City Council - Regular Meeting

Okay. Good afternoon everybody. Welcome. Good afternoon. Welcome to this regular scheduled meeting of the Community Redevelopment Agency of Boca Raton. It's Monday, March 23rd, 2026th. The time is 1:30 p.m. Let's call to the meeting to order. Please, everyone, let's rise for the pledge of allegiance. I aliance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you. Miss Citizens, please call the role. Chair Wter, here.

Vice Chair Thompson, thankful to be here. Commissioner Ducker, here. Commissioner Knack here. Commissioner Singer here. All present. Uh, thank you, Mr. Sahin. Are there any any amendments to the agenda? Thank you, Mr. Chair. There are no amendments to the agenda.

I have one amendment to the agenda. Uh, our elections have occurred and the people have spoken. The work that we do here transcends councils and so does the rule of law. Many, many, many people have emailed us asking that this issue of the CRA, that the only matter on the agenda today, be postponed so that the new council and CRA can be seated. Likewise, the applicant desires to have the hearing before this council leaves. Quas judicial hearings require that the government conduct fair, unbiased hearings that have not prejudged the matter until all the evidence is heard. I've said this multiple times over the hearings in the last several years and of course it holds true regardless of who's sitting up here. I have confidence that the incoming council CRA will respect the rule of law and the procedure required. So in the spirit of trying to bring the community back together after this divisive election. I'm making the motion to postpone the matter on the CRA until the next or until two CRA meetings from now because there's vacation so that the new CRA can be seated and I make the following motion. Do I hear a second?

I'll second. Should we discuss discussion?

Mayor Lex Thompson. My view on this is that I appreciate the folks who have reached out about this. Uh my view on it is that council members are elected for a three-year term, not a twoyear and 51week term. So um I have every confidence that this existing council can rule and you know render a decision on this just the same way as as any subsequent council would be. So, uh, but at the same time, I'm not going to be I'm not in a position to tell anyone else whether they should postpone it or not. I'm happy doing it today, though. Very good. Chairman, yes,

I agree with Mayor elect Thompson uh that we are still here in service and we still have to finish our terms and that we are ready to hear this matter. And I agree with you with one of the things that you said or many of the things you said that the next council um has to follow the rule of law and the legalities so that we're not caught up in litigation for years to come and affects taxpayers. So I'm ready to hear the argument today. Thank you. Very good. I'm willing to proceed today. Very good. I will with hearing and I'm willing to go ahead hearing so I will withdraw the motion. Thank you. Uh, are there any corrections to the minutes, Mr. Sohaney?

Mr. Chair, thank you. No. No. Uh, if not, I will seek a motion and a second to approve the minutes of February 23rd, 2026. So moved. Second. Second. All in favor? I. I. Thank you. There are no presentations today. So, we'll move on to quasi judicial and related public hearings for which there's one.

Miss Ciddens, please read the title and take your time. DDRI IDA number CRP 2301 consideration of an individual development approval by the Bocaraton Community Redevelopment Agency for the Meisner Plaza Hotel project on two parcels totaling approximately 1.65 65 acres generally located at 132 and 170 Northeast 2nd Street to authorize construction of a 12story 275,412 ft 219 room hotel which includes a combination of individual rooms and suites. 30,840 ft of retail high consisting of 12,000 ft of restaurant use and 18,840 ft of retail. and internal structured parking totaling 131,134 square feet with the maximum height not to exceed 140 feet 0 in with architectural features with a maximum total height not to exceed 141 ft 6 in together with a technical deviation from paragraph 24B3 of the DDRI development order to reduce the required number of off- streetet parking spaces from 557 spaces to 328 spaces is a reduction of 229 spaces and a transfer of 154815,000 square ft of office equivalent development based upon an equivalency factor for retail and office from downtown sub areas D to downtown sub area B resulting in approximately zero square ft of office equivalent development remaining in downtown sub area B and approximately 279,815 square ft of office equivalent development remaining in downtown sub area D and including a conversion of uses within sub area B providing for appealer providing an effective date.

Thank you. Mr. Kaylor, please review the quasi judicial procedure. Yes. Uh uh board members, as you know, this is a quasi judicial matter. Uh, in pursuant to the rules of the board, each applicant requesting approval, relief, or other action from the CRA shall disclose at the commencement or continuence of the public hearing. Any consideration provided committed directly or on its behalf for an agreement to support or withhold objection to the request of relief or action. The quasi judicial rules that govern this proceeding are attached to the agenda and a copy can be obtained from the clerk. They're available online as well.

Very good. Members, if you have any exparte disclosures that have not been disclosed to the clerk already, please do so now. Mr. Thompson, I spoke yesterday with Ellie Zacharitas, who's council for the applicant, regarding the merits of this project. I spoke, it was perhaps a week ago, very briefly with James Basian, about the fact that this was going to be on our agenda today. I spoke I got a voicemail from, though didn't have a chance to return the call by Ellen Bogdanov. I was out of town. I'm sorry. And I had a conversation earlier today with Arie Seville regarding this application being on our agenda today. I believe that concludes my exparte disclosures.

Thank you.

Thank you, Chair Wagner. So, I've uh all of us have gotten many emails from residents of tower 155 that are those are in the record. Um, I was also at a candidate interview which included comments and questions from Victoria Malazo, Dan Orin, Janette Orin, Jeffrey Weinstein, and Bob Simpkins. Uh, I also spoke with Dr. Alan Putterman, and Miss Lynette Putterman, and Scott Alswang. And over the last year, I've spoken at some point with Armen Beseian, Troy Mlelen, Alex D'Angelus, Al Travasos, Vic Rose, and Shelley Nesbbit. I had a Zoom meeting this morning with Ellie Zacharitas, Alex D'Angelus, Mr. Mrs. Basian, and John Donaldson. I had a phone call with Ellen Bogdanoff this morning as well. And over the last week, u Mr. Besian, I spoke with him on the 18th. He also left a voicemail on the 21st. Um, obviously been to the site often.

Very good. Thank you, thank you. So, thank you for everyone that submitted comments. All the emails from the residents are in uh the record and all the meetings that we've had. I did have a Zoom call uh with Ellie Zacharitas uh last Friday. I also had a conference call with Ellen Bognanov uh last Friday as well. I briefly connected with Mr. BMI. He left me several messages. I've also had meetings in the past uh with Armen Basian, Alexanderitis. They're all documented uh in the file and I believe that's all my disclosure. Thank you.

Thank you. And in addition to the emails we've gotten from residents both at tower 155 and other parts of the city uh that are in the file and other meetings in the file, I have had conversations with Ellie Zacharitas who is applicants council uh Alexandelus who's an architect for the project. Uh James Besian and Armen Benesian who are representatives of ownership of the project and they were all speaking in favor of or advocating for why they thought the project should go forward. I also spoke with Ellen Bogdanoff who is council for the association at Tower 155 and she relates some concerns including some concerns related in an email today. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you. And likewise, in addition to the email uh an email we received on this matter, I have had conversations over the past several years with Jim and Marta Betasian with Ellie Zacharitas multiple times. Uh I did have a conversation with Ellen Bogdanoff last week as well about their concerns in the project. I also attended the candidate interview at tower 155. So I duplicate uh uh Miss Knolas's disclosures there uh with my discussions with all the residents uh over there. Uh I've also heard from Vic Rose. Um and I believe that also constitutes all my disclosures.

Mr. Chair. Yes sir. May I just add, you reminded me, you and uh deputy mayor Knox just reminded me of the candidate forum where we did speak, I did speak with members of the community that live at tower 155. So the ones that come to mind are Dan Orin, Janette Orin, and several others, ones that you had mentioned. So thank you. I just wanted to add that. Yes, we all attended that interview all and all those people part of that 155. Thank you. Um okay. Uh so very good. Now, we're going to wish any person who wishes to speak on this matter please stand while the clerk administers the oath.

Please raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm that any testimony you may give before this public hearing will be truthful and accurate? I do. Thank you, Mr. Cainy. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Development services director, Mr. Shad and staff will make the rep uh presentation. Very good.

Uh thank you, Mr. Sohaney, Chair Wter, and members of the board. Susan Leser, senior planner. The item before you is the Miser Plaza Hotel Individual Development Approval or IDA located at 132 and 170 Northeast 2nd Street. The approximate 1.65 acre property is located directly south of Northeast 2nd Street, west of Northeast Meisner Boulevard, east of Northeast 1st Avenue, and south of Meisner Park. It is zoned DDRI with a compatible future land use designation of CBD and that's located within downtown sub area B. And when the application was originally presented to the planning and zoning board, um the uh city-owned parcel uh highlighted in purple was included in the proposed development and now it's no longer part of this application.

Excuse me, everyone, please. Thank you. The application proposes to redevelop the site with a 12story, 219 hotel room um with a total of 30,840 ft of retail high and internal structure parking. authorize a technical deviation to reduce the required parking rates from 557 spaces to 328 spaces, which is a reduction of 229 spaces. Authorize a transfer of 154,815 um square feet of office equivalent development from downtown sub area D to downtown sub area B. And that does include a conversion of uses. This is the proposed site plan. The applicant uh proposes to construct the 12-story hotel in two towers totaling approximately 275,412 ft. The hotel rooms are located above the two floors of retail and restaurant use. Uh within the larger tower, which is the east tower, 115 rooms are proposed and the west tower, which is adjacent to Northeast 1st Avenue. contains 104 rooms. The ground floor provides approximately 17,000 square feet of retail high as well as a total of 5,214 ft of lobby area and that is between the two towers. A signature staircase is provided along the northern frontage of the building and that's adjacent to Northeast Second Street. It's approximately 20 feet tall and 56 feet 4 in wide and it's aligned with the south entrance to Meisner Park across Northeast Second Street.

In addition to the stairs, the second level is accessible by a 275 ft long pedestrian prominade and that's located at the southeast corner of the property. On the second level, a total of 1,800 square ft of retail high, a 4,000 square foot spa, and access to 6,600 ft² of restaurant use is also proposed. The remaining 5,400 ft of restaurant use is proposed on the 12th floor. The applicant proposes to widen the sidewalk with pedestrian access ranging from 15 feet to 19 ft in width along Northeast Second Street and a 6' wide covered walkway along the rear of the property adjacent to the east west alley. Vehicular access to the property is through the alley along the south southern boundary property of um where vehicles can access the alley via a full access on northeast 1st Avenue and a right in right out access on northeast Meisner Boulevard. This alley is parallel to East Booker Road and will be widened to 20 ft in width to accommodate two-way traffic and uh the pattern that will serve the site. Other improvements along Northeast Second Street include an east west dedicated 5- foot wide bicycle path, new medians, and an enhanced 8 foot wide raised crosswalk across from Meisner Park. The staircase, covered walkways, pedestrian ramp, and wide sidewalks along with frontage of the property provide a pedestrian-friendly environment that is consistent with the goals of the amended downtown plan. And since the previous submitt there is a reduction in daily trips and that number um it reduces from 147 daily trips to 1,15 daily trips.

The required open space is 40% and 46% is provided as open space. Up to 35% of the total required open space may be covered open space. That does include arcades as well as colonades. and the project provides 34% covered open space. This slide represents the modifications proposed to the city-owned lot to accommodate the portion of the widen alley and that's adjacent to Northeast Meisner Boulevard. Two parking spaces will be removed. One space to accommodate the alley widening itself and one space for the proposed landscape island at the southwest corner of the lot. The two spaces will be relocated along northeast uh second and a landscape island at the southwest corner approximately 12x 22 feet will be provided. The size of the existing southeast landscape island will be reduced from approximately 15 ft 9 in to 11 ft to allow for the expanded alley width. The existing FPL pads will be relocated within the newly proposed landscape islands and the existing FPL pole located at the southeast corner will be relocated further north or if permitted will be undergrounded. The modifications will allow both westbound and eastbound egress into the alley. And the modifications to the city own lot would be at the applicant's expense. And again, the two spaces will be removed and replaced along northeast second. The applicant has requested a technical deviation from the development order paragraph 24B3 to reduce the number of required off- streetet parking spaces um for a total of 229 parking space reduction for the proposed hotel as well as retail and restaurant uses. the 10

spaces are going to be replaced um along second and the applicant's traffic engineer submitted a parking analysis that states that the city's downtown parking code relies on outdated 40-year-old rates that overestimated the demand. The required parking for the proposed development is considerably higher and not in accordance with the current and future parking demand in a downtown area. Therefore, al alternative parking rates for the hotel as well as restaurant uses including um outdoor dining have been proposed. The TDM plan um development plan and implementation process shall include the following. Uh to designate an individual to oversee and coordinate the TDM plan. The coordinator shall be the liaison between the hotel and the city and shall monitor all TDM plan activities for the hotel. The applicant through a declaration shall sign assign the property management the responsibility for the implementation operation coordination as well as management of the TDM plan. The hotel main lobby shall post information about the program and locations that are readily visible to hotel guests as well as employees. This is an area that is used to supply information about bus and train schedules, South Florida commuter services, name and phone number of the TDM program coordinator, and information on local restaurants and shops within walking distance. Also uh to ensure the availability of meaningful incentives to the hotel employees and guests who make trips by modes of transportation other than the single occupancy uh automobiles uh by providing transit, shuttle, carpool, walking and biking subsidies which shall specifically include at a minimum a 50% transit pass subsidy for Tri Rail and Palmran and a 20% transit pass subsidy for Bright Line.

The applicant also has voluntarily profered profered to the city an annual contribution in the amount totaling $27,661 and that will be applied towards the city's downtown transit programs. The parking structure includes 330 spaces um two below levels of parking. The application includes the replacement of the 10 city-owned spaces which um are proposed to be removed and improved as part of the project. That's eight on street and two eliminated parking spaces from the city lot. Therefore, a total of 10 on street parking spaces along northeast second, all of which will be public parking spaces. This is the north or front elevation and the building would be um 140 ft tall with a maximum total height including all architectural features of 141 ft 6 in. The application was submitted as a downtown quality project and pursuant to the DDRI development order section 25. Uh it makes it subject to the interim design guidelines or IDG and this allows for certain design flexibility such as greater height but without any increase in the overall building volume. This is the south elevation and the east and internal west elevations. The project was reviewed at the January 20th um 2026 CAB board meeting and the board unanimously recommended approval. The vote was 70. At its March 5th, 2026 meeting, the planning and zoning board reviewed the application, voted 6 to recommend approval of the IDA. The majority of public comments submitted in connection with the application expressed opposition to the project, citing

concerns regarding increased vehicular traffic, the architectural design of the building, the proposed width of the alley, and the proximity to the proposed structure of the existing north tower 155 residential building. During the discussion, the applicant agreed to the following new conditions of approval. uh condition L which relate to the evaluation of the parking structure and it states that a structural condition report must be submitted for the Tower 155 parking garage including any required protections during construction. And condition M relates to a vibration and seismic report. An approved engineering report with vibration limit limits, monitoring schedule, impact analysis, mitigation measures, and ongoing inspections must be submitted and non-compliance triggers a stop work order. The proposed hotel and retail uses are consistent and compatible with adjacent land uses. The project complies with ordinance number 4035 except for the technical deviation related to reduced parking rates. Therefore, the development services department recommends approval of this application. The city's urban design consultant complete city's planning group also reviewed the project and found it to be consistent with ordinance 435. And that concludes my presentation and I'd be happy to respond to any questions you may have.

Thank you, commissioners. Any questions? Go questions. No, I have several questions. Um, with respect to the trans transfer of OES, office equivalent units from one subdist to another. Uh, my recollection is that the there's usually a heightened level of scrutiny about uh transferring those uh things that we look at that are in in the code. Can you talk about a little bit about uh the applicant's compliance with the uh transfer of OEES regulations please? Brain the child development services director. So the only criteria in 4035 when it comes to transferring uh OES between sub areas is an heightened evaluation of the infrastructure impacts which the applicant has submitted. It includes uh traffic and other infrastructure impacts. Those have all been reviewed and found uh that they're not going to be uh harmful to the levels of service. And so that is the criteria that's used in 4035 for those.

Thank you. And with respect to the um with respect to the alley and the widening of the alley, obviously right now everyone's aware that uh the current Meisner Plaza uses the alley as for service. I assume uh the post office perhaps is as well. I guess tower 155 as well has a rear uh entrance. There's a gate in their garage that allows them to use the service alley. Um what kind of analysis has been done on future use of the service alley upon the widening of the alley after this is done? And my understanding also is in addition to 155 and uh this project, there are some uh other uses uh in the far on the far side near Sanborn Square. Uh there's some other uh there's some other uses that we're still going to be using this as a service area. Uh and obviously service areas are where you pick up all your trash and get all your deliveries and whatnot. And so those other uses were still going to require all of this to occur. Has there been any discussion on where is the loading and unloading? I uh on the schematics I did not see a location of a loading dock or anything like that. So the first thing I would say is let's keep in mind this is an alley and a lot of the comments that I've heard seem to sort of not understand that and and want to treat it like a street. It really is not a street. It's an alley. It's for service. It's for those types of things. But first of all, today it's 10 feet wide.

Yeah.

Two vehicles cannot pass. Obviously, not even close. If there's somebody stopped uh you know, unloading or loading, unloading tower 155, any of the other uses today, no other vehicles can pass. So under this proposal, the alley would be w would be widened to 20 feet. Two vehicles could pass if there is loading or unloading activity happening. Uh a vehicle could pass around that vehicle. Uh, additionally, uh, the trash service for the proposed hotel is actually located off of the alley. So, it's accessed from the alley, but it's a separate space that would not block the alley. There's additionally another loading area that's designated on First Avenue that would be for the uh for the restaurants and those types of of uses that would be in the new building. So all so all the restaurant deliveries all the retail deliveries would happen on 1 Avenue I guess.

Yes. Yes. Thank you. Can you go back to the site plan please? Um with the open space requirements right there. Can you just explain and refresh our recollection about the compliance with open space about how that works in terms of that they have to have a 40% open space requirement? So the amount of open space required um on the property under 4035 is based on the height of the building and 40% is the most that's uh that's required. So this building requires 40% open space as Miss Leser mentioned. Um it is uh there's 46% provided. Um so within that 40% um 65% is required to be open to the sky. U the remaining 35% can be covered open space. That would be things like under arcades and those sorts of similar structures.

Um I'm not sure if you had there was more to the question or not. No no that that was that was helpful. Um on this plan here, um it looks like south of the southern arcade, it looks like there's open space. Uh is that on the alley that the alley that the alley widening is being considered the open space? Uh so yes. So that is um it does meet the definition of um not the definition exactly the it the open space memo we call it an interpretation from back in 2016 about what counts and what does not count as open space. This was reviewed and it does count. That being said, uh even if it didn't count, the building would still comply.

Thank you, commissioners. Any other questions? Oh, go ahead. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Could you go one uh slide earlier? So, I see the uh site plan but without the green and yellow, please.

Thank you. Could you just indicate more about where the service entrance is for the hotel, whether it's for garbage or laundry or other services, please? So, off of the alley, let me see if I can get this right. There's a valet and drop off pickup area here. to this side is where the uh trash service and that type of similar uh loading and unloading would occur. There are hour restrictions on that so it doesn't interfere with the u the typical operations. Um and then as I mentioned there is a you see a labeled loading zone here and it points here to u a loading zone off of 1 Avenue

and is there a a door from that loading zone going toward the west lobby that serves a service purpose? Is there a door going from the west lobby out to Northeast 1st Avenue there? I'm picturing a laundry truck, right, with cart with with linens? I'm I'm going to have to ask the the architect to answer that. I'm sorry.

Right. We will ask them. Um I see here of a revision to the IDA that has a number of changes. They look similar to what was proposed by the council for tower 155. Are they identical or are they different? So the planning and zoning board recommended those conditions and they recommended them in general terms for staff to draft after and that's what those conditions are what we drafted based on the intent of the planning and zoning board's recommendation. Um the um council for tower 155 has proposed a number of other u changes or conditions that I believe were provided to you.

Yes. Has staff had I know that request came in at 9:28 this morning. Has staff had a chance to analyze or address any of them? Yes. So the one thing that I would say is that these conditions that we drafted require a structural analysis of the tower 155 building prior to construction. Um one of the concepts there is to have the same thing done post construction. And I think that makes sense. Um we are not in favor of the other changes and I can go through those individually if you like. Uh maybe later we'll just proceed for now. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. Okay, seeing nothing else, we will open up the public hearing. Petitioner first can speak first. You'll have up to 20 minutes. Please state your name and address for the record.

