Historic Preservation Board - Regular Meeting

Good evening, everyone. I'd like to call to order this meeting of the Delray Beach Historic Preservation Board, 02/04/2026. Can you please call the roll?

Peter Dwyer?

Here.

Carol Perez? Here. Benjamin Baffer?

Here.

Vladimir Maitrescu? Here. Richard Casier? Here. Chris Kabasis? Here. John Miller?

Here.

Full house tonight. Are there any changes to the agenda? No. Okay. Minutes. 11/05/2025.

I have to approve

the agenda.

Anybody wanna make any comments or motion approval?

I I think we've gotta approve the agenda. You asked if there are any changes, but no motion.

Alright. Like, somebody make a

to approve the agenda. Okay.

I'll second.

Second. Thank you. All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Okay. Minutes moved on November 5. Make a motion to approve the minutes. I'll second. Okay. Motion to second. Any comments? All in favor, say aye. Aye. Opposed? Alright. Okay. If anybody here was plans on speaking on one of the quasi judicial hearings tonight, if you could please stand up and be sworn in. If you think you may or may not speak, if you just on the side of caution, please stand up.

Please raise your right hand. By the authority vested in me as the notary of the state of Florida, do you swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

K. Thank you. At this point, item six, if there's anybody, a member of the public, who would like to comment on anything that is not on the agenda tonight, now is your opportunity. Three minutes.

HPB board, how are you? Good evening. Roger Cope, Cope Architects Inc. This is a public service announcement. I'd like to invite everybody in the room, the board, the staff, and the audience, to the second annual Build Delray LEGO event.

It's for family and and kids of all ages. We're all kids. But, you know, for our teenagers and kids who love to play with Legos, it was a wild success last year sponsored by the Preservation Trust. Concept is we've developed a gigantic map of the of the city of Delray Beach, like a street map. And on that map, we've identified 50 excuse me, 60 historic sites throughout the city that are of historic significance, and we allow kids to come in and select the site that they wanna build or have some affinity to, and then they get to try to replicate that building based upon photographs and etcetera of that building.

And so, it was wildly successful last year. So this is the second annual. We invite all architects in town, and last year, mister Gary Eliopoulos here in the back row brought his entire staff and dominated the competition. So so the pressure's on again this year. It's held in the old school Square Gym, and it's it's on a Saturday, a couple Saturdays from now, February 21, ten I think 10:00 in the morning.

But so you're all invited. Commissioner Angela Byrne showed up last year, brought a big team, and had a ball. The Downtown Development Authority is a cosponsor along with the Preservation Trust, and every it's a win win situation, and we hope to expand the program. And next year, we've got a couple of surprises up our sleeve to make it a little bit different than the first two. But please, you know, bring your kids, your grandkids, your nephews, everybody that you can grab and try to come to the event. You'll have a ball.

Thank you. Thanks. Didn't know you could win at Legos, Gary. Everybody's a winner. Anybody else? Alright. Moving on. So we're moving on item seven, quasi judicial hearing, items. I'm gonna read the rules for quasi judicial hearing. This hearing shall be conducted in accordance with the city Of Delray Beach's quasi judicial rules.

The applicant and the city shall be permitted to present their case. The public shall be allowed to speak for three minutes each or for maximum of six minutes if the person represents an organization or a group of people who are present but is agreeing not to speak. The city commission, board members, staff, and the applicant may be allowed to cross examine a witness. The city or the applicant will be allowed to offer rebuttal testimony. The decision to approve or deny an application or appeal may not legally be made upon the personal views as to whether a project is a good project or not, nor may a decision be based on the number of citizens who support or oppose a particular project.

The law requires that all decisions must be made on the basis of whether the project meets the requirements of law, the comprehensive plan, and the land development regulations. Okay. We're gonna move on to seven a, variance HP three eleven twenty twenty five.

Okay. For the record, I'm Katharina Paloboda, senior historic preservation planner. I'd like to enter HP three Eleven-twenty25 into the record. It's for 53 Palm Square, and it's a variance.

I'm going to ask if there's any ex parte communication on any Board member's part for this item. No.

None. Okay.

I believe the applicants

are here to present. How

are you guys doing today? Thanks for hearing me. My name is Issa with KER Construction, and I'm here to talk about for 53 Palm if possible.

And have you been sworn in?

I have.

Okay. And have you been sworn in? Are you planning on speaking?

Possibly.

Okay. If you wanna just go ahead and get sworn in. And if there's else

Anybody else who came in after we did that? Alright. Great.

By the authority vested in me, as the notary of the state of Florida, do you

swear or affirm that

the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? It's a great way

to do a camera. Thank you.

The home will undergo a small renovation that, overall, it doesn't exceed 25% of the full value of the property, which means the land and the house. We're trying to get a variance because we're at five foot and three quarter inches currently. FEMA is asking for us to lift it to nine feet. We're worried that if we lift it to nine feet, it's gonna cause damage to the house. And at that point, we're gonna have to rebuild, which is not good in the historic district.

We're trying to maintain and preserve everything within the property. We've been under the property. We've checked the property properly thoroughly, and there's no damage to the property after all these years. The house was built in 1940, so it's been eighty something years that the house has been there. So we're asking for the variance to see if we can get past this FEMA regulation and be able to continue with construction. The historic district has already approved the work to be done, but it's just the FEMA regulation part is what we're trying to get past now, if possible.

Shane Ames, architect. Architect. 203 Dixie Boulevard, Ames International Architecture. We've been working on this edition for quite some time, and it's a very, very small edition. So you can see up on the drawing, it is just a an old back porch that was enclosed. It's about ninety ninety nine square feet. It's not affecting the rest of the house. The slab was already there.

Yeah.

And we're just expanding the the roof out to incorporate a a breakfast room for the house.

That's all. Alright. I'm sure we'll have some questions for you. Alright.

Thank you. Thank you.

You can sit for now because staff's gonna go ahead and give their presentation, and then we'll call you back up. Thank you.

Okay. So the request is for the property located at 53 Palm Square. It's located in the Marina Historic District, and the request is a variance. So just for the record, the property did have an application that was approved by HPB on 02/07/2024. It was a certificate of appropriateness and variance stat it was file number 2024Dash054.

It was a request for an addition and exterior modifications to the existing contributing structure. It specifically approved two additions totaling a 102 square foot. It was an addition to the rear of the home, installation of a pool and a deck in the rear of the property, replacement of an existing cardboard awning, replacement of existing paver hardscape in the rear of the property, and a variance to reduce the required south interior side back from seven foot six inches to five foot nine and five eight inches. So as the project was approved, it went to building permit. And that's where because the building department did the review it determined that the percentage of improvements made to the structure exceeded the required 50% threshold, of what was called substantial improvement, they were required to comply with the FEMA finished floor elevation requirements.

Therefore, the request to keep the existing structure at the existing finished floor elevation, which the FEMA regulation requirement is nine at the requirement and they're requesting to keep it at the existing five foot three fourth inches so this request is not before the board So we can see the location of the property located in the Marina Historic District. This is the front elevation. It's facing west. This is the side, south elevation. Rear East Side North.

And then here the applicants did note the area that you see in red to the right those were the approved additions made to the structure. Here we can see the existing front elevation and then the newly approved elevation. The items highlighted in red were the changes that were made and approved. To the left and the right you can see what the existing finished floor elevation is and the bottom where it's noted already approved there's no change change to the existing mean roof height. It's also the same for the existing north elevation to the left.

So the red also notes the addition that was approved. Here we can see the new rear elevation. All the red is what was approved. No changes to height or the finished floor elevation. And so here is the variance request.

Attached to the staff report this also includes the findings that they needed to determine whether or not the variance would be appropriate to the structure. This is also a screenshot from our staff report. We noticed we noted that the additions would allow the interior the small addition would allow for the interior renovations to the historic structure while also maintaining the historic home. As you could see from the previous approval, they were very minor and majority of the additions were in the rear of the structure so they weren't the public right away. They weren't visible.

In addition, because of the substantial improvement which we've continuously been seeing with historic structures, you can either raise the structure or because of the FEMA exemptions for historic structures, they can request this variance in order to keep the existing finished floor elevations. Granting the variance request would keep the existing finished floor elevations but would also retain the overall character the existing single family structure. These are site plan technical items. And that concludes my presentation.

Thank you. Any members of the public want to comment on this item? Not yet. Seeing none. Any cross examination or rebuttal by the applicant? If if you have something to respond to what they said. Please come up here and speak from the microphone if you're going to.

This has been a very long process for us. It's been ongoing for probably two years trying to get this little cottage fixed up and put back into use again. We put new kitchens in, new bathrooms, updated everything on the inside, and working with an area that you we could eat, and when they put the new pool in, it needed a little breakfast area. So the existing patio that was there just got enclosed another four feet going out. It was a very small area, and I am very sensitive to the historic because I'm in one of the oldest buildings in town, 203 Dixie on the corner there, which turned a 100 years this year.

So I've been through this process many times when I redid the entire structure over there. Okay.

And it's Anything in particular

to doing that.

Anything in particular about staff's presentation, though, that you would

Staff's presentation was perfect because it's been going on, on, and on for quite a long time trying to get through this

hoops. I'm sure we're gonna have some more questions for you. Okay. So alright. Staff, any rebuttal?

No rebuttal from staff.

Okay.

Rebuttal from staff.

Just to note that the project was approved on 02/07/2024, so we are nearing two years since the original board approval. And, you know, there are other concerns too relating to expiration of projects and things like that. So I just heard you say that, and I thought we should probably touch base tomorrow on some of those items. But also that the substantial improvement was triggered less because of the additions in the rear and more because of the interior improvements that are happening, the remodel

Very much.

