Application, the applicant will amend the comprehensive plan and zoning code to create potential where ACI and D that includes under the same site plan, the Booker Return Triaral Station, to provide a maximum density of 42 dwelling units per acre and 1.18 FAR or floor area ratio. This is going to serve as a bonus and incentive to encourage such development at the TRIR station. The applicant is also requesting to amend the Zoning Code Text Amendment, which would exempt 340 residential units, proposed at the Booker Rotone Village CMD from the 2500 unit cap for the CMD projects, and it will also create a separate allocation of 340 units specifically for CIMD projects near the trial station. It should be noted that the allocation of the 340 units will provide flexibility by does not guarantee that the site plan for the Book of Village CIMD will be approved by the City Council. So when we analyze this request, we considered a number of things. First being that the trial rail station, it is a major transit stop in the city. Historically, it has had high ridership numbers compared to other trial rail stops within the quarter. It is in close proximity to major employment centers, including the Book of Retone Innovation Campus and the Arvita Park of Commerce. And there are a number of mobility options that connect to the trial station, such as the epoch shuttles and city shuttles, those feed into the trial station. So for the Book of Village CIMD, the applicant has incorporated certain principles of a transit oriented development, such as incorporating a number of mixed uses as part of the project. The applicant is proposing a total of 51 affordable and workforce housing units and will provide transit subsidies for residents and employees of the CIMD. So these are things that will encourage multimodal transportation within the city. We also analyzed the project to make sure it is consistent with the city's comprehensive plan and I have included a number of policies within the city's comprehensive plan that address this on these are from the land use element, the transportation element and housing element and have highlighted one policy, and if I could just read into record what it says, in policy 4.1.4, it states that mixed use development shall be strongly encouraged in areas identified as major transportation attractors and generators, or along transit quarters to complement adjacent uses within a quarter mile radius of each site. So this project is consistent with those policies that I highlighted and indicated in the previous side. So staff is recommending approval of the proposed tax amendments and this concludes my presentation. I'll be happy to answer any questions you have. Thank you. Questions for staff? Mr. Mitchell? No. None. Mr. Questions for staff? Mr. Mitchell? No. None. Mr. Roca? No questions? Mr. Solon? No questions at this time. Mr. Doran-Blazer? No questions right now. It's RISI. Thank you. Chair has no questions. Okay. I understand we have a petitioner here that would like to say a few words on this. Good evening, David Millage for the record here on behalf of the applicant. I do have a presentation tonight, but the staff is recommending approval. These tax amendments are really creating the first true TOD district within the city. The site is unique as it provides a direct access to a trial rail as well as other transit routes. And as staff had mentioned, it does further several of their mobility policies within the conference plan. Happy to answer any questions or, I mean, I'd be happy to go through the presentation if you think it's appropriate. Does anyone have any questions from Mr. Millage? Mr. Salon. Yeah, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Millage, I see in the report here that we're asked to authorize additional density and intensity for this zoning. Do you know what the original density and intensity is? What is the up zone? So based off of the CIMD, density for providing 10% affordable housing units is 20 units per acre, but you can go up to 25 units per acre if you provide an additional 5% for workforce housing. So based off the CIMD it's 25 units per acre. So you're complying with those minimum requirements for the affordable in the workforce housing? housing. You know just just as a matter of opinion when we do these upzonings and give additional latitude to developers who own property you know I always want to see if we can get something back for the city since we're doing them this big favor although in this case it's a little murky with a workforce housing thing. You know I want to get something to improve our public realm like separated bike lanes and you know, wider sidewalks. Right now we're just giving them a text amendment. I know. I think we can give them a whole list. So is that the case that when you come back for your site plan that we can request and receive those additional items? You can request anything you want. I know that you like certain bike racks. So we can look into this. We can help you out with that, Mr. Millage. But yeah, we can look at the plans to see if there might be opportunities that enhance mobility options for this potential TOD district. I would really like to see the public realm improved in that area for what it is that is being considered. So, no further questions. I appreciate your comment. Thank you. Anybody else? Okay. Thank you. This is the public hearing. Anybody from the public wishing to speak on this item? Please state your name and address of the record. You have three minutes. Jonathan, Angie, and 6501 Congress Avenue. So I'm not against this project. I'm going to start off by that. However, I am against the gift that this city is giving this developer in the form of a bonus or incentive. As I happen to, I believe be the only person who has put in an application for the Live Local Act under the 40% affordable housing. And I've been told that I'm limited to 20 units in acre if I was to do 40% affordable housing. So looking at a project such as this, for the purposes and reason that they just happen to be on that site, to be given a 100% bonus, more than 100%, 20 units and acres, the actual density that's allowed in this area, 25 if you do that affordable housing. But that's a massive upcharge. And the reality is, we live in Boca Raton. We're in a major employment workforce area here with 15,000 jobs within a half mile. Why do they need such a bonus there for units per acre? The reality is 50% 75% of the people that are there aren't going to be on the trial real every day. They're going to be on the roadways. They're going to be going to work. Why are we giving special zoning and spot zoning to one property? Where does it cut off? How about if the person across the street wanted to develop? Do they not get the same bonus? And the answer is no. This is truly for a tax amendment for one property in the city, which is truly the definition of spot zoning. So again, I'm not against this project, but this city needs to to and Mr. Shad Brandon needs to really look at this city and its property rights as a whole Okay, because 20 units an acre Isn't possible to develop for pretty much anybody here any development you see here Is a small concentrated parcel that they took a much larger area that had existing buildings and passed their density to it. And that is the only way that you see any of the development around here of the large multifamily residential. So I just want to give you something to think about as you're approving this and you want to give the gift that you're giving great question because it is massive what they're being given compared to what the city is. And me as somebody who proposed a project was told I can't do 40% affordable housing. And if I did that I would be stuck to 20 units an acre. I find the disparity to be ridiculous. And I find this to be 100% spot zoning zoning and I think that more critical questions need to be asked Because the reality is these people aren't going to be on the trial real every day They're going to be coming around our streets and to get such a bonus just because they're there There's no rational basis for it besides maybe some special interests from the people who own that land Please wrap it up. Thank you. Thank you. Anybody else wishing to speak on this item? Public hearing? Last time. Public hearing is now closed. I look for a motion and a second on item. Let's see. Seven a one. Which is the which is the comp plan. Motion to approve. Second. I will second. Any discussion. Mr. Shad. I'm praying that you had development services director just in relation to what Mr. Salam is saying about the public realm. One of the, this isn't specific to this code amendment or to this, you know, the tri-rel site, but CIMBs in general, there's a specific requirement to provide street trees along all street fringes in a CIMB project. That's the affordable housing designation. a lot of the things that we have to do is to make sure that we have to make sure that we have to make sure that we have to make sure that we have to make