Planning and Zoning Board - Regular Meeting

Chair whenever you're ready.

Alright. We'll call to order the site plan review and appearance board meeting of 03/25/2026. So we can call roll.

Annette Gray is absent. Christina Morrison? Here. Cynthia Lloyd? Here. Wensky Villanois?

Here.

Rhett Talbot?

Here.

Nicholas Kapola? Here. Jose Alvarez?

Here. Alright. If we can get a motion to approve the agenda?

So moved. Second.

Follow.

K. Nick Gray is absent. Christina Morrison?

Yes.

Cynthia Lloyd? Yes. Wensky Villanois?

Yes.

Brett Talbot?

Yes.

Nicholas Capolo?

Yes.

Jose Alvarez?

Yes. Alright. Get a motion to approve the minutes of 01/28/2026.

I'll move to approve the minutes of

you have a correct correction? No.

So moved. Second? I'll second.

Thank you. Oh, you were quick.

Okay. Nick Gray is absent. Christina Morrison?

Oh, yes.

Cynthia Lloyd? Yes. Wensky Villanois?

Yes.

Rhett Talbot?

Yes.

Nicholas Capola? Yes. Jose Alvarez?

Yes. Alright. If we can get a swear in of the public, please.

President Gillespie, please stand and 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? I do not. It is.

Thank you. Please be seated.

Okay. So we'll go

over the oh, any comments from the public not pertaining to the items on today's agenda? Seeing none, we'll go into the quasi judicial hearing items. Go ahead and read the rules. This hearing shall be conducted in accordance to with the city of Delray quasi judicial rules. The applicant and the city shall be permitted to present their case.

The public shall be allowed to speak three minutes each or maximum of six minutes if the person represents an organization or group of people who are present but agree not to speak. The board members, staff, and the applicant may be allowed to cross examine 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 personal views as to whether a project is a good project or not nor may a decision may 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 the law, the comprehensive plan and the land development regulations. Alright.

So we'll move to our only item for today's evening, eight a, which is 540 West Atlantic Avenue, Dunkin' Donuts. Yep. Has there been any ex parte on behalf of the board members?

No. Nope. Nope. Okay.

I've spent about twenty minutes walking the property and I had communication with staff. Okay.

Yes. My apologies. I did have a question conversation with staff. Okay. Understood.

Alright. So we will now allow

the city

to enter the project file into the record.

Good evening, board members. Alexi Howell for the for the record. I'd like to enter file number 2024Dash152 for level two site plan modification, and the applicant Michael Ventura, the architect is here today to present.

Okay. My name is Mike Ventura. I'm the architect of record, and I'll be brief. I know this has been going on for a while, so I'll go through these slides as quick as I can. This is a subject property. This is obviously on the Southwest 6th Avenue and Atlantic Avenue. That is the survey. This is what the property looks like facing Atlantic. This is the rear of the property, west side. This is the east, and that is the oh, that's the west.

I'm sorry. So the idea here was originally, just to give you a brief history, the franchisees were gonna they took over the property. We were gonna basically put Dunkin' Colors on it and take over and and start operating like the business that was there before. But when we started looking at the property, the trusses were all termite ridden, completely rotten, and it wasn't worth investing more money to do finishes on the inside without redoing the roof. So when we decided the roof was gonna have to come off, the the concept was to square off the building and try to make it as close as possible to a Dunkin' within the parameters.

So these are some of our neighbors that to our west, east, south, and everybody's, I'm sure, familiar with. This is the new site plan. Basically, what brought us here was, again, when we were gonna just basically take over the existing business, building, the lot was is as it was. It was as it looks like today. And when we tried this do it as minimal as possible without too much causing waves, it it things started evolving with, obviously, zoning and and requirements and and going back and forth.

And we'll I'll go back to that in a minute. So in let me see here. Oh, this is way back. I mean, there's a I wanna show you. We came on oh, this is this is missing some some slides.

Oh, here. So on February 10, presented to this this presentation was presented to the downtown advisory board. We had a, I think, a unanimous, you know, a positive outcome with that, and the next step was we were still going back and forth with zoning with some zoning issues of requirements required for glazing and textures and colors and stuff like that that we still had to fit you know, we were still working on. But for the most part, we were, you know we thought we were close. But then the site came into play, and then the site also threw another curveball, which created a lot of, you know, additional work and and back and forth.

