:19:33] Because the structure is higher and less prone to flooding.
[4:19:38] Excuse me.
[4:19:39] With that being said, here's the one of our first slides about elevation of structure.
[4:19:43] I'm going to call up lean when from affinity architects to walk you through what all of this means and why we're elevating the structure to the height we've proposed.
[4:19:58] Good evening.
[4:20:01] Before I walk you to the elevation on the building section, I would like to have a minor opportunity to discuss the nature of the project.
[4:20:10] and how we got about getting involved in this very important project for us and for the client.
[4:20:18] The first meeting that I met with our client then, as usual, as you can see from the previous
[4:20:25] photo, the state of the existing building that we called historic structure due to our
[4:20:33] research and the fact that the building is in the district is in a very bad state.
[4:20:41] It is falling apart.
[4:20:42] It has not been occupied for a long time.
[4:20:46] Without knowing the scope of the project, I asked Dan what his goal is for this property.
[4:20:56] And this is one of the first time I seen the passion in the client with regard to a structure
[4:21:03] you know, in the array. A lot of people would say, yeah, I would tear it down in a split
[4:21:09] second and build something new. If that's the code that would allow me to, then said that
[4:21:18] I want to preserve everything on this project. I want to preserve the building. I want
[4:21:22] to preserve the fuel and the flavor of the historic aspect of it. And I want to preserve,
[4:21:30] You know, the look from the outside and the inside of the building.
[4:21:34] So that's very significant.
[4:21:36] He want to preserve the outside and the inside of the building.
[4:21:40] And there are structural implications to doing that accurately, historically,
[4:21:47] structurally, including the amount of budget that we have to be involved with.
[4:21:52] So that's the nature of our first encounter on the property.
[4:21:56] So if you look at the slide, the blue building or the section on the slider in blue, that is the cut section of the house of the existing house.
[4:22:10] And if you notice the front section is actually about two feet lower than the main section of the house.
[4:22:19] And as we were saying, we want to preserve all of that.
[4:22:23] Now, come to play is the 9-feet, 9-feet, N-A-V-D requirement.
[4:22:33] What N-A-V-D means is that that is about the height of the elevation above the sea water level.
[4:22:45] It's a way to measure the height, vertical data.
[4:22:50] That's the technical term, it North American vertical data.
[4:22:55] So we are not raising the house nine feet from grade.
[4:23:01] Existing grade is two feet or two and a half feet.
[4:23:06] So we are raising the house up six and a half feet.
[4:23:12] Okay, so to preserve that, the existing structure that Neo was talking about
[4:23:18] is sitting not on great itself but on some falling apart structural elements.
[4:23:26] So we raised the structure up to a point where the bottom structure of the existing elements, the building,
[4:23:36] is going to be clear from the flood elevation that is required by FEMA.
[4:23:41] In addition to that we want to preserve the exact state of the building
[4:23:47] where there are two feet difference between the front and the end of the house and the back of the house.
[4:23:53] So that's what explained the nine foot difference
[4:23:57] or the description that we keep saying, we are raising the house nine feet.
[4:24:01] We are not raising it nine feet.
[4:24:02] We're raising it six and a half feet to meet with the FEMA elevation.
[4:24:09] The back of the addition, where we're asking for the new addition behind the house,
[4:24:14] is also complying at nine feet.
[4:24:17] So we are not asking for more than the female allowed.
[4:24:22] So that's it.
[4:24:24] Thank you.
[4:24:25] Thank you.
[4:24:26] I'm gonna get into what we're asking for tonight
[4:24:29] because the list is long and distinguished.
[4:24:32] Certificate of appropriateness, relocations
[4:24:34] for the vertical relocation of the existing home
[4:24:37] in the guest cottage.
[4:24:38] Variances on the front side rear and side interior setbacks.
[4:24:42] waivers for secondary and supportive and visual compatibility standard,
[4:24:46] building high-plane visual compatibility standard and scale of a building
[4:24:50] visual compatibility standard.
[4:24:53] Seems like a lot and we're going to dive into it.
[4:24:57] Certificate of appropriateness.
[4:24:58] So you have findings here that have to be consistent with objective HPE 1.4
[4:25:04] of the Historic Preservation Element section 4.51 of the Historic
[4:25:09] or a Beach Historic Preservation Guidelines in the Secretary of Interior Standards for Rehabilitation.
[4:25:16] So 2.4, I'm sorry, the objective, HPE 1.4, that is to implement appropriate and compatible
[4:25:24] design and planning strategies for historic sites and properties within historic districts.
[4:25:29] Then sub 1.4.1 says that continue to require the Historic Preservation Board to make findings
[4:25:36] any land use or development application for a historic structure site, or within a historic district
[4:25:40] is consistent with the provisions of the Secretary of Interior Standards for Rehabilitation
[4:25:45] and the land development regulations and Dora Beach Historic Preservation Guidelines.
[4:25:49] Well, happy to report that that happened to the historic preservation board made those findings
[4:25:55] previously.
[4:25:57] Secondly, the FEMA Florida Building Code requirement to raise nine feet impacts the preservation
[4:26:02] of structures not just on this property.
[4:26:05] But on every property in the Marina Historic District, property is an existing, this property is an existing non-conforming lot and is extremely
[4:26:14] small and constrained, so the options are limited and to come into compliance with today's standards as well as to save and preserve the home.
[4:26:25] Section 4.1 of the LDR's talks about carports and garages.
[4:26:32] I know the staff has a lot of consternation about the garage.
[4:26:36] Well, garages and carports are encouraged to be oriented
[4:26:40] so that they may be accessed from the side or rear and out of you from the public right way.
[4:26:46] Ladies and gentlemen, that is exactly what we did by designing the garage
[4:26:51] to be part of that nine-foot elevation required by FEMA to go under the structure.
[4:26:58] It's not visible from the public right of way and unfortunately we can't have any access
[4:27:05] to the rear of the property, it's fully developed.
[4:27:07] As well as the side is so small, can't really fit a car through the side.
[4:27:12] So this is what we chose and we think that this is a creative way to meet the standards
[4:27:18] of 2.4.1 to a 5.
[4:27:24] Secondly, with parking.
[4:27:28] We understand that, again, parking shall strive to contribute to the historic nature of properties and districts.
[4:27:36] I believe that somebody even proposed that we have all of our parking on Marine Way,
[4:27:42] which is, again, I remind you, only 18 feet wide.
[4:27:45] So having parking in front of Marine Way really isn't safe or feasible, which is why the garage is important.
[4:27:52] And if you look, locate the parking adjacent to the building or in the rear row,
[4:27:56] we're under the building because we can't really go adjacent or to the rear.
[4:28:00] Screen parking, so it can be viewed from the right away it is.
[4:28:03] Utilized existing alleys, there are none.
[4:28:06] Construct new curb cuts and streets side driveways, only in areas where they are appropriate or exist to historically.
[4:28:13] Well, we have done our best to provide access to this site and feel that this is a very
[4:28:19] appropriate location for the driveway.
[4:28:21] Use appropriate materials of the driveway, of course, in the driveway type should convey
[4:28:25] the historic character of the district and the property.
[4:28:29] Then we get to your historic Delory Beach Historic Preservation Guidelines.
[4:28:34] And I'm going to go to historic, or sorry, Hurricane Preparation, which is actually, oh,
[4:28:38] this isn't working.
[4:28:39] But it's called, it's on one of those slides.
[4:28:42] I'm going to read what it says.
[4:28:44] There's a balancing, oh, it says specifically.
[4:28:47] Owners of historic buildings are subject
[4:28:49] to a balancing act in which they must weigh disaster
[4:28:54] preparedness against the overall goals of protecting
[4:28:59] the character of the historic property itself.
[4:29:02] It's a balancing act.
[4:29:04] It is not a hard, fast stringent to the rules,
[4:29:09] sticking to the rules.
[4:29:10] This is a balancing act when we're dealing with hurricane preparedness, and the Secretary of
[4:29:15] Interior even goes on to say that, I'll show you that in a second.
[4:29:19] So when we get to the standards, there are, I think, six or seven standards that are applicable.
[4:29:24] Standard one, the property shall be used for hits his historic purpose, excuse me.
[4:29:30] The property was used as a residential.
[4:29:32] It will be continued to be used as a residential, so we meet that standard.
[4:29:37] Standard two.
[4:29:37] The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved, removal of the
[4:29:42] historic materials or alteration of features and spaces that characterize a property shall be avoided.
[4:29:49] Again, all buildings are being preserved and protected here.
[4:29:54] The properties in the Marine Historic District, which is characterized by various styles of architecture, including
[4:30:00] Mediterine and Revival, which this is. Buildings are being preserved, not demolished. I already said that. And the elevation of buildings we understand is causing the concern that were three stories and not two or two and a half stories as is the Mediterranean revival. But I will have you remember, because you will remember this at the end of this presentation. We are being forced to go out nine feet. We're almost forced to be going up an additional story already. So between two and a half feet plus the nine feet, we're
[4:30:29] already, I'm sorry, two and a half stories, plus nine feet, where exactly where this building
[4:30:35] is, 3435 feet tall, standard three. Each property shall be recognized as a physical record
[4:30:43] of its time place in use, changes that create a fall sent to this historical development such
[4:30:48] as adding conjectural features or architectural elements from other buildings shall not be undertaken.
[4:30:53] So we aren't proposing to add any conjectural features or additional architectural elements
[4:30:59] to the building. We are proposing an addition to the building as you all know. People have said
[4:31:06] that it is large and massive and maybe to you it is large and massive. However, there is a point
[4:31:13] to the addition. It is enough of an addition to make the property useful as a single family home as a
[4:31:22] Because right now, the property that's not seen even that,
[4:31:27] how built up it can't is not even available,
[4:31:29] but the living spaces are so small
[4:31:32] that I don't think it justifies the value of the property.
[4:31:38] Additionally, our goal is to preserve and protect the buildings.
[4:31:42] We've never even asked about demolition.
[4:31:44] We've took design cues and intent from the preserved structure
[4:31:48] and we'll get to that in a second.
[4:31:50] This is another graphic of the elevation, but I think we want to talk about this elevation
[4:31:57] graphic very shortly so we can make it through the presentation.
[4:32:01] Okay, so as you can see, the blue section is existing house and the portion on the left
[4:32:09] is the addition.
[4:32:11] If you look at the first floor, that is at 9 feet elevation, and that's, again, is a 9 feet
[4:32:20] NAD that we have to do, which is one foot above the flat zone that is required at AE8.
[4:32:30] In addition to that, as we were mentioning earlier, if you look at the lighter finish floor underneath
[4:32:38] the blue section of the building. Right now we are showing that to indicate the floor structure
[4:32:46] of the building. But realistically speaking, you cannot support the existing structure with
[4:32:53] just, you know, there is no possibility structure engineering wise to support the existing building
[4:33:00] with eight inch or, you know, less than a foot of structural member that are already falling apart.
[4:33:06] So the rationale for the space above the cars that people are saying, why are we having a garage underneath that building?
[4:33:18] The fact that we have to raise that building up to preserve it from the future flood is one of the requirements.
[4:33:24] The second thing I want to add is the ceiling of that garage is going to be at eight feet.
[4:33:31] that is as minimal as you can get for a garage structure for for ceiling. So that is the main reason why we have the elevation set the way it is.
[4:33:45] The last thing I want to make is, on the addition itself, the highest level, the roof deck of the highest level on the third floor,
[4:33:56] comply with the requirement in the city and every other city in South Florida, which is 35 feet.
[4:34:05] So we're not asking for any more than the exact requirement that the city is allowing us.
[4:34:13] Thank you, Huay. Let me get back to the Secretary of Interior Standards. We have Standard 9,
[4:34:21] which I'm going to highlight, the new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be
[4:34:26] compatible with the massing size and scale architectural features to protect this
[4:34:30] historic integrity and property and its environment. Again, as far as the internet is concerned,
[4:34:36] the new work is compatible with features to protect this historic integrity of the property,
[4:34:41] preserving the house for reuse requires a larger than normal addition to bring this property and
[4:34:48] home into today's standards while maintaining the historic integrity and preservation of
[4:34:59] the home. Again, I wanted to be very clear. FEMA reviews has created this issue with the
[4:35:08] going up eight feet plus the one is nine. They review flood maps every five years or sooner
[4:35:14] if there are events.
[4:35:16] So in five years or less than that,
[4:35:18] we could be talking about 10, 11 or 12.
[4:35:22] And this district would be subject to that.
[4:35:26] There are more standards with related to natural hazards.
[4:35:31] I can't even read my own handwriting in here.
[4:35:34] But you can see that we believe we've addressed the recommendations
[4:35:40] and addressed some of the not recommendations
[4:35:42] to show how our project complies with that.
[4:35:48] This is my slide.
[4:35:50] This is the slide that I really enjoy,
[4:35:52] because I looked at the Secretary of Interior Standards rehabilitation
[4:35:56] and they did a guidelines on flood adaptation
[4:35:59] for rehabilitating historic structures.
[4:36:02] And in the forward of the text, it says,
[4:36:05] and I have it highlighted here.
[4:36:07] Treatments described here are a means of preserving
[4:36:09] historic properties located in floods,
[4:36:11] prone areas and making them more resilient to flooding hazards.
[4:36:15] Flood events can be particularly destructive to historic buildings, and therefore may require
[4:36:21] greater adaptive treatments.
[4:36:24] While many of these treatments can be undertaken with minimal effects on this historic
[4:36:27] character of a property, some may require more change than would normally be acceptable.
[4:36:37] Commissioners, we are not saying that the changes proposed to this structure would be acceptable
[4:36:42] in historic district away from a marineway that weren't subject to a nine-foot height requirement
[4:36:50] or an increase, excuse me.