sure that we have to make sure that we have to make sure that we have to make sure that we have to make sure that we have to make sure that we have to make sure that we have to make sure that we have to make sure that we have to make sure that we have to make sure that we have to probably know that's probably my signature issue. If nothing else, street trees anywhere I can get them, I think that's critical. So that is already in the code for the CIMB projects. So I just thought it was worth pointing that out. Thank you. Okay. Anything else? Yeah, just. Overall, we're putting this kind of density right next to the trial rail station with the intent that that's a Kind of a commuter line that we have a lot of traffic on however if all of these people are right next to the trial rail station Aren't they then getting on the trial rail and leaving bokeh rather than going to the area right around here When the idea of the trial rail if they're coming from other cities to work here So I don't really understand the point of putting a high density next to trial rail. If the point of trial is its commuter line and everybody that lives there, the idea then is they're going to jump on the trial rail and they're going to go elsewhere, rather than live right there by the trial rail and go to a job within a block or two. I mean, that's just my thought process behind it. Mr. Shad? Yeah, I think what you're saying is true to a degree, but I think we have to recognize that we live in a larger context. We live in a larger region. The idea, and this is it, you know, happening up and down the corridor of placing not only residential but also non-residential. The CIMD also requires a certain amount of non-residential development within it. So the idea is that if you're going to put density, residential density, or residential units somewhere, there, then at a major transit station that's accessible is among the best places to do so. And so if we have someone who's getting on the train say to go to Hollywood to go to work, then the same would be true in the reverse as well. And obviously we've been running shuttles and so on from our tri-roll station to the employment areas for a long time. And we're also doing a lot through these development projects and also through the city's capital improvements to make the area more walkable, more bikeable, and just generally to provide means of transportation other than single occupant vehicles, not only from the trial station, but particularly from the trial station. So again, I think when you take all that into account, that's sort of the rationale. Okay. Thank you. Anyone else? Not? Mr. Slahn? And I particularly like the idea of the workforce housing at the Tri-Rail Station. I think that's a good fit. Let's also not forget that that building is going to create a nice tax increment for the city as well. Okay. Okay, Jamie. I do have one question. Mr. Mitchell. Okay. This is right next to the plaza that has a Starbucks in the AT&T store. Yes Is that plaza going down as a part of this or is it going to be next to that plaza? That plaza will remain as is This is 29,000 additional square feet of commercial right to the east of that plaza. All right. Thank you Okay, Jimmy, please call the roll. Mr. Mitchell. Yes. Mr. Sloan. Yes. Mr. Roussha. Yes. Mr. Doromblaser. Yes. Mr. Richie. Yes. And Chairsaville. Yes. Pass 6 to 0. Next item is item 7-8-2, which is recommendation to the City Council regarding the Code Amendment. Look for a motion in a second. So motion. Second. Okay. Any discussion on this point? Okay. Seeing none, Jamie, please call the roll. Mr. Solan. Yes. Mr. Roshra. Yes. Mr. Gomblizzer. Yes. Mr. Ritchie? Yes. Chair Saville? Yes. And Mr. Mitchell? Yes. Past 6 to 0. Okay, thank you. Okay, next item is 7B, the CAB ordinance. Jamie, would you please read this item into the record? An ordinance of City of Book, Ritone relating to the regulation and enhancement of community aesthetics and standards, the authority of the community and appearance board, and the stream authority of the community and appearance board, and the streamlining of the review process. Mending Chapter Two Administration, Article Three, Division Four, Community Appearance Board, and various provisions of Chapter 19, Building Regulations, Chapter 23, Planning and Development, Chapter 27, Vegetation, and Chapter 28, Zoning, Code of Ordnances, to amend and restate the powers and duties of the community appearance board and to delegate certain approval authority previously held by the community appearance board to the city manager, manager or his designate subject to appeal reformatting and restating various provisions for clarity, amending these supplemental criteria for procedural rules of the community appearance board to revise the lists of recommended and prohibited tree species for meeting landscaping requirements, relocate certain procedural provisions to the code ordinances, and amend and restate said provisions, providing for severability, providing for repealer, providing for gratification, providing an effective date. Thank you. This will be presented by Aaron Sida. Good evening, everyone. This particular text amendment as stated before modifies the powers and duties of the community appearance board to expedite the development review process. And this will also allow the community appearance board to have greater input into the design of development projects earlier in the review process. The proposed ordinance is based on discussions at the February 26th City Council workshop and the April 2nd and October 1st, CAB workshops. So what I'm going to do for the presentation is we're going to walk through the summary, the general summary of the changes, and then get it into a little more detail of each group of changes as we go through the presentation. So as a general overview, this ordinance will allow for advisory review of site plans and IDAs, and this again allows for community parents board input earlier into the process, and we'll get into what that means and how that works in the later slides. It will allow administrative or staff review of certain building permits. And staff review would be for permits consistent with site plans or IDAs. And then there would be also certain types of improvements that would be exempt from CAB review. It would assign new appellant board duties to the community appearance board to appeal for appeals of staff decisions to architecture and landscaping for building permits. And it would allow administrative review of paint color changes. Now this would be limited to applications consistent with the CAB approved color palette and for paint color permits that are consistent with approved site plans and IDAs. So we'll first start with the exemptions. So exempt from CAB review, this would be exempt from site plans, IDAs, and building permits. Would be building facades that are not visible from a street or a similar right of way, and those buildings that are less than three stories are 24 feet in height. Trees that are required are proposed to be planted in the right away. Modifications to landscaping required by the utility services department or the engineering department for the protection of infrastructure. Landscaping modifications to less than 20% of the total combined landscape and yard areas for sites that were had a landscape plan previously approved by the CAB or as part of an approved site plan or IDA. Modifications, designs, architecture, and landscaping, and turn to limited access are gated residential communities and not visible from any public right of way and single family and two family properties. Any questions on the exemptions? We're good. Okay, so getting a little more detail into the overview of the changes that this ordinance will make. The first stop is site plans. So the CAB will review and provide a recommendation of architectural elevations and landscape plans for consistency with the criteria set forth in section 229 and 213, which include their standard review criteria and their supplemental criteria. So if a site plan application would come before this board as the final decision making authority, you would now receive a recommendation by the Community Parents Board on the Architecture and Landscape plans. They would also make this recommendation for not only new site plans, but amendments to site plans that were previously approved. Now there is an exemption to that. So if there are modifications to the architecture and landscaping, but again, there are less to less than 20% to any front or side facade or rear facade if the building is greater than two stories or if it's changes to less than 20% of the total or side facade or rear facade if the building is greater than two stories or if it's changes to less than 20% of the total combined landscape and yard area, those minor site plans would be a staff-only review, moving forward. But anything else would require review and recommendation by the CAB. And that changes a little bit because really right now the CAB's authority is at the end of the