City Commission - Regular Meeting

Uh, meeting the order regular meeting, like, or at the beach planning zoning board or Wednesday, August 5th, 2026. Sherry please.

All the road Jackson, so here he's here. He's pressing Daniela. I'm adore here. Darryl shadow here. Dan. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

Yeah.

Thank you.

Please rise for the pledge of allegiance.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Are there any additions, deletions, or requests to reorder tonight's agenda? No, Mr. Chair. Hearing none, I will entertain a motion to approve the agenda as presented.

Motion to approve.

All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Thank you. The approval of the July 21st regular meeting, are there Any corrections or amendments from the board at all? If not, then the minutes are approved as noted. At this time, I think we need to swear in anyone who plans to speak or give testimony regarding tonight's cases. If you plan to speak, please stand and raise your right hand. Our secretary Sherry will reveal.

We plan to give testimony this evening. Please stand and raise your right hand. Do you swear and affirm the testimony you give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, and so say yes? Yes.

Proof of publication, PCB project number 26-00001, ordinance number 2026-12, the pinnacle on 6. Do we have proof of publications for tonight's case?

Yes, we do. That's included in your packet.

Are there any withdrawals or postponements for tonight? Are there any board disclosures, ex parte communications regarding any of tonight's items? I need to hear from each board member. We have a no.

I have disclosure. I spoke with Bradley Miller on item B. I'm sorry. I have disclosure. I spoke with Bradley Miller on the pinnacle item, item B.

Turning give a brief synopsis of the nature of your conversation and a statement of whether or not it will impact your ability to be unbiased decision maker in this process.

brief synopsis is I spoke to him on the phone I asked him why the packet was so much more detailed than unincorporated county and. complemented the city staff on the thoroughness of their analysis and that conversation did not sway my ability to weigh in on this project whatsoever.

I also have a disclosure. I attended a neighbor, a meeting at the Hatch on this, you know, community presentation. I attended that presentation and listened to it. I do not think that it will have an issue on what, you know, on items here in this quasi-judicial hearing.

Thank you both for that. I appreciate it.

I have a question for the city. Is that okay? Sure. Is that allowed?

As board members, ex parte communications are discouraged and they are considered prejudicial unless you disclose them and are able to remain an unbiased decision maker in the process, basing your decision on what you hear at the hearing. And so as long as you can honestly make those disclosures and declare that you can remain unbiased, then that waives the bias and secures the proceeding.

Okay, so there's no rules on that. It's essentially just the ethics behind it, right? I was saying whether we have the judgment, right? Is that what you're saying, ultimately?

Correct. Ultimately, you all are responsible for that. And if you feel like you can, some people decide that they want to stay away from any ex parte communication and they're stringent and adamant about that restriction for themselves because they don't want to put themselves in that position where they need to make disclosures or where they're their ability to remain unbiased would be questioned. Other people feel like they can have those conversations and it won't sway their bias one way or the other and they can base their decision on the hearing at no problem and that's not an issue for them. So that is a personal preference. And so long as you follow the statutory and code procedures for making those disclosures, then it's okay. Thank you very much.

One more, sorry. funding directly uh but that competition has already happened and they received funding and our project also received funding so there's no conflict that i believe i can be embedded in this review i just want to make sure that that there was previously i i had to recuse myself because we were still competing for funding but this case we're no longer competing we built that

I know there's been times where I have produced myself for certain things. Um, but listen to my fellow board members. I have no problem with moving forward. So I think they would like to continue. Um, I see on the agenda, there is no, um, old business. So we'll just go right to the new business, uh, under a, which is ordinance 2026 dash 11 consideration of an ordinance amending chapter 23. Land development regulations related to non conforming poll signs and establishing a definition for sign face. So, take this, let the staff explain this for us, please.

Good evening for the record, Scott Rodriguez plan and zoning and just a clarification. This isn't necessarily strictly for poll signs. This is going to be dealing with all non conforming signs. See. So the item before you is Ordinance 202611, which addresses legally existing non-conforming signs. This ordinance is intended to clarify the city's non-conforming sign regulations. It defines what constitutes a signed face, clarifies that replacing only a signed face is not considered an alteration requiring the sign to comply with current standards, current regulations, and removes the compliance headlines for legally non-conforming signs other than billed Under today's code, there's uncertainty as to whether replacing only assigned face constitutes an alteration requiring the entire sign to comply with current regs. This amendment is intended to resolve that ambiguity. This ordinance is intended to clarify the city's sign regulations. It allows routine replacement of the sign face while maintaining the existing requirements for structural modifications and preserving the city's overall sign rights. Staff is recommending approval that the City Commission approve Ordinance 202611 and that concludes my presentation.

Could you just clarify exactly what you mean by sign face so we all understand?

So try to give an example. Typically, one of the primary non-conforming signs that we deal with are pull signs. So what happens when a pull sign permit comes in for a change of the face? The current code requires them to replace the whole pole sign because it's prohibited. So they have to find another sign type, if you will, to have that sign. So basically what you're talking about is maintaining the pole. If no other structural alterations are made and you can go ahead and change the face, this code's just going to, this ordinance is going to allow to do that.

Just to change the face. Yes. Okay, I have questions from the board. One at a time, please.

Question here. So is this similar to the farmer's girl case where a new owner came in and came in and they had a poll sign. They had to replace that sign.

I think that's one of the examples. We've had a lot of these signed poll signs come in and oftentimes the applicant either doesn't do anything or they replace it. But they were technically supposed to be replaced a long time ago. But this is just going to allow the poll sign to exist for the code and just change the sign base.

Any other questions from the board?

It's all signs, all nonconforming signs.

One comment I can make is I speak with a lot of the business owners in the downtown Lake Worth. And I know this particular thing affected many small business owners that were told to take down their signs because they didn't make code. Then they had to replace it with like a $20,000 sign, apply for a grant from the CRA. So, you know, the businesses that have had these signs for decades, essentially. So that was very discouraging for a lot of the owners. And I definitely had some conversations about that. So to make it easier, I think this is a motion that probably should have been passed a long time ago, but is wonderful. It's brought up now and we all should pass.

Thank you. Anybody else from the board have any questions? Yeah, just so there's so structurally got a full sign. You're just assuming that structurally it's Stable and sound that they're able to replace the face without doing anything to the structural integrity of the pole.

Correct. And if the permit comes in and there's some structural changes and they have to comply with the current code, so that pole sign would have to come down.

Structurally integrity, you know, the structural integrity of that poll was sounded out to the new base.

Well, we review the permits as they come in. I mean, oftentimes we're reviewing what is before us. So, you know, unless we go out to do a site site visit, we're not sure on what the integrity is. So, yeah, we're relying on the plans that are submitted. To show a structurally sound. Permit application or full sign for the permit application and then we review based on sign lettering etc.

If I may add from my understanding and correct me if i'm wrong, it seems that this will be most beneficial for businesses who already been here, who had the signs like bali imports who's been here for decades right. Their their sign and the woman from the collect the collective was asked to take her sign down as well. you know, all these things hurt these small businesses. So if it's a new business, they'll have to apply for the permit, right, get it approved, correct? So I think this will be most impactful for the business that are already standing.

It's a combination of new and existing, yes.

Any other questions from board members? Any public comments on this ordinance at all? No. If not, then I'll just close that. And if there's no other board comments, I'll present and obtain a motion.

I will move to recommend the City Commission to adopt the proposed LVR tax amendments, including ordinance 2026-1.

Do I have a second? Second. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? 0.

And for the record, the member online also voted in favor of the item.

Okay, so here we go. ITEM B UNDER NEW BUSINESS, BEAR WITH ME ON THIS ONE. PZB PROJECT NUMBER 2601501, ORDINANCE 2026-12, CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST FOR A MIXED USE URBAN PLAN DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL FOR THE mixed-use urban plan development, residential only, major site plan conditional use permit, sustainable bonus incentive program, and affordable workforce housing program, and two waivers. The subject parcels are located in the mixed-use Dixie Highway, which is NU-DH zoning district, and have a future land use designation of mixed-use E, The proposed development will consist of two mid-rise residential structures, one five stories in height and one four stories in height, with a total of 92 dwellings. Units for property located at 610, 615, 617, 621, 622, 625, 626, 629 630 and 702 8th street so the pinnacle on six this is a comprehensive request that includes a mixed-use urban plan development major site plan conditional use permit and several incentive programs and two waivers um i just After the staff presentation, we will go with the applicant or any representatives and then questions from the board and then public comments. So we'll start off with staff.

