Okay, we're going to go ahead and call this meeting to order. Welcome everyone to the regular meeting of the Boquerotone Community Redevelopment Agency. It's Monday, September 23rd, 2024, and the time is 1.30pm. This meeting is now called to order. Would everyone please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance? I pledge allegiance to the flag and the House of the State of America and to the flag and the health of the state of America and to the republic for which it stands, automation and draw, even as a whole, the third day of the injustice is strong. Thank you, Ms. Sydenz. Would you please call the roll? Chair Nackles, here. Vice Chair Thompson. Thank you for the bid to be here. Mr. Commissioner Drucker, here. Commissioner Singer. Here. Commissioner Wakeder. Here. All present. Senator Drucker. Here. Commissioner Singer. Here. Commissioner Wakeder. Here. All present. Thank you. Mr. Brown, are there any amendments to the agenda? No amendments this afternoon, thanks. Okay, thank you. And are there any corrections to the minutes of the regular meeting of September 9th, 2024? If not. Madam Chair, I move adoption of the minutes is presented. Thank you. Second. Thank you all it's Mr. Singer and Mr. Drucker all in favor. Hi. Thank you My minutes are adopted There are no presentations today. There's no quasi-duitial and related public hearings so we'll move on to public requests If anyone would like to come up and speak, you will have three minutes to speak on matters of the downtown and the CRA. Please state your name and address when you come up for the record. Anyone like to come up? No? Going once? Twice? Okay, we're going to close public requests and we're moving on to resolutions and regular public hearings. Missedans, would you please read the title of the first resolution? Resolution number 2024, 04, CRA. A resolution of the Boca Raton Community Redevelopment Agency amending the CRA application review and processing fee schedule to be consistent with the city's user fee schedule by eliminating the advertising processing fee and advertising deposits and updating the fees associated with public notice. Repealing resolution number 2022-03-CRA providing for severability, providing for repealer, providing an effective date. Thank you, Mr. Brown. Who will make the presentation today? Arlene Cheese Nelson, who's DDR planning analysis analyst for the city will make the presentation on resolution 2024-04 CRA. Thank you. Good afternoon. Thank you, Mr. Brown, members of the board. For the record, I'm Arlene Chies Nelson, DDRI planning analyst. Before you this afternoon is resolution number 2024-04 C CRA, which amends the CRA application review and processing fee schedule. This resolution changes the CRA application schedule by eliminating the advertising ad, I'm sorry, eliminating the advertising administrative processing fee and advertising the posits updating the fees associated with public notice mailing repealing the previous fees for one consolidated schedule providing consistency with the city's fees and will become effective on October 1st, 2024 On this slide are the actual changes to the fee schedule shown in strike through and on our line. Staff recommends an adoption of resolution number 202404 CRA as presented that concludes my presentation and I'd be happy to answer any questions you might have. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Does anyone have any questions from Mr. T. Salson? No? Okay, so at this time we're gonna open the public hearing, would any member of the public like to come up and speak on this matter? Okay, seeing no one, we're gonna close the public hearing. And I'll ask for a motion and a second to approve resolution number 2024-04-CRA. Mr. Wigter. Second. Mr. Thompson. Thank you. Is there any discussion on this? Okay. It's seem done. Ms. Siddins, can you please call the roll? Wigter. Yes. NACLESS. Yes. Singer. Yes. Drucker. Yes. Thompson. Yes. Yes. Singer. Yes. Dr. Rucker. Yes. Thompson. Yes. Motion passes. Five votes to zero. Thank you very much. Miss Siddons, could you please read the title of the next resolution? Resolution number 2024-06-CRA. A resolution of the Booker Aton Community Redevelopment Agency, considering the approval of the landlord plans submitted by the Center for Arts and Innovation Inc. In connection with the development of a performing arts center and the redevelopment of the amphitheater as required by the pre-construction and development agreement entered into between the Bokeritone community redevelopment agency, the City of Bokeritone and the Center for Arts and Innovation on October 12, 2022, providing for severability, providing for repealer, providing an effective date. Thank you, Mr. Brown. Who will make the presentation today? Ms. Gibson, our Deputy City Manager will make the presentation on resolution 2020406-ERA. Thank you, Ms. Gibson. Thank you, Mr. Brown. Good afternoon, commissioners. Chrissy Gibson, Deputy City Manager. I'm here today with a presentation for you to discuss the pre-construction and development agreement. We'll refer to that as the PCDA with the Center for Arts and Innovation who is here today. We'll be referring to them as TCAI. We have a lot of acronyms. I'm sorry. And very specifically, we're going to be discussing the Section 4 of the PCDA, which is the Landlord Plan Approval Process. of the PCDA which is the landlord plan approval process. For those who are unfamiliar with what we're going to be discussing today, I want to give some context about where this is all happening. This is downtown in Meister Park. We have both the CRA and the City Council involved because of the land ownership here. As you can see, the art museum on the left is owned by the CRA. The properties that we're talking about are the art museum on the left is owned by the CRA. The properties that we're talking about are the current amphitheater which is owned by the city and then the empty lot to the east side which is owned by the CRA. And because there is that double ownership of each of the organizations that's why both bodies will be hearing this resolution today here at this meeting and then at the special meeting that immediately follows. A little bit of background. The Center for the Arts and Innovation in 2019 came to the city and proposed to build a new performing arts center on the CRA Cultural Land, which is that east lot, and to renovate the Meister Park amphitheater. They came to the city and the city said we should probably hear some additional proposals. So we did an RFP for proposals. We reviewed them all and TCAI was selected. In October of 2022, the city council, the CRA and TCAI entered into this PCDA, the pre-construction and development agreement, and a long-term lease for the properties. This April, April 2024, the landlord plans were due, and they provided those to us, and we are here today to present this to you for approval from the CRA, and potentially from the City Council. I wanted to talk a little bit about the original concept plan that was provided to you all. This original concept plan, as you can see, was provided by TCAI, and we're going to be comparing this original concept plan to the landlord plans that they have most recently submitted and that the staff has had a chance to review. In this original concept plan, you can see that they had talked about renovating the amphitheater, which is number nine, which is in its current location. You can see the green lawn there, number eight. Just to the east of that, they had the original concept for the main theater, and then the parking garage, the farthest to the east at number 14, which is where the garage would have been. So a little bit about this pre-construction and development agreement. Within 24 months of the PCDA approval, the landlord plans were due. Again, those were due in April of this year. The landlord plan approval process cannot exceed six months. We received them in April and the end of that process is October 19th. So we come before you now. We have a little bit of time left. TCI, TCAI updated these designs based on the original concept plans and again we're going to talk about the comparison. The PCDA defines required elements of the landlord plans and they're very specific and we'll go through those in a table like format that's section 4. The landlord plans were to include architectural drawings, renderings, elevations, floor plans, layouts, seating plans, landscape and signage plans, parking garage and ballet area just to name a few things. So what we've done is we have put together a chart based on all the requirements of section four from the PCDA. So we're going to walk you through those and some specificity. I do want to note that when we started this process in April, the staff has met with TCAI and their group in various configurations from our staff to their staff. To review these plans, give very, very detailed comments. Have them go back again and revise. Have them answer questions. So this has been a very iterative process over the last several months with TCAI. And on the staff side, we had development services,, and Mr. Shad, who's the director. We had Ruby Childers, who's the director for downtown. We had Zach Beer, who's our municipal services director. Myself, Mr. Brown was involved on some level, and we also had Amy Denorsio from the Ampitheater, so all of us who know this project and have been involved in some way. All of us were involved in providing comments to TCAI. So in Section 4-1, we can go through fairly quickly. And again, I'm providing a table, but TCAI is presenting after me, and they have all of the photos and renderings and pictures that are going to help you conceptualize what this will look like. So to begin, they had proposed a main theater and concert hall. They are still proposing that, but they've changed the names of some of these things. This is now called the main venue. The absolute minimum amount of seats to be provided was 720. They are proposing 800 or more in different configurations, which you'll see so they met that goal. A rooftop terrace with approximate capacity for 200 people. They also had proposed a jewel box theater. That's now called the Flex Cube. It was originally proposed for $99, a capacity of $99 people. The Flex Cube will seat $200, and again, they will go into much more detail and show you the photos. I'm sorry, the renderings that you'll be able to see better. Back at the house they are proposing green rooms, dressing rooms, rehearsal studios, all the things that we required. There's a special space consisting of the front of the house. They're calling that the public hall that you'll see. They are proposing a valet and vehicular drop off area which we'll talk a little bit more in depth about. Section 4.2, they had originally proposed to renovate the amphitheater. They are now demolishing the amphitheater. It will be an open space that they called the Piazza. There was supposed to be a minimum capacity of 2400. They have met that as well. Installation of a custom door that transformed the stage into an enclosed performance venue in theater. You'll be able to see that more in detail, but yes, that is there. Improvements to the back of the house, including loading docs, stage acoustics, and lighting. They have met that. Construction of a connection between the amphitheater and the performing art center. Yes. Removal of the East Colonyd and existing amenities and improvements currently located on the amphitheater. That has been met. Those will go hard-scaping and landscaping improvements to the amphitheater plaza, including improved accessibility to the stage from the plaza area, installation of the public amenities and conveniences, including without limitation of water feature restrooms, infrastructure for on-site food and beverage, and an improved VIP installation of the public amenities and conveniences, including without limitation of water feature, restrooms, infrastructure for on-site food and beverage, and an improved VIP experience, which you'll see. 4.1.3, the concept plan currently envisions that the Performing Arts Center will be conducted to the amphitheater by the back of the house in the loading dock areas. That is in their plans. And the addition of a canopy feature that provides shelter from the elements and a new parking garage structure to service the amphitheater in the performing art center. When this was first brought to our attention, I think most people were thinking from the elements as being rain and maybe sun. What they've actually proposed in the landlord plans are called 10 Dito's and they are more of a retractable shade structure but they do not protect from the rain and I have more information on that. Additionally, we'll talk in detail but the parking garage that they have proposed is no longer on the east lot. If you can envision that now, it's now an underground parking garage that's under where the current amphitheater is. And 4.1.4, the concept plan shows the currently envisioned estimated total square footage of each building and the areas included within each building and they did provide that. The project plans include designs, architectural drawings, renderings and elevations, all of which you'll see in the upcoming presentation, landscaping plan, floor plans, layouts, and seating plans, and signage plans, all of which you'll see in the TCAI presentation. Also wanted to provide a floory comparison between the landlord plans and the conceptual plans and point out that the landlord plans do propose more square footage and that might be notable because with more square footage may come a higher cost. So we wanted to make sure that the council was aware of that. Wanted to talk a little bit about the threshold concept plan change, which is a definition in the PCDA and it basically provides a minimum approximate level of capacity, I'm sorry, what it provides for is that they cannot reduce any part of the plan that is a minimum approximate level of capacity by more than 20%. So for example, they could not go below the 720 seat minimum for the main theater, they could not go below the 2400 seat capacity for the amphitheater or Piazza space. We felt that they did not break any of those threshold minimums as defined here. The second part of the threshold concept plan change is that if the changes were modified significantly and changed the overall architectural style of the performing art center. From modern, we felt that they did not. They're still showing us a modern architecture. Or significantly changes in any material adverse manner, any other material component of the project as contemplated on the concept plan. While we didn't feel that any of the material changes are adverse at this point, there are some significant material changes that we wanted to bring to your attention. And of course, this is here before the spotty today and then at the special meeting because this is subject to your approval. Some of the things that we wanted to point out include the Underground Parking Garage. As proposed, the underground parking garage was originally on the east lot. It was not an underground garage as