That's where we are today. So today, this is the the evolving of from the the the downtown advisory board to today. There's we are still some shy of some zoning requirements in regards to glazing on Atlantic and on

6th

Avenue. And and we've been going back and forth with Alexa and trying to get see where we are because any more glazing, it's I mean, for example, the the the area in the on a I I like avenue that has a red line is kinda hard to see, but that would be a basically a false window because that would be back a house. But they would give the glazing, you know, quoting quote It would would make us meet our quota for the glazing. So that's where we're at, you know, basically, I think pretty much down to the to the wire with the the zoning and and requirements as far as, if I'm not mistaken, some of the small details that we gotta clean up, I guess, and decide which way we're gonna go. So for the most part, that is you know, and this is the interior.

I don't know if that really matters for this hearing, but, I figured I'd show it anyway. So in case we had to come back to it. These are the street elevations from the side views that we we also presented. This is a landscape. We have the landscape Austin here from Thomas Insight Studios that's gonna, you know, answer any landscape issues that we may have or questions. And this is just a couple elevations that they they presented for this project. If you have any questions, I'll be happy to take them.

Alright. Thank you.

Let's do it right here.

Okay. Good evening, board members. I'm gonna go through this really quickly. Everything was detailed in the staff report. But this is a level two site plan modification for renovation of an existing building for Dunkin' Donuts at 540 West Atlantic.

So this is a subject property location. It's just west of, Swinton on Atlantic, the corner of Southwest 6th Avenue and West Atlantic, just south of the the fire station and the police department. So this is, in the CBD Central Business District within the West Atlantic, subdistrict with a overlay of the West Atlantic. It is, primarily surrounded by CBD except for the north with the CF Zoning District. And, again, the existing use is the building is existing, and there was previously a restaurant, but it's currently vacant.

And so the proposal is to add a restaurant. Really quick with surrounding areas, again, to the north is the fire station to, directly to the east is, the new tropical barbecue house, and, to the south is a, I think, 18 multifamily unit, and then to the west is vacant. So a little background. The original building was constructed in 1984 as a one story and evolved as a continuation of multiple restaurants. So we have the dates below.

It started in May of a restaurant. In April, it was Didi's Conk bar. And then in 2018 is where the Bear shack came in, and, it's currently vacant. And so these are the existing conditions. The Northwest, just, these are actually taken today. So we have actual existing conditions for you guys today. We have the south elevation, which is the rear of the building, the northeast elevation, which is the it is not the northeast. Is it yes. It is. And then the east elevation with the Rica Palms.

So as the applicant stated, the the owner wanted to come in to renovate the building and do some minor modifications to the elevations and then submit a building permit later for the the resurfacing of the parking lot. But with with our LDRs requirements, you would have to come in for a level one site plan modification. So he was advised to submit those two modifications for the elevations and the resurfacing of the parking lot together in this level two site plan modification, which includes the addition of a walk in cooler. And so, as you can see, the existing conditions are heavily deteriorated. There's a lot of potholes.

There are no dedicated parking spaces. The vegetation has really died off around the buffering area and is very unstable and unsafe. And so hence why the site is really heavily improved, as you can see in the site plan later on. Here we have three distinct pictures of the existing black olives that are on the perimeter that are visible from the right of way. I just took those today, so they're very lush and landscaping, but there could be some maintenance issues that could be taken care of to, you know, beautify the area.

And here again are some existing conditions of the building. So these are just quick snapshots just kind of showing how the roof and the exterior are really deteriorating. The middle picture is the enclosure towards the rear that kind of screens the AC air conditioning units and things like that. And so here we have the request for the Level 2 site plan modification to add a 168 square foot walking cooler, modify the building elevations, and to improve the site. So as part of the review, the application was reviewed with performance to chapter three, which includes land use, concurrency compatibility, consistency with the comprehensive plan, and the LDRs.

And so overall, it all meets. There are no issues. And so I'll just skip right through that. Here are the site plan requirements. We looked at height, setbacks, even streetscapes, storefront frontage requirements, civic open space, parking, and parking as well.

So overall, I'll just give a quick overview. So as the application was coming in for review, it does have to come into compliance with parking dimensions, driveway aisles, landscape islands. You know, we did ask them to provide a dumpster enclosure since this is a restaurant, didn't have one. So all these improvements the applicant has provided and has met code. There are no deficiencies in meeting the LDRs except the existing nonconformities, is on-site, which is the setback at the corner, which is indicated with the eight foot and then the 12 foot, which are actually just the eight foot, which requires a minimum of 10 foot setback.