process and their role and the code is to ensure conformance with the site plan. So by moving them to the beginning of the process, they have really more input into the design of the building. Item 2 is looking at the downtown IDAs. There's no changes to this process. This will stay as it was. There is some modifications in the packet, really just clarify the role and modify some language just to kind of streamline it for clarity. Three, building permit review and approval. So the CAB would review landscaping alterations except where the alterations are determined to be consistent with an approved site plan or IDEA. So again, this is very typical and most local governments. In fact, I've worked in many local governments throughout the years and my almost 25 year career, and I've never seen a place where you review it at the end of the site plan process, usually the reviews at the beginning. So this will just be consistent. The staff will just confirm conformance with the site plan and the landscape plans in the packet. Building facade alterations to front and side facades and rear facades greater than two stories. The CAB would review those items unless they have been determined by staff to be consistent with the approved site plan or they have been determined by staff to be consistent with the approved site plan, or they have been determined by staff to be consistent with the building's architectural style, and to affect less than 20% of the front side or rear facade. Appeals of administrative decisions, building permits. So now the CAB would hear appeals of administrative decisions or decisions made by staff with regards to the approval or disapproval of building permits. And for appeals within downtown, those would follow the standard process or some change there. Regarding paint color. So, staff would review paint color permits to make sure that they're consistent with an approved site planner IDA. The CAB is given the authority to develop a pink, approve a pink color palette in a guidelines. That staff will use to approve administratively approve pink color permits. And then the painting of materials such as stone, coral, rock, glass, clay, brick, pebbled panels, precast panels, architectural concrete, those will require CAB approval regardless of color. And in discussions with the CAB about the paint color palette, kind of the starting point we discussed is starting with the coral gables, paint color palette. What kind of the starting point we discussed is starting with the coral gables, paint color palette. They have a really nice, comprehensive one. Again, it's a lot of creams and, you know, beiges and things like that. And then, and then it will also include some guidelines which talk about paint termination. Like paint, if you're using more than one color paint, we'll need to terminate at banding or at a corner. There is no change to signage review either. So other changes that are included in the ordinance. This will reduce the membership of the CAB from eight to seven members, and it will revise the qualifications of the membership to reflect the reduction in the number of members. It includes minor modifications to the CAB approval criteria. It will limit postponements by the CAB to one without applicant consensus and obviously inclusive of the fact that the applications need to be complete before that role will apply. It will clarify that the CAB supplemental criteria are a component of the city's landscape requirements and it updates applicable references to the throughout the land development regulations. It will modify the CAB supplemental criteria to remove processing and procedures. There's a whole section just on like when you submit an application, you need two copies, you need to do this, you need to do that, all that's being moved to the code, and then being removed from the supplemental criteria, where it's more appropriate. It will remove advertising requirements as well for certain types of signage. These are very small sign types, and what we've found is that basically for these sign types, we've never had anybody show up for them. So it was a decision was to include their removal. And then it will also revise the list of recommended and prohibitive tree species to meet landscape requirements and modernize the list, for example, care wood is now prohibited. And that concludes my presentation. Okay. Everyone, base a question before I ask the board. How much input did the CAB members have in this change? So we met with the CAB members twice. We had an initial concept that we brought to them in April. And we modified our concept for how we were going to change the powers and duties and organize this quite substantially. In fact, the concept of the 20% of the facade actually came from a CAB discussion. When we brought this back in October, you will see in your ordinance the devil strike through an underlying, all of these changes were occurred after the CAB discussion on October 1st. So these are all the double-endered changes came as a result of that discussion. Thank you. Other Ms. Richie? Mr. Doran-Layzer? Yes. In your presentation, you backed item like three or four. It was talked about two story buildings or smaller, something along those lines. Building facades that are not I think was after that. Right. So this actually came from a CAB discussion. So the concern was, because originally the thought was to only have front and side facades reviewed by the CAB, but it was brought up at the October 1st workshop that if you have buildings that are taller, you're going to be able to see them from more, you might see them from the residential neighborhood or they might impact the skyline. And so we wanted to include those as a result of that workshop. Okay. Can you one more slide? You don't mind? Building facade or two rear facades building or alterations. Okay, just building facades alterations to front and side or alterations to rear. Greater than two stories and are equal to. So if it's one story, it's not coming in front of CAV. Okay, that would bother me. But okay, I just want to make sure I'm clear. Thank you. Okay. Mrs. Salon. Thank you. Okay. Mrs. Salah. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. If it's two stories are greater than two stories. So one story and two stories. Just for that. Many people know that I was on the community parents board, but in full disclosure, I was the past chairman and a board member for 27 years. And I figure that's over 1,000 meetings and 15,000 individual applications voted on one by one by one. 15,000. So while everyone has an opinion about things they've heard about the community appearance board, I'm here. I can give you the real skinny on it. What's going on? So to give you some context about the CAB, youB, there didn't used to be a community appearance board. Back in the 60s, Bedding Barn came into town and decided they wanted to put a barn-themed building in North Federal Highway. And of course, it was allowed by code. And so they built it. And there was a bunch of himming and hauling about that, but betting barn was very happy with that outcome and they applied for a permit for another barn building at the South End of Federal Highway. Our local architects at the time Pat Lynch, Howard McCall, John Choup, Paul McKinley, they just went nuts over this. And they came up with this crazy idea that we're gonna have a community appearance board, a blue ribbon panel that's going to review the developer's plans after the developer has jumped through all the hoops. He's passed the Zonico, the building code. He's done everything right at the very end. He's gonna have to sit down in front of this table of Blue Ribbon Panel, as you'll see. It's a crazy idea. If you took that idea today and you went to Omaha, Nebraska, they would run you out of town. It's absolutely crazy that it got passed. But in 1966, that also was the same year that passed, we passed the first bond issue to purchase beachfront property for the city. That was the first of six bond issues that came through in 1966. We could see back then what was happening to the south of us. And the citizens of Boqueratone and the leadership were saying we want no part of it. We want to preserve our beachfront and they came up with a share of brand idea for the community parents board. On July 17th, 1966, this is a Sunday, two days before the city council was going to vote on what to do about this idea about this community parents board. The Boquerton News published three times a week, came out with an editorial about the community parents board, this idea. And I'll read this paragraph at it. As it stands now, we're on the verge of having Booker-Tone look just like Pompano Beach, Fort Lauderdale, or Hollywood, where the hot dog stands, alternate up and down the highway with used car lots. Now, that's a lot of flowery speech, but it gives you a feel for what federal highway, which is the main road, was looking at. And they go on to say, as I was explained, we've already got a barn at one end of the city and another under