On the inside. I don't think any of us anticipated that when it came through in 2024. Mhmm. And then when it went through permitting, building flagged it. So that's why they're before you with

the variance. That's what's gonna be my first question. I mean, obviously, this is a small small addition. How was that calculation made? And this board really doesn't have any purview over interior. So

Yeah. So we've had a few projects we've looked at very closely. If I could just go back here and show you you know, this is the back elevation. Right? And so you can see it's a very small area.

And when they do the substantial improvement breakdown at the building department, the general contractor submits a permit with evaluation. How much is that job going to cost? And if that is more than 50% of the value of the house alone, that triggers a substantial improvement, which by FEMA's definition means the building building has to be vertically elevated. We've looked at some other properties across the district, and I was kind of surprised that the value of the structure here was so low.

I was gonna say that's subjective, isn't it? Well, it's set by the property appraiser.

So that that was a bit of a surprise. We've seen applicants come in with much bigger projects that haven't triggered the substantial improvement. So, you know, the applicant could always get a private appraisal and go through that process with an appraiser, but the land here is more valuable than the house. We've had some on Nassau Street over on the beach side where it wasn't triggered. So, you know, it's we never know until they actually move through getting the GC quote on the project, and that doesn't happen till the time of permit. Okay.

Any other comments or rebuttal? Okay. Alright. We're going to move in the board discussion at this point, unless you have any rebuttal to her rebuttal.

I know it's been taking quite a long time and the property appraiser is notorious for under evaluating properties, especially old ones because they they just don't update them constantly.

Okay. Alright. Thank you. Alright. Who would like to start? I just had questions.

We

are Staff talking or applicant?

No. So for staff.

Okay.

Question for staff. So we're we're talking about this board tonight. We're talking about the variance. Right? We're we're not we're not talking about the additions or that's already been approved.

Correct.

Right? So we're just talking about we're just talking about the variance.

This is strictly variance for finished floor elevation. So instead of going to what results in nine feet in this area, for them to remain at, what is it, five and three quarters inches or something like that to remain at these rules

for historic properties? Historic property, there is exemption. Right?

And so would you like me to

talk about that? Yes, please.

The Federal Emergency Management Association or agency has a exemption in place for historic properties. To retain the character of the building, you you can, you know, not have to elevate. Some cities choose to keep a list, and staff handles it administratively. Our city chose to put the regulations in the LDRs and require the applicants to come through to the this board to ask for the exemption as a variance. So it's a little loose on, FEMA's side on how they do it.

They will come in and quality control and pull this permit after, you know, it's approved, and they come in and check all of those permits. FEMA does. So there's a double check system. But, yes, it is in place through FEMA's own regulations that we've adopted and we've created the variance process for such. So we've had a handful or more get this in the past. The closest one is the Marine Villas directly south of this on the corner of Marine Way and 1st. They also received variances to finish floor because they

were

adding less than a 100 square feet, I think, per structure for new bathrooms. So I hope that answers your question.

Thank you.

I have a question. The applicant mentioned that there was no signs of flooding ever on this property. Do you do you know the history of flooding in the area?

So we do know that Marine Way itself is the street that floods the most, and the city is working on that capital improvement project to increase the resiliency to flooding over there. I have not heard reports of flooding happening at this property or severe issues happening on Palm Square where this is. Okay. That doesn't mean it's never happened. I just have not heard about it.

So the the need for the this variance really resulted from the stated value on the permit application that then was 50% over what the value is at the time of permit from the property appraiser?

Of the structure. Yes.

Of the structure. Oh.

Can I ask everybody when you speak, just speak into the mic so then the recording, I can pick it up? Thank you.

So it was 50% of the improvement value or of the total value?

So it's if the contractor estimates that the project is going to cost $200,000, that estimate gets put in with the building permit. And if the value of the home is 400,000, we're right at the threshold. But if the value of the home is less than that, they trigger the threshold.

And that's the total value, not improvement of the that threshold contemplates the improvement value as well as the land value.

No. It does not include the land value.

So it's just the improvement value?

Yes. Okay. Yeah. And there's there's where the discrepancy lies in some of these properties.

Yeah. And then question for the applicant. So on the permit application, the, I guess, the the value of the work was, let's say, over the 50%. The house improvement value. Sorry.

The house value is a $150,000. Our improvement value is close to 600,000. Oh. Because the whole interior needs to be done. I mean, today, you could barely do a bathroom and a kitchen for what 50% is of the property value.

Yeah. I think the most recent I looked on papa, and the improvement value on this property right now is about 121,000. Yeah. Yeah. So it's I mean Yeah. It's very low.

The overall is 1,500,000.0, I think, what the house itself is. Yeah.

Yeah. And and and I just just back to Steph. So if we approve the variance here, did it starts and stops here with us. It's FEMA then doesn't have to come in or the city doesn't have to come in and then give their input.

So the board can approve the variance. Applicant then can proceed with the permit. We can approve the permit. And just to note, in the back of the staff report, there are three items known as site plan technical items. These are taken directly from the code.

They must record the variance with the clerk at the county, Palm Beach County, then provide us a certified copy of that recorded document. Then the city's flood plain administrator provides a letter to the applicant specifying the difference between the base flood elevation requirement requirement versus what they're going to retain. Right? No change. And that notifying them that the cost of federal flood insurance is going to increase because there's increased risk should they flood here.

So that's all gets filed with the final permit by the time the permits getting ready to issue. So it's a double check system Mhmm. Essentially. But yes, once this board approves, should you choose to approve, they technically, we still have to run through the city commission appealable time frame, which takes about thirty days or less. Provided it doesn't get appealed by the city commission, then we can approve the permit.

Or the applicant.

Or if the applicant chooses to appeal a decision of the board. That's correct.

Okay. Okay. Thank you.

I have I have a question to to staff, I guess. There's also mention of a side yard variance. Is that created by what? I mean

Did you say there's mention of a site plan variance? I I couldn't hear you.

I'm sorry. Approved previous, I believe,

the setback. I thought I thought it's part of Side yard. Part part of the variance. Variance. You can you can think

That was previously approved in 2024.

To be what we decided that has nothing to do with this because it says it says well, if I read the report, it seems to say that that is I thought it was part of it. If read you

Maybe you're looking at page one.

I know he's saying he had it. Wait a second. Where do I see that?

Am I

going crazy?

There was also this discussion of the side

So, Kathy Okay.

That was part of the February 7.

Sorry about that. No worries. No worries. On page one, it does describe the previous approval.

So that was approved. Yeah. Okay. Then the other question I have is more of a general question to you. I mean, we we both went to the similar. Right? Is is nothing they they required to do in order to mitigate a little bit for the problem flooding, potential flooding? Because there's serious difference in elevation. It's not just a little. You know? So And and sorry. Just to say that I don't know in terms of materials, if using anything that can can be can sustain flooding. Mean, that was one of the benefits of the old construction. They they were a little more resilient. You know?

Yeah. If you had to replace everything with sheetrock, new one, you're basically not helping much. You know?

On the ex on the interior. But if we seal in the exterior properly, it protects the interior. So some of the things that we're trying to use, like, were trying to use Hardiebacker planks

Mhmm.

For the exterior, but we still have to go through the city to see if they're gonna approve that portion.

So maybe if I could

because Please.

You held up the if you could hold it up again. What mister Dumitrescu here is holding, we can also provide you a link for this document. Yeah. This is the secretary of the interior standards as it relates to flood adaptation. Okay.

And there's several methods of flood adaptation for properties that range from having a trench system around the site all the way to elevating the site. So there's different approaches. As far as materials, you know, should the applicant be looking to use hardy boards, say around the bottom four feet, they would have to come back to the board for that approval, because technically But the structure has I'm glad that you brought that up. We can discuss that with the applicant about methods that they can take. There's a lot. There's a lot of options.

Let the water go through. That's right. More than one. It's just and also, I'm just curious in general because this area is prone to potentially that problem, and it's probably other areas too. But when it says that it's really not causing damage to the surrounding and all that, it is not expected to. How if it does happen?

What do you do? Yeah.

Yeah. Who who's paying for it? Who's repairing?

Who's The the owner will or their insurance company if they can get that insurance.

And that will cover now other damage to other properties and

Mhmm.

And further that.

That's the risk they take with getting the variance in that letter I described. I see. That they have to pay an increased premium for flood insurance because of the variance. Right. But there certainly is options or are options in the book that you're

Right.

Describing that we could review with the applicant. And if you wanted to go so far as a board to make that direction to the applicant that they work with us to review those options.

Mhmm. I think it's it's good for everybody. Sure. Alright. It's not

good. Can I make another I was just told that in the landscaping plan, we do have almost like a French drain system going around where the rocks are located to where they're gonna dig down and fill that area with rock? So in that way, it will appease the comment that you made about the drainage system. It'll be able to catch some of the water.

And as a reminder to the board, those plans don't typically get reviewed until the time of permit. Right. We don't review them at the board level, but we could go over them with the applicant in advance just to make sure we're troubleshooting any That's right. Potential pitfalls.

We're in your realm, so we gotta make sure we abide by your rules.

Yeah. So

Okay. Any other questions? Anybody else?

I have a question for the applicant. Yeah. I'm curious why somebody would spend $600,000 and leave a structure four feet below the present flood elevation? I mean, just I'm not sure how much more it would cost to lift it. It's a small structure.

It's almost $200,000 to lift the structure. Okay. But it's not just lifting the structure.

I under I'm a general contractor.

I know what

it takes. But Yeah.

It it begs the question. This is a lot of money to spend on a small structure to leave it. I drove by. I mean, the thing that whole street everything on that street's gonna have

to be

raised at some point sooner than later. I mean, I know we like to keep the character, but the best way to preserve a structure is to keep it out of the water. So, you know, I have some feelings about it. I just think we've gotta be practical. Practical. It's a beautiful home, and don't wanna hold you up. But I understand. I mean, something to consider.

K.

