Planning and Zoning Board - Regular Meeting

I'd like to call this meeting to order. This is the 03/11/2026 meeting of the Coconut Creek Planning and Zoning Board. Ms. Bausch, you call the roll, please.

JULIE KIRIN KIRIN LAJOY: Present. Ms. Nancy Fry.

JULIE L.

Here. JULIE Mr. Alex Escoriasa.

JULIE L.

KIRIN Chair Jeffrey Light.

Here.

Deputy City Attorney Kathy Mahaffy. Here. Assistant Director of Resilient Design and Development Lizette Aguilar. Here. Planning Manager DeAndrea Moyes. Here. And also we have with us tonight the Director of Resilient Development Resilient Design and Development, Justin Proffitt.

This meeting is being conducted live with a quorum physically present. The material for today's meeting is available online at www.coconutcreek.gov. Anyone wishing to appeal any decision made will need a record of the proceedings and for such purpose may need to ensure that a verbatim recording of the proceedings is made, including the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. The archive of this meeting may be requested from the city clerk or may be heard online at www.coconutcreek.gov. If you haven't already, please silence your cell phones. If you must take a call, please excuse yourself and step outside.

All right.

The first item is the approval of the 01/14/2026 meetings of the board. Are there any corrections or revisions to the minutes from that meeting? All right. Seeing none, is there a motion and a second to approve the minutes as presented?

So moved.

Second.

Ms. Fry? Yes. Mr. Scorriaza?

Yes.

Mr. Briggs?

Yes.

Vice Chair LaPlante? Yes. And Chair Light?

Yes. We're now going to consider several quasi judicial items. Will the Board of Attorney please explain the city's quasi judicial procedures?

Yes. Florida courts have determined well, first, wanna remind everybody, if you didn't already turn off your cell phones, please do so. Florida courts have determined that there are certain types of matters, including agenda items four, five, and six on tonight's agenda that are to be treated differently than other items considered by the board. In these quasi judicial applications, the board is applying existing rules and policies to a factual situation and is therefore acting like a judge and jury do in a trial held in the courtroom. In such cases, the courts have decided that due process and fundamental fairness require that more formal procedures be followed.

The board's decision must be based on the evidence and information that is presented at the public hearing, including the agenda materials, staff recommendation, testimony presented at the public hearing, and the deliberations of the board. The quasi judicial procedures require that the board consider the evidence presented to it and base their decision on the applicable law and primarily on credible evidence presented whether by staff, the applicant, or members of the public. In a quasi judicial proceeding, the board is not allowed to take into consideration public sentiment or the popularity of a particular development proposal or application. The board may only consider competent substantial evidence. This means testimony or other evidence that a reasonable mind would accept is credible and adequate to support a conclusion.

Florida courts have made it clear that mere generalized statements or opposition are to be disregarded, but fact based testimony can be considered competent and substantial evidence. This can include eyewitness observation testimony about relevant facts and documentary evidence including photographs, aerials, and maps. Citizens who want to participate in a quasi judicial hearing can testify as to factual matters in any element of the case that would not require specialized training or specific academic degrees. Their testimony will be considered provided their testimony is backed up by established facts, studies, or evidence that is not conjecture or just based on a feeling. The quasi judicial hearing process is not a popularity contest.

The strict rules of evidence do not apply during the public hearing, but any comments must be relevant to the agenda item. Everyone who seeks to speak on an item will be given an opportunity to speak. If you intend to provide testimony on the application to be considered tonight, you will be sworn in before your testimony is taken. Please know if you speak, you may be subject to cross examination. The board may comment or ask questions of persons addressing the board at any time. If you refuse to be either cross examined or to be sworn, your testimony will be considered in that context and given its due weight. The general public will not be permitted to cross examine witnesses but may request that the board direct questions on their behalf to the applicant or staff. Will the clerk please confirm compliance with the notice requirements?

The city has satisfied the legally required public notice for the public hearings for agenda items four, five, and six.

Thank you. Will the board please oh, will the board clerk please swear in the witnesses for agenda items four, five, and six?