Good evening. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, board members. Lauren Pross, principal planner with the Planning Preservation Division of Community Sustainability. The applicant, Pinnacle on 6th LLC, is requesting approval of the following items for the project, commonly known also as Pinnacle on 6th. They are requesting approval of a mixed-use urban plan development, which is an overlay zone that uses the base zoning for its basic construct. And then you can request approval for additional incentives that are authorized through various sections of the code. This proposal is to construct two buildings, one five stories in height and the second four stories in height. and there will be 92 dwelling units, all of which will be classified as affordable housing. They are also requesting approval of a major site plan to construct a residential development with more than 7,500 square feet and conditional use approval to establish a multifamily residential use greater than 7,500 square feet. and they are requesting approval through the Sustainable Bonus Incentive Program for additional density, intensity, which is the floor area of the building and height of the building, both buildings. The Affordable Workforce Housing Program, through that program, they are requesting additional density and intensity above the base zoning district, the mixed-use Dixie Highway zoning district, and the sustainable bonus program allowances. And within that program, it includes an affordable housing bonus of additional units based on the originally plotted subdivision of that neighborhood. So the original plotted lots, a lot of them have been combined into larger properties, but they are allowed to request approval for additional bonus density based on the number of plotted lots that were originally there. And then they can also request up to a 25% parking reduction. As part of a plan development, waivers of the standard regulations can also be granted, and this request includes two requested waivers. One to shorten the length of the parking stalls by two feet, and a second waiver to reduce the required five foot landscape strip adjacent to an alley to zero feet. And So the chair already went over the locational attributes in terms of address, but the property is located south of Sixth Avenue South, west of South Dixie Highway, and generally in the intersection of Seventh Avenue South and South H Street. The total site is 2.01 acres combined. Because of how the planned development regulations are written, we look at this property as a whole. And in fact, even though it's bisected by right-of-ways, it will be required for the ownership of the property to be unified. But parcel A is 47,250 square feet. Parcel B is 33,750 square feet. and parcel C is 6,750 square feet. The existing land use is a combination of vacant property and mixed residential uses, both single family and multiple family uses. And the current future land use designation is mixed use east. There is no change to that land use designation being requested. And the underlying zoning will remain mixed use Dixie Highway with a planned development overlay. So here we have the site plan. Again, you can see the property is bisected into three parcels. Building A is at the northwest side of the site on west of South H Street, and it will have 57 units and 62,234 square feet. It is proposed to be five stories in height, and that includes three stories of sustainable bonus, and plan development bonus. They are proposing 61 on-site parking spaces and 32 indoor bicycle storage spaces, as well as four exterior bicycle parking spaces. In this building, there will be a fitness room, an activity and game room, business center, and a covered open-air gathering space. And Building B, which is located on the east side of South H Street, this building is proposed to have 35 units and 34,728 square feet. This building is proposed to be four stories with a two-story sustainable bonus incentive, 39 on-state parking spaces, and four exterior bike spaces. And Parcel C is that small parcel south of Seventh Avenue South. That is a 6,750 square foot open space parcel that is proposed for an art sculpture, a 1,200 square foot dog park, and three parking spaces. So just to talk a little bit further about parking, again, the Affordable Workforce Housing Program allows the applicant to request a 25% parking reduction. That would require 109 parking spaces for this proposed development. There are actually 128 provided. They are required to provide at least one space per dwelling unit and one space per unit on each parcel is provided, at least on the site plan. We have 76 standard onsite spaces, 10 compact spaces, eight alternate bicycle spaces and 780A. And then there's also the ability to park up to 17 cars on street. The code allows up to 25% of the required parking to be provided in alternate parking configurations, whether that's compact spaces bicycle spaces, motorcycle spaces. In this case, they've elected to propose 10 compact spaces on each site and eight alternate bicycle spaces counted for those 32 indoor storage spaces. And so that's the parking proposal for this property. So as I indicated, the applicant is permitted to, and the commission is authorized to grant waivers of the standard provisions of the code. And on both sites, the applicant is proposing to reduce the depth of the parking spaces by two feet, mitigated by a two-foot overhang, as well as a wider than required drive aisle. Our drive aisles are required to be a minimum of 20 feet. They have 24 feet. This two foot reduction applies to their request applies to both the standard nine by 18 spaces and the compact eight by 16 spaces. And they are proposing this condition for both properties or both residential sites. The second waiver is the code requires a five foot setback from an alley, a five foot landscape buffer. And as I zoomed in here to show they're utilizing the existing 10 foot wide alley and for access and expanding that to meet their minimum 20 foot two-way movement. And for those portions of the property, that's where the reduction is being requested. This condition also occurs again on parcel C. Parcel C also provides a driveway access point on its south side to the newly relocated city electric substation to the south of the property. that I kind of put a red bubble around it in that inset to show that kind of dark spot. That's a gate that leads directly to parcel C. So that's why the driveway, it's actually a driveway access to that property. And there'll be a utility, an access easement over this portion of the property when we complete the platting for the site. So this is a landscape plan for parcel A, landscape plan for parcel B. And I will say, I'll just go back. I did note in the staff report, there is a notable tree. There's a 98 inch strangler fig located within the building footprint of this building. it is very large its canopy is 60 plus feet wide um so it is located within the um north l shape kind of the center of the the l turn um and that that is proposed currently to be removed this is the proposed landscape plan for parcel b and then Parcel C with the dog park and the sculpture park. So I'm not going to go over all the architectural elevations because the applicant also has a presentation, but I did want to highlight the proposed public art locations. These are not finalized designs. The final design, an artist has yet to be selected, the design has yet to be finalized, and that will come before you for approval before that is installed. So there along Sixth Avenue are three pieces of public art, two mosaic tile, and then a large mural that is situated prominently on the northwest rounded corner of the building. And then here is another mosaic as you turn the corner onto Seventh Avenue. or onto South H from Sixth Avenue South. And then this is the easterly view of that corner mural. You can also see a little bit of the mosaic turns the corner there. So these are just the architectural renderings of both the five-story building And the four story building, you can see that they're designed to be sister buildings. They're similar, but not the same because of the differences in height and some of the different articulation provided on the buildings. Then an artist's rendering of the art park. There are three proposed color palettes. Staff really couldn't land on a single one. And so we're looking for some feedback from the board this evening. This was the original color palette that was proposed. Then they changed the accent bands to be a more rustic brown in response to our commentary. and then this uses that rustic brown in a different shade of blue. So now we'll get into a little bit more detail about the incentives. With respect to the Affordable Workforce Housing Program, the Comprehensive Plan, Policy 3.1.2.2 states that the city shall support increased densities and or a decrease of living area requirements for innovative designs of up to 15% in order to promote affordable housing projects. They also have the ability to request a unit size reduction. We have a minimum unit size in our code. The applicant is not requesting any reduction. These units comply with the standard requirements of the code. One bedroom units are proposed to have 694 to 832 square feet and the two bedroom units will be 946 square feet. And as I previously stated, 100% of all the units will be income restricted and they are through the Affordable Workforce Housing Program requesting approval of a partial reduction of the required parking. Did I? Yes. So we talked about the CRA Platted Lot Units, the bonus units. That is a provision of this program and this development proposes to use five of the CRA Platted Bonus Lots. And they are required to provide as part of the sustainable bonus program to provide 15% of the bonus units, the 25% additional units to meet the income guidelines or requirements of the city's affordable housing program. It's a little bit complicated, but that turns the math results in 2.26 units must comply with the city's affordable housing requirements, which Different programs have different requirements, whether you're getting state or county or local funding. And then 100% of the 15% density bonus under Tier 2 of the Sustainable Bonus Program must also comply with the city's program for a total of 11.3 units. And so there's a total of 19 units of the 92 that will have to conform strictly to the city's affordable housing program requirements, while the remaining units will also be income restricted under other program requirements for their financing. So the sustainable bonus incentive program, policy 1.2.3.4 of the city's comprehensive plan permits a plan development to obtain a 25% bonus on density intensity, which is the floor area ratio and height over the baseline as outlined in table one of the comprehensive plan. Our comprehensive plan identifies based on your land use category, the maximum allowable density and FAR and the height that you can have in a specific zoning district, but through the sustainable bonus, you can request incentives over that. So this proposal is seeking additional height above the 30 feet that is the maximum height permitted in the mixed use Dixie Highway zone they're permitted to seek up to 56.25 feet with five stories. And that they are proposing 55.8 for building A and being four stories in height, building B is significantly less than that. The base Density permitted in the mixed-use Dixie Highway Zone is 30 dwelling units per acre. But with the various incentives, they are able to achieve 45.67 units, and that is actually less. That's what they're requesting. It's less than what they could actually develop, which is 49.5 units. per acre. And they are requesting a floor area ratio of 1.1, which is above the base 0.9 floor area ratio. They could have requested up to 1.4 FAR. So as part of the sustainable bonus incentive program, they must provide certain design elements of their sustainable design elements of their project. They are proposing that because they're providing 100% affordable housing, that that qualifies them for the full sustainable bonus credit. The way the program works is they provide 50% of the value of the bonus fee, which is $547,200, 50% of that in onsite improvements. And then they're required to pay 50% to the city.

My apologies. Are we saving questions till the end for this?

Yes. So... Some of the items that can qualify, again, is affordable housing, proximity to public transit, public open space, public art. They can qualify based on building in conformance with green building standards. And so this project will have 100% affordable housing units It will be constructed in accordance with national green building standards and there are public amenities being provided in the form of public art and open space. The applicant is, and this is just a note, it's not really for, it's a commission decision relative to the sustainable bonus incentive. they're requesting that they qualify for a 100% waiver because of the level of affordability of the project. So this is just a breakdown based on the financial calculation for the sustainable bonus. And staff finds that the subject request is consistent with the as conditioned with the comprehensive plan, the strategic plan, the land development regulations consistent with the general findings to harmony within the land development regulations and protection of the public interest. It's consistent with the criteria for planned development districts. It's consistent with the qualitative development standards. It's consistent with the community appearance criteria and the specific standards for all conditional uses. And it meets the criteria to be eligible for the sustainable bonus incentive program and the affordable workforce housing program. Staff did indicate we are recommending approval with respect to a number of conditions. You have them in your package. I don't think I'm going to read them all for just brevity. We have quite a list of them from all of the various departments. There are some details that need to be clarified on the site plan, so that is a modification that we're seeking. There are some flatting requirements that we would like the park to be deed restricted for open space because it does serve for them to meet their impermeability requirements for this project, as well as it being held open for public open space. There's conditions relative to the affordability covenants, as well as a lot of technical things relative to permitting and platting and easements. I am available for questions and then the applicant also has a presentation.

Thank you. First of all, I want to let everyone here on the board know that it's our responsibility to conduct these hearings fairly and to make sure that everybody in the public and the board will be able to ask their questions or present their information and express their views. Just before we move to the presentation, I just, what Wanda asked is actually maybe legal whether a single omnibus motion is appropriate in this case. I mean, we have, Motion.

Sure. The method of approval for these because the plan development is through adoption of an ordinance. And so all of these components are included in that ordinance as presented. And so your motion is to recommend approval or denial to the commission. of that ordinance. If you would like to discuss some potential changes or things about each of those sub portions of the application, then you can certainly do that. But what you're looking for is related to the ordinance as a whole as your motion.

But if we do have one problem with one item in it, then it creates a problem for the whole motion, correct?

Well, so you all have handled that in a few ways in the past. And what you could do is, for example, if you wanted to recommend approval, except a portion of it that you could, you could do that you could recommend approval of the ordinance with the caveat that one portion of it not be included or that something be amended within the ordinance or the conditions of approval.

Without breaking it down to six individual motions is what you're saying, right?

No, that is not what I'm saying because what is before you is an ordinance that is for recommendation. So you can recommend changes to the ordinance or to the conditions of approval in that ordinance. You can discuss whether or not Um, the various portions of the application meet the standards for requirement, you know, as part of your discussion, but your motion should be strictly one motion on the ordinance. Thank you.

Um, can I ask a question as well?