Anybody else? Anybody wanna make a motion on this? I my feelings are, you know, they know the risks. That's why the city sends the CYA letter. And, you know, I I would have concerns if this is it's none of our purview, but if it, you know, it gets flipped to somebody who doesn't know the history of it and they move in and think they're it's all good and meets everything and they could have a problem down the road. Because that area, like Pete said, it's flooded before. It will flood again at some point down the road no matter what the city does. So but as far as it goes here tonight, I'm in I'm in favor of approving the variance. But

How about with some conditions of some mitigating items with staff working with staff?

I mean

Like, it is flood vents or

something. Still gonna probably come through to us at some point. That's is that on the table tonight, Kelly? Or

I think it's difficult to condition it on something that will have to be approved by you guys. But if you, you know, if you just condition you could I mean, you can instruct staff to discuss other options with them that hopefully they can bring forward. I just don't know that you could be like, I condition it on flood vents when you have to approve flood vents. You know, that's all

I'm saying.

Flood vents are typically utilized for spaces, and there are none here. There's no garage. It's only a carport. We wouldn't wouldn't typically see flood vents as part of the habitable space.

So the crawl space is already vented?

Yes. I mean, they

The there are things even the electric I have

pictures here

in the existing crawl space if you wanna see them. Wiring, rewiring in different ways. Yeah. Not everything is that's not difficult. Mhmm. You should do it if you do so much work in the house. Like, you can't

I mean, I'm just I'm just concerned we're we're,

you know,

answering questions we're not being asked here tonight.

So to make a motion.

K.

I'd like to move approval of variance HP three Eleven-twenty 20 5 for the property located at 53 Palm Square Marina Historic District by finding that the request and approval thereof is consistent with the comprehensive plan and meets the criteria set forth in the land development regulations.

Second. Motion and a second. Is there any discussion? Please take the

vote. Chris Gabesis? Yes. Peter Dwyer?

No. Richard Kassert?

Yes. Benjamin Baffert?

Yes.

Vlad Dimitrescu?

Yes.

Carol Perez? Yes. John Miller?

Yes. Good luck. Here you go. Mhmm. Okay. Alright. Moving on to items. Now do we discuss items b, c, d, e, and f concurrently?

Yes. I have a plan.

Alright.

Approved by law. Legal. And so I'm you can come on up. I'm gonna introduce the project and then get their application queued up. So first, Michelle Hoyland, principal planner for the record.

And I'd like to enter files number HP4242026, 423, 2026, 422, 2026, 421, 2026, and 420, twenty twenty six into the record. These are five applications. Each application is a COA with a variance and a waiver. This is for the Magnolia Place project. That's five lots in individual approvals for each of those.

It's not a unified development plan. They were approved as duplexes. And the applicant is coming forward to request relief from the code for improvements made to the property. Mister Gary Eliopoulos is here. The property owner's architect and the property owner, mister Tom Ladhani, are is here as well. And did you already open these? It's behind. It's in the back? Yeah. Oh, it's this right here. Okay. So if Gary's at the podium He is. He can begin.

And I I just wanna make one quick comment about it. They they can be presented altogether, but I would just let the board know, caution you guys to just consider that each one is separate, and you will have to make a motion on each one at the end.

And there'll be a separate note.

Yeah. Yeah.

And some of the variances, while they're very similar applications, there are variance variances to the variances. Variances. Variations to the variances. So just keep that in mind as you're going through the till you can keep each one

straight.

Before we start, I do wanna ask if there's been any ex parte on this item. Nope.

Yes. Yes. I was on the site. I went to check it out. And Pat White, one of the owners of Seaside, was there, so he gave me a tour.

I've I've walked by it.

No. None. I drove by, and I spoke to Kristen Finn about it.

Okay. Mister chair and board members, my name is Gary Eliopoulos. For the record, address is 1045 East Atlantic Avenue. We are GE Architecture. Michelle stated, our owner rep as far as the developer, Tom Holland Downey, is here should you have any questions for him. We we've obviously been here before for several things, and we are hopefully here at the end to wrap this up. The project is pretty much completed and tonight we are here for something that's kind of unique and it kind of overlap. The variances in waiver are about basically, we're dealing with artificial turf. Let me see if I get this right here. Okay.

Our location. So we are in the Southeast Corner of the Oshad District. It is unique area in the sense that we abut on the East Side to the CBD. Just to the north is actually CBD with an overlay of historicness within our block. To the South is residential, and when you go to the West, you actually have mixed use. You have commercial, you have multifamily. So again, we're kind of in a neat little area there. We feel that, you know, when we did this project, it was like a transition. You you were coming from the high rise next door, which were five stories, and you were going west to the lower ones. The locks are right here.

I'm gonna go through these. There is gonna be a correction that I'll show in the presentation that we came up with that I do have to work with staff should this move forward. So here's our location. We got Southeast 1st Avenue and Southeast 2nd Street, and then, of course, we have the alley on the West Side, and there are the five lots. So as you go through them, we're dealing with requirement.

So 25% is required when you see Lot 1, we are actually down to 9.3. That would be the request that we're going from 25 to 9.3. The artificial turf by code, what we are allowed to do and I know there's some landscape architects up here that can correct me. We can do three square feet on Lot 1. As you go through them, Lot 2, we have 25 open space down to 10.9. We could do 26 square feet of artificial artificial turf. Turf. And as you go through, you see the numbers. They're pretty much in that range. So what happens is with the artificial turf and the way the code is, you have to meet your 25%.

Anything over the 25% of open space that you have, 15% of that can be artificial turf. What I think is there's a little issue there is that this is a code that's for the entire city. So, you know, it's one blanket code and it doesn't change where you are. I would tell you that in an urban setting, is more appropriate to actually rethink this code and see how it should be for smaller lots versus a large lot that might be on the ocean. Now here was the mistake that we did on our calcs.

We didn't realize this is all artificial I mean, not real sod. When we went back out there, they had finished this portion and installed it. So those calcs have been put into the numbers. And so when you see lot one, there was an extra 545 square feet. It raises it to 17.2%. As you go through them, the rest are pretty much at that 14%. I bring that up because if if we were actually right across the street, we'd only be required 10%. Now I know we're not in the CBD, but that's how the code does does work in an urban setting.

Sorry. Can I stop you for a second? Are you asking for a decreased variance on multiple lots?

It technically would be. Yeah. Okay. But if it's gonna mess up today, I won't. Okay?

So you're going for the full variance even though

you Yes.

Have portions that are sorted?

Right. Okay. Just because if it changes, it would have to be re notified?

Right. Yeah. No. No. This was just conversation. So right here, what you have is Lot 34, And 5. Often the distance in the upper corner, you can see the other commercial building that's being built right now. Again, it is a unique area in the sense that we felt this was a good transition to the neighborhood. Kind of one of the comments that or one of the things you look at is what we are requesting, is it gonna change the character of the neighborhood? For what we feel is what we're talking about tonight, you don't actually see it.

It doesn't affect the character of the neighborhood at all. This is one of the pool settings that we have. Another unique thing about this property is that, you know, most projects can't afford to be doing the splash pools. They don't offer it. It's a nice little amenity. It gives you the feeling that you do have a little bit of a privacy yard even though as you can see across the street is a five story structure. This is just showing you across the street what we are having. It's not stating that they're complaining about the neighborhood, but it is in an urban setting. That is a ramp going into a parking garage. This is what we were here at the end of last year, the signage.

You can see how the project has developed, how the landscape is all coming in. One of the things is, again, is the visibility. Is the artificial turf visible by the public right of way? Another setting right in here. So what you do see from the street is actually real turf, but that is in the swale. It's not part of our property, but that's actually the only thing that's visible. Again, another shot straight on. And right here, one of the criteria that we have to do for the city engineering is demonstrate, is this pervious? So one of the criteria is that you look at with the code of Delray is that it has to be the drainage, the permeability has to be 30 inches per hour. We actually are at a 100.

So we will exceed the drainage counts for this property. We also had to submit other criteria to the city with regards to how the turf is made, how it meets everything. So right here, you've got a lot of items that come into play with the waiver when you're talking about the artificial turf. We are requesting a full waiver from all of them, but I was highlighting some of the things of saying, obviously, we we we were going in for permits for this. We have other items here where we're looking at it with the artificial turf as far as at the rear.

It is in the interior portions of the lot. We did not do them in the driveways, so that was one of the criterias that you could do. When you're talking about properties that are in the actual historic district, again, it's only allowed in the rear and the sides. We have those, but I would state that even though we have it in the front with the fencing and the landscaping, you do not see it. As far as the recycling of it, the materials of it, we satisfied all that.

We did submit all the specs on it. When you talk about the percolation of it, we're fine there. When you talk about the demonstration of how it feels in the yard, we actually had staff out there. When you walk in it with bare feet and everything, this feels just like grass, if not better. When you talk about warranties, eight years is a what the city city requires. Requires. We have turf that's installed that's ten years. I'd actually be happy to see if any of my grass lasted that long. I can't keep it that long. So that is one of the good things about this.

When you start talking about the what it's installed over. We have it installed over sand and rock. Again, that's what makes it so pervious and it drains so well. You start talking about again, that was the the criteria that the city has. We exceed that. Again, the comfort of walking on it, how the blades are. Then you talk about where you install it. We do not have it butting up any trunk trees or anything like that, so we are satisfying that. With regards to the, material base underneath, everything is gonna be and has been inspected. And, of course, you have to maintain it.

We will be having an HOA that will be maintaining all these properties and keeping them up to the criteria that is set in the code. The variance. So basically, again, what you're talking about is is that this is something that is not considered open space. So that's really what we are talking about. The character, I would I would state that I don't believe this is gonna be changing the character of the historic district.

I I really do believe that it's not even visible. You know, there is no as far as historicness to the site that we were changing with regards to structures or anything like that, and the little interpretation, we we feel it's not gonna, again, alter the historic character of the district. It's not diminishing the neighborhood by any means. And as far as the e, it's not really apt because we're not really affecting a historic structure. This right here just happens to be it's not law.