Anyone wishing to speak on these quasi judicial items, please stand and raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Thank you. When you come forward to speak, please state your name and address clearly for the record. State whether or not you've been sworn in and whether or not you understand DAY: the rules of the proceedings. We

will now hear agenda item four. And if there are no objections from the board, the applicant staff, or public, we'll also hear items five and six at the same time as they are related. Are there any objections to doing that?

Okay. In that case, are there any disclosures on behalf of the board for agenda items four, five, and six? I see none, and hear none. Thank you very much.

All right. City staff will now make its presentation.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Good evening members of the board, staff, applicants, and of course, of the public. For the record, my name is Lisette Aguilar. I'm the assistant director of the Resilient Design and Development Department. To my right is.

Deandra Moyes. I'm the planning manager with the urban design and development division.

And just behind us is Justin. Justin Proffitt, the director of our department. The next three agenda items relate to the same redevelopment proposal for the Al Hendrickson Toyota property located at 5201 West Sample Road. The applications before you this evening include agenda item number four, a rezoning application from B 4 Regional Shopping District to planned Main Street Development District or PMDD to redevelop the existing Al Hendrickson Toyota automobile dealership. Agenda item number five, an amendment to chapter 13 of the city's land development code to amend section 13 dash six two six master business list planned Main Street Development District to adopt the list of permitted and special land uses specific to the Al Hendriksson Toyota PMDD.

And agenda item number six, a site plan application to redevelop the existing Al Hendriksson Toyota automobile dealership. I'm going to try and summarize all three applications in a chronological and succinct way, so here we go. So starting off with just a tiny bit of history, when the original site plan, excuse me, when the original site plan was approved for Al Hendriksen back in 1989, the property was zoned b four. The property currently has a b four zoning. So fast forward to 12/02/2004, excuse me, I have a frog in my throat.

The city commission adopted the Main Street Design Standards, which established the overall design framework for the entirety of Main Street. However, that those design standards do not have the effect of rezoning property. As such, re the rezoning application and the rezoning of new development or redevelopment, or in this case, from the b four to a PMDD, provides consistency with those adopted standards, the adopted main street design standards. The land development code amendment is a necessary amendment to implement the Al Hendriksson PMDD, and to provide clarity on what types of uses and special land uses will be permitted. As for the site plan, there are currently two distinct structures on this site, a sales showroom and a service car wash building.

A site plan application, or this site plan application to redevelop the Al Hendriksson Toyota automobile dealership would expand the dealership from approximately 39,300 square feet to approximately 98,000 square feet. It also provides for a 157,300 square foot, roughly, six story parking garage with 568 inventory parking spaces. It also provides for the integration of many of the main street design standards. Overall, staff has reviewed and finds that agenda item number four, the rezoning application from b four regional shopping district to planned Main Street Development District or PMDD, agenda item number five, an amendment to chapter 13 of the city's land development code, and agenda item number six, a site plan application to redevelop existing Al Hendrickson Toyota automobile dealership, comply with the city's land development code, minimum site plan review requirements of the land development code, and the comprehensive plan. Staff findings are further summarized in the agenda item report and backup information in your agenda packages.

Staff is recommending that the board recommend approval of agenda items four, five, and six subject to outstanding DRC comments. This concludes staff's presentation. I see representatives here on behalf of the property owner, and I believe they are here to make a brief presentation. Other than that, I'm happy to take any questions from the board. That concludes the staff's presentation. Thank you.

Before we get into the substance of it, you need to understand, if this site was zoned B-four, when Main We Street, this site was not part of the Main Street project. So how did the design standards for Main Street become applicable to this site?

So the boundaries, right, of the Main Street project area go north to south, Wiles to Sample, and east to west, say Road 7 to Lyons Road. And the Main Street design standards are applicable to all of the development within that big square. Since

Okay.

Toyota is within it, they would be subject to

it. Okay. Alright, thank you.

You're welcome.

I'll turn to the applicant now to make its presentation.

Good evening, Liz Somerstein, 200 East Broward Boulevard. I'm technologically challenged. So, is it just this for sliding forward? All right, great. So I'm sure you're all familiar. I'll try to keep this brief because Liz did a wonderful job giving you kind of the recap. So I'm sure you're familiar with the location. It's North Of Sample Road in between 54th And Banks. This is the entire existing site. We have really three items before you, but two applications that pending with the city.