Or is that a question to the end for everyone? We want to have the presentation and then present our questions because once the questions start, I'm sure we'll all be very healthy with our questions. As well as I am and I think all of us. Just quickly and I'm going to bring up anybody who wants to present, but there was a meeting two days ago. Was that a summary? Was that any problems with that meeting that came about because it's on such short notice? Did we have any problems with that meeting at all? Anything come out of that that was... Negative or so forth, or anybody that brought anything is bringing anything to this meeting.

I think the applicant can speak to that. That's their meeting. They, they hold those meetings by code staff is we merely facilitate it. It's entirely their meeting and we actually do not attend those meetings. It was noticed in accordance with the requirements of the land development regulations. And in fact, we held two because the first one, while the mailers went out in August, the proper time and the signs were posted, the notification wasn't posted to the website in a timely way. So we held a second meeting to meet the requirements and that was noticed appropriately posted on the website. The sign was posted on the property in a timely manner, I think 15 days prior to the meeting. Thank you.

Okay. Well, at this time, I'm going to ask the applicant or somebody that is involved with this that wants to speak first, please give us your name and your background, your information, your address.

Just give us one minute. I want to make sure their screen's properly shared. It's not going into slideshow. Yeah. Won't go into slideshow mode.

Can you try the next one for us? Okay.

The awkward silence. I need to have a joke. I will compliment Ms. Preston and the whole staff for the projects here and the presentation she just gave you.

While you're waiting, do you want to give us your name and information while she's setting that up?

Absolutely. My name is Bradley Miller. I'm the land planner and the agent for the applicant here with Urban Design Studio in West Palm Beach. And with me tonight is Tim Wheat. He's one of the principals of Pinnacle himself, as well as Lucille Heiners, who's an architect, and Jeff Trumpeter, who is our subsection. Well represented. yeah just to kudos to the staff on that it is uh complicated not only the six items that uh you point out uh mr chair but the the calculations and the percentages of the percentages uh lauren and i went back and forth on spreadsheets like two forensic accountants i think that of making sure that the Smithers are on target. So she did a nice job of presenting it. You've probably all heard about the local projects, which are this property would actually be used eligible for that at the same number of units that we're proposing here tonight.

I'm going to interrupt you, but because it's being recorded, you have to get a little bit closer to the microphone. Yes, I pulled it towards you or something. Yeah, thank you.

So it's not like the Grammys where it's like somewhere in the vicinity. So with that, I brought that up with Tim here, and he does not organize this as a planned development. It's a That's a more inclusive type of way to do it, to treat all three properties as one project. And so that's a short version of how we got here, a very short version of how we got to the plan development that we're requesting. And just for clarification, the plan development does go to, actually this whole application ends up going to the city commission A lot of times applications stop here with the planning and zoning board. But this one, because of the plan development part of it, it does go on to the city commission for the final site.

Are we ready with the presentation?

I think we're on stand up time. All right. So thanks again for giving us this opportunity to present the project. And I will, I'm going to have Tim give a little bit about Pinnacle and his company and what they do and what they've done and some sample projects. So, Tim, if you want to do that, and then I'll finish up with the rest.

Thank you and good evening, everyone. Can you hear me okay? My name is Tim Wheat. I'm a partner at Pinnacle. We're a Miami-based company, but I'm a Palm Beach County native. I've maintained an office here at Pinnacle overseeing all of our developments outside of Miami-Dade County for the last 24 years. And we're really super excited, Mr. Chairman and members, to present Pinnacle on 6 tonight to you. You had asked about community meetings. I attended the first one, which was needed to re-advertise and do the second one on Tuesday. And I'm sure there are members of the public that will be here to speak on the two issues. But as I understood it, the two main issues were the future of the very large strangler fig tree on the property and whether that could be saved or relocated later. And then the other question that had come up about the number of elevators that are provided in each of the two mid-story buildings. So we'll address those as part of our presentation as well and here to answer any questions. Pinnacle has been around since 1997. We focus primarily on affordable housing. We've developed 11,000 units of affordable housing, both in Palm Beach County and around the Southeastern United States. But our main concentration is Florida. You see us, you saw in Lauren's presentation, the emphasis on art in public places. That's a big thing for Pinnacle that we spend a lot of time focusing on. We try to create pride, invisible, visual interest in our communities, and that's one way we do it. And public-private partnerships, like we've put together with the City of Lake Worth Beach, involving Palm Beach County funds as a resources from Florida Housing Finance Corporation, all cobbled together to do a best-in-class affordable community. As I mentioned, our portfolio is large. This will be the 29th development I've overseen at Pinnacle in my career, including the award-winning Berkeley Landing development in Riviera Beach, which we completed in 2024. That won the Florida Redevelopment Association's award in 2025 as the best new affordable community in Florida. Our Pinnacle Palms community, that's kind of near the outlet mall right off the east side of I-95 at West Palm Beach. Pinnacle at Tarpon River, which we built in downtown Fort Lauderdale when land was still reasonably affordable. It seems like a long time ago. And then Pinnacle 441 in Hollywood, a two-phased, mixed-use, mixed-income type community that was built along State Road 7 in a declining corridor that the city wanted to revitalize. We created 213 units of affordable housing the South Florida Business Journal Structures Award in 2025 for the best new before. So I mentioned Berkeley Landing, interesting development on US 1, 112 units included to live workspaces and It has two separate civic plazas required by the city where we placed art in public places, including a piece by internationally renowned artist Romero Brito. And I mentioned... Oh, that's the only one we have. I was about to dive into another property because I thought that was the next slide. So... You know, Pinnacle prides ourselves, and we'll get a little later, and Bradley will hand it back to me in terms of our interior and exterior unit features. We believe that just because housing is affordable doesn't mean people shouldn't have the best in-class lifestyle and live in communities with durable surfaces, countertops, and the like. And then with Pinnacle on 6, as with many of our newest generation communities, Each of those two buildings will have a standby emergency generator that will allow us to power the common areas and elevators in the event of a storm. form secured and green certified by the National Green Building Council, which we are a partner in excellence, one of 20 companies selected nationally in 2025 for leading the certification trend. So I'm going to turn it back over to Bradley. Thank you for your time.

Thank you, Tim. To go back through this, and I'll try not to repeat what Lauren went through, it does consist of three parcels that we've given labels to as A, B, and C. It totals up to just a hair over two acres. We've got the mixed-use component. Building A has its five stories. Building B is four stories, a total of 92 units. And then there's the different components of our application that Lauren went through. One of the things I want to touch on and clarify, which I'll do on the next slides, is some of the what's actually happening with these two waivers that were included. But before that, to go through the site plan, this is a colored rendition of the site plan. The buildings are in tan. Sixth Avenue South is at the top of the screen. Seventh Avenue runs closer to the bottom, and you can see Parcel C is to the south of that. The pink arrows are really what we consider our primary access points for Parcel A coming off of Seventh Avenue South. And then for Parcel B, it would be coming off of South 8th Street. And then the yellow are more secondary access points. The design, it was really dictated by the code. The code wants buildings up on 6th and on 7th, having the building close to the property lines. I'm sure I've heard about setbacks. In this case, we actually have build two lines, meaning our buildings need to be at the build two lines, which is 10 feet off of 6th Avenue. So when you plug all that in, it leaves the location of the parking where we have it. There's not a whole lot of flexibility of that in order to comply with what's in the code. For parcel B, again, access is coming off of South 8th Street, got the parking lot. Both A and B have portion of the alleyways, for A, it's on the northwest side, and for parcel B, it's on the southeast side. And those alleys, we're widening those alleys for a couple of reasons. One is for better access, and more so for fire access, garbage trucks to get in and out. If we just had the single access point off of 7th or off of South 8th Street and Dead End, getting a large fire truck or a garbage truck to go through that property would be a nightmare, if possible at all. So, and it's the 20 feet is something that I've had other projects here in the city that it's going from a 10 foot alley It improves the look of the alley and better access for everybody. Actually, the adjacent parcel owners will get some benefit out of that improvement. The electrical that runs typically in the alleys, and they do here too, all of that is going to go underground as part of the development program. So that will take away some of the hurricane activity and and fierce with the electricity as well as the appearance of the project as a whole. So the waivers. The way it was described, and which is coming out of code, is that we're shortening the parking stall. We're actually not. The parking stall is 18 feet in depth by code. And then the code requires that you have a wheel stop that's two feet off of that in the front. What we're proposing to do is you can see the 18 feet there in the wheel stop in that exhibit. And then that two feet that's from the wheel stop on, we're actually proposing to extend the landscape. and extend that landscape area that's in front of the cars and put in a curb instead of wheel stops. Pinnacle has actually had some difficulties with wheel stops. And if there's somebody in the room that hasn't tripped over one in their lifetime, they're lucky. So it's the same 18 feet. It's just that the front two feet of that overhang, rather than having more pavement, is going to be grass and landscaped area. So the stall is still the same. We're really just asking that that front two feet be allowed to be a grass pervious surface as opposed to more pavement. The other waiver is in a similar aspect back to the alleys. The purple strips that are on the plan are showing where those alleys are being widened. and they're being widened into the pinnacle property. So the code requires a five-foot strip between the property line and the alley. Well, if we're widening the alley, we're covering that space with the widened alley as opposed to the landscape. So it's more for, we feel that it's a, It's a better situation for everybody with the the widened alley here on both are all all three parcels actually and then we still have still the previous area on the site we comply with code landscape. as well, plant material, et cetera. For parcel C, Lauren touched on it. It's interesting because the city's electrical plant is just to the south of this and they have a gate there. So we designed that parcel around the gate. It gives the access for the city to be able to get in there. We get a couple of parking spaces that'll be open to anybody to utilize that park. So those are the two waivers. Architecturally, this is the first time I've worked with Lucille, and I hope I get to work with her many, many times after this. She's a fantastic architect and has done a really good job with this. These are the four elevations. And Lauren went through the color palettes, so I'm not going to dwell on the elevations actually the pretty pictures at the end again building a is five stories building b is four stories the floor plans um none of us are going to be able to read those but It just gives you an idea of what the layout is going to be between one bedroom and two bedroom units throughout the project. There's a lobby and a fitness area and bicycle parking. That's all part of building A. And then building B is a smaller building, four stories, 35 units. has a similar unit layout as the others. The amenities that are in building A will serve both buildings. These are the amenities, Tim, I think you wanted to address those and can do it much better than I can.