And then there's the other nonconformity about the glazing that the applicant highlighted. But overall, all the site meets all the LDR requirements. Even for parking, there are nine spaces provided. No civic open space is required on-site. No streetscape was triggered for this review, so we didn't look at streetscape.

The height is meeting. They're providing bicycle parking that was not there before. And, again, the dumpster enclosures provided on-site, and they're providing a safe route to the building from the ADA space, which was not provided before. And as part of the review as well is that on the south side of the property along the property line, there are existing utility lines. And so part of the review, we did request a, a utility easement.

And so, the applicant has provided that easement, and we are going to ask for a 10.5 foot utility easement along that area, which also includes existing conditions of trees and a fence. So here we have the landscape plan. So all the tree most of the trees are that are existing are staying on-site except for one mahogany on the south end is being removed, and it is being mitigated by one silver buttonwood. I've highlighted some of the the existing black olive trees in green, and then the rest of the proposals are heavily, you know, lushed landscaping all around that's been improved. So overall, the landscape plan is consistent with the LDRs, and there are no significant issues except all the wonderful improvements that are being provided.

So, here we are going to the architectural elevations. The Board has these criterias to review the elevations that it's in conformity, in good taste, and in harmony with the surrounding area. And so the proposal consists of removing the roof into some of the windows and the doors. Currently, the opening percentage is 54%. Within the CBD, there's a requirement to have at least 80% openings along the street.

So right now, they're at 54. And here's another elevation just showing again, these are the modifications, removing of these windows to put impact windows, the removal of the the roof, and then the enclosure towards the rear is being removed for the walk in cooler. And here's the proposal. So it started with Submitle one, which had a mazering modern architectural style. It is one of the seven approved styles.

However, it would require city commission approval. And so we advise the applicant if you did not want to go to city commission for the masonry style approval, you could choose one of the other five or four that are not part of the list that require city commission approval, is Art Deco and and Maisery Modern. So they went with the Florida vernacular, which was beautifully executed. They have the prominent tower feature with the metal roofing that is overhanging. And then the opening requirement did increase to 56%.

So it is bringing it up into or decreasing the nonconformity. Received. And so here we are with the west elevation, again, it's a middle one and then to today's product, number seven. And here we have the east elevation, which is towards tropical, and then the south elevation. So here today, we have the border options, move to approve, approve with conditions, to deny or continue with direction.

Thank you. Thank you. Is there anybody from the public that

would like to Any rebuttal? Is there any rebuttal? Okay.

Any Okay. Sorry. Yeah. Any comments from the public to speak? Any rebuttal to the city's presentation, Mr. Ventura?

Question for the city. Alyssa, you mentioned streetscape wasn't triggered. What can you expand on that, please?

Yes. Gladly. So in the CBD section 4,413 EB1, it requires streetscape designs to be the 15 foot. However, it's only applicable to new construction or relocations or additions that are 20% or equal to the the gross floor area of the existing building. This did not trigger that 20% requirement.

Okay. So we'll move on to board comments. If you want, we can start with Mr. Talbot.

Okay. First, I'd express my gratitude to the applicant for going through such a long process. And it's a really good looking building. And I think any comments that I'm going to make, I want you to understand that I view this property as a really key component to the city as you enter it because you're gonna be the first property that we come into contact with after a long vacant stretch. And I think your architectural renderings are great.

Unfortunately, you're saddled, in my opinion, you're saddled with a landscape plan and trees on-site, which if we had our best desires might not be there. And in particular, I know some of these will get mitigated through pruning and repair, particularly the black olives. So I'm gonna start my comments on the on the black olives. So we've got one two three four five black olives, six black olives on-site. One of those black olives number Black Olive number seven looks like it was a kind of a secondary intention.

It just grew up. It wasn't placed there. I I would be willing to bet if we went back and looked at the site plan from 1984, they planted black olive two, six, eight, and probably one. And number seven has kinda just grown up. I'm gonna recommend I think that Black Olive doesn't need to be there, and that's that's one of my comments.

I'm also because of the because of the size and the canopy of those black olives, I think there are other vegetation on the property that are gonna have a hard time surviving. In particular, the existing foxtail palm that kind of is under the shade, and it's it's I was out there. It's a very small diminutive tree. I think landscape could do something with that. Either move it on-site would be a possibility.