you can see and you will see in their plans. It is now proposed to be under the amphitheater parcel. Underground, the entrance will be on Fifth Avenue and I have a rendering that we can actually go there. Sorry. If you can see here on the far, I don't have a rendering that we can actually, let me go there, sorry. If you can see here, on the far, I don't have a, above the blue, the darker blue on the right-hand side, that's myzner boulevard, that would be where the entrance to the garage, the underground garage would be. Staff does have some concerns about that for various reasons, but they are in the process of, I know they have hired a traffic consultant and a lot of these things that are of concern to us today, they will be fleshed out in the IDA process as well. The other thing we wanted to bring to your attention was the Valet plan, which is where it says Northeast 5th Street on the bottom of that slide. They have kind of a cut-in, cut-out area right in front of the Piazza and the main venue. We weren't exactly clear and we had lots of questions about how that valet would work, how would it work in conjunction with Meisner Park's main valet, how would they get to the garage, what spaces would they use, that sort of thing. So more to come on the valet, but it was a concern for us knowing how the amphitheater works and how many people drive in there on 5th Street. We had some operational concerns there. Another, what we would call material change is the orientation of the main venue. The main venue as proposed in the concept plan was facing the same way as the amphitheater, facing south adjacent to the amphitheater. They've moved that to the east side, it's facing west, so it faces the Boquer-Tone Museum of Art. And staff had several concerns. We did talk through a lot of these with them, and again, they have hired traffic consultants and other folks that are helping work on these details that will be fleshed out in the IDA process, but we kind of felt like this could be an operational issue for them to have loading in on myzenable of our across from residential area, also right next to the entrance to this underground garage. We also had some questions about the acoustics. We understand that they have world-renowned acousticians working with them, so they can probably speak to that. But we had some concern about having the main venue open to the amphitheater area or the Piazza and the sound going west and hitting the art museum. But again, they have acousticians that can probably speak to that. The last thing we wanted to bring to your attention was the canopy feature. The canopy feature was originally designed for quote unquote the elements. We had hoped or thought that might mean rain, but it does not. These 10 DDoes, which they will talk more about, and I can actually show you a picture here, are for shade, not rain. And they do retract, I believe, but they can speak a little bit more about that. And on this slide, as you can see, that would be the cut out where the valet area and drop off would be. Again, had some concerns there. And I believe that the picture to the far right is actually a, it's being, it's a projected image, it's not actually something happening there, but that speaks to the flexibility of this venue that they can close these doors and project images onto them, they can open them up so that if there is performance inside the main hall, the doors can be open to the amphitheater or Piazza part. So I'm sure that we'll hear more about that as well. Staff is recommending approval and adoption of this resolution in this meeting and in the meeting to follow, but as I mentioned before, this is at the discretion of the council and we did want to bring those material changes to your attention. And so what is next? Where do we go from here? If the landlord plans are approved, then TCAI must meet with Meister Park's developer and obtain their approval by April. Additionally, they must apply for their IDA within six months, although Meister Park development approval has to come first. The IDA approval has to be given within 18 months of the application. Department of Health and Health and the health care and health and health care and health care and health care and health care and health care and health care and health care and health care and health care and health care and health care and health care and health care and health care and health care and health care and health care and health care and health care and health care and health care and health care and health care and health care and health care that's based on 95 million, actually it was just over 100 million. The 50% of hard costs that's coming right up this next October, and then 75% of hard costs you can see the dates there. So this will be happening as they are continuing to refine their plans and go through the IDA process. So I would be happy to answer any questions, but I promise you'll have better pictures and renderings coming next. Thank you, Ms. Gibson. Does anybody have any questions, but I promise you'll have better pictures and renderings coming next. Thank you, Ms. Gibson. Does anybody have any questions? First, staff, right now. Mr. Wager. Thank you, Ms. Gibson. Thank you. First, can you go to page five of your presentation? Let me click. My recollection is that the landlord plans would do within 18 months of the PCDA approval and that the landlord plans approval process should not exceed six months so that the total would be, right, because it was approved in October. So 18 months after that, it was April 2024. So I think there just might be a typo there. The typo is important because it coincides with the date that the financials are due in terms of October. So the plans were submitted in April of this year. And then the staff of course reviewed it and refined it. And in fact, came to the staff approval. Is there anyone on staff that has looked at independent consultants for some of the significant aspects of the center, the acoustics, the functionality, the operations. Has there been any independent analysis beyond the staff's review of this? Not at this point, no. Thank you. A question from Mr. Kailer. Can you explain briefly why there is a landlord process pursuant to the development agreement that's separate from the IDA process because again we have a regulatory component which I'm familiar with but then of course we have a development agreement and there's kind of two separate things going on and there's multiple layers and different times for approval so I think it would help everybody and just refresh my recollection of you you know, what's the landlord approval process and why is that different from an IDA process? Sure. So IDA individual development approval under ordinance 4035, the downtown regs, is the body acting as a regulatory capacity, the way that it reviews all development applications within the city. The proprietary or ownership role is the other hat, if you would say, if we were wearing two hats as a body, one is the owner of the land and making the decision to provide these publicly-land owned lands to TCA and I. The idea was that at the time of the PCBA there was a vision, an idea, but it was still early stage planning, and it was based upon the best available data at that time, and it was a concept, it was called the concept plan. And so the parties agreed that this was still a concept, and that in this period of time, as you pointed out, 18 months to submit, and then another six months to obtain approval for the landlord plans, the landlord hat was the process by which the body would review the transition from the concept to something more like the project that would be presented to the city CRA as the regulator reviewing it the way it would review any development projects So it was an opportunity for the governing body to weigh in and Make sure that this project still aligns with the vision of the body Appreciate a madam chair. No further questions at this time. Thank you Mr. Raider. Anyone else? Mr. Singer? Thank you Madam Chair. Ms. Gibson could you go back to page 7? All right so I know we'll hear from them but walk me through a little bit. The renovating instead of renovating the amphitheater, they're going to demolish the existing structure, which I think on your later slide was covered up by an orange area, which is kind of like back of house and also front entry. The amphitheater was a raised stage that had capacity of, you know, 4200 even a little bit more with the, at least one colon aid. They're taking that down minimum to 2400, but how will you, how will those people be oriented in what will be the stage situation there? So it's my understanding that there's some flexibility in how you use that space. The stage could either be in from the main venue, so to the east I guess, which that glass door would open and there's a stage there, so it could be facing out, or what they're calling the public hall, which would be, I guess if you can envision where the stage is now, and the actual structure of the amphitheater, that will be their public hall where people come in together before events. That also could, that front area could be used as a stage facing out the way that it does now. Facing toward the south, you're looking north. And do the plans include any pricinium or elevated stage there for that entry hall? Because if it's an entry hall, imagine it's a grade. Honestly, I don't know, but hopefully they can speak to that. Okay, but yet staff didn't feel that that was a material change or at least a material adverse change. We felt the orientation in itself was a material change and that included the fact that yes, they had these flexible ways of using the space but the orientation was of concern. Okay. What analysis have you done with these changes of impact on costs and their minimum construction budget? Well, that information is coming forth soon and we did bring to your attention that the square footage overall has increased which could be of concern if it raises the price of the entire project and therefore they have to raise more money. But at this point we have not done financial analysis. We are waiting on their second report for their 50%. And when is that report due? Is it due before October 19th? I think it's due the 22nd. That's so much for Mr. Bringer's point about coupling. You said in response to Mr. Bringer's question, you don't know if there are adverse effects impacts yet. Yet, you recommended it in favor. Why? impacts yet yet you recommended in favor why. Because we felt that they met everything that we asked them to do in the PCDA and that we didn't know that these material changes rose to the level of the threshold concept plan change as adverse issues. They understand our operational concerns. Those are concerns that we have having operated over there in this very unique space at the amphitheater in Meister Park. I think they're aware of them. They have hired experts to address those issues, but we won't know those details until they get into the IDA process. So we felt that at your discretion, you could determine whether you wanted to approve now or not, and let this go forward to the IDA process, or it's within your discretion, not know, you could determine whether you wanted to approve now or not and let this go forward to the IDA process or it's within your discretion, you know, not to approve. And to the timing of it, we pushed a little bit to have this as an earlier meeting prior to October so that you would have a little bit of time in between if you wanted to consider what we had presented. Right. But let me go back to your lab, the prior point, which is we can consider or not whether to give approval today. If we give approval today, then what ability under the IDA process do we have to deal with some concerns that their response was TBD? A lot, Mr. Brown, chime in if you want to. Sorry, I did. Certainly. Ms. Gibson said, you know, it's presented for us today so we could approve or we could elect not to approve and wait till the IDA process. But what can, if we approve today, and there are concerns that the city raised and they have not responded to by saying those will be to work down the IDA process, what lesser rights or what lesser ability do we have at the landlord stage than we would at the IDA stage? I think the PCDA provides that if the landlord plans are not approved we can terminate the agreement. That is one option. If in fact the council has concerned to that level that it's not time to approve the plans, that's something that we need to hear and then we can address that particular situation if it occurs by deciding whether or not to terminate or to make other arrangements to go forward. As far as the, you have, I think, more discretion as the landlord to say it doesn't work for us. We're concerned, it doesn't work for us. Then in the IDA process, where it's a matter of responding to code requirements and their application, as well as the practicalities of access, et cetera. All right, then conversely, if we know of concerns now but want to deal in good faith with them at the IDA process, what do we do to ensure that everything about circulation and these other points will be met then? That would be through the IDA process, in other words, saying the plans need to be revised in order to reflect or address this concern. Whatever it might be. Thank you. May I go back to Ms. Gibson? So talk a little bit more please about the Tenditos shade. At least when I was thinking protection of the elements, I was thinking rain. It's a very common element. I wasn't thinking malignant. So it, in all last them to explain more, but it's a, it's a permeable surface. So it provides some shade, but not complete shade, and therefore it provides no protection from rain or modest. Not my understanding. Okay. Given your experience at the empathy or how do you see that playing out, obviously you think it's averse, but not material-ateverse. While the way that we, when we talked through it, you still have the opportunity to have indoor outdoor concerts because you can move those sliding doors. So conceivably, you could have an indoor stage, you could have people outdoors and if it rained and there was enough room, people could come in and get under. Would it be perfect? No. Could you put a tent? Probably not. But I'm sure they can probably answer some additional questions about the Tenditos and if they have any other options for shade or or a canopy. All right thank you. Go for the questions then, sure. Thank you. Anyone else? Okay. So no other questions now. So we're going to open the public hearing and anyone who would like to come up and speak please state your name and address for the record. Yes and we'll start with the representative from center Miss Virgin. Thank you. We're gonna give you 20 minutes today for your presentation Thank you chair necklace and thank you all for having us here today I'm Andrea virgin chair and CEO of the center at 433 plaza real sweet 271 there in beautiful Meisner Park folk or town I'm joined here today by my colleagues on the design and planning side as well as some of our staff members. And