One is the site plan, and the other is the rezoning to go from B4 to the PMDD. As was mentioned by staff, the rezoning is really a function of bringing Since we're doing the site plan and expanding the dealership, we're now rezoning to PMDD, so our design standards are consistent with the overall Main Street design standards. Again, this is the existing zoning. You can see the subject site in red, is B 4. The rest of the patched marked area, that's all PMDD, with the purple as I'm one.

Again, with the proposed rezoning, we would be consistent with the surrounding area and creating our PMDD. This is to give you just a little bit of an overview of the scope of the site plan amendment. So we're really adding let me take a little bit of a step back to just explain the purpose of the site plan. So Toyota, this is dictated mostly by Toyota Corporate. This building was built in the '80s, and really for branding purposes, Toyotas across the nation are supposed to really revamp their sites to have consistent product about every ten years.

This site has never been done that. Think I it's the last Toyota in the Southeast Region to upgrade their location. So this site plan amendment that's before you is really dictated by forces above the individual property owner. It's being required by Toyota. And so as part of the expansion, they're expanding the building, you can see by about 60,000 square feet.

There's a small auxiliary building off to the I'm gonna get turned around here, off to the west, no, to the east. West, sorry. Off to the west, we're not touching that building. They're adding a car wash detailing area that's in the parking garage, that's gonna expand by about 4,000 square feet, but the bulk of the expansion for this site is the parking garage, which was meant to keep the car dealerships, so we need a lot of parking spaces to hold our inventory. The purpose of the parking garage was to keep our inventory off of the surface street, so to create a parking structure to hold the majority of our inventory on-site.

You can see the top is the current existing view of the dealership, and the bottom is the proposed renovation. So you could see it's modernizing the building, but keeping with the same Toyota coloring and branding. Project features, I won't I'll spare you from reading all of these, but some of the big ones that I wanna point out is that we are adding an eight foot path along Banks Road, like a sidewalk walking path, as well as a bike lane, and a median there along Banks Road. Along sample, we have a 12 foot meandering path, and both of those paths are going to be Venetian red concrete. A long sample, it's gonna be a meandering 12 foot path.

There's gonna be three pedestrian plazas with permeable pavers, some benches. We're adding an EV bench towards the entrance of the building, so there'll be some shade, and customers, they need to come and charge some of their electronics, will be the bench out front. And again, I want to mention the parking garage because that is a big component of the upgraded site. It's going to be a six story, six level parking garage, but one of the key features is this green wall that's along the front, and it has this technology. I'm trying to summarize it without reading you this whole thing, but even though it's an artificial green wall, the technology that it has is it breaks down VOCs and essentially acts as if it is traditional landscaping, but it's much easier to maintain and is meant for outdoor spaces like this.

I just want to point out on the pedestrian plaza along Sample Road, those are the three plazas and some images of the EV benches that I was mentioning. There's also going to be traditional benches along Sample and a shade pavilion structure. This is showing the enhanced landscaping for the site, so we are maximizing the landscaping within the existing footprint that we have on the site. And this is just a photo to show you the project in context. And so even though you see the square footage and the building is expanding quite a bit, the scale of the building is staying at the pedestrian scale from Sample Road.

I believe oh, here. We're also doing some interior updates, you can see what the inside of the building is going to look like, so the entire project is going to be modernized at a much more beautiful dealership in that location. We're here for any questions that you have.

I have lots of questions.

All right. Thank you for now. We're going to open this to public hearing. Are there any members of the public who'd like to speak on agenda items four, five, or six? All right, I don't see any response. The staff have any questions for the applicant?

No, not at this time.

All right. Does the applicant have any questions for staff or anyone else? Public hearing then is now closed. Do members of the board have any questions for the staff or the applicant?

All

right, I guess I'll start. So, I had one question. It was mentioned EV chargers, but then you said there were benches. That's not electronic vehicle chargers, or charging stations?

They're separate. So the EV there's EV parking on the site plan, but these are let me just see

if I'll

But the 12 it says 12 quantity new EV chargers?

That's the parking.

That is the parking, okay.

And this

is separate. So these are these benches you can see in the top right hand corner that You have

said something about EV benches, and that's I just wanted to clarify on that.