The existing mahogany number 10. Aesthetically to me. It it's just in a bad location because it's gonna be crowded over again by that that big black olive number eight. And I know we're getting rid of that existing mahogany number 11. I would sure like to see if that existing mahogany could be moved possibly into the traffic triangle as a as a location to to give it an opportunity to thrive.

Another comment I have is I I'm I just think there's too many black olives on the site. I'm not in favor of black olive number one because I think that even if you cleaned it up, it's in such close proximity to the live oak, which is a a wonderful native tree. I think it's it can create problems for that that live oak. So I'd like to see something done in terms of replacing that black olive number one. My last comment is about the Saketia palm that's at the Northeast corner.

I'd really like to see us push for more inclusion of native species. A foxtail there, I think, would be better. I think that's all I've got for right now. I may come up with some other stuff. So those are my comments. I'm not sure how we're gonna work that into approvals, but we can hopefully, that'll start the discussion.

Okay. Thank you. Ms. Lloyd?

Yeah. So to go along with that, and and by the way, I echo the thank you. I think, yeah, it means a lot that you took that time and it's it's definitely, definitely thank you. My only comment with regard to the trees is I just wanna throw it out there, not necessarily whether we can accomplish it or not. But I think there's a problem citywide with replacing canopy trees with palms, and they're actually not the same coverage and benefit.

So I just I agree. It's not that I disagree with anything. I just think it's an important point that we put out because many times with development or redoing, a lot of times it's there's a movement to Palms for a variety of reasons, but they genuinely don't provide the same as as the canopy trees. So just a thought.

Okay. Thank you. Miss Morrison?

Okay. Well, thank you very much. We need a Dunkin' Donuts downtown. I'm glad you're bringing it back. Thank you. And the neighborhood's great. Police, fire, you know, all of us peons that work out there are really gonna appreciate this. So thank you. I just wanna remind the board that this is an existing site on an existing piece of land that's been there since in the eighties. And it does have beautiful shade trees, which our city needs shade trees. So that said, my concern is the East side I'm sorry, the south side of the building. In past when Red Bears was there, it was always a mess where that lattice area was. It was that's where the trash was. It was always dirty. It smelled, you know, all that stuff.

So, that's where the cooler is gonna go. Is that correct? So that'll be gone. That situation would be corrected. Okay. Great. The fence on the again, on the south side facing that divides the apartments from this site. Is that fence belong to this property or to the apartments? Do we know that?

Yes. On the survey, indicated the fence to be on the subject property.

Okay. Because that fence is really important. That that landlord tries so hard to keep those apartments nice, and it's been a battle, you know, when bears was there and and in past uses. So the preservation of that fence is really important to keep that property divided from the commercial use adjacent. Is there gonna be outdoor seating on the front like they're attached? Is that foreseen?

Not maybe the applicant wants to answer that.

Yeah. We haven't decided to see what it looks like right now.

Can you come up to the front? Introduce yourself, please.

Mike Patel. I'm a franchisee of Dunkin' Donuts. We have multiple we have all the locations in Delray Beach when it comes to Dunkin'. We haven't like, this particular site itself, like, when we first went in there, the rent was great, and that's the reason why we moved in there. But then when we realized that there was, like, a lot of work to do on this property to bring it up to par, you know, my profitability went from, like, 20% to, like, 3% with the amount of money we're gonna be putting into this place because our our original cost idea was maybe spending, like, $5,600,000, but then I think it ballooned up into more than what it's supposed to be.

So we're gonna try to make it as best as we can, you know, because that's what we're known for. I'm still working on another property in Delray too to, you know, beautify it. But our our passion is Dunkin' Donuts, and we wanna make sure that works really well. I I know there was a couple of comps on the trees. I you know, I I love the greenery, but when you have too much of the canopy trees, it kinda makes a big mess with all the leaves and everything. That's the thing we fought for at the other store that we had too. That was right across the street. So, I mean, I I like palm trees better because it's just, you know, nice little without too much maintenance on them. So anything that can, you know, help us will be great. But we we are gonna look for outdoor city if we have area.

We have to first see how it progresses. And, you know, if it does well, then, you know, we'll ask for the city if we can add, like, really nice outdoor decor. But until now, we don't know how it's gonna be, so I can't foresee outdoor seating until Okay. We realize what's gonna happen in that area.

Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Situation with the eight foot setback on the east the North Northwest corner, I believe it is, and the glazing, don't they get any points for using stabbing an existing building and or or do you have to really

Yes. That's an existing non conformity that is allowed to exist. So this is not a problem. We just identified it as one of the points that is a non conforming regulation, but it is allowed to continue because they are not rebuilding. It's just like the scope did not trigger a full compliance to the code. So

the non conforming will be allowed to continue because

of the

That's correct.

Perfect. The glazing, I'm sorry, there was one other thing. The setback. Is that okay?

That's correct. Yeah. The structure is existing already.

Okay. Because they've been at this for a couple years now, it would be nice to let them go.

Just to clarify, it's not increasing the nonconformity to the setback because it's existing. It's existing.

And you're accepting the existing. Correct. Perfect, thank you. That's all. Okay.

Yes. Definitely. Happy to see you, Duncan. I have no questions, but I will, out of respect for the experience with the landscaping, I will be open to a conversation to make that better if need be.

But that's all.

I'm okay with everything. I don't think given the the existing conditions and the

great architectural work, I think it's it more

than

suits everything else. So I'm okay with everything.

Thank you very much. So I'll I'll put in my my 2¢ on the landscape given that, hey. I'm I'm I'm the landscape architect here on the board. So I I certainly appreciate your sentiment with the with the black olives. You know, those are definitely nut trees that nowadays you you would recommend for parking lots.

They're messy. They drop a lot. But I do think at the same time we have to recognize their current size and the canopy value that they bring to the city. So switch them out for something else, would just take, in my opinion, it would take a lot of years to bring something to meet the size that would match something to what's there now. Would, you know, even though it's something that we typically don't plant near parking lots anymore nowadays, it very common in the 80s and 90s, you know, there's been a lot of lessons learned with you know, those type of trees in in parking lots.

But I would I would opt to to keep them just based on the on the size that that you have.

Can I just clarify? Yeah. So the only tree that I've the large canopy is black olive number one. Black olive number seven is a little understory tree that's getting choked out by the canopy of the others. So I'd at least like to give the applicant the opportunity to get that out of there so he doesn't have to worry about the maintenance of that.

What they what's labeled here is a 14 foot black olive. My again, back to that black olive number one at the entrance, I just think we could do better by you know, I again, I I appreciate the idea that it's gonna take time for something to grow up, but we've already got there's already such substantial canopy on that property. Plus, you have that the live oak that streets that's on the streetscape. I I just feel like the presence of my personal opinion is the presence of that black olive number one at the entrance is unnecessary because of the presence of the live oak and the presence of those three other, you know, really big trees, which hopefully when pruned and maintained are are are gonna look a heck of a lot better. So those are my two black olive and issues.

Understood. Yeah. I mean, I don't and and I guess to to mister Bennett, it there wouldn't be anything that would allow us to to recommend changing the existing conditions or I'm not I'm not sure.

So the landscape plan is before you. So even if they're existing, it is still part of your purview. The board's job is to evaluate the plan and determine if the plan is compliant with the LDR. So if the board could make that determination that some of these trees or the current trees in our landscape plan do not meet the code or we start getting to what it should be, that's when we get into that design from the deus idea that you hear us say sometimes where we can't necessarily tell the applicant what would be we think a better plan. And remember too, you're speaking as a board on this application, not as individuals.

So it would be a board Yep. Decision. But I believe the landscape plan, if if the applicant proceeds for without any modifications and this is approved, the landscape plan should be generally a level one or a level two site plan modification. So if they did want to remove one tree, if it it was excessive underneath the LDRs, they could do that potentially after the meeting through an administrative process rather than having to come back

to the board as well. Understood.

What's your as a landscape architect, what's your feeling about that mahogany and its location, and could that be moved to a better location? Because they're they're they're losing one mahogany that's already below 50% DBH. And that one is just aesthetically, it it's kind of in a no man's land because it's it's gonna be sitting and I'm looking at this from an aesthetic Mhmm. Perspective. That's what I'm I'm trying to envision. What can we how can we guide the applicant to a plan that may actually be better long run that will require less be more aesthetically pleasing and more easier to maintain maybe even.