we're here today thanks to you all as our partners at the city and of course our great donors who have funded us here to date. Over the course of the last six months since we submitted the plans as per the agreement in April. We've been pretty busy at work with the staff members that have been assigned to the project and thanking them for their hard work and working with us. But in addition to the work that we've been doing with staff, a lot of work has been happening behind the scenes to bring us to the concept plan that you have before you today. Some of those items include new consultants that have been retained since that original submission in April. Threshold acoustics are acquisition, Thornton Thomas said he are structural engineer, Konsentini who is our MEP designer, Kim Lee Horner, traffic engineer, and Walker consultants are parking consultant. You'll recognize Walker. They have done a lot of the parking studies that have handled the master plan and the master parking study of Meisner parks. We're lucky to have them on board as well. In addition to the work that we've been doing with staff, we've been having meetings internally with our entire design team, probably about 20, 25 person design team meetings. Those meetings have in addition to addressing staff's comments have also taken a look at the concept plan as originally presented in April and say, is this the right project? Is there a square foot more than we need? How can we cut back the project to just the project that we need? That's been informed by two really material important aspects of our planning process. That's inclusive of our building program analysis. That is how big does each space need to be and nothing more. And also informing that process is our business plan. What types of uses do those spaces need to accommodate? How big do those need to be from an operational perspective? Who are the partners? We're looking to partner with that would program within there what are their needs? And that's led you to the seating capacities and square footages that are outlined in the concept plan today. So a lot of work went into the April submission, further work over the last six months has further informed that process. The work that our other consultants like Kimley and Walker will take the approval of our landlord submission, take that scale and use that is defined in those plans and say by scale and use, what is that capacity for traffic, what is that for parking, and helps inform us to prepare for the IDA submission going forward. To present a little bit about what these spaces can do and why they're informed to be the scale that they are, Joshua Dax from Fisher Dax and Associates, we'll present that portion. Thank you. Okay, hi. So we're really excited about the mix of spaces. Can you please just state your name and address for the results? Oh, I'm sorry. Sure. Joshua Dax, Fisher Dax Associates Theater Planning and Design Consultant. We're really excited about the mix of spaces that has emerged out of this process and the concept design that has been developing to accommodate it. Understand we're at the very outset of the design process. We haven't even entered schematic design, design development, construction documents, or any of that. But the spaces, the spaces that we've conceived of here include spaces that are designed for maximum flexibility. In the main venue, we've designed a room which is quite large, which is capable of being used as a fantastic 800-seat pricinium theater with an orchestra pit and raked seating with fantastic sightlines, fly space, very, very capable for traditional arts. We also conflat in that room and make it just a really large receptacle for all sorts of events, as I'll illustrate shortly, including banquets and conferences for up to 1200 people. So we can accommodate traditionally staged ballet and opera and concerts, we can accommodate non-traditionally staged dance of all sorts, non-traditionally staged opera, non-traditionally staged concerts, even chamber music in unusual configurations. And also, we have the opportunity to open the big door onto the Piazza and create indoor outdoor events that could be really fantastic. Because of the scale and the technical equipment in the room, we'll be able to accommodate high tech events like the famous drone races we've been hearing about. Art installations of all sorts and sizes, shapes and descriptions, media installations of one sort or another, GA rocket roll, if we want to for a standing room audience or a seated audience, we can also accommodate gala's and banquets in a way that can't be done in a traditional hotel ballroom. So the idea is to do unique events, need a unique environment, and we can provide that here. At the same time, we can do traditional conferences and trade fairs, and that sort of thing. A second space in the building is called the Flexcube, as you've heard, which has flexible seating for up to 200, and the opportunities here are to accommodate intimate performances of all sorts to accommodate multimedia immersive events like the David Hockney exhibit in London at a place called the Lightroom, which sort of puts you inside his process and his paintings. We can accommodate new media installations like David Burns Theater of the Mind, live interactive productions that involve actors interacting with an audience like Sleep No More, which ran for about 13 years in New York. And we can develop new VR, our XR immersive projects in the space using the technology that the center will have. We can also accommodate motion capture and volumetric capture to support those projects as well as the gaming and film and TV industry. At the same time, we have a range of spaces of various sizes and shapes and descriptions that can accommodate all kinds of activity, rehearshorsals, classes, maker workshops, like STEAM classes where students learn to make robots, conference breakout sessions to support events that take over the entire building, perhaps. Programming hackathons that bring programmers together to solve problems, even social interactivity like, you know, dungeons and dragon scoops that meet every Thursday night can be accommodated in the building. At the same time, we still have the amphitheater. It will still accommodate seated events. It will still accommodate standing events. And it will be better served by the better technology that's available within the main hall. It can still accommodate festival of the arts, and it can accommodate outdoor activity of all sorts, you know, festival marketplaces, farmers markets, and the like. The building also has, as you've heard, public spaces and restrooms and all sorts of things that you'd expect to support the public activity, as well as all the back of house stuff, catering support, dressing rooms, offices, loading docs, storage that will make all of that work efficiently. Antoine? Hi, my name is Antoine Shia. I'm a partner at the Renzo Piano Building, their shop in Paris. I would like to say something that I heard a very good and fair question in the beginning. I would like just to highlight the fact that we are still in early stages of the project. We are only in the concept design, and we are still having two years ahead to develop the project. The next step will be schematic design, follow it by design development, before starting for construction document and bid document. So despite the fact that many of your accomments are fair and good, we may not have today answer for everything and we need to find a response to that during the process. Having said this and beyond the business aspect of the project and the fact that the business plan generate an appropriate building program which is reflected by the current scheme, the project has another story to tell. The project has a civic role and a duty to the community. This is a general plan that showed the Meisner Park with the Piazza Real, the building at the right and the museum at the left. The building ambition is really to be a destination, to create a place always open to the community, which is the Piazza. By the way, the Piazza is also the amphitheater that preserving the current capacity was the current event, and more than this, improving the use of the Piazza and we will see later on with the other things. So today, what happened? When this space is not used, this space is not very lively space. The idea is to create daily activities, spontaneous activities. The space will be open for family, for everyone. So this space would be a lively and vibrant space. And because this element is the community component of the project, and I insist on the community component of a project, what is the best place than the conclusion of real Piazza, the real, the Placarilli and the Museum and the Center. So this space, the community space, becomes the focal point of the downtown and the Museum and the Center. This is, I would like to show this, this is like a toy, but I know that you have the image, but this is like an X-ray of the building. You may x-ray for the building, and you highlight the main program element in the problem. You see, for example, the yellow one is what we call the Piazza or the amphitheater, the blue one, what we call the main venue. The green one is the flex theater and the orange one is education, innovation and creativity. In addition to this, we have a small element in red and the middle, which is the periscope of the project, is a flying element above the roof. This is the roof plan showing and this is something very important because the roof plan is about 80,000 square foot of PV cell which you produce. This is an important sustainable element of the project which you produce 1.8 giga watt hour per year and after the museum. This is the ground floor showing the function, showing the main Piazza and the main venue. And here I would like also to address the comment that Ms. Chipson did about turning the function. We thought a lot. And we think that with the current dimension of the space, this is the only way to fit it inside the site, in taking advantage with its relationship with the Piazza. If the Piazza today is minimum for 24-handed people, we will be by using this denture space, we will doubling the capacity between inside and outside. I heard also some comment on acoustic, and I know now we are not having complete analysis, but I would like to highlight something that between the main venue and the exterior, we have a buffer zone, but I would like to highlight something that between the main value and the exterior we have a buffer zone that means we have like double skin. By closing double skin we can create complete isolation between what happened outside and what happened inside. But of course when we open both together it's like today. Today what happened when we have in the amphitheater an event. We will hear. But maybe we can do something to mitigate it. The reason why we need to be more study about that. This is a small comparison between what we had previously and what we had today. And heard also some concern about the east side of the region. And you are right about that. But if you look to the new project, I would like to more talk about the new project, what we try to do, we try to compact the project, compact the massing in order to save the maximum trees, existing trees, which are extremely beautiful to the east. And to complete this with more, it's about 100 trees. So we have like a urban forest. And we are very much sensitive to the relationship between this building and the residential area. The reason why we create this green area between the two. And of course, because we moved the main venue to the side, the loading duct need to follow. By the way, we have no choice. The loading duct need to be somewhere on this orientation. It could not be close to the north, close to the crossing for security reason. It could not be to the south, it could not be to the west. The only way to put it is really on the ass, where we agree with you, we have to pay attention how to hide it with this forest that we are creating. This is the second floor showing where the FlexCube is, where the innovation and the education, and so this vertical spine with this stair and the two elevator that serve the the elevator on the top. This is the rooftop showing that part of the rooftop is covered terrace and we have another part completely up into this to this guy and we have also is a restaurant bar that serve this area. This is the roof again with the 80,000 square feet of PV cell, which approves 1.8 giga what hour per year. And we have the basement. You know, the new model of the city is to put people in the light and the car and the dark. I know I don't have time to talk more about that, but we deeply believe that we prefer to keep the precious space above great for people and to calibrate and insist on this point, calibrate the bottom level of the parking garage by raising slightly maybe three or four feet the ground floor in order to stay outside of the water table and simplify our life with some technical issue. But we have good consultant, we have worker, and we have good engineer, and we will be working and addressing concern with this regard. These are some elevation, some preliminary elevation. I mean, if you allow me to be for two second architect, I would like to talk about poetry and say that this building looked like the mass where the natural light is not required, is an opaque mass, and look about floating above the ground, the floor, because the ground floor is very permeable, it's very luminous and open to the city. So this mass looked like lividating above the ground, it's like a ballerina and somehow suspended between the sky and the ground. And you see this element that emerging above the roof, which is the Belvedere, it could be good destination also for people coming for Bca Raton just to go and to see the city from the top. These are the other elevation. This is a view from this sky to the, and see this is very important element. We try to stay within the Boca Raton skyline in order to not be very high and very aggressive in the neighborhood. This is an image from the center showing the piazza was the tendidos retracted. This is the other view looking to the main venue and running fast. And again, the tendus is a very important issue. That means we heard that we know that people are very sensitive to the fact that how the project is dealing with the city. This project is not taking possession of the whole plot. This project is sharing this space with the community, with this city. So, I don't want to talk about technical issues, but if we have a fixed ceiling here, we have to deal with uplift, we have to deal with hurricane, and we have to deal with cost, and the space will be darker, and will be like part of the building and not open to the community. We are very much sentive in all our projects. How the project is open to the community and how the space will perceive as part of the city and not part of the building. Reason why we prefer to have this temporary, stanched protection. This is another image looking to the event. This is from the lobby inside showing the transparency and the flexibility of the space. And this is an image from the top showing the city 360 degree panoramic view from the Periscope. Thank you. Sorry, I was a big thank you. Thank you, Antoine, and thank you, Josh. I won't spend too much time. I know we want to wrap up here and hear your questions. This is just a comparison similar to the one that Chrissy had on there. I just want to call it to attention. The right is the original concept plan and to the left is ours. If you look at the range, our 113,000 square feet, which is the minimum we're proposing, is somewhere in between where we had thought we would be. The 190,000 square feet represents the maximum we ever think we might go as we continue to design the process. There may still be some scaling up in the case that some of the design elements require a little bit more space. We do not project to be approaching that, but we're suggesting that that might happen during the IDA process. The plan that you see before you is actually around 150,000 square feet, so less than the maximum that we thought we might have previously. So just know that's where the concept plan is sitting right now. We're not aiming to build a square foot more not only than we need, but then that we can afford. So the 150,000 square feet is generally what you're seeing today. But we're just building in some room in the case that we need to ever go about that. I can answer this in a question if you'd like, but generally the process was already outlined by Chrissy. This is the process that we're prepared to go through to submit on time with the process that's outlined in the PCDA, which would be in March and April of next year. These are just some consultants that we would be engaging, but we're at the time, so I can answer any questions about that. I can pull these slides back up. I appreciate all of your time. Thank you very much for having us here. It's an honor and appreciate your partnership. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Virgin. So we're going to continue with public comment first and have everybody else's questions. And then we'll come back to you to have some discussion on it. Would anyone else like to come up for public comment? OK, last chance. Okay. No one. So we'll close the public hearing. We'll ask for a motion and a second to approve resolution number 2024-6-CRA. So moved. Mr. Drucker. Second. Mr. Thompson. Thank you. So now we can have discussion. Would anybody like to start with some questions? I would like to start with some questions, please. Thank you. Mr. President. Thank you. Mr. President. And maybe some of your colleagues, too, but I'll start with you, please. The site got larger or the potential uses larger, the potential garage is smaller. Why? So the original range, I can pull that back up, is if that's still up there, there we go. So the original range was 113 to 190, sorry, the 88 to the 170 and we're at 113 to 190. Generally the project crossed up slightly because of several factors. One, we hired Fish and Jackson Associates just after the approval process had happened. There's a number of things that happen in the building program process that helped define scale of the project. So that's generally one of the reasons. In terms of parking, we're proposing a footprint that is proposed underground to take advantage of the overall site and I can go back to that if we need to as well. The parking will need to accommodate whatever it needs to be and we'll have that further study happen later. We may even be looking at off-site parking opportunities and exploring, you know, we're part of a master parking study overall in Meisner Park, so we'll be exploring that as well. So scale going up doesn't necessarily mean parking requirements go up. There may be a lot more back of house, which is where some of the gross up happen that don't really require a parking to be allocated to those. So it just involves a lot more study than we really have the information to present today. We're keeping that open. One of the things that we talked about with George and Chrissy was this process of studying with Walker and Kim Lee Horne will happen over the course of the next three months now that we'll have scale and use. We'll have that information presented to the staff before IDA submission present those updates to them. In the case that any of this requires us to go back and revisit the landlord approved set, then we can do that at that time. We're prepared to go ahead and submit for IDI, we can do that then as well. So generally, the program is defined by what the uses are. The parking will be similarly defined by what is required. Thank you. Since we're on parking in December, I want to leave, but I'll just go on at Valle. I heard staff express some concerns and just as a layman who's not a parking engineer looking at this I see some concerns if the valets up in the front on the south side toward northeast 5th and then one way or another you got a circle around Well, it's 90 degrees or 270 degrees and the 90 degrees requires a u-turn So I see that as an initial already. I wanted a flag of the for IDA. What's your thought right now on how you're going to handle that? I think the idea of having valet and I can invite in to one up if you'd like. But parking or sorry for valet drop off, usually that a nice arrival moment up to the front of the building is usually ideal. Access for parking for those who are self parking themselves can access underneath. At the same time, we do have Walker helping us understand what the overall flow of traffic should and could be. So, Valle may change if the recommendations from those studies reflect that those need to be all in the same place. We really just don't have as much information as we need to determine that. But ideally, that's where we were thinking Valle would be nice up at the front and the rest of the parking along the side. But those consultants will help us over the course of the next three months to determine what that should be by end of year or so. Have you, I know you're not there yet but and again this is not my professional expertise but if you had a valet area along north east mind or boulevard along that kind of what I'll call like two o'clock to three o'clock area there you're not walking through the front you're close to the valet which makes it a heck of a lot easier for the cars, but not so much for the patrons to give you, given thought to that, is it a possibility? I think that's great feedback. And we'll take that into consideration with our design team to ensure that they get that feedback. I'm sure they're going to be thinking the same thing as well. Wherever valley and parking need to be, and of course this is an 18 month process which we'll be having with staff, it'll be where the whole after we have the information available to us, it'll be where it needs to be to make the most sense for both the patron experience for traffic and for the rest of myzner parking downtown overall. Okay. You're, could you answer some of the questions that were brought up earlier that I raised earlier to Ms. Gibson about the stage if you're having a stage on What's the north end of the Piazza now? How will that work? Will it drop down? Will he added? I wish I had a pointer. Yeah, so right now in the configuration that you're seeing today where the amphitheater is being shown is on the east side of the parcel facing. Oh, does it point? Oh, yes, thank you. You're seeing it. It might, Ellie. Oh there. There it is. Sorry here is the amphitheater stage shown right now but you could have the amphitheater stage proposed underneath in here projecting south as it does today. We're just showing that there's some flexibility in the way that you can orient the public experience when there is an amphitheater experience going on. It's just shown right here because it can happen here and project out for the same capacity of people. That stage can also be back here and open up those doors for an entire experience. And then you could also still have the amphitheater stage proposed over here and facing south. It just depends on what the event is. If it's a public event where you really want to make sure that you have that experience where all of Plazerial can enjoy it, we will be able to accommodate that in this design. So the stage will be movable and flexible. That's exactly right. Your colleague mentioned something about elevating about three feet. What was three feet? Because it looked like the piazza is at grade, right? It's at grade now and that requires a little bit further study, but the idea is how could we raise the site a little bit so that the parking garage that's proposed doesn't act like a parking garage underground, you know, in the sense of being in a bathtub? How do we stay outside of the water table? So it feels like it's almost in above grade parking garage in the sense that it won't cost as much to dig as deep as some other projects that enter into the water table. So it just has to require a little bit further grade study to understand how that would affect the seeding experience when you are coming out into the Piazza to experience a program, a little further study on that. And we'll provide some elevations and sections so that you understand during the idea process what that would feel like. But a little bit further study once we understand truly where that water table is. What are you possibly talking about having the piazza not at grade like deep ramps nowadays, but I think of Lincoln Center. You go up a series of steps when you're in the central piazza there. You're about, I don't know, three, four feet, if not higher above the street. That's exactly right. Are you talking about that? I don't think that's the great differential in Antoine. You can come and address this. I don't think that we're not talking that quite that high. But go ahead. Yeah, let me say something very important. Today, the current situation, when you arrive, you have a small share. You'll go up on the street. This is one element. The second element during talking with different people, we heard some security issues saying, what are you doing in order to impede a car to get inside the piazza in case of event for maybe terrorism or something else? So what we are trying to do is to combine three things. First of all, is to deal with security. To create a certain obstacle between the street and to protect people inside the amphitheater. Second is to solve, to give better solution for the parking garage, to stay out of the water and have a spend reasonable money to achieve it in the below grade. And the third thing is exactly what we have today. Today, when you come, you have some stairs, you have stairs. But I think we can do it better than what it's today in making a more smooth step, something like six inches by two feet. So we don't feel really like a nobstay. We'll be an obstacle, but the people will not feel it. We'll be an obstacle for cars that coming with bad intention to that area. Thank you. Part of the reason I asked was the original vision was having the piazza stage of the north spill out to the south so if there were events that you wanted even greater capacity and visibility from the public realm of Pfizer Park that that would be maintained that's I want to ensure that that would be part of it. Yeah the intention is exactly the same. We think of, you know, even using the facade of the southern facing where the public call is to be able to do projection mapping and sharing a simulcast event of, like, say, the final four game when FAU is playing. We hopefully see that again in future years where the entire community can really experience that. That will be maintained. We're going to really have to just study exactly what that threshold might look like to raise it up slightly. I'm not seeing that as a material amount like Lincoln Center is where you see that really raised, you know, almost six, maybe some, what, six feet, you know, with all the stares rising. I'm actually Joshua. You'd probably know that really well having designed there. No, the intention is to have it feel like it completely blends down Plasarail. I think that's why Antoine has that exhibit as his first slide that shows that yellow kind of glow that comes from the North End and spills all the way south. That's the intent is to maintain that and just handle it with design. Right. You're showing the same square footage high and low for Piazza and Ampitheater Outdoor area. Are you still planning just to forget opening up the doors? That area would accommodate the same neighborhood people. Exactly right, exactly right, Mr. Mayor. Tenditos. Yes. So if the Festival of the Arts Mocha or other festival wanted to plan a 10-day thing out there. They've always insisted on the tent. We've spent lots of money every year to have the tent. How do you address that? That you can't plan events the same way if you don't have rain protection. So the idea, you could still have the tent if you wanted it. When we looked into designing this, the idea was you're almost creating this indoor experience with the festival when you tend to it, when you try to handle acoustics for it. By offering an opportunity to have an indoor experience at the same scale that you have outside in the sense of what you're proposing through the main venue, the festival could go indoors and have this incredible, you know, kind of experience much like they try to have today. Now if you wanted to maintain that outside, you could, we could still have a tend that, then, deals your right, does not protect against rain. But if we were to hardcover canopy, you know, you have to weigh out the pros and cons of all these things. The hardcover canopy, talk about a cost issue, is a very expensive element wherein you have to protect against uplift for hurricanes. And so all those columns all over the Piazza plus the cost and expense of it, if we can accommodate events that happen outdoors, that would like to be indoors and have that weather protection, we can accommodate that through the main venue. And for more public events that don't require or don't necessarily need all of that weather protection, much like every other event that we have every year without the exception to the festival, can still be outdoors and have that as well. I did do at something if you allow me. Today, according to the business plan and the capacity of what happened in the area, and keeping the current demand on event in the Piazza, the Piazza is used event in the Piazza is 60day a year. What we don't want to do is penalize this space for the next 300-day in the year. So today, if there is any need for this 60-day, maybe we're not more any for 60, for 40, 30 or whatever, if we need to add a tent, we can do it as today. But what we'd like to avoid is penalizing the 300-day in the year where people can enjoy enduring the good weather, the evening, or during the day and looking to the sky. That's it. Okay. And then I know we talked a little bit before the meeting started about costs because I know you don't have everything set, you're going to get something more. Could you give us a