construction at the other end. So that came out and the City Council on that next Tuesday, July 19th, 1966, approved this idea of a community parents board. And by the way, there were no other community parents boards in the country at this time. There were two government sanctioned review boards, one in New York and one in California that were bedroom communities and they dealt strictly with single family architectural style, two of them. But these guys down in South Florida said, no, no, we don't want to locate anything about the single family homes. We want to regulate all the businesses. So if you want to do business in Boqueratone, you've got to go before our Blue Ribbon panel, and we're going to make you do it right. That's what they did. It was pretty impressive. And I can tell you, you know, that crazy idea, I can think of three reasons why, you know, it was a great success. First of all, it only took a few years before every municipality around us, from Palm Beach to Carle Gables, enacted their own community appearance board based on the Bokertone model. It's crazy, almost everything in South Florida, they all have community and parents' supports. And I haven't heard of any of them looking to diminish their powers, by the way. That's one reason. Second reason, if you're on federal highway in Broward County and you're traveling north and I've done this on purpose just to do this, and you go through the cities to the south of us, and you see some things. And you get a feel, you get a vibe for what's going on. And then you cross into the city limits of Boqueratone. And honestly, it is, as if Dorothy and the Wizard of Oz drops down out of the sky into Boquerton and everything instantly changes from black and white into Technicolor. I mean, it is a fabulous experience. You're northbound, you cross the city limits and all you see is this beautiful lush green and landscaping, beautiful buildings, everything is clean and there's all this room. It takes my breath away every time. And the third reason that I know it's a success, and this is probably the most important one, is if we all look around today, we all of course recognize how nice and attractive our city is. We're all proud of it. We have friends that come from out of town that have never been here. They're like, oh my gosh. And we have relatives that come and visit and they say, oh, you're just so lucky. You live in Paradise. It's beautiful here. And I can tell you that we didn't get to look like what we looked like today by following some form-based code. You don't get to have the bulk return we have today by checking off. OK, foundations, columns, check. Okay, it's not like that. The community peer to sport had a very strong hand. They weren't the only ones, but they had a strong hand in making the city the way it is today. And believe me, that's really important that we are such a desirable city to live in. Because that increases all of what everyone's property values and it keeps our taxes low. So I am really grateful that those city council members back in 1966 decided to go that route and help create the city that we have today. So I just wanted to give everyone a little bit of context on what this community parents board is all about and I'll give it a rest for a minute. Okay. So there is no question. Okay. I have a question, but I'm going to take a break. Okay. Mr. Mitchell. No questions from me. Mr. Whitney. Well, that is a hard act to follow. But thank you, Mr. Chair. Staff, I just have a question. I think you said that by moving the CAB Review to the front of the line beginning of the project. There would then be a recommendation for architectures and for landscape to this board. But the time it gets here. That is correct. So when we're getting plans are getting more detailed and more specific, including architectural elevations and it makes sense to have the CAB provide that review and recommendation at the beginning of the process and then have that review follow it through to you all if you're the final decision making body are then to counsel for on the appearance, the architecture and the landscaping. In addition for most minor site plans that would be administrative site plans, the CAB will have review and recommendation authority to staff. So there are only certain very, very minor site plans where the CAB wouldn't also provide a review and a recommendation to staff. Okay, I like that. Thank you. Mr. Roga. No, Mrs. Salon. You're on. In fact, thank you, Mr. No. Mrs. Laud. You're on. In fact, thank you, Mr. Chairman. In regards to the areas where CAB is exempt from reviewing the, based on only 20% of a building is being modified or stuff, you know, that's been a real important thing for me to streamline the review process when we have IDAs and site plans. The old guy who wanted the ice cream store on Palmetto Park Road and it was a lawyer's office and it took forever and that showed everyone that we need to make some changes to that. Took, I don't know. Nine months or so. It was crazy. And cyclans, if you make a small change to a cyclan, you shouldn't be held hostage to months and months and notices and getting on hearings. And it's just a huge unnecessary delay. Right? And so now staff has been charged with creating some efficiencies with the community appearance port. So, okay, so if it's less than 20%, you know, but you know, the stakes are not the same. The community appearance board meets currently every two weeks, we used to meet every week, and you're not facing these huge delays for by eliminating any of these items. So if there's a small change, it's less than 20%. If you take a commercial building, the two-story commercial building and you wanna change 20% of it, you're gonna be in the permitting process for more than a couple of CAB cycles. So there's no delay, and I'm not so sure, efficiency is the correct word to use. You're not really gaining that. But I do have a couple of specific questions if you don't mind. Under page five, we're exempting single-family residential and two-family residential duplex properties. The CAB has always reviewed duplex properties. Why are we eliminating them? So, single-family and two-family are typically are there by-right properties, they're by-right development, and their single-family and duplex are treated the same. And it's an individual permit. They don't require a site plan for those styles of residential, so it made sense to combine them together. And in fact, the CAB board was actually OK not reviewing duplexes. They said when we brought this to the October that they said they were fine from exempting duplexes. OK. Okay. I can remember when I was on the board there was a big sea change with duplex properties who wanted to reroof their properties and they had tile roofs. And for years we said well you have to put a tile roof back on. You don't want to diminish the appearance of the neighborhood. And as time goes by, and the pressure comes on, we finally relented and say, oh, it could be an architectural style shingle. Put that on. And it just seems to be the case in many of these items that just you just kind of chip away at it, and you chip away at it, chip away. And then at the end of the day, you're You just kind of chip away at it and you chip away at it chip away and then At the end of the day, you know, you're left with a pile of rocks The next item is the paint color palette guidelines now I did see your presentation Well done to city council the city council was looking to Use or reflectivity or something Yes, we were looking at trying to find, you know, as an alternative to a palette to sign some technical standards or threshold standards. So. So it seems to me like they're looking for approved paint colors, I guess, like coral gables as or whatever. All pastels, creams and beiges and so forth. Non-objectionable colors. So I'm gonna carry on just for another second. I think we all remember the mark. Does everyone remember the mark downtown? I guess. So the mark. Does everyone remember the mark downtown? Yes. So the mark was controversial and it was approved by the Community Appearance Board. I was the chairman and six months later the applicant came forward and said well you know I'd like to change the paint colors. I've given it a lot of thought, and I want to blend in with the other colors around me. So he showed these pastel all paint colors. The original application, which you probably haven't seen, had areas of high contrast to it. Some dark colors and so forth like that. But it was very contrasting. And so they came before the community appearance board and said we like to change this and solve the Nellah, it's all beige. And I remember thinking that night, you know, here I am, I was chairman, I take full responsibility for what happened. So here I am, I was chairman, I take full responsibility for what happened. So here I am, I spent 20 minutes with this rendering. And here is the owner who's ponying up 100 million dollars and has been living with this thing 24-7 for six months. And it's his decision