It is just stating that the state of Florida is actually looking at this. This has not been adopted. It's actually been sent to DEP right now. They are reviewing it. One of the things they are looking at is that any property, an acre or less, can have full artificial turf. Again, it has not been approved but that's what they are looking at. So here in conclusion what we have, the proposed artificial turf. Let me go back. How do you go back there? Let's just go with the fact that artificial turf, you do not water it, you do not cut it, you do not fertilize it.

It is actually eco friendly. When you talk about an urban setting, I do believe that this is appropriate for the downtown area. Some would say, well, jeez, there's not a lot of property there. Well, that's when it's actually totally appropriate. That's when you should have it. That concludes my presentation. I'd be happy to answer any questions should

you have them. Thank you. Thank you.

And I just wanna say one comment as well. I know it

was

just conversational, but I would just ask the the board to ignore the portion about that they have filled it with SOD because, you know, the open space variance will be that variance and that runs with the land. So, you know, if you're approving that variance as is, you have to imagine it is as is as well.

Thank you. Got it.

For the record, Michelle Hewitt, senior planner. And once again, this is for a COA variance and waiver request for lots one through five of the Magnolia Place project. Here we have an aerial with the subject properties outlined in blue, Southeast 1st Avenue to the East, Southeast 2nd Streets to the South and South. And there's an alley to the West. I'm going to go over a brief background of the property.

Approximately roughly two years ago, the Historic Preservation Board reviewed and denied a COA request that included variances and waivers for the construction of five duplexes at the subject locations outlined in blue up there. The variances were for lot coverage and for the swimming pools and there was a waiver for building height plane. The applications were appealed and approved by the city commission at the February meeting. A building permit was issued for the subject property and the project is nearing completion. However, artificial turf was installed, Rasad was approved and permitted.

Subsequently, a COA application with the waiver and variance were submitted for the following. So a waiver is submitted for the artificial turf entirety of the section and then a variance is also requested to allow reduction in the minimum required open space that is 25. So here is the addressing of the lots as they are now. Again, they're duplexes, so there's two addresses for each unit and then those five lots. Going through some photos here.

At the top left corner is Lot 1, the front unit, this faces Southeast 1st Avenue. And then in the middle there, can see where the main area that the artificial turf is located, around the swimming pools. And then at the bottom left is the rear unit, this faces the alley and then the swimming pool again on the right for that rear unit. And then you can see where the sod is in the alley between Lots 1 And 2. Here we have Lot 2.

Again the top left is the front unit and then the subsequent artificial turp on the pool. Bottom is the rear unit, faces the alley and then the pool on the right. And then in between properties, this is Lot 3. We can see the front and the location of artificial turf around the swimming pools. And then between the properties, here's Lot 4.

Again, unit, rear unit, and then their pools in between. And then we have Lot 5, the most north unit and their swimming pools. So with the installation of the artificial turf, this is kind of like the process of installing the turf at the, I believe it's a subgrade, and the type of material that they use being permeable. And then here it's kind of how it is in the field during installation. And this is how all of them were installed in this manner.

So I'm going go through all five of the site plans, where you can see the building is outlined or highlighted in red, the pool is in blue, Any sort of hardscaping is in gray. Yellow is representing what's on-site in yellow for the artificial turf and then the green is sod. So here is the most south unit. This is at the corner of SE 2nd Street and SE 1st Avenue with the alley to the left. This is Lot 2.

Again, building in red, artificial turf yellow, and then the natural, the grass in green. Lot 3, Lot 4, and Lot 5, most north unit. So typically, the Board doesn't review landscape for single family and duplex structures, but because the request before you pertains to landscaping, we did a brief analysis for the artificial turf section. So the installed artificial turf does not meet the open space requirements, nor all of the pertinent artificial turf requirements. Thus, wave and variants were submitted to address the after the fact installation.

As this concerns historic review, there is concern with the use of artificial turf in the front and side street areas of the property. These specific turf sections were developed to allow the use of turf where it would be shielded from view, such as rear and side yard areas, given synthetic material is typically discouraged for use within historic districts. And then just a brief section from the Secretary of Interior Standards. The Standards do recommend approaches when it comes to the use of materials at the ground level. Using a substitute material for the replacement that does not convey the same appearance of the surviving site feature or that is physically or ecologically incompatible is not recommended.

So if a material was to be installed, it would it's recommended that it's considered ecologically compatible. And from a drainage perspective, that it can percolate and as well as the appearance of the artificial turf. And then here are the section I just read. And then looking at the official compatibility standards, given the nature and design of the site, which included variances and waivers to reduce setbacks and exceed lot coverage, there are limited areas where natural open space was to be accommodated. The applicant has indicated that the installation of sod is not feasible from a maintenance perspective around the pools.

And while artificial turf is installed in all areas where sawdust be placed, it is noted that there are landscape areas surrounding the perimeter of the site that incorporate hedging ground cover in trees. So going into the variance requests, as previously mentioned, this variance request is to reduce the minimum required 25% open space for the newly constructed duplex sites. Just something to clarify, in the artificial turf section, artificial turf itself does not count towards your 25% minimum open space. The 15% artificial turf item that was mentioned earlier is for any remaining lot area after your open space has been calculated, open space lot coverage, all of that. It's the additional lot area, no more than 15% of that can be artificial turf.

So, you can see here on the table, each of the proposed variance requests, the reductions with lots two and four being the same because they're the same type and then lots three and five and then lot one at 9.3%. So here are the variance findings that were used to analyze the request. So going through requirements, the variance would allow for the reduction of minimum open space, the standard applicable to all properties within the subject historic district. It requires that it's consistent and compatible with the overall historic district as well as the structures within the district. As previously mentioned, open space requirement cannot be met due to the use of artificial turf, and it is for historic structures reserved for use in the rear end side of the property.

There is concern that the large reduction is open space that may not be granted for other sites in the same zoning district. Looking at the waiver requests, as previously mentioned, the entirety of the artificial turf section is requested to be waived. However, they are meeting portions of the artificial turf section, which I'll show on the next slide, of first waiver findings. So here are the sections that are currently being met. They are meeting a lot of the technical portions of artificial turf in the LDRs.

So items such as the rate at which water percolates, the type of base that's being utilized, and that artificial turf in the code is considered pervious, so there's no concern that it will affect drainage calculations. Additionally, staff went out there and conducted a site visit and determined that the appearance and material and feel of the turf was appropriate to meet the emulation of natural turf or sod. So going through the waiver analysis, it is contained within the boundaries of the site, so it's not anticipated to impact any neighboring areas or properties. There are a few instances where TURF is utilized in historic districts and it is either not visible from the right of way or placed prior to the addition of artificial TURF LDRs. So this is very particular to this request.

Should the property be required to comply with current landscape regulations, the turf could only be located in the rear or side interiors and or side interiors. Proposed waiver may not be granted to another applicant or owner under similar circumstances because it also involves approval of a variance to reduce the required open space. However, it does emulate the appearance of real grass and its configuration creates small areas that could be seen as difficult to maintain. Here are the Secretary of Interior Standards and Visual Compatibility Standards where we use the relationship of materials, textures and colors to analyze the request and the Certificate of Appropriateness findings. Here we have some site plan technical items for the request.

And that concludes my presentation.

Thank you.

Any members of the public want to comment on this item?

For the record, Roger Cope Cope Architects Inc. I don't know if you're supposed to give your address or your ZIP code these days, but I'll do both. 701 Southeast 1st Street. I think the ZIP code's 33483. I had no intention of coming up and speaking on this item, but I'm going to. Listen. There is much more use than, than maybe staff is aware of of the installation of artificial turf out there and very much specifically within historic districts. Yeah. Mister Tom Crocker's home, it's at 73 Palm Square, has it all the front yard. Whether he got a a permit to install it or not, maybe irrelevant, but it's in use out there.

It's the wave of the future. It's what our clients demand. It's what these very high priced homeowners, buyers demand. So it is far more permeable, and eco friendly as as some of the competent and substantial evidence given earlier. It it drains better because you can control the sub base that it sits on versus a natural turf that has to sit on an organic material that has no drainage capabilities whatsoever.

So it's very hard to criticize the use of artificial turf in any installation, let alone what they're proposing tonight. I would just ask you to support the waivers, the variances, the the reduction in percentages. It's in this particular case, it it is very urban and in a much different environment than if it were a single family home sitting out in a a PUD or something. So you're reducing the the noise of the maintenance that's required that would have to take place if it were real grass, you know. No no blowers and and and loud motors.

And and listen, when leaves fall from trees and bushes and surrounding shrubs, it looks just like it's a brand new, you know, real life grass anyway. I find, you know, zero drawbacks to its use, and I hope you guys feel the same. I think it's a perfect use for it. I I think you should support it.

Thanks. Thank you. Anybody else? Seeing none. Any rebuttal?

No? No rebuttal? Yes. Oh, yes.

Oh, no. Sorry.

Just a few notes. The the LDRs on artificial turf were created not long ago. In fact, we brought them to this board and asked for specific guidance. It's not exactly a blanket code across the city. I could see where the applicant where mister Iliopoulos would say that when it comes to, like, lot size.

That might be how things are looked at across the city, but there are specific requirements for historic. Michelle already touched on the open space piece. Oh, the DEP. So the Florida State Legislature has created some type of regulation about what's going to be done with turf, but they're referring it down to DEP to come up with those regulations. So we are in a holding pattern.

It's possible that they may create regulations that say you can't have regulations in your city controlling turf, or they may create some more stringent types of requirements than even we have. So it really can't be a factor in the case, the cases before you. We did discuss that with our city attorney's office ahead of bringing it to the board to be sure that we weren't stepping out of our control. So that that just can't be part of the consideration tonight. You have to utilize the LDRs that we have in place per the request.