[4:36:52] We're saying that because of the flooding, because of FEMA, that the changes that we are proposing
[4:36:58] are more than normal than normal, and everybody will agree to that because they're necessary.
[4:37:04] And the Secretary of Interior said, yeah, that makes sense.
[4:37:10] If you're in a flood prone area, you may have to take more action than is normal when preserving properties.
[4:37:17] They go on to say, adaptation treatment should further reduce the risk of flood damage as possible,
[4:37:22] but it should do so without destroying significant historic materials features or spaces.
[4:37:27] There are property considerations in the middle.
[4:37:29] I'm just going to read the top highlight, which says the size,
[4:37:32] scale height and massing of a building will affect how much change and height may be acceptable without impacting the
[4:37:39] Historic character of the property establishing a universal standard or our measurement for how high any given building can be elevated is not possible
[4:37:48] All right, so with that being said we looked at some of these guidelines and highlighted the fact that you know
[4:37:56] identifying and retaining historic massing size and form and proportional relationships
[4:37:59] while ladies and gentlemen, the district is getting increased by nine feet minimally
[4:38:06] due to the flood to the FEMA regulations.
[4:38:10] The design, next one, designing a new foundation that preserves the historic character of the building.
[4:38:15] We're doing that.
[4:38:16] Using existing attributes and features such as large-sized tall building, high visible
[4:38:20] foundation, portraits or terraces and steps, stairs and steps to minimize the impact and
[4:38:25] alterations to the historic character of the property.
[4:38:28] We're doing that, not recommended,
[4:38:30] elevating a small scale or one story building
[4:38:33] to heights approaching an additional full story.
[4:38:36] Well, unfortunately, we have to do that
[4:38:38] because FEMA's requiring that nine foot increase.
[4:38:43] Again, new foundation, constructing a new foundation
[4:38:46] that is compatible with the historic character of the building,
[4:38:49] our foundation doesn't impact this door character of the building.
[4:38:51] It actually makes it better by allowing cars
[4:38:54] to park under the building, using creative design techniques to minimize the perception and change
[4:39:00] and height and appearance of the foundation and historic building where compatible,
[4:39:04] terracing of front and the garage, which are the terracing is very reminiscent of Mediterranean
[4:39:11] revival.
[4:39:14] Designing new driveways and parking areas are patio, so they are not obtrusive or possible.
[4:39:18] We're doing that.
[4:39:19] You get the flavor.
[4:39:20] So I want to get to a visual compatibility standard so I'd like 13 minutes to do so much stuff.
[4:39:26] All right, so long story short, as far as height goes, the structure is within the 35 foot height limit and as you know we're going up because of FEMA.
[4:39:36] Our neighbors to the north and our neighbors to the south both support this project.
[4:39:41] Windows and doors, modifications to Windows and doors have been made to address FEMA and to address our historical context as best as we can.
[4:39:50] the rhythm of solace, the voids. Again, we have embraced the tiered terrorist idea from HPB into the design.
[4:39:58] There are other visible compatibility standards. I want to get with the last remaining few minutes.
[4:40:03] I want to get to the waivers and to the variants. I think those are important.
[4:40:09] The relocations, again, I have responses to all the different criteria.
[4:40:15] your staff made a very thorough staff report.
[4:40:20] Some of the stuff we didn't love to be honest with you,
[4:40:22] but we read all of it, and digested it,
[4:40:24] and have tried to synthesize it as best as possible.
[4:40:29] I want to get to the variances.
[4:40:31] So, therefore, variances requested,
[4:40:35] some continue what is existing, some do not.
[4:40:40] I don't get to all of them.
[4:40:41] And here's the front setback variance that is what is shown on the site plan.
[4:40:47] And you can see we are proposing 9.8 feet to 12.7 feet of feet of feet, whereas the existing
[4:40:56] is 17.7 to 20.6.
[4:40:59] Again, this is the smallest variance necessary to comply with the FEMA requirements and the
[4:41:06] site constraints in order to preserve the property, which I think is everybody's goal here.
[4:41:11] tonight. Special conditions do exist because we are in a FEMA floodplain that requires the elevation
[4:41:18] of at least nine feet as well as the lock is extremely small. It's probably smaller than
[4:41:26] any other lock on that block. The garage is creative solution and that is one more. Yeah, that's
[4:41:37] front setback variants or the south setback variants, which is 2.3 feet and we're proposing
[4:41:48] to that's the existing setback, we're proposing to maintain that line after conversations
[4:41:55] with staff at the beginning.
[4:41:58] So, criteria, it's necessary to maintain the story character
[4:42:01] of the property. Again, we're complying with FEMA to go up to go up in order to preserve the property.
[4:42:08] The site constraints require us really to go up in order to preserve the building, the site is so small.
[4:42:16] The building is so small in order to make it feasible from not even a living perspective, just a development perspective we need to go up.
[4:42:28] Special conditions include the small lot and site constraints, the existing non-conforming
[4:42:34] south side setback and again the FEMA requirement, the literal interpretation of the provisions,
[4:42:41] all through the historic character of the historic district or historic sites, such an
[4:42:45] extent that it would not be feasible.
[4:42:47] We believe that the south setback is already at 2.3, which is a non-conforming, adding this
[4:42:52] to the existing setback line does an increase
[4:42:56] the non-conformity.
[4:42:58] Additionally, the neighbor to the South,
[4:43:00] as I told you, it's expressed to me personally
[4:43:03] and to the client that he is in full support of this project.
[4:43:09] Differentials from, or the variance or possible,
[4:43:11] not significantly diminish the historic character.
[4:43:14] So, differentiations from old to new
[4:43:16] is not feasible on the south side.
[4:43:17] The existing structure currently sits at 2.3,
[4:43:20] is, if the current structure is already at 2.3 and is considered to store, how are we diminishing
[4:43:29] the historic property of the regular building, the rest of the building goes to 2.3. It really
[4:43:34] doesn't make that much sense. This is the separate that was established with the building and
[4:43:39] we're proposing to continue that setback. Okay, where are we? The rear West, the rear setback,
[4:43:47] which is the less setback, which is already an existing non-conformity at 6.8 to the rear.
[4:43:55] We're actually proposing 8.4 in the rear, which is an improvement over the existing structure
[4:44:01] setback.
[4:44:02] I think that one's a no-brainer because we're actually making the situation a better.
[4:44:08] We're improving the non-conformity here,
[4:44:12] so there's that.
[4:44:15] The art encroachment variance for
[4:44:24] this is for the swimming pool.
[4:44:28] Maintained of variance is not the variance is necessary to maintain the historic character
[4:44:31] of the property.
[4:44:32] Again, the proposed swimming pool is set back to 7.6 feet from the north property line.
[4:44:38] The new pool will be elevated to 9 feet.
[4:44:41] The new pool at grade is 7 feet to inches from the north property line.
[4:44:47] Again, we're elevating the pool due to FEMA and the existing pool is not seen from the street.
[4:44:53] There are special conditions. Again, they exist for all of these variances of the FEMA requirement and the...
[4:45:00] The desire to preserve and protect this property of seven minutes left.
[4:45:06] Let's see,
[4:45:10] literal interpretation, the variance improves and existing legal non-conformity.
[4:45:14] The pool is elevated again from nine feet due to FEMA and existing pool won't be seen from the road.
[4:45:20] The request of variants is necessary to accommodate appropriate adaptive reviews of historic building or structure of site.
[4:45:26] Again, it is to elevate the pool, nine feet,
[4:45:30] and make this property somewhat marketable.
[4:45:33] Wavers,
[4:45:37] this is a big one.
[4:45:39] So building height plane, I guess, is in place
[4:45:43] to limit height and massing on historic properties.
[4:45:48] However, the building height plane
[4:45:50] doesn't take into account the requirement of FEMA
[4:45:53] to go up nine feet minimally.
[4:45:55] You can see the existing property right now encroaches into the building high plane
[4:46:02] With the nine-foot female elevation more of the structure would violate the building high plane
[4:46:08] This is
[4:46:10] the intrusion into the building high plane with the addition and with the nine foot
[4:46:18] Repartment for FEMA
[4:46:20] Again, FEMA impacts this, not just because we're raising it nine feet, but every other property,
[4:46:28] along the runway, if they improve their lots, by more than 15, or to improve the structure, excuse me,
[4:46:34] by 50% or more will have to raise their property up nine feet, minimally.
[4:46:42] And in fact, we know that the two properties to the south of us have already in for application.
[4:46:45] So, the criteria here shall not adversely affect the neighboring area.
[4:46:51] Again, the historic streetscape will be raised in minimum of nine feet to preserve
[4:46:55] the historic structures.
[4:46:56] And we know that the two structures to the south of us already submitted applications shall not
[4:47:01] significantly diminish public facilities.
[4:47:03] Obviously, this doesn't.
[4:47:05] She'll not create an unsafe situation.
[4:47:07] The waiver doesn't create an unsafe situation here.
[4:47:10] Does not result in the grant of a special privilege.
[4:47:13] So, the elevation of the structure is the minimum necessary to meet the theme of requirement and preserve the structure.
[4:47:21] All the other properties in the district, in this floodplain, will have to raise their structures in minimum of 9 feet again.
[4:47:32] Weaver 2, additions shall be secondary, so again, shall not adversely affect the neighboring
[4:47:40] area.
[4:47:41] This addition is being constructed to preserve the property.
[4:47:47] We have gone, we raise the pool house 30 something feet in order to preserve the pool house,
[4:47:53] which again is a creative idea in order to preserve that structure.
[4:47:57] She'll not significantly diminish the provision, the public facilities, there's not the claim
[4:48:03] that this will, nor will it create an unsafe situation.
[4:48:07] And does it result in the grant of a special privilege?
[4:48:11] So the elevation of 14 feet, which I will submit, is maybe one of the elevations, but don't
[4:48:18] forget the front of the house is being elevated to about 12.16 feet.
[4:48:23] and as you heard from our architect, that's in order to preserve the house the right way.
[4:48:28] So we don't believe that it results in the grant of a special privilege and then just the scale
[4:48:33] same arguments again. The south-sept back is an existing non- conformity
[4:48:41] furthermore, the everybody in the district is going to have to go up 90.
[4:48:46] All right, with four minutes left, I'm going to cut this off, but I'm going to remind you of what
[4:48:51] a couple of things. What the Secretary of Interior said to do in situations like this.
[4:48:58] The treatments here are a means of preserving properties located in floodcron areas and making them more resilient to flooding hazards.
[4:49:06] Planting events can be particularly destructive to historic buildings as we have seen with this structure.
[4:49:11] While many of these treatments can be undertaken with mental effects to the historic character of a property,
[4:49:16] some may require more change and would normally be acceptable.
[4:49:20] This nine-foot elevation and the desire to save the building.
[4:49:27] Building, excuse me, has led to the elevations as proposed and has led to the addition
[4:49:35] as proposed.
[4:49:37] Marineways of very narrow streetscape with a perspective that reflects that.
[4:49:41] staff said a third story wouldn't necessarily be felt at grade. We agree with them. We believe that, you know, I'll save that for a bottle.
[4:49:55] Easier it's easier to demolish the existing main structure and existing structure than to preserve them. It just is.
[4:50:02] It's cheaper. It's better. But we're not choosing to do that. We've taken the hard road here as you can see.
[4:50:11] And then lastly, the elevation is the lowest possible to meet FEMA and the Florida building
[4:50:17] code while preserving the structure.
[4:50:21] I know that this is larger than normal.
[4:50:23] I know that this makes you make you feel uncomfortable because of the size.
[4:50:29] I'm happy to have a discussion about that.
[4:50:32] However, know that this is before you and we're proposing all of these to save the house.
[4:50:40] Okay, I know that's what all the historic preservationists would want to do.
[4:50:45] So with that, we thank you for your attention.
[4:50:49] And do you have anything to add?
[4:50:52] No, thank you.
[4:50:54] Thank you very much to the city.
[4:50:57] Okay, so the city presentation comes up.
[4:51:00] I'm happy to have Michelle Hoyland who's the principal planner in charge of his tour, who knows this project and can hopefully explain it faster than I can.
[4:51:08] I would also like to recognize Michelle, who's worked diligently on this as well.
[4:51:12] This has been a big project. It's been in the office for a long time.
[4:51:16] I do want to just say one minor thing while the presentation is pulled up there.
[4:51:23] We spent a lot of time talking about the elevation, the difference between the metric of the elevation and the five feet
[4:51:29] that is required at the physical lifting.
[4:51:32] And I know I'm hoping that the graphics staff has will help
[4:51:35] maybe clarify that.
[4:51:36] That's the hardest part to grasp about this project.
[4:51:39] But the other thing I do want to point out
[4:51:41] is that this is an existing 1,328 square foot
[4:51:44] two-story residence with a small little cottage
[4:51:48] that is less than 300 square feet.
[4:51:50] And what is being proposed is a series of additions
[4:51:54] that bring the entire property of 5,457 square feet
[4:51:59] 4,900 and 22 square feet of that is under air, so it isn't just about the elevation, it's about
[4:52:07] the size of the additions and I'm going to turn it over to Michelle to provide a good overview of
[4:52:15] the project for you. Thanks.
[4:52:20] Hello, good evening, Michelle Hoylin, principal planner for the record.
[4:52:23] I do note that I'm starting my presentation just before 10 p.m. with a 10 30 stop time coming up.
[4:52:34] Okay.
[4:52:35] That was when he's gone.
[4:52:38] That's one commission of freckles here.
[4:52:42] It's 11.
[4:52:44] It couldn't get that changed.
[4:52:46] All right.