Yeah, as I mentioned before, we try to focus on building quality, durable products. We'll be storm secure and the interior corridors will be air conditioned and we'll have controlled access entry to them and surveillance cameras around the development that we'll be able to pull up, you know, online and share that in the event of any kind of law enforcement action. So, and each of the units will have hard surface countertops, either granite or quartz with European style cabinets, Energy Star rated appliances. we either will choose build pvc blinds or solar shades and will meet and exceed actually all the handicapped adaptable and accessibility requirements under the fair housing act and the uniform federal accessibility standards so this is just an idea of the typical common areas that many of the common elements sit up facing six avenue south to create the effect of an active liner So they'll include a great room for gathering space and parties and resident activities, a really well-equipped fitness center. We threw in a couple of little features we've experimented and tried in recent developments, including a kid's playroom for smaller kids adjoining the fitness room so mothers can take small children to the playroom. And then adjoining the main gathering space, we created a VR room or virtual reality rooms where older kids can get together and play video games and hang out. And we've had huge success. Kids are immensely well behaved and really treated well. The other thing we did is we created a breezeway patio where we'll have louvers and allow for natural airflow moving east to west. That's sort of more or less on the south side of our amenities adjoining our office. So that'll give the effect of an outdoor covered patio because we don't have a tremendous amount of open space to work with. And during the pleasant season, we want people to be able to enjoy sitting outside. So... We've added that in. Lucille Hinners, as Bradley mentioned, was best in class. Actually, I'm not supposed to say, but I think this was chosen for American Institute of Architects design competition. She submitted it, and it was recognized recently. But that's the building A as you're looking directly at it south. I think, and this is looking at it as you're on South H Street. So, and this is the smaller building B, looking at it more or less from the back part of the property. And then looking in the northeastern direction up H Street. And the mural, the idea with the mural is that we wanted to create visual interest as you're driving eastbound off I-95 headed south or headed east on 6th Avenue South. We think the mural will jump out. We also think the tiered height of the two buildings when you're driving down US 1 will also create some visual interest. You'll see the four-story building, then you'll see the 5th. So that's what we were going for. We wanted to pick vibrant colors that are keeping with the style of Lake Worth Beach. And the sculpture park is something that you know, that we, we value, but I know we're getting credit for it. I know that there's a lot of interest in potentially relocating the tree there, the large tree. And we're, if that can be achieved as both in terms of making sure the tree can survive and it's a good fit there and arborist and horticulturalists recommended at a price that we can manage, we're willing to do it. I've never, I'm, full disclosure i've been involved in tree i've never relocated a tree that big before so it kind of scares me but it's something that we're willing to work with the community to do in lieu of the sculpture park if we can make it work and we hope to have a lot more answers on that before we get to the city commission first reading we just don't we're having people assess it it's survivability and the cost as well So this is actually a cool aerial perspective, it kind of gives you, you know, what the future would look like when pinnacle on six is developed looking south and then also looking east. And that's building a looking south. And then looking northeast so. then a rendered perspective just fly over kind of drone perspective of the smaller domains from 7,000. As you've heard mentioned, this is an affordable community. It will have a majority of 66 one bedrooms, 26 two bedrooms. We're really trying to target the central workforce that works in this area, service sector workers, entry-level professional personnel, people in the healthcare field, even teacher salaries fit within this. series of tiers that were required to follow in concert with their financing. So that gives you an idea of what the rents are today, subject to change because they change with the publishing of annual median income guidelines. And then at the various income tiers at 30, 60, and 70% of the area median income. Wanted to give you an idea of the size of those households, you know, or the household income. It varies by the number of people in the household. So, Bradley, unless you have any closing comments, I want to thank you for your time. I hope we've done a good job of at least trying to bring, highlight what Pinnacle of Six would be about, and we're happy to answer any questions you have, Bradley.

I believe I'm done as soon as- Do we have any other presenters that are going to speak? Not for us. just want to um i guess i'm reading your project description and your uh supporting documents you show both buildings being uh built on seventh avenue north so you may under project description you may want to uh make a correction there because uh it's with access from 7th Avenue North. I'll tie to that. I'm going to open it up to the board for questions for you, the presenters, and also for the staff, and welcome our board to start. Who would like to start with questions? As long as we... I know we may have a lot of questions, and I just hope that the board that we you know, try to get it out one at a time while we speak.

I'll start, I guess. What is the security plan for this building? And before I ask, actually, I'll just ask that question. What is the security plan for this building? Can you please describe the day-to-day, the overnight, if it's going to be in-house, how many people will be overnight for security, and any other security measures that will be taken?

We're not, we don't currently plan on any kind of man security. Sorry about that. to do most of our security electronically. However, always one of our property management personnel live on site, so they can be contacted 24-7 in the event of an emergency.

But all residents... Is your property management company in-house? Is that in-house management?

Or what is the company then? The company's name is Professional Management, Inc. And where are they located? They are based in Miami, Florida, and they manage... the vast majority of all of our complexes for Pinnacle and Florida.

Okay. All right. So I've already seen many, many safety concerns and security concerns for this project.

So one second, please. There is no code requirement for security measures on this building. So please make sure that your questions and comments deal with compliance with the code provisions.

That would be great. So we can't address anything that is outside of that.

Your role is to make sure that the project complies with the city's code.

Okay, but I think there's at times, we'd have to welcome some questions, even if they're, you know, on what you're saying, I can understand the questions.

Yeah, I actually just had to move out of the Bohemian due to security reasons. And I'm from they will see about Honduras. I've lived in Brooklyn with many places. I'm from C Street on Lake Worth Beach. That's where my family Move to, and we moved to this country, and I was very disappointed to hear that the city did not make sure that affiliated had a proper security plan. And many of the tenants in the building had to break their lease for the same reasons. So that is a huge concern. You're talking everything from things that. I do not want to say on the record, but very scary things for the community and the residents. And it's a little shocking to me that there's no process where we would be able to bring something like this up. Because then, I mean, I guess it just seems like there has to be some sort of process if there's a major concern from the board that we would be able to bring up.

If there are things that you would like to see in the code, you can bring those up for the Commission to consider as a code amendment, but if it does not.

But you have to apply the code as it exists today to this project Okay, so then does that mean that what you're saying is I can say. hey, separately to this, can we address this code? And this is a problem for this city. If we're going to allow large developers to come and build out these big development projects, which I think should be encouraged with the right measures.

I have a question on that. It's a conditional use of purple, isn't it? And unincorporated, sometimes the board of county commissioners adds conditions of approval. And I know for example, like places of worship or traffic engineering has added requirements for the movement of traffic by requiring extra things, but you don't do that with conditions of approval here in Lake Worth?

There are conditions of approval. They have to be related to the code requirements. and um there is a condition that is proposed for video surveillance to be required on the property the applicant has offered that ready and so but um so you all can review the conditions of approval um you can ask the applicant if it would go over and above what has been proposed but you cannot require that they provide anything that's not required by the code

okay okay i'm going to address this a little differently so instead of requirement would you consider a security fence and gate for access to this building and you mentioned i believe i think i saw in the presentation you do have card access to the actual building itself would you consider other security measures outside of that for the parking lot. And one other caveat, and I do want to ask, and it does relate to this, you're going to do the improvements in the alley, but that also includes widening the alley, which is, I think, very important.

Well, we'll take the last question first that Bradley can answer better than me. But the reason why we asked for that waiver is in order to widen the section of the alley that we'll be using from 10 to 20 feet. So in the sections that where our traffic would flow, we would widen it because we wanted to use it as secondary access. On the question of security measures, making it a gated development would be difficult because we could never meet the stacking requirements for traffic to pull into the parking lot and clear a gate. aren't as effective as one would think. That's why we like to use the controlled access entry methods where we'll use a box that we use a box now that has visual or video recognition. So if you're going to go see a guest, you buzz that guest, the guest can see you and you can see them, or they can opt in. You can't see them. So, and then if you're a resident, you have a fob in order to get access. And there will be surveillance cameras all around the perimeter covering, including the alleys, different angles of the building, and also the interior corridors and common areas of the development. We do that to protect ourselves as well as to add a measure of safety and security for our residents.

Can I ask the city a question? Is there a requirement when it comes to that video being available? For example, several things were stolen from me at the Bohemian. And when I asked, including in spaces like the bicycle spaces and things, if they had footage or they said that, unfortunately, they did not. So even if there are cameras, if they're not being properly used, then, you know, how is our city prepared? Our residents, you know, protect it, essentially, from things like this.

I think Greg had another question.

Well, actually, my comment regarding the alley is not the lighting, but the lighting. Oh, lighting. Lighting the alleyways. Yes. Where you're doing those improvements.

Yes. There you go.

But I have one comment on your, you can put a fence where, you know, it slides, you know, it doesn't have to swing. I mean, it's, it's doable. And, you know, to her point on another property, and there's a project we're doing right now that I'm concerned because we don't have that. So I don't know if I'm going too far out of the realm here, what the attorney do, but I wish you would consider it.

I have a follow-up question. So general conditions of approval number nine says a video security system shall be required for the property. To expand upon that, what is the intent of that condition of approval that they maintain recording for X amount of time? And what's the staff intent behind that? Because as mentioned, sometimes those videos, they delete like every 24 hours or whatever. So what is staff's intent by adding that condition of approval?

This is a condition that we've applied to other planned developments that have recently been approved, such as Madison Terrace. I'm not sure about WMOTA. But I do know that it was a condition for approval for Madison Terrace, just for security purposes. But there's no elaboration on that condition in terms of the length of time the video is retained. So, I mean, if that's something that you want to amend, you could make that part of a motion.

Okay, because it doesn't... You know, it doesn't explain, is there going to be somebody watching the camera like 24-7? Is it going to be recorded and saved for a minimum of 72 hours? You know, what does Pinnacle do on other properties with their video surveillance system? Good question.

But a camp answer offhand is I don't, I know two things. One is that we retain the video for a period of time longer than a day. I believe it's 30 days, but I cannot, it depends on the system. And as time goes on, we get better capacity with these systems. What I can tell you are a couple of things. One is that there are a series of monitors in the manager's office that during the day when the manager's there, the manager or the assistant manager can see what's going on in the property in real time, right? Then it records and the, you know, the... We have been able in the past, unlike the experience you cited, to share video with law enforcement if an incident happens on our property. We would certainly be willing to do that in any instance and even make that a condition of approval that in the event of any incident, we would be willing to share recorded video with law enforcement for any investigative purposes. But I don't know the precise number of days that we are able to save it, but it's longer than a day. I can assure you that.