And I did walk the site with my team, with the director of our department, as well as director of public works, took my shoes off. It does feel soft. It wasn't hot. That's why, you know, we put that in the staff report. And does appear to emulate a natural type of sod, but it it is not. And, you know, if we have additional pictures here that are some are hidden if you want to look at into it more in-depth. That's all I had for rebuttal. Thank you.

Thank you. Any comments? No.

Forget it.

Alright. Moving in the board discussion. Anybody want to start?

I have a have a quick question. Was this work is already done?

Yes.

And was it permitted?

No. So the approval was to have Saad here.

Mhmm.

And is there a protocol for permitting turf in the city?

They do have to submit a landscape plan with their building permit. And so that plan has identify what they're using. So they'll have to alter or revise that plan. They are at the point of beginning to get CO for these properties. So they're going through the TCO process, which is a technical CO, almost temporary in nature, because they have some items to address, including this. Reduction of OPPs.

The permit that was submitted had signed. Mhmm. Correct. Okay. Yeah.

And then quick question for the applicant.

So when

you installed the turf, did you know that you were going to have to come here and request a variance for it?

That's a good question. Well, I didn't install it. But

Or when the when the when the owner installed it.

Speak to Yeah. No. Yeah. It'd have to go to the owner. He can tell you what happened. Yeah. I I can speak to it. Come on, Tom.

I don't know if he was sworn in.

I sworn in. Okay. For the record, my name is Tom Ladani. I'm here with Seaside Builders. 185 Northeast 4th Avenue, Delray Beach.

I've been a developer here in this city for twenty eight years. I've developed many, many projects. This project is one of the more challenging, but one of the most attractive that we've done, thanks to the the help of the historic staff and and the development staff, and Gary Iliopoulos, our architect. At the time when we installed this turf, it was not installed in any kind of a malicious way or a way that indicated that we were trying to avoid any kind of a process. We've gone through several iterations of of permit adjustments as well as the fact that we came before this buret board a while back and just for a request for use of the signage, if you recall, that was granted, and I I greatly appreciate that.

I did have the pleasure of having the senior staff members come out with Michelle. Indicated, they were very pleased to see the quality of the product as well as the the the turf. The turf is not hot. It's very pervious. It's the most practical application because of the fact that we're in a confined area gated with for for the small spa pools. If you looked at the some of the videos that we've seen earlier, what you see as you drive down the street is you see natural turf. You see natural turf in the swales. You see natural turf in the open areas adjacent to the garages. Mister Dwyer, I think you were there. Yes.

And and maybe you would witness that yourself. I spoke to the I spoke I'll

be brief. Mister Ladoni, it it just as to the question that he's asked at this point because they're in board discussion, so just limit your answer to to what he's

asked about that. No. Okay. What was your question?

No. I no. The question was

The question was I'm not I I did not intentionally avoid a permit for this turf. I never contemplated that this would not be considered to be a pervious surface, and I never contemplated that we would be violating the open space requirements because I think that this product meets the open space requirements. Matter of fact, I spoke to the mayor of Ocean Ridge today, Jeff Jeff Pugh, and he indicated that they just changed the LDRs in Ocean Ridge just for this very reason. So I think it's something that's being addressed locally because of the practicality of of the use of it and and the high demand as mister Cope indicated earlier. So I hope that answers your question.

So just to sum up, you installed the turf, everything was fine, and then you found out that now you're going to have to come in for a variance because of it.

And the way I found out was when we're going through the the the the the CEO process, the landscape inspector came out and the associate landscape inspector came out, and he indicated, to my surprise, that we did not meet the criteria. So therefore, it sent us into a a a process of coming before this board for a waiver and a variance. It was not something done maliciously or intentionally. I was you know, when I got the phone call, I said, oh, wow. This is unbelievable.

I didn't expect this to happen. So I've I've been doing business here, mister Kayser, for many, many years, and I've never all my projects have been done successfully and and without any deceit in in mind. Okay. Thank you very much.

That is how

may have some more questions for you.

We concur that is how it happened. Mhmm. It was identified during a site inspection. Inspection.

Okay. You.

It was a little mentioned before, but this is actually for staff I think. Why is not an open space?

What is the question?

Why is it not considered an open space?

So like we said in the staff report, there have been advancements made in the construction of artificial turf, but not all turf that's on the market is pervious. So OpenSpace is really designed. It's kind of a hinging type of setup with our code that you need a minimum of 25% of green area. It's natural green areas what's identified in the code section. All areas of natural plant communities are areas replanted with vegetation after construction such as revegetated natural areas, tree, shrub, hedge, ground cover, plantings and lawns.

Water bodies and artificial turf areas cannot be used to calculate open space areas. This is primarily because there is a requirement for natural, but there is also a requirement for percolation for drainage so that these sites don't flood onto adjacent property or rights of way. So artificial turf historically has not been in that category. This turf, one of the requirements that we made as part of the submittal was to show us what part of the artificial turf section do they not meet and what part do they meet? And one of our nonnegotiables per our city engineer was the percolation.

So the minimum requirements for water percolating through the turf into the subgrade had to be met. And if that wasn't met, that was going to require a different type of request. It would look different. They'd probably have to do trenching and whatnot. So they do meet that requirement, they submitted those

documents. Documents. Okay. Okay. And it's still kind of creating a conflict. I mean, you could find a way to condition the percolation and then allow the the this as long as it's a good good quality material, and they are several very considerable.

This came before the board when we reviewed artificial turf because before we added the I don't remember if you were on the board, mister Dumitrescu. No. The city brought through land development regulation amendment to specifically add regulations for turf into the code because we started to see a proliferation of its use across the city. And so we had the board weigh in and say, what what would you think is appropriate for a historic district? And that part of the code says that turf is to only be used in the rear inside I see.

To preserve the historic front. While, yes, this is in Oshad, these are new construction, so I could see where there might be a dilemma for you and and how the board deliberates on this.

Okay. So alright. Do you anybody knows what that warranty covers? That would be

best for the applicant to answer.

Any any like health issues or something like that that could be still

would like the applicant to answer that. Sorry.

Yeah. So the warranty actually covers if if in fact this gets damaged, you know, whether through the sun. Like, I think, somebody mentioned Roger might have mentioned, you know, when leaves and stuff like that come on it, does it actually change its color? So the actual product itself. So the warranty covers that. They they basically give you the product back. They do not install it, so that owner would have to install it if it did fail within the ten years.

Okay. So, you know, it's kind of guaranteed that doesn't cause any health problem? No. Yeah. No. The warranty does not do that.

Well, it it it it talks about how it was made and everything and they've their their testing doesn't suggest they would ever cause any I gotta believe that fertilizing

Right. It's

also is way worse than this.

No. Europe has some strict controls about some of it as long as it has and we are, you know I'm not sure exactly how how well we know if this is as healthy as I like it to be. But Got it. You know, the owner makes that decision. He's signing for it. He likes it. As long as in in terms of septic. In terms of the historic district, it actually contributing buildings. Are you where you stand in terms of I know it's supposed to be only on the side and the rear. Is it acceptable? I don't know how to call it.

Well, the code says it's to be in the side in the rear. So any deviation from that would be this board deliberating on its use in a front yard. Right. So I think we'd have to do a case by case basis. If it were coming through for a contributor, where is it being installed?

I

understand. It's hard to to postulate on that. It's similar

Basically, you're you're still gonna have to apply those variants Right. Standards and the waiver standards.

But it's similar to the glass. If you're reflective glass or colored glass and roofing that is not appropriate, all that needs to be discussed. Okay.

That would be you know, I I see the analogy that you're making in this instance, But I I would hesitate to say, yeah, it would be okay. And then have something come through that's like 10,000 square feet of artificial turf in a front yard. I I would have to see Right. The proposal. And ultimately, our analysis is just that.

An analysis of does the request meet the code or does it not meet the code and what instances. You know, we're not we don't provide a recommendation in these staff reports. We provide you the analysis and the guidance. There are other things in the sorry. I'm flipping fast just because I things like this.

So while the secretary of the interior standards don't specifically touch on artificial turf Mhmm. The standards talk about substitute materials that don't does not convey the same appearance of a surviving site feature or could be ecologically incompatible. This is site related or setting related. So it was to me applicable, but it could also be seen as somewhat of a stretch because we're not talking about a fountain. Right. A historic fountain or historic site wall like we saw with Sunday village. So it's up to the board to make the decision here ultimately if this is appropriate for use and is it appropriate to reduce the required open space.

Okay. Well, I'm glad that there's a control factor. You know?

Yeah. Thank you.

I mean, nothing really important, but in the report, there's a misspelling on the title. It says you're missing an I and the artificial term on the on the third page.

On page three?

Yeah. Mean Thank you. Very important page. Yeah. Thank you.

Was it only one?

No. Only one. It's only the two. Just one. The title and the and the very beginning.

I feel like we did pretty good then. Yeah. In page three.

Yes. Yes. Yeah. Bob. Nothing gets past you.

Mhmm. Well

I'm glad that shows me he's reading the report.

So Yeah. So

it is there is another spelling error

on the first page.

I defer. Okay. Anything? Comments from our landscape architects here? You want me to go?

You want me to go?

Go ahead.

Okay. Oh. Yeah. I mean,

it's a it's

a big subject. I mean, I I think we do have to look at these, situations on an individual basis. This is an urban area. And these townhomes, the the front yard kinda becomes the backyard. I mean, it's just a it's it's just a different situation.

I I'm in favor of using the artificial turf in this situation and for this application. I think it will look nice. I think it is screened from the seat from the street. And there's letters from the civil engineers saying that it's going to percolate and drainage will not become a problem, which is what the city has this open space calculation for, which I've dealt I've dealt with this before too. The artificial turf calculations are really prohibitive for small lots like this.