[4:52:47] So thank you for having us this evening, the Project 46 Marine Way involves a certificate of
[4:52:56] appropriateness, variances, waivers, relocation of a historic structure that sits on the west side
[4:53:03] of Marine Way in the Marine Historic District. On the east side of the property is the intracosal
[4:53:08] waterway. For those of us who know we have a multi-million dollar capital improvement project on
[4:53:14] way to improve and for the sea level rise flooding and drive flooding and what flooding
[4:53:21] that is occurring on this road. So here is a summary of the variances, waivers, and the
[4:53:27] project overall as Miss Genotus indicated the square footage already. This is a 1926 Mediterranean
[4:53:35] revival style structure. If you can see it here in this photograph, it's blue. I did not take
[4:53:42] this photograph. I believe I took this from a realtor.com listing. On the right, you can see a
[4:53:50] newer structure and on the left or two other structures in the historic district that are considered
[4:53:56] contributing or historic and also as a matter of note because I may bring this up as we go along.
[4:54:02] Those two projects are also in the process for renovation which is going to include vertical
[4:54:08] elevation and additions. They are in a holding pattern. They've advised us as staff that they're in a holding pattern, waiting to see what develops from this
[4:54:19] Request. So I'm going to move quickly through our photographs here. We can always come back. Should you like to see them?
[4:54:27] This is a photograph of the rear of the property staff did tore the property. It is in
[4:54:34] There has been some flooding occurring to the structure, but surprisingly we were quite impressed with the condition.
[4:54:40] It's in compared to other structures that we've seen throughout our historic districts that have been subject to flooding and some that have not.
[4:54:49] This is the front of the structure, the front facing marine way.
[4:54:54] This is just a quick graphic.
[4:54:56] Should we come need to come back to it, but this is a reminder of the project.
[4:54:59] the city is embarking on to do the improvements to marine way in relation to flood resiliency.
[4:55:07] That project you can see in the upper left hand corner does account for some on street parking.
[4:55:12] This is not a suggestion or requirement, but it's a design option for owners who may not have parking associated with their properties.
[4:55:22] So here we have the existing site plan for 46 marine weighing. It contains a two-storey
[4:55:29] um 1300 plus minus square foot structure is the main structure and in the rear is an
[4:55:36] accessory structure that's being used as a cottage. When it was built it was originally designed
[4:55:41] for a garage. We believe both of these structures faced north where lovers lane once existed
[4:55:49] demographic you can see later on and not necessarily their fronts facing east facing
[4:55:56] marine way. Lovers Lane years ago was closed and the property was divided amongst this
[4:56:04] site and the property to the north. There's also an existing swimming pool that's on the
[4:56:09] north side of the property that's proposed for removal. Here we have a quick graphic that's
[4:56:16] you a general picture of the overall improvements happening to this site, the addition to the front
[4:56:23] of the structure, the addition to the rear, and then the gas cottage which is being adjusted and
[4:56:29] elevated up to the third floor from grade. Here is a rendering of the front east portion of the building.
[4:56:37] What's in red? You'll notice most of my graphics show what's new in red and what's existing in blue.
[4:56:43] so that's what you're seeing here. Red is the existing in blue. I'm sorry. Red's a proposed in blue is the existing.
[4:56:52] We can come back to this. Should you have specific questions on the square footage?
[4:56:57] But this is a provision of every floor plan. I have all floor plans. Some slides hidden with a screen here that screen shot showing you the area calculations for this building.
[4:57:10] I do want to touch on what, you know, the requirements for this, these projects and historic
[4:57:17] districts have to comply with the City of Del Rey Beach Land Development Regulations,
[4:57:23] Visual Compatibility Standards, Secretary of the Interior Standards, Visual Design Guidelines
[4:57:29] has sounds like a lot to absorb.
[4:57:32] But our season professionals with experience and preservation can move, you know, fairly quickly
[4:57:38] through the process because they've utilized these code sections and as staff were here to provide
[4:57:43] support to the property owners and applicants and how to apply these standards. I do want
[4:57:49] to address that there's been some discussion amongst board members and people in the community
[4:57:54] that the Secretary of the Interior Standards are recommendations. While it's true,
[4:58:01] the recommended and not recommended approach in the Secretary of the Interior Standards
[4:58:05] is a recommendation. They are designed to show the applicant how they can come into compliance with the 10 required secretary of the interior standards.
[4:58:16] So this is what can you do? How can you design your project to be in compliance with those 10 standards?
[4:58:23] Here we have one of our standards which is new additions adjacent related new construction.
[4:58:28] Shelby undertaken or will be undertaken in such a manner that if removed in the future, the essential
[4:58:34] form and integrity of the main structure that historic property shall be unimpaired.
[4:58:40] Well, one might say, why would we be worried about this?
[4:58:42] This happened with the Paul Rudolph, over on Seabreeze and Vista Delmar, there were 1980s
[4:58:48] additions that occurred to that building that a future owner came along and removed so
[4:58:54] that they could re-envision the historic structure.
[4:58:56] If those additions were designed in such a way that they couldn't have then removed in the future,
[4:59:03] it would not be in compliance with this standard.
[4:59:07] This brings me to the section drawing, which is, and I'm going to do my best because say in
[4:59:12] this 40-minute window, and I'm going to touch on the most imperative or important topics.
[4:59:19] What we're showing you, which is a lot of info on this one section drawing, is where the historic
[4:59:25] structure exists in the proposed plan, you can see it here with the blue versus the red.
[4:59:33] There is concern that placing the historic structure on top of a new garage addition,
[4:59:39] that that garage addition couldn't be removed in the future without affecting the historic
[4:59:44] structure as it is and will become its new foundation.
[4:59:49] The other structure that we're concerned about is the guest house, which is being taken from
[4:59:54] grade level and elevated up to the third floor.
[4:59:58] We did have discussions with the applicant.
[5:00:00] And suggested that they could make an application for demolition, as we advise all our applicants there entitled to do process. We have respect for private property rights.
[5:00:10] I don't know that that would have been such a terrible request, but that's not what we're looking at. We're looking at moving that guesthouse up from grade level to the third floor.
[5:00:21] You can see what's in red here on the left side of the blue structure is the new three-story edition and there is a new patio open porch that's terrorists in front of the existing structure.
[5:00:35] Here's a photograph of that pool house and you can see it does have the screen or sliding glass doors in the front that were designed in the opening of what was the original garage, so that is still red as a garage.
[5:00:52] These are additional standards, Secretary of the Interior Standard Nine, and we've already discussed ten.
[5:00:59] Nine talks about new additions, external iterations, and related new construction,
[5:01:04] not altering or destroying historic materials, features, spatial relationships that characterize the property,
[5:01:11] and that the new work is differentiated from the old.
[5:01:14] So again, reminder, here's the front of the existing structure.
[5:01:17] This is the proposed rendering.
[5:01:19] This is again the front, looking down the side, here is the front rendering with the south view of that wall, which we'll talk about in a little bit.
[5:01:30] It's including a variance request to allow a two foot three inch south side set back to continue for all of the new addition.
[5:01:40] This is the front east looking at it from the north of it what's somewhat obscured in this photograph and kind of difficult to see is the ground floor garage that hooks around the terrace area and is underneath the home.
[5:01:57] I'm going to flip through these. These are, this is just too much information. I think I've got 80 some slides. We can come back to these.
[5:02:05] but these are proposed and existing.
[5:02:09] So, existing's on the left,
[5:02:10] proposes on the right.
[5:02:12] And the main thing that we see here,
[5:02:14] you can see a little animation happening
[5:02:17] is that, guess, structure moving up to the third floor.
[5:02:21] These are those 10 standards I mentioned.
[5:02:23] We're the Secretary of the Interior Guideline Book
[5:02:26] with the recommended approaches,
[5:02:30] a very long written book.
[5:02:32] Those are designed almost like a cliff-nodes version of how to get into compliance with these 10 standards.
[5:02:40] The standards we have concerns with are 1, 2, 3, 5, 9, and 10.
[5:02:46] They're highlighted and discussed in the staff report.
[5:02:50] And things that we're concerned about is the increase in financial or elevation.
[5:02:55] So to cover the FEMA requirements, yes, FEMA did increase the maps in 2017.
[5:03:01] This was a major update. There had not been a major update for a want to say decades and we knew it was coming.
[5:03:10] And then we had another update that happened in 2024.
[5:03:15] So the idea that they happened every five years isn't really the case. It should be the case, but it's not.
[5:03:21] So we had two major jumps in our minimum finished floor elevations sent out by FEMA.
[5:03:26] We are at eight, eight, eight, eight here with an additional foot for the building code.
[5:03:33] So nine foot, finished floor elevation is required for this structure and if I could come back,
[5:03:40] let's go to this. The image on the right, you can see there's a dash line here.
[5:03:54] You can see this dash line here. That dash line essentially represents the nine.
[5:03:59] That's where the structure is required to go, the minimum.
[5:04:04] In this case, the structure is going up more than the minimum requirement.
[5:04:10] I will save some of my discussion from Rebuttal, but it's actually going to 12.16 and 14.
[5:04:19] Finish floor elevation from four.
[5:04:23] So that is an increase of about 8.18 to 10 feet.
[5:04:30] We'll talk more in rebuttal.
[5:04:32] So this structure is increasing significantly.
[5:04:36] There's freeboarding happening.
[5:04:38] And part of that, as the applicant indicated,
[5:04:41] is dictated by their design, their architectural design.
[5:04:46] So, that triggers concerns with the Secretary of the Interior Standards about the continuous
[5:04:52] wall along the south side, which is the variance, the open patio in the front porch.
[5:04:59] It's a decent design and that the terracing isn't approached at the Secretary of the Interior
[5:05:04] would recommend to transition alterations and height elevations that occur as a result of
[5:05:13] of FEMA flooding requirements and the finished four elevations.
[5:05:19] But what extends is too much is what needs to be reviewed by the board.
[5:05:25] What impact is that having on the streetscape?
[5:05:28] What impact is that having on the historic district?
[5:05:35] There's concern that the proposal will create a false sense of historical development with
[5:05:39] the structure sitting up in the air as much as it is, somewhat being engulfed by the addition
[5:05:45] And that is proposed around the side and rear of the structure underneath it.
[5:05:51] These images indicate how alteration of a site with regards to massing could have a negative
[5:05:58] effect on visual compatibility of the whole streetscape, not just the structure.
[5:06:03] I know this is so much and it's so late, and I'm so sorry, there's so much information
[5:06:09] to cover.
[5:06:12] I'm going to move a little bit quicker here.
[5:06:16] So I want to talk a minute about these Secretary of the Interior Flood Standards.
[5:06:20] So the Secretary of the Interior Standards that we apply with these recommended not recommended approaches to compliance of the ten standards.
[5:06:29] The National Park Service, when FEMA increased the maps, put together a webinar, a training, and a new guidebook,
[5:06:36] to provide people with guidance on how to be flood resilient and there are several different approaches.
[5:06:43] Elevating a structure on its foundation is one of the last approaches per the training that an applicant should take.
[5:06:52] But sometimes is necessary abandoning the lower floor, almost creating moats,
[5:06:58] around the building, some digging trenches around the building,
[5:07:03] there are several different approaches.
[5:07:05] But the idea is yes, there is going to be some adjusting that has to happen
[5:07:10] when you're in a flood zone.
[5:07:13] But the treatment selected shall always be the one that minimizes the changes to the
[5:07:18] historic character of the building.
[5:07:20] In this image you can see on the left is the existing historic structure
[5:07:24] and on the right is after the structure was elevated, which was deemed in the guideline book to not meet those standards.
[5:07:35] This is another image where there's an entire floor put underneath the structure and parking is there, which was deemed to not meet the standards.
[5:07:45] Because there's an alteration occurring in the features that define the space and prominent locations of the way the buildings designed.
[5:07:54] This meets the standards, and you can see there's an approach here with
[5:07:57] some terracing. There's one level of terracing from grade where you see
[5:08:03] some hedges on top of a terrace wall. That building has been increased in
[5:08:09] meets those requirements. We also have a hidden slide if you want a word for
[5:08:13] word information on the visual compatibility standards, but this standards are
[5:08:18] designed as a guide to the applicants how to come into compliance. These
[5:08:24] requirements dictate or determine in the regulations height, front, facade, proportion,
[5:08:32] they're giving the applicants the method by which they can be in compliance with historic
[5:08:37] preservation of the district and that structure.
[5:08:41] The proposal does not meet the requirements for some of our visual compatibility standards
[5:08:49] and that is for the waivers and we're going to talk about them after the
[5:08:53] variances.
[5:08:57] I'm going to move through some of these visual compatibility standards
[5:09:01] and come back to them because I want to talk about the variances as well before we
[5:09:09] lose out on that opportunity.
[5:09:12] So the proposal involves four variances requests.
[5:09:15] We have a front-step act, variance requests, right now the structure is non-conforming and the request will increase the non-conformity on the front.
[5:09:25] The south side, there is a non-conformity and the proposal will continue the non-conformity for all of the new addition.
[5:09:33] The rear, which is the west side, has some non-conformity as well and the proposal includes a variance request to not comply with the 10-foot rear.
[5:09:44] And then the north side, there is a pool proposed on top of a nine-foot tall structure that also does not comply with the minimum requirements for a pool setback.
[5:09:57] One of the benefits of the historic preservation board or in effect this board making a review and decision on an application is that the incentive is that the boards can approve
[5:10:09] variances and relief mechanisms in the spirit of historic preservation or preserving a structure, along with that comes a different set of findings.
[5:10:20] So a lot of the requests that you look at 2.4.1185 are more traditional variance findings.
[5:10:28] For historic, they are different set of findings and are geared more towards ensuring the historic compatibility and character is preserved.
