Hollywood Planning and Development Board Meeting - June 10, 2025
STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE
Hollywood Planning and Development Board Meeting - June 10, 2025
On June 10, 2025, the City of Hollywood Planning and Development Board held a meeting covering nine agenda items, including variances, design and site plan approvals, and a text amendment regarding domestic chickens. The board approved most items unanimously, continued one item, and denied a text amendment.
Consent Calendar
- Approval of the previous meeting minutes (May 13, 2025) was unanimous.
- Item 10 (25-L-15, land use amendment for Sea Air Owner, LLC at 3726 S. Ocean Drive) was continued to a date and time uncertain to allow the applicant to work with the community.
Public Comments & Testimony
- File 19-V-04b (Kosher House): Several residents spoke: Louis Granteed (Tobin Real Estate) supported the variance; Bo Rosenblatt, a long-time resident, expressed support for the hotel and its restaurant; Beverly Robinson (5505 SW 44th Ave) opposed, stating the venue operates as a loud bar and has made the neighborhood unlivable; Caroline Heiha (5520 SW 44th Ave) acknowledged some noise improvement but voiced concerns that covering the roof could increase use and noise.
Discussion Items
- File 19-V-04b – Kosher House (Variance): The applicant (Rod Finer, attorney) requested a variance to increase roof-covered amenity area from 28% to 52% for an existing hotel/restaurant at 5510 S. State Road 7. Staff reported that the variance was inconclusive with ZLDR but consistent with the comprehensive plan. The board approved the variance with a condition to add an additional sound monitoring device.
- File 24-DPV-03 – Bluevis LLC (Paddle Ball Facility): The board approved a variance to reduce landscaping requirements for a 22,000 sq ft outdoor paddle ball facility at 600 Knights Road. The applicant stated hours of operation would follow nearby pickleball courts (until 10 p.m.). The design and site plan were also approved unanimously.
- File 23-DP-97 – MEC Investments Inc. (Taylor Street): A 4-story, 18-unit multifamily development at 1938-1942 Taylor Street was approved. No variances were required. The applicant agreed to a condition to move second-floor railings back three feet and add landscaping.
- File 24-DP-68 – Mike Kaplun (Monroe Street): A 4-story, 27-unit development at 2242-2246 Monroe Street was approved without variances. Parking exceeded requirements (34 spaces provided vs. 32 required). Design and site plan were approved unanimously.
- File 23-DPV-50 – 1840 Mayo Street LLC (Mayo Street): The board approved a variance to allow a building height of 66 feet where 55 feet is the maximum in the FH-2 district. The project is a 6-story, 49-unit development at 1834-1840 Mayo Street. The variance, design, and site plan (with conditions for unity of title and a hold harmless agreement) were all approved unanimously.
- File 23-DP-45 – DTD 190 LLC (Pierce Street): A 4-story, 62-unit development at 2224 Pierce Street was approved without variances. Parking provided exceeded requirements (99 spaces vs. 80 required). The design and site plan were approved unanimously.
- File 23-DP-09 – 1735-1739 Jackson Street LLC (Jackson Street): An 8-story, 70-unit multifamily development at 1735-1739 Jackson Street was approved. The board added a condition requiring glass railings on the two-story townhome portion. The design and site plan were approved with three conditions (including stucco exterior and design refinement).
- File 24-DP-24 – Grace Harrison (Rodman Street): The applicant requested a design and site plan for a 2,040 sq ft warehouse at 6013 Rodman Street, plus a variance to increase curb cut width from 15 ft to 22 ft. Board members expressed strong concerns about the metal building design and its compatibility with the neighborhood. The item was continued to the September 2025 meeting to allow the applicant to redesign the exterior.
- File 25-T-45 – City of Hollywood (Chickens Text Amendment): The board considered a zoning text amendment to allow keeping up to six female chickens on single-family residential lots. After extensive debate about enforcement, lot sizes, and potential nuisances, the board voted 6-1 to recommend denial to the City Commission.
Key Outcomes
- Approved: File 19-V-04b (variance with additional sound monitoring device), File 24-DPV-03 (variance, design, site plan