kind of a handle or a gut check right now? You're going underground with the garage, you're looking to not do the whole expense of a bathtub. You'll need less space because it's not going to be stair-stepped. At the same time though, you've decided to go ahead and demolish the amphitheater and replace that with new buildings. Where do you think you're going to order magnitude? Where do you think you're going to be relative to your original cost projections? I think I'd like to reserve. We should have the, now that we have kind of scale and use determined, we'll have a lot more information after the next few months. The cost consultant that we have engaged would be able to give us a really greater understanding of that by end of year, by the end of the calendar year. So based on the scale of the project, it is generally more or less in line with where we were. We have to do a lot more studies in the design process to understand what exactly that cost of the underground parking garage might be. We're looking at offsite parking opportunities that might actually alleviate some of the parking underground. So I think it's just too early to say exactly where we are by year and definitively this team would like to know what budget we're working against. And we need to know that as well as an organization going forward. Do you have an upper bound for example? You know it's not going to be 50, you don't have a 50% increase to you. I mean, yeah. 25%. I would rather reserve until we get to the end of the year to give you that information and as I mentioned before it will always be a process of maintaining transparency and good partnership with the city to make sure that you understand. I get it but I there's I would like to know more if it's 25 or 20 because that's more of a break point given that 20% reduction on other things. Mr. Mayor I wish I could give that to you today but we're going to have to wait until from the next three months once the studies are done and once the cost consultant can get back this information that we'll give him. All right. And I know same question concerning your operation fees because there are milestones in the TCDA and the lease will probably the TCDA about projections for endowment and operations funds. Are you projecting in the same ballpark? Don't know yes. What outer range? So there's a several sites, right? There's the operational reserve and the endowment. Those are tied to the operational aspects of the project, which haven't materially changed. The idea behind the maintenance reserve is tied to construction cost. And so it's 5% of that number, whatever that number comes back. And that reserve will have to equal that. OK. So that will probably be the one that gets dictated the most by that number. Thank you. If you can't think more about that cost question, while others are asking, I would appreciate it. Absolutely. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Wigtre. Thank you very much. I was not here, as we know, in the very beginning of this process. Your staff and Chuan Josh, many of the team members, we've met separately. I always appreciated all those things. I've talked to the city attorney many, many times, trying to explain the difference between landlords' approval of the plans and the IDA. And as I mentioned before, there's a deep coupling in the agreement not necessarily that I would agree or disagree with that that's what it is but it's something we have to deal with in terms of raising the funds how is that going? We're on track, we're cautiously optimistic as we always are. And in terms of understanding what the threshold costs are for construction, I guess was it, I think Mr. Joshua or you, we're talking that we haven't yet evaluated the actual cost with the new scheme. That's right. And so the real question here is, you know, for my reading of the agreement, right, I'm left to read the agreement and go by that as the document between us. And so what was the thought process? And this Gibson's presentation, she mentioned the word renovation three times. And of course, not that I disagree, as I've said, this plan is aspirational. But what was the thought process on taking out the renovation of the existing amphitheater and all the things that it means has meant and will continue to mean in terms of functionality and all those things, and doing a complete demolition bathtub and moving it to the eastern side of this project. I would like to understand, whether it's from you or Mr. Antoine, why there was such a significant change to go that way. And again, I'm not a theater designer. I'm not an expert. So I'm asking the expert. It's a great question. So the amphitheater, when we first presented the concept plan, this was prior to an entire design team really being amassed and having the opportunity for some of the best in the world to have inform us. The original design intent with the amphitheater and the main venue being a part was one to ensure that you understood that we would preserve an amphitheater-like experience at the current capacity. And that we also wanted an opportunity for an interior experience that we've, I know, long been wanting here in this community. And looking at it from a business plan perspective, it was very rare that we were ever going to see those two venues being and we went over here, ever being used simultaneously. So to remodel an existing structure that was already seeing its age and was going to need some significant capital improvements in the course of 10 to 15 years based on a property condition assessment that we did. And a main venue that was going to already be a new build, we thought why have two separate structures that are likely never to be utilized the same time and expend the resources and eat up precious ground floor space for two venues. How could we more efficiently and effectively combine those experiences into one footprint? That would also alleviate some of the space to allow for a little bit more public space and some of the other programmatic elements that we sought to have. It also opened up the floor for some of the services and things that we would need on that ground floor. So the idea was not necessarily to expend more resources. It was actually trying to make it a bit more efficient to take what was two different venues and combine them into one. Considering the fact that almost never would we have those two experiences happening at the same time. Will we, could we, we absolutely could, you know, this main venue could have an immersive experience going on and the Piazza could still service, you know, let's just say the summer series. But to have two separate structures and the expensive both of those thought we thought that would actually be more inefficient than what's proposed today. The next one. Yeah Mark, I would like to provide an architecture response to that. So if I'm speaking in French, I will be talking about Bicolage, but I understood in English, be it Hatch Patch. So when we design, the lot is not big. I'm talking now as architect. The lot is not big. And when we design, when we have an intervention on such operation, we look for urban unity. And because the lot is not very big, we don't want to add with free vocabulary, free languages in Ubelling, Design by RPW and existing amphitheatre and then the museum. And if we have the magic one, we'll go further. I will not say more, but if we have the magic one, we will go further than this. And treat this as one plot and one urban unity. But we don't have this magic wand. The idea is really to save the rest and to try to create nevertheless an urban unity and this is what we did. Honestly, you don't need us if you would like to keep the amphitheater and make new building You will be spending too much money on us. You don't need us. This is this is to be honest. This is the response. Thank you It's a good response. Thank you Mr. Urgent, can you has the property condition assessment for the current Amphitheater been shared with the staff? It was actually part of the original submission when prior to, which I'm happy to send to you, Mark. Very good, Mr. Brown, you could have that sent to me. I would, yeah, absolutely would like to review that. I don't disagree with the architectural considerations. Like I said, I'm not a professional architect. I have no knowledge of theater design or any of those things other than what has been told to me or the research I find on the internet. And that's the limit of my scope other than real estate. The changing though, even though it's with the best intentions, changing from a renovation plan to an underground parking facility, you have to appreciate is a significant change in how this building is going to be constructed because of course it includes wiping out the entire plate, raising the entire structure, substantial construction, and again, that might be more of the IDA process. And there's a little bit of this differential between the landlord plans and the IDA process. And so again, I'm bringing it up now because I don't know of another time to bring it up of how it's all going to work. How is the museum going to be impacted? How is Myzner Park going to be impacted. How is my partner park going to be impacted? I find it odd that the city council would give its approval prior to Brookfield's approval. I find that to be, you know, just maybe the timing or the agreement or something. Like I said, because the staff looked at it, just things that we didn't know about. I think in all agreements, there are things that we look at two years ago. We're not sure how things are going to work. We have a kind of general framework of how we think things are going to work. Of course, now, as things get more crystallized, it's time to ask more serious questions or really just kind of change those things. Like I said, I have concerns, how have your conversations with Brookfield been going? They've been going very well. We actually just had a conversation just a few weeks ago. I think the idea here was as the owner of the property is to make sure this is still materially the same type of project you had anticipated when you entered into the agreement. Your opportunity to raise any comments and concerns. We have about 18 to 24 months of opportunity to work through that. And then you know that we're here as a partner. And in the case during the course of the IDA process, we're not going to hold you to this. For whatever reason, we find that we might need to revisit anything during the process. We could always go back to you as well. So know that if there was ever a material concern over anything, we're going to have 24 months to be able to sort through that as a partnership. I appreciate you saying on the record that you're not going to hold us to it. But that's in terms of this type of complication, this complicated agreement, and our looking for the benefit of the taxpayers and the resources that are spent and how this is going to operate, it's, you know, it does get a little more complicated, I'm sure you can understand, then just taking your word for it. With the considerable concept plan changes here, Mr. Josh had said before that we're still at the kind of outset of the design process. We're not in construction drawings yet, we're really just saying this is the final concept, right? I guess we'll do that. I mean, scale in use, right? So the final project will continue to evolve as the design process evolves. So I guess the question to the mayor's point, in terms of operations and functionality, if we're at the beginning of the concept plan, how has the business plan been updated? Operationally, how are we looking at, you said before that you're very happy that you just hired a new chief operating officer, development officer. And so I guess my thought process is, as the design gets changed, there is some sort of financial model that's also simultaneously changing, whether it's a cost per square foot in construction, but also operationally, we're saying, okay, this will produce X dollars of revenue. This will cost X dollars to operate. How is that? The process has been great. We have a great working relationship with AMS and AMS is here represented by Nora, who is more than happy to come up as well. The business plan has been designed to be the business plan that this organization and its mission needs. The business plan has also been informing the building program to say this business plan needs this capacity, this square footage in order to be able to function in the way that it intends to. So know that the iterative process not only has been established to develop where we are today, but will continue to iterate as design decisions get made to say, how does that impact the business plan? Is that something we like? We don't like how might that change things? That process will continue throughout. I was just going to read that point. Every space that I talked about was not, didn't come first. The business plan came first, and that drove the program, not the other way around. So as AMS got into the business plan, they said, we need the space to do X, Y, or Z. So we said, okay, well, if it's gonna do that, it's gonna have to be this scale, and it needs this kind of support space. So we developed it in lockstep with the business model as they learn things about the business model that might alter the planning, we've adjusted the planning and it's all moving together in lockstep. Appreciate it. Has the business time been shared with the staff as well in the original generation or the updates? I think in one of the original packages when we were in the RFP process it was but the latest business plan we just got and I'm still in the process of reviewing it but it's based on all the work that we've done over the course of the summer. When do you think that will be available to be shared with us? I'm happy to get back to you to share that with you. And went over the course the next couple, six weeks a month. An in-appierative time. Sure. OK. You said that you were looking at a couple of things and you'll also get back to us by the end of year in terms of, I guess, construction updating, offsite parking and whatnot. The intent is to have those studies based on the timeline with our consultants is to have been done by the end of the year. We would be reviewing that information and we can be meeting with you in January for that. Thank you, Mr. Virgin. I have some comments in discussion, but I have no more questions for the Council. Thank you, Councilor. Thank you. Okay. Anyone else? Mr. Thompson? Mr. Rucker. Okay. I had a couple comments as well. So thank you for answering all these questions. Thank you for bringing us new pretty pictures to look at this time. So the comments I had, a lot, most of them were covered. Mr. Singer, I mean, just looking at the numbers of the anticipated program totals, it looks about 20% right? The increase from the minimums, 88,000 to 113,000. So that's kind of the number that I'm going off of. The Tenditos versus the Hardcover Canopy, I like the idea of the Tenditos more because already when you moved the main venue up, I think you created the less of a breeze