[5:10:38] So here you can see that those five standards that exist are largely focused on ensuring that
[5:10:46] the character of a building is maintained if special circumstances or conditions exist that
[5:10:51] they're reviewed that might be in the location, historic setting, literal interpretation of
[5:10:58] the ordinances would alter the historic character of a building, diminishing the historic character
[5:11:05] that the variance will not diminish the historic character and that the variance is necessary
[5:11:10] to accommodate an appropriate adaptive reuse. Adaptive reuse is that the building can still
[5:11:16] be used for some function, whether it's original or some other function.
[5:11:22] So variance 1, which
[5:11:24] is the front setback, e.s. There are concerns that have been addressed in the staff report, construction
[5:11:31] of that garage, which we've already discussed in the raised patio and the front is increasing
[5:11:35] the front, set back non-conformity that, you know, the addition could be accommodated without
[5:11:43] encroaching or further encroaching, increasing that non-conforming on the front. The variants
[5:11:49] could diminish historic character of the site and the district, the marine historic district.
[5:11:54] It creates a concern with the project's ability to meet visual compatibility standards,
[5:11:59] which I'm going to come back to. Additional waiver and relief requests are required
[5:12:04] in order to have this variance and that it may not be necessary to accommodate adaptive reuse.
[5:12:13] This is essentially the situation with all four variances.
[5:12:19] So we've got a two foot three foot three inch setback on the south side that exists for
[5:12:25] the historic structure.
[5:12:27] You can see this little not-to-scale graphic but representation of the building immediately
[5:12:33] to the south at 48 marineway, which sits at six foot three inches. This is combined eight foot
[5:12:41] six inch distance setback between those two buildings. It is fairly narrow. We've, you know,
[5:12:48] gone out and done sight inspections and looked at this condition. The entire addition,
[5:12:53] so an additional 50 feet linear feet long of the building in the new addition is also proposed
[5:13:01] for a two foot three inch setback, which is very small.
[5:13:05] There is concerns that that could diminish the historic
[5:13:08] character of the site.
[5:13:10] Again, the design of the project creates concern
[5:13:14] with the ability to meet the visual compatibility standards
[5:13:16] as additional waivers are required in order to achieve
[5:13:20] that proposed design.
[5:13:24] This is the rear setback.
[5:13:25] The variance will allow for portions
[5:13:27] of the new three-story edition and accessory structure
[5:13:31] to encroach into the rear setback, which may not provide historic context to the site, may
[5:13:37] not be necessary to maintain the historic character of the property and could significantly
[5:13:42] diminish historic character of the site. Again, more visual compatibility standard relief requirements
[5:13:50] have to be sought in order to aid with the standard just
[5:14:01] regrouping here.
[5:14:02] Take a time.
[5:14:03] I'm sorry.
[5:14:04] I feel like this spends a million words a second.
[5:14:10] The accessory structure could also remain at its existing current setback and location.
[5:14:17] Variance 4, which is for the pool on the north side, that this, it's not unusual that the board would
[5:14:25] or the commission potentially would approve a variance for a pool, sometimes in the front setback and different
[5:14:30] because it's a ground level improvement, so they tend to be less impactful on a site.
[5:14:36] But in this case, as you can see in the graphic here, the pool is actually increased six foot
[5:14:43] six inches from grade.
[5:14:45] So it will be up at the nine foot NAVD finish four elevation, not a grade level.
[5:14:52] So as you're swimming in the pool, you're potentially, you know, neighbor can have a different view.
[5:15:00] Review, then they would, if you were at the ground level. Of course, that could potentially be mitigated with landscaping and things like that.
[5:15:08] But there is concern that the pool being closer to the property line and on the elevated structure could have a negative effect on the historic district and the site.
[5:15:18] I say could, because this is your decision to make on the deliberations.
[5:15:23] So, waiver requests and forgive me, but I am going to roll back several slides.
[5:15:30] We have waivers for building height plain.
[5:15:35] We have waivers for scale of a building and
[5:15:41] we have waiver for secondary and subordinate
[5:15:43] of the addition and the rare.
[5:15:47] So, we have a lot of information here for you, but I'm going to start here.
[5:15:53] The city of Delray Beach visual compatibility standards outlines minimum height, maximum
[5:16:00] height requirements, and this building height plane situation, and these are massing controls
[5:16:07] so that the structures that are being designed or added onto in the historic district are
[5:16:13] in compliance and compatible with other structures in the district, so we don't have tiny
[5:16:20] houses versus McMansions. The existing historic contributing residential structure in this
[5:16:27] case is a two-story structure and the proposal involves a three-story structure which in effect
[5:16:36] from grade to the top of the third floor is 42 feet. We have to account for the fact that there's
[5:16:44] Some freeboarding happening with that finished floor elevation, so the height of the building is 35 feet
[5:16:50] But it's starting much higher than great and that that will happen in in the district and here you can see
[5:16:58] What's on top is the existing structure and what's on bottom is the proposed in relation to the surrounding buildings
[5:17:07] This is a graphic and I'm just going to kind of flip back and forth. You can see the big difference here are the structures to the left
[5:17:14] or a self of the structure which are in progress, not a proof, but waiting review, these are
[5:17:21] their proposed drawings, which could potentially change, there's nothing set in stone.
[5:17:28] Visual compatibility standards regarding windows doors, there's concern on some of these
[5:17:33] windows that they are not in size compatibility with the existing structure.
[5:17:38] The image on the right here shows you that there's, you know, a plate glass or sliding glass door
[5:17:45] from the guest cottage that's being retained along with an awning window that really could be changed
[5:17:52] so that there's some compatibility with the windows and doors of the overall structure.
[5:17:59] Directional expression of the front elevation.
[5:18:02] So we've talked already about that we believe the building face north. There's nothing we can do.
[5:18:07] We wouldn't recommend that they turn the building. They could ask for that, but they haven't.
[5:18:13] So that what we're seeing as the front is technically the original side of the building.
[5:18:18] But that adds to the historic integrity of the history, the telling of the history of this site.
[5:18:26] Directional expression of the front elevation, more so here is when we talk about rhythms of solids of voids and, you know, the overall height, the proposed garage, these things, having an impact or potential impact on the project's ability to be truly cohesive with the existing architectural style and historic streetscape, bring up concern.
[5:18:51] The little image on the left here, just for a matter of note, is the Sanborn maps from the 1920s
[5:18:58] that show the house and its original location where lovers lane once existed facing the
[5:19:05] front of the house facing north.
[5:19:07] Then some photographs here are taken again from the internet, the realtor.com listing when the
[5:19:21] This
[5:19:34] is more about the recommended and not recommended approaches for visual compatibility
[5:19:39] in concert with the Secretary of the Interior Standards.
[5:19:43] The recommended approach is to identify, retain and preserve
[5:19:48] entrances and purchase and their functional and decorative features that are important to defining the overall
[5:19:54] store character of the building, the materials themselves, including masonry, wood, metal,
[5:20:02] those features, doors, trancems, windows are all important to defining that character.
[5:20:09] This is another item that we're going to talk about in a moment with respect to the waiver,
[5:20:18] with respect to the addition, so there's six standards, individual compatibility standards
[5:20:23] that talk about how do you achieve compliance with visual compatibility?
[5:20:29] The concern here is that the addition is massing is so much larger than the existing
[5:20:34] structure.
[5:20:35] So we don't necessarily see a clear means to meeting the secondary and the subordinates
[5:20:44] standard.
[5:20:44] What is secondary and subordinate mean your addition should not overwhelm the massing
[5:20:51] the existing structure should be smaller than more diminutive,
[5:20:58] and here are some photographs
[5:20:59] or some images, graphics from the applicant's presentation, again, highlighting the additions.
[5:21:07] So I'm going to move forward here to the waiver request.
[5:21:13] So we have three.
[5:21:14] The first waiver requests involves a building height plane.
[5:21:17] Your findings are the same findings for any waiver within the City of Del Ray Beach.
[5:21:24] The ones that are probably the harder ones to meet are A and B, which shall not
[5:21:28] adversely affect the neighboring area.
[5:21:31] And D does not grant a special privilege.
[5:21:34] Well, yes, we do say that there are no precedents.
[5:21:36] This is one of those relief standards talking about that this request does not create
[5:21:42] a special privilege, and that the same waiver could be granted under similar circumstance
[5:21:48] for another property.
[5:21:50] So building height plain.
[5:21:54] This is a design mechanism where an invisible line is taken from the property line intersection
[5:22:01] with grade and extended at a two to one ratio back.
[5:22:05] This is what you see in a stash line.
[5:22:08] Anything above the stash line is the no-build zone.
[5:22:12] In this instance, this building is probably the existing historic structure, which in this
[5:22:17] case is shown in red, there's no way it wouldn't not be in the no built zone because
[5:22:24] of the FEMA finished floor elevation requirements.
[5:22:28] So we could see where a waiver would be supportable for the existing historic structure.
[5:22:33] The question is, is the waiver necessary for all of the additional addition area on the
[5:22:41] up here. All of this is in the no-built zone. So that that needs to be reviewed and then
[5:22:48] here are your waiver findings and justifications from the applicant's, you know, in the
[5:22:54] staff report, but the lower elevation of the finished floor elevation would reduce the overall
[5:22:59] impact of that building shifting into the no-built zone.
[5:23:05] The second area in the subordinate
[5:23:06] waiver, which I just mentioned about the massing being more
[5:23:10] diminutive of the addition to the existing historic structure.
[5:23:15] So in this case, we're looking at what's read is this massing
[5:23:20] appropriate for the historic structure.
[5:23:24] Again, the proposed waiver creates concern with the project
[5:23:29] ability to meet the standard and could potentially
[5:23:33] have a negative effect on the historic integrity
[5:23:35] of the existing structure, more appropriate addition should not overwhelm that one story, especially
[5:23:42] two stories structure in general.
[5:23:46] Waver Request 3 is a particularly applicable to the south setback, so this is scale of
[5:23:53] a building, another massing control.
[5:23:56] Focus here on the image on the right.
[5:23:59] This is a calculation that's done when a building is greater than 50% of the depth of the
[5:24:06] overall lot that additional articulations are supposed to be created pushing part of the building
[5:24:11] in additional setbacks when it's above the one story measurements. So your second and third
[5:24:17] floor should have articulations that push in and what you can have in these areas are balconies
[5:24:23] or balconets or some other method of creating less impact of that massing on the adjacent properties.
[5:24:31] In this case there are zero articulations proposed along the south side of the building.
[5:24:38] So not only do we have a two foot three inch set back along the south side but the overall
[5:24:43] massing of the entire building which is sitting at 42 feet from grade at the top of the building has no side articulations.
[5:24:52] There's concerns that we are triggering again with these waver minimum waver standards that the building
[5:25:00] could overwhelm the historic residents have an impact upon adjacent properties.
[5:25:06] I do want to note that with our Marina Historic District in the 2000s,
[5:25:14] 90s 2000s, there was a run for large additions and massing and new structures
[5:25:21] that were all built south of southeast Thur Street along 7th Avenue.
[5:25:26] A huge handfuls of really beautiful new modern homes in the historic district.
[5:25:35] When the consultant came through to reassess the integrity of the historic district,
[5:25:40] staff doesn't do this, we engage a consultant to do a look back every five to ten years.
[5:25:45] They said that the entire all but two properties sell section from the third street to fourth street was completely inappropriate in size, massing architecture in complete juxtaposition with the historic district and they suggested we remove that entire block.
[5:26:08] So that's what can happen, right?
[5:26:10] What's the effect of approving a project like this?
[5:26:14] It's the domino effect that we could have this property,
[5:26:19] the next property, the property, next to it,
[5:26:21] all three of them come through because the next two
[5:26:24] are going to say, you know, well, this is this really not
[5:26:27] granting a special privilege because, you know,
[5:26:31] you granted a waiver on another property that,
[5:26:33] that same waiver could be approved on my property.
[5:26:36] So it kind of creates a snowball effect, that's the protection of the streetscape.
[5:26:40] These are high altitude looks and we've been down in the details of these
[5:26:47] of this proposal. It's a lot of technical review and as the applicant said,
[5:26:51] you know, here's the big one. So the relocation criteria is here. This again is both structures
[5:27:01] are vertically relocating. So we think relocation that we're moving buildings around districts,
[5:27:08] horizontally, we apply the relocation criteria when vertical relocation happens to ensure that we
[5:27:16] protect the soundness of a structure that there's no negative impact we can utilize the bond
[5:27:23] requirements should anything get damaged in the transition of the move if you're
[5:27:30] interested in seeing a successful completed in progress move. We have one at 1019
[5:27:35] Nassau Street, Roy Simon was one of his last projects he worked on for the
[5:27:39] Dancklers. You could ride by and see, watch the progress of that when it just came down.
[5:27:45] So vertical relocation is a requirement that the board has to approve. In this case,
[5:27:52] Again, the concern is the amount of vertical relocation that's happening here, elevating
[5:28:00] this new, this building on a new foundation we've mentioned with that garage underneath.
[5:28:11] I'm almost done, very close, 249.
[5:28:16] All right, so here's a few images I've put in just in case the board wanted to know what
[5:28:22] would this building look like without a third floor.
[5:28:24] This is the building rendering as proposed.
[5:28:28] No, we're not, we're not considering any revisions to what was presented to the HBB.
[5:28:34] Okay, so I'll move past it.
[5:28:37] So that's not there.
[5:28:39] Pretend like I hit those.
[5:28:41] So here's the rendering.
[5:28:43] The applicant did submit in their presentation a slight adjustment to the front terraced area.
[5:28:50] I just want to make a note that that was not part of the submittal, it was not, it's a little different than what went to HPV and while that might be something that's, you know, to be considered this request as Miss Jellon just indicated is what we have here, so we can't really consider that adjustment that was proposed on their plans.
[5:29:18] This concludes my presentation.
[5:29:21] I can't believe I did it in 40 minutes.
[5:29:24] Thank you.
[5:29:24] Get in 38 minutes and 12 20 seconds.