Good afternoon. Ellie Zacharitas, Miss Bachman, 14 Southeast 4 Street. Uh Susan, thank you very much for your very thorough presentation. It has been just shy of three years that we've been working on this. So, thank you for your time and consideration. Um this is just showing you the context of the location of the property with its surrounding uses. We have Misner Plaza here to the right, Tower 155 to the south or left, and Sanborn Square to our west. Okay, so let's talk about the development in a little more detail. As Susan noted, it is two parcels totaling 1.65 acres. This is a true mixeduse development. Uh we have seen some development happen in the downtown over the last decade or so. We have not seen a true mixeduse development that has significant retail and restaurant as well as other uses. Um this will be one of the first um to my recollection in quite some time. So this is a hotel with retail and restaurant. It's a hotel of 219 units housed in two towers, the east tower and the west tower. We have just shy of 31,000 square ft of retail and restaurant. The vast majority of that will be on the first two floors of this development. Each floor, the first floor and the second floor are each 20 feet in height. So, the first 40 feet of development is completely open to the public, completely vibrant, um, and has those commercial and and residential, sorry, retail and and restaurant uses. We also are proposing a 5,400 square foot restaurant, rooftop restaurant on the 12th floor of the East Tower. Um,

and as Mr. Shad and Mr. Wiggner noted we exceed open space. Um we're at 46% instead of 40. So we're over approximately 4,500 square ft of open space. This is a colored landscape plan. Again, as you can see, and as Susan noted, we have left the the city owned lot in its current condition. Um all of the ground floor is retail and restaurant. Um, this is a loading zone here on the west. We also plan on using the motor court on off hours for potential loading and unloading if necessary. And as Mr. Shad noted, all that trash pickup as well as other loading and unloading could occur within our valet during off hours. Um, Mr. Mayor Singer, we do have doors here on the west that would go in straight from the loading zone on the west side. And all of these doors here are also for service entries as well.

Mr. Chair, may I just ask a question on that, please? So, the the West Tower lobby, you would have a doorway for service and a doorway for patrons and guests of the hotel. So, um we're ideally would love to have service all happen on off hours. So, you don't you wouldn't have a lot of the pedestrians utilizing either retail, restaurant, or the hotel. So they can be using that same entrance into here into this elevator area as well. That's your ideal though, but you don't have one dedicated. You don't have a different door that serves I do not believe there's a separate and apart service door now. Thank you. And then Mr. Chair, if I may, one more. Sure.

A question on this motor court here. Here it looks rather squared off with the East Tower Library and retail projecting at right angles. I thought the the access plan was a little more curvy so that you had wider birth for cars. Am I missing something here? So, there's a I think we have a better picture when I get to the renderings of of the motorc court, Mr. Mayor, but yes, it does look boxy here, but there is plenty of turnaround space for this motor court. Right. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you.

Okay. So, I have stood before you on numerous occasions regarding our beautiful downtown um and how much it means to me and how much I'm trying to create vibrancy and a destination and a sense of place. The way to start that is putting the pedestrian first. First and foremost is the pedestrian. This project exemplifies that beyond any scope of a project I have seen in our beautiful city. To the north, highlighted in blue, we have 15 to 19 feet of public sidewalk that will be an easement for public use. Um, that is above and beyond the sidewalk that already exists. That is on city-owned property that you can see here further north of that blue area. We are also providing the first protected bike lane in the city. There are other areas in the city that have a bike lane with delineators, but nothing real structural separating the bicyclist from the moving vehicle like we are proposing here. Um to our west, we have a 12-oot sidewalk along Northeast 1st Avenue. Again, the entire purpose of our downtown is to make sure we have that vibrancy and that pedestrian sense of place and destination. This is here. The only vehicular interruption we have at all on our north is the motor court, which we just discussed that's highlighted in yellow. The reason we decided to include the motorc court is because I, for one, am a huge fan of the circuit. Uh, we want to encourage the use of the circuit. We want to encourage the use of Uber and lifts as well. Um more so the circuit in my case, but we wanted a convenient place for people can drop off and pick up very easily and accessible. So that is that yellow

portion up on the north. On the south, we have put all vehicular traffic to the south and have proposed to expand the alley 10 ft. Again, that additional 10 feet would be a public easement um to the city for the public use, but nonetheless, we still have pedestrian environment and welcoming on the south as well. We have a 6 to 8 foot 1 in covered colonade that runs the entire length of our southern property. It is 20 ft tall with landscaping on top of that. It is separate and apart from the building itself. Um, from there we have a 20 foot wide pedestrian ramp that goes from the ground floor to the second floor. Uh, this is that second floor. Um, these are what I call the iconic stairs. It's literally my favorite part of the project, which I'll get into in more detail, but that is one access point to go from the ground floor to the second floor. We also have elevators in both the east tower and the west tower. Um, again we have that in orange, the 20 foot uh wide pedestrian colonade or prominade moving up ramp, excuse me, going up to the second floor. This is our open space. We've already discussed that we meet or exceed all setback requirements. Again, we're expanding that alley to 20 ft. Um, much care was taken throughout this entire development. um not only with regard to Meisner Park, although that was a big inspiration to our design, uh but also our surrounding neighbors at tower 155. Uh so again, the downtown code, as you all know, requires zero foot setbacks in the rear. Here we're providing from building to building, we are providing over 54 feet in setbacks.

Um, here is a rendering from the northeast corner from Meisner Boulevard. Actually, let me go back here. So, as you can see that the 40 ft in height of that public open space with commercial and vibrant uses. You could see how vast that really is. On the fourth floor is where you get the pool deck for that east tower. Uh, here is that motor court. Mr. Mayor. Um, here is our 15 to 19 ft sidewalk on the north side with our 5-ft protected bike lane. Okay, these are the stairs. These are literally my favorite part of the project. So, in addition to um Alex D'Angelus, our architect of record, in my opinion, designing the most beautiful building I've ever had the privilege of working on. and I'm quite proud of it. Um, not only were we considerate of our neighbors and really pushed that building back 54 ft when zero setback is required, but he also took into consideration Meisner Park and making ourselves integrated within Meisner Park. So, as you'll see from some of these additional renderings that are following, these stairs are perfectly aligned with the plaza in the middle of Meisner Park. So that green space continues to connect. Um what I personally love not just about the design and the that connection with with the plaza, but I love that on the one-third of the stairs on the east, sorry, on the west side are typical stairs as it relates to height, width, and the like. But the 2/3 on the west are deeper, more of a gathering place. Um, yes, I would probably have a glass of wine while my daughter is eating ice

cream, but it is a place where you can sit and relax and gather as a community. Uh, this is sitting on the top or on a step facing north. So, you can really see that connection with the plaza. And you could really see it here. It just completely follows through. uh northwest corner off of Federal. Okay. So, we have one ask and only one ask. We meet or exceed all other code requirements. Um, this is not the first time that I've stood before you explaining to all of you that the city of Boca Raton's almost 40-year-old parking code is archaic and antiquated. Um, and it it shows. So currently we have a code that encourages residential development and I am all for residential development because we need the people living in our downtown and act to actually walk and utilize the retail and the restaurant and the balance of the vibrancy. But what we're having is only residential being built. Um look at East East Royal Palm Road. You have 327 purely residential, 343 was approved, purely residential, 375 purely residential, 475 East Royal Palm purely residential. Alina Glass House, we haven't had, to my knowledge, and I'll stand corrected, Madera, just residential. Um, we haven't had anything in the heart of our downtown that is

proposing any retail, new retail or restaurant because the parking code discourages it. The parking code discourages retail and restaurant development and rather encourages residential. So without retail and restaurant, we don't have a downtown. We have Woodfield, which I love, in a midrise in downtown Bokeh and then it's not a downtown anymore. It's just a residential development. So this is your code today. This is what the city of Bokeas code requires. This next column is what I call our alternative parking plan. Um first of all, this is the exact parking plan that was recently approved by this body for Royal Palm Place Hotel. Um, and the two biggest differentials as it relates to parking is hotel and restaurants. So, let's start with hotel. In the downtown, the code requires one parking space for every 1,000 square ft. Period. Full stop. It doesn't matter if it's a generator room, a staircase, an elevator shaft. It takes the entirety of the hotel building and requires that it park one space per 1000. In this scenario, we have 231,179 square ft of hotel. That is not including the retail and restaurant. That is just the hotel that triggers 232 parking spaces. However, we have 80,829 square ft that is back of the house. Again, elevators, stairware, stairwell shafts, uh generator rooms, electrical rooms, and the like. That equates to 35% of our building or better yet 81 parking

spaces. Um, so that is why we've asked for a reduction for this hotel portion. As you can see, this column here, and we'll go through it in more detail in just a moment, is the government center um regulations. I recognize they have not been adopted yet. I recognize that they're on the agenda tomorrow, but we have been as a city and as a council and as staff have been talking about these new regulations for some time. Um, and they would require I want to say 55 less spaces than what we are proposing. The second biggest differential in parking is as it relates to the restaurants. This section again that you approved for Royal Palm Place Hotel, this section was not drafted out of whole cloth that actually came for all it was to all property that was annexed into the city from the county. So, by way of example, Midtown uh restaurant row, restaurant row, which I love and I partake very often. Um it but it is not our downtown. That is the code that they have to utilize. So, that is their parking requirement. It is about half of what would be required in our downtown again in our downtown. So, we are significantly overparked in our city. Um, again, this is what the government center uh regulations would require if they were approved and and we were in the government center. Um, but we would have 68 more spaces than what would be required for this development in the government center. The last column is West Palm. I've stood before you again and I'll say it again. I don't want to be West Palm. I want to be so much better than West Palm. But West Palm does treat their downtown accordingly. Um, and their pedestrians are of the

utmost importance and the vehicular use is secondary. There is also significant parking in our downtown that is underutilized. We have office buildings in close proximity that come 5:00 at night, weekdays or weekends all day are sitting completely empty. Um, and I'll try to be brief because I'm running out. I only have a few more minutes. But, and Mr. Donaldson can speak to this if any of you have any questions specifically, but FDOT did an analysis in 1995. That was 30 years ago. 30 years ago, they did analysis of Meisner Park and found the results of which was a 40% internal capture determination. 40%. Again, 30 years ago, that was before the circuit. That was before Uber and Lyft. And more importantly, it was before all the residential units were developed and occupied where you have residents living in our downtown and walking. Um, this is very contrary to city code. So when when the city looks at parking in the downtown or really anywhere, they look at it in a vacuum. So, by way of example, if I'm going out to dinner at Max's, the city code assumes that I'm going to park my car in the east parking garage abuing Max's. And then after I go to dinner at Max's, if I want to go to the movie theater and I pick, it assumes I'm getting back in my car, driving around the plaza, and parking again. and then assumes that again if I'm gonna go shop at Sephora or or whatever stores I want to shop at in Meisner Park. That is

not reality. And the FDOT analysis from 30 years ago prove that. Again, I noted how Alex designed this to be integrated with with Meisner Park and not in opposition with Meisner Park. We also need to take into consideration that people going to Mesner Park are going to hopefully, fingers crossed, are going to keep walking south now because there is something to walk to. And god forbid they keep walking even further south and go to Royal Palm or along Palmetto Park Road. These this is what we want in our downtown. We want to encourage that. Uh we have an office building going up right next door to us. Those individuals are not going to drive from the Alletto to Meisner Park for lunch or to Meisner Plaza for lunch. They are walking. Okay, that's it. I did it with two minutes left. I'm here to answer any questions as is my entire team.

Commissioners, any questions? Mr. Chair, very well. Thank you. Yes, Miss Zecharitis, have you seen the uh requests profered by Ms. Bogdanoff and do you have any thoughts or response to those?

So, I need to I need to go into them in more detail. Um, Ellen and I have been speaking probably daily, if not multiple times a day. Um, there were certain conditions she originally posed prior to PNZ. I think a day or two before going to PNC that had five conditions. From those, we could agree to three. Uh two of them are memorialized in this ordinance that is before you today. Uh the third one was asking us to review their their structural engineers analysis of the damage that's already been done to tower 155 and of course we would agree to that as well. Um there were additional requests that I'm having a hard time agreeing to by way of example. They want a wind tunnel study. We are 54 ft away. Um we could be 11.48 48 ft away. Uh so I do not think that this proposed development triggers the need for a wind study. Um but so the conditions that we've agreed to are memorialized within your packet.

Thank you. Do you know off hand what is the distance from the south side of tower 155 to the non setback areas on uh Boca Raton Boulevard? Boca Raton Road, excuse me. I do know that that is it's 20 feet. Um it it's 20 feet, but I will say it is obstructed with walls, trees, and things of that nature. So there's not like a 20ft clearance for pedestrian purposes on that southside. And I will know for the record that East Boca Raton is from what I've been told is 18 ft wide and our and it functions perfectly fine where our alley is 20 ft wide.

Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you. Any other questions? Um, Miss Zacharitus, um, I've made some concerns to the staff as well, and I'd like you to speak at them or the applicant in terms of use of the alleyway for service and for all vehicular traffic. Um, what is what is the intent there? I guess first of all, uh, how many spaces are in the current Meisner Plaza and what's the traffic generated by the current Meisner Plaza? I would have to defer to Mr. Donaldson on that.

Sure. John Donaldson 800 Chriswood Court. The traffic right now, the vested development is 1,669 daily trips with a net of 1,56 and the net proposed is 2161 which is increase of about,00 trips. I believe that's what Susan had has had shown on her uh her site. I do not know the parking calculation. Sorry. No, but it's a it's a basically doubling the amount of trips that are going to the site. Is that what you're saying?

24-hour trips. Yes, sir. Yes. Thank you. And and most of those would all be directed to the rear to where the garage entrance is or they they would all go Well, you're going to have some Uber, Lift, that kind of stuff out front, but the majority of those trips are toward the rear in that alley. That's right. So hold on, John, don't go away. So again, those trips assume that people are coming to one use, right? So by way of example, Meisner Plaza today is completely underparked, but it still works, right? I don't know, Mr. Wigger, how many parking spaces are there, but I can tell you it is not code compliant. A

and it still works. And and just to clarify the there are 42 new peak AM peak hour trips and 57 new PM peak hour trips. So there's more 24-hour which you would expect from a hotel use which might have later trips and the restaurants might have later trips than the existing plaza does. And those p those AM and PM peak hour trips is what we focus on.

Thank you. Um my understanding is that the underground parking there is uh occupies the whole lot and I guess has there been a discussion yet on construction stationing staging and uh logistics in terms of the need potentially for the developer to close off Second Street in order to affectuate um the pilings, the the service delivery, the concrete delivery, the That's right. all all those things uh that have to be done. Number one. Number two is you know has the aggregate cost of agg underground parking be being considered by the applicant uh you know in terms of the feasibility of this development.

So I will take that one at a time. Your staff is exceptional as it relates to. So when we go in for a public works review as well as our building permit submitt, I could assure you that there is no building permit being issued to this applicant or any applicant without an MOT. Um which will talk in significant detail as to where the crews will park, what roads will be closed, if any, if closed for how long, what sidewalks need to be closed, what's the detour, what's the the change of route. All of those things are worked out in significant detail during the public works review and building permit process. Um, Mr. Wigger, I already forgot your second question. I'm so sorry.

The feasibility of underground parking with respect to these developments.

So, sure, there is a significant cost involved with underground parking. But I will tell you the same thing I told the property owner. What is the alternative? is the alternative to have an above ground parking garage on the south cap of Meisner Park. I certainly wouldn't want that and I sincerely hope that the five of you sitting on this day is wouldn't want a above ground parking garage on the south cap of Meisner Park. My understanding from the other um buildings in Boca Raton built with underground parking garage is that due to the level of the water table that there's significant flooding concerns, waterproofing concerns and whatnot. And some of those buildings that have been recently completed um pursuant to their section 558 uh you know complaints and whatnot that I've reviewed have undergone and continue to undergo significant waterproofing issues. You know, you have to create this bathtub. uh basically per se you know quote uh in order for this to become waterproofed. So you know the question is has there been any thought um you know thought as to that?

Yes. So I am not an engineer nor do I play one on TV but I am being told that the actual I never know which which way to say this. the water table is lower here or we're elevated, but this area of our city has some of the lowest water, I guess, is what you would say. Uh the lowest level of water, so we are not worried about it.

Is the staff worried about it? Yeah. I mean, as M Zacharitus alludes to, it's really a function of the project engineer to engineer a building that complies with the code and obviously is going to last. Um, we enforce code requirements.

Thank you. Um, additionally, with respect to underground parking, my understanding over the last several years is that uh EV vehicles um obviously the building is going to be fully sprinklered um but EV vehicles are not uh are not able to be uh the fire fire cannot be put out EV fires cannot be put out with sprinklers. Um has there been any uh has there been any updates as to uh building design or architecture with respect to the proliferation of EV vehicles and fire safety with respect to underground uh because you would not be able to get down there. So if this was a residential tower, if this was tower 155 with underground parking for the residents that live there, I would be significantly concerned about that. Chair Wter, I am not here. This is a hotel. Most people don't even have a car when they come to a hotel in a downtown environment. Uh number one. Number two, it is a commercial space with retail and restaurant. um the the governor and the state of Florida has taken control and decided that the m local municipalities cannot require EV parking spaces. So, no, to answer your question, I'm not concerned about it.

Can you go back to the slide showing the uh the valet court and whatnot? Just site plan, I guess.

I have a lot of slides, so bear with me. That's very That's good. So, can you just explain to me how this is going to work, right? Because now people are used to going to a retail a traditional retail shopping center. They know where to park. They know what to do. Um, so you know here in in terms of just logistics, wayfinding and and operations when when all these cars come here, how how are they going to be directed to know even know where to go?

So we're not allowed to put signage on our plans at this juncture that goes in for later time. It's not part of this entitlement process, but I'm sure there will be wayfinding signs throughout our development. I will tell you it only takes somebody one time to figure it out. But in terms of the actual valet, I guess are they that all is that valet supposed to be the motor court uh on Second Street or is it supposed to be let's call it that little circle on the south on uh I guess on the alley.

So this is not a motor court. This is actually a valet drop off that has significant amount of queuing uh way beyond what code requires. So an individual can come in, they do not need to valet. They could go down the ramp which is right here that goes down into the underground parking or alternatively they could circle, drop their car off and go on their merry way, return, pick up their car and also go about their business,

right? Okay. But they would in theory they they could come to the front uh let's call it the front, I call it the front, Second Street. uh a new visitor will come to the front and then have to be redirected to drive around the block, I guess, let's say drive around the block to the alley to to then pull into the queue. Somehow there will be some sort of directional those people that don't know that it's in the back. We will have some wayinding signs. Yeah. Okay. Commissioners, any other questions on this? Anything? Nope. Thank you for your time.

Thank you. Um Okay. Uh on this matter we do have a representative uh for the adjacent o association. They will have the first opportunity to speak Miss Bogdanoff and then we will go through the cards. Uh you two will have up to 20 minutes.