that you were going to get into the amphitheater. So if you put a hard canopy on that now, you're just having a heat box here in Florida. So I think that your option is this retractable canopy. But I am concerned because we are South Florida. We're not in Italy. We're not in Paris. And we're not in New York or the Northeast. But we have hot rainy days. And we have a lot of activation, our summer concert series. It's just starting to cool off now towards October and 80 degrees are cooling off. So I'm concerned with while you'll have permeable paving, I am concerned about water, standing water, still I'm concerned about the heat during the summer, like how much shade is that Tenditos really gonna give is it gonna, when you don't have the breeze from the east because you have the main venue now moved up, is still gonna be kind of a hot box. So, it's just things that I'd like to have answers to when you come back. And I looked through your whole presentation, I didn't see where you would put a stage where the current Amphitheater is now, but Ms. Virgin, you said that there could be a stage there. I had read that you may also put one on like a battle, the bands type thing you said on the west side. I do like the orientation of the Amphitheater now with the sound going down the plaza real. I have a little bit of a concern again with the concert series. If this Piazza will hold 2400 minimum, but you're saying minimum 2400, and our current Piazza holds between 4,000 and 5,000, I am concerned about those activities and our current Piazza holds between 4,000 and 5,000. I am concerned about those activities in the future because we've just really started to get the live nation concerts back and it really is great for the city, brings a lot of people into the restaurants and the businesses around here. So I don't wanna see that go away, even if it is 16 days of the year that we that we do those kinds of things. And let's see permeable paving. So the accessibility for everyone with the city events and I like that you are looking towards sustainability said with the water that you would be collecting on site, you would reuse that within the amphitheater as well as the your own electricity with the roof. And I just wanted to make sure I think it's been answered, as an answer to a couple times, but with the cost increases, you don't anticipate your fundraising timeline changing at all. I think after the course of the next three months, once we have a little bit more information, obviously you guys would be the first people to know if in the case that we needed to come back and talk to you about that. Just to go back to the amphitheater piazzaa, if you look, but these are scale to be the same, that piyats is exactly the same size as the one that we're proposing. You can still have the 4,000 people and there's still capacity for 4,000 people in there. We're saying that the, you know, if you have a concert for 2400, that will comfortably and without feeling too grand have that opportunity. But the scale of the Piazza is exactly the same size as it is today. So, just so we can, I wanted to make sure I address that we want to make sure we keep those lovely concerts going. And I think one of the renderings shows that as well. Okay. Thank you so much. Thank you, Chair. Thank you. So, those are all the questions I have no one else has any other sure not close Okay, yeah, we're quick there was a cut miss Gibson said something earlier about And I think it was just we're talking about it than deals so we're talking about that But that that valet wasn't going to be covered the valet I'm assuming is going to be a covered portish Say of some core of some kind if we can just clarify that because I had that on my notes. I just went back. No, it's a great point. I mean, it's open here in the, you know, up along Fifth Street. I think that's a comment that won't certainly take into consideration because when we show up, I don't know if we don't want to be excited. Right. Because itless with the Tendee, those. I think that when you and I met, we met last week, we just had kind of some conversations. You were saying in terms of the architecture, what you said back to the box, because we want to have a visible line out. So not only are we bringing the center per fine arts in terms of accommodating our programming, but it's also an architectural, I guess, masterpiece if you're going to call it that. Maybe I should call it that just for me. So again, I think that's where it came from where we don't want it to be kind of blocked when you go into other areas. And many of you know I travel a lot and I've got, I like to do that because I like to look at different areas and kind of see what's happening in different parts of the country. And this summer I had the opportunity to go back to France and I went to Central Pompidue because it's one of the projects that was done by this architect and it kind of has this kind of open space. And I hadn't been there in many, many years and I made it a point to get there. So again, I mean for us as we go through this process, there has to be kind of that vision of what we're bringing to our city to make it more beautiful. So that's just my take on what the new conceptual versus what was presented two years ago and how things are evolving and getting things to scale. I also had the question to Ms. Virgin last week about fundraising because it's because what as Mr. Wigdor said earlier, you're coming to us earlier than we know what the funding is and some of the members on here were and on council before that some of us were in favor of this project from the beginning and as you know I've been in favor of this project from the beginning. We also have to have fiduciary responsibility for taxpayers and for the land that we leased. And you said and you can go on record that in October you would be providing that you were hitting your fundraising goals. So that's right. And the idea here is that there are so many elements of this project, it has to be the right mission, it has to be the right project. It has to be the right building to accommodate that mission and it has to be within a budget that the organization can uphold. We are always going to be working together to ensure that we meet all of those objectives throughout the process. And the agreement has all the protections that the city needs to ensure it's not waiting forever to ensure that we do meet those milestones. So thank you. Thank you so much. That's a no questions. Thank you, Mr. Rucker. So I already had a motion and a second to approve. Right, yes, yes. So this was the discussion. So Mr. Rector, did you have more discussion then? I do have some comments, yeah. Thank you. So after the landlord approval plans were submitted, I had a meeting with the center, as I said, I talked about some of my concerns generally and specifically in the May 13th CRA meeting. I expressed those concerns and this is an update of that presentation with a little bit more. Obviously, we've talked about this, you've talked about this, projects of this nature are completely complicated. They will impact the environment. My recommendation then, and it remains now, is that the city, which Miskips and confirms we have not yet done, that we need to hire our own independent consultant, with specialized experience on these matters. Each of us in different ways have expressed questions requesting knowledge for which we're not experts. Clearly, Ms. Virgin has her team of her experts. And of course, both parties are trying to ensure that the best thing happens for the city. The taxpayers, as Mr. Drucker said, in terms of our fiduciary responsibility. So, I could see no better way to support this project than if we, the city, had our own independent analysis of that. I think it would bolster the center's hard work to this point. I mentioned briefly in the mayor touched upon it, you know, that the plan is decoupled. The landlord's plan is decoupled from the IDEA in regulatory process. And, you know, in a conversation today, you saw back and forth, a lot of these things are conflated and perhaps confusing. And the idea then is what does the plan mean? Is it just the building plan? But as we talked about, it's also the operational plan, the financial plan, the true business plan, that, as Virgin you said, we're just getting to that point where we're going to start to understand these things. We talked about the design, the functionality, the programming, the updated cost to build a structure as designed, of course, given the new supply chain environment, new interest rate environment, not the traditional IDA profile here that we're typical that we're used to seeing. The cost to operate a center on an annual basis, I was very pleased to hear that the business plan really and the business model really pushes on a construction side what those costs are going to be, but yet we don't have them, that's going to be an end of the year, end of the year thing. I was talking about the changes, of course, when I was looking at this, you know, that, you know, going to the bathtub, going to the underground parking, you know, changing the renovation, I don't, Mr. Antoine, I don't disagree with your architectural expertise and all those things in your vision not to have three different architectural styles and there's one piazza there, it's smart. But it wasn't the original thought and it's true, we didn't, we all didn't know what this was going to be and some of us were not here. The agreement calls for the renovation of the Ampeth Theater. And again, it's not that I disagree with you. I think the plan is quite aspirational. The question is, how has that been evaluated, in terms of cost, in terms of operations, and Ms. Verden you admit that we're not quite there yet. It's going to be a couple more months before those things. Obviously, we're not quite there yet. It's going to be a couple more months before those things. Obviously, we're not talking about renovation. We're talking about a complete tear down. I told you something like concerns there. We've talked about the plan changes. If there's a significant adverse change, Ms. Gibson talked about it. Any material component, this is a significant change. Does it do aspirationally what the city, what the previous council, what this council still wants it to do? It's up for review and those are open questions that I think an independent consultant. Again, I'm not asking for the project to be canceled. I'm asking it for it to be analyzed with some specificity to bolster all these things and to bolster the city's investment here. Obviously we talked about this as well. But you saw with the bathtub, you know, almost adjacent to the museum, you know, I do consider, and I know that might be more of the construction regulatory process, but I do consider in order to dig and build a parking garage and what's required. And it looks like we're going right up to the property line of the museum. It looks like a significant operational concern of how the museum is going to function during the piling, during the significant demolition and foundational work, that the museum will be significantly impacted. I'd like to hear their thoughts. I'd like to hear the museum's thoughts as well on what they think this means. I was also concerned, as I said before, that Brookfield has not yet appinded, and because the way the agreements formed, this meeting was by necessity that this meeting has to happen and happen as we said a month before the funding deadline. So again, we don't also have the approval of the, you know, we also don't have approval from Brookfield. And so looking at all these things, you know, I see a construction impact. I see, you know, I see potentially an impact from Meisner Park, you know, during a significant period of years. Again, economically, we're talking about something that could have economic benefits to the city. Absolutely it should. I think that's why this was approved, but have those really been considered. The externality costs that Ms. Nockless talked about and what not, the pumpkin patcheslet talked about and what not. The pumpkin patches, the concerts and what not. Again, in terms of having the hard cover, I don't disagree that the ten details, that's what it's called, ten, ten, ten details. I think it's a beautiful design. The question is, as a city, we need to think about where are all of our programming going to go that's usually under a hard cover that might not be the center's problem. That might be our problem. But again, we haven't think about it. Maybe we do have time to think about it, but it's a concern. Will it be a revenue impact, economic impact, jobs impact? I mean, there's a lot of operational impacts of a plan that are separate from an IDA that are concerns that require analysis and they are beyond my expertise. This is very complicated stuff. What I'd like to recommend to my colleagues is that we have an independent consultant help us review these issues before and beyond the IDA process. Of course, the financial modeling that Ms. Virgin, that you talk about, you know, of course it has to be shared with us, of course. In terms of doing a real sensitivity analysis financially, the city does need to look at the worst key scenario. What happens if it doesn't work? Recall that the amphitheater was a private entity or a foundational entity that gave the keys back to the city and it's something that we have to take care of. I know there's some threshold things about endowments and maintenance studies and reserve funds in the agreement to do that. All those things need to be updated to the new plan and hopefully those will all be answered but they haven't been yet. Lastly, this is not a situation where the IDA is granted and then the developer continues alone with the approval. This is a public private partnership. The agreement, the lease, it wraps this IDA forever and the fact that we can say we can come back to things in the idea, or not the idea, it's not really that way. I think there might need to be some small amendments to the agreement to clarify these things because the idea process from a regulatory nature stands on its own that is separate from the landlords' agreement. And as the city attorney has attorneys and I've discussed Adnauseum is that the two have to be kept separate. So anyway my summary is that the landlord plans accompany a lot of things that are separate from idea approval. It's more than just concept approval now. The flexibility I applaud all the flexibility, all the design, all these things, it is aspirational. But the thorough view as Ms. Virgin and all the teams said, we're at the outset of the design process, Brookfield has not approved yet. We're still waiting for end of year in terms of construction. We're still waiting for the business plan. And I'd like my colleagues to consider immediately that we should hire an independent consultant to be engaged to review this thing. And I think we should be deferring the vote at this time. Well, we can at least start these things. Because of the way the time configuration has happened, in effect, that this is actually