[5:29:27] Thank you for your attention.
[5:29:30] I really sorry I went on for so long, but it's the record.
[5:29:35] A lot of information.
[5:29:37] Those are the certificate of appropriate.
[5:29:39] This finding should you need to refer back to them.
[5:29:45] Okay.
[5:29:45] I don't know, yeah, I'm getting tired, I'm sorry.
[5:29:52] I'm just slower than I was earlier.
[5:29:54] The same way there.
[5:29:57] This meeting is now being open for public comment.
[5:30:00] Anyone wishing to speak on this application come to the lectern if your name and address for the record, and you will each have three minutes. Seeing many.
[5:30:19] Good late evening, Mayor and commissioners, Price Patent 10, 20, Tamron Road.
[5:30:26] I'm here on behalf of the Delory Beach Preservation Trust, where a 501-C39 profit
[5:30:33] and is the complaint says we're your partners and we're your advisors.
[5:30:38] to listen to the applicant's discussion of the project and the city's discussion of the project.
[5:30:48] I thought they were talking about different projects.
[5:30:51] They were the applicant was praising how they're saving this historic structure.
[5:30:57] But when you read the 36-page report, it notes that if approved as is, it could create a complete loss of the historic integrity, a 46-minute ringing way.
[5:31:15] So they're not really saving an historic house. They're destroying it with all the additions.
[5:31:21] Mr. Long, I think you had an eloquent, during your eloquent approach earlier today, you're
[5:31:26] talking about the state taken away homeeral rights.
[5:31:29] And you said in our rights to protect our neighborhoods, I contend staff is trying to protect
[5:31:35] this neighborhood for inappropriate additions.
[5:31:40] I, you know, these are small lasts.
[5:31:41] I've developed three or four houses on these historic houses on these lots, in this neighborhood
[5:31:46] in the last 10 years. That's what I did after our retired. We need waivers. We need
[5:31:53] variances. But when we did the waivers and variances, we made an addition of simply
[5:31:58] 800 square feet to a 2800 square foot bungalow. We took two small townhouses and 900 square
[5:32:10] feet. We made additions to make them livable up to the modern day. We added 60 square feet
[5:32:15] each of those. We had another bathroom, so we had two bathrooms. We built an infill house.
[5:32:20] It wasn't even historic, but FEMA said, raise it to eight feet. We raised it to eight
[5:32:26] feet. We didn't go to 12 feet or 13 feet or 14 feet. So, we don't, we are not opposed
[5:32:34] to, we are not opposed to waivers' variances and the billing for high playing. But to this
[5:32:43] extent. I mean, I don't know how many of us need live in a 5200 square
[5:32:47] for the 800 square foot house. I'm perfectly comfortable with smaller house.
[5:32:52] The house is just too massive. And if you listen and you read the report,
[5:32:57] you read the staff report. You can't come to any conclusion other than to
[5:33:00] didn't write this. Thank you. I mean, I make family and make this our
[5:33:03] resolution part of the record. I know I sent it to all of you.
[5:33:07] Yes. Thank you. Thank you very much.
[5:33:09] I have a question for you though, because I'm going to ask each one of you
[5:33:12] the same question. We have this historic house here. It's gone through a period of, you know,
[5:33:18] lots of different changes in machinations and different boards looking at it, different staffs,
[5:33:22] looking at it. I understand why you don't like it, but what is your proposal? I mean, I'm trying
[5:33:32] to figure out what do you, what is your proposal? I mean, if you don't like this, what is your proposal?
[5:33:38] Well, what are you saying that you would have you got for it?
[5:33:41] We've got no problem with lifting the house to 9 feet.
[5:33:44] That's what FEMA says.
[5:33:45] We've got no problem with the addition.
[5:33:47] It could be 10 feet next year.
[5:33:48] It could be done.
[5:33:49] I mean, whatever that whatever the problem is, this in the house says we start, I don't think we
[5:33:53] start at 15 feet or something.
[5:33:56] I think we need to be careful.
[5:33:58] I think we need to be careful.
[5:33:59] Staff and the applicant have the ability to essentially...
[5:34:02] Well, cost is the amount when it says it really should know that if you're going to
[5:34:05] testify you.
[5:34:06] Never mind.
[5:34:07] Thank you very much.
[5:34:08] I just want to keep the impartiality of our commission.
[5:34:10] Thank you.
[5:34:11] Thanks for your time.
[5:34:12] Thank you very much.
[5:34:19] Good evening.
[5:34:20] It's getting late.
[5:34:21] I'll try and be brief.
[5:34:23] But the answer, Mr. Mayor, your question.
[5:34:26] It's really not up to the public to redesign this building that they're proposing.
[5:34:34] But my name as they did before is Sandy Zeller.
[5:34:40] I live at 209 Northwest 12 Street.
[5:34:43] I formally lived at 126 Marine Way in the Marine Historic District, and while for 13 years and while I was there, I was the president of the Marine Historic Historic Tomones Association, and I still have a big interest in protecting the integrity of the Marine Historic District, and that's why I'm here tonight.
[5:35:09] I read the staff report, the 36-page staff report, by the Department of Development Services.
[5:35:16] There are professional planners including the Director, including the Historic Preservation
[5:35:23] Planer, including the Senior Historic Preservation Planer, and I fully concur with all of
[5:35:31] their comments and findings that were placed on the record here tonight and their conclusions.
[5:35:36] They're all very well-stated, they're all specifically detailed as to each aspect of this
[5:35:48] application and how this application fails to comply with the mandatory requirements
[5:35:53] of the city's LBRs, including 4.5.1, the compound, including the mandatory obligations
[5:36:01] of the Historic Preservation Element, the mandatory provisions of the Delare Beach Historic
[5:36:07] Preservation Design Guidelines, and the mandatory provisions of the Secretary of the
[5:36:15] Interior Standards that were placed on the record.
[5:36:20] That reports bells things out specifically and indicates their concerns and reasons why
[5:36:28] this application should be denied.
[5:36:30] The question tonight to ask yourself, I believe, is who do you trust here?
[5:36:38] Who's report are you going to give credibility to?
[5:36:42] Are you going to give credibility to your own professional planners who have the obligation
[5:36:48] to protect the public's interest regarding the development that goes on in the city and
[5:36:55] properly and accurately advise the city commissioners as to what the circumstances are concerning
[5:37:06] each development and what's acceptable about a development and what's not acceptable
[5:37:10] or do you trust the developer who has made their presentation who wants to maximize their
[5:37:19] It's build the largest monstrosity of a building that that they can possibly build that's had a character with the marino
[5:37:28] Historic District and fails to follow well those mandatory requirements. Yep. This this is up
[5:37:35] I mean it's three minutes
[5:37:38] I'll wrap it up then
[5:37:40] The applicant knew what they bought when they bought it. They knew that they knew what to require
[5:37:46] Thank you, Mr. Zelden.
[5:37:48] Okay, thank you.
[5:37:56] Earl and Patent in 10, 20, Tamarind Road.
[5:37:59] I spent a lot of years living at 65 Palm Square tonight.
[5:38:03] Like Mr. Zelder, I care a lot about the Marina Historic District.
[5:38:07] Some context, the Marina District was first established in 1988
[5:38:13] by the Historic Preservation Board and by this commission.
[5:38:20] And since that time, families like mine
[5:38:22] and countless others have spent hours and dollars to maintain the integrity of the district.
[5:38:32] Federal authorities agreed and in 2014 they placed it on the National Register of Historic
[5:38:39] Places.
[5:38:41] This project at 46 Marine Way cancels all that.
[5:38:46] It's height and mass, be lies, or historic ordinances.
[5:38:51] The staff has done a fantastic job outlining that.
[5:38:55] Please deny this.
[5:38:57] Please listen to your staff.
[5:38:59] Thank you very much.
[5:39:05] Mayor, commissioners, manager, attorney, and city clerk,
[5:39:11] who doesn't get enough attention.
[5:39:13] My name is Jim Shard.
[5:39:15] I live at 401, southeast, 4th Avenue.
[5:39:17] And I had the honor of serving this city on the historic preservation board for four years.
[5:39:26] And two of those years were as chair.
[5:39:29] I would say that this decision of all those that came before was perhaps the hardest.
[5:39:35] It is a very challenging property when you hear that it's 800 square feet.
[5:39:42] You really have to be there and see how small 800 square feet is.
[5:39:49] And when you see the water line from frequent flooding up to two and three feet,
[5:39:55] you realize that this is a building that's going to need a lot of work.
[5:40:00] I had the mixed pleasure of renovating a pre-civil war brownstone.
[5:40:06] So I know what it takes to go from one period to another.
[5:40:10] And when you look at our Maria Historic Districts, we have, I'm sorry, when you look at
[5:40:18] our historic districts, including the Maria Historic District, there are substantial
[5:40:25] increases in mass.
[5:40:28] If you look in, for example, Delighted Park,
[5:40:34] there are many little cabins that were 800,000
[5:40:38] square feet and are now 3,000 square feet. But that's really what it takes in order to be
[5:40:45] able to afford renovating a place like 46 marine way. The building needs to be or the entire
[5:40:55] parcel needs to be up to modern standards in terms of kitchens living space bedrooms and so forth.
[5:41:03] It is going to take a lot of money to save this building and to actually put it in a shape that somebody would want to buy it or live it.
[5:41:21] And we do know that there is something called demolition by neglect.
[5:41:26] And we have seen that in this city most notably at the Sunday Village.
[5:41:31] that could happen here too. It's not only active demolition, it could be demolition by neglect.
[5:41:40] So the HPV board spent something like four or five hours on this. They had two different sessions.
[5:41:47] They framed it first. I'm sorry. Turn it down. I'm almost as bad as Neil in my head.
[5:41:53] Time tied, Mr. Knight. Turn it down the first time.
[5:41:57] They came back with lots and lots of changes to our recommendations and
[5:42:04] I think that something needs to be said about that kind of responsibility
[5:42:08] of trying to accommodate what the city is asking for.
[5:42:14] Thank you.
[5:42:14] Thank you, Mr. Chart.
[5:42:20] Hi, my name is Dan.
[5:42:21] I grew time here on the property.
[5:42:23] So I am dressed this way.
[5:42:24] I flew in and got caught in Dallas on the delay.
[5:42:26] So I rushed to get her by five o'clock.
[5:42:28] I guess it was early.
[5:42:29] Michelle May I borrow your streetscape video real quick please if I could.
[5:42:36] When I bought this property I've got about $4 million invested in this.
[5:42:40] I have four choices.
[5:42:42] One I could go and demo the property.
[5:42:45] That wasn't my choice from day one and buying the property.
[5:42:48] Two owning the property now.
[5:42:50] I could let it sit or I.
[5:42:51] And that's what it's doing.
[5:42:53] It was riding before I bought it.
[5:42:55] I'm a series of basically three dumps.
[5:42:58] I'm the first one, unfortunately, and I hate to say that.
[5:43:01] I live in this community when people get on the Atlantic lady
[5:43:04] and go under that bridge, this is what they see,
[5:43:07] and it's horrible.
[5:43:08] And if I can point out, this is where I have to be
[5:43:11] right before my
[5:43:17] intention, raise that life fee.
[5:43:19] It's the same length as my property.
[5:43:21] What I'd ask you for one, you have to go to the mic.
[5:43:27] She can go up nine feet.
[5:43:29] And I talked to Gina, and she is totally in favor of this project.
[5:43:32] And so it was the property of the South, unfortunately there I didn't use the architect that they're using, and that was a negative, but I spent two years with the board, the historical board, I'm a member of the Historical Society, I am trying to preserve this house, I'm doing everything I can to preserve it, it's going to cost me several extra millions of dollars to do that.
[5:43:55] The third floor of the height seems to be the problem, but the house to the north can go to FEMA and be at the same height that I am by rights under FEMA.
[5:44:07] The house to the south can raise 9 feet if they choose.
[5:44:10] The house second to the south of that can go 9 feet if they choose.
[5:44:14] So we're not talking about, I understand I'm the first one in this project, but
[5:44:27] it's the right thing to do.
[5:44:29] Thank you.
[5:44:35] Sorry if my eyes are bloodshot. I don't even know where I am now. Kristen Finn wanted to
[5:44:40] I know it's late. I swear I've not been drinking.
[5:44:45] I wanted to George Bush full of art. So I live in Delight Apart,
[5:44:49] because historic district live in a 1925 house.
[5:44:52] I had the honorable pleasure of serving on historic preservation board for three years.
[5:44:58] I am good friends.
[5:45:00] As with Dan and I am all about preservation in Delray. I'm acting secretary on the Delray Beach Historical Society. I did an addition to my historic house. I only added 600 square feet, but that was what I wanted. I don't think that when you buy in a historic district that you should be subject or penalized, like we're talking about height, they're not asking to go above the height that is allowed in this district.
[5:45:30] When you had a chance to go and look at this property, I was able to consult with the historic preservation board and every member that came and looked at the property and saw how small it is and how, you know, once you go and look at the property, you can see that, yes, this is a rendering, architects do the renderings and I don't know if they do them, so they look huge and they look great.
[5:45:57] but if you were physically on the property, you would see it's not,
[5:46:01] there's not enough space between the existing property and that little pool house
[5:46:06] to make it this, you know,
[5:46:08] monstrosity that everybody's portraying it to be.
[5:46:11] Dan is all about preservation.
[5:46:14] He wants to make Delray Beach and preserve properties.
[5:46:19] He's not a developer like somebody who's coming to take over.
[5:46:22] He is passionate.
[5:46:23] You heard the passion, that's not an act.
[5:46:25] He is passionate about this. He wants to preserve it. I personally walked in the property and I said,
[5:46:30] What are we preserving here? Like literally this should probably be knocked down.
