Change from 94 units to 95 units by adding interior walls. The project is still within the 18 units per acre and there are no exterior modifications needed to add the additional one unit.

Reduction of Underground Parking for a total of 317 (307 striped) spaces instead of the now required 351 or the 365 originally approved. A portion of the underground parking garage originally proposed would not be built. A shared parking study was conducted to demonstrate that less than the required number of parking spaces for the commercial portion of the property were needed, if a valet parking service is added.

1. Question - Number of Residential Parking Spaces The project relied upon multi-family residential parking space requirements of *34-981(5)a.* that allows 160 spaces residential for their now 95 unit project or 1.68 per unit, rather than residential in a commercial zoned area of two parking spaces per unit or 190 residential parking spaces.*34-631(12)a. The Planning and Zoning Director testified in support of the reduced parking. The Town Engineer testifying in support of the project, referenced a multifamily residential parking study that supports less than 2 cars per unit. The 160 spaces for residential was previously approved, when the total parking was to be 365 spaces. (another section of our code that needs attention)
2. Question - Approval of Shared Use Study without Additional Open Space Dedication The discretionary approval of a shared parking study to reduce the number of parking spaces needed is accompanied with the public benefit of increasing the open space by 200 sq. ft. for each parking space reduced, or in this case [351-316=35] 7,000 sq. ft. of open space. *34-981(5)b.1. However, no additional open space was offered with the proposal, nor were any other additional public benefits offered instead of the additional open space. Project proponents testified that the original approved project already included 12,772 sq. ft. of additional required open space above the minimum, so the 7,000 sq. ft. dedication of open space needed to support the shared use parking is already included within the project.

Note that the limits on building coverage of a property includes set back, open space, and parking requirements. By parking underground, you have the benefit of not seeing the parked cars, however you lose the restriction on the building footprint size that otherwise would be reduced by the required number of parking spaces for the project use.

Addition of free Valet Parking for Commercial Portion of the project. A valet parking service accessed from the Donald Ross entrance is proposed to assist with parking for the commercial properties. The valet has 26 parking spaces assigned out of the 317 total spaces. The requirement for valet service would be in perpetuity as it forms the basis of the shared parking plan.

Reduction in Outdoor Seating area from 2,500 sq.ft. to 2,000 sq.ft. This change was requested by Town Council to accommodate turning lane roadway needs.

Obligations to the Town - Given the problems found with the grant for the proposed Event Center at Town Hall, it was on the Town Council's goal list to better communicate about grant applications. The *one page summary in the backup materials was inadequate for this purpose. However, at the meeting Town Manager, David Dyess explained the obligations imposed by the State for the acceptance of the FRDAP grant funds to the extent possible without the grant contract.

He provided information specific to this location such as the slope, which indicates that a straight ramp access may not be possible, if we are to keep the canopy of seagrape trees in place that surround this beach entrance. Also, prices for the upgrade of this location seem to be in line with the previous $50,000 grant applications for our other dune walkovers.

Funds Better Spent Elsewhere - General discussion of the Board was that making beach access for all is a worthy goal. The Donald Ross location for an ADA compliant dune cross over is not the best, because it lacks parking, cross walk signals, and a life guard. The Board consensus was that this is not a good location and the funds could be better applied to other beach access locations such as Loggerhead Marine Life Center or the Juno Beach Pier, where other needed facilities are available.

Concerns for Mobility Challenges - A dune cross over ramp only, would not help a mobility challenged person across the sand. Mats can be used to aid access. The sand on our beaches must be kept clear of matting for our threatened and endangered sea turtles who nest here and for their hatchlings.

Solutions should fit the identified problem. If beach access for the mobility challenged is the goal, it could be achieved with a targeted solution, for example with *all terrain wheel chairs* (there are a number of different styles and price ranges on the market). These types of chairs could be purchased and available at existing life guard locations that have ramps, cross walk signals, and handicap parking to provide beach access for those with mobility challenges.

Despite, P&Z Board opinions, the grant proposal application will move forward, as Board approval is not necessary for the grant award.

Planning and Zoning Board members and their Council person who appointed them are: Chair - Diana Davis (Cooke), Vice Chair - Jim Ferguson (Wheeler), Nancy Wolf (Hosta), Michael Stern (Cotronakis), Laure Shearer (Halpern), and Jane LeClainche (Council consensus). All Terms Expire 2024

Click on bolded text* for web link to document referenced.