earlier than anticipated, we have two more CRA meetings before that time period happens. So we can work on some of these things. We could work with the developer, with the applicant, and their attorneys, and their staff on clar developer, with the applicant and their attorneys and their staff on clarifying some of these language and some of this review process. As you said, these things are going to uncover things. And I think during that time we can immediately, I think it's under Mr. Brown's approval authority that does not require its own RFP. Mr. Brown, do you agree that an independent consultant of this nature is something that you could require under your own approval? Yes, provided we can find one. Provided we could find one. Well, that's important. And lastly, I want to basically tell the center and the respected staff here. When I'm doing these thoughts, when I'm considering this for hours and days and months, I don't do it lightly. I do it with the best interests of the city at heart. And the research that I performed over days and months is to see how this would work. I see congratulations are in order for Renzo Piano, which was awarded the Sarasota Performing Arts contract. And there's a significant design there. They had their own independent advisor, HR and A, advisors, a leading real estate firm, to evaluate those things. And then likely I looked at the Broward Center, the R Center, and the Kravice Center's annual budgets, and some other performing arts center construction, cost estimates, and whatnot, to really see how close we are with this. And all of those centers do not stand on their own operationally. They require significant donations, the development, and that's understandable. But it is something that we as a city have to appreciate that this is not something that's going to be, you know, this is something where there's going to be a foundation and a donating fund with all the people that care and love Book of Retone and the arts so much. This is going to be something that is always going to be searching for significant donations to function. And likewise, you know, the art center in Miami, right, the Broward Center, we're talking countywide stuff is, you know, the art center in Miami, right? The Broward Center, we're talking county-wide stuff, has significant, significant donations. So anyway, those are my thoughts. Again, I'm moving to postpone this. I'm moving to table the motion while we consider some of these issues. I think we have the time at least two meetings until the financial hurdle comes along for us to talk about this more and a project of this complexity. Obviously, it deserves a significant review. Again, my feeling, as I've said, is like, if we do this analysis and the independent review looks at it really closely and gives us all the feedback that we need to be comfortable so we can make a decision, I think it will only help the center make their decision, make their business model, and it will help you raise money if the city has its own independent consultant as well. Like we also, you know know making sure that we're The Brookfield component. I think I think Brookfield has to give their opinions As well before I'd be comfortable making my decision. So thank you for enduring my thoughts and Me unloading my my brain that that's what I have to say Thank you for sharing those thoughts. And so if we could find a consultant, how long are you looking to postpone this? Well, I think there's two things happening. I think one, we need to find a consultant. And then two, I think it looks like from Miss Vergin that a bunch of the or several of the considerations that are not yet known are happening within the next three months. So I don't even think we need to make the motion to extend to a date certain yet. I think we still have one or two meetings where we can talk with staff, see how things are going, we could talk with the center for the arts group, see how things are going, and then once we get closer to knowing what the dates are for the updated cost estimate, for the updated business plan, to see how things are going with Brookfield, then I think we could probably put together a very, very brief amendment, one or two pages that clarifies those things and things we talked about. Ms. Nockless? Mr. Nockless? Mr. Nockless, you asked the question. So thank you, Mr. Reader, for that presentation. So I'm going to defer this question to Mr. Brown so that you could give us a little bit of the history of why we didn't hire an independent consultant. We first started this process and I understand that you were not on the council and either was Ms. Nockless but the ones of us that were here, we decided again hiring an independent consultant at that point. So I wanted to turn it over to Mr. Brown. If you could give us a brief overview as to why that didn't happen at the beginning of this process two years ago and then I'll have a couple follow up questions. Excuse me. At the time that the proposal had come before us, there was staff had recommended that we go through a full process to hire a consultant to help us evaluate what we had received and assist us during the process. Council declined to do that. We did hire a firm that is now working for the center, and I always forget the acronym, but they did a brief analysis of the programming aspects of the proposal. That was basically what it was focused on. I don't have all the details in my head, but I could go back and get those for you if that's a interest But fundamentally it was requested by staff to do it just to halt the process do a full analysis of feasibility and the council said no we need to continue and that's why we continue Thank you mr. Brown. So just a follow-up question. And Ms. Gibson did say that as we proceed through this process, if we need to bring independent consultants during the IDA process, we'll be able to do that. The reason we didn't do that, Mr. Riggter, two years ago is because it's a very specialized field, and there's not as many consultants as one will anticipate. So that is why we put that burden on the center to provide not only the consultants, but also that information. It's also a very expensive consultant because they're very limited in nature. And again, we didn't want to taxi that on the taxpayers who wanted to put the burden back on the center. So that was a couple of reasonings. Why we didn't do that back then, and I don't remember the exact name of the company, but that was what I was alluding to. So again, for me personally today, I understand what you're saying, and the only trepidation that I had of the Miss Virgin confirmed earlier was the fundraising goals for the next report, and that they were on track, was really the financial part, because a little bit of the scope has changed in terms of this project. However, I do not want to hold up the process for a consultant because there is a timeline that we're adhering to based on what we already signed with them. I also wanted to ask a question about the Brightline station. How is this different than the Brightline station? Did they have a consultant that they had or that we hire a consultant to consult on the Brightline? So if you can answer that too just from an education perspective. We hired a consultant to evaluate the financial feasibility of the plan for the Brightline station and whether or not it made sense for the city financially. But we did that prior to entering the agreement. That is correct. So this is like, no pun intended, but kind of like the train has taken off a little bit where we're at now and my train analogies. So again, I don't want to hold up the process. They're saying that I don't mind deferring the vote. However, I'm more inclined to vote today just so that it could continue their process. They could present the October fundraising goals and because staff has reviewed this and once again it goes back to the experts. Staff is comfortable with what has been presented. So again, they're the experts. Also, we can hire these consultants or get our own interpretation from their consultants that they have as we move along this process. So I guess that's kind of where I'm at now. I don't mind taking a vote today. I don't mind waiting a meeting. I don't know what is going to impact. What I don't want the impact to be is a delay in the process to get the center moving. What I don't want is for them to come back to us and say because you delayed, we are not meeting our fundraising goals and we're not meeting our timeline. Then they're going to blame us the city. Not saying that you would, I'm just saying I'm thinking ahead when things like this happen. So that's kind of where I'm at right now. Thank you. Any other thoughts? Mr. Thompson? I feel similarly. We didn't choose to have a consultant, but I'm happy to bring one on if it will help. But I believe we owe them an answer on these plans within the next month, and I just don't think it's realistic necessarily for us to be able to find a consultant, hire them, have them do an evaluation, and still give them that answer within a month's time. And yeah, there may be a chance for an amendment on that, but they'd have to agree to that. And even if it did happen, then you're talking about pushing back potential other deadlines because of the consequences there. So I'm happy to have a consultant be retained to help it. I agree. This is a complicated thing that is without, certainly outside my subject matter expertise if I have any. So it makes sense to have somebody help us along there. And there are significant consequences to a lot of the things you're talking about. So I'm happy to have a consultant within reason. I'm not sure we really fleshed out what the cost was going to be the last time, maybe we did. But I be willing to look at that as significant of a decision as these things are. But I view the landlord plan approval process as requiring an answer by us from us within the next month. Now, if the center is willing to postpone, go along and have us postpone up until that deadline, maybe a meeting or two from now, that I'd be willing to consider, because they would allow for additional information to come in between now and then, that's fine. But I don't think we could realistically get a consultant on board and have them conduct the kind of analysis that you're contemplating within that time. And I don't think that the center is necessarily interested in pushing it any further beyond that one month deadline between now and then. So between the two, I think I'm happy to have the vote today. I'm also happy, I would want to hear what the center has to say about, because I think they themselves fleshed out the fact that the meetings didn't line up exactly right. The deadline wasn't such that, we were here a month before Brookfield even can have a say on what things look like. I'm happy to push it back maybe that length of time if the center is okay with that. But I don't think that, and I am, like I said, the consultant idea is a good idea. I'm just not sure that we're going to be able to get the kind of robust evaluation that you're looking for within that period of time. Thank you, Mr. Starrer. evaluation that you're looking for within that period of time. Thank you, Mr. Sainter. Well, I thought the center wanted to respond to Mr. Thompson if otherwise I'll find in. I saw some heads shaking and I see Ms. Echoritus. Why not come up? Ms. Echoritus, good afternoon. Ellie's Echoritus, 14 South East Forest Street. Thank you all very much. This has been a great conversation and staff has been phenomenal to work with throughout this process. I hear your concerns, Mr. Wigder. I do respect them, especially since you were not on council. And you definitely provide more insight from a new perspective, a new set of eyes. We are not necessarily opposed to a post-ponement. This is a partnership between us and the city of Boca Raton and we want to continue down that path. So if it is the will of the council to post-pon for a one month while we you hire your consultant and we move forward, that would be completely fine. And we would still be within the terms of our Developers Agreement. If however we go beyond that one month period, then we would need that amendment that would push all timelines, right? All the timelines would have to be pushed out based on, so let's say we postpone for three months, we'd have to push all the timelines out three months as well. But again, this is a partnership and if that is what you're comfortable doing and you want some a third set of eyes on this, absolutely. With regard to Brookfield, there is constant communications with Brookfield and the center. Unfortunately, we can't get Brookfield to sign an agreement right now until everything is finalized. For example, the parking. Things of that nature need to be finalized so that we can get Brookfield sign off on those plans, which is why the developer agreement has Brookfield signing off later in the process as well. Does that answer your question, Mr. Thompson? Thank you. Yes, it does. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Secretary. Thank you. Yes, it does. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. Thank you, Madam Chair. All right, so I've heard the good news is we're early. So we got a month to do this. So I think it makes sense to use that time because there were some questions. And in fact, if we were going to vote now, I was going to ask for a 10 minute recess because and call her some language when I got into the weeds of section 4.4 and 4.5. I'd rather not try to rush that on the fly because I wanted to address the questions about costs and also the parking because I didn't want to lose the ability to speak now for everholder peace as a landlord concerning the parking and the circulation as related to the IDA. And I think that there may be a difference there and again, rather have the time to flesh that out. So I'm fine with this idea. I think it's only, can only be helpful. Aim to get this done quickly, see if we can retain a consultant, have them all pine, come back in a month, we can have interactions beforehand. I can work on my, the question by the way, Section 4.5, just concerned about approval of landlord plans. So it was about the parking. And I wanted to figure out how that relates to costs and the milestones for not for the endowment and the, sorry, 40. Endowment and working capital reserve, because there was no indexing there. So if you know that if you have a better idea of those cost overruns, maybe we just put a little more there to make sure it's at parity. So with that, yeah, I'm fine with trying to maybe then amend the motion to adjourn this and someone will state what they want, maybe Mr. Wiggher. So I'll leave it to you, Mr. Madam Chair. Thank you. I just have one question because the landlord plans approval process not to exceed six months that date is October 19th To CRA meetings from now is October 21st so The good news is I think the agreement provides that when a deadline falls on a Saturday which is October 19th it goes to the next day Okay, okay, good So when checking on that I'm going for memory, but goes to the next business date. Okay, okay, good. Thank you. So when you check me on that, I'm going for memory, but that's the usual thing in agreements. Okay, so Mayor, we'll just from up. Do you want us to withdraw the motion or to amend the motion? I have no issues deferring. Again, we don't know when the consultant's gonna come in, what I had said earlier stands. I don't have a problem with the consultant. I just don't want that to hold up the process. So that's I could go either way. So I could definitely defer today until October 23rd or do you want to say the following meeting? 