[5:46:35] He's not going for demolition. And I wish that all of you had the chance to go and physically see the house
[5:46:41] because it is in disarray and it's not by his neglect.
[5:46:45] And it's just, it's an older house and, you know, yes, he, you're right.
[5:46:50] the gentleman said he knew what he was buying but you should not when you buy in a
[5:46:55] historic district you should not be penalized and say oh you're allowed to go to 34 feet
[5:47:00] or 35 feet but we don't want it because of the streetscape like Dan said the house to the
[5:47:05] north if they if they want to raise their house they can do it so the streetscape is going to change
[5:47:12] the other two houses to the south are already in I implore you guys to realize that if they if
[5:47:18] You don't allow him to do this.
[5:47:20] This house is going to float into the inner coastal,
[5:47:23] because it's already been flooded
[5:47:25] and the pictures are there to prove it.
[5:47:27] Thank you.
[5:47:29] Mayor.
[5:47:29] Thank you very much, yes.
[5:47:31] Can I just make a couple of points, please?
[5:47:33] I think we need to be really mindful.
[5:47:35] I'll let Mr. Coco and then I'll make my points.
[5:47:37] I thought we were done.
[5:47:38] Go ahead.
[5:47:38] Thank you.
[5:47:40] For the record, Mr. Mayor and City Council Roger Cove,
[5:47:44] I think 701 southeast, first street,
[5:47:49] which is about a half a block away from this site.
[5:47:52] Everybody in this room is passionate about
[5:47:54] this historic preservation, first of all.
[5:47:56] Or we wouldn't be here five hour, five and a half hours,
[5:47:59] six hours after we started at five o'clock today.
[5:48:02] So, I just want to say to you that there's good architecture,
[5:48:11] there's average mediocre architecture,
[5:48:13] and then there's architecture that just doesn't hit on anything.
[5:48:17] This thing doesn't hit on anything.
[5:48:19] I am so confused after the third time listening to their presentation
[5:48:24] on how the heck they got to 14 feet when FEMA is at eight.
[5:48:31] The city of Bill Reis at nine.
[5:48:33] Their lowest finished floor elevation, which is the front edge of the house,
[5:48:39] isn't being said at either one of those.
[5:48:42] It's up at 12.2, which puts the finished floor of the main house at 14.
[5:48:50] That's five feet above, that's six feet above FEMA, five feet above where the city of Del Rey wants it.
[5:48:57] So is it an insurance issue?
[5:49:00] Because Mr. Jones started out with his presentation about insurance.
[5:49:05] And so if that is the issue, there maybe there should be some clarity with that and why the heck are we all sitting
[5:49:11] at nine feet then when we should be sitting at 14 feet. I mean that's a huge question.
[5:49:18] This thing is 5 feet higher from its base than it needs to be. So the rest of the thing is
[5:49:26] 5 feet higher than it needs to be adding to the fact that it's over-designed anyway.
[5:49:40] So the
[5:49:41] point is, architecture 101, why the heck is the garage underneath the most important front
[5:49:49] edge of the facade of this house? When it should be in the back, the pool is where the garage
[5:49:55] should be, and I guess part of the logic on the 14th beat is that they've got to jam the garage
[5:50:05] underneath that front edge. And so that's maybe there's some structural rationale that
[5:50:11] they're using there, not quite sure, but the garage is awful and I'm a front of the
[5:50:19] facade, the main facade of the house, which is exactly where it shouldn't be. Then they're
[5:50:24] coming in from the side, big deal. Of course, they wouldn't be allowed to come in from
[5:50:28] the front. And then the rationale that the front, moving forward of the already non-conforming
[5:50:37] the front edge of the house is unprecedented in the city, so I don't understand how they
[5:50:43] are even allowed to bring that to the table to take a non-conforming issue and make it
[5:50:50] more and more.
[5:50:50] Thank you, thank you.
[5:50:52] Thank you.
[5:50:52] I can talk for another five hours.
[5:50:54] I'm done.
[5:50:56] So, Mayor, can I make a couple of points?
[5:50:56] Please don't.
[5:50:58] Mayor, can I just make a couple of points?
[5:51:00] According to our local rules, it is now 10.57 pm, so if you want to continue.
[5:51:04] You said no, I go by that clock, it's well, the point is you have to make a motion if you want to go past the 11 which we're in the middle of an agenda item, so I think so, yeah, so I think we just in a motion to continue
[5:51:24] We will deal with that. I mean the the 8 a and 8 b are a promise like they're they're quick
[5:51:31] We will the rest of the items aren't that bad, but I think
[5:51:42] So can we get a motion to send past 11?
[5:51:45] Second.
[5:51:46] All in favor.
[5:51:47] Any opposed?
[5:51:50] I'm not sure.
[5:51:51] OK, a couple things.
[5:51:53] We can't consider here, say.
[5:51:55] So people can say that the neighbors don't object to it.
[5:51:59] That should not be something that you should be considering today.
[5:52:01] Unless the neighbor actually came here and testified.
[5:52:02] So that effect.
[5:52:03] This is quasi-digital.
[5:52:05] So you're acting like a quasi-judge, and that's not acceptable.
[5:52:08] So, and he references to what neighbor said or what people might have said when they looked at the property,
[5:52:13] you should not consider those today.
[5:52:16] In addition,
[5:52:20] the other houses in the neighborhood, that should not be considered.
[5:52:24] So things that are coming during the application process, this application stands on its own.
[5:52:30] It's not going to create a precedent, it's not going to do any of those things that you worry about,
[5:52:33] but it's got to stand on its own today.
[5:52:35] And so I need you to also disregard what the streetscape's going to look like once those others get developed and all those references and then the last thing is each side has
[5:52:47] Rebuttal but it's limited to three minutes.
[5:53:00] Would the applicant like to rebut the city
[5:53:04] you will have three minutes. Yes
[5:53:08] Yes, Mr. Mayor. We like to perform some rebuttal not necessarily all about the city's comments
[5:53:13] but some of the public comments too.
[5:53:15] I'm going to start with our argument.
[5:53:16] Would you wish to cross the exam in any member?
[5:53:18] I'm not going to cross the exam in anybody that's
[5:53:19] too formal for this time and night, but my architect does have
[5:53:24] some things he'd like to say.
[5:53:25] Please start a three minutes now.
[5:53:27] Thank you.
[5:53:28] First of all, would like to say thank you to the staff
[5:53:30] for a lot of this and through the two year process
[5:53:33] that we affinity architects and the client
[5:53:35] and the staff went through for this project.
[5:53:39] I just want to reiterate that this, the historical
[5:53:42] approval approved this project after those submitted that we went through with
[5:53:48] difficult and a lot of consideration through the design. Contrary to what Mr.
[5:53:54] Cope was saying, the house is not set at 14 feet. The main addition is that at
[5:54:01] 9 feet and AVD, which is 6.5 feet more than the existing grade. I just want to
[5:54:12] We really, really want to stress that this project is not as big as it seemed graphically speaking.
[5:54:22] If you visited the site, it is a tiny little lot.
[5:54:25] And what we had done for the massing of the job is to move the second floor and the small third floor addition to the back of the building.
[5:54:34] So you will not perceive it at all.
[5:54:36] The one last thing I want to add is if we have done, if we had put the garage on the driveway,
[5:54:45] further into the property, we would further the, you know, the great the property and increase
[5:54:52] the the nuisance of cars and automobiles to the neighbors to the north to the south and to the west of it.
[5:54:58] So I just want to say, you know, we spent two years studying this working with the staff
[5:55:04] to make sure that this project is in accordance
[5:55:07] to what the recommendation of every party involved.
[5:55:11] Thank you.
[5:55:13] Thank you.
[5:55:13] Mr. Schult.
[5:55:13] Yes.
[5:55:14] Thank you, Mr. Mayor, and briefly a couple of things.
[5:55:18] First, when we talk about historic preservation,
[5:55:22] and I know that a lot of people like to
[5:55:25] describe motives for my client, but you heard it from him,
[5:55:28] and you heard this in serity in his voice that he wanted to
[5:55:32] save and preserve this house.
[5:55:34] You heard about the adaptive reuse and what it takes to perform a successful adaptive reuse.
[5:55:42] And what saving this house actually realizes when you see the addition you see the house.
[5:55:52] Just like the Secretary of Interior said, when you're dealing with flood prone areas,
[5:55:57] you may have to do more in order for the preservation.
[5:56:03] Tonight's vote is you guys having to do more to preserve
[5:56:08] this house on Marine Way, which we know is substandard
[5:56:13] and floods because I have the damage in my home that shows it.
[5:56:19] And not doing anything.
[5:56:21] It's just going to make this problem persistent persistent persist.
[5:56:25] We're here, we'll happy to take any advice, suggestions, if you want to see some revisions,
[5:56:35] we'll be interested in those, too.
[5:56:37] So thank you so much.
[5:56:38] Thank you very much.
[5:56:40] You're just a quick point of order.
[5:56:42] There's no revisions that are contemplated.
[5:56:43] This is all or not.
[5:56:44] No, no, no.
[5:56:45] I just want to be clear.
[5:56:47] Mr. Schiller knew.
[5:56:48] We're not going to do this.
[5:56:49] Yes, it's all or nothing.
[5:56:50] So I do think that we keep, do we only get 15?
[5:56:57] All right, go ahead and go.
[5:57:04] So I just want to do my best to try to address some things
[5:57:09] that I'm hearing that are not consistent with how we understand this.
[5:57:13] But the application specifically shows that the
[5:57:18] bottom of the first floor of the existing house, goodness gracious,
[5:57:28] right here, just this right here.
[5:57:31] This is at 14 foot and ABD. It's set 10 foot six inches above the floor slab of the garage.
[5:57:42] I'm hearing this opposition that is not at 14 and I'm sorry I don't know the architects name architect.
[5:57:49] Yep, he's new to me. I'm sorry. We're working with someone else. I apologize, do you sir?
[5:57:56] It is at 14 feet
[5:57:57] Okay, the proposed edition is at nine. That's correct, which you can see in this
[5:58:04] Terracing the existing house
[5:58:07] portion of it does sit at grade
[5:58:09] Mr. Schiller also
[5:58:11] Testified that the road is higher than the house. That's not the case. I double check the survey in the interim the average kind of road
[5:58:19] 1.53, the grade on the property is 2.5 or the house sits at 3.73, so that factually is
[5:58:27] not accurate. There is more than 6.5 feet of raising on this house. The architect indicated
[5:58:35] there's no more than 6.5 feet, that's not accurate. The raising of the house is at a max of
[5:58:41] feet from the existing grade 3.73 or it's rounded up to 4 on the survey at the 14 at 10 feet and
[5:58:53] work that is the max. So that fundamentally is not the case. The garage is visible from the
[5:59:00] right of way. We had discussed demolition. I already mentioned the ceiling of the garage is at 10
[5:59:05] with six, not eights, the theme of flood maps
[5:59:08] don't review every five years.
[5:59:11] This statement, I don't have time to pull their slide up,
[5:59:14] but the idea that changes have to happen.
[5:59:17] I've heard this a couple of times.
[5:59:19] If you read the sentence prior to that, it says,
[5:59:22] and I quote, the treatment selected
[5:59:26] shall always be the one that minimizes changes
[5:59:30] to the building's historic character.
[5:59:33] So you don't have to have more changes
[5:59:35] in order to be flood resilient. Remember, we're at nine foot, finished
[5:59:40] whole elevation. It doesn't need to be at 14. That's the design. That's
[5:59:45] dictating that not the flood resiliency requirements happening here. It's not
[5:59:50] smaller than any other lot in the block. I looked at that too. In the interim here
[5:59:55] there are other lots that are smaller. I haven't heard from the neighbor to the
[6:00:01] I'm not saying that they're not, I just haven't received that. I have two more things here. May I?
[6:00:08] Thank you very much. My last two. No. I really have to be fair to both sides.
[6:00:14] I apologize.
[6:00:16] But I offer a point of clarification and is not about a rebuttal. I just, just so that you understand the way height is measured.
[6:00:22] That BFE.
[6:00:23] I beg your pardon for the one more time.
[6:00:24] So just so that we're clear on how height is measured.
[6:00:27] This isn't a rebuttal.
[6:00:28] This isn't a rebuttal.
[6:00:29] This is a clear, clear, clear, clear.
[6:00:31] Go ahead.
[6:00:31] So the way that, when you're in a flood zoning,
[6:00:33] you have to lift it up.
[6:00:35] That the BFE plus the one foot from the Florida building code
[6:00:38] in freeboard becomes the New Zero.
[6:00:41] So the 35 feet maximum for anywhere in the city.
[6:00:45] This isn't unique to historic.
[6:00:46] That's your zeroed out there.
[6:00:48] And then it's 35 feet.
[6:00:50] If you decide to elevate beyond the freeboard limit,
[6:00:53] it comes out of your overall height.
[6:00:57] Do you see what I mean?
[6:00:58] So I'm just trying to make sure you understand.
[6:01:01] And everyone is agreeing.
[6:01:03] But you're saying that the way the LDRs are drafted,
[6:01:08] if you go 14 feet, if you're allowed to go 35 feet,
[6:01:11] and you choose to go 14 instead of five,
[6:01:14] you lose that five so you can literally...
[6:01:15] The overall height.
[6:01:17] So for example, the elder building,
[6:01:20] the original building, is elevated higher,
[6:01:22] which this seems to be the beginning.
[6:01:24] But it is still below the 35-foot height limit
[6:01:27] because it's able to, because it's a two-story building,
[6:01:30] it's able to absorb that extra elevation up within the limit.
[6:01:35] The new part is elevated as high
[6:01:38] and so the three-story's fit.
[6:01:40] And that's just the way it works.
[6:01:42] Anywhere in the city, not unique to historic.