I would just like to add that this is exactly what I was told at the Bohemian, and the footage was not available.

Thank you. With regards to that issue, we have brought this up multiple times. and it has not only been required on land developments, it's been regarded, you know, it's been put in place on other properties as well, that we should have some parameters. I'm not sure if I even agree with it as being a standard code thing. I think that if it goes into the code, we'll have more dialogue with more people and more perspectives, but there is some liability. Like, we've been involved in property management for so long, ex-boyfriend in a parking lot which happened here in Florida and then they sued the apartment complex even though it was a domestic issue that they both knew each other and they lost the lawsuit over that because they went properly because there was something that said you know in their literature that they had secure parking lots but they didn't have any actual security parking lot so as a city if we're requiring them to have video cameras there is an And if it's a code requirement, we should detail what that will be. I had a couple of questions on the, you're expanding the alley against building A and B, but not C. C, you kind of have a separate two-guard drive that's separate from the alley, it appears.

Is that just because- No, actually in C, it's also widened.

Oh, it is. Okay. It's just in the graphic, it looked like you- the gate that you're both dropping some yourself. So you are improving the alley?

Yeah, actually, I think if I if I drill down on the plan, I think it's actually wider than 20 feet to be able to align with the gate.

Okay. Okay. So the only question I have a couple of questions. One is kind of for staff, but I'll get that one in a minute. But for you guys, the only concern that I had to show the kind of purple arrows, the yellow arrows, and so the or secondary, knowing the city, the yellow area on Sixth Avenue is going to be your primary, unless you do something to otherwise deter that from being your primary.

When I put those arrows on that, I...

I had similar thoughts to it. Yes. And I don't really know what you can do about that, but it will, it could cause stacking issue on Sixth Avenue. People, those alleys, you don't have the same visibility triangle. So when people have to slow down to turn onto an alley, you know, in Lakewood, people don't always use their blinkers and people stop at I've seen your accidents because of alley traffic.

I had that on the way here.

Yeah, so it's one of those things when you're turning into an alley, it's a lot more difficult than turning into a road. your primary usage point. I don't know if you can do something where when it comes into your actual property to make that like a one-way exit only or something along there. Just even people are going to ignore the signs anyway, but anything that you can do to try and make that a little bit less.

It's more so up at the connection of 6th Avenue South that you're concerned with.

Concerned people coming from 6th Avenue South and turning into your property. Sure. So I don't know. You can easily turn on South H or I guess it's not high. Was it East Coast Railway? Those are easy roads to turn on that come straight to the back of the property. But just knowing people, that's a shortcut and they're going to take it all day long.

Don't disagree. I do think the widening will make it a little easier, but there's... I know you do still have that visibility scenario. I don't know if there could be some signage or something there that will, Take that into consideration.

Okay, the other. There's a condition in here that I'm going to kind of challenge the staff on just a little bit because I know conditions, I believe that it's five, although some of the numbers might be different depending on under the site conditions of approval. And basically, it's just saying building A and B will be built on the 10 foot and 18 foot build two lines. And then it says the site plan modification will be required once fine materials are selected. So this is going through this entire process. It's going through an ordinance. How do you do a site plan modification to an ordinance? One. Two, why is that required? Why can't that be addressed in permitting?

Well, it's intended to be addressed prior to permit.

No, I understand. So you have an ordinance passed when they come in for a site plan modification. That would typically be a staff level. Is staff able to amend an ordinance that was passed by the commission?

The condition will be part of the ordinance. It'll be an exhibit to the ordinance. So they're required by the ordinance to amend the site plan to meet the Bill 2 line. The reason that condition is there is because if you look at the site plan, I have to go to the other PowerPoint, I think, the applicant has added a few inches to their setback. along Sixth Avenue South and South H Street and Seventh Avenue South. Those are actually build two lines, not setback lines, but they have these inches added because they haven't finalized their final material selection at this time. So they don't know the exact depth. So once they have their final materials selected, they'll be able to properly site the building. And so then we will make sure that that, that setback is properly met prior to that as part of permanent.

Why are you going to require them to submit a site plan and application modification, which in our experience, we were submitting very minor ones. Scott, you're familiar with it. All of a sudden, we got Lake Worth Fire, Palm Beach County Fire coming back with new comments that weren't received. It took months to get through what should have been a very minor site plan change because we were being asked to go through the process again.

permitting why do we have to force them to go through a site plan modification is part of the permitting process it's it's just uh in addition to the permit itself um if it were a site plan amendment that's a total that's kind of a different process this isn't this is concurrent with modification usually goes in line with the permit okay so when it says a site plan modification they're not talking about a site plan amendment no they're just saying that as part of permitting their site plan that they submit for

Anything else, Sam? Oh, yeah, discussion. Yeah.

Okay. And then the third one that I have here, which is kind of for staff is just that We've had some, I know I saw in here where it had a 25% bonus above 30 feet height and then we get to 55 feet and all I saw you present was a 25% bonus. So I believe that there's a bonus for the land development and then there's also a bonus for sustainable and that they layer on top of each other, but I'm not exactly sure how you got to that.

That is correct. They do layer. And I should have had that calculation in my staff report for your benefit. It is 25% on height above the 30. And then I think there's two 15% bonuses through the sustainable bonus program that gets you to the 15, the 55.25 foot height for the Dixie Highway, mixed use Dixie Highway zone.

I would like to understand. So my very first meeting here on the board four years ago was approving a project where I was kind of told on the record that I was looking at the wrong part of the code. I didn't see it and then came back and I was looking at the right part of the code and I still don't agree with the interpretation at that time. That was a different issue because I didn't do a trans-oriented and whether or not it had a train station and things of that nature. But I would like to see a calculation five stories transitioning to four stories. It's in a good location. It's, you know, in terms of features and amenities for affordable housing, I think it's great. The range you're catering to some of the 30%, which is kind of a very difficult area to meet. So this isn't one of those projects that comes in and says, we're going to do a bunch of units at 80% of the AMI. We're going to call it affordable, but really it isn't. These are genuinely affordable units. So I just want to make sure that it does we understand how we're getting to these high requirements in our city. And that's, that's. Okay.

If we can circle back to that a little bit later, answer that one.

And then the board members.

Yeah. So you're, you're widening the alleys, but so the remainder, the remainder of the alleys and for from sixth to seventh, are they going to be improved? I don't, you know, I know there's site work and things that is that plan on being, improve for the rest of the length of the alleys?

I think I'm going to lift a step. I think we're responsible to clean up the rest of it, repaint the balance.

You're going to improve both sides, the alley and the private side, and there's going to be an easement over the private side for access.

I think what he's asking about is the non-purple area. Right.

Oh, areas. Because I know there's, I'm looking at your plans, there's tie-ins for sewer and water and all that stuff in the alleys, but are they going to repay or is this going to be patching or what's the plans for the remainder of the alley?

So the alley on parcel B is once you, it's, you can't even get into it.

So on the landscape set for parcel B and as well there's a condition for approval for I believe a temporary construction easement over the alley for them to kind of grade and seed that portion of the alley that's not being utilized. And then on A, there's still some access points and there's There's still some pavement as you navigate south in that area, and their site plan ends at that spot where their landscape strip starts at their property line. So the alley condition will remain, when I say unimproved, I mean not improved as part of this development condition. for that area south of the access. I believe there's a fence along that property line too. We discussed one in this on-site meeting.

A fence on Parcel 8?

No.

Yeah, there's a lot of things on the parcels now that thanks to the City Fire Department is going away slowly. So I think all of that will come down. Does that answer the question?

I guess it's I guess it's sad. I guess the staff is okay. But I'd say, again, the rest of the alley if it's if it's going to be driving down that alley, because you can continue down through there. Just want to know if the city wants that taken care of and improved to the rest of the half the rest of the alley. Just

So we can get clarification from public works on that question. And we can either add it to the staff report or provide that explanation to city commission. Typically, public works would comment on something like that on the possibility of a possible improvement of the alley that's going to be impacted. I don't see one, I don't think, in this report, but we can get clarification on that.

I think from a practical standpoint with the undergrounding of the electrical power lines that that's going to tear some things up too. So we're going to have to put it back into Equal to, if not better.

Okay, so I do have some information. Sorry about that. Page 15, condition number four. Thank you.

Back on the height calculation. So the maximum height in the mixed use Dixie Highway zone is 30 feet. But as part of the sustainable bonus, they can be granted an additional 15 feet. And then the plan development adds another 25% bonus above 45 feet, taking you to 56.25 feet.

Thank you.

I have some questions. Sure. They're all on C. So on parcel C. So is the dog park and the parking open to the public and the little courtyard with the, is that a public dog park or is that a private dog park?

The conditions for approval require that property to be deed restricted as open space. because it is part of the impervious area calculation for the overall plan development. And so the condition is for there to be a deed restriction on the property, allowing it to be a public open space into perpetuity.

The dog park?

Yes.

Who's going to handle the liability, the city? Because a lot of dog parks separate little dogs from big dogs. And if this isn't open to the public dog park, there's always going to be liability associated with it.

The unity of title requires all three properties to be owned by Pinnacle on 6th or whoever their successor is. Yeah.

Generally, these small dog parks, we don't typically separate by breeds or size. They typically are small, but we have to insure over the entire property, including parcel C. And it's open to the public? It's a condition of approval. It's available to the public.

Okay. My other question, does the art in C generate more credit than a top lot? Because I know there was comments about There was the standards and conditions and it talked about the art and they were getting credit. This is a personal opinion, not code, but I think that would have more value as open space or with the tree, maybe not the relocated one because the 60 feet canopy is going to be eat up that entire thing. But it's, you know, 7th Avenue South is not a major thoroughfare. It's not a critical aesthetic point. I mean, it seems... odd if the code gives more credit to a sculpture than recreation. It just seems a little peculiar, but that's the way the code works.

The way the code works is that the applicant is to show that you're speaking to the sustainable bonus.

I'm talking to the part of the staff report that said, kudos to you because you have a sculpture in the little circle in letter C. I believe that's the sustainable bonus portion.

So the applicant's justification for the sustainable bonus is that they, because their project is 100%, income limited, income restricted, that that fulfills the $247,000 or $547,000 of value that they are obligated to provide under the sustainable bonus credit. So they're not using those items, but those are also items that are listed within the sustainable bonus portion of of the code that can be considered. So it's more so above and beyond.