Thank you Mr. Chair. Um Ellen Bogdanoff representing tower 1551 East Broward Boulevard Fort Lauderdale. Um, first of all, I want to publicly thank Ellie for being so available and having um extensive discussions. All of the residents of Tower 155 have real concerns and it's not about view or anything else, but it has to do with safety. Their building was approved many years ago. I don't know that any of you were necessarily on the commission when it happened. Uh but when the building was approved, obviously it was approved in its size and in terms of all of the exceptions that were given to that building. Um one thing is important to note that uh the plans that I found for that building because there's that loading zone that's supposed to be in the back of their building um does not meet code. Uh the plans show that it meets code but we actually measured it and it doesn't. um in in particular um that is the height is okay. The length is only 41.6 in. It needs to be 45 and the depth is only 11.9 and it needs to be 16. The challenge with that is they can't really use it for a lot of their service deliveries. Uh and I bring that up because um right now they're using it uh for loading and offloading when it comes to you know moving trucks and other things that are being delivered there. Um and it's a challenge um for this building and I I recognize that you know it meets code for the most part. Obviously the two exceptions are the deviation on the parking and the expansion of the alleyway and but for those two items this building could not be built. So, and I understand also and respect that it is your political prerogative to approve those. Our biggest concern happens to be with the alleyway. Um, number one, right now, if five or six cars go through that alleyway, it's a lot. And dump, you know, a a garbage

truck once in a while. Um, and when you spill out from tower 155, like you're you're there, okay? Because that was built very close to the alleyway. You're there. You're on the street. um having vehicular traffic going through there. So from five to six cars, we're going to be looking at a thousand plus. That's no longer an alleyway, that's a roadway. Um and it's still being considered an alleyway. And that's a real big concern um for the residents in terms of the amount of traffic considering that they do use that sometimes as an exit way. Um the the items that we presented um to the developer to consider were done by our structural engineer. I'm sure you all know that Tower 155 is in litigation. There are huge concerns and challenges with the building as it as it was built. Um and we want to make sure that the residents are safe. We believe what we've asked for is reasonable. Our structural engineer didn't put anything in here. And the reason it changed slightly is the initial letter was a little bit more of an opinion than it was language that you all could, you know, look at and say, "Okay, this is reasonable." The additional items that we're asking for is a 247 platform that informs specific individuals through email if a threshold on the vibration is exceeded. Um, the reason this is important is, you know, um, this month in Orlando, a building that's relatively new, um, was basically closed down and all of the residents removed. Uh, when fire came in, they had to actually use crowbars to open some of the doors to the apartments so that people could exit. So, it's it's the concern is real. Meaning, in other words, when a building is not built properly, there's real exposure. and they just want to make sure that they're informed immediately if there's some challenges with the vibrations during construction. I

understand they put it back 54 ft and that is clearly appreciated but the construction is going to be h happening immediately adjacent. The other thing is we ask for to install cameras because of the proximity of the building. Um, we'd like to know when cranes and other other materials enter our airspace, which could ultimately end up damaging the building and creating additional vibrations. Um, we would like a survey of the building with drones because we know that there are probably cracks and I think this would be protection for the developers as well that there that we cannot access. Um the other thing we ask for is which is standard in a lot of the development agreements that that I do is that um tower 155 after construction be put back together again like Humpty Dumpty and that is either to power wash or to uh paint the building and to make sure that all of their landscaping if any of the landscaping has been destroyed due to trucks etc is replaced. Um, and the wind modeling. I'm I'm not a I'm not a wind modeling expert, but I don't believe our structural engineer would have put that in there if they didn't think that it was important. Um, we just need to make sure that our windows and our building can withstand whatever wind. And it may turn out that everything is fine, but we don't know unless the wind modeling is done. And this is standard a lot of times in in buildings that are in close proximity. Um, as far as um anything else, I mean, we've talked about the concern that um if this um if if the CRA is inclined to approve this building, um that we'd like some more protections on the alleyway. We talked about um an elevated crosswalk. Um and a lot of these things obviously if they're not in the development order, if they're not in the IDA, they may or may not happen. Um the other concerns that we have,

can you say sorry, can you slow down? Can you say that last in terms of a crosswalk? Can you can you talk?

It was an elevated We talked about an elevated crosswalk um on the alleyway so that people could actually cross over from tower 155 to whatever sidewalk that they have there because right now they kind of enjoy, you know, a little bit more direct access to the other plaza. Um they would have to go around this building and if they crossed out of the back of the building, um they would literally step right into a two-way street with more than a thousand cars. And and even though I know that Lift and Uber are supposed to go around the front, you're not going to be stopping anybody from coming through the alleyway, taking the convenient route around where the valet is. I mean, I I would venture to say it's going to be more than a thousand cars a day. And that's that's a huge that's a that's a big flow. Um it's no longer just an alleyway that's just servicing uh the two buildings that are adjacent to it. It is now become a major access point for everything. So, are you talking about like a speed table

slash turn into a crosswalk at a specific location to intersect the uh I guess the prominade or correct whatever they're building back there.

I know they're doing something similar um on second to Meisner where they have an elevated crosswalk, something similar. So, it would it would slow them down when they come down the alley. It almost acts like a um a speed bump as well as a crosswalk. Um the other thing is and I know that is not for something to discuss with respect to the developer but it's brought to light some cons additional concerns and that is um because we really don't have an effective loading zone in the back we would like to create a second loading zone in the front and that's taking two city parking spaces. Um, I I know that parking is a premium uh in any downtown, but what we could do is limit uh the amount of time that it would become a loading zone for maybe smaller trucks. Um that would give them access to take some of the pressure off of the alleyway.

You mean on Boca Raton Road? East Boca Raton Road. Yes.

Um the other thing is is that um we'd like to legitimize the loading in the back. Um, I don't know that the the IDA is is basically says it's for service trucks. I don't know that it was effectively there for maybe a moving truck that has to sit there for 3 4 hours um unloading and loading. We'd like to legitimize that because they have no choice. And with all due respect, none of the residents or the association had anything to do with providing a CO and approving a building that its loading zone did not meet code. Um, and because of the narrow aspect of the alleyway, a truck can't wiggle its way in there at all. And some of these moving trucks are longer than 41 ft. Um, and then the only other thing we would want to kind of get the blessing of of of this this ERRA would be to say that um, right now we have a restriction where they can't really access the alleyway unless East Rome Boulevard is blocked, which happens a lot by the way because people just kind of park in the middle and go deliver something and just like leave their truck there. Um, we'd like to change the amend the IDA to allow them to actively use the alleyway for an egress and an ingress into their garage. Um, so they would have two access, one on East Meisner and one in the alleyway. Um, if you're inclined to approve, but you know, there are some strong objections simply because the scale of this building is much more than I guess the residents anticipated and because of the reduced parking. If you had to have the parking that is currently in code um because I did hear that you enforce code um if you had would um in code they couldn't build this building to scale because you would need many more parking spaces in order to make it work. I understand the argument I get it again you know to reduce the parking but the scale of this building exists because of the reduced parking. So those are really the concerns and I think there are a few residents who will speak to some

additional concerns that they may have. Um but I'm happy to answer any specific questions that you all might have on um our our specific requests.

Thank you very much. Uh just a note there and Mr. Soy I I saw you taking notes very well but um some of those things in terms of uh either use of the alley or having a temporary loading zone maybe expanded out front. Um maybe those things that are things that our city should be looking at or our CRA in terms of downtown should be looking at irrespective of what happens here anyway because it seems to be logical. Again, we still have a lot of uh of of hearing to have here and uh needless to say those seem like legitimate concerns irrespective of what happens with this vote. So I I saw Mr. Soy looking into it and I know I know that he will. Um thank you. Thank you chair. Yes sir. Please.

Thank you. A question. It seemed like some of the requests relate not only to the IDA that's pending before us, but amendments to the prior approved IDA that allow TAR 155. Did I hear that right? Correct. And I did state that. Meaning, I know it's not really for discussion here, but sometimes a nod from the CRA to staff to say, please work with these people because these are challenges that not only do we have today, but will be exaggerated once the building is built if you approve it.

Right. Um since those can't be granted today, is there any um has the association given you authority to uh be supportive of the project if a certain set of conditions are met or are these just wish lists and the there's no profer that can come from the board of tower 155?

I was um I I was asked to express their concerns. I believe their preference is for a reimagining of the building. That would be their preference. but also recognizing that we had a 6-0 vote at planning and zoning and just kind of tracking the development that has occurred downtown in in the past. Um that you know we were looking for a plan B, right? But to be clear, there is no plan A. There is no set of uh conditions to which uh could be imposed today that would find Tower 155's association being supportive. scaling down the building the size what to what specific but you haven't

I I have not been authorized to to so the answer is no that's good good guess all right thank you Mr. Sure. Chair Wagner. Yes.

Thank you, Miss Bucknoff. Uh just so that I'm clear is I want to make sure they have included some of the requests that you had independently to Mayor Singer alluded to, which is there are some things that are going on with Tower 155. They have to look at separately from this particular hearing. Um and they were included in the idea that we received today. Right. So, from what I understood from Miss Acharitis, I just want to make sure for clarity and and and just make sure that we're all on the same page. They added um the schedule assessment assistic testing and vibration readings and then um let's see what else they put on here. They added a few of the requests that you made. The everything that is underlined on the paper that I sent you was what I had sent to Ellie. What the plan was when we talked at planning and zoning was to have the two engineers have a conversation because the original language was kind of vague. So what I asked our engineer to do is go back and be specific. So these are a reflection of the specific asks that we wanted to discuss. The two engineers never got together because actually they don't have a structural engineer yet because they're not at that point in the plans where they need to hire one. So I had asked ours um to give me language that for you all to consider um because even if the developer doesn't if if you are has the same concern share the same concerns as the residents of tower 155 that you independently could require it.

Follow up one second. This is for the city manager or for Mr. Shad. Is that what we got in the revised IDA? What their structural engineers presented? from tower 155 just so the the blackline IDA the whole IDA that is the language that staff wrote and I believe that Miss Bogdanoff is talking about this sheet I know you it's we're a long way away from each other but it's not the IDA itself it's a separate sheet okay and has the applicant agreed to what's in the IDA the the the gray the gray underlined

I believe so. Yes. Yes.

And then if I'm correct and either miss if you can answer the only thing that I heard earlier from the applicant was that the wind modeling was one of the provisions that was not included at this point. There was no agreement on the wind modeling. Correct. There's no agreement on to my knowledge of anything that's underlined on the sheet that I gave you. The rest of the language I literally copied and pasted which was similar to our language from the language that staff wrote and then I underlined all of the language that we would like to add. And that was after a conversation with our structural engineer because they didn't have one to say I need specifics because the letter that he wrote was sometimes an opinion like you should have this or you should like tell me what I need. So that was written.

Okay. Thanks for the clarification. Thank you Chair Wter. Thank you. But just to Miss Ducker's point that there there was the the black line that's been provided to us in addition to wind modeling there there were several I have several other things that were not included that you're still asking to be included. 247 monitoring, uh site cameras, um drone surveying of uh the building and the current uh you know current uh status of it. Um and then obviously uh you know required repairs, power washing etc. Painting if there's any damage from this dust and

once the building is complete obviously you know it's going to continue to have issues. So it's would be once the building is complete. Yes. Okay. Thank you. Anything else? Seeing nothing else. We will open up the hearing to uh the rest of the public. We have many many cards uh and I will read them in the order that they were presented to me. Uh the first is Brian Critchman.

Please state your name and address for the record. One second. Thank you.

Let's get this flattened out. My name is Dr. Brian Critchman. I live at 155 East Boone Road. I'd first like to thank the citizens of Boca Raton for the resounding victory on March 10th. The citizens have spoken have said, "We are tired of the city council rubber stamping every single building project in downtown Bokeh with all the transfer of office equivalents and variances." The developers for years have said to the PNZ board and city council, "Jump." And they've answered how high. On December 2nd, 2022, the tower 155 558 engineers report was finished after full inspection of the building. On page 52, it states, "Cracks in concrete slabs, columns, and other members. Cracks are present in levels underground to third level of the parking garage and multiple locations of the post-tension elevated slab." A further report last year stated, "The inspector's design review of the parking garage shows, quote, that there are some areas at the slab of the parking garage where the design is not complying with the requirements of the Florida Building Code and the American Cement Institute. Therefore, shoring of the garage is mandatory to prevent further cracking. Remember, your city planners approved the architect's plan for the garage, which was not drawn to Florida building code, and your building department gave a certificate of occupancy to a garage that was not built to Florida building code. And we still don't know what the very bottom of the garage looks like at the bottom of the grade. Mr. Batsmey now wants to build a hotel within 20 ft of tower 155 and excavate two floors of underground parking plus the foundation. This is a recipe for disaster. I asked Susan Leser what precautions are being taken to prevent the collapse of tower 155 since it is already compromised by not being built to Florida building code. She stated that there will be an evaluation of tower 155 before the construction of the hotel will begin and monitoring of tower during the construction. Then I was floored when she said, quote, "In the event damage were to nevertheless

occur, that is ultimately a private matter between property owners." You've got to be joking. We do nothing and they are causing the damage and we have to sue them to stop the collapse of tower. A private matter instead of the city immediately ordering a work stoppage to prevent further damage and risk of collapse. The city approves the plans without an independent evaluation of a structural engineer and then allows construction of a building. And if it cracks and damages the adjacent building instead of halting construction so the adjacent building doesn't collapse, the property owners have to work it out. I guess that's what you think about the safety of your residents. Mr. Mayor, the city council, what steps are you going to take before the vote today to protect the residents of Tower 155 from having to sue Mr. Batsmasium to stop the project from collapsing the tower? I have 20 seconds. Anybody want to answer the question, please?

We'll take all the comments and then we'll be responding afterwards. Thank you.

Thank you. Miss Janette Orin

Janette Kuven Orin 155 East Boca Raton Road. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you, city council members. We're going to spare you from hearing from every one of the 125 apartments in Tower 155 today. Our attorney covered some of the legal issues that should make this an easy no. Today I will speak to the ethics of it all. The Batnesian family is extremely generous to the city of Bokeh. But if the election on March 10th taught us anything, it's that city leaders should not work for the developers alone. Elected leaders are beholden to the people, the businesses, the infrastructure, and the future of Boca Raton. You have one week left to do the right thing and vote no on this too large, too close hotel. The job of you elected officials is to envision and actually plan what is best for the city. Just because a developer wants a big hotel doesn't mean he should get one or even two in this case. No one moves to Boca Raton to live in concrete canyons separated by 20 ft alleys. What precedent are you setting for the future? Of course, we understand there will be new construction and temporary inconveniences. Miss Zecharitis likes to characterize us as ungrateful residents. This is unfair. We just don't want the fabric of this beautiful city torn apart. You can say no today. Everyone wants downtown Bokeh to be a livable community, a place to grab a sandwich and support a local shop. The Pink Plaza is incredibly popular and busy. We want more places

like the deli, the dry cleaner, the pizza shop, and the UPS store. These are the kind of stores, the threads that give the neighborhood a character. We don't want more luxury storefronts that will be empty. When you approved Tower 155 as a residential building, long before any of us purchased our apartments there, you made a conscious decision to weave our block into a livable community. Don't unravel that now. I grew up here in Palm Beach County. I love this place. You have an opportunity to complete your tenure in office with a new message. When a project is too large, too close, and simply doesn't fit the future of Boca Raton, say no.

Thank you.

Mr. Alan Slutski. I'm Alan Slutzky and I live at tower at live at 155 East Bocarone Road. First, I want to thank Mr. Mayor for your service and CRA on the work you do and I will respect your final decision. My wife and I have been proud residents of Bokeh for over 45 years. We've raised three children here and now three grandchildren are growing up in our fame city. I deeply care about Bokeh's success in future, as I'm sure everyone here does. This project is designed to attract a tremendous amount of interest and visitors. But I'm concerned that we will fall victim to our own success. Even without the traffic from Rolto or this proposed hotel, downtown traffic is already at or near capacity during peak. We all know this, not because a traffic study tells us, but because we live there. Residents driving on Little Boca Raton Road toward Sanborn Square an obstacle course of constant pedestrian activity, cars, and trucks. If we were to turn west on Palmetto, we often wait through several stoplight cycles because traffic is already backed up. Traffic studies are models based on assumptions. If an assumption is wrong, the conclusion is wrong. The CRA recognized this unknown with the Leto and approved it with the understanding that traffic would be addressed when the project is 80% complete. If the Alto assumptions are off, the city can pivot like convert Boeron Road to a one-way or remove street parking. But the Meisner hotel traffic study adds layered uncertainty. Unknowns sitting on top of other

unknowns with both Alto and the newly proposed eightstory private members club on Little First Avenue. This is exactly how consequences happened in a pedestrianheavy corridor. That's enough to cause Q spillback and gridlock unless mitigations are locked in. Carl's cars would extend past intersections and block driveways, alleys, and side streets. Gridlock is not only an inconvenience, it is a potentially grave problem for fire, police, ambulance personnel, and pedestrians. I'm not here to oppose development. I'm asking that we pause to independently verify traffic assumpt assumptions before, not after problems occur. lock-in mitigations today tied into measurable triggers. If we get this right, we all get what we want. We want to protect the project, protect the neighborhood, and protect the city. That's how we can move forward together and responsibly to save Bokeh. Jill Rose. Good afternoon. My name is Jill Rose. I'm a longtime Boca Raton resident and I currently live at 155 East Boca Raton Road. Thank you all for your service and for giving us your time. The Meisner Hotel requested parking deviation of 41% is likely the largest ever requested in Boca Raton. There is no precedent for this and it should be summarily rejected. This large parking deviation can deviation can easily be solved by making the project smaller. The deficiency is totally self-inflicted. Making the project smaller could eliminate or reduce the need for parking

variance or deviation. In April 2025, this council rejected an application concerning another downtown location because of a requested 31% deviation. This project is asking for a 41% deviation reduction, more than 30% greater than the rejected variance. As with the standalone emergency room application, this is certainly not a minor reduction with, if you'll pardon the expression, a postage stamp size alley, even if it gets expanded, and an already inadequately wide East Boca Raton Road one block away, with other large projects adjacent and active in the area, such as the Sanborn Social Club on Northeast 1st Avenue facing Sanborn Square and the Alledo off office office colossus also on East Bocarone Road. Spillover can create major traffic disruption and parking demand which honestly already exists during certain events even before these new projects become online. Council members may wish for reduced driving and parking, but visitors to Boca Raton and certainly to a hotel will be driving and parking. They need spaces to park and viable roads to drive down. I shall conclude with the words of Bonnie Mskell, someone I believe is familiar to most, if not all of you. I am told she presented these words before this commission regarding another project. quote, "Could they have built a bigger building?" No. Could they have built a smaller building? Yes. And if they had built a smaller building building, they certainly might have been

able to do sufficient parking because the building would require less parking. One more thing I want to address that was not part of my remarks. They talk about off-hour services for laundry and garbage. Does that mean that we in Tower 155 have to listen to deliveries and garbage collection all hours of the day and night? That makes no sense for us. I thank you in advance for your consideration of our concerns. Thank you very much. Thank you,

Mr. Richard Warner. Richard Warner, 1322 Southwest 9th Terrace, Boca Raton. As difficult as it is for me to feel a great deal of empathy concerning Tower 155, which in my humble opinion should never have existed. Uh I understand what they're saying. And this does give you guys an opportunity to uh do something to correct the legacy of shame in your uh previous history. Uh let's just look at this. It shows that the CAB and the planning and zoning people are tonedeaf and incompetent. It shows that the compliance rules are completely wrong or this wouldn't be within compliance. This goes back, I understand, to 1980. I've been here before then. Uh I understand the legal process that forces your hand in some of these things. However, you don't have to be compliant. Anything you can do perhaps to make this uncomfortable for the developer to do might be a good idea. Uh because the bottom line is no matter how much lipstick you put on this pig, it's going

to stay a pig. The bottom line is look at the the look at the picture there. Has anyone done a study of what this would do in a major hurricane? I mean, in California, you can't build things that won't stand up in an earthquake. What's the story on this building? You know, the downtown code is an atrocity. The reality is that the whole development is unnecessary and wrong. Uh, I don't know if you can vote no. I don't know. I'm not an attorney, thank God. But I think if there's a way to keep this unnecessary hotel, I mean, we have a hotel a couple blocks away that's never full. Who the hell's going to stay in this hotel? Why? Why do this? uh you know you have an opportunity to do something right for a change. Go for it. Thank you,

Daniel Flynn. Good afternoon. Daniel Flynn, 99 Southeast Meisner Park, Boca Raton. Um, Southeast Meisner Boulevard, Boca Raton. I had no idea I'd be here. I have no horse dog in the race. No association whatsoever. I even sat on the wrong side. I'm in favor for this. There's no sides. Well,

one city. Uh the ideas that I hear there are against this are seemingly individual ideas, very micromanaging of what someone doesn't want as opposed to a commerce community and an economic community and impact. Uh I hear about what they don't want shouldn't be and the incompetent building of tower 155. I've lived here long enough to when there was opposition of 155 pomemetto proomenade Houston's some get approved some don't. So now what we're saying is we shouldn't approve 155 for all these reasons, but it's still there and we did. And because of the structural integrity or lack thereof integrity, we shouldn't allow another developer who you look at all his buildings, they're beautiful. The impact that that he's had on real estate in Boca Raton and Southeast Florida, Pompo, Lighthouse Point, it improves it. It's fantastic. I wanted to touch on the EV. I don't have a prepared script. This is off the cuff. the EV whether or not they can put out the fire. Well, that's an EV problem. They should have taken into consideration the sprinklers that the sprinklers couldn't put out an EV and maybe not approve the EV. So, we can't go and change all the sprinklers in all the commercial buildings. Meer Park is dying whether people want to admit it or not or acknowledge it, but Meisner Park is dying. Less and less people are coming here. The tenants are nothing but a revolving door. You can come up with reasons, but the bottom line is the commerce isn't there. There was people that were against Meisner Park, but it's here and now we love it. That's what happens. This development, I think, could be proactively the catalyst that revives Meisner Park and brings people to Meisner Park and not Atlantic Avenue in Delray Beach because we all see the commerce and the growth and the development there. People are against people for it. No one's ever happy. Mr. Mayor asked if there was anything they

can do to make them happy and the answer is simply no. The bottom line is this is a huge huge investment on an individual whether or not he's successful or not. Extremely successful. Bravo to him. And he's done an enormous benefit impact on Boca Raton. He's charitable. He takes care of people. And the bottom line is maybe this is the proactive catalyst that Meisner Park needs. It's last shot to survive because it's not surviving. But maybe this will bring people here and it will revive Misner Park and bring better tenants and have a great impact on a downtown commerce center, not a residential area. It's mixed use, a downtown commerce center of business. Thank you. Thank you very much.