[6:01:45] OK.
[6:01:47] To the commission, Mr. Mark,
[6:01:52] I'm probably not going to be in favor
[6:01:53] this. I look at this. I went over and looked at the lot. It's a postage stamp size
[6:01:59] lot. The house is enormous that you're trying to put in. It goes up way of an
[6:02:03] ear. I agree with Mr. Patton said it just it doesn't seem to fit to me.
[6:02:10] Okay. Mr. Long.
[6:02:13] It's apologizing at Bands. My comment might be a bit punchy because I'm
[6:02:18] angry and I'm sitting here at 1106 under fluorescent lighting. So I'm in a bad mood
[6:02:24] right now.
[6:02:25] And I'm about to move also because we just spent two plus hours talking about something
[6:02:31] that should have been approved on consent in my opinion.
[6:02:35] If I were the applicant, I would have demoed this property by now.
[6:02:40] I would have demoed it.
[6:02:42] And that's frankly what we're incentivizing you to do, which defeats the purpose.
[6:02:50] I commend you for making the effort to save this tiny little flooded property, to try and save any semblance of this at your own expense.
[6:03:02] I give you credit for.
[6:03:06] I frankly don't want to talk about this anymore.
[6:03:09] I don't think that it's up to us to design your property for you or give us our insight on if we think it looks good or not.
[6:03:15] It's your money, it's your property.
[6:03:18] You could demo this tomorrow if you wanted to.
[6:03:22] He could have already demoed it.
[6:03:25] There's a process, but it's probably eligible.
[6:03:27] OK.
[6:03:29] It's probably eligible.
[6:03:31] Well, there's an argument that, you know,
[6:03:33] well, I would have pursued that process, especially
[6:03:34] at this point, if I were you, frankly.
[6:03:37] I just think that we are de incentivizing people
[6:03:41] from actually doing adaptive reuse when it's this difficult.
[6:03:44] people get villainized for trying. So I'm frustrated by this. I'll leave it at that.
[6:03:51] I'm going to support moving forward. This should have already moved forward.
[6:03:56] That's where we have a historic preservation board, by the way, with qualified people on it
[6:04:00] that are mandated to be qualified to be on it.
[6:04:10] You want to go next? I'm going
[6:04:15] to go to the
[6:04:19] the demo process, if you don't mind for anyone listening, if you just, if you don't, if one of you would please.
[6:04:27] In a historic district, there are three types of properties.
[6:04:30] Contributing aka historic, non-contributing aka non-historic and vacant lands.
[6:04:36] A contributing structure must meet the application requirements, which includes structural reports,
[6:04:45] Repair, projected cost of repair, and appraisals.
[6:04:49] Appraisals are the cost of the structure as it exists,
[6:04:54] the cost of the structure as it repaired,
[6:04:56] and the cost of the property in the district,
[6:04:59] without that structure in existence, so demolished.
[6:05:02] You have to have justification, that's justification statement,
[6:05:06] but you have to document that the condition of the structure
[6:05:09] is beyond repair.
[6:05:11] There is a public notice requirement
[6:05:14] to notify everybody within a 500-foot radius when demolishing historic structure.
[6:05:20] These things are in place to protect the overall integrity of the district.
[6:05:25] As structures get demolished, and sometimes they do, they're primarily the non-contributors,
[6:05:31] non-historic, that get demolished, running the risk of demolishing historic structures
[6:05:37] and removing structures from a district you don't have contacts or legitimacy for a district
[6:05:42] if those buildings are no longer there.
[6:05:45] So it could not be demolished tomorrow,
[6:05:48] but an application could be made for demolition.
[6:05:52] I mean, I was being a bit hyperbolic.
[6:05:54] Like I understand that.
[6:05:55] I understand that.
[6:05:56] But if you want to clarify one thing, you say,
[6:05:58] when you talk about cost of repair,
[6:06:00] once you do a certain amount of repairs,
[6:06:01] you're required to bring it up to code.
[6:06:03] So you're including in that cost of repair,
[6:06:04] they would also have the requirement
[6:06:05] to raise the house whatever it is.
[6:06:09] So the cost involved at raising this eight
[6:06:11] square foot house regardless of what you know that's included in your cost of repair.
[6:06:17] So whether you want to save an 800 square foot house and then there's requirements for
[6:06:21] demolition by neglect that in 2018 the city commission adopted by LDR. So if a
[6:06:27] structure is not being maintained and there's specific standards in the code for 5199
[6:06:33] is that section? Should anybody want to go look at it? Those standards are protection
[6:06:38] against termite damage would rot from water damage. So basically we're telling our historic homeowners
[6:06:44] where the city is telling them you have to maintain your structure. This best example and they
[6:06:50] I'm sure won't mind that I'm bringing it up is sweet and social. This is the property of cross the street
[6:06:56] from Sunday Village where there was some demolition by neglect occurring. If a homeowner property owner
[6:07:04] allows a structure to be demolished due to their neglects.
[6:07:08] The historic preservation board has the authority
[6:07:10] to restrict permits for not allowing reconstruction
[6:07:13] on that property for five years.
[6:07:15] It's called the Scourged Earth Policy.
[6:07:18] The commission, the board, the public,
[6:07:20] all deliberated very carefully about this
[6:07:23] when these LDR requirements were chosen and put into the code.
[6:07:30] So code enforcement can go and do an assessment
[6:07:33] and sites somebody, which they did on Swint Social, and Swint and Social came through and repaired their buildings to protect from further damage.
[6:07:42] Thank you. And also just for the residents, if anyone is still listening.
[6:07:48] Even if this is demoed, this property cannot, the gentleman, the applicant, can't build what he's proposing here today.
[6:07:56] I mean, construction would be required to beat the setbacks and all of the standards within the code and receive border proof where we are.
[6:08:04] And also be elevated.
[6:08:06] So look, I've wrote a ton of notes about the variances, relocation, the waivers.
[6:08:11] I mean, the one variance that's very concerning is the two foot.
[6:08:16] Three inches if you're elevating the house to that extent.
[6:08:19] That's two foot three inches right there.
[6:08:22] That's something that's concerning.
[6:08:24] the relocation, 14 foot versus nine, the guest cottage on top, and then the LDR 4.5.1
[6:08:34] about the secondary subordination, the report notes, the original structure is, it's placement
[6:08:40] within design is absorbed with the larger massing of the additions and neither can be reverted
[6:08:48] to its original appearance, which I believe is a requirement. So and you're talking the original
[6:08:53] structure being 1,644 square foot with the two 1,330
[6:09:01] Oh, I apologize.
[6:09:02] And then going to the three, two, three, two, three, two, three, four, thank you very much.
[6:09:07] So and then I made other notes regarding the building height, plain and the scale of the building.
[6:09:13] But I think you've said a lot and it was very informative.
[6:09:17] I appreciate the report and all the information we got.
[6:09:20] And I think fundamentally, you know, we ask people to follow our rules, and yeah, there are exceptions, but these are a lot of exceptions.
[6:09:30] And you know, we saw that many have successfully redeveloped to historic homes, even adding additions and the like, and they've been beautiful.
[6:09:40] I think, Miss Wyland, you did a lovely presentation for us just recently.
[6:09:44] I think there's a house in Del Ida.
[6:09:46] I don't know.
[6:09:47] There's three other, three total that had been done in.
[6:09:51] And so it's possible to create a beautiful home for yourself, a lovely home.
[6:09:58] And still keep within our requirements.
[6:10:07] If this project goes through there are two similar following and we're not supposed to discuss that, but what happens is you're opening the door to those application.
[6:10:16] We're not.
[6:10:17] Okay.
[6:10:18] I'm sorry.
[6:10:19] We're not.
[6:10:20] We're not.
[6:10:20] We're not.
[6:10:20] We're not.
[6:10:21] We're not.
[6:10:23] I'm sorry.
[6:10:24] We're not.
[6:10:28] We're not.
[6:10:29] We're not.
[6:10:31] I'm sorry.
[6:10:33] We're not.
[6:10:33] And now that we look at the state, and they are starting to regulate what we can do,
[6:10:38] like we just discussed with SB 180, and it's impact.
[6:10:42] Now is the time more than ever to embrace and protect the integrity of our historic
[6:10:46] districts, because we may never have another one.
[6:10:49] We have to protect what we have.
[6:10:52] So the land development regulation section 2.4.1.2525 prior to approval, a finding must
[6:10:59] made that any certificate must be made, that any certificate of appropriateness is consistent
[6:11:05] with the historic preservation purposes, pursuant objective HPE 1.4 of the historic preservation
[6:11:12] element of the compound, the provision of Section 4.5.1. The historical perfect excuse me,
[6:11:20] I'm doing it to Mr. Chart. Preservation design guidelines and the Secretary of Interior's
[6:11:25] standards for rehabilitation.
[6:11:28] The current proposal is incompatible with our goals, our regulations, our land development
[6:11:34] regulations, and positive findings cannot be found based on our staff report.
[6:11:42] And I do appreciate Mr. Edwards that you want to preserve this house.
[6:11:47] I truly do.
[6:11:47] And I mean that with all my heart.
[6:11:49] But I want to preserve this historic district and all the others.
[6:11:53] And that's
[6:11:55] Thank you
[6:11:57] So I think this proposal risks the integrity of our historic district and I will be denying. Thank you
[6:12:05] The first
[6:12:07] Yes
[6:12:09] This is a lot
[6:12:11] And it's late and I'm not gonna make any excuses. I do have about three pages of notes and questions
[6:12:18] However, you know, I'm really concerned about maintaining the integrity of the historic
[6:12:26] districts.
[6:12:27] You know, we only have five historic districts in our community and we need to, I'm very
[6:12:33] careful about making sure that we maintain those, and I appreciate the fact that you
[6:12:40] want to save this house and create, you know, a safer environment for it.
[6:12:45] However, there's just so many questions and so many things that don't work, and I do appreciate
[6:12:53] staff, your 36-page report, I read it, and it is very obvious that you're trying to protect
[6:12:59] this district as well, but this five of the standards for the Secretary of the Interior
[6:13:08] were not met, and then we have this, which is very confusing, but staff, thank you for
[6:13:15] clarifying that the addition is at 14 feet and not 9 feet. The other way around is at 9 feet,
[6:13:27] not 14 feet. The, the lies, I know these are diagrams, but it really helped to me with
[6:13:34] the, which are preferred at lines. And then the maximum 10 feet, not 6 feet. And then the 10
[6:13:45] It's like there's so many things that are not connecting and not making sense, it's just too many of them for me to say that I can support it.
[6:13:57] I don't see anything that was minimized to change the historic structure.
[6:14:02] I think it does, it sees, it sees the massing controls, it keeps going, I can just keep going on my pages here, so.
[6:14:18] I see where this is going.
[6:14:20] Let me do this.
[6:14:21] I had a conversation within the year earlier today.
[6:14:26] Let's always tell you, it's always comes down to you.
[6:14:28] always view. And having been on both sides and I have a lot of, I mean, I have some real
[6:14:35] problems with the side setback going all the way back. I think new construction needs to be
[6:14:40] setback, you know, compliance setback rules. I got a, some issues with the third floor and putting
[6:14:44] anything up there. But overall, I think it's important that we try to save the, the, the structure.
[6:14:53] And I don't think oddly enough I don't think we're that far apart that this or can't be certain changes made
[6:15:01] Would you listen? Let me finish, please. Thank you.
[6:15:07] What I'm suggesting is that we don't act on this tonight and we recommit it back to you, because otherwise they lose a year.
[6:15:20] And I don't think that's fair to the applicants, but so much time and effort already, and it appears so many times in front of it.
[6:15:26] and see whether or not they can work something out before the factory is shaking our head now
[6:15:31] if this is so unusual we keep on making exceptions to the rules this is out of control
[6:15:36] i'm asking that the people that you know so they don't lose a year this is every applicant is going to ask for the
[6:15:42] same thing we cannot make exceptions like this to our work okay well we're also not taking that into consideration
[6:15:47] however i should take that into consideration how do we keep defending the rules randomly
[6:15:52] I don't know why asking someone to be recommit to go back to see because they put all the time in money.
[6:15:59] I know you'd like him to, I mean, you wanted to make a personal comment like that.
[6:16:02] I'm saying, you're obviously saying you're making Mr. Joe here.
[6:16:06] I'm just saying.
[6:16:08] I'm just saying.
[6:16:08] I'm speaking.
[6:16:10] I'm asking the commission to do so that they don't cost this applicant a year who's by all accounts
[6:16:17] I spent some millions of dollars, I don't know what that number is, and an amount of time,
[6:16:23] it was two and a half years or a year and a half, all I know is that if we deny this,
[6:16:29] they can't even come back for a year.
[6:16:33] That's not accurate.
[6:16:34] That's only a result.
[6:16:36] Only a wealth worth worth talking about.
[6:16:37] This is not a result.
[6:16:39] We're talking about a variance.
[6:16:40] There's no time limitation.
[6:16:42] They can come back.
[6:16:43] They can submit an application tomorrow if they wanted to.
[6:16:45] Well, I think what I would like to do, rather than deny them, is to have them go back and
[6:16:53] see, I mean, as I said, I share the same view about the side setback on as it relates to the
[6:16:58] new structure.
[6:16:59] In the back, I think that, you know, if they moved it to seven feet, they'd lose 150 square feet
[6:17:05] in the project.
[6:17:08] I think rather than deny, I would rather see them go back and try to fix.
[6:17:16] because I think it's fair to them because of all of the
[6:17:23] time and effort and money they've
[6:17:24] already put into it.
[6:17:25] I don't think that's an unfair thing to do because they seem willing to make changes.
[6:17:29] That was the last remarks out of the question.
[6:17:30] They do.
[6:17:31] They made changes twice for the historic preservation.