And I've come up against it. You're up against it. I I do not feel that all homes should have a huge area of artificial turf in front of them. So, again, I'm just talking about this on a site specific situation for this project. What else?

I mean, my biggest problem is the sustainability. And in ten years, you know, I know a lot of artificial turfs going into a landfill. That's what bothers me, but I think it will look nice. It'll be always be green. And, yeah, there's trade offs. If if it was real turf, you would have to fertilize, you would have to mow, and you'd have to replace it several times over because they with all the shade and everything, you know, the sod gets shaded out and it dies, and then you see dirt. So, actually, this will probably look better than real turf because it's hard to maintain that in small areas like this. Oh, it's hard to mow small areas like that too. Okay. That's

it. Actually, I totally agree with that. Those are my same thoughts. You you wouldn't wanna see a lot of artificial turf in the fronts of lawns. You know? If everything turned plastic, that would be a shame, but this is a special case. It's behind the wall. Overall, I'm in support of this. I do think the code is a little restrictive right now with artificial turf because it is used a lot, and there are circumstances in backyards where it does make sense to use it. It's kind of an unknown item right now. It's a little bit like, we don't know the long term effects. We don't know if there is health effects. When it gets middle of summer, it's, you know, 95 degrees. There's no shade. There could be fumes that come up.

I think there needs to be more study on it, but it is used a lot. It is very practical. I think it looks very nice here. It creates a sense of green and life even though it's plastic.

So It's not an organic.

Yeah. Overall, I'm in support of it. I do wish there was more native plants maybe around the project that might enliven the space a little bit more. Some sables would have been nice, but that's another topic. So overall, I'm in support.

Pete? Okay.

I did go to the site and have a firsthand look at it. So it looks good. So visually, I think it's compatible. Also, you're really not gonna see it unless you look over the fence and and go jump in the pool. But I think it's a reasonable accommodation for an unusual site. You don't have a backyard, so this becomes the backyard for the people living there. So I'm in support of it. K.

Yeah. I I the maintenance aspect of it, I can appreciate no sprinklers. You know, the water use, the appearance, it's green. I guess you could, you know, call it that. But there's to me, there's no authenticity about it. I don't think it's appropriate in the historic district in this setting. And, you know, this this property was a clean slate. It was scraped clean. It was started from scratch. There's no reason in my mind for a lot of variances and waivers for something that you're not working around a historic structure.

You're not trying to save anything and, you know, give a little bit because of that. So, you know, I I'm not in favor of it, but we're gonna have a vote. We'll see where it goes. Anybody wanna make a motion or anybody have any other comments?

Just the the motioning of it has to be each individual.

It does. Yes. And I think queued up for you. Michelle will pull up one for each.

So this is I have five. So this is lot one. These are your four options. Can choose from. When you're done, I'll move to the next.

Somebody wanna start? When they get tired, we can move on.

Somebody else? I'll make a motion to approve strip code of appropriateness variance and waiver, h p four two four two zero two six for the property located at 171 To 176 Southeast 1st Avenue, Old School Square Historic District by finding that the request and approval thereof is consistent with the comprehensive plan and meets the criteria set forth in the land development regulations.

A second?

Motion and a second. Any discussion? Please call the roll.

Chris Cabasis? Yes. Peter Dwyer? Yes. Richard Kassar? Yes. Benjamin Baffer? Yes. Vlad Dumontreski? Yes. Carol Perez? Yes. John Miller?

No. Okay. Lot 2.

I could do this one. Approve the certificate of what? Just closer to the mic. I'll make a motion to approve the certificate of appropriateness variance and waiver HP Dash423Dash2026 for the property located at 160 Dash 166 Southeast 1st Avenue, Old School Square Historic District by finding that the request and approval thereof is consistent with the comprehensive plan and meets the criteria set forth in the land development regulations.

The motion is second or a motion. Any second? I'll second. Second. I have one comment. One other thing that I forgot to mention, was the plan said sod, and this was installed as turf. So this was a conscious decision. It wasn't a last minute thing. The irrigation system had to, you know, support this type of thing. So that's another reason why I don't think it's appropriate. K. We'll call the roll.

Chris Cabasis?

Yes.

Peter Dwyer? Yes. Richard Kasser? Yes. Benjamin Baffer?

Yes.

Vlad Dimitrescu? Yes. Carol Perez? Yes. John Miller? Nope.

Lot 3.

Who's next?

I'll go. Alright. I'll make the motion to approve the certificate of appropriateness variance and waiver for HPDash422Dash2026 for the property located at 150 To 156 Southeast 1st Avenue Old School Square Historic District by finding that the request and approval thereof is consistent with the comprehensive plan and meets the criteria set forth in the land development regulations. Second.

Motion to second. Any discussion? Please call the roll.

Chris Cabasis?

Yes. Peter Dwyer? Yes. Richard Kasser? Yes. Benjamin Baffer?

Yes.

Vlad Dimitrescu? Yes. Carol Perez? Yes. John Miller?

No.

This is the next

one I I put in.

I'd like to make a motion to approve the certificate of appropriateness variance and waiver HP Dash421Dash2026 for the property located at 140 To 146 SE 1st Avenue Old School Square Historic District by finding that the request and approval thereof is consistent with the comprehensive plan and meets the criteria set forth in the land development regulations.

We have a second.

I'll second.

Motion second. Any discussion? Please call the roll.

Chris Cabasis? Yes. Peter Dwyer? Yes. Richard Kasser? Yes. Benjamin Baffer? Yes. Vlad Dumitrescu? Yes. Carol Perez? Yes. John Miller?

No. Last

one. I'll make a motion to approve the certificate of appropriateness variance and waiver HP Dash420Dash2026 for the property located at 130 Through 136 Southeast 1st Avenue, Old School Square Historic District by finding that the request and approval thereof is consistent with the comprehensive plan and meets the criteria set forth in the land development regulations.

I'll second.

Motion second. Any discussion? Let's call the roll.

Chris Cabasis? Yes. Peter Dwyer? Yes. Richard Kasser?

Yes.

Benjamin Baffer? Yes. Vlad Dumitrescu? Yes. Carol Perez? Yes. John Miller?

No. Thank you very much. Motion carries. Appreciate it. Good luck. Thank you. Appreciate it. Welcome. These are consistent. Alright. Item eight, legal training. What do we have in store tonight? Right.

Okay. Am I able to use that? Okay. Great. Thank you.

Yeah. Well, I guess it was it was in the agenda, but it was very

small items.

So there it is.

I'll try to be quick.

Alright. What do we okay. You'll explain.

Give me the easiest one.

Mouse is easiest.

Okay. Perfect. Sounds good.

Okay.

Yeah. The the reason we're we're bringing this here is just because back when Michelle was doing the FEMA floodplain elevation training, I meant to bring this to you, but, unfortunately, I ended up getting sick. And so now we're bringing it back to you, which is now three months later. But we just kinda wanted to go back through some of the guidelines for legal stuff, the ethics, the, you know, your meeting requirements, sunshine law, those kind of things. And then I also wanted to just kind of look at, like, our design guidelines and our LDRs a little bit and just kind of talk to you about, like, the way that the when you're reviewing a project, the way that, you know, you can talk about these projects to kind of come in line with those design guidelines and make sure that, you know, when you're creating a record up here, you're creating a record explaining the reasons that, you know, you're seeing that actually go from a historic preservation standpoint versus whether, you know, if you like it or you don't like it, if you think it doesn't fit, that's okay.

But why doesn't it fit? And does it meet one of those guidelines that it doesn't fit? Does it, you know, not fit with the streetscape of the project? So I will try to go through this quickly. I know that you guys have seen some of the public records law of Sunshine Law. I'll try to, you know, kind of cruise through it. And if you have any questions, obviously, stop me. And we did put it at the end just because we were actually trying to be respectful of your time so that if it was going late because it it looked kind of like a long agenda, you know, I would skip that and come back on another time. But, fortunately, we're at 06:30, so things are looking good. So okay.

I am wait. Can I go back on this? I'm not going to. I'm just gonna leave it. I kinda went through the what I was gonna go through with you. Public records laws. Our office actually does the public records. So what you guys need to know really is that it's a really broad definition. Anything that is related to city business, related to your service on the board, if you anticipate an agenda might item might be talked about. Anything that you're creating a record, it could it it is a public record, and those are things that you need to keep.

And you can also send to our office as well so that we're keeping them. Or if you get a request for a public record, you need to make sure that you reach out to us, and we'll create it in our system. And then we will release those records. I mean, we might have to ask you for those records, but we'll release them out of our system. That way, we have a record of it, and we're tracking it.

There is there are very strict laws about public records, and we have to fulfill them within a reasonable time frame. So, you know, the moment you get them, if you can let us know that way, we can kind of be tracking that. It could it it can really be anything. You know, if you're commenting on a Facebook post about something that will be related to your board service, an agenda item that's coming before you, something like that, that can be a public record. So just be mindful of that when you're, you know, interacting with people.

So what about, like, notes taken during the meeting?

So notes, if they're not shared, are not public records, But the moment that you are sharing them with the with the public, then you are creating a public record. So they're they're considered, like, draft notes.

Well, like, for example, I something comes in my head. I'm gonna forget it. If I don't write it down, I write it down, then I ask a question. So it's that kind of a comment.

Well, the question's gonna become a public record in the video camera and that kind of stuff. The same. But if you're you know, if you take those notes, you go send them to somebody and you're like, this is, you know, this is what I think about this item. Those are public records and we you know? But generally speaking, those will not become public record unless shared. I mean, there could be some minor exceptions to those rules, court order kind of things. You know? But

I don't have to keep them for seven years or anything.

No. I mean, I would recommend keeping them. Okay. You know? At least your service. Okay. But generally speaking, no. You know, I mean, if if you had that note and you kind of just, like, showed it to Benjamin, you know, or, like, obviously, for me, it would be Benjamin, but for you, Carol, then, you know, that could that makes it a public record at that point. So I don't think you're doing that, so I think you're probably okay. Yeah.