Thank

For clarification, I believe that is 12 EV parking stations. It is not 12 charging stations.

Correct. Oh,

okay. So it's just special parking for electric vehicles not charging for electronic vehicles? No, there's charging.

Oh, all 12 of those?

Okay.

There is 12 EV charging designated spaces for customers to park their cars and charge.

Okay. And that's exclusively for customers to use?

Yes, that's not for

Not for public? Yeah. Okay. And then, I think I read, the purpose of having this new parking garage is just for increased inventory for Yes. The Okay. That's all I have. Thank you.

Diane? Yeah. Okay. If you could put back the previous plan. It's a rendering of an aerial. It's like a not there yet. The one, you know, the kind of oblique view you just had it up before. That's it. Okay. Thank you. You.

Get there eventually.

Alright. So of all of all the drawings, I mean, presentation, the renderings in this case, The last building is the garage. Right? So the last footprint is the garage. What is right behind it today?

It is the city owned, it's like a surface parking lot.

City owned. And what is that going to become? In other words, who's going to be looking upon that garage? It's interesting nobody's here so nobody's objecting. So, is that because that property isn't developed yet?

I defer to the city, city owned property and it's a parking lot right now. I don't know what the city has planned for it in the future.

Okay, maybe.

Right. So it is a city owned property that's currently a surface parking lot. At this time, we do not yet know what it's going to be. But as we worked with the applicant for setbacks and landscaping on the north side of the parking garage, we paid special attention to that.

So if it's just a parking lot, there is no plans, master plan going forward for a use that may not be compatible with a six story building? For instance, a school. Is there anything in the plans that once you, you know, look at your plan and says, yes, we're considering an elementary school in the back of that building.

So there's no formal plans or concepts, I guess, for that lot at this time. So, like I said, what we could do right now is just make sure that we have an appropriate setback from that property line, making sure that that garage on that facade is screened appropriately, that we include additional landscaping on there to, for right now, prevent any, you know, potential negative impacts. But we don't have anything formal in right now for that property.

Okay. I have a few more questions. It's just the background. So obviously the growth is substantial, but it may not be. It may mean the use of this property may continue as is. Now you can have more inventory there. In other words, is there any kind of a consolidation into this facility that's going to generate traffic that isn't there now? I mean, I hope the business goes well and you have more customers and all that, but are you consolidating anything into this facility from other locations?

No, it's just this expanded facility.

Just the same location, just upgrading it?

Yes.

Okay. Yeah, that's those are the big questions. Thank you.

Hi, thank you very much. I actually do remember when the structure was built back in 'eighty nine, and I think that this is a major facelift that was definitely warranted. And as far as the parking garage goes, I think that's for the cars to keep them cooler with the sun. Like most all the car dealerships around here all have six, seven story parking garages. So, think that I definitely think that this is in the right direction. This is just something I'm throwing out there. I like the benches. They're metal, aren't they?

Yes. So,

with the heat in South Florida, is there any way that we can get like a canopy over those? Or, you know, like if people are sitting there waiting for the bus, so since these will be your benches, right, not the city's?

Yes.

I'm just asking, that's just something I was thinking of, especially with the metal.

Well, there is, It's not directly over the benches, but there is a shaded pavilion that's going to be near the bench area as well, if you can see on the bottom right hand corner.

Okay. Yeah, no, that was the only comment that I just think that this is well needed and just about the benches. And so, otherwise, everything else looks good for me. Thank you.

And just for additional clarity, there is significant tree canopy along Sample Road, so the intent would be to have those benches located such that the canopy helps provide some of the shade for the benches themselves.

I have a question about the ordinance and zoning. Should I wait until the next agenda item, or we can bundle it here?

No, since we read all three items and the Board have no objection to doing it as one project, I think we can start that conversation.

So I understand the, I guess, not constraint, but impetus to updating the PMDD, it's just complying. Why is it only limited to that parcel rather than the other B4s in that area?

This applicant only owns this property.

Okay.

So they're just rezoning the property that they own. They don't have control over the adjacent B-four properties.

Would Citi consider throwing it into the ordinance to change those zones preemptively, or

Liz, do you mind flipping back

to There's that significant notice requirements and different depending on who initiates an application, they have to be treated differently, whether it's something city initiated versus applicant initiated. And so that entire overlay was and the main street planning area was put in place to be done on an applicant driven as development occurs.