[6:17:33] Well, maybe they need to make it three times.
[6:17:36] So, maybe they need to do it four times.
[6:17:37] We had this issue in the past and the commission had a policy was in this commission,
[6:17:42] but there was a policy that when these applications come before you, especially as an appeal,
[6:17:47] the commission needs to just decide on the limited issue before you, which is the appeal.
[6:17:52] So if the applicant wants to take your comments and submit another application that's
[6:17:56] well within their purview, but again, that's akin to redesigning from the days,
[6:18:01] and we need to veer away from that because what happens is, and this happened before,
[6:18:07] it goes down back to the other board, and either the applicant doesn't want to
[6:18:17] I just...
[6:18:17] I just...
[6:18:19] Mary, I completely respect what you're saying to you.
[6:18:20] No, I was telling you.
[6:18:21] Anthony and I both agreed that this was what we should...
[6:18:23] Well, I spoke with Anthony about that and I reminded her that that is not permissible.
[6:18:28] I'll point you all the projects in the city that were decided late at night and with a commission
[6:18:33] that wanted to work with an applicant and that doesn't always work out.
[6:18:37] So respectfully, I feel that what is before you is an appeal and either you approve the appeal
[6:18:45] and approve of a derivative program, or you deny this derivative appropriation, but they will still
[6:18:51] have to go through the entire process again, tack, HPB, and potentially commission, because
[6:18:57] whatever changes are going to be made, all those committees and boards have the right and the
[6:19:03] duty to review. I understood they would have to go back to all those boards. That I did understand.
[6:19:11] All right, then I do. I need to make a motion.
[6:19:15] You make a motion motion to deny resolution number one three five
[6:19:20] This is board discussion. Yes, there is no beats. I mean like motion to deny resolution number one three five dash two five
[6:19:31] Second
[6:19:32] All the role
[6:19:35] Commission of the sound yes
[6:19:37] Dept. Device may have burned. Yes, may have carnie. No
[6:19:42] Mission marker. Yes, vice mayor alone. No, okay
[6:19:52] And my nose is based on the fact that I really wanted it to go back, not whether or not
[6:19:56] I think the place you'd change is what you clearly does,
[6:20:01] what we'd make them back to that.
[6:20:02] I mean, that's two and I've never been able to do that.
[6:20:11] Oh no, the Tantees, we talked about it.
[6:20:14] You said.
[6:20:14] I know, but they're not here.
[6:20:16] Oh, I'm sorry.
[6:20:17] I'm sorry.
[6:20:19] I'm sorry.
[6:20:24] You don't want to say sorry?
[6:20:25] The appointment's wrong?
[6:20:27] I don't have any way.
[6:20:29] I don't have any way.
[6:20:29] I don't have any way.
[6:20:30] I don't have any.
[6:20:30] I don't have any.
[6:20:34] It's really just two points in A-A-A-A-P. I don't think Mr.
[6:20:38] because that was going to be presentations.
[6:20:40] It's really just me reading the ordinance.
[6:20:42] I'm going to read it for public comment.
[6:20:44] It's the first reading.
[6:20:46] Okay, read it.
[6:20:46] So we're not doing the appointments.
[6:20:48] Can you defer on these appointments?
[6:20:50] Board of Adjustment would be great if anyone's prepared
[6:20:52] because it takes this super-
[6:20:55] Board of Adjustment is the Mayor and Commissioner Burns.
[6:20:59] I mean, I can make my Board of Adjustment one.
[6:21:01] Okay, so why don't you apply to what's doing. I mean, these are quick.
[6:21:07] They're quick. They're quick. They're quick.
[6:21:09] They're quick, please. Thank you, Miss Oylund.
[6:21:11] Okay, what's the first one?
[6:21:13] 70. 70 is a part of a house.
[6:21:15] What's the last one?
[6:21:17] All right, we have this.
[6:21:19] The nominations for the equipment to the affordable housing.
[6:21:23] There are three regular members to be selected.
[6:21:25] First is made by Deputy Vice Mayor Burns.
[6:21:28] The second mayor is Mayor Carning and third is Commissioner Marker.
[6:21:32] So, Vice Mayor, Deputy Vice Mayor.
[6:21:35] I have a question.
[6:21:36] So, I appointed Daniel Lent, a lands for an appointment that she said that she didn't want
[6:21:47] to be.
[6:21:47] Did she want to take her name completely off with just that board?
[6:21:52] Completely off.
[6:21:53] Thank you.
[6:21:54] So she's off this one too.
[6:21:56] Okay.
[6:21:57] Is that correct?
[6:22:05] I'm sorry, she's on the on the sheet, so I'll nominate Rosanna for Tertale, Tertale, Tertale, Tertale, Tertale.
[6:22:21] Thank you.
[6:22:23] All in favor? Any opposed?
[6:22:26] Okay.
[6:22:27] This is not this one. I can do in that large as well, right?
[6:22:31] All I'm going to point on Nicholas Copla.
[6:22:33] No, I think he was just a point.
[6:22:36] What do you mean he's not on those?
[6:22:37] He's not on those? He's on this list.
[6:22:39] No, right.
[6:22:39] He was a point in last room.
[6:22:41] He was a point in OK.
[6:22:42] I don't know.
[6:22:43] Was that OK?
[6:22:44] Where was it?
[6:22:46] Yeah, I remember.
[6:22:48] I remember.
[6:22:52] And you say Michelle, Michelle data is still available, she's available.
[6:22:58] Okay, Michelle data is.
[6:23:01] All in favor?
[6:23:02] Any opposed?
[6:23:03] Great.
[6:23:04] Okay, that's those of two.
[6:23:06] Now, the third is you.
[6:23:07] Steep Pasovski.
[6:23:11] All in favor.
[6:23:11] Aye.
[6:23:12] Any opposed?
[6:23:14] I'm just happy.
[6:23:15] I'm just happy.
[6:23:18] Seven F.
[6:23:19] There's appointment for the site plan review.
[6:23:21] board the parents board this is mine. I am going to a point Jose Alvarez reappoint Jose Alvarez.
[6:23:29] I agree. You can just say that.
[6:23:32] All in favor. Okay, we're done. And the last an nomination for the appointment of the board
[6:23:37] of adjustment there are two appointments on this. The first is to meet my Japanese vice mayor
[6:23:43] and secondly if you made my me.
[6:23:45] Barbara, you guys?
[6:23:48] Yep.
[6:23:52] Hi.
[6:23:53] All right?
[6:23:54] All right. All in favor?
[6:23:54] Aye.
[6:23:55] Any post?
[6:23:56] Okay.
[6:23:57] And we're going to have Suzanne Donohot
[6:24:00] as the At-Large on the Board of Adjustments.
[6:24:04] Any second?
[6:24:06] All in favor?
[6:24:06] Aye.
[6:24:07] Any post?
[6:24:08] Anyfine?
[6:24:12] Public hearings.
[6:24:13] Second readings.
[6:24:14] First.
[6:24:17] I know, but I'm just trying to, I wasn't, I mean, I was, I hadn't gotten to the next stage yet, but it's under second readings.
[6:24:25] Can I read them both together?
[6:24:27] The say is, come first readings, would you please read the ordinance?
[6:24:31] Ordinance number zero seven dash two five eight ordinance of the city commission of the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the city.
[6:24:42] 4.4.21 community facilities, CF District, to modify the purpose and intent of the district
[6:24:47] and to allow an adopt regulations for the adaptive reuse of historic places of worship
[6:24:51] as single family residential use and many appendix aid definitions to adopt a definition
[6:24:56] for a place of worship and historic place of worship. Providing a conflict's laws for writing
[6:25:01] some mobility laws authority to codify and providing effective date. Ordance number 08-255 in
[6:25:07] ordinance of the City Commission of the City of Dore Beach Florida, many of the comprehensive
[6:25:09] Plain Amendment, pursuant to the provisions of the Community Planning Act for the Statue
[6:25:13] Section 1, 163.3177, and Section 1, 163.3184 by many of the historic preservation
[6:25:19] element.
[6:25:20] And the neighborhood districts and corridors element of the always del Rey Comprehensive
[6:25:23] Plan to adopt policies for the preservation and adaptive reuse of historic places of worship,
[6:25:28] providing a conflict's cause, providing a stability clause authority to codify and providing
[6:25:32] an effective date.
[6:25:33] And these are public hearings that I believe the applicant and the city will not be making
[6:25:37] presentations.
[6:25:38] They're both privately initiated and so first reading transcendence then to the state review and then to be determined on the one-second reading and full presentation
[6:25:46] All right, staff will not be making your presentation, but this is a public hearing
[6:25:50] Are there any members of the public wishing to speak please get up and I mean please come to the lectern
[6:26:00] Okay, motion.
[6:26:02] What's your room in this direction and say what you want to say?
[6:26:05] Closed up.
[6:26:06] No.
[6:26:06] Hearing none.
[6:26:08] Public comment is closed.
[6:26:10] Motion to approve ordinance number zero seven two five.
[6:26:17] All in favor?
[6:26:18] Any opposed?
[6:26:20] Motion to approve ordinance number zero eight two five.
[6:26:23] Second.
[6:26:25] That's a similar subject, right?
[6:26:26] That means on the same one.
[6:26:27] So we've got a second.
[6:26:29] This is also a public comment.
[6:26:32] You can't good.
[6:26:33] Public comments closed.
[6:26:35] All in favor? Any opposed? Okay, that's great. No first readings. Comments by the city manager.
[6:26:42] Non. Comments by the city attorney.
[6:26:45] Comments by the city commission. Mr. Marker.
[6:26:52] Comments by former commissioners.
[6:26:57] I'm just going to quickly thank everybody for being here.
[6:27:00] staff. This was a long night. I lovely clerk. I T department. Thank you. And Mayor, can we now
[6:27:07] considering it is after 11 30 talk about this four o'clock. Start time.
[6:27:13] No, we have one thing. No, no, no, no. Listen, I'm a total. Why? Why?
[6:27:20] Because I can't do four. Everybody knows if I can. Can you do four? I would not like to do four.
[6:27:26] This is, but it's our staff. It's here. I have those web and 30.
[6:27:31] We've sent this before and I'll repeat again. I don't work for those people. I love them, but I'm not working.
[6:27:37] I can't get out of it.
[6:27:39] Anyway, and let's not forget because the cheapest year, let's run with the chief Saturday morning.
[6:27:45] Woohoo, I can't wait.
[6:27:45] It knows it's a standing thing that I say so if she's, or she looks in a kill you.
[6:27:51] Oh, I don't see it. Are we done?
[6:27:54] No comment for city commission, are you finished or you didn't start?
[6:27:59] I'm sorry.
[6:27:59] I'm just, I just wanted to commend the Ocean Rescue, Ocean Rescue had their accomplishment
[6:28:10] and winning the fourth consecutive rowing championship, which received national recognition.
[6:28:18] So I just wanted to say congratulations to that team of both out there on the beach Ocean Rescue.
[6:28:26] I wanted to make it clear, just because all this comes with DDA that it's somehow a personal
[6:28:33] matter with me.
[6:28:34] It's not.
[6:28:34] I'm looking after taxpayer dollars, and so I don't like when I talk about the DDAs, everyone
[6:28:40] says, well, you're taking it on lower.
[6:28:42] I'm not.
[6:28:42] I'm taking it on a government agency.
[6:28:44] I'm talking about the spending of a government agency to protect taxpayer.
[6:28:48] So just one, quite clear, because everyone seems to think it's against, I mean, I had
[6:28:52] that same issue years ago with the CRA, they said, well, you can't criticize them because
[6:28:56] you're criticizing the executive director and I said, it has nothing to do with the executive
[6:29:01] director.
[6:29:02] That's to do with the body and their things.
[6:29:05] We all want to embrace your concerns, but we kind of don't know whether you're going to get
[6:29:08] together.
[6:29:09] You've got a little bit today.
[6:29:10] And secondly, I don't like being accused of when I go get ethics opinions that I didn't
[6:29:17] accuse you.
[6:29:17] Excuse me.
[6:29:18] You said you do the appearances, right?
[6:29:19] I said you don't want to go back.
[6:29:22] But anyway, get your lawyer. I'll send me a cease and desist. I don't care. No, I mean, I'm just saying, I don't don't
[6:29:32] The appearance of impropriety because some of you I said we don't want to have an appearance of impropriety
[6:29:36] And we know what you said. Well, you know what I can't remind you know you're right
[6:29:41] All those things I said are true and can be proven. So tell your lawyer to send me the letter. No, I don't talk about the lawyer
[6:29:47] It's just that I'll contact my lawyer.
[6:29:49] I'm saying, I'm saying, you brought off my brother.
[6:29:56] He has a title company with him.
[6:29:57] I said, your brothers, he has the gentleman he's giving you.
[6:30:00] Mr. Brewer, title company business, have you not? He's giving him, he's an escalator. He's just said if he or even didn't. He's an escalator for seven property owners. And he wasn't even contacted by this guy.
[6:30:11] Okay, thank you guys. Okay, Mayor, honestly, it's a fair enough.
[6:30:15] I'm not here. I'm not here. I'm sorry. It's my opinion and I'm entitled to it. In my opinion, there was an appearance and I'm bringing it up because you asked them to have me removed from voting.
[6:30:24] But you have questions, you are asking me, thank you. I'm going to drop it off you didn't say that they should remove me from voting on that
[6:30:34] I didn't say it in the meeting. You didn't say it in the meeting. I just know you said it.
[6:30:41] I see, okay, well now, I don't know you know. Okay, well.
[6:30:44] You make up so many things.
[6:30:46] I make up everybody else. Let's talk about making up things.
[6:30:49] Okay, no, I'll go through the list next week of all the things like when you said you got a consensus and you didn't
[6:30:57] Know you didn't it's on the team