21st. It'd be up to. I'm sorry. I was 21st. Yes. Thank you. That's fine. Well, my suggestion, if I may respond, I don't care if the question was directed by me. I don't know whether it's a procedurally I guess it would be the chair's discretion. I guess it would be a motion to you could take them lay the motion on the table and do a no motion that may be easiest but then we now have to figure out what it's a Cooper 21st and what happens the meantime and what's the what's the response state or maybe just leave it to staff's discretion in terms of higher the consultant report back as soon as practical but no later than blank. I think that I think we should take the first motion off the can I ask a question of staff or Mr. Brown? Yes. How long would it take us to get a consultant or what what that process look like? The process of finding a consultant would involve staff researching what consultants are out there that do this kind of analysis of the consultant that worked for us briefly with AMS. They're now working for the center, so we can't hire them. We need to be an independent consultant. The hiring would take place as soon as possible. Their ability to review and report on the feasibility of the business plan, which I think is what we're being asked to determine, as well as some specific questions regarding access, etc. Whether they can get that done before the 21st of October, I don't know. I think it's unlikely to be honest with you. Madam Chair. Okay. Thank honest with you. Madam here. Okay, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Ruck. Go ahead. Yes, I'm sorry. No, I just, go ahead, Mr. Sankert. What were you gonna say with the moment? I just wanted to respond, Mr. Brown's point. I was not thinking that we would have a consultant. The language I was drafting was relating to parking and circulation. I wanted to, as consistent with what Ms. Virgin said, that we would work that out on the IDA process. I just wanted to make sure I was trying to find on the fly, whether we have this word section 4.5, so that I didn't want them in the future, which they wouldn't do anyway, say that, well, we gave the landlord approval plans to this concept. So if we have Hartburn later with the circulation and traffic that we've waived that right. That was the one thing I wanted to preserve there. If we can get language, which I think is simple enough in the order of approval, which we would discuss with them, I think we don't need a consultant for the traffic and parking at this point, and we don't need that number 4 to 5 October 21. I just want to ensure that that's part of the IDA process. So that was separate. In terms of the someone who's pining on it wasn't my you know it's Mr. Waiter's suggestion. Mr. Thompson's comment's more about the nature of the consultancy and maybe we should if you want to take a recess for a few minutes and flesh those out we could do that too. How about we take a 10 minute recess? Okay. Okay. So we're going to take a 10 minute recess. We'll come back at 342-345. Hello. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. Thank you. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same. I'm going to do a little bit of the same. I'm going to do a little bit of the same. I'm going to do a little bit of the same. Thank you. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same. I'm going to do a little bit of the same. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same. I'm going to do a little bit of the same. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. Yeah. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to do a little bit of the same thing. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. Okay, everyone. Thank you for that brief break. We're back at the Community Redevelopment Agency meeting today. It is 3.47. So we have a motion on the table, but Mr. Drucker, what would you like to? So I'd like to go from here. After speaking to the city attorney, I'm going to go ahead and amend the motion to postpone the vote until meeting of October 21st. The deadline for the center would have been October 19th, but because it falls on the Saturday, we will be back here on October 21st. During that time, city manager will start looking into possibilities of hiring and consulting to help us throughout this process, but we will reconvene on October 21st. Okay. Do I have a second question? Second. You do. You have two of them. Mr. Thompson. Okay. Okay. So is there any more discussion? Mr. Thompson, yes. Just to clarify for everybody's benefit, I suppose. The consultant, I see them as more of a long term partner. It's going to help us along the way as we do this. What kind of analysis could we realistically expect to get in 30 days? It's not real life, I don't think. So I don't think that emphasis should be on dropping everything, Mr. City Manager, to make sure we find somebody tomorrow in order to have that analysis done by 30 days' time, because that's not realistic. I want them to be able to give us some guidance on an area of expertise that is perhaps outside of all of our strike zones. That's how I see it. Second, I would like to clarify too that it is not my preference that we start changing deadlines. The consultant's job is the way that I see it. It is not going to be to second-guess the lease agreement. It's not going to be the second-guess decision that council made previously. It's not going to guide us along the way so that we bring this in for a landing in a positive way. It's not intended to be as, maybe we as was discussed, it's not there to second guess or undo things that are already on paper as part of the agreement. And the court layer to that is I'm not necessarily inclined to start moving deadlines because you start moving one deadline and you're from the center not wrong you start moving all the deadlines and then it throws the whole thing into, into flux. So my preference is we stick with the agreement we hue to it closely as it's written it took the city many months to preference is we stick with the agreement, we hue to it closely. As it's written, it took the city many months to negotiate that agreement, I'd like to stick with it. I just like to have a consultant there with us that knows the theater and performing arts space better than I do, perhaps than we do. And that way I think we get a more positive product. That's my, in order to clarify, I was what I was hoping to articulate. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Thompson. Anyone else? Mr. Wigtcher? Yeah. I don't disagree that a consultant's gonna take more than 30 days to do this. And certainly the city's going to need its own owners rep, and this consultant along the way. But I am concerned about the way that the agreement is drafted in terms of a last bite at the apple and the differential between the landlord's approval and the IDA process and the fact that they're not, you know, completely coupled and as Miss Virgin, you know, even said just a few minutes ago. If the construction costs and other things are substantially different than what we thought about, then obviously it will have to be revisited. So obviously, admittedly, we're not receiving those things till the end of the year. The updated business plan has yet to be received. admittedly, we're not receiving those things till the end of the year. The updated business plan has yet to be received. So again, I think an agreement of this nature that's very complicated, as you said. It took many months, as you said. It's a guidepost, but like I said, as COVID happened, different things happen. So I say, as circumstances change, if it necessitates us doing small amendments and not penalizing the center at all, but giving them more time to crystallize their plans, I don't think it needs to be so hard and fast. I think the Constitution of the United States was amended a few times. And because everyone knows sometimes things, the amendments don't make it worse, the amendments make it better. And I think there's an opportunity for us to even make it better. So again, being hard and fast here on an agreement of this nature, I think I just, I don't think I would go at that at that moment But the next couple meetings will give us some time to crystallize with both sides really need right to go forward because the center Likewise doesn't want to have you know, it doesn't want to have these hard. They super hard dates They might not want to be you know so stuck as well. There's this rush and all these other things. So I think it behooves us. We can have a little flexibility here. It doesn't need to be so hard without stopping the process. And I agree with that. Some things can happen at the same time concurrently. So just some different thoughts. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Rector. Mr. Singh. Madam Chair, thank you. You heard my concerns, which are more perhaps, if there are costs overrun significantly from construction, and we don't know them all yet, tying the two funds that I mentioned so that there's some concomitant indexing or levering up. Maybe a consultant might be able to apply on that and that might take some interaction back and forth. I don't know as I sit here now, how much of that program is already fleshed out or I identified, but there was enough back and whenever the agreement was signed to have some frameworks that we might be able to know more. My suggestion would also be in request that the executive director of the CRA report back at the next meeting on the progress because that will help us give us a Status check and I'm seeing some heads nodding yes, so can be deemed that as part of it Everyone's fine. Yes, I'm seeing. All right. Thank you, Mr. Director I'm not sure we're going to get everything in the next 30 days. Let's see where we are next meeting and by then As you know, I had some concerns when the room was signed, but some of them were not going to be reopening them from day one. So we'll know a little bit more and we have time by doing this early to get this there. I get the concerns about extending timelines out and it's mutual too. So they might come back and say things. Meanwhile, we're still eager for that huge donor to come through and hopefully see our excitement today in our enthusiasm So that they can be the title sponsor and a lot of the other deadlines fall out because you've got the money in hand Then then we're golden and finally yes, it is Constitution week. Thank you for referencing it I will go on record is that I still oppose the 18th amendment and I think it was the 21st amendment Refealing provision was a good move. So it's not always better. Thank you. Mr. Singer, you're out of order. Sorry. I wanted to make a similar point that, yes, amendments not always, but often do make things better. So let me clarify again by making my comments better if you'll allow me. Certainly amendments are appropriate. They can be. And so long as they're mutual. I'm not sure what we're looking at one right now. I don't see the need for one at this moment. Certainly, I can foresee a situation where amendment could be appropriate. I'm not seeing that we're going to be able to do it now and still kind of get, stay on track the way that we need to. But your points are good, Mr. Wiggher. And I didn't mean to say, under no circumstances am I ever going to consider an amendment to this. No, but I'm not sure one isn't needed right now. My point more was to clarify that the point of the consultant was to help guide us along the way, consistent with what the agreement contemplates and not to second guess it. That's all. Thank you. I appreciate that. Thank you. Okay. So, my final thoughts on this, are I really appreciate this discussion. You have a lot more expertise, Mr. Wigter, than I'll ever have in this field of development. And again, I wasn't on the council either, so I'm hearing all this for the first time too. Well, not for the first time, but the first time up here. So I appreciate the discussion. I hope everyone from TCANI considers this discussion today and takes the time over the next month to address some of the concerns up here. I briefly talked to Ms. Gibson and while yes, I know that staff did recommend a consultant at the outset, which counsel declined. This time around with all the questions during this review, they did not recommend a consultant. So, but I'm fine with Mr. Brown trying to find a consultant, maybe narrow the scope of what that consultant is going to be looking at for us and find going ahead and taking the vote today. So with that, everybody good to move on? Oh, to put yes, to post one. So what we're going to do is going to defer this discussion until October 21st. Okay, that's the motion. Okay, so Miss Siddons, can you take, is that if that's a roll call vote on the vote? Okay, the vote. The vote. Take it away. Singer? Yeah. Trucker? Yes. Thompson? Yes. Nackles? Yes. Yes. Motion passes five votes to zero. Okay, so thank you So now we are moving on to other businesses. We have no other business to consider We will move on to the director's report Mr. Brown Madam chair, I want to offer a suggestion to simplify our process this afternoon Sure, adjourn the the CRA meeting at this time. Open the special meeting of the City Council, dispose of that matter, and then come back and have the rest of the presentations. Okay. On the CRA. Just in order to dispose of the city, the special City Council meeting, it may save some time in the long run. I'm thinking we could all keep our current seats and just quickly run that meeting, get it over with and be done. Okay. I'm just saying to run that. defer to the mayor because it's his meeting. Yes. Yes, but we're moving everything to the workshop. Why don't we just change seats quickly? It'll be easy. That's right. So when we're done with this meeting. Okay, so we'll move the directors reports from the CRA will put them at the City at the workshop meeting. Even though they're CRA matters, we'll have them at work. I'm sorry, Mr. Brown, that's what I thought you were saying move to workshop. Oh, that's fine. No, my suggestion was to adjourn the CRA meeting, hold the special meeting of the City Council to dispose of the center issue and then come back to the CRA and then go to workshop. That's fine with me and I'll keep my seat for that. Thank you. Okay. So we are going to adjourn this meeting and start the special meeting. Okay. And then we will come back to. We will reconvene. We'll reconvene the CR meeting after the special meeting is adjourned. Okay, this meeting is adjourned at 358. Right.