Pam Pashki, Miss Pashki. Pam Pashki, 341 Southwest 2nd Street. So, um, my biggest problem here is the parking variance. And I don't think I I like what that one lady said, which was, why do they need this much parking variance? I guess cuz the building's too big. If they made the building a little smaller, they wouldn't need as much parking to still comply with the city code. The problem here is that you're allowing developers to dictate city code and we don't want that. If there's a process where city code gets examined and revised, that process needs to happen. Maybe Miss Zacharitas would like to testify at that hearing when you're talking about changing the parking code because she was basically saying that here. I want you to change the parking code, which is not the proper way to go about this. So I think for that you tell them go back to the drawing board figure out a way where you don't ask for so much reduction in parking. The second thing is they want to take part of the city property to widen the alley over to miserable whatever's over there. They want to widen it by taking part of the little parking garage parking lot that the city has on the end of that block. They're not giving you money for that. They want to take 10 feet of that 10 feet or 12 feet whatever it was of that little parking parking lot without compensation. So originally they wanted the whole thing to buy it and now they say oh all we have to do is make the city make this a street instead of an alley and certainly that's something that city planning should be doing and deciding where the streets should be. Now, if they want to do it on their

private property, they're perfectly fine to doing that. But that little last little piece to get over to the the cross street, the city should not say, "Yes, we'll go ahead and give you the like an easement for no cost to to go through city property." And then they're taking away two parking spaces. And what they're saying is, "Oh, we're going to give you two with city property on Second Street." It's ridiculous. It's my time up. No. No, keep talking.

Oh, sorry. I saw the yellow. I was thinking it was red. Okay, so that's the front parking. The second thing that I the third thing I guess that I don't understand is this underground parking. Miss Sacharitis was just up here a few weeks ago with another hotel for the Batians where she said, "We realized that underground parking was not feasible for that." So, they got a sevenstory parking garage. This time suddenly the water table moved or something and now we can build two stories down. I think that's a without a structural engineer they don't have one. How can they possibly say that this is something that they can do? I think you should ask them to go back to the drawing board. Fix whatever they have to fix to keep everything they're doing on their own property. Not take city property and not if it if they don't get the parking variance. That's how you just send a Mac say go do it again.

Thank you. Thank you. Meredith Madson

Meredith Meredith Madson 1193 Southwest 19th Street a local resident and most recently the bronze medalist in the city council run for CP. Congratulations on silver mark. You've done a good job here today. Thank you for asking very important questions. I'm asking you to defer this item's vote because what the vote represents right now just came out of a contentious election where 75% of the community was exhausted by overdevelopment and voted to stop, especially in the downtown. And the project now touches every single one of the election issues, architectural style, building heights, parking, density. We have plenty of time. There is no urgency for the residents part. This is the single largest commercial land owner in our town. So, no one involved in this issue is going anywhere, even after you do. The urgency is only for this developer desperately trying to force a technical deviation through that residents definitely don't want. And it's a selfcreated, self-inflicted parking deficiency to be absorbed by the residents quality of life. Simply making this project smaller eliminates this entire problem. It saves all of this time and it saves all this wasted energy. This is just project one, by the way. And it's not even a minor parking reduction we're talking about. It's 229 spaces. Is actually the largest requested parking reduction in the history in the densest part of the city where we have small roads and multiple projects on deck. And granting this reduced parking request is going to spill into our streets and our neighborhoods. It's a massive overreach. It's borderline brazen. And for all we know, it's going to set the precedent for the future urban creep. So, please just stop. The issue is not resolved enough to vote on right now anyway. There's First Avenue, there's loading docks, there's wind studies, there's uh there's parking issues that we're

already under parking as it is for our town. This landowner has received so much from us. All these land values that we're talking about are based on us and our value as exceptional citizens. the quality of life we have collectively created with our schools and our parks and our businesses. These are the land values we're all talking about that make us uniquely desirable place to live and it's part of our building requirements that made it do so. So please hear us reduce the scope and reduce your need for deviation. Just scale it down again. Keep your stairs. It's your private property. Build on your property within the confines and the context which you bought it with and without asking for special deviations every single time. and the largest in our history at that. We have 47 projects in this pipeline right now. Who of them will not line up next afterwards asking for these same requests? I'll say it again. We're not against progress and nobody protested the link because that's the kind of progress we're all fine with. I'm asking you respectfully, send this back to them to fix and defer this vote until it's complies with our existing code. Just table it. Thank you and thank you for all your service.

Thank you. Jeffrey. Thank you, Jeffrey Weinstein.

Good afternoon. My name is Jeffrey Weinstein. I live at 155 East Booker Road. I am here in opposition to the hotel project. Approval of this project would require multiple concessions or giveaways from the city of Boca Raton. While the council has the authority to grant these, the question is why should it? I have a list of eight issues that argue for a rejection of this development. But with the time constraints, I will focus on only two. Number one, parking. The developers argue that the current parking requirements are outdated and need not be met. In Florida, vehicle registrations have surged by about 85% since 1990, roughly 40 years ago, from 9.8 million registrations to over 18.2 million registered cars in Florida. Hardly evidence that parking need that the parking needs are outdated. Ride share services like you, Uber, and Lyft add to the traffic as they constantly circle around waiting for their next ride uh to be requested. Today, traffic in Meisner Park, East Boeron Road, Meisner Boulevard, and East Palm Meadow Park Road shows worrying congestion. Gridlock on these roads is a daily occurrence. They are not only inconvenience but pose real safety concerns as ambulances, police and fire vehicles get caught in this gridlock. A request of a 41% reduction in standard. No project has ever received such a

concession and this request should be rejected out of hand. Second, city-owned land. The developers pulled their original application when the community questioned the sale or gifting of the city-owned parking lot adjacent to the post office to allow for the widening of the alley to accommodate over 1,000 more automobiles, trucks uh emanating from the proposed hotel. density without infrastructure upgrades worsen congestion and strain services. The Boca 1 government site development proposal involving public land was overwhelmingly rejected by the voters on March the 10th. Now the developers seek a smaller but similar concession. Give us just enough of the parking lot to allow us to widen the alley. This is still a giveaway of public assets for private benefit and for private profit and should be rejected out of hand.

Mr. Weinstein, thank you. Your time is expired. Miss Shelley Nesbbit. Hello, my name is Shelley Nesbet. I am the property owner of 250 Northeast Meiser Boulevard, probably the closest single family home to this wonderful project. When I bought this property, I bought it strictly because of its proximity to downtown. My purpose of purchasing this property and for a lot of the people that do live in the same quadrant as I, anything from Meisner Boulevard, Fifth Avenue, East Boca Raton Road, all the way to Sixth Street or 7th Street, all paid a premium to be in close proximity to Meisner Boulevard. I feel terrible about what's happening with Tower 155. I think it's a very unfortunate situation, but I think this project is for all of the residents of Boca Raton, not just the residents of Tower 155 and people that are concerned about Bokeh. The things that I want to talk about today are staying focused on how this city was supposed to be originally developed and what the downtown core was originally proposing and what this city council has approved for many many years of what the downtown should look like. We want a downtown that will be vibrant. We want a downtown that will allow walkability and accessibility to all the favorite things that we like. And I'm sure the residents of tower 155 purchased in that for that same reason to have walkability and accessibility to all the amenities. I think it's very important to be

thoughtful in in in the development of the project. I also know that it's extremely important for the economic outlook of our city. We have a proposed tax change coming up for all property taxes. How are we going to make up the difference in revenue for the city if we don't allow development? This is extremely important. We cannot look at this in a vacuum. We cannot look at this as one isolated situation. Not to mention the fact that this project is so magnificently beautiful. It will become an iconic landmark for our city where will it will attract people and allow people to enjoy. It's not just for the residents of the core, but it's for all the residents of all of Boca Raton. The other thing that's really important to take into consideration is that especially with the current elections that just happened, what was important to this committee before the election should be important today. Please do not take away the growth that we need because we definitely know we're going into a potential stagnation and how dangerous that could be for the residents of Bokeh. Please do not take away the privilege that our residents deserve to have future development. I think it's very very important to keep our eye focused on what was originally agreed and what was approved. Thank you.

Thank you very much Steven Newman. I think somebody left. Good afternoon. My name is Steven Newman. I live at 210 Southeast Meisner Boulevard and um I'm for this project. Um I think it is a beautiful looking building. I think that it will add a lot to the downtown area. One of the reasons I moved to this area is because I love the be to be able to be to walk everywhere I go from the restaurants to Starbucks to Krema to everywhere. And I think walking is a great thing and I think it changes the whole downtown. I think that um by looking at this building and having something be brand new and be iconic to this area, we'll bring a lot of new businesses and a lot of new people. Um right now you have a lot of people stay at the Bokeh Resort because it's one of the nicest places to stay here. But there's nothing else that's like that anywhere out. And if you have people that come and stay at a brand new hotel, the restaurants do better, the stores do better, the little mom and pop shops all do better because of what's able to be able to be walked to instead of staying on the grounds of one particular place. I think that you have to look at the things in general and just say, "Wow, this is great and this is a beautiful building and it's going to be iconic and people will love it." I do understand where the building's coming from. I think that, you know, we've all lived in places where growth has changed and people have lost their views and buildings are not maybe built to how they should be, but things change and things move on. And I, you know, long before I lived here, when that building was being built, I'm sure there were people that didn't want it to be built, but things happen, things change, and I think we have to move forward and look at what's best for the city.

Thank you very much, Mr. Scott. Thank you, Mr. Scott Kerner. Hello, Scott Kerner, 561 Golden Arbor Drive. Thank you for listening to everyone today. Um, my wife and I are raising two kids here. I have a daughter that's graduating from FAU. I think it's important to look at over the past 5 years, this city has exploded. Um, we've seen tremendous growth. We've seen approximately 110,000 people living in Boca Raton at this time. Um, if you recognize FAU had a great great final four about four years ago and you saw the school blow up and just a tremendous amount of interest of coming into Bokeh from the youth. The average age in Boca Raton has decreased down to 48 years old. I think if you actually look at what's going on in Delray, Palm Beach, Pompo, we don't want to be left behind. This project is instrumental to the future of this city. It will change everything. We also need to support our youth. And when we think about our youth, it's giving them opportunities, job creation, things of that nature. Right now, 25,000 undergraduate students are at FAU. A total of 33,000 are enrolled. 88% of them are instate tuition. These are facts that we can't ignore. This project is instrumental to our growth, our city's development, and our future. Thank you.

Thank you very much, Mr. Ned Kimmelman. Ned Kimmelman. Oh, come back. Mr. Kimman, welcome. Well, this is the last time I'm going to see this board sitting in this capacity or any capacity. I want to say thank you. You have been the greatest board. Just name and address for the record, please.

Ned Kimmelman, 200 East Palmetto Park Road, Florida. And I mean, when I moved down to the downtown in 2016, there was nothing going on. Now it is a party. From baby carriages to young couples to older couples, we're all walking. I know people every single day. It's like a miracle. Bocon was dead until you came in. And not just this board, but a few. Scott's been here forever. I bet a great public servant. Mark, same thing. Fran and Andy Thompson. You guys, you make the city great. So, I just wanted to tell you thank you. from the connect to uh Meisn Park. Even though this project just now was defeated, it doesn't matter. Bokeh has to move forward before this election with a six to nothing PNZ. You would have approved this hotel and this hotel is what from the 25th century. Who would have dreamed that Jim Badmian would give us this type of architectural piece of work? This thing's incredible. It looks like this magnificent crazy flying saucer. Who would have dreamed? Not me. I love the deli. I love the UPS. But I also was here for Taro 155's birth. They had a caboose on the property like everything else. They bought a few pieces of property. They changed the way things were here in Boca Raton. So you could actually build in this tiny little lot. And they put this monstrosity up. I don't want to tell you about the wrong hole that they they drilled to begin with, how they changed the building on the way up, but in that caboose when you bought John De Shields was there, a local guy, he was the broker. And if you asked him and everybody was, "What's going to happen across the way here? Who owns that thing?" And they were told some bat mingling, whatever. Will he build? Of course, he's not going to build, the Shields told them. Everybody knew. Every single person who bought at Tower 155 knew. I'm not saying it's not

a terrible situation, but you know, we have the glass house going across from us. Nobody on the east side of my building is very happy about it, but that's the way it is. This is an urban center. Mr. Basian has the right to build. You want to get us sued? Great. I don't like it. You have two things here today, and I'm not telling you anything you don't know. You have a civic duty, and you have to respect property rights, life, liberty, property, or you get us sued. And finally, I want to say this. Do not continue or table this to the next council. I elected you. So did everybody else. I know what's right. This will light up the town. This is such a great thing. It'll ignite this thing. Ignite this city. And I'm all for that. So please don't table it. Approve it and don't deny it because you'll get us sued.

Thank you. Thank you very much, Miss uh stop. Thank you. Please, please. Thank you. Uh I have four more cards. Uh I am going to need to take a break in a few minutes. So I think I think best we're going to pause now. We're going to stop right now. We're going to take a five 7 minute break with a slight recess and then we're going to recharge your batteries. All right. 7 minute recess. Thank you.

Heat. Heat. N. Heat up here.

Hey. Hey. Hey.

Hey. Hey. Hey. Oh, hey. Baby.

Hey, hey, hey. Hey. Hey. Hey. Oh,

hey. Hey, hey, hey. Heat. Heat.

Hey, hey, hey. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat.

Hey, baby. Thank you. Thank you. We will reconvene the meeting at 3:47. Thank you everyone. Um, I'll remind those uh about to speak that you are under oath and those who might have just joined us that uh if you do come up to speak, the clerk will have to readminister the oath. I have a couple more cards and then we'll continue. Victoria Malazo.

Victoria Malazo 155. Oh, pull it. Yeah, pull that down a little. Yeah. East Boca Raton Road. Thank you.

Okay. Uh, good afternoon, Mayor Singer and members of council. Yes, I am from 155, the building they love to hate. I am a resident of Tower 155, and I want to address specific comments that Tower 155 residents hear over and over whenever we raise concerns about the overdevelopment of downtown Bokeh. We are often told, sometimes quite bluntly, that we should not complain because if it weren't for these ordinance and changes, you wouldn't have Tower 155. Another striking example, and I quote, "Twer 155 is literally the tallest building in our downtown, and they are complaining about a building that is 20 ft less in height." This is a direct quote from Miss Sakarites at the PNZ meeting in March. But that statement misses a very important truth. If these ordinances and changes had not been granted by the city council, it might have been the best thing that ever happened to downtown Bokeh. The decision to allow that level of height and density was not made by the residents of tower 155. It was made by the Boca Raton council in 2015 and voted yes by the honorable Scott Singer, Robert Weinroth, and Michael Malaw. And during that time, two ordinances were passed that allowed the building of Tower 155. That decision set a precedent. It opened the barn gate. And since then, we have seen

project after project use that president to justify developments that are larger, denser, and more impactful than what downtown Boca Raton was originally intended to support. The landscape of our downtown has permanently changed. Yet today, when residents raise concern about new massive projects, we are often told that we live in Tower 155, we somehow created the problem or have no standing to speak. Let me make this very clear. The residents did not create that president. The city council did. And what we're asking now is simple. Stop repeating the mistake. Stop using Tower 155 as the justification for more overdevelopment. Recognize it as a lesson because the future of downtown Boca Raton should not be defined by repeating past decisions that many residents and voters now recognize as a mistake.

Thank you very much. Learn from it, Josh. Please. Josh Rosenfeld. Josh Rosenfeld. Maurice Aloy. Is it Josh Rosenfeld?

Yes. Sorry about that. Uh, good afternoon everyone. Uh, my name is Josh Rosenfeld. Uh, 2795 Northwest 29th Avenue. Um, I'm in favor of this project. I think our downtown needs it. Like a lot of people said, other than the Bokeh Resort, um, there's no competition. There's a common theme, I feel like, in a lot of the people that come and speak here and the Save Bokeh, and it's easy to point fingers at the developers, but I feel like none of them take accountability for themselves and kind of the personal interest. Um, I think this, uh, development would do a good job at connecting, uh, Meisner Park to Royal Palm cuz to be honest, um, nothing in Meisner Park is really, you know, that favorable. Um, it's easy to look at today, but thinking of the future generations and down the line, what we want our city to be, the type of people we want it to attract, the type of businesses we want to attract. Um, I think we look at the issues like traffic and construction and those are all temporary issues instead of looking at excuse me and I mean people are going to move here either way despite the construction or not. You know, a lot of people back here are laughing and stuff, but the points they're making don't seem very logical. They seem like they're based more on emotion. And I don't know if you guys have like grandchildren or, you know, family, but, you know, thinking of yourself and not the future generations is a good way to kind of destroy the city. I mean, you can move to like Stewart or Port St. Lucy if that's kind of what you guys want. But I mean it it's funny that you know I'm trying to be as mature as I can and a lot of these people are much older than me and if you look around the room uh the average age

Excuse me Mr. Chairman. Yes, Mr. Chairman. I'm hearing a lot of comments. Can we remind residents please that we're all here to hear each other and if I can hear someone up here then others in the audience can't hear the speaker.

Duly noted please be respectful of every speaker and their time. Thank you. Yeah, appreciate that, Scott. And that just goes to say for all these meetings I've been to, it seems that um there's a lot of immaturity. You know, I don't know if people don't have much other to do, but I think it'd be good as a community to come together instead of, you know, these childish games of pointing fingers and blaming. At the end of the day, you need to develop. If you don't, you're just going to be left behind. So, I mean, think of the future. Think of other people. Uh try not to be selfish. I know it's hard not to be, but I think if collaborately the city comes together, uh, we would get a better result than consistently just running into the same roadblocks and the same issues and the same kind of nonsense that we've been hearing. Thank you everyone. Thanks very much. Appreciate you

Mr. Please everyone please Mr. or Miss Marcy is it Marcy Aloy? Can't read the language too well. Maurice Aloy Martian Martesian 890 Lake Drive. We're the residents of Boertoan for 43 years. When we moved here, I saw nothing but a desert. I cried for six months. Then I got involved and more involved and more involved and I realized that we have to do something for this city. Since then, we haven't stopped. We don't have second homes. We don't have yachts. We care for this city. I've got two sons and four grandchildren. My younger son, I don't know where he is. He asked me not to come. Mom, you're going to come and cry because they're going to say bad things about us. And I said, "Let them do that. You as a council do not represent Tower 155. My heart breaks for you. It truly truly does. But it is not our problem." Ever since this project got approved by the PNZ 6 to0, I received 440 inquiries nationally from Colorado to New York all over. Can we please come over? Can we work with you? A week ago, a well-known TV personality of chef iron chef came with with his entourage here

and they said, "How can we do that? This is beautiful. This is incredible." Here they're asking us to reduce the size of this project. The reason it is so successful, it has gotten such national attention is because of its looks. because it is so different, so incredibly beautiful. I do remember for uh June June 24th, 1987, we purchased Royal Palm. Everyone was screaming and yelling, "What are these people going to do?" 60% vacant, a horrible place. We went there every day working for a year. We filled the plaza and it's the most beautiful place. Then they told us Meisner Park cannot survive unless it's connected to Royal Palm. That's exactly what we're trying to do. We have my son improved 70 projects. I cry every day when I sign those checks. I permit fee, millions and millions of dollars. Mom, shame on you. You're living here. This is your city. It's disgusting looking. We have to improve these properties for your grandchildren, Mom. Four girls. I have four little girls. We're doing this for my grandchildren and you have to respect that. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Thank you,

Shannon Otto. Hi, my name is Shannon Otto. I live at 233 Northeast 31st Street. I didn't expect to speak today and I saw one of the um links to a video about about the hotel and I feel for all these dear people like in building 155. Um, I understand the concept of wanting to build and be wise with building in a city. I know many people that travel and when they travel, they don't travel usually to go to a concrete city. I'm not saying people don't go to New York for the city life, but many people want a beautiful open space place where they can go to the beach, go to parks. You know, people go to North Carolina. They want to be they want to be outside of buildings. They don't really want to be in buildings. I understand some people want to shop and be in buildings, but we here in Bokeh really don't want overdevelopment. We really don't. And I understand there's all this talk about, you know, oh, Fort Lauderdale and, you know, Del Rey and we don't want to be like even Del Rey. We don't we don't want Palmetto to be like Atlantic Avenue. There's an Atlantic Avenue. If you want to go there and do whatever it is you want to do, enjoy it. Um, we want to be more quiet. We want to be the the park within a city. We really don't want congestion and more. You know, it's it's hard enough. Today when I was

driving here today, there were three guys going across um Yamato on um right there right before I came up to Second Avenue and they're crossing on bikes and I didn't get close to hitting them, but it was just we have to be really careful with all the wheelies, the bicycles, you know, the the pedestrians. We don't want overdevelopment. We really don't. And I just would think that this last election impressed that upon you. Um, just really take note of that. I I don't understand if you haven't. Um, I would like to see you vote according to, you know, what these people would like and and not for this hotel. This hotel is It's not that it's not lovely. I have three children all grown and I have nine grandchildren and I want them to enjoy open beautiful space. If we want to travel somewhere else for city life, we'll do that. But I want my grandchildren to enjoy a bokeh that's smaller.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. That's all the cards I have. Does anyone else wish to speak? Mr. Major, you've been sworn in. I have. Please state your name and address for the record.