So art gets more than recreation in that part of the code?

No, it's the value of the improvement. But they didn't value that portion of the print improvement. I just listed it as part of one of those items that could be considered as part of the sustainable bonus.

Okay. Another question. Why is there a handicap parking space in C? And is that for residents of building A or B? Because I don't get that. I don't get, I mean, ADA compliant spaces, is it for somebody driving from A and B over to C to park in an ADA compliant space? Or is that an expectation that someone who lives in A or B is going to park in the ADA spot in C and then hoof it across seven?

There are sufficient handicapped spaces within A and B to meet that code requirement. The reason for placing a handicapped space there is because it is open to the public.

All my questions.

What I'd like to do, and our board will be able to ask the questions, but I would like to turned us now over to public hearing. Anybody that would like to come up, I believe Sherry has some names. Anybody coming up, please list your name, your address, and you'll have three minutes. Come on up.

Come on up.

Hi.

Can you hear me? Okay. I'm a member of NEST, Neighbors Encouraging Shade Trees. We've been collaborating with the city for over three years, coordinating the planting of 79 shade trees in Bryant Park along the wellness walk. When the commission approved the new playground for the Royal Poinciana Park, they suggested staff continue to work with NEST to add shade to the park. What is the value of a tree? Not just the cost of removing it, but the value of everything it gives back to our community every day. This Florida native strangler fig is an historic specimen. It may be 100 years old. Trees like this cannot simply be replaced. Whenever possible, preservation in place should be the first choice. If that is infeasible, relocation should be considered to the Royal Poinciana Park on South B Street, or to the New Pocket Park on Seventh Avenue South, or another park where shade is lacking? Could the tree beautification funds be used? Could the tree request the Pinnacle Finance moving this tree? Could the Sustainable Bonus Incentive Program funds from the Pinnacle be used? This tree is more than landscaping. Let's make the story of this tree one of preservation, not loss. Imagine what preserving it could say about our community. Instead of watching a large tree be cut pieces, picture residents gathering with drums and other musical instruments, walking together with a flatbed truck as it slowly carries this magnificent tree to its new home in a neighborhood park. It could become a joyful community parade, a celebration of conservation, history, and hope. Children would remember the day our city chose to save a centuries-old tree instead of destroying it. I just want to say the trunk, the clear trunk on this tree is 20 foot, so there's plenty of space around it and under it when it is moved to that neighborhood park.

Thank you. Appreciate it. Randall Difuntorum, Co- Hello.

Randall Difuntorum, Co- Good evening, everybody. I'm Ramsey McLeod 24 South Street. I was present last year when this projected idea came up before the Commission and It was very enthusiastically received because this town and the city has made an effort to put in affordable housing and be very sensitive to the needs of our low-income residents. That's why we have Madison Terrace. This will be just down the road from them. However, when it was before that board, they made it perfectly clear they wanted two elevators per building. You're looking at, if you go two people per apartment, one bedroom apartment, let's say it's a married couple, double the amount of cars per unit, you've doubled the amount of people in the building. What if something happens and they have to get out? What about your residents that are ADA or mobility challenged? When she cited all the parking spaces, she did not once say how many parking spaces in A or B are designated for dead handicapped parking. I'd like to know what that number is going to be in each of those lots because I didn't see it. As you mentioned, the only one I've seen so far in this project is labeled and identified in parcel C. So I think it's very important that that second elevator be included. Every member of the dais wanted it. The mayor and Commissioner Malega both brought it out as a strong thing that they wanted to see added. Safety and video cameras was also brought up by Commissioner Malega. So I think even though they're not required, we need staff to have a second elevator. I don't see why people with a lower income should have to worry if there's other safety means to get in and out of their location where they're living or should somebody need to move and somebody needs to get out of the building but they can't get to the elevator to use because somebody's moving furniture or whatever. It limits the ability for actual residents to be mobile to get out of the building should they need to. And I think I know you can't make it in a condition, not part of code, but I really think it's a very strong item that needs to be considered strictly out of safety and non-discrimination of providing that safety for people of lower incomes. Thank you. Thank you very much. Oh, the one other thing. I got a second. Yes, sir. They're going to, hold on a moment. If you know where the Dunkin' Donuts is, and if you've ever been down there or sit in the Walgreens parking lot and watch the traffic, These people pull out of there. I've almost been hit head-on three times going 6th Avenue East to hit that light and turn right or south onto Dixie Highway. They come right in the lane so they can get over, or they pull out into the passing lane to go left into Walgreens. And so if you're trying to get in there and turn at that street, you've got somebody coming right at you head-on. I think with 90-some units and people coming out of that, you're going to have a real serious traffic issue. And I think maybe PBSO says it's fine or something like that. But you also have the railroad tracks just above where you're going to have that entryway into their building A. And I can see you're going to have some serious accidents. And if we can do marking or some kind of traffic identification just to make it safer for people and residents moving in the area.

Hello, good evening. My name is Jenny Powell. I live at 224 North Palm Way. Good evening, Mr. Chair and board members. I'm speaking tonight as a citizen and tree and landscape board member. who supports more shade in our city. I will say this did not come before the tree board. It was not required to come before the tree board. So we had no discussion in any of our meetings about this. Just want to be clear on that. I'm asking tonight for the city and Pinnacle to try to save this large native ficus tree on the property. I was pleased to hear that there has been some consideration of this since our meeting, since the meeting on two nights ago. This is a magnificent shade tree with a huge canopy to block sunlight and with lots of leaves to release water vapor to cool the ground around it. Shaded ground and sidewalks can stay 20 to 45 degrees Fahrenheit cooler than unshaded surfaces exposed to direct sun. In South Florida, shade is critical for a livable city. Large ficus trees can be successfully relocated, and there are a number of cases locally that have done that. These trees are shallow rooted, they have a fibrous root system, and are generally easier to relocate and have a better survival rate than a comparable large oak tree. My thought is that you not waive the sustainable bonus credit for the 50% share that would go to the city and look at using part of this to pay for the relocation. The location to be determined, but Arsenal C came up as one possible location. and also Doyle, Louisiana Park. So it will depend on the cost, the need, and the logistics. So you have the power. I think you won't decide tonight on this, perhaps, but I think I would like to see this tree saved for the benefit of Lake Worth Beach residents and visitors. And I will say that I do like this project. It's affordability, the architecture. I like the colors as proposed. So anyway, that's all I have. Thank you very much.

Thank you. We love trees. Thank you. Good evening.

Hello. My name's Diane Brown. I live at 905 North Lakeside Drive. I am a member of the Tree and Landscape Board here in Lake Worth Beach as well. This is a magnificent native strangler fig tree. It provides shade and cooling. And to just cut it down, a tree, any tree is priceless, but a tree this big is... Just magnificent. And it would be really good if Pinnacle would strongly consider moving it rather than cutting it up. And that's all I have to say. Thank you.

Thank you.

Good evening.

Good evening. Yeah, my name is Susan Ona. And I'm also a member of NEST, the Neighbors Encouraging Shade Trees here in Lake Worth, and I wanted to also speak in favor of saving the large strength of fig on the property of Building A. At a time when we need more shade and natural cooling mechanisms, along with vital development for workforce housing, it behooves us as a city to take steps to work around our old trees and incorporate them into our plans for development. It will take a lifetime to gain back, or many lifetimes, to gain back the shade and the tons of carbon storage that this tree already provides. We can be a model for other towns and development projects. Let us have the vision to work with our old vital trees as partners rather than cutting them down. Thank you.

Anybody else from the public have any members speak? If not, then I'm going to close the public hearing and turn it back over to our board members and see if we have any more discussion and prepare for a board potential motion.

have some more questions i forgot that's okay absolutely um the 17 parking spaces on the street are those designated for residents or those just anyone they can be for everybody they cannot designate them for their projects specifically so they're in the public right-of-way and they're open and available for anybody to park there okay

And within the parking lots of A and B, typically does Pinnacle does designated spaces for the residents or it's just first come first serve?

Typically designated. No, no, no, they're not. Oh, I thought he said yes.

And does the city have an arborist? I know there was an arborist, but does the city have an arborist? And if so, has the tree been looked at for viability?

The city has a consultant arborist, and she will be reviewing this project and this tree, and we hope to have some guidance by the end of next week prior to city commission.

We also have an arborist looking into it as well, so we'll We'll get together with Citi and work that out.

Yeah, we have a firm that specializes in large tree locations since this came up on Monday. I just don't know enough right now.

very very large tree and we have to figure out whether parcel c is suitable for yeah the the mcdonald's on dixie used to have some pretty amazing figs and they were taken down uh over the years and there's a couple around you know that are huge and very cool um i just lost my train of thought um But I'll remember.

That's okay. Take your time. Mr. Chair, if I could address one question for Mr. Boleski on the height. Absolutely. Step through the calculation. Starts at 30 feet by the zoning district. The sustainable bonus allows additional 15 feet. The plan development allows another 25%. So that gets you to the 56.25.

that in general, the way that I interpret it is a little bit different in the code, but it doesn't have any meaningful impact on you. I think you would apply the 25% first because it says 25% of the base in the table. So I think that would be applied before any bonuses are applied and then you add nine feet, so you're below it anyway for the majority of it.

The first time I did it, I came up with like 67 feet. So, yeah. But we're good with the height regardless across the board. Yes. Okay. Thank you.

I'm sorry, I remembered my question. So 10-foot Bill 2 line doesn't offer a lot of space for a tree canopy, and that's something to NEST and staff to consider is modifications to the Bill 2 line to allow... 12 15 feet you know if we want a tree a proper shade tree over our sidewalks we need more than 10 feet and that's nothing that this property can do like at this moment when there's a condition of approval docking inches um it it i just think that's kind of um you know i just 10 foot built in line is just way too small. In my opinion, it should be bigger to allow for canopy trees, particularly along major thrillers like Sixth Avenue. Where the street is wider and you can have a wider setback or built in line in order to have a better canopy tree. The other question I had the two elevator per building comments so building code only requires one elevator for building.

Yes.

Is that something that we can bring up as a condition? I think the person who spoke about this brought up a great point. In the Bohemian, for example, one elevator was often broken right when I was moving, so that was amazing. And it required basically doubled my moving bill since they had to go across a huge avenue, right, to move all those things and was a huge inconvenience and also safety issue as well. I find it hard to believe that for this many units that only one elevator is required. It seems like more as the public spoke of a safety concern than anything.