that he wants it to go that way. And I remember thinking, who am I to say that he can't do what he wants to do? And that was a mistake. That was a mistake. Because later on, we had a suret about how is the downtown doing? How's 4035 working out? Everybody shows up and the consultant was there and he throws up in this discussion. He throws up elevation, color elevation of the mark as originally proposed. And then he throws up a big slide of the mark, you know, as amended. And there was a gasp in the audience because the distinction was so great I gasped too. In my opinion, that was my biggest regret and I take full responsibility for that happening. So no applications will be postponed or continued more than one time prior to the board taking final action unless staff says it's incomplete. Well, if it's incomplete, it shouldn't come before the community of transport yet. Or the postponement is at the request of the applicant. In my experience, and it's been a while, and I see we do have some CAB members in the audience who are going to speak. Sometimes things, the applicant doesn't show up, and the board doesn't want to rule on anything without having the applicant's input. So in that case, am I at a line with that, or do you have a work around or? I mean, it's one. In my opinion, if the applicant doesn't show up for their project, they deserve a denial. OK. That that happened more frequently than I care to maybe, and maybe because we didn't just deny him straight out. We allowed that to continue. But if staff understands that if they don't show up, they are denied and they have to start all over again, it just seems a little harsh. the review of bus shelters is no longer part of the CAV review. If I could just speak to that for a second. Yes sir. When it comes to the city's shelters, there is a standard design that is, you know, throughout the city. When it comes to the palm trans shelters, they have their own shelters. They have the right to install in rights of way as they see fit. So I just don't understand what the role would be. I mean, if we were going to change the city why design standard, that would make sense. We probably would ask for the board's input just as a matter of course. Otherwise, I'm not sure what the purpose would be. Well, Mr. Shad, I think there might be cases where the CAB would like for the bus shelter to more mimic or be compatible with the architecture of the building that it's in front of. That would be the goal. It goes on to say about the Planning and Zoning Board, our board, that currently we are charged with reviewing screening, landscaping and lighting. I didn't know about the landscaping. But the change now is going to be the rear charge at landscaping and screening, including consistency with all applicable city landscaping requirements. Now this is either the planning zoning board or when the city manager does their review in lieu, the city managers and us are charged with that. And then it also adds in here consistency with building architecture with the applicable criteria is set fourth in section 2-130, which is the criteria for CAB. Yeah, I don't know if we're the right board to determine if it is consistent building architecture, compatible with the CAB criteria. I think the CAB is the one who should open. Do you mean to answer that or do you want to finish? Oh, no, I'm done. So I think the difference is that the approval process used to work much differently. To a large extent, landscaping and even to some extent, architecture came at the end. After the site plan was approved at the building permit stage. And now what we see is architectural elevations as part of the site plan or the IDA. And we see landscape plans as part of the site plan or the IDA. And in my opinion, that is a good thing because especially when it comes to landscaping, because landscaping is an essential component in many cases of the site plan. It's to try to evaluate a site plan without knowing what the landscaping is going to be. To me is not as effective. So what we've done here basically is said, instead of the CAB looking at something at the end of the process, at the building permit, after the site plan has been approved, and only being involved in the site plan stage on a mandatory basis for certain projects, which includes downtown and certain other projects, but mostly not. We're saying, no, let's get the CAB involved on all site plans, essentially all site plans, at the beginning, at the front end as a recommendation before the planning is owning board acts or before the city council or the CRA acts. Okay, that's a great answer and I really like that idea. And then it goes on a great length about landscaping Requirements in all the zoning districts. I think I counted it was like 30 times where the code says The current code says all such landscaping shall be subject to the approval of the community appearance board. That language is crossed out. And insert it is all such landscaping shall be approved and accordance with landscaping requirements set forth in this code. So can you explain to me a little bit more about what's going on? Certainly. So what we wanted to do is that no matter who was reviewing an application that all the landscaping regulations would consistently apply. So what we did is we took the supplemental criteria related to landscaping and we adopted it as formally as part of the city's landscape code. And then rather than say by the community appearance board, who approves the board or whose authority those that application is reviewed by will be governed in the powers and duties section. And but that the applicable landscaping requirements, including the supplemental criteria for landscaping in the CABs supplemental criteria would apply regardless of who has the final approval authority. Okay, well stay with me on this. Because that language is referring to dumpsters, equipment closures, parking garages, property walls, a host of zoning districts. So I'm not sure they keep taking away the subject to this community appearance board review and inserting in accordance with the code is the community appearance board no longer providing landscape review and the R3, R4, R5, P-, BOI, PMD, LARP. Yes, that's part of the site plan process. Okay, in the very beginning. Just about finished. And then on page 25 they're talking about parking structures being screened and this part, this part disturbing me. It says, and this is, we're talking about parking structures adjacent to residential properties. So a parking structure adjacent to residential property, the facade should be designed to obscure views from the parking structure to neighboring residential plots and to eliminate light spillage from the interior of the parking structure. Right? That's what the code currently says. And the code continues to say currently that the design and materials used to comply with this requirement, and this is a very important requirement, shall be subject to community-apparent support approval. And that part is struck. So it is just that the facade shall be designed to obscure the views. I assume without community parent support approval of what that screening is. Is that correct? It would go. Again, so that would be part of the site plan process, right? So if you're going to build a parking structure and that code section applies, then before the planning and zoning board approves the elevations view from residential, that would all be part of the site plan and therefore it would go through the CAB. On a mandatory basis, not a optional basis or it's only sometimes a vacation basis, before the site plan is approved. And then that is part of the site plan, which then gets implemented at permit. And it's a known already worked out fact before the for development happens. I just wanna note that part of why we took this out and all the subsections is that it gets confusing when you're routing items and you're looking at items. The process, we establish the process and the boards and powers and duties. And then that process is the same for every single similar application type. It doesn't matter if it has a parking garage or not have a parking garage. Anything that the CAB has the power and duty to review in that first section, they will review everything as part of the site plan. So. review in that first section, they will review everything as part of the site plan. So okay, thank you. In this particular case, I don't see a reason to delete the requirement that the CAB specifically review the design and materials. Because that's a very important thing. I see that the community parents board membership is down by one and they've reduced the need for an architect. So it's seven members. You have two architects and one landscape architect. I know when we first started this we had some the chairman resigned from the community parents board that we had other resignations since we started this process. I believe we've had at least one more. One more. And the current makeup of the code is how many people and how many professional