Joe Mages, 254 Northeast Fifth Street. Um, I'll just speak about the elephant in the room. A 41% ask for a technical deviation on a reduction of parking is a bit egregious in my opinion, especially after one for a 31% parking reduction was supposedly rejected. I do like and appreciate the argument that was made for having a smaller building that might not require technical deviations. That should be considered. Um, a hotel is fine. It is a beautiful property and a smaller one would be even better. Let's assume this application is considered and moves forward. Couple things to consider. I think the applicant may want to uh offer it as part of their package to the city. Would they, if they were granted the technical deviations requested, give the city and its residents access to the properties Miss Sacaritis mentioned that are in the downtown after 5:00 for parking free of charge? That that would help to alleviate the burden that a variance might impose on the residents. Secondly, have we fully considered the nature of the service entrance on First Avenue and what's going to happen traffic-wise once Alto is built? because, you know, I frequent the area and it does get very congested, especially on weekends or if an event is going on. So, if you're adding a service entrance and one of the Tower 155 residents brought up the fact that, you know, if they're doing that after hours, well, after hours to a commercial district is when the residential, you know, components of that community are trying to sleep. So, I just don't think that's been fully considered and flushed out. And I don't think there's space for it. it should be uh looked at a little bit more. And thirdly, you know, what's going to happen to that ground floor retail if and when this hotel gets built because the renderings are beautiful.

It's a beautiful looking property, but you know what contributes to the sense of community in that area is the ability to pop into a UPS, to pop into a Second Street deli or the dry cleaner or anything that's in the plaza. And if you put a Louis Vuitton or a Gucci store there, it's not going to serve the needs of everyday residents for everyday services. It's just not. And you know, I understand there's this argument being made as well about, you know, you're taking car trips off the road and you're getting people out of their cars and you're getting them to walk. People don't walk. People don't walk. It's hot. They're going to drive. And just like Palmetto went down to two lanes this weekend and everybody said, "Oh, we're going to make that, you know, pretty walkable." No one's walking. It just makes traffic worse. So, you need places to put the cars. I would ask that you seriously consider that as a part of this application. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else? Anyone else? Okay. Uh, no. Swear me in. Do you swear or affirm that any testimony you may get before this public hearing will be truthful and accurate? Yes, I do. Thank you. Thank you.

Hello. My name is Judy Marorrow, 1305 Northeast 5th Avenue. uh the owner of the property where the post office is and the restaurants and the dry cleaner and all the little stores in there, he owns a lot of property. So, as the city council and the mayor, it might just might, my suggestion would be is the city owns that little parking just east of the post office. That should be a negotiation bargaining chip and say, "Well, if you want to build a hotel within the code that we have now and and that's 10 stories and that, you know, has to have more parking. Then we might with our bargaining chip of that little bit of land say we will give you the land if you follow the code and you give us some other land east of 95 or east of the railroad tracks to build our downtown post office because that is so nice because I can tell you Joe's right people my friends. They don't a lot of people do not like to walk or ride their bike. They like to take their car. But that post office, there's a lot of people in our neighborhood that walk there, ride their bike there, including myself, including my neighbors. And so to have a downtown post office makes more sense than to have a go all the way to El Rio, Del Rio, whatever it is out there. Um, I'm

sorry, I don't know. I'm a little nervous. Uh, the name of the post office that we'd have to go to in Bokeh. So, that would be important. Also, I got a little bit of time left. I played tennis at Boca Raton Tennis Center and unfortunately the city had $550,000 to put into Boca Raton Tennis Center that was given to the city by the greater beach and parks and they did not use it but swim and racket used their money. Patrifus used their money this weekend. Yesterday, Sunday, when I played tennis at Boca Raton Tennis Center, our court number nine, which we played on, was so poorly maintained. So poorly maintained for four people, we had a group of eight people. it. The clay was so dry. It had not been watered. More slippery and also there were enough leaves.

Comment after this. This is about this project. Thank you. Thank you very much. Anyone else?

Thank seeing no seeing none. Uh does any member wish to cross-examine another one who provided testimony? Seeing none, we'll give the petitioner an opportunity for rebuttal and closure. You have a 10 minutes. 10 minutes. Thank you. Okay, I will run through as quickly as I can since I only have 10 minutes and I've wrote down a lot of questions and comments, so I will try to go through as many of them as I possibly can. Um, let me start on a positive note. I am 1,000% in favor of an elevated crosswalk. Ellen and I spoke about that yesterday, the day before, the day before that, I can't remember. Uh, we did have conversations about it. It was she asked for a crosswalk and I actually said I think an elevated crosswalk would be more ideal. 100% we are on board to do that and we can during public works uh we could work on the exact location and design with your with your staff. Okay. So I recognize that one of the ladies mentioned it was not us residents of Tower 155 that built Tower 155. I recognize that and completely respect that. But nonetheless, every resident of Terra 155 bought in the tallest building in downtown. They did that by choice. They may not have been the developer. They may not have been the developer that asked for relief, nor were they the city council that gave them the relief, but they chose to live there. So, this is tower 155. Um, code allows them to go up

to 160 ft. Pretty pretty close to that. 158 88 8 in um as I mentioned in my presentation they didn't have to have any setback on their north on their north property line and they took advantage of that and that's okay. Uh but they did provide 1.48 ft. This is what their setback looks like. This is the property line. I don't even know that that's 1.48 ft but here we are. That alley has been used historically by Tower 155 as their own personal driveway. I in a minute I will get you a slide showing that their approvals, as Ellen noted, prohibits them from using the alley. We have designed this building to be as neighborly as remotely humanly possible. Again, we could have built at 1.48 ft from our property line as well, but we didn't. nor did we ever propose to sorry um I'm just going to skip through these the design of the building I mentioned we took tower 155 mer very much into consideration with the design so as you can see tower 155 is 160 ft along Meisner Boulevard and then step staggers down as it heads west so Alex our architect designed a building that does the antithesis. The reason being is he's maximizing as many views as remotely possible. So again, that was a consideration that was done from the onset. Okay. So with regard to too close, no sorry, too large and too close comment, I want to explain very

carefully how our code is drafted. Your top left is ordinance 4035 regulations. You're required to have a 6-foot front/ street setback. No setbacks on your sides or your rear is required. You are allowed to build up to 100 ft by right nine stories. 4035 gives you what I like to call a jar of peanut butter. Okay, that is your jar. You do not get more than that jar. Your top right is is the IDG. You're taking your jar of peanut butter and you're stretching it. So instead of nine stories, you get 12. Instead of 100 ft, you get 140. with an exchange. So in exchange for expanding that or stretching, excuse me, that jar of peanut butter, you now need to have a 26 ft front setback, not six, 26 ft. Again, the whole purpose of the IDG was to create this pedestrian friendly environment. Top right is what I am allowed to build today. That is too large. That is what is permitted by the IDG today. The bottom left is what we are proposing. You see a lot of hollow areas as compared to the top right. This slide shows you in pink all of the leasable square footage or salailable square footage that the applicant left on the table. over 210,000 square ft that they left off the table because they were trying to be friendly. Let me go back to this slide. I want to make it very clear.

Yes, we are requesting a reduction in parking that we our experts believe is justifiable as does the city's experts believe it's justifiable. Number one. Number two, just because we're asking for a technical deviation, if it was the will of the council, and I hope it's not the case, but if it's the will of the council to not approve our technical deviation, you can still get the top right. I could build that top right pictureund a 12 stories 140 ft 160 ft with architectural uh features and I can build 190 unit residential tower and you can have that building and I can park it. I wouldn't need one additional parking space. I would not need any relief. But is that what our city wants? Is that what we need is another residential tower with no vibrancy? And with all due respect to the woman who spoke that she can go elsewhere to go enjoy city life. I'm sorry. This is the the city that you live, work, and play. I don't want to go to Pompo that has two W's under construction, a Ritz Carlton, a Waldorf. They are eating us for breakfast. I don't want to go to Del Rey who's eating us for lunch. And I don't want to go to West Palm that's eating us for dinner. I want to live, work and play in my city and I want my daughter to do the same. Um, this is what Tower 155 built. This is what we are proposing and this is what we are entitled to and that is with or without a technical deviation for parking. Again, I want to remind this board of the ask that tower 155 had. again not the residents but they have enjoyed the fruits of that labor. Um they reduced

the acreage requirement for IDG to allow them to build 12 stories. They asked for a parking reduction. I submit to you a parking reduction no matter how small on a residential tower is significantly more intense than any parking reduction on a commercial development. Um they're complaining about the size of the alley. The alley was 13 feet previously. They requested an abandonment of three feet. So now it's 10. And we're giving an additional 10 to make it 20. This is their approval. This is one plan sheet. One plan sheet that I zoomed in. Staff took it upon themselves to write not once but twice that the northern exit of the garage, the gate of the garage shall remain closed at all times. There will be no ingress and egress from that alley to or from the parking garage. The only time they are allowed to open that gate is when the city has an event that closes off uh East Boer Raton Road. That is the only time yet. The night before PNZ, this is what you saw. The gate was open and cars were going in. They mentioned a loading zone. They have a loading zone. The alley is not their loading zone. This is their loading zone. I know Ellen I know Ellen noted that it's it's it wasn't built in accordance with the code or with their approved plan. Again, that I was not the developer. I'm sure that was an oversight, but you could move some of these sidewalks. You could extend the length of this. There are things you can do. I personally am not opposed to Ellen's request to remove two parking spaces off at East Boer Ron Road and have them for loading and and unloading. That's obviously the will of the council. Um, this is really important. These are

the condo docks that each and every uh owner in tower 155 had to sign. I hope they reviewed it, but it specifically talks about it being in an urban area where demolition or construction of buildings and other structures within the immediate area or within the view lines of any particular unit may block, obstruct, shadow, shadow or otherwise affect views. It then goes on to say, "As a result of the foregoing, there is no guarantee of you, security, privacy, location, design, density, or any other matter." Um, I'm trying to answer some questions. I I understand that again, I'm going to use the quotes, too large, too close. the the residents of the city of Bokeh spoke and they spoke very loudly in the 80s about creating a true downtown and um and and removing slum and blight. That is the hat you all are wearing, the CRA hat to remove slum and blight.

Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Yes. May I ask some questions of Miss Zacharitas? Sure. Thank you. Miss Zacharitus, you are summoned. requested a return. Couple questions. Couple of questions. Thank you. Thank you, Pacaritus. You and I discussed um the and you referred to in your presentation the parking that's controlled by this owner uh within the 500t range. Uh is there anything you can do to address some of the concerns that were raised concerning parking after hours and availability if needed?

Absolutely. Thank you for that question. Um we believe and and again our experts and your experts believe that we do have enough parking as proposed. However, this is phenomenal because you do have a property owner that has more than the code required parking less than 600 ft away. Your code allows you without a technical deviation to provide parking offsite as long as within 600 ft. So I if it's the will of the council, we are more than happy to have a condition where if parking does become an issue, which again we don't believe it would. If it does, your code says signage needs to be placed denoting alternative parking locations. So we are more than happy to accept a condition to that effect. Um so that again if there's a parking problem maybe the at the discretion of the director of development services or the city manager if there is a parking problem then we will place signage and ensure that people know that there's alternative parking locations

meaning those two specific buildings correct and that they would be available to the uh they would be available that's accurate thank you uh I don't the question for you or for staff. What is the maintenance obligation for the expanded alleyway since some of it will be you're you're dedicating it, but that has to be brought up, you know, it's it's going to be functioning as uh there's more cars driving on it. Who's maintaining that? Yeah. So, anything that's on our property ultimately will fall onto our responsibility, but we are more than happy to pave it, beautify it, and maintain the entirety of the alley. All right. Thank you. All right. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Anything else? While you're still up there, Miss Zacharitus, could you just for maybe for the edification of everybody in the room, could you bring up the slide? I think it's number 28 on your presentation that identifies the location of the off-site parking. Oh, yes.

Do you happen to know offhand the addresses of these two locations? The top one is 101 North Federal and the south one, Mr. Basian. 100 North Federal 100 North Federal. So the first one's 101. This is 100. I don't Maybe maybe Dixie. It's possible this aren't the right. Yeah. Throwing it out there. Sorry. So this one is one North Federal and this one is 101 North Federal. And based on this graphic that you all are indicating that there are between those two locations 245 spaces

correct thank you. Anything else? Miss No, thank you. Miss Acaritus, those 245 spaces are available 24/7 as the other parking is. No. So, as I said in my original presentation, those are office buildings. So, come 5:00 the they tend to be completely vacant because everybody goes home on the weekdays and on weekends, which is when typical parking demand for Meisner Plaza would peak.

Okay. And do you happen to know the language in the code that you're referring to with the or that Mayor Singer referred to with the 600 ft? What the allowance that that's I don't have that language in front of me so I don't know what it says. Maybe Mr. Shad does. Chair Wer Mr. Kaylor I don't know if you have it too. Mr. Chad, do you have it? It's going to take me a minute to look. Okay. Thank you. Yeah. Thank you. Do you have any other questions, Miss Knockless? Well, he's looking up that. No, I'll wait.

Thank you. Okay, I've located it. It says required off streetet parking spaces shall be located on the same parcel or no more than 600 feet from the use they are intended to serve if approved by the CRA board of commissioners and a legal instrument assuring the continued availability of such spaces is reviewed and approved by the city attorney or this I'm sorry the CRA attorney

and for the record that's section 24B6 of the ordinance 435. Does it have to be It has to be a condition of the IDA. It would be a condition of the IDA that the CRA board would, if it was inclined, would would announce this afternoon. Yes. Very well. Yes.

If I could just point out using this provision as it's written, there's some practical problems here. And this is today is the first I've heard of this. One is that these are required spaces for other uses. I understand the idea that they're closed after 5:00. Maybe, maybe not. I don't know. I haven't reviewed it. Um, they could be redeveloped. They could be sold. Um, so it's really a for now solution as far as I can tell.

If I and I appreciate that, Mr. Shad, if I could just add, I don't I I think this condition, at least the way I'm profering it, this condition would come into play if and only if there is an apparent parking issue at Meisner Plaza, right? And if and when if that was to ever arise, it wouldn't just be these two buildings. We don't necessarily need to tie it to this, but we would have to have a condition that the applicant has, I don't know, 90 days to find additional parking within 600 ft. I think would be in my head the ideal scenario. Okay. Um, Miss Knuckles, still your floor.

I'm good for now. Thank you. With respect to the 600 ft issue, if the developer had the right to swap out parking spaces for other properties that they they had um obviously and they were to consider building a garage in one of their other properties that would satisfy this. I know we've talked about in the past uh hypothetically, not specifically, of a possible future where, you know, there there could be a parking hub built to satisfy this situation. What's your thoughts on that? Yeah. So there are discussions um very premature and internal as to a potential as you know investments limited is a large property owner in our downtown and in our beautiful city. Um and there has been some discussions about building a parking garage that would assist not only with Meisner Plaza but a lot of their holdings in and around our downtown. Okay. Any other questions for Miss Zacharitas?

No. Thank you. Oh, no. No. No. See motion. Seeing none, then we'll close the public hearing and adopt uh ask for a motion and a second to adopt resolution DDRI IDA CRP 2301. Motion to adopt. Waiting. A second. Second. Okay. Very good. Any discussion?

Very good. Mayor elect Thompson. I think the way we probably need to start in describing or in discussing this is to get back to the fact that our downtown has kind of a unique property right regime there that was put in place many years ago that allowed for the redevelopment of areas within the downtown up to a point. 8 million office equivalent square feet and the building that people talk about and they they reference it typically in the context of overdevelopment is effectively just the execution upon that plan over the course of time. So the buildings that have been going up including tower 155 have all been done and completed and built as part of this long-standing redevelopment plan that's now been in place for 30 over 30 years. That law which was approved by the voters came with it vested property rights for property owners. And so I hear loud and clear the fact that some folks in the community think that the city is growing too big too fast in the last however many years. But this is something that the property owners in the downtown area have rights to do. And so long as they are building things that are heightwise, densitywise all within the code, this is something that they're allowed to do. and the the denial of that simply because we think it's too big or it's too close that runs potentially into problems for us because we would be in the position we would be denying people their property rights which has a constitutional element to it. So we have to remember all of that when we look through or look at something like this. For the most part, with the exception of the parking situation, which I'll talk about in a second, um this building, while tall, according to the neighbors and and others, and while potentially close, are is within that set of laws. And so, this is not something that we I

don't think can say simply we we don't want it or it's too much or it's too close. That's not, in my view, a constitutionally valid basis to deny the property rights that this property owner has and any property owner has in the downtown. I also heard some comments about the use that a hotel was unnecessary. that that may seem to be the case in some people's minds, but this is this is America and in a free market society like ours, the owner gets to decide the use of their property so long as it's within the code that the that the city has and a hotel is a permitted use in this part of town. So, that's not something that we can do use to deny an application like this. I do like the idea, as was mentioned by Senator Bogdanoff, of having some improvements, including an elevated crosswalk next to Tower 155. And let me say, too, I I I also feel for the residents in Tower 155 who are dealing with some issues in their own building, right? I get that and I I am mindful of that. But I I'm not sure that we can necessarily just deny an application next door simply because of those factors. And so I like the idea nevertheless though of trying to ameliate those issues as best we can. So the elevated crosswalk is a great idea. You had mentioned or senator Bogdanov did a couple of changes potential changes to the tower 155 IDA which again while not necessarily germanine to what we're doing today I think probably should be looked at by our staff to help them deal with the situation as it exists on the ground for them. I think the last thing we should talk about is the parking situation. I I I happen to think that the a modest parking deviation is one thing. I believe tower 155 had a modest parking deviation as part of their approval.

This is more significant one. And so I do think it makes sense a to put into place some measures that allows for the use of parking spaces on other locations assuming that's what the code says and Mr. shed confirmed that it did so as to address the problem if it were to be created. The applicant may be completely right that it's never going to be an issue and maybe our code is a little antiquated when it comes to how we park for restaurants and hotels. That that quite possible, but I like having the idea of a backup plan there so as to address that in the event that it does happen. Hopefully, it never does. It never gets to that, but I like having that put in place. Um, and also we can probably work on some language that will allow for other contingencies such as the parking garage that was mentioned a little while ago. Um, all of that is my way of saying that uh while I hear the concerns raised by particularly the neighbors, but others too, I do think that this is an application that is consistent with our downtown ordinances with ordinance 35 4035. And I do think that with this additional contingency in place for the parking spaces, we're out of the world where a deviation is even necessary. So with that, I plan on supporting this application.

Are we good, Miss Ducker?

Sure. Thank you, Chair Wter. Thank you everyone that came out. I know a lot of the residents at Tower 155, we've been around town and we run into each other and I appreciate everything that you have to say and I have great respect for Senator Bognov. one of my mentors. She knows that um we're outside of here. We're actually friends. But um I also know the B Mazes and I know all the good work that they've done in our community, philanthropic and also the property rights like Mayor Elect Thompson stated. Um I can't sit here and say about parking because everyone knows that I feel that we're overparked and I'm always asking for less parking. I've been saying that for a year and a half. It would be disingenuous uh to my leadership to come here and say that I want I don't agree with the parking variance because for years you guys have been hearing that I believe that we are overparked in the downtown. I believe that because the referendum failed uh I believe this is now even more necessary because we don't have a hotel at the at the government center. And I like that it's anchoring Meiser Park and we continue I believe that we continue the need of a vibrant downtown with a place and a destination. And many of you might disagree with me and you might not agree with me ever and that's okay and I respect that. You respect me. I respect that. But we need a place for people to go for people to go eat for people to go shopping to provide jobs. I have two co almost two college students. I have a college student and another college student who are leaving the state. I don't know if they'll ever come back here. here. They always wonder about jobs. I've had this conversation before. I want our talent, our kids, our generation, my grandchildren someday, I hope, to come back to Boca Raton. So, I agree with uh mayor like Tom said on the back plan in terms of that creates some some some kind of less ag I I could go either way because if it was up to me, I would just approve it the way that it is. I don't believe that we need all that parking. I believe that in the downtown we are overparked and if you

ever go to Meiser Park which we all frequent there's always parking there as well and this is going to be right across the street even though this is not owned by the property owner um it's there and I believe that you know there going to be things coming up with Miser Park in the future. So I like the way that it's anchoring the downtown. We need that. I like the proximity to Royal Palm. I like how it looks into Alto and Sanboard Square and I see that now as a quadrant since we since since the referendum failed and that you that was going to be some of the epicenter of this area we have a need for this. So um for all those reasons uh I'm going to go and I'm going to be able to support this project today. Thank you. Thank you Miss Knox.