I know that's clear.

And just

so you have for reference the other B4 properties besides the city owned parking lot that's just behind our property, The one with the purple on it, that's owned by FP and L.

Mhmm.

And then the one to the left of it is part of the casino, the So Seminole it's there isn't large developments

Yeah.

That could go in those properties.

Right. And as well, because this is a car dealership and their PMDD list of permitted uses is specific to the car dealership, you couldn't rezone the other piece, the city owned piece, to PMDD and then limit to those two. So it would have to go through its own rezoning to attach those permitted uses to that site.

Okay. So application initiated and uses specific. Got it.

Yes.

Thank you.

Yeah, I just what is the setback behind the parking garage to the property line?

It is. Give me one moment. 17.5 feet.

Okay. I assume that complies with the city ordinance? Any other questions from anyone? Okay. All right. Any closing remarks?

No, just if you had any other questions, otherwise, you

for Thank Closing remarks?

Nope, not at this time. Thank you.

Are there any comments or deliberations from the board on agenda item four, the PMDD rezoning application for the Al Hendriksen Toyota dealership? If not, I'll take a motion on Agenda Item four, the PMDD rezoning application for the Al Hendrix and Toyota auto dealership.

Motion to approve Agenda Item four.

Second.

Roll call please.

Ms. Fry? Yes. Mr. Scorriaza?

Yes.

Mr. Briggs?

Yes.

Vice Chair LaPlante? Yes. Chair Light?

Yes. Are there any additional comments or questions from the board on agenda item five, an amendment to the land development code to amend the PMDD master business list? If not, I'll take a motion on agenda item five, an amendment to the Land Development Code related to the Al Hendrix and Toyota PMDD permitted and special land use Master Business List.

Motion to approve agenda item five.

Seconded. Roll call, please.

Ms. Fry? Yes. Mr. Escoriasa?

Yes.

Mr. Briggs?

Yes.

Vice Chair LePlante? Yes. Chair Light?

Yes. Are there any comments or deliberations from the Board on agenda item six, the site plan application for the Al Hendrix Ontario Auto dealership? If not, I'll take a motion on agenda item six, the site plan application for the Al Hendrix and Toyota auto dealership.

Motion to approve agenda item six.

Second.

Roll call, please.

Ms. Frye? Yes. Mr. Escoriasa?

Yes.

Mr. Briggs?

Yes.

Vice Chair LePlante? Yes. Chair Leich?

Yes.

All right.

So that actually, I think, concludes everything related to Al Hendriksen. So, thank you. Well, next, we'll move on to agenda item seven, an amendment to the land development code regarding fees for private provider plan review and inspection services. Presentation by the city staff, please.

Yes, sir. Good evening, Justin Proffitt, director. Good to see all of you. I haven't been here in a while. It's good to be back. I think you'll see more of me, because our legislature has been busy. And when they get busy, they sometimes pass laws that require local governments to adopt new ordinances. And in this case, we have a new we have it's not new, but it's in the past few years, the legislature has adopted legislation regarding what they call private provider services. Just I'll briefly explain what that means. So, private provider services only applies to building code plan review and building code inspections performed by our building department.

Developers and contractors and property owners now have a choice, when they construct something, that they can now either use the services of the local government's building department, or in the case of plan review and inspection services, they can now utilize the concept of a private provider to review plans and to perform inspections. These types of plan reviews and inspections only apply to things like structural, electrical, plumbing, mechanical. It does not apply to fire. It does not apply to landscaping. It does not apply to zoning, or utilities, or engineering.

So, it's just related to building code plan review and building code services. There's a whole procedure in the statutes and in our policies at the city for that type of private provider action to take place. There needs to be registration. There needs to be contractor identification, a whole registration procedure, and review process by the city as we follow those statutory requirements. But, one of the main features of this type of alternative plan review and inspection service now is a requirement that when this occurs, a reduction in a city's when a contractor or a property owner chooses to use a private provider, they are now entitled to a reduction in plan review and inspection fees here at the city.