licenses. On the screen there, so it's two architects, one landscape architect, and the four remaining members need to be professionals. So they need to be architects, landscape architects, professional engineers, planners, contractors, or real estate professionals. Oh, currently. I think you have two landscape architects, two architects. Currently, I think it's three architects and one landscape architect. But I believe you're down to five members on the board now. So the ordinance, when it was introduced to council, proposed going down to five and based on input from the board, we have revised that to seven. So having an even numbered board is, this is the only example I've ever come across in my 20 plus years. But so I think an even number board is problematic. So seven makes seems to make sense. And then finally, I'll wrap this up guys. Under the LIRP, there's talk about the commercial nodes and removing language that the design appointments, the sign, the exterior lighting are going to be subject to the approval of the community and parents board. So I suppose that this would be back to the site plan for the commercial nodes or the community appearance board would review the architectural design, the appointments, the business sign. Sooner or later, they'll see the business sign and the exterior lining. Okay. That's, okay, I guess, concludes my remarks, thankfully. Mr. Chairman, I see that we do have a couple of board members who would like to speak. I will have the turn. I hope that you will grant them the courtesy of not having the three minute limit for them as they are fellow board members on their professional capacity here. Any other questions? Sir Dorn Blaser. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. most of the packets that we've seen. So there is what we call a preliminary review, which is optional. It's completely optional. A lot of applicants do it, they find it beneficial, but it's optional. There are certain types of projects that do require a recommendation just before it comes to the sport. Downtown projects is the most prominent example. Okay. And then I agree post-pollumment, especially if the application isn't complete. I've seen when I've had to present in front of them countless applicants that don't show up with everything and on down the line. So I hope city staff would start to hammer down on those and post-pollum them because they're the applicant isn't ready. I agree it should be earlier in the process, but I also would have to say for the city, I think the city needs to be harsher on making sure that the CAB's approval actually falls on, their recommendations actually occur on the settle plans or on the project. You know, I would say I as a contractor, I've built things with certain approvals from CAB and when it came down to final inspection, nobody ever caught that we did something different. I'm not going to tell you what those projects are. But I don't know how much enforcement there actually is right now on what CAB's requirements and approvals were and those actually making it down to actually occurring on the projects. Two things on the completeness. So, and I wanted to mention this when Mr. Salon said it. The only reason it says, if we determine after it gets to the board that it's not complete, that's not normally how it works. I mean, typically we're gonna determine completeness before it goes to the board that is not complete. That's not normally how it works. I mean, typically, we're going to determine completeness before it goes to the board. That is really just in the event that something comes up that alerts us, hey, actually, we needed this. So we have the ability to say, you're going to be pushed off to the next meeting or a future meeting. Sorry, remind me of the other point you were just made. That enforcement. Yeah. So if, until the extent that's happening, that's a problem that needs to be addressed. I would appreciate if you did tell me, maybe privately, what projects we're talking about. What did you say? Yeah, right. Ms. Richie. Did this go with your presentation this far? Yeah, yeah. Why was this handed to us? Oh, OK. Thank you. You want to press OK. Now I understand. OK. OK. Any other questions? OK. Seeing none, this is a public hearing. I'll open the public hearing. Anyone wishing to speak, please come up and state your name and address for the record. And you have five minutes, not three. So I came in a little bit late. I don't know if I need to be sworn in. No, this is a regular public hearing you've done. All right, thank you very much. My name is Jessica Dwarmblazer. I live at 136 Mohican Circle, Booker, Town, Florida. I am a community appearance board member. I want to thank you all for your time this evening. I have been very aware of this item since the meeting at City Council in February, which I was unable to attend. At the time that this idea was so controversial that we actually lost two community appearance board members at the meeting. And since then we have lost one more. So we have lost three members over this particular issue at hand. We understand that over time things have become less efficient and we are absolutely willing to work with the city to find ways to streamline the process. However, I do want to mention I've been on this board for almost a decade now and when I started we had lots of rejections, lots of postponements and a serious list of conditions and I know you all know what that means with all the conditions. We would have like 20 conditions attached to some of these things and the reason for that is because nine at a 10 times applicants are not prepared. And I can tell you being an architect myself, I've been in the industry for 22 years now, I've been a registered architect for 10. I have a bachelor's degree in architecture, a master's degree in construction, I had 5200 hours of internship before I could sit were over in the old building department. I'd have to go in with all of my things. So, down with Keith Carney and he'd have to go through the list and make sure I had everything I needed because he didn't want to waste the community appearance members time with me coming in with an incomplete submittal. And I can tell you it happens every other week now. And so that's why we postpone things. And a lot of the times it's things like, you know, they're doing a change out of doors and windows, but they don't have what the color of the windows supposed to look like. They don't have whether it's an awning style or a fixed glass or a horizontal roller, all they have are NOAs. So it's like, well, no pictures of the existing building, no pictures of what it's going to be. So we have to postpone these things. I also want to mention some of the conditions that happened in the past were very random. Things like the color being too dark and adding ridiculous conditions like make your colors 20% lighter. Reduce your sign by an inch, have space around the sign by X amount of inches. And I feel over the course and the changing of hands with all of the many different chairments that we've had in my past. We've really found ways ourselves with our own committee to find ways to streamline the process. And I appreciate that the city is trying to come up with ways to make this more efficient, but Mr. Shad just mentioned that a lot of this stuff now, a lot of the reviews that CAB will have, will actually happen during the site plan approval process. That is actually less efficient in my opinion, because there would be a lot of things that might get held up at CAB that would actually postpone items from coming here and coming in front of you. Things like screening a parking garage. There were, I don't know how many times the parking garage at the hospital came in front of CAV. I feel like we postponed them 12 times because it was unattractive, inappropriate, and the proximity to residential neighborhoods. So if that was the case, I get it, we're only allowed to postpone something now one time. But if there's a reason why we're able to postpone things longer, then it's actually going to make the site plan approval process less efficient, not more efficient. And what would happen, and Juan is here, he has been somebody who has come in front of our board before, he's been on our board before, but he's always requested us to approve with conditions so that they can at least get in front of you guys for cycle and approval and we'll work all that out before they come in for building department permit. That's how it's always been. So we've tried to find ways to make things more streamlined and we only have 40 seconds left. But the couple things that I do want to talk about are the fact that there's other weight, other things that we can do to streamline the process. I'm going to have to skip ahead. But what I did provide to all of you is an example. At the top is what we saw, CAB saw, and this is how we would see it at site plan approval. And then it goes through the process with staff and then staff dumbed down the elevation and actually made it less attractive