Thank you Chair Wiger. So um I have a few thoughts on these things. First of all, I I think the hotel is beautiful. I think it's a beautiful design. Um I appreciate everything that was thought of. The wider sidewalks, the bike lanes, the walkability, all of it. The the lining up with Meisner Park. I I have loved all of that. Um and I shared concerns with you today. Even the alleyway, I mean, you're improving it very much so. I agree that this is private property that you have a right to build within our code what you want to build on it but a 41% parking deviation I technical deviation for parking is not something that I agree with at this time. Um, I also agree with you that our code is antiquated and it needs to be updated, but it's not yet. And I asked Mr. Mr. Sahaney to ask Mr. Shad in the last 10 years how often a technical deviation over 30% have been granted in the downtown. And there's actually been three. Lu's Fish House, how you doing? and then the Royal Palm Place Hotel. That's the only three in the last 10 years where we have exceeded a 30% uh technical deviation for parking. Um I also asked Mr. Kaylor about um our code of ordinances and specifically section 281659 which um was not really talked about today but I'll I'll read you a section of it. A parking study shall be performed by a qualified professional engineer, architect or planner experienced in parking studies. Study shall demonstrate

how the technical deviation meets each of the following standards. the planning and zoning board, the city council or the community redevelopment agency as appropriate shall deny any application that does not meet the following standards and there's five standards to be met. And I had to ask and clarify between Mr. Shad and Mr. Kaylor if that does apply to the CRA and it does apply to the CRA. So there are two standards in here. One is the technical deviation is the minimum deviation necessary for the petitioner to make reasonable use of the property and the number five is special and unique conditions exist which are not directly attributable to the actions of the applicant. I had asked if something smaller could be could be considered. Um you know at the beginning of the meeting Mr. Mr. uh Chair Winger, you know, suggested that we table this and and I was fine going ahead and speaking about it, and I may be the only one uh concerned about the 41% uh technical deviation for parking, and that's okay. But I think that it needs to be that's something that needs to be considered. And even though I think it's a beautiful project and I think that it definitely would add to our downtown, the 41% technical deviation for parking is is too much I think right now. So I do not support it.

Thank you, Mr.

Thank you. Um, let's just frame what we're talking about here because to state that there it is true that property owners have rights and to state that that you know there are certain property rights that may weigh in favor of voting yes for this it's not entirely accurate. We have to weigh what's before us. Um this is not a there is discretion here to the council, but for a variety of reasons I'll go into I think we are wise to exercise that discretion today and vote in favor of this. Um it's not just simply that there are property rights and yes we have to say yes. Um they are asking for a technical deviation but I believe they made the point on why it should be granted and I come back to the type of use here. Um this is a specific hotel use. It can't be switched to a different type of residential use. Um you know if they have to if they do that then they have to go back and that throws off the calculations. They're providing three quarters of a parking space 75 parking spaces for every hotel room. Um our exist our examples in the city uh show that that sort of usage is not going to be hit. Certainly the high place isn't and realistically people coming to a downtown to a hotel are not going to be using that many spaces. That's on top of all the the restaurant and the retail that's already factored in. I'm not giving credit for that. They're parking that. I'm just talking about the hotels. So, uh, that to me is satisfactory because I think it's unlikely we're going to have that much parking. And I asked staff and, you know, this the way our code was written in the 80s probably has an overabundance of parking. I started off as a parking hawk. Um, I voted against a project in 2015 in the downtown because it was less than three spots. But over time, I've come to see how people are actually using the downtown and I think how they would use this site. I also go back to what let's go back to as of right because Miss Zacharitas made the point as of right they're entitled to build a much denser building uh uh you know a residential building a lot more density a lot more

volume and they could park it there and I don't think that's what we want I think the hotel and the vibrant mix of uses deserves uh to be in our downtown and would complement a lot of what we're trying to do I give them credit on their design it is a forward-looking design and brings to fruition something that was departure from the cookie cutter uh the cookie cutter reinterpretation of what Addison Meiser did is 1920. We got away from that several years ago. I think that was a benefit to our city. It allows more creative designs that will remark, you know, provide some remarkable architecture. I appreciate that they've tried to reverse the direction of the stairst steps on the setbacks to give a greater view corridor. And I'm sensitive to people who bought in Tower 155, but case law is replete. There's no entitlement to a view under Florida law. It's in the covenants here. They have set back their building further than Tower 155. And I feel sorry for an individual said Tower 155 was a mistake and yet lives there. I don't think Tower 155 was a mistake. I think it added something to our downtown. Uh I think it was a benefit and I think it's helped create uh a little more of that downtown feel. A note on the post office and some of the retail uses. Um, first in 2018 when there was discussion about the post office wanting to go out, this landowner approached uh me and I also a lot of residents came to me. I would just become mayor and we advocated for that post office to stay. We reached out to the postmaster uh for the region and advocated strongly. We were able to help get that there. I would love to see a post office remain in our downtown whether it's part of this project um or elsewhere. the downtown campus plan, which is not going forward at this time, had a post office as part of that. Um, as for the other retail uses, I hope that there'll be an exciting mix of retail. Second Avenue Deli is one of, excuse me, Second Street Deli is one of my favorite spots to eat at. Um, and I

frequented the other retail shops as part of Meer Plaza. Those can remain, but it's really a question of what you want to what what we need to do. There are rights. We could say no and have the developer say, "All right, we're just going to build this." I think what they've offered is better. And I'm pleased that there are conditions here that will address a parking concern which largely is not going to be needed because of the type of use. So, for those reasons, I think uh this should move forward. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you. Thank you. Very good. Um okay. Uh couple issues. Um I thought about this a lot um over the last three years and obviously you know what I what I've come to learn over the last three years is that um a lot of the problems that we face um as Miss Knox correctly stated are not problems with um you know with development or overdevelopment or whatever. They're problems with our code itself. This is what the code allows. Uh Mr. Thompson had said so, you know, said a little bit about that too, that this is what the code allows. And so, obviously, you know, what's happened over the years is instead of city council, this one and previous ones, instead of us um let's use the word fixing, but instead of us, you know, um you know, altering the code to reflect, you know, the current status and traffic and all those other things, um we we we haven't fixed the code. instead uh the code remains and developers come in and ask for technical deviations uh again. So, you know, it's a situation, you know, I have said often that, you know, the downtown is, you know, potentially overparked. Um, you know, right now I know for a fact people leave their cars at Meisner Park uh in

the garages so they can go to the airport so they could save 20 bucks in parking or 30 bucks in parking, things like that. you know, there's things that need to be fixed structurally that relate to the whole downtown, not just one not just one project. Um, but one of those issues is parking. And one of those issues is underground parking. And I am not in favor of significant underground parking for a multitude of reasons. the most of which is safety. Um, as as I've said before, uh, I've had personal experience, uh, in other cities, um, of dealing with properties that are built adjacent to other properties. Um, and of course, uh, where a significant foundation is required, 50 ft foundations and whatnot. And obviously in Florida, you have a very significant concern with water table. And so, you know, we we've had conversations and I've had personal conversations with the applicants who I adore and love and I know that they're so charitable that I beg them not to do an underground parking garage. Um, you know, that there's other opportunities to do this. And then the cost is insane to do uh I don't use the word I use the word insane in quotes but the the cost is ex exorbitant to do underground parking you know to beg them to do a parking garage someplace on top so that it doesn't have to doesn't have to be underground. the property that I dealt with uh you know up in New York that was built adjacent to another was uh a 21story building built uh adjacent to another property. Uh there was seismic monitors

on the adjacent property for the entire duration. There were seismic alarms on the property for the entire duration. There was um there was before and after pictures taken of every single apartment, every single store, every single room of the adjacent property and the adjacent properties within a 200t radius here this is the only property right but the idea is that the conditions of before and after which were uh which were talked about in Senator Bogdanov's uh and her comments that the conditions before and after uh were standard and they are standard practice. is in New York development. Obviously, there's a lot of highrises there. Um, but the idea was to show conditions before and after and that if a crack occurred or if there's structural, you know, integrity concern occurred that that it would be taken care of immediately. And there was a very very significant and detailed negotiation of the construction parameters that were going for that were necessary for this project to go forward. And they were approved. They were negotiated and approved before the project was approved. And those are my major concerns here. I think the project is beautiful. I think the lot is just, you know, just what the lot is, it's adjacent to an alley. Um, and you know what what's happened over the years, the original part of this project was supposed to include the applicant buying a small parking lot to turn into a public park to also have the driveway access to also have the driveway access be on the side off of Meisner Boulevard as

opposed to where it is now. And so the and the applicant was willing uh you know there was a negotiation and the first uh the reason why this went to PNZ twice is because they went first to to to PNZ with the the park that was there and then excuse me and then the park was taken off. But the point is that I'm trying to make is it would have been better if the park was there. It would have been better if the side entrance was on the side. It would have been better if all those cars didn't have to go to the alley. If they can just go into the side access. So, what happened is that the plan was amended to make it worse, not better. And, you know, it it's a it's a it's a situation that we we have to deal with, you know, and work with when we fix these this parking lot. When I think about the elevated crosswalk conditions, you know, obviously the the parking swap within 600 feet is good, but the parking garage the parking garage within 600 ft it's it's a better idea. If the parking garage is created within 600 ft, the applicant wouldn't need to build two levels of underground parking at a ridiculous cost. It would save you millions, tens of millions, tens of millions of dollars would be saved if you built a garage somewhere else. Tens of millions of dollars. So again, this is another situation where my feeling is that the deviation, as Miss Nolas said, is self-created, that the plan hasn't improved. Um, we're trying to force development into a time period instead of developing at the right time

and and working out all these issues. I don't have more time. So, I I would have liked to have worked out these issues and and come back and and made a made a more holistic deal that's better for everybody, but since I'm out of town, I can't support it right now. So that being said, so we have a motion on the floor. We have a motion on the floor. We have Please call the RO Mr. We have some amendments. Amendments discussed amendments. Okay. So let's talk about amendments then. Uh does anyone want to start?

I made the motion. So the so the amendments that were submitted to us um earlier today which were under K well what was under no K L&M these were for um the structural engineer report and the systemic testing was all it's in here and then are we adding uh the elevated crosswalk and then the last thing we talked about was the contingency parking of 600 ft from um the property. So, I'll turn to Mr. Kaylor to give guidance.

Sure. I think in and I'm working with development services director Shad on I think the the the more lengthy condition is the is this parking condition. If it's this board's desire to hear proposed language, um we can read into the record and then Mr. Shad, you can supplement. Um uh but based upon this board's discussion, I think it would read something like in the event the city manager or development services director determines that on-site parking is insufficient or results in adverse impacts. The applicant shall no later than 90 days following written notice of such determination provide for off-site parking located within 600 ft of the project. The applicant shall demonstrate that the off-site parking is reasonably located in relation to the use it is intended to serve, including consideration of distance, pedestrian access, the nature of the use, likely purpose of trips, and any physical barriers. Such off-site parking may include, but is not limited to the properties at or near 100 and 101 North Federal

one and 101. One and 101 and 100 North Federal Highway 101 and 101.

Thank you for the correction. Uh, the applicant shall implement and maintain a parking management plan to ensure effective utilization of the off-site parking. Such plan shall include clear directional signage, ensure availability and accessibility of the off-site spaces, particularly during evenings and weekends, and actively manage patron use of those locations. The applicant shall provide a legally binding instrument and a form acceptable to the CRA attorney ensuring the continued availability of such off-site parking spaces and failure to secure, maintain, or implement the required off-site parking signage or parking management measures shall constitute a violation of this development order and shall be subject to enforcement pursuant to the city code, including applicable compliance and enforcement procedures. Mr. Shad, is that a general generally accurate?

That sounds good to me. Yes. Miss Miss Trucker, your amendment. Yep. That sounds good to me. Um I think we included everything and not part of anything that I missed. Mayor Singer here. Well, I did at one point before you made the motion, but I see Miss Zacharitus rising. Could we ask Miss Zacharitas for clarification on the position on there? I think that was a little bit different than what was stated. So,

thank you. I I I think we're fine with that language. I just wanted to provide some discretion and and confirmation that we're not if Mr. Shad comes and says, "It looks like you guys are short five parking spaces, so please find me five parking spaces elsewhere." That's fine. But I want to make sure that Mr. Shad's not going to come back and say, "You're short five spaces, so now you need to provide the entire deficiency of parking elsewhere." Do you see my my concern there? You're asking me? Sure. Um the or Josh

Mayor Singer, your floor. So we that's okay. Were there any other concerns with saccharitis? No, I'm I'm fine with the way it's written. As long as we find if there's an issue, we we solidify or provide a number of what that parking deficiency may be and then within 90 days we have to find a location within 600 feet. We're fine with that. All right. Thank you, Miss Ear. Thank you. Um, may I just suggest would it help for a brief recess for Mr. Kaylor and Mr. Shad to talk directly so we don't or we can do this here. I just No, I I I do agree there'll be a short but I want to flesh out all the amendments first because I think there's a I have a list that maybe let's go through that first

just on this one point Mr. Chair please. My suggestion and it remains a continued one and I hope you'll carry it forward. I always prefer saying the city manager or designate because when we delegate an authority to an individual officer if that position changes um there's a question it it creates a question. It also this council supervises a city manager so we should invest authority in a lesser um ranking official who's not the designated by the city manager in case we ever have some sort of weird conflict. So noted. Yeah. So, so the condition then would be in the event the city manager or designate determines that and then it would continue. Thank you. Okay. I Yeah, that I can agree to that motion as I made the motion and Mayor Singer

and and uh board members, there was also I believe the condition regarding elevated crosswalk. Elevated crosswalk. Uh Mr. Shad, I believe you have some language. Yes. Maybe we can you want to talk maybe generally about amendment deal points first and then we could specific anything else right. So we have parking uh 600 ft parking and we have elevated crosswalk. Was there any other well what what was in the actual IDA on page 11 L&M to be included L&M which is given that was um the gray underline of today the double underline I'm sorry of today double underline okay

of the IDA so that included 600 ft parking elevated crosswalk L&M and then uh anything else just Mr. Chair two topics Mr. Yes. One, the applicant made a profer about maintaining uh being responsible for the alleyway alley maintenance. Yes. And then um I don't know if we ever if there was any more common ground between what Tower 155's council had asked for and what was amendable. Um I know it wasn't all of the things. I know it wasn't the wind tunnel. I know that this reflects some of these. I just wanted to spot. Is there any other common ground? If so, then we might as well find it. Thank you. You're talking about in terms of like 24/7 seismic monitoring.

The the other asks. Yes, Mr. Chair. I don't know if there was I I believe there was no further common ground, but thought I'd raise it. Thank you. Mr. Chair, may I make the suggestion? Why don't we take a fiveminute break? Let Mr. Kaylor speak to Mr. Shad about whatever remaining language we need to put together and then in that time maybe Senator Bogdanoff and Miss Zacharitas can get together and ideally come to a resolution on all of these points. Is that a sensible idea? Okay, sound good. All right, we'll take a fivem minute recess. Thank you.

Hey, hey, hey. Hey, hey, hey. Oh, heat.

Hey queen. Heat. Heat. Hey. Hey. Hey.

Oh, hey. Hey, hey, hey.

Hey, hey, hey. Heat. Heat. Whoa. Heat. Heat.

Okay, we'll reconvene again at 5:16 p.m. Thank you. Uh, we were working on amendments to the IDA. Staff is working on amendments. Would you like to uh is it best to have you guys summarize the proposed amendments?

Sure. Again, in speaking uh with the development services director during the recess, uh my our understanding from the direction from this board is language that this board can have a motion to consider this application. One addressing this uh off-site parking in the event of a deficiency, which we read briefly before the break. Two, there was language having to do with an elevated crosswalk. three, there was uh language uh as set forth in the submittal by tower 155 and the development services director had um uh some recommendations with regard to that. So I I would just start with the parking condition. Again, the language that I read uh into the record prior to the break would be uh the city's recommendation, staff's recommendation. We would add uh one additional clause that would say prior to the um the uh language about having it being an illegally uh binding instrument uh just a statement that would say any required off-site parking or measures supplemental measures shall be reasonably proportionate to the identified parking deficiency. So there's some nexus or link uh between what's being done here uh and uh

can you can you say that one more time?

Sure. Again, the the trigger is in the event the city manager or designign determines that on-site parking is insufficient or results in adverse impacts. That's the the what triggers this clause that the CRA is asking for. And so the supplemental language would say that after it goes through the statements about providing it at the addresses within 600 ft with the signage, there would be just a statement that would link the uh that additional parking effectively additional required parking to the deficiency that's been identified. So there's some to address the issue. Well, if there's a 20 parking shortfall, it's a space. It's not a a full 200. It's it's linked to what the deficiency is that's been identified. And so, the language is any required off-site parking uh or or operational measures shall be reasonably proportionate to the identified parking deficiency.

Okay. U the and then I'll turn it over to the director. The there was one other condition was I think I heard a member share about the alleyway the maintenance of the alleyway and I believe Mr. Shaded said that could be a new condition 15 that would read as a condition of approval the applicant shall be responsible at the applicant's sole cost for the ongoing maintenance of the full width of the capital A alley. It's defined in the development order which shall be maintained in a safe, clean and functional condition at all times and upon determination by the public works director or designate to use uh the recommend the city manager or designate that the condition of the alleyway warrants resurfacing or repaving. The applicant shall upon written notice repair, resurface or repave the alleyway as directed. And I'm seeing some nods there. And then Mr. Chad had uh addressed the uh elevated crosswalk and the the remaining conditions.

Mr. Chad, so the elevated crosswalk condition would be um 5A and then it would be Roman numeral 16. This is a list of things to be approved by public works review. Um it would say an elevated crosswalk connecting the tower 155 property to the property across the alley. These are defined terms with the location and design subject to review and approval by the city manager designate. That's okay. I wanted to discuss uh one second on that. And are we is everyone crystal clear in case we're reading this sometime in the future that we mean elevated not elevated in the sky but elevated at ground. You know what I think we should change it to raised?

That's a common term. Yeah. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chair. The proper term is buffered. a buffered crosswalk. I think the they're we're talking about an elevation change. So that's raised is the right term. Okay. Yeah. Um okay, Mr. and I wanted to talk about the conditions offered by Ms. Bogdanov.

Um rather than number one, I want to put the same concept into a prior to certificate of occupancy condition. So that would become uh 9F and it would read submit to the chief building official an evaluation of the structural condition of the existing tower 155 building upon completion of the hotel noting any differences since the elevation sorry since the evaluation required by condition number 5L. That's good. Can Can you say Can you say that one more time? Yes.

It would read, "Submit to the chief building official an evaluation of the structural condition of the existing tower 155 building upon completion of the hotel, noting any differences since the evaluation required by condition number 5L." And 5L is the one that requires the evaluation prior to construction. But my I guess my concern was not just before and after. It was it was during was it in terms of you know is in terms of monitoring during construction.

So 5M requires the vi the plan for the vibration monitoring approved by the chief building official which would then be implemented during construction. Does that work? And speaking of 5M, um what she has uh written as number two is in our IDA 5M and we are in agreement with the additional language that she's underlined there. So we would add that.

Can you just read that into the record please, Mr. Sh? I can. This requirement shall include colon benchmarks at the columns of the building, vibrometers, I think is how you say that, at selected locations, tilt meters at selected locations at the lower level columns, and utilizing a 247 platform that informs the contractor through email if a threshold is exceeded. Okay. Yes. Um and then condition number uh that she has listed as number three.