So, in the case of this ordinance, the plan review and inspection review fee reductions would consist of a maximum 15% if a contractor or a private provider provides plan review and inspection services, and a maximum of 5% if just inspections are performed. One thing I would ask the board to do, because the legislation is actually currently evolving right now in Tallahassee, so with the recommendation tonight, one thing I would ask the board to do is direct city staff, as a part of your recommendation, to consider any new updates to legislation, and I'll let you know what that means. Right now, there is legislation under consideration that may increase the minimum fee reductions. And, right now, it's looking like the maximum fee reduction under that legislation could be 50% of the fee for plan review services and 25% of the fee for inspection services. So, if the recommendation is for approval of this text amendment, I would ask that you also direct staff to include any additional bills that are approved in order to avoid having to come back to the Planning and Zoning Board if something like that significantly changes.

And that way, we can move forward to the city commission. With that, I'm here to answer any questions. And again, staff recommends approval of the ordinance. We don't really have a choice. It is law. It is state law. So what we are doing is reflecting that in our ordinances and carrying out those statutory requirements. Thank you.

Do members of the board have any questions?

I have questions on

this. Yes.

I'm assuming there is some sort of study that went along that established the 15.5%?

Yes. Our building official and our permitting supervisor have looked at some of the average fees and costs of services over time. We've also done a survey of other cities around Broward County. Quite an exhaustive survey. So, with a combination of the cost analysis that they looked at, and the surrounding cities in Broward County, that's how we went about doing this.

So, this is within the norm?

Yes. One of the things we didn't want to do is be way outside of the norm of what most cities were doing, in addition to looking at what we believe is the appropriate feed Like,

dead center the norm?

So, average so, in the report, we put that so, we've got we actually updated this spreadsheet for you. So, on the average around Broward County, it is an approximate 20% to 25% reduction, maximum reduction, and a little bit lower for inspection services. And that's so, we are at we're a little bit more conservative in our recommendation, compared to the rest of the county.

And do you get this request often to use private providers?

It's not as popular now, though it probably will be more popular considering that the fees, if this bill is adopted, the fee reductions will go up much higher. So I would imagine there will be more interest in this. And I believe they're also increasing the flexibility of this law, well, in terms of who can use it and how they can use it, so it may become more popular with this new legislation. But right now, we don't see a lot of it. We do see it what we mostly see it on are small projects, like air conditioning change outs, or electrical work, or plumbing work, but not any larger projects, at least not yet.

Interesting. Okay, thank you.

Yep.

All right,

I have a couple questions. Yes. First off, the where it says the registration and verification of private provider credentials, is that through the city, or is that through the state?

Which where are you looking, in the report?

On the yeah, the agenda item report, page two, first bullet point.

Yes. So, that's the city. So, the city has a packet that we will when someone initiates the request to use a private provider, we have a registration packet with a bunch of procedures and checklists for them to go through, and all the bits of information that we need to allow that type of service.

Okay, good. So, it's not something that's regulated through the state, it's regulated through the city?

Well, it's regulated through the state.

Or sorry, their registration

verification? We monitor it and gather up the information on who's doing it, where is it located, typical things like that. I mean, at the end of the day, we have to issue the building permit, so we need some basic information at the very least, but there is a lot of information in that packet that we get.

Yeah, I just want to make sure that someone in the city is keeping tabs on who's doing this work. Yes. And then, as far as the oversight and audit of the inspection reports, is that being factored in when we're talking about the supposed cost savings of someone using a private provider? Is there still costs to the city for this oversight and audit process?

So that is included in terms of our workload. And there is a fee also in the audit that's included in the I believe it's included in the ordinance as well, if there's an audit needed.

Okay. And then, just procedural question for the direction to the staff to consider any new legislation that arises this session? Does that happen when we move to pass or not pass the ordinance?

Yeah. I would ask you to just add that additional direction in your recommendation.

Got it. Thank you.

You go ahead.

So

I just was thinking of this. For the private providers, is there like a list, approved provider list, through the city of who people could choose?

There's not a list, but we do have it's public records on who's providing them. If someone ever wanted to know, you know, types of companies that do this, they could ask for that, and we would provide it that way.

And why would a person, you know, a developer, hire a private provider after the permit is issued? Where would they need help for the private provider after the permit is issued?