because it fit more the box that the city wanted. So my concern is that if we only see it one time at the beginning, we're being sold this bill of goods of a beautiful building that's attractive. And then it goes through the process and then we get something that's less attractive. And by the way, the elevation that you see was like everybody loved it at CAB. Nobody complained about it. And now we have a less attractive building that's coming into the city of Boko because it fits more of the box of it being industrial and not being a car dealership. And I think that's all my time that I have. Thank you. Thank you. Who's next? Juan Carcedo. Yeah. Can you give me one time? No, no, no. No. Please state your name and address to the record. Yeah, Juan Quasado. It's 556-0. Northe's 7th Avenue in Boca Raton. And like Jessica said, I actually, I was a member of the community of being board for 14 years. I served on that capacity under Larry's termmanship. And I think the board is actually a very important board. However, it is important to streamline the process. And there are some things that the CAB doesn't have to be reviewing. But there are other things that are actually we're mentioned here that I think are critical for CAB to review. I think Mandela in CAB to review. I think mandating the review at the beginning of the project as an option is an important thing, because it obviously is important for the applicant to know what he stands in terms of the aesthetics of the project at the beginning of the project rather than coming in at the end and having somebody with an objective, with a subjective opinion, giving some changes to the project. So I think that that process of submitting at the beginning and mandating that at the beginning is important. However, there are things and Larry actually mentioned a project that I did, is the market in downtown Bokeh. He's a project that I did, is the market in downtown Bocca, is a project that I did, and it was actually subject of a lot of criticism and a lot of complaints, and it had to do mainly with the colors. I am of the opinion and I'm an architect for a long time, and I've been doing a lot of work in the city of Bocca for a long time, and I'm of the opinion that paint is not architecture. See what happens with paint is it is really a matter of opinion. If I ask 100 people on the street about the mark, most people will actually relate much better to the colors that it has right now, than with the colors that it was proposed at the beginning, which were brighter and more brilliant, more colorful building. But that's not a matter of opinion. However, the architecture of the building and the massing and articulation of the building is very important because if no matter how much you change the color of the building, no matter how much you paint it, it's really not going to change that character, that articulation. So I think I'm saying this is because at the end of the day, living this in the hands of people that might not be qualified to review it is a concern to me. Living the idea of living, even in one story building or two story buildings, limiting the size of the building to the review of architects like Jessica, who is very good at what she does, it's concerning to me. I think that that component of architecture, particularly architecture review, has to be given to the professional that has done it and understands three dimensions and plays making and architecture. Like Jessica does, actually, we have been blessed with the transition of the board. Has been changing from one generation to the other one, which is done with the board is really remarkable. And I think it is not to take it lightly. And as much as it is important to streamline the process, be careful in what spin streamline because as a group of volunteers doing the review for the city on paid and with great qualifications is going into hands of somebody that is actually trained to do something else, that is educated to do something else. That is not a person that actually is going to look at the building or the city in this three-dimensional form. And so I have concerns about the idea of how to streamline this process. And I think it probably deserves another dialogue between the CAB and the staff to really understand what are the new nuances that actually have to be addressed to be able to streamline the process. For instance, to me, signage is one that I always said, no, today comes in this restaurant and they come up with this signage and we go through three meetings reviewing the signage and approving it at the end with the conditions, like Jessica said. Two months later, the restaurant goes out of business and they come to an ex restaurant. And the signage is actually something that changes constantly in the city. So if it's regulated properly in the code, it shouldn't be as much as something that is for CAB to be in charge of. I mean, that's to me something that is not that important force for CAB to review. However, the architecture and the landscape in terms of the impact that it has in our cities and the place making and the end result is is a long lasting impact and I think that none of that no matter what the scale is, should it be taken away from them? 20% could be the main door of a building and that main door may have a huge impact on the overall building architecture. I think my time is up. Thank you. Thank you. OK. Who's next? No one else? No. OK. I didn't quite remember your name, but I happened to agree that the top is better than the bottom. That's personal. OK. OK. Any other questions? Okay. I can not look for a motion. Mr. Chairman, I do have a couple of questions based on some comments that Mr. Crusader made. Who at the city, Mr. Shed, is making the decision when they review this to say, what are their qualifications to look at it and say, hey, yeah, I think this looks okay, I'm going to approve it. Do we have an architect on staff that's reviewing this stuff and saying, yes, okay, or is it just, you know, I mean, we have a board of licensed professionals that their kind of review process is being curtailed and handed to at least in my opinion, maybe people who are in this qualified. So we have at least one planner currently that has an architecture degree. Now, we always have the option and we are certainly considering this of Using an outside consultant to give us an opinion So that's that's an option that we have Okay, but with even an outside consultant are they do they I mean most of the Board members for CAB live in the city of Bokeh outside consultant doesn't necessarily live here They don't have a vested interest like the board does. I mean, you know, everybody on CAB lives in this city. They have a vested interest in what it looks like. An outside consultant doesn't necessarily. Just my opinion. It's true. That's it? Okay. Mr. Salon? To follow up with Mr. Dornblazer's comment, if the powers that be, you know, are unhappy with the decisions that the CAB is making, if they've lost trust with the community appearance support to make the correct decisions. And I can see we're taking a lot of, we're putting up some, a lot of guardrails, it seems like to me for them. You know, I would suggest that one option to be considered would be to do away with community appearance board in its entirety, not to, you know, handstring it, but in its place have a town architect that would be full-time working for the city, not only reviewing these sort of architectural questions that we were talking about tonight, but could also give the city a lot of good guidance on the direction our town should take. I think that's a great idea. Maybe we should hire a landscape architect to go along with them. But that's my suggestion if they're unhappy with the direction of the CABs currently going. To me, that's an excellent compromise and I think it really moves the city forward to have a town architect that we could someone with some chops you know who could make the right recommendations and we could listen to them so I'm just throwing that out there is another way to solve the problem. Anybody else? Okay, I look for a motion and a second for discussion on the recommendation to the City Council on the CAB. So moved. So the second for discussion. So seconded. Okay. Okay, I'll ask you this, Mr. Flan. second for discussion. So seconded. Okay. Okay. I'll ask you this, Mr. Slum. Do you want to add conditions to this? Well, there are some great ideas in here, which are putting the Community Parents Board involved in the very beginning for site plans, they're already there for the IDAs in downtown. But for us, Mr. Shad pointed out, the majority of the site plans being involved early. And if there's enough specificity into the site plan, which is a very preliminary thing, that the CAB can act on with some reliance. I'm not in favor of the city staff at the end of the day when they're looking for the billing permit. The city staff is going to take the most current application and look at the site plan and the city staff will determine whether