Um we don't have a problem with the installation of cameras to to watch a crane or something. But my recommendation is the city should not be involved. We don't want this in the IDA. We don't want to be responsible for enforcing this. Um, same thing for number five about pressure washing and or painting and somebody has to decide if the pressure washing is good enough or not. I don't want to be that person. My recommendation is the city's not involved and it's not in the IDA. Um, regarding the use of a drone, we would incorporate that into the language requiring the um the evaluation of the structural condition. And then finally, the wind mitigation modeling. Um, this is really something that the engineer decides needs to be done or doesn't need to be done as part of their expertise. I don't think it belongs in the IDA. That's my recommendation.

Thank you. Thank you, Miss Zacharitus. Any comments?

Yes, thank you for that. Um, just a couple of things. these conditions, the one that we're agreeing to, I just want to make sure that it's in the IDA, provided that Tower 155 gives us access. We can't go onto their property and do these surveys and these engineering reports without them allowing us on their property. So, I think that's really important. Um, number in Ellen's number two, which I believe is 5M in the IDA, the additional language she added, we're not opposed to it, but with um if we could delete specific individuals because that's very open-ended and uh change it to the contractor responsible for the construction. So, we have a point person.

When I read it, I replaced Oh, thank you. you already. Um, okay. And then if three, four, five, and six are not being included or you're adding the drone from four. Just the drone. Yes. Okay. That's it for me. Thank you, Miss Bernoff. Any comments? Thank you. Actually, I thought we agreed that for the north side of the building that we would do a survey of the condition and then when the construction was done, there would be a second survey of the condition and that they would either wash it or paint it if it was destroyed. I thought we agreed to that. I don't

just to make my position clear, we're good with the the evaluation on both ends of construction. I don't want to be involved in deciding if the pressure washing is sufficient or not. I It's not the city's business. It's between them. Yeah. So I did agree to that with Ellen. So we'll have to have something in writing just between the parties. The private the parties will have to have a private access agreement and access. Well, the access is important that it's specifically specified in the IDA chair WDER because if it's not and tower 155 does not give me access, I now cannot satisfy a condition which is very different than me painting their wall on a side agreement.

Right. But you'll have to work out those details in me yourselves. And to the extent the board wants to impose language or clarify language that all conditions requiring structural evaluation, pre and post construction condition surveys, vibration monitoring, geotechnical analysis, uh, and other protective measures for the benefit of tower 155 shall be contingent upon the owner of tower 155 providing reasonable access to the applicant as necessary to perform such activities. That would be a simple statement to that effect. I think you could add that. That works beautifully for me. Thank you,

John. Mr. Chair, I'm in favor of that, but instead of owner of Tower 155, I'd say the ownership or association since it's a condo. Thank you. Yeah, I agree. That's that's a good catch. Thank you, M. Thank you. Five lawyers up here. Yeah, because of the motion. Anything else? That protects both parties actually with that with that last statement that you made. Okay, Mr. Would they have to do something with this motion? Uh well, we're still talking about amendments. Yeah, I just wanted to clarify. So, there's the two that are that Miss uh Senator Bogdanov had put in here already. And then there's two three more that are being added. Two more that are being added. Giving access is one. The raised crosswalk, the um drones. What else was there?

Raised. Yeah. Is there anything else? That's it. alley maintenance and alley maintenance and off-site parking contingency, right? And then the construction uh the seismic monitoring as part of the building conditions. Okay. Thank you. So that's it. So that appears to be the list. So that's the list. I um so uh Mr. Kohler, do you need me to amend her motion? and the motion to state everything we've discussed. I I I think you can generally describe. Yes. Thank you.

So, based on both parties and development services and our city attorney, I make a motion to amend the motion made previously to include all the items that were discussed within this body. Second on the amendment. Good. Okay. All in favor of the amendment say I. I. I. Okay. And uh now anything else? Discussion on the main motion. No further discussion required. The citizens please call the role. Thompson. Yes. Ducker. Yes. Nacklas. Yes. Singer. Yes. Wter. No.

Motion passes four votes to one. Okay. Thank you very much. Congratulations. Now we'll have public requests. Uh we have another meeting right after this meeting. This is just about the downtown and the CRA. Anyone wishing to speak about just the CRA? Seeing anyone, we will close the time for public requests. There is no other resolutions or business to consider. Excuse me. We're trying to finish a meeting. Thank you. Um there is no other business or settlements to consider. Director's report, Mr. Suini. Thank you, Mr. Chair. No report. Thank you. Mr. Kaylor, I have no report. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you. Uh,

Mr. Thompson, no report. Thank you. Thank you. No report. Thank you. No report. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Singer.

As this is my last CRA meeting after 12 years, I just want to thank uh everyone. It has been an honor of my life to serve on the city council and as mayor and as a commissioner and former chair of the CRA and I think we have a lot of great things in in store for our downtown as we do for our city. Grateful for my colleagues, for staff, for the residents, for the businesses, and for the people that make our downtown so vibrant. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you. And uh I'll I'll have prepared remarks that I will save for next time uh next next meeting, I mean uh tomorrow. But uh it's been an honor to serve as a CRA chair for two of the last three years and uh for two two of the three years and uh the downtown has so much more to do. But it involves us coming together and working to fix the code to make it something that we can all enjoy and all love uh rather than uh something to you know to have debates about. So again, let's all work together to make this downtown a better place. And uh like I said, I'm honored to serve and I'll uh I'll there'll be other ways to do that after this uh after this brief chapter. Uh thanks so much. Meeting adjourned at 5:31 p.m. Heat. Heat.

Good afternoon and welcome to a workshop meeting of the Boca Raton City Council. It is Monday, March 23rd, 2026. The time is 5:33. We have no proclamations or presentations. So, I'll turn to board interviews. Uh, we have four boards for which we're seeking applicants. I see at least one here. Uh, community advisory panel. Are there any applicants here? If so, please come forward. Yes, please come forward. Give your name and address and you'll have up to three minutes to tell us why you want to serve. Good evening, Mr. Mayor, council, senior staff. Thanks for the opportunity. My name is Martin Castanos, United States Coast Guard retired, Boeron Police retired, and I also have a small business here in the city. My address is exempt under Florida Statute 119. During my past term on the CAP, uh we've had a lot of good conversations among ourselves when we were tasked by the council and by the mayor. Occasionally, citizens have come in and had discussions with us. Occasionally, we pointed them in the right direction. Occasionally, they were disappointed. As you may have guessed, with 104,000 residents in the city, I'm sure we wouldn't be unanimous on a lot. I couldn't get four cops to agree on lunch. So, you can imagine how that proportionately is the same. Um, whenever possible, I've taken the opportunity to speak from a public safety perspective in our tasking from the council, and I'd like the opportunity to continue doing that. Recent events suggest that we may be discussing more than public safety and crime in the world we live in. I think uh terrorism is going to come up sadly uh violence uh mass shootings in public spaces going to come up and this is my area. So um I'm happy to take questions and look forward to the opportunity to continue serving.

Thank you very much for your service and your interest in continuing to serve. Any questions? All right. We will make the appointments tomorrow night and that goes for anyone. If you've interviewed today, you do not need to be present tomorrow night to be considered. Thank you. Thanks, sir. Welcome. Evening. Evening. My name is Michael Nissenbound. I reside at 2665 Northwest 41st Street. I'm sorry, Mr. Listen. Bam. Are you interviewing for community advisory panel? I amum for planning a zoning board position that I believe is open. That is um that is two more to come. So, if you hold on for a moment and thank you. And then Miss Siddens, did we have his application?

Thank you. All right. Uh, we'll we'll come back to you in a moment. Yes. Welcome.

Jel McAden, 300 Northeast 24th Court. I wish to serve on the community advisory board because I value meaningful civic engagement. I believe resident voices are essential to strong local government. um this board's role, it seems um vital because right now it seems that we aren't really connected and there's things that we could probably do better. I've been here my entire life. I graduated here. Uh came back. Uh my parents are here and I love this community and I just feel now is a good time for me to get involved. Is there any questions? Thank you.

Thank you, council members. Any questions? All right. Thank you again. We'll make the appointments tomorrow night. I don't any other applicants for community advisory panel. I don't see them here. All right. General Employees Pension Board. Mr. Lai. All right. Planning and Zoning Board. And sir, if you'd like to come up, have you um just come to the microphone, please. We'll let you interview now. I don't believe we received your written application, so you'll need to submit that, but please give your name and address and up to three minutes on why you'd like to serve.

Okay. Thank you. Again, for the record, Michael Nissenbalm. I reside at 2665 Northwest 41st Street in Boca Raton. I've been a resident here since 1995 and actively worked in the land planning field since that time and actually prior before moving here. Um uh as a resident I've got a tremendous interest in the well-being of our city and I believe you know my background I had a certification AICP worked as consulting for many uh planning organizations engineering organizations been involved in land development uh currently uh with brokerage with Kers International and I would very much like to serve on the board to help guide our city and and advise as I can council and our residents and happy to listen have any questions. Continue on to any interview.

Thank you, council members. Any questions? All right. Please make sure to get your written application in. Thank you.

So we can consider you. Thank you. Any Mr. Graves? Thank you, Mr. Mayor, uh council. Um, first let me thank everybody for their hard work and dedication. Um, I followed you all all throughout uh, council and you've done a great job. So, I just want to commend you for for the work that you've done. I'm here. My name is Charles Graves, 299 Northwest 52nd Terrace, and I'm here to apply for the planning and zoning board position. Some of you know my background. I've been a planning director in various cities across the country. Baltimore, Maryland, where I worked on Inner Harbor and the baseball stadiums and the football stadiums. I've worked in Atlanta, Georgia, where he worked on the street car. And I've worked in Cincinnati, where I worked on the uh comprehensive plan as well as the zoning code and building code. So, I'm very familiar with planning. Currently, I serve on the historic preservation board and it is a it's an honor to do that. I also serve on the affordable housing board and committee and although we meet four times a year, um I think that there's more that that could be done, but it is a great um committee that uh serves a ser uh purpose for community development block grant dollars. Um, I'm also very familiar with transportation planning. Um, I've been involved in transportation planning in in all of my career uh through all the cities that I've served served with and

I'd like to uh continue uh to do that. Presently, um I've been working with the city. I worked with the city um on getting a community called Pearl City on the National Register for Historic Places. Um I obtained the grant for that. Um and although the city at first did not support it, I think the city now supports it unanimously. Since then, I've also um worked with the city and the particularly the city manager and his staff on getting historic markers for Pearl City and we're we're really excited about that. So, I've been involved in planning in a variety of of levels. I'm really encouraged by community engagement and hearing what the community has to say. And as a member of the board, I would be listening to what the community has to say as well as taking into consideration um the staff's recommendation. So with that, I um I want to thank you for your service again and I'd be glad to answer any questions you might have.

Thank you for your service and continuing to be interested in serving. Council members, any questions? Right. Again, we'll make the appointments tomorrow night. Anyone else for planning in zoning? and the police and firefighters pension board. Uh we had both Mr. Gerard and Mr. Lawless from both here earlier, but they informed that they could not stay. They still wish to be considered. We'll see if they come up tomorrow night. That concludes our board appointments or interviews. We'll turn to future agenda matters. Are there any items uh for discussion now? If not, then we'll turn to review of regular agenda items. Any council council members with any questions concerning tomorrow night's agenda? I'll bring up something during my report at the end. A public request. I do have two cards, one from Angela McDonald and one from Richard Warner. If you'd like to come forward, please give your name and address. You'll have up to three minutes to address the council.

All right. Hello everybody. My name is Angela McDonald. Um I live at 1350 North Dixie Highway um here in Bokeh. Um, I want to say that, you know, I know with what I'm getting ready to talk about that this board cannot, this commission cannot do anything, but I want you to hear me and I want to put this on public record. And here I go. I say first, I want to say that I'm not perfect and I've made mistakes um on the Boca Raton Housing Housing Authority board. I am a resident commissioner of the Boca Raton Housing Authority. Uh you hold the appointment authority over every commissioner on the board. Uh and I'm nervous and and that appointment authority over every commissioner on the board and the authority to carry it with an ongoing accountability that does not dissolve the moment the vote is cast. I was placed on this board to represent residents and I intend to do exactly that no matter what policies are crafted against me. On January 28th, 2026, the Boca Raton Housing Authority V board voted 6 to1 to adopt a policy restricting individual commissioners um individual commissioners to request information from the executive director. My vote was the only one against it. I was to be clear about I want to be clear about something. I do not vote just to vote. Every vote I cast I can defend the documents with citations with governing rules um excuse me rules the Book and Ron Housing Authority itself adopt. My descendant vote on January 28th is no different. I'm still against the policy

and today I'm putting all involved involved party on formal notice of this of notice of exactly why this is not a complaint. This is not a grievance. This is a public public record and I am reading this into the record so that no one can later say they didn't know. I'm bringing you this um because the same majority passed the policy uh would be one to enforce it against me. This is not governance. This is the majority sitting in judgment of a very dissent they sought to silence. You already know a motion was made to remove me from this board several months ago. And with that action taken alongside this policy is exactly why I'm standing before you today. Today they point to the coordinated effort to silence me. A duly appointed resident commissioner rather than a governance rather than in governance this authority transparently and in good faith. A commissioner who who asked questions file record request casting vote.

That is your time. Thank you. May I say one more thing, please? Please. No, we we've had a long day. Thank you, Miss McDonald. You can always reach out by email, as you know. So, yeah. As you said at the beginning, this is probably not the best forum for this anyway, but I appreciate your concerns, Mr. Warner. Well, you

Richard Warner 1322 Southwest 9th Terrace. I wanted to take this moment to kind of reflect on uh the last year and a half and say that uh I think the legacy of the city council was really tarnished over the last year and a half by what was done in terms of the government, campus, whatever. I thank Mr. Thompson for his votes. I think probably Miss Ducker is very glad she didn't have to run in this election. As far as the people leaving, I want to thank everybody for their service because though I may diametrically oppose your views, I realize this is a job and a big job and a difficult one. So, thank you Fran and Mark and mayor. Having said that, I think probably it's a good time to reflect on paying attention to what the citizenry that brought you here really wanted. And I think maybe there's a lesson to be learned. I hope so. I think it caused two of you to be gone. another promising congressional career probably to be a joke.

Hopefully going into the future, you will look at things in a different way. I think there's a moral here, a lesson that had you listened, so much of this could have been avoided. I I mean there's no way to get around the fact that you were tonedeaf 4 to one against it. It wasn't an accident. It was clear to everyone that this project was totally against the will of the people and yet you guys ignored that. Hopefully it was a learning experience. Thank you again.

Anyone else to make a public request? Mr. Unen,

Jonathan Unen, 6501 Congress Avenue. Uh, so council and Mr. Mayor, first I want to start off and and thank you all. Um, four of you, you know, have been on this council, uh, and, uh, removed the zoning restrictions in this area, got rid of the bad parking for medical within this city. Um, and I can promise you all up there that with the new council, I'm I'm not going to take it easy on them either. um certainly going to be critical of obviously proper governance and when the city can improve we should. Um and uh I hope also it starts tomorrow night uh with this council with the freestanding emergency room. Uh we approved a a hotel today with a large variance. We didn't approve. We we we overturned a freestanding emergency room on a small variance in parking. So, I certainly hope that that's thought through as that's going to be the next discussion. And I've been here way too long. Yesterday was my birthday. I got a daughter and a wife that I I got to get home to. So, I'm going to listen into that discussion from my car on the ride home. Uh, but I'm curious to see what that discussion is and then how that discussion goes tomorrow. Um, but I just want to say thank you to you all in including Mr. Thompson um that that wasn't up here for some of the zoning changes and and the parking. Um, I do think that this council has made some some great changes. Um, and uh I know I've been very critical. I think that there's a lot more that can be done in this part of town planning. Um, but I just want to point out the last thing in

this part of town with the one property who was asked for a freestanding emergency room that asked for a variance in parking and that was pretty much it. And a certain law firm argued that make the building smaller, you don't need as big of a variance in parking. We're doing the same thing there. And I hope that this city has better planning going forward because we certainly need it. We need a plan in this part of town. We don't need to focus so much on the downtown. This part of town is ripe for it. And I hope that with a new council that that can be looked at because we certainly need progress. We need a growing tax base and this is where it belongs. So, I thank you all again. I may be here tomorrow night. I may not. Uh, but look forward to hearing this next discussion, the city manager report as to the to that. Thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else with public request?

Joe Mages, 254 Northeast Fifth Street. Um, I'll be brief. Just wanted to bring up what was going on on East Palmetto Park Road this past weekend and possibly still this week with the uh supposed utility improvements that are being done on street. So, we're removing on street parking temporarily and uh blocking off a lane in either direction. Speaking from experience the past couple days, it's been a nightmare. Um certainly where the lanes converge going westbound, uh coming over the bridge where it intersects with Northeast Fifth Avenue. Um, I know there is a group going around town proposing to narrow Palmetto to uh two lanes, one in either direction or similar arteries. And I just think that would be a fundamental mistake. I want to put that on the record because I would encourage anyone to drive over there and uh see what it's like when the bridge goes down on a weekend and beach traffic is trying to get off. Uh it's just not very resident friendly. So, I just wanted to state that. Thank you. Anyone else with a public request? We will close the time for a public request. I'll just add, Mr. Majes, thank you for bringing that up. I did see some comments suggesting that there was this was some sort of uh shadow effort by the city to implement the plan um as testing ground for one lane in each direction. It was not. And I have been on record for years saying that. I think that is the complete wrong approach. um that uh we can enhance walkability in our downtown in a variety of methods but don't have to take away those need to travel lanes that impact all the residents on the barrier island and in this part of the community. So um at least we've clarified that. All right, we will now continue to city manager reports. Mr. Sohaney.

Thank you Mr. Mayor. just kind of to follow up from our February 24th public hearing on the ordinance uh 5767 which is on tomorrow night's agenda and that's regarding the freestanding emergency facilities. Um at the direction of council over the last month uh we conducted really a preliminary survey of existing facilities across Palm Beach, Bard and Miami date counties and our uh development services director Mr. Shad will make a a presentation on that. Hello again, mayor and council brain the chat development services director and this is city manager mentioned at the last um hearing on this matter. I picked the wrong stack. Um we did some research about the um 18 existing um freestanding emergency rooms that are in um in South Florida in Palm Beach, Broward, and Miami date counties. Um so just a really quick summary of what we were doing with the amendment. Uh one, it would have um uh allowed freestanding emergency facilities as conditional uses in uh the zoning districts that you see here. That was the latest iteration of the amendment. And just geographically, those are the areas that you um that that would cover as far as zoning districts. Um it created a definition of of that. It required that these facilities have vehicular access that is on an arterial uh not within a school zoned, does not abut existing or zoned single family, and has at least one dedicated ambulance loading and unloading area that doesn't interfere with site circulation. Um, and I made the point here that it reformats parking provisions but does not do anything to change parking standards for these facilities. Um, okay. So again, at that last meeting on February 24th, uh there was the council

asked for quite a bit of of data about existing facilities. So these are the jurisdictions listed here that have u at least one freestanding emergency facility that we were able to verify exists today. And the number next to those jurisdictions is the number that are located in that jurisdiction. As you can see, the most is unincorporated Miami date county was six. Um, so what we found out about these properties, one, uh, it was questioned, are they in shopping centers and similar or are they standalone sites? We found that three of them are in shopping centers or similar multi-tenant properties and 15 of them are on standalone sites. Um, as far as arterial frontage and access, 14 of the 18 are on properties that um that are on an arterial. And of those 14, all of them had direct vehicular access uh to and from the arterial. As far as ambulance facilities, all 18 had a covered ambulance uh drop off area, um which you'll note that our ordinance did require as well, and five of the 18 have separate dedicated ambulance parking that were we were able to identify. Um the council also asked for some information about turn lanes into these properties. We found that 11 out of the 18 properties had a dedicated right turn lane into the property and 12 out of the 18 had a dedicated left turn lane into the property. Mr. Shad.

Yes. Go back to that please. Could you describe visually? I'm having a tough time reconciling. You had the 14 of 18 that had an arterial access, but then you have 11 and 12. You're saying turn lane dedicated with would there be um was there an intersection that's just signalized or not? Does that speak to that? No material. So, this is not about um a intersection left and right turn lane. It's a dedicated turn lane directly into the property. So, like for a left, you'd be talking about a median cut. For a right turn lane, you'd be talking about a right turn lane that's in addition to the travel lanes. And how does that comport with the 14 of 18 that had the arterial access?

That's a completely different uh issue. It's the question of which uh streets those particular properties were on. So you wanted to know I guess which of the ones on the arterials had the turn lanes. I guess if you had Well, I guess I'm just the math. 14 have arterial access. Yes. Um but only tw I'm trying to picture the intersections here because multiple properties have both a left and right turn lane. So, how would that lay out? Um, for example, this property has a right turn lane into it, right? Yes.