In that scenario, they could use it for inspections.

Oh, is

that As long as the city hasn't performed any of those inspections, they could use it for inspections.

And they would get back because they've already paid all the fees, they'd get back 5%.

And they would get back 5%.

Okay, thank you.

Okay,

you.

Yeah, so, I'm president of an association in Windmoor. So, I'm very curious, does this save us money or cost more money whenever we have to do a project? So, say we have a project to do some structural upgrades of our facadesupport system right in the front of the building. Say it costs 50,000 all in, buried in there is a fee to the city. If if the contractor or we ask the contractor to elect this private provider.

Does that in any way reduce our cost? It's not clear to because I've heard the cost to the city. I'm talking about the cost now to the applicant, to a typical applicant. Would they be motivated to go this way to save money, besides what other benefits on detriments there may be?

Yeah, I think that's, I think that, I think it's dependent on the type of project you're doing, but I think my understanding, the intent of the legislation is that there is going to be some kind of savings to a property owner to utilize this type of service. You know, I don't know exactly what that savings is, except for what you see in this ordinance, will be a permit fee reduction. But I think the intent is that there will be a savings in time, in terms of a plan review.

You

know, you can now utilize one of the many types of engineers out there that are available to do this, instead of just relying on a city. And same with inspections. So, I think it's a time savings as well, which time is money.

Okay. Thank you.

Yeah, I think it makes sense on the inspections. That tends to be the bandwidth limitation. But for plan review, this is more for developers than that are making their own and submitting their own applications with plans from their specialists, engineers, whatever, that a regular property owner still would need an electrician, an HVAC person to create plants, correct?

Yes. They will have, the way it works, they'll have their team that will create a plan, and that it will be reviewed by a private provider. That provider Okay. Yeah, they would, I mean, just as much as we review their plans, in this case, that private provider, maybe an engineer, or a structural engineer, electrical, depending on the type of job, they would review those plans.

Okay, so it's just, again, increasing the bandwidth of plan review and inspections? Got it. Yes. Okay. Understood. Thank you.

I'm sorry. I have another question. Does the city have staffing issues or shortage of the professionals to do this on the city side?

Right now, no, we are fully staffed.

Right. So, the way it's drafted now, I don't anticipate that there would be a savings, because it's only marginal benefit, you know, percentage wise for the city the way it's drafted now. Who knows what Tallahassee's gonna do? So really, it would just be speed, but if you're properly staffed, there, I wouldn't anticipate a significant delay there either. True. So I guess we wait to see what Tallahassee does.

That's true, yes.

Okay. May I? One more. Yeah.

No, so we've actually, at my building, did see county employees come and do inspections, And they said they're from the county, but they're assisting Coconut Creek. Maybe there was some backlog too that needed to clear. So, using a private engineer, and I know some of your plant inspectors, not inspectors, the people who review the plants here, particularly the structural part. And, I know their capabilities, and we had some record. These new engineers, do they have any training in being reviewers?

Do they have to show some skill in that? I'm a licensed professional engineer, no longer licensed because it's in New York. But, my job was just to design buildings, not to review all the people's work. Although, you know, if you had younger staff that reviewed their work, but it's very different than reviewing on behalf of a building department. Is there any any training they have to do?

I don't know about the exact training they do. First of all, they need to be licensed in their discipline, of course. And I believe there's also things like they need to have insurance. They need to have all the other identification and qualification statements attached. I'm just looking at our policy here.

So I think by the time you get done filling out and getting all of this information, you're getting more seasoned individuals that have the experience. And if you're going to use a private provider, you want to ensure that you're using someone that does have that experience, so you're not wasting your time going back and forth with someone making comments that are irrelevant to your design team, right? So, you're going to utilize someone who's definitely trained. Now, to go back to what you said earlier, yes, we occasionally will use outside plan review and inspection services in our building department, well. We have a great relationship with Broward County, as do many other cities in Broward County.

And we utilize them when we have those really surge busy periods. We can use them on the various disciplines. We have contracts with them. And it does provide that extra assistance when it's on an as needed basis.

Okay. Thank you. You're welcome. All right.

We're a little beyond the scope of this proposal, but I'll ask the question anyway. Sure. Are there restrictions on the relationship of the providers to the developers? In other words, you don't have a developer, you have a big developer who also has some inspection company.