they're mostly compatible. Currently in the IDA process, that's what the CAB does and I would like for the CAB to continue to do that. I'm not in favor of this color palette or you automatically get something approved. In my example, the mark, the applicant wouldn't even have to go to CAB. He just says, look, this base is approved. I don't have to ask anyone's opinion, including the cities. So it can work the other way too. And I don't see really what you're gaining. I don't see what the problem is. It seems to me like a solution, you know, looking for a problem. I don't see what the problem is. So there are portions I like about this. I don't like any of the, all this language that takes, you know, the Community Parents Board review out of it. Mr. Shad is explaining, there's still all involved. But it just gives me a very queasy feeling to see that it's all going to be in accordance with the code and the CAB review has taken out of that language so many times. So I don't plan on supporting it. Any other comments? Mr. Door blesser? I would agree with Mr. Salon. I don't, I see where the CAB has been removed from all parts of this language as they'll find a way around any of this going to CAB at some point and we're going to have essentially a bureaucrat approving a lot of this stuff that again as this even shows you know I don't think staff has the has the knowledge base or the the experience to make some of the decisions that CAB does. And I don't intend on supporting it. I also don't like the idea that even in the presentation building facade alterations 24 feet that are equal to 24 feet in height or determined by staff. Let's see, consistent with the building architecture, effect less than 20%. I still think things two stories are less need to go in front of them. I think that's going to be a problem. We have a lot of one story, retail and all of that that cannot end up looking awful. So I just want to clarify that the 24-foot thing is for rear facades. I understand. Well, take a look at the language and make sure it's clear. Thank you. Any other comments? Okay. The way I see it is we can do one of two things tonight. We can do an up and down vote or we can table this to a subsequent meeting and maybe get the parties together and meet somewhere in the middle. Anybody have a response to that? I think that's a wise suggestion to have staff come to some sort of terms with the board itself. There are some things that the board likes and I don't think we're in any rush to get this through. Okay. So we'll withdraw the motion and look for motion to table this item for how long let's discuss that. I just want to make sure the board is a yes the board is aware that this is on the City Council agenda for public hearing on Tuesday. And certainly if you if you recommend that they don't take action at the table we will pass that recommendation along. Okay so look for a motion look for a motion to table this item. I'll make a motion to table the item and four a month. Okay. Our second. Okay. Jamie please call the roll. Mr. Russia. Yes. Mr. Durham laser. Yes. Mr. Richie. Yes. Mr.elle. Yes. Mr. Durham-Lazer. Yes. Mr. Richie. Yes. Mr. Whitney. Yes. Chair Seville. Yes. Mr. Mitchell. Yes. Mr. Salon. Yes. Pass of Nizero. Okay. Janamus. Okay. The last item on the agenda tonight is the Paving and Landscape Yards text amendment. Jamie would you please read that item into the record. Nordinance of the City of Boquerton amending chapter 28 zoning code of ordinances to clarify the bus shelters, sidewalks and shared use pathways required by the code of ordinances are allowed within required landscape front yard setbacks in the R3R3A, R3B, R3C, R3D, R3E, R3F, R4, R5, and R5A multi-family zoning districts in the NCB and RB1 commercials zoning districts, the W1, M1, M2, and M3 industrial zoning districts. In the village center, VC zoning district, and commercial industrial multi-familial developments, CIMDS, in mixed-use multi-familial developments, MUMDS, and in the front yard along streets separating certain businesses, commercial and industrial district plots from a residential district, and to remove certain restrictions on driveway and walkway orientation Providing for severability providing for repeal or providing for codification providing an effective date Thank you. This is being brought to us by Heather Weldstein I know you have the floor Good evening chair and members of the planning and zoning board. I'm Heather Weldenstein, Senior Planner with Development Services. The text amendment before you is to allow certain paving within required landscape yards. Currently the provisions within the code of ordinances applicable to different zoning districts limits paving within required yards with the exception of driveways or walkways leading to a structure when perpendicular to the front plot line. We're proposing to update these provisions to allow items that are specifically required by the code such as public sidewalks that encroach on private property, shared use pathways and bus shelters. In addition, the amendment will support the implementation of the recently adopted complete streets policy, which was adopted by City Council in November of last year. The complete streets policy aims to improve mobility and connectivity through incorporation of public sidewalks shared use pathways and bus shelters. As an example, this excerpt from multi-family doesn't currently allow for paving within the required yard. However, with the proposed black lining, it allows for certain paving consistent with sections 23162, which is the sidewalk policy. 23163, which is the shared use path policies. And 23192, which is bus shelters and bus pullover lanes. The change to perpendicular paving is related to public sidewalks, which typically occur parallel to the front plot line. Staff does support this text amendment, and that concludes my presentation. I thank you for your time, and I'm happy to answer any questions relative to the text amendment. Right. Okay, questions for staff? It's routine. Mr. Dornbliezer, Mr. Solan. You made it very easy. OK. It's the public hearing. Anyone from the public wishing to speak on this item? You're the only guy here. OK. All right. Then I'll close the public hearing and look for a motion in a second Some motion Any discussion Jamie, please call the roll Mr. Durham Blazer. Yes, Mr. Richie. Yes, Mr. Whitney. Yes, chair Seval. Yes, Mr. Mitchell. Yes, Mr. Salon. Yes, and Mr. Roushah. Yes, pass of the zero Okay, we have no public to request anything so Mr. Shad, do you have any report? I have two items Forget which ones come first. I think it's the calendar for next year. Did you guys have some comments on the calendar. Yeah. Okay. I guess I should have sent them to Amy sooner, but we usually have one meeting in July and August, so I would suggest canceling the 5th of July, or was that the third? That was the 3rd of July. And the 37th of August. And anybody can comment on these at any time. And then there's a October 2nd is the holiest day of the Jewish calendar. And we should not have a meeting then. And in December we usually have one meeting. So I would suggest we keep the meeting on the 4th and cancel the 18th. Any comments, disagreements? Well, many cancellations that have up to. Two, three, four. Yeah, six. I prefer only four cancellations a year, but it's not a big deal. I think we want to give people the opportunity to come before us. Well, there's more than 18 times. There's at least a month of meeting every month. Yeah, I'm sorry. I only count. I count five. Well, the city took out June 10th. So we have June 10th. We have July 3rd is out, August 7th, October 2nd, and December 18th. Correct. Five total. Thank you guys for talking about. All right. I'll move it with that. five total. Okay. Thanks. Good. Thanks. Good. Thanks. Good. Thanks. Good. Thanks. Good. Thanks. Good. Thanks. Good. Thanks. Good. Thanks. Good. Good. Good. Good. first and third. Correct, but Thanksgiving itself is on the fourth Thursday of November, right? Yes, because of the hard work out there. Yeah. OK, so we all agree on the calendar. OK. The other item was the attendance policy. I guess the idea here is just to bring it to your attention so that you're aware of it and you can look at it, read it. If you got any questions, let me know. Is there a change to the policy because I was keenly aware of not missing three meetings in a row? That's still what we've always had or at least recently. There's been no changes. I'm aware of it. Okay. Thank you, sir. Okay. I have no further reports. It looks like anybody would have anything else. If not, it's 731. We're adjourned. 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 the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to go to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm sorry. 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 the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to the beach. I'm going to go to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. I'm going to the next station. you