So, I don't remember in my mind if Congress has a left turn directly into this property or not. I think it doesn't. Actually, you have to make a U-turn, don't you? Right. Uh, but if it did, that's the situation you'd be talking about with both a left and a right into the property. Got it. Okay. So, you are talking about not signalized median, but we're talking about a median still. Yes.

Okay. Thank you. That Thank you. Sure. Um okay. So of those 10 10 jurisdictions with current facilities, um five have specific code provisions about freestanding emergency rooms. Um Palm Beach Gardens, the freestanding emergency rooms are conditional uses. That means council approval in some of their induct sorry institutional and commercial zoning districts. They have a minimum parking requirement of one space per 200 square ft. U Palm Beach County, the unincorporated area requires that these uh properties have furnish on a major street and for the county that means an arterial or collector or an expressway. Um also requires they be fully screened from any residentially designated property. When we met on February 24th, the county had not adopted these regulations yet, but they did two days later. uh in Westlake. Um these facilities are permitted uses in mixeduse and medical zoning districts and they also have a minimum parking requirement of one space per 200 square feet. Pinrook Pines um permits these across a broad range of their zoning districts, commercial, industrial, institutional, etc. with a minimum of three and a half parking spaces required per thousand square feet. And since the others were um in terms of per 200 square feet, I translated that it's.7 spaces per each 200 square feet. So a little lower than the others. Um also to remind you, we discussed PMPO Beach last time who does not have a current facility, but they did adopt regulations recently. Um they allow these facilities in certain commercial and industrial districts. They require a minimum of a acre and a half of a lot size. Um, emergency vehicle access, so that's specific to emergency vehicles, can only be from an Ontario or collector. And they have additional

access and buffering requirements when they're within 500 ft of a single family or two family residential property. So, you can sort of see the similarities across some of these requirements. Um that was the information that we gathered at the direction of the council in a very uh compressed time frame. So um I'll be happy to try to respond to any questions. Thank you council members. Any questions? Miss Atlas. Thank you Mr. Mayor. So Mr. Shad, are you do you have any recommendations on the or on the um tech sorry text amendment as written? We continue to recommend it be adopted as direct

ordinance. Yeah. Okay. You do. And Mr. Lcastic, I want to ask you the same thing because you are now in this new position, right? I am. Yes. Okay. So, granted about a week and so I know, but still jump right in. My life has been um the campus for a while. So, I know I'll I'll I'll defer to uh Mr. Chad. So, you don't have No. Okay. Mr. Ducker.

Mayor Singer. Mr. Zohaney. Can we have a copy? Maybe you already sent it. I'm up to date. I know you have an email that you recap, but could I have a copy of the PowerPoint, so I'd like to go back and look at that and digest some of the information. Uh, Mr. Shad, thank you for providing the information. This is this is this provides a lot of the clarity that we were requesting in that meeting and thank you for expediting that. Appreciate it. Further questions? All right. Do we want any discussion? Oh, please. I'm sorry, Miss Reer.

So, two things. the application in question, the the issue is they had arterial frontage but not direct access, right? His point that there was no dedicated right turn lane. Um the the revised plan did have it. The the idea is that the next possible right turn, you know, either they have to make a U-turn somehow on Congress Avenue, but the next possible right turn was Congress was Congress Avenue, right? Was was Congress, meaning that it would it would create a situation on arterial where a person passes an emergency room, presuming it's an emergency. They they pass an emergency room, realize that they passed it and directionally have no have no way to understand where is the next time for them to, you know, uh, correct their error in passing the the first entrance. So, you know, the question is, do they, you know, do they get directed to make a U-turn? Do they, you know, because because that McDonald's out there is, you know, it's half a mile later. So the question is, you know, when we were talking about a dedicated right turn lane as a potential, the idea is that there has to be some sort of either direct arterial access or a dedicated turn lane within X, you know, within X feet. I think either way is what I was saying before or after to avoid people stopping and a major arterial road like Yumato and causing a greater situation. I think one of the you know uh I don't know if that as it's a conditional use you know maybe I guess looking at it in application if it's a conditional use Mr. shed. Would you say that during the application for conditional use because it's sight specific? That would be the appropriate time to say yes, but a dedicated right turn lane

should be initiated on one specific property or does it is it something that should be in an ordinance uh you know per se in it in itself? Yes. So the criteria for the approval of a conditional use includes things that are related to traffic and circulation uh safety and efficiency. So yes, I think that the council could impose a right turn lane requirement um on a conditional use application. Yes.

Okay. Um the the second thing is uh obviously the previous application was a denial. There was a discussion that this is a new ordinance. Uh, generally speaking, after conditional uses are denied, my understanding is that there's a 12-month waiting period uh generally until there's a relication. But since there was no ordinance in place specifically to deal with this situation, uh you know, I've had uh you know, discussions with the city attorney's office with Mr. Taylor that um that any applicant should not be subject to a previous denial uh is uh and would be able to apply, you know, as of right onto a new application. Does that need to make its way into an ordinance or is that a subject of interpretation?

Um I would need to discuss it with Mr. Kaylor and it it may be an issue of interpretation. Um if the in if we're not able to interpret it that way then then it could be corrected in ordinance. Okay. Well, that would be Mr. Killer. That would be the question then. Those are my only two comments. Thank you.

Yes. And the the way the matter had Yes. An ordinance would be uh certainly a way to address what council member Wicker has has raised. Um another possibility might be through uh a stipulated agreement, a settlement agreement between the parties. There's outstanding litigation connection with that one particular item. But again, if you were to make it a policy going forward or some broader application, you'd want to do it by ordinance. And that would have to be separate from the ordinance that's uh on the agenda for tomorrow night or would it you can think I'd have to review the notice and see how it was noticed. Yeah. All right. Thank you. Further comments and please

just one point of clarification. Right. So I think the question if let me just recap it to make sure when I review this today and tomorrow or tonight and tomorrow you recommend approval of ordinance 5767 as presented in our last meeting and then if there's any variations for turn lanes etc. you could do those as projects arise as a condition of the site plan. Um to the first question, yes, we recommend approval of the ordinance is drafted. To the second question, so if it's related to the criteria for approval of a conditional use and the council finds that that condition is needed to make it comply with those criteria, then yes. But I I can't really speak to it without having application in front of me to look at.

Okay. I just want to make sure just because that's that's the what I'm thinking like how are we going to put that into play without not knowing where these facilities are going to go and then every facility could be different. So differently located in terms of whether it's a U-turn or right access a turn axis or a major arterior or or or a minor or like an inside road. Sight specific differences are one of the reasons for conditional uses and and when they're

Okay, perfect. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mayor Singer. Further comments or questions? First, thank you staff for this information. It's helpful. Um, I continue to have some discomfort with an ordinance that at the outset creates conditional uses as a as a requirement because I don't think that gives the clarity that people who'd want to invest or bring facilities to the city have because you still have to get to the finish line. I don't know how to reconcile that with what you're saying now and whether that's a better a better course would be to require turn lanes or a dedicated access lane um but not make it conditional use. And I don't know what everyone else's attitude is on that one. Uh but I I still I confess I still have some discomfort with yes but a conditional use across the board. that just I think creates more uncertainty and punts questions down the line. Um, Mr. Rucker,

I mean, in my opinion, I mean, we should have voted this ordinance last time. We just wanted more information. So, in my opinion, like I'm okay with the ordinance. I understand what you're saying, but it's hard to prepare an ordinance that's going to cover every single thing. And I would hate to say you have to do this or you have to do that without understanding the parcel and how it impacts the traffic pattern, how it impacts that arterial road, whether it's a shopping center, whether whether it's a standalone. It's really hard for us to predict that. It's just a hard thing to do when you're putting in the measures. I think the most important thing for tomorrow night and we can sleep on this is to get this passed so that we can get this process going because it's taking so long. So that's kind of where I stand with that. I don't disagree with you in terms of the conditional use, but there's it's really hard to do that with this particular type of of project because it's not something that we can say there's a building that we're going to put and we need to do this and it's just a very it's just different. It just depends where these go and now that we've identified the different areas, I'm okay to move forward um with the ordinance and then I mean we could always revisit it later. I agree. I just think we're not going to find a fitall solution for this product because it's such a new product and we don't know what's going to come before us. And I think at this point I'm ready to move forward with the ordinance so that we can start understanding how these product are going to affect our city and our footprint. That would be my two cents off the bat.

All right. Thank you. Further comments. All right. If not, well, thank you. Mr. Sohaney, your second item, please.

Yeah. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And uh our last workshop, February 23rd, 2026, uh council also directed staff to really analyze the public facility impacts of the authorization of a thousand additional uh units uh based on the pre-approved ordinance 5684 uh which is the commercial and industrial zoning districts or CIMD. Um so the staff did prepare a level of service analysis uh to the impact of the following sanitary sewer potable water storm water management recreational parks and facilities transportation and traffic also fire rescue as well as police. They've analyzed potential impacts to their respective response times uh with these additional 10,000 units constructed as well as the school district of Palm Beach County provided some input on potential impacts to the to the school. So with that our uh director of development services will make a presentation.

Good evening again Brandon Chai development services director. And so as Mr. Sahin mentioned this is an evaluation of level of service and other infrastructure impacts from the uh potential addition of a thousand units to the CIMD bank. Um I'm going to try to go a little faster than I would have normally because we've had a long day. So, I'm not going to tell you all about the CIMD because we all know what it is pretty much in this room. Um, so I'm going to just invite you to ask me questions if you have any. Um, the comprehensive plan does establish level of service standards for the following things: sanitary sewer, potable water, storm water or drainage, parks, and traffic. Additionally, our evaluation has um evaluated impacts on police, fire, rescue, and schools. Um, I'm going to skip the ones that again are fairly obvious and tell you that we're in good shape with sanitary sewer. We're in good shape with plottable water. Um, storm water. Um, really the level of service is enforced at each and every development. And the the projects simply have to engineer solutions that comply with the standard. Um, and again, these I can go back and talk more in more detail about these things if you like. Um otherwise I'm going to go through. So um parks we have a standard of 11 acres per 10,00 population. Uh we currently have um close to 1,600 acres of parks, a population of about 107,000 and that works out to a little less than uh 15 acres per thousand population. Um, so with additional thousand units at 2.3 persons per unit, another 2,300 people, uh, we're still uh pretty much in a very similar range, about 14 1.5 acres per thousand population. So well above the level of service standard. Um

as far as police um it's not exactly a standard but it is a uh a aspirational goal or or basic guideline that emergency calls are answered within 5 minutes and non-emergencies within 15 minutes. Um the additional demand for a thousand units is works out to about 140 calls per year or uh 0.14 calls per residential dwelling unit per year. Um and that's the equivalent to two additional offer officers at current service levels. So basically the level of service we're providing today um would equate to about two more officers. Similarly um on fire rescue the u guideline is 6 minutes for EMS and 6 and a half minutes for fire. Um this equates a thousand units equates to about 122 calls per year. Um that's based on the number of average number of calls from multif family units in all of 2025. When it comes to schools um so as you can see here um these are the schools that are in the city. Um you can see the current uh capacity the projected enrollment of those schools in 2029 2020 and 2030 and that is without additional units. So on the right hand column, those that are in parentheses are um below the capacity or projected to be below the capacity and then there's two schools that are projected to be uh somewhat above capacity. Those are Don Estrich and Spanish Spanish River High School. So when it comes to projected demand from a thousand multif family units, elementary school, we're looking at 27 projected, middle school 13, and high school 19.

Mr. Shad, yes. Just two things. First, I want to point out for viewers at home or in the audience that uh school capacity is determined by the school district based on their boundary committee and where they set the boundaries. It's not something set by the city. Um and then second, um I'm guessing that these projections for 2029 2030 have not factored in any redistricting yet, have they? Correct. Okay. So I mean because net net if Bokeh High is at 191 and Spanish River is at 175 in these projections there's still capacity among the two high schools that serve Boca Raton and other residents. Yes. And and boundary changes are a typical way that these uh these are evened out or or other methods to um to increase capacity.

They are. Thank you. Mayor, may I ask a question to you? And we see we have several veterans from the school boundary committee up here. Those are good times, right, friends? Good times.

Very pleasant. it was for me. Um the I think where do we get was that the school district that provided that data as to what the 2029 2030 projected capacity would be because I think a lot of that is based on shortterm changes because of the voucher program that may normalize. I just I I find it hard to believe that that is actually what the capacity would be at in in five years. Bokeh high 200 under capacity. That just it strikes me. They're 200 less than now. I find that to be not doubting their data. I just I feel like that I think is a reflection of a shortterm adjustment in public school enrollment. Like Broward is closing schools at like a pretty significant rate. Palm Beach County hasn't gotten to that point yet, but I think these things will normalize over time. I don't mean to interrupt your your report. Thank you.

No, that that's fine. We're we're just reporting what we received from the school district. And please,

Mayor Singer, and if I could comment on one thing, for example, like Don Estridge is a choice program. So when children leave Don Estridge, like my child, for example, left in the middle of the school year, they don't replace that child. So that the number is always skewed. And yes, we a bunch of us on the ABC or the boundary committee. Um, in addition to that, the county has been experiencing um there's 6,000 kids that are unaccounted for in Palm Beach County due to the ICE raids and families that's sending their children to school. Those are facts. That's I'm sure it's going to play in the what they call the roll count come next year um in October. So, when kids start school in August, by October, they do the 10-day roll count and you're going to see those numbers continue to go down of if the raids continue the way that they've been they've been they've been happening here in the county, unfortunately. So, again, I think that to Mr. um to Mayor Elect Thompson's point, I think these numbers might even be less based on vouchers and based on the information that I just provided. Given that we the state has a voucher pro program that doesn't seem to be uh departing anytime soon. Um do we consider private school enrollment in the city?

Not in this evaluation. No. And uh I know in the past several years we have uh approved zoning changes. There are capacity increases of the private schools in the city as well. So, uh, I would think that we would also want to consider the private school enrollment to show total capacity enrollment because there's a public component and a private component that are within the city. I I will say that when the school district makes their projections as to how many uh, you know, students would be generated by the residential units, they're taking into account that a portion will go to private schools. Okay, thank you.

Before you go on, just want to point out we're still talking this is a projected demand of 59 students out of many thousands here. So, um knowing that boundaries can shift, uh I think in the grand scheme it's a very small number overall. Agreed. Thank you.

Okay. And then to the the fun one, traffic. So um the level of service standard in the city according to our comprehensive plan is a level of service D. And what that basically means is that there is a comparison of the what's uh considered to be the capacity of various links. The link is from one intersection to the next versus what the actual volumes are projected volumes are. So, um, as you might remember from the last workshop, the, um, the request was generated by the town center mall and they volunteered to help us out with a traffic analysis. And so, uh, what they did was they evaluated, uh, a number of units at the park at Brooken Sound area, the area where we are now, and at the Midtown area, basically in the Town Center Mall area. So what the projection showed was that there are some uh projected failures 10 years out 2036 at the intersections that I'm going to list here um based completely on background traffic. So nothing to do with additional residential units just purely based on background traffic. There are these failures. Um, as you can see, Spanish River Boulevard from Military to Second Avenue, Clintmore Road from Jog to Military, Congress from Clintmore to Northwest 82nd Street, Palmetto Park Road from St. Andrews to I95, and Glades Road from St. Andrews to I95. So again, that's without any additional units. Um, so we don't have a lot of control obviously on the amount of development that occurs outside of our boundaries. um what might you know just natural growth of background traffic that has nothing to do with new development. But what we can do is is identify mitigation that might uh help us to um alleviate these traffic congestion issues and then determine what to do about those things in terms of capital improvements in terms of uh funding whether that's you know with

funding um help from redevelopment or if it's other funding sources. So what we've identified in terms of potential mitigation um funding mitigation by new funding participation excuse me by new development or redevelopment for the existing shuttle system and potential Bokeh connect expansion so beyond the downtown um closing gaps in the multimmoal network that means missing sidewalks missing trail links um uh transit connections those types of things um broken sound streetscape enhancements um which include shared use paths um a mini circle at Broken Sound Parkway and Broken Sound Boulevard. Um some Spanish River Boulevard corridor improvements. Those include additional lanes, turn lanes, um signal upgrades, Glades Road including expanded sidewalks, protected bike network, turn lanes, signal upgrades, and potential full uh signal at Fire Station number five. St. and Andrews Boulevard improvements including um the intersections with Estrada Lane and Town Center Road and improvements on Butts Road that include um enhanced pedestrian crossings, new signals, and improved connectivity to the mall. And that is our update for now. So to be clear, and I and I have Zach here because he's going to help me with any difficult questions with traffic. Um what we're talking about here, those things would require further evaluation, further study. Um, but those are, you know, sort of identifying what kind of improvements would be available to try to to mitigate those impacts. And we're happy to answer any questions.

I'm sorry, one question just uh to make sure I understand. So what you're saying is there's really no whether any development scenario whether small or large lower or higher fundamentally is does not change the outcome of the projected traffic congestion in 2035. So those um those level of service failures happen regardless of any uh additional development. And the amount of development that we're talking about is um basically it's a drop in a bucket. Drop in the bucket if I didn't say that quite right. Thanks. Questions, Ms. Nicholas.

Thank you. Thanks for doing all this analysis, but some of the um and I know when we were looking at the government campus, we talked about alternative transportation mitigation solutions. Some of the alternative transportation mitigation solutions include participation by the development and redevelopment, which if we're going to have a failure regardless, some of this some of these mitigation efforts could help get funded by the development and redevelopment. Now, if we moved ahead with something like that, yes, that that is a policy choice that can be made. Yes. Okay. further instructor

just a followup chair um mayor Sanger thank you um thank you for the information and thank you for all for the audio update um and I agree with u Mr. Soy on the level of service was really the question that we had and in terms of finding ways for the traffic in terms of everything that we're doing and what I'm what I'm excited mostly about is that we're getting ahead of it. So now we can see that if we try to put some of these measures in, we won't we'll hopefully avoid the failure, not what's happening in the downtown that now we're having to adjust for the failure because it was planned incorrectly and it's not a knock to the city or to what we approved, you know, 30 plus years. It's just population. And we all know that by 2030, the state of Florida is going to continue to grow. And then we also know that this county is the fastest county, the fastest growing county in the state of Florida. um because of business, because of development, because of the weather, because of everything that we have to offer here from east to the west, south to the north. So, I appreciate you putting those um that data together because that gives us some food for thought and I agree with Deputy Mayor Knas about putting some of that responsibility onto the development community because that way they participate in the process and they buy into the process and they can help us mitigate some of these potential failures of moving people around. So, thank you. This is more of a comment, not a question.

Thank you. Further comments or questions? All right. Thank you. Anything further on this item, Mr. Si? Mr. Mayor, thank you. No, nothing further. All right. Thank you. Then we will turn to city attorney reports. I have no report. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Council Member reports. I'll start on my right with Mr. Wagner. Nothing further at this time. Thank you, Ms. Ducker. Nothing. I'll hold my my comments till tomorrow. We'll have a report tomorrow night. Thank you, Miss Nicholas. No report. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Thompson. No report.

All right. Thank you. I actually do have one item and uh pardon me here. So, um I'd indicated in the agenda the possible removal of four ordinances that generally related to the downtown campus plan. In further conversations with staff, it occurred to me that um one of at least one of those relates to not just the campus plan, but areas something that staff would uh Mr. Jeff, don't run just yet, please. I might have a question for you. Um relates to an area that I maybe I'll ask you to describe it. the area between um just north of the DRRi third street to fourth street or third street to sixth street including the library um where it's kind of Mr. actually could you how would you describe this parcel? It's not orphaned, but it's it's got a set of regulations that don't tie into the downtown. It's in between residential and downtown DRRi. Yeah. So, um that block has two or three different zoning designations that are quite different from the the regulations that apply to downtown that are immediately to the south of Third Street and and obviously to the east as well. And then to the north of that block is the library and the Bright Line uh station. So, uh, it's it it is sort of in the middle and it doesn't really fit uh fit very well. Um, so we think regardless and we said before, you know, the the election, regardless of what happened with the campus, we thought it made sense to make that block part of the downtown. Um, so we would still support that. So, in light of that, I wanted to mention that, you know, when taking off the downtown stuff, that was the purpose here, but I that might have gotten swept in. So, please think about that and we can discuss it tomorrow if we want to just take up that small um subset issue which doesn't relate to the downtown campus and obviously leave the rest of the downtown campus things that are no longer relevant um take them off. So, I just wanted to raise that issue and I

will save the balance of my report for tomorrow evening. It is 6:27 and we are adjourned. Thank you and good evening.