Hey. I'm Austin Scott. I'm a landscape architect. I figured I should talk about those two mahogany just because there is an existing sewer that runs under them. So I don't think relocation is really a viable option where we can kinda let it be as it is. And if it causes an issue long term with the sewer, we'd have to remove it. But I think if we tried to relocate it, it would be too dangerous.

Fair enough. So we didn't

wanna Okay.

Get involved in that.

That's good. Good. And if I may add, like, a keyword we just used here was the aesthetic. To go to your direction, that's not our responsibility, which would be designed from the diets as long as they meet the LDR. Is that correct? Or we believe

I mean, aesthetics in different parts of the LDR are within your purview. So I wouldn't just say generally aesthetics aren't. But from a landscape perspective, and I'm sure mister Glover knows the landscape code far better than I do if there's anything he has to add on that on that issue. But, yes, this would be, you know, placement, number, screening. Those types of things are generally what the LDRs address.

Understood. The the other question, maybe for for you and the the code for this particular zone, and it just keeps in my mind, but is there a percentage of native requirement for the understory? I know in some properties, it's like a 25% requirement. I don't

I don't

I can't recall on Okay. In in the CBD. I know for on the beachfront homes, there is.

Yeah. Hey.

How are

you guys doing? My name is David Blair. I'm the senior landscape planner. Yes. There is a requirement for native species when it comes down to trees. But like we were saying, we wanna really illustrate that this is an existing property.

Mhmm.

So pertaining to the code, which is 4.619, which is our tree preservation code, the code speaks about for the first step in my review is to preserve all trees on-site.

Mhmm.

Okay? So when they took that option of preserving trees on-site, that kind of overrode the requirement for the native species. As far as you're looking at the perimeter buffer to the east with tree number seven that's under there, the code requires trees to be every 30 on center. So that is a 90 foot square foot property line there. So it requires three trees to be there.

So removing that tree would trigger a noncompliance within the code. Like the landscape architect talked about is there's a 10 and a half foot easement on the south side, which utilities was really adamant about not putting any trees in there, not touching anything. They even had a we even had a battle with what type of species to plant for scrubs against the hedge because they didn't want anything that would be invasive to match with that that utility line. And so this property had to give the whole full 10 and a half feet because usually it'll be five on each side. So they went above and beyond to preserve this.

Hearing all the comments, yes, black olive trees are not great trees. Some people look at them as nuisance trees. Other cities have different plans to remove black olive trees. We do not currently have any standards for that. I am in my opinion, I think the biggest issue is is a maintenance issue. So I think something that maybe the board could talk about or suggest would be maybe adding a note to the plan as far as pruning these trees, doing a 25% maximum amount crown reduction. That way you can eliminate over the overhang on some of the existing trees, and I think that will provide enough aesthetic pleasing of what you guys sound like what you're looking for. Well,

yeah, that that was all my questions. So thank you. Thanks. So do do we want to entertain a motion? Sure.

Move approval of a level two site plan architectural elevations and a landscape plan to modify the existing facade and construct a 168 square foot walk in cooler addition with associated site improvements at 540 West Atlantic Avenue, finding that the request is consistent with the comprehensive plan. Comprehensive plan meets the criteria in the land development regulations subject to the condition that, the, owner provide necessary and ongoing pruning of the trees on-site.

Second. Second. Second.

Which who's second?

We're all excited to

vote. You

pick, Rochelle.

K. Nick Gray is absent. Christina Morrison? Yes. Cynthia Lloyd? Yes. Wensky Villanois?

Yes.

Rhett Talbot? Yes. Nicholas Capola?

Yes.

Jose Alvarez? Yes.

Alright. Thank you very much, board members. Passes. Passes.

Thank Thank you.

Alright. We'll move on to any reports or comments from staff.

No comments. Just a reminder of the upcoming meetings, April 22, May 27, June 24, always the fourth Wednesday of the month. Thank you. Appreciate it.

All

right. Thank you very much. Any comments for the board?

Just have to ask Rafika a question. Rafika, are we still taking comments for the capital improvement plan?

I can actually check with Rebecca and then come back to you. It's just I can answer to you tomorrow by email. That's fine. That's fine. Do a question I

can submit to?

There is an email usually, and I can share with you as well.

Okay. You.

Thank you.

That's it. Alright.

Thank you very much. And with that, we adjourn.

Thank you. Have a good day, everybody.

You also. Thank

you. Bye. It was

really great. Didn't get

a