I agree. Also being four and five stories high with two elevators per building would be pretty.

I also have a comment about the colors which you guys brought up. So I actually have a large background in affordable housing. I've worked on many award winning projects across the nation, really. And one thing that the firm I work for, really, we would speak about a lot is people who are in low income housing, in affordable housing, you know, they don't want to feel like. we see the low-income housing building. We know this building, these people are coming out, they're low-income. And I'm seeing something in South Florida with the developers choosing a style and colors that all of the affordable housing buildings are doing the same. That teal, that mixed with this orange i'm not really sure where that's coming from but if i look at the other buildings like related gray star other developers um even affordable projects that we've worked on in new york where we you know it's part of the community meetings where the community says you know even though we're we're living in these places and we're grateful we want we don't want to feel like you know, people can point at the low-income people in the neighborhood. So we as a firm started applying more high-end design that, you know, you wouldn't know, right? So although these colors might look fine, I think if we look at buildings like, I don't know, any other residential buildings in the area that are more elevated, these colors are not nowhere in know that you see um so that's just obviously a comment um that i i wanted to address since the colors came up um the second comment i wanted to make was about the arborist and if this um tree would be moved is the city going to be taking care of that or would the developer and the reason i'm asking is because the developer just stated they've never done this before and although they're You've never done this size. Okay. All right. So, but, um, so is the developer moving it or does the city move the tree? To be determined.

Okay. Is it to be determined? I guess it's staff.

So one of the things we're looking at, we've asked the arborist to recommend a tree relocation analysis as to the viability of relocating this tree and its ability to survive the relocation. So that would be part of... They would recommend site characteristics that would be suitable for a tree of this size. And then we need to take that report and work with the applicant further to come to a resolution.

So how do we approve this if we don't have those answers?

You can make it a condition for approval. There is a condition already for the tree mitigation. portion of the landscape plan that that be revised and and be properly accounted for the mitigation requirements in our code that could be part of that tree mitigation plan could you put the potential motions up on the boards yes so again so

This is your motion is a recommendation to the city commission, so if you all want to make suggest changes to the conditions of approval, those would also be recommending those changes to conditions to the conditions.

Okay, so my thoughts do I see that now, then, or that I would like to request a condition.

When is this going before the City Commission? Is it on their agenda yet?

We haven't scheduled it officially yet. We were waiting for the outcome of this meeting. There's been some tentative talks.

I have a thought. We don't know if we can move the tree and how much it's going to cost to move the tree. If we move it to Lot C, you know, you got this big canopy. But, you know, we got a substation, I think, right behind it. So I think Ed Liberty might have something to say about that. So my thought is this. Before this goes in front of the city commission, we need to find out, one, if we can move it. Two, how much it's going to cost to move it. And put that in front of the commission and let them figure out how this is going to get paid for it. That's my recommendation. Because we don't know, and I can't vote on something that I don't know, but I'd like to put a position that we could start the process and come to a conclusion on it. That's my thought on it.

Yes, and I would like to add to that, that I think the city should move this tree. You know, I've worked on projects like this. We worked on many projects, one actually that was featured by the New York Times, where there was a rock, a huge rock in the middle, basically, of this affordable housing building in the Bronx. And the firm did find a way to preserve the rock and build a beautiful design around it. That being said, arborists are, I just think that this particular thing should be handled by someone specialized. And I think it should be handled by the city. And I think the community would probably like to see that as well.

My opinion on this, I care a lot about environmental stuff, and I may not always come off that way because I do work in development, but my father was Richard Valesky. He ran all of the environmental protection we really need affordable housing and having a tree. And now if the tree can be moved, and if the city has the budget, if that can be worked out, I'm in favor of doing so. But if it can't, I would still vote to approve this project. I would not hold up this project because of that. But if it can't be moved, we should really try to do so. But I would be comfortable moving this forward with the recommendation that back to the, you know, we find out that the arborists agree that the tree can't be moved, that it's not viable, that it will die. You know, charcoal figs are known for having fairly shallow roots, but they're very wide roots. So it is possible that they might be able to do print trimming and remove it. And, you know, it's, if it's moving just there, it could be close up. Hopefully they can come up with an engineered solution. But with moving it forward so that it can go to the commission and then the commission you know hopefully this information is available when it goes before then hopefully the public comes and then speaks to the commission and tells them how important it is to them so that the commission can look at um but i think that that's you know i don't think that would sway me to say if it is not viable if the reports come back

um that's my take on it i do i do agree with you at that point i would love to see that tree stay um and but here we are at the board we don't it's the unknown to us can it be moved will it be moved how much will it cost and i don't think that should hold us up with the approval of this uh uh complete pool of this uh board here in

completely willing to see the sculpture garden go away in favor of the tree and that way they don't have to come back to burn a beautiful on that and then it comes down to cost and viability in the commission i'd be happy with any kind of specimen tree instead of sculpture and i know royal plinciana is not a native but they have a lot of canopy and it's really beautiful and if the tree could be moved to either a city property or to where the sculpture is supposed to go Even the mango tree would be super cool because then people could have fruit, you know, stuff. But some kind of really, I think spectacular specimen tree would be better than sculpture because that's my personal opinion on the quote in Marcel C.

Can I ask, based on what she's saying, is it possible, does that qualify at all for credits? If they take this tree and put it somewhere else for the community, does that qualify for credits if they're not doing the sculpture?

I think they're not going to have any problem meeting their credits by providing 100% affordable, even the sculpture, if you got rid of it. I don't think there's... Now, again, we can set conditions that we can't be willing to preserve this tree, and we can make that a requirement, and it's financially feasible to do so, and the tree will survive. I agree with you that I would rather see a big tree there than a...

driving past yes is it possible if we can just require them to move forward with with Following through to see if it's possible. I guess what where I'm scared of is that if we say, oh, it's it's fine, because obviously we can all agree that the city desperately needs affordable housing. So we'd like to pass this. Right. But doesn't that allow the developers to say, oh, we tried, we couldn't. End of story. So is can there be something that we can put as a condition? So if it really is that it cannot be moved, which is perfectly fine, but that we at least made a valiant effort.

So there's already a condition for approval that probably could be modified under on page 13 under site conditions for approval number 2A. They provide an updated landscape plan that meets the mitigation requirements of the land development regulations. You could probably modify that in some way or another to address your concern.

Yeah, I think it would address the community's concerns as well.

These are conditions of approval in the ordinance. I think what we're talking about is prior to going to the board that they have some more information on the viability of the tree.

So what, again, what you're doing is you're making a recommendation to the city commission. So if you wanted to include in your motion for approval of the ordinance, that, um, there be a, that you also recommend that the city commission consider adding a condition of approval to the ordinance regarding the relocation of the tree if it's feasible or something like that. So to give that recommendation to the city commission that you all have considered that, you want them to acknowledge or review the feasibility of that relocation and that that is your preference that they consider that.

You do that as a single motion, like a motion for approval, or is it two motions?

It would be part of your motion for approval with any additional conditions or modifications to conditions that you wanted to recommend.

But if it's a condition to be adopted and we want something before the hearing, how does, you know, because I think one of the comments was made is since there's no scheduled hearing and since you're actively talking with a consultant arborist or whatever, there should be a doable You know, by the time it gets to the board some sort of financial dollar amount or feasibility should be possible, but we couldn't put that in the ordinance because that work, then it'll be past tense.

You can request that the that the applicant continue to to have that information. Continue to work toward having that information available for the city commission what you're recommending, but what i'm suggesting is that your recommendation to the city commission be that they consider. Adding a condition of approval in the ordinance that that tree be relocated if the board if the city commission determines it's it is feasible, so they would have that information from the city's arborist and from the applicants arborist and they make that determination.

And certainly outside of a recommendation contained within the ordinance that is adopted potentially, it's not unusual for the board to provide context and direction relative to those conditions for staff to include in our staff report to the commission.

May I ask you a question?

Okay. I think Mr. Stahl, we have one of our board members online.

My apologies. I'm coming from afar.

Mr. Stahl, I don't know. Can we... One second.

We're trying to get to... Go ahead and speak and we'll see if you're... Just start speaking.

We'll see if we can hear you.

My one thought here is... What happens when we have a city hired consultant, an arborist, and then there's an independent arborist from the development company? So what happens when we get two different opinions on whether the viability of the tree is a yes or a no? My only question is, this just sounds like a tough position to be in. And I'm all about saving a canopy tree. I heard everybody very clearly. And I think that there was a lot of passion there. But this is a difficult task at hand, moving that size of a tree. You know much like an arbitration usually 2 parties have to come and agree on an independent lead non bias. Arborist in this in this case to. Kind of give a final decision on whether or not. This is viable, even if the city was willing to pay for it, or whether the development side pays for it. How do we. How do we not just have a conflict in the end with two different parties possibly coming up with two different answers to this? Because I think ultimately I heard Dan and I think I come from the same position that I think this tree should. There should be an attempt to save it, move it, and do the best we can upon an independent study, in my opinion. But if it can't, sadly, I don't think that that should deny this project. I think the city is in need of more affordable housing, and I think this project meets that. you know, meets that criteria for what this, you know, the city is looking for. But I am curious as to what happens when we have a possibility of two very, you know, two different decisions coming from two different arborists.

So what would happen is that we would have to have both arborists, if they're conflicting, get together with staff and the applicant to discuss this. So since the city has a consultant arborist, we would tend to go with their report as we move forward. And that's really the best answer I have. We've had a couple of these situations where we, with code compliance, tree abuse cases. So the conflicts do arise from time to time and the arborists do mean to discuss and sometimes it works out. But generally, if the city's consultant provides a report, we generally go with that one. But I want to be careful because what if our arborist says it's not feasible and the applicant's arborist says it is? So We would have to get together and discuss this. There's a common one.

Okay.

I have a question regarding the art, the sculptures. Are these sculptures by local artists? Are these just random sculptures? Do we know what they're going to look like?

Well, there's talk that it's sculpture or not. but we have an art curator that will help us select the mural and the mosaic tiles. And as instructed, we're supposed to bring those back for consideration. Our curator will advertise, we'll do a call for artists, and we'll focus on trying to find local people.