Yeah. You know what, I don't know the rules on that, but I think there are some conflict of interest rules. I mean, first of all, these folks have licensing ethics and conflict of interest rules themselves, which they will still be subject to. But I think I don't know if, Kathy, if you're aware of this more but I do think there are rules relating to conflicts of interest that they have to abide by. Yeah.

I can look it up real quick, I don't know the specific answer, but they are supposed to be an independent, you know, whether or not it is a separate company tied to, but I can look it up.

Well, I don't want to get lost in the weeds. Mean, we're way beyond the The question is a proposal to recommend the ordinance that To comply with the state directive as a percentage of reduction. So, I think that's what we're the rest of it is all interesting, including my question, but we're spending a lot of time on something that really doesn't pertain. So, I think that'll conclude that. Thank you.

You're welcome.

Okay, I'll now open this to the public hearing. Are there any members of the public who would like to be heard on agenda item seven? Okay, seeing none, the public hearing is closed. Are there any comments or questions from the board? Any more comments or questions from the board on agenda item seven? If none, I'll take a motion on agenda item seven, an amendment to the land development code regarding fees for private provider plan review and inspection services.

Motion to approve Agenda Item seven with direction to city staff to modify the proposed ordinance as necessary to be consistent with state law pending any legislation passed during the 2026 legislative session. Hopefully, I did that right.

That's great. Perfect.

Is there a second?

Second.

Roll call, please.

Ms. Frey? Yes. Mr. Escoriasa?

Yes.

Mr. Briggs?

Yes.

Vice Chair LaPlante? Yes. And Chair Light?

Yes. All right, are there any board members or staff, any correspondence or reports for the good of the board?

Yes, just a quick update, if you don't mind. With respect to Main Street, you all were here when a lot of those approvals, those site plan approvals went through. So, if you remember Block 4, which was the multi family project with the five towers and the four zero two units, we have now received in our Building Division 3 permits, not sure if I mentioned that the last time was here, was gonna I'll keep tabs, promise. For Building 12, And 5, so those two buildings have gone through a second round of review, one is going through a first round of review, and we fully expect to have the other two towers submitted for review as well. You all remember as well the Fifth Third Bank, which you approved down on Coconut Creek Parkway.

Both a bank I mean, building demolition and a bank building permit are in and very close to being issued. We're just pending some final cleanup with some applications for the general contractor, etcetera, so you'll be seeing some activity out there as well. And just a little FYI, then just gonna read this out. I know some of you may be interested. The South Creek Community Organization, which is made up of our South Creek residents, are hosting a business expo for the first time this year.

The event is scheduled for April 18, and it's going to be from 10AM to 1PM at the city's community center, and while it is designed to showcase South Creek businesses, it is open to the public. So if you'd like to visit, they will be there. So, and that concludes my communications. If I may.

Last weekend or just last weekend, two weekends ago we had our Butterfly Fest, and I know some of you were able to attend, not all of you. But just wanted to do a quick reminder. If you had more than two guests, excluding toddlers, then the we do need you to either you have an option of either paying down the entry fee to a $100 or to you will need to submit a four nine as a gift. Those tickets are valued at $50 per person.

So I didn't make it, but because of the rain.

Okay.

Nothing? We're good? Nothing. Okay. Thank you.

Is it just the $50 per person for over the two guests or for all guests?

It's $50 per person. So if you had three guests, we need to either pay down or submit a Form nine as a gift. Sorry, 50 for dollars

JULIE just say for so I had four family members with me. So two of them I would have to note two of them on the Form nine.

There were four of you total? You Five of us total.

So it would be three. Three.

Okay. Thank you.

Nothing further?

I have just, you mentioned permits. And there was something in the press about Whole Foods coming. And I must have missed the meeting or maybe this was talked about. Any anything you can tell me beyond what was in the

Yeah. I think at this time we don't have any building plans and or additional information.

Okay. Alright. So there is no permit in the works at the moment.

No, that's correct. Don't have

any you.

Right. One more time. Anything further from anyone? If not, the meeting's adjourned. Thank you. Thank you, everyone.

Thanks, Jeff.

Good job.

Thank you.