I know. Yeah.

Alright. Yeah. All correspondence, email, that kind of stuff. There's no unfinished business. So if you're sharing drafts of things, those become public records.

And, yeah, you have your own city email address. We do keep track of those. So, like, if we got a a records request for just city email address emails, we could pull them ourselves. If you get them for, like but we will generally if they ask for personal and city emails, then we would reach out to you and say, like, we need your personal emails related to this if you have any. I'm sure most of you guys are operating under your city email.

We suggest that because that keeps it on the server. Mhmm. Less likelihood that you could lose those emails and an easier retrieval for us. Florida sunshine law, this is based on the premise that, basically, Florida wanted to make sure that everything was in the sunshine. People aren't operating in backrooms, making decisions before they get to the day, So you guys have to keep everything kind of in the public, and that requires three different rules, which is that they have to be open to the public, the meetings.

Reasonable notice has to be given, and minutes of the meetings must be taken. Because of that, outside of this room, you guys should not be communicating about anything that will come before you. Your discussion of that will be out here. So, you know, if you guys I guess, even if you go out, like, say, go out for drinks or something, you guys are friends outside of this. That's fine.

You just can't talk about any agenda items that are gonna come before you. Another thing, like, if you guys ever email, if you try to, like, blind cc everyone, if you were going to I don't know. Like, I'm not gonna be here for some reason. That's why we actually do it on the, like, board email so that you guys don't have that option to just, like, reply all. That way you're not now you're, like, in a meeting with each other.

And if you're talking about an agenda item, then it could become a Sunshine violation. So just be careful of that kind of stuff. Even Facebook posts, like, if you start communicating back and forth with a board member somehow, even if it's, like, a couple down, you know, you're possibly violating the Sunshine Law. So just be careful of that kind of stuff. Yeah.

It can't the public meetings can't be held at anywhere that discriminates. I mean, we always have them here in the chamber, so you guys don't have to worry about that. And, yeah, what I that's what I just said. Ethics and financial disclosures, you guys are always required to do that ethics training video. Also, the financial disclosures, if you guys have any questions about that, like, what forms you have to file, I know it got switched from, like, being sent to your home versus online recently, so that caused a little bit of confusion with people.

So if you have any issues, if you wanna call over to the clerk's office, I do have their number at the end of this presentation. So just make sure you're keeping up to date with that. Okay. Voting issues. Voting conflicts.

If you guys ever have any fear well, what is a voting conflict? And I guess, you know, if you're if you're here and you don't have a voting conflict, you have to vote on it unless either you have a voting conflict or there is one Florida statute exemption two eighty six point zero one two, which actually allows you if in a quasi judicial setting, there is the appearance of impropriety. The whole world knows that you worked for that company and you did some other I mean, that actually might be a regular voting conflict. I would recommend you call me anyway. But, like, if for some reason people think that it's a potential voting conflict, it's actually not a voting conflict, but it looks it looks kind of bad for you to vote, there is two eighty six zero one two that you can rely on.

It's not a required abstention, but it is something that you can can do. If there's anything that's close, would just recommend you call me. I'm always always happy to hear conflict questions before the meeting. You know? If you guys can get them to me in advance, you know, that's why we always, like, encourage you to read your agenda when you get them.

That way, you can just see, like, have I ever had any, like, any dealings with this this person company? Is this in my neighborhood? Is this my next door neighbor? Is this gonna affect me financially? Those kind of things so that you can make sure that you're doing that in advance to try to if we need to, we can get you an ethics opinion, or we can do some research and see if there's some opinion that's already out there that we can provide you that meets that.

So what is it? You can't vote on anything that would ignore to you, a special private gain or loss. So no matter if it's, you know, if it's helping you financially or it would hurt you financially, still an issue. Also, if it's any principal by whom you have been retained or that of any relative or business associate. So just keep that in mind.

It's this mouse. Misuse of public office. You you can't try to influence others to take action on your behalf or do something take action because of others because you're in your position. And for all of these people so I can send this out to you guys if you want so you can look at it a little closer. During your ethics training, you also have to acknowledge that you've read the ordinance too, which I can send to you as well.

Crop misuse is basically just, like, with a wrongful intent. So you may have met the other ones, like, you may misuse it. You can't do that to help somebody out. This one's you can't do it with a wrongful intent. So alright.

What what do you do if you make the voting conflict? Obviously, I told you, please call our office. If I can't help you, somebody else there will. We will make sure that we either are able to get you an opinion, find you a a a letter, or we figure out something to tell you, you know, we think it's in your best interest to abstain or we think you know? So if you are told that you do have a voting conflict or you know yourself that you have a voting conflict, you just need to make the oral declaration on the dais, and then you say, like, a brief description of the conflict, and then you will just walk out there and not have any participation with it.

Then you'll have to file the form eight b, which the city clerk's office can help you with. That's within fifteen days. So just after you've done that, I mean, you might be like, I'm all done, but you still got the form to file. So just make sure you do that. Again, there's our office number.

You're always welcome to call, email, whatever you need. Gifts law, you know, it's always it's always best to not accept any gifts that seem like they're related to your service. You know, you wanna gifts can only be accepted up to a $100 in the aggregate, and then you have to actually report them. So just make sure that, you know, that that can add up. You know, you're doing coffee with someone five times, and then somehow it's a $100 because went to Starbucks. You know? So just keep that in mind. You really wanna be cautious of doing that.

Wasn't it 50? It went up inflation?

I'm not sure when it did. It's been a 100 for a little while, but maybe that that might be state $50. So if there's

a I know there's

a lot of

dollar limit somewhere on there.

The lobbyist one, actually, I think might be $50. So okay. Yeah. Report gifts. We got that. I already talked about that. Quasi judicial hearings. Obviously, you guys kinda know what's going on in a quasi judicial hearing, but you are sitting here acting somewhat like a judge. That's why they call it quasi judicial. You are while it doesn't have the exact same evidence provisions, the the applicant does have due process.

So that's why we go through it in a very, you know, matter of fact way. We have the judicial procedures read. We have the applicant the introduction of the file, the applicant, and then it goes back to staff. And then, you know, they get the opportunity to rebut. There's public comment, and then it comes to the discussion. The reason is, obviously, like, these are these are, like, their private this is their private building, their private land. You know? We're applying law to them. So we wanna make sure that they have the ability to, you know, give their case, really. So because of that, this becomes a lot more formal.

This can be appealed. In this case, it gets appealed to the commission, but then the commission's decision can be appealed to circuit court. Then they get to decide whether we met the requirements. Ex parte communications, you guys know the drill with that, but I know some people I walked by it. If you're walking by for the purpose of of this this meeting, then it's definitely an ex parte communication.

If you're walking by it because you live in that neighborhood, it's not an ex parte communication. Ex parte communication is really you're doing something because you're reviewing this application, you wanna make a decision on it. And it really applies to any any communication that you have, whether it's a applicant or it's a friend, it's a somebody who works at the historic society, who works at the city, you know, you gotta disclose those. That way, again, because of due process, they're just allowing the applicant to know all the things that you guys know. Okay.

So I think when I was talking about, like, how to just apply these things, I think sometimes, you know, it comes easy to be like, oh, I like the way that looks or I think that's a good project. I I appreciate what you guys are doing. That sounds like a great thing. But when it comes down to it, you wanna apply, you know, the guidelines, the secretary of the interior standard, the historic guidelines, the LDRs, the sorry, that I'm blanking on that word, visual compatibility standards, which are part of the land development regulations. So I've got some of them up there.

Just thinking, like, you know, if you have something where it's like, let's say somebody adds ornamental, like, ornamental things on the window treatments or something like that or near the windows, on the door. You've got like a masonry modern house and that doesn't really fit within the historic guidelines. So, when you're seeing that, a lot of you guys, a lot of people, not just just you guys. I'm just saying in experience that a lot of people will say, you know, like, that doesn't really fit. I don't like that.

This that looks out of place to me. But if you look at your report, you're always gonna have these standards listed out. So you can really lean into those standards. Make sure that you're saying, you know, this is giving a false sense of historic development. That wasn't there. That doesn't fit with this project. You know, you're trying to act like this is partially Mediterranean, and it's actually a masonry modern that was built in the seventies or something. You know? I don't know. But

You're doing really well, though.

But yeah. I've been paying attention. Okay. Thank you. I appreciate it.

So so I think just going back to always kinda looking through your report and making sure that you're seeing, like like, even, like, the variance standards. When you are looking to determine whether variance is met, you wanna go back to those and say, hey. I actually don't think that this I think that this would affect the neighboring properties. And for that reason, if it's not meeting all of them, the variance isn't allowed. So just going back and actually stating the reason in the land development regulations or the standards, it's going to make it so that you have I know this one doesn't necessarily go to court.

It goes to the commission. But if you were on, like, a board of adjustment, which does go straight to circuit court, this makes it so that you have defensible decisions. Like, I didn't say I just like it. I said, I think that, you know, the rhythm of solids to voids matches what it was in its historic character. You know? So I think, like, when you're looking at that and you're saying, okay, they've removed eight windows and now it looks completely different than what it was meant to be. Think about that standard, which actually comes in the visual compatibility standards and make and draw attention to that. You know? If you think that the massing is that this one? Or let's go with the height.

If you think that the height is too tall, you got visual compatibility standards that say, you know, the existing structures around it are all two stories and you wanna put in a four story building, that's that's not gonna fit with the landscape that we're here on, and it's not visually compatible in comparison or relation to the height of the other existing structures. So just making sure that you're kind of drawing the line between what you're seeing, which you guys are all like, have such great eye to all the things that are wrong with buildings and stuff. But if you can if you can or or great with buildings. Not even saying that it's necessarily like a negative or anything. But if you can point to the reason legally that that doesn't meet our land development regulations and that doesn't meet our visual compatibility standards or does, you know, all of those things help to support the record and show everybody, you know, we're not we're not just applying these willy nilly.

It doesn't matter if we like your project or not. We're making sure that we're protecting the historic preservation of the city, and we're applying the things that we're supposed to be applying, which is the land development regulations, visual compatibility standards, secretary of the interior, and the historic guidelines. I put them all in here. I think you guys kind of get the point. You know, open space open space between so, like, if you're looking at that, obviously, they were here for a variance.

So it doesn't really apply because they're they're not meeting this and they're asking to not meet it. So but if you were if you were seeing that at first and they were like, you're deciding whether they meet the open and you're gonna lean in on your rhythm of buildings on streets and see if the open space is visually compatible with those surrounding area. And I mean, to an extent, you kind of did that in the variance because you're like talking about whether it's urban and it's surrounded by other things. You know? And that kind of goes to it's a special condition that, you know, that property has.

So all these things, I'm just saying, like, when you honestly, the staff report always lays out all of these things. And if you just kind of choose the ones that fit with the thought that you're making, it will help create defensible decisions and that, you know, helps in the long run. And I know, again, it it goes to the commission for this and it's de novo review. But if you were in a scenario where you're on the Board of Adjustment or the commission, which then gets appealed straight to circuit court, those things get looked at by the court and they determine, you know, did did they give them due process? Did they have substantial competent evidence to make the decision that they did?

And you guys saying those things and saying why you're making the decision that you are and what you're basing it on will help make for a better record so that you can prove that you guys were, you know, following what you're supposed to be doing. And that's really it. If you guys have any questions, I tried to talk really fast, so hopefully I did.

I I was expecting longer.

So it's very good.

Awesome. Alright. Well, if you have any questions, again, please always reach out. I'm here, and so are a bunch of people in our office. So we're here for you, and I have a bunch of numbers and emails on here. I can send these to you guys after. That way you have it. Okay. And thank you guys so much.

So much.

Thank you.

No problem.

Alright. Any seeing no legislative items?

No. None.

Reports and comments?

So at the sorry. I'm not on record as I'm walking around. Oh,

yeah. Go for it. And this one?

At the diets, I believe Britney put the the year schedule And then there's also development services accomplishments. So it's just a quick two pager at a glance of the things that our department has accomplished in fiscal year twenty four, twenty five. I think one of the most impressive things is the number of building permits you see that we are processing. Now that our system is fully digital for permits and development applications, we were able to track the timing. I will say that we have applications that are sitting in the queue, meaning they're trying to get sufficient enough for development review.

And we are talking internally about how we can even improve that and make it easier for the applicants because we have some things sitting out there that we feel like they're all gonna drop at once. This is likely the reason why we didn't have many cases in December and January, and those meetings got canceled. But you can see here that the list 40 COAs were processed in the year, 21 approved administratively, 32 waivers and variances were analyzed. The overall department, 37,600 building inspections were done. So we really are cranking.

There's two day average turnaround for our review with permits. That's the whole department. And then development applications of one of our biggest numbers are in the ZCU and BTR. So this is when somebody wants to come into the city and open a new business or move their business, they have to get a business tax receipt. We process 3,899 business tax receipts, for all businesses in the city.

91 sidewalk cafe permits, five tax exemptions, 13 Platts. The requirements for Platts change at the state level too, so that's going to become more of a ministerial task, administrative level. And then you can read a little bit more about the LDRs and the planning studies and community initiatives that we've undertaken. Our next meeting is March 4. I do not know what's on the schedule yet for that meeting.

So again, if we end up having to reschedule, we always look first to the third Wednesday of the month. That's our backup day, and I will ask availability on email. So I appreciate it. A lot of you email me separately and let me know that you're coming to the meeting. You don't have to, but I do appreciate that you do that. Or, you know, you let me know when you're not coming to the meeting, which helps us plan. We we can't require or ask you to do that, but we appreciate the courtesy that you do that. And then I think, mister Dimitrescu, do you have an announcement to make? Yeah.

Okay. I'll stand up. Now this is my last attendance to the meeting. That was a super interesting experience. I learned a lot and I appreciate everybody. I'm I'm traveling abroad for a year or two. So obviously, I cannot we're not Zooming that much. So Yeah. So yes. But this is We did the Zooms.

We did do Zooms. That's right. Doing well.

For COVID. But I really appreciate my time here. This is not the only board that participated. I was in adjustment and spread about it. And it was always very, very interesting.

I'm not sure exactly how much I brought in, but it's it's very nice that the cities has this concern and good people to to try to find the best way to do the the right thing for the city and the cities. Cities, it shows it, I think. You know? It's a it's a it has a nice sort of develops nicely even though not everybody likes it, but I think in compared to other cities, it's very powerful, very complex, and kind of nice mixture of things. You know?

Personally, I I hope to be more control about some of The US historic buildings. I'm sorry for Swinton. Swinton is, like, left out, and a lot of buildings there will be gone, and that's not nice, not good. I mean, beautiful properties. But I understand the reason. A little bit of Atlantic also is having some problems, some of the buildings that they're not becoming they're not protected, so not exactly sure how well they'll do. But, overall, I think it's a it's a it's a very successful development, the city. I I I appreciate. I like it. And as a kind of I'm not sure to say, like, a funny note.

I I went to school, obviously, almost fifty years ago. So we study ecology back then. That was part of it. I didn't understand much. But at that time, there was a very talented architect in in that school. This is in Chile, not here. And he was creating those cartoons that they were very, very funny and very to the point. And I cannot not remember his he has one that, for me, it's a resonance. I I had to kind of bite my tongue not to and to vote in a certain way because it's was reasonable. But I I I remember that cartoon a lot.

There was a small, you know, drawing showing a view of a city from far, far away, full of just buildings everywhere, and windows, windows, windows everywhere. And far away, there was a window open, and there was this grandmother knitting on a on a desk and nothing else. You know? Can see just buildings and little windows and this one person. And the text saying, like, son, I I they said on the radio, the spring is here. Why don't you go out and buy a plastic flower?

That's great.

That's that. Well, thank you to all.

Well, as chair, I wanna thank you very much for your service, and your comments are very much appreciated. So thank you so much.

I hope that you will sorry, Carol. Do you wanna say something?

I just said safe travels.

Yes. Yes.

Yeah. I'm I'm going to France, actually.

Kind of hope that you maybe will send a photo here and there so we can give the board updates, like where in the world is Vlad to do the rescue.

Why not? Why not? Actually, I'm going to a region that I did not know well, and it's kind of remote in France. I mean, remote, but not, but it's, like, not so urbanized. It's just villages, small villages everywhere.

Love to see the pictures, architecture,

the history. I'll definitely I have tons already.

Yeah. Send us some. And then at the each meeting, I'll put a picture to Okay.

I'll I'll try

in the world is glad. Exactly.

Exactly. Well, wish everybody luck and a good Thank you. Good future. Right?

Yeah. I wanna say thank you so much too. And I I Michelle and I were talking about how you've always been, like, willing to learn anything that's before you and, like, we tell that we can always tell that you take this very seriously. And, you know, we are gonna miss you here on this board and we appreciate your service. So thank you very much.

Well said.

So is that vacancy being filled this We're month

working on it. City clerk's office handles that. It has to be a qualified professional because Vlad, there's five of you and without Vlad we don't have five. So the city clerk's office is reviewing their applications. If any of you know anybody that would be from the qualified backgrounds, please encourage them to apply. You can do that on the city's website to apply for a new board member position. So if you know someone, tell them.

They have to be an architect or a realtor of some type or

Lawyers estate aren't actually in the list for our board, but GC, architect, engineer, landscape architect, historian, planner. I think that's everybody, but real estate professional is not there anymore. That was taken out.

Oh, okay. Alright.

The code was changed to align with the requirements for the state of Florida. Okay. I promise. I think it's the maybe you could speak more to this. In previous a previous mix of the board, when mister Chard was on the board, he was asking about a tour of Sunday Village. Mhmm. And I think Tom Wernke is going to

be doing tours. He's he's had several of them already.

Yeah. I saw there were several dates. Mhmm. If you all aren't signed up for the historical society's e blast, they send a nice email out with their upcoming events. And if anyone's interested, you can go walk Sunday Village. It's open to the public. The main block is right now. But believe if you're interested in the the guided tour, it's mister Wernke with Historical Society. We'll be doing a guided tour. Yeah. Just be careful if you are together amongst other board members that you don't talk board business.

And let our office know if you think that there are gonna be more than one of you together. We may need to notice that.

The tours are offered, you know, a couple times a month. And it's Sunday Village, a one a, and Atlantic Avenue, three different tours. There is a cost for board or for members. It's like $10. And for general public, it's like 15. So future members. Okay.

That was all I had. I don't know if anyone else has anything that they'd like to share.

Guys, real quick, I just had I noticed there was a lot of land clearing up by the McKinney old McKinney's old place.

I noticed that too. Is there any There's no application in process.

Okay. Alright. Yeah. It's Tunerville Trolley's cartoonist.

What was it? Fontane Fox.

Fontane Fox. It's right over on the south end of the public beach. Just south. North end. Just south. North end. North end. Sorry. George Bush. Right

right there.

Right. Yeah. Just south of George Bush.

Is that Frank

and Kenny's old house?

Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

It looks like they cut the

tree house. That used to be the tree house. Yeah. The house until he came before the board to remove the tree house.

Well, he he installed that tree house without approvals to begin with. And

they they had to fight to get it built.

Yes. And he put plumbing and electric in?

Oh, Oh,

yeah. Yeah.

It was a whole thing. I've read through that file. It was quite a bit, lawsuit and everything. And then now it's gone, I think.

The tree house is gone. Yeah.

Yeah. And then all the sea greats