Okay, yes. Most of the projects we worked on, affordable housing, we would incorporate a local artist. so um just wanting just wanting to make sure that it would not be like a miami-based artist you know but and someone from long beach county as this is a very arts filled um county with many talented artists yes i agree i have one final recommendation for the applicants just i know um

This is just a recommendation to you. I'm not going to make that part of any motion tonight, but if you would look at your selection criteria for residents for tenant selection, and if there's an ability to prioritize workforce that has an employee within the city of Lake Worth. I know you can't make it exclusive, but if you can do a priority, because I've seen a lot of times where workforce housing gets built and it's just people kind of move from other areas and then vote for the rookie.

You're probably familiar with some language in Section 32 of the IRS code that governs the housing tax credit program that allows that if a state makes a designation, for certain central service workers, then those can get a fair housing exemption under the code. So we'll study that. That's been the top that was adopted by the state legislature in 2025. We'll study that to see if we can tailor a unique residency preference for local local workers who pay perhaps even city employees. We'll take a look.

I want to make one more comment. I think they are in building And lots A and B are perfect. The only art that I'm talking about is being replaceable with a tree is the one in C. Right. Because I loved all the design and everything in A and B.

A true film. name or year old, that you would see driving he's found the two mosaic tile bump outs on the building sculpture. So yes, I can.

I have one quick comment. I want to thank you for coming back. Two years ago, we looked at affordable housing on that spot instead of listed the three story walker. And thank you for stepping back, reconsidering what you brought forward. Thank you very much. Thank you.

Any other comments from the board that will entertain a motion?

I'll make a motion, but before I just want to read to everybody what I intend to kind of tack on the motion in terms of what we discussed for the tree, which would be that essentially the motion as prepared by staff to recommend approval, but then a second paragraph that just says this recommendation is contingent upon the applicant presenting a fee and a recommendation for the commission to consider an additional condition to require relocation if feasible. Does that cover what you guys were concerned? Is he saying that it's contingent, okay? Fairly. And it is with Florida. Yeah, so is everyone okay with that? Okay. and parking dimensions to reduce the required depth of parking. And two, section 23.6-1 C2B to reduce the required five foot landscape strip adjacent to the alley. To construct a 92 dwelling unit multifamily residential development at the subject site based on the competent and substantial evidence provided in the staff report and in the testimony at the public hearing. This recommendation is contingent upon the applicant PRIOR TO FINAL APPROVAL AND INCLUDES RECOMMENDATION FOR THE COMMISSION TO CONSIDER AN ADDITIONAL CONDITION IF THE RELOCATION IS DEEDED TO BE FUSIBLE.

DO I HAVE A SECOND?

SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. OPPOSED? NAY. NONE. SO APPROVED. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you for your time, your presentation. And thank you for all those others that came up this evening.

We're going to just continue on to finish our agenda at this point.

Planning issues, are there any general planning issues from the staff to discuss?

Yes, and I apologize. I'm going to need to have you stay here a little longer. This is a, this is an item that's being brought to you for a use interpretation and I apologize. It was not added to your packet. Something I forgot to do, but it's something that I can ask the board now for you to consider. Just give me a little patient with me on trying to explain this. Is Mr. Reichel still here? Yeah. So we had an inquiry. I'm trying to give some context. We had an inquiry on a business that would like to go to the downtown zoning district. And what we typically do as a team, we ask for the narrative of the business. We ask for an explanation of what they want to do. Essentially, where we landed was a type of use that we felt at the time was a medical office use. And with coordinating with Mr. Reichel, who again is here, and he can provide an additional explanation, it started to become an area where it could be a different use type unrelated to medical office. Medical office uses are not allowed in the downtown zoning district. So the type of business that is being requested is somewhat of a office with lab component, accessory lab component to it. Essentially, there's And, um, I guess people would come in and, um, being a cop and no one comes there. Okay. That's how it was explained. If you want to get up and explain this, sorry.

Thank you very much. I'm Bill Reifel. I have a commercial real estate firm here for 40 years. And we're working on a project at 302 Leucerne, which is an older building that was totally renovated. I think really a gentleman that did a phenomenal job. So we put on the market for lease or sale and we came upon a buyer. that is located just west of there, actually, in Palm Beach County, unincorporated area. They've been in business for seven years. And essentially they are, it'll be an office component with a lab component. No one comes there to peel a cup or give blood or anything. All those samples are shifted to them. They look at them, they evaluate them, they're picked up. None of it is considered biohazard waste, which I think is an important component. It's clean. it's it's just a very clean uh highly regulated type of business with this kind of lab work they've been in business for seven years um it's a it's actually a very pretty strong sale for the city i mean you know you guys look at your tax base it's good comp sales um i'm not a liberty to tell you what it is but it'll it's it's pretty significant Really good people. It's a cash transaction. And we're just here. The main thing for them is they want to know that they can use this facility for what they could do. So I'm here to answer any questions and hopefully get a clarification if that's acceptable in your minds.

Do you know what's the name of the company?

Sure. It's NRG Management LLC. They've been in business seven years. And basically what they do is they test, I guess, hearing for substance abuse for different facilities throughout the state. We have plenty of them. I don't know if that means anything to you, but they've been around for a while. On Lucerne? 302 Lucerne, yes.

The medical office isn't allowed on Lucerne? Because my dentist used to be on Lucerne. It was in that building that is now a restaurant.

We'll confirm, but it's either going to be a condition use permit or it's not allowed. The medical office would have supplemental regulations.

And the code doesn't have a medical or dental office? Medical or dental lab.

They do, but it's not allowed in the Sony district either. Those are typically allowed in industrial districts.

And on 302 Le Cern, what was in this, do we know what was in this building before?

No, but we can check real quick. I don't know what, we'd have to look at the business license and activity.

But if it's a lab, it's a lab.

It's an office with lab facility.

You have a percentage of square footage that's for the testing? Like is it 30% or less?

The whole building, I think it's... 2,800 feet. I would say, I guess, 50-50. But there's nobody coming there to get services. Right.

There's nobody walking. It's good. It's just the employees and shipping.

Yeah. And the employees, there's five employees there. There's eight parking spaces. So it really kind of alleviates any parking concerns in that particular area. We've had a lot of other kids that might be there that would probably take up a lot of parking. Yoga studios, hair salon.

So regular offices alone? Regular office?

Yes.

So the idea would be that this decision would be just to make it regular office instead of medical office?

With accessory lab component, yes.

Because I know in unincorporated code, the parking requirements for medical office are higher than professional office, and there's some other things that lean to the greater impacts of a medical facility, but you're Talking about less maybe than even than a regular office.

This is not really medical. I think of medical as like a dental office or a surgeon's office. Treatment.

What would we consider that then is what we're talking about, right?

So the consideration would be an office used with accessory labs. So if the board is amenable to that, that would be the use interpretation, and we can get Mr. Reichel and head in the right direction.

I'm fine with that. Thank you.

that does any, has any kind of lab component. It shouldn't even, if they're not facing outward to customers and they're not, you know, bringing people in, I don't see any reason. I'm always in favor of making it general enough that it applies for us to work. Thank you.

Mr. Chair, can we get a motion on that? We'll get a motion. I need somebody to make a motion and I can't.

One specific to the law of the nation.

No, I think just for this interpret that for this use, it wouldn't be specific to location. Um, it would just be, you know, really bringing this to the board to. Way if this, if you feel this is an office use.

Motion to recommend staff consider a use. That is an office with accessory laboratory as an office use. Is that what you're looking for?

Yeah, I mean, that sounds, uh. All in favor?

Aye. Thank you.

We do have public comments for anybody that wants to speak on any non-agenda items. Anybody here right now? Any department reports? Any other information? Any board members have anything else to say?

I'll say something. Staff, wow, you knock it out of the park with your packets and two resubs. I mean, you guys got civil plans, landscape plans. It made our zoning packets and unincorporated look very light. That is intense. You guys look at a lot of stuff. That was pretty awesome with Pinnacle. And I mean, the renderings and the visual analysis. I mean, the level of detail that you guys demand. That's really, really impressive. I was a little apprehensive, though, because with that level of detail, I mean, you even had the pipes for the utilities. There always is going to be those administrative modifications because you're never going to be able to be perfect, right? So you guys do those like ZARs kind of things, like administrative tweaks. You're going to. I mean, we're just going to find mistakes. I just have one comment on the parking spaces. It would be really nice if they said vehicle versus vehicle. bike because I had a hard time doing the math on the parking spaces it would say the parking spaces but when I think of parking spaces a compact space is a vehicle space an ADA is a vehicle space a regular space is a vehicle space and then the bike spaces are a bike space you know and I did have a little bit of a challenge trying to figure out the parking because 30 to bike spaces is eight equivalency or whatever, but just think about that, you know, vehicle. So it might be easier for us to digest. But great job. I mean, that was just an incredible packet.

Thank you. And really, I mean, it's, a testimony of the applicant because you know we do our review and they resubmit and they were very thorough in their resubmittal which is why it was really too recent i mean there were three but they really they nailed it pretty good so i think this is going to be a very um impactful project for our community so it's very exciting to see yeah i really like

I actually like the colors. I mean, especially if you're a Dolphin fan, which I'm not. But I think the Art Deco, you know, the Art Deco on that, that really does fit our vernacular here in Point Brook Beach. But no, and what they came with two years ago, I mean, I raised hell at City Commission, a three-story walk-up on that spot. It was just like, come on, we can do better. Pinnacle. They presented this to you three years ago, I guess they presented it.

three-story walk-up. And that was CRA-funded project from about 10 years ago. And at that time, that was the max you could do on that. And our city, over time, grows. And now we're able to do very much. I agree with you. I think it's a great use.

I'm proud of our city for what we've done.

Well, there's also been a lot of changes in the availability of funding for these kinds of projects at the state level and the federal level. So, you know, in support of affordable housing. So I think there's a lot of different factors that have played into them being able to you know really bring a better a better project to to for consideration specifically the county uh the county for all of you that voted for the housing bond loan program because uh

funding for our projects through the county for that. So it's an excellent program.

Well, I want to thank the staff who did a great job with the presentation and And I want to thank my board for the great questions that we presented. I think we all did well. And if there's no further business, we're adjourned.

I'd just like to add one thing. This is my last meeting. I'm going over to the CRA next month. But it's been fun. This was a great way to end it. It really was. This is a great project. Like I said, you guys put so much work into it. A lot of weekend reading, I'm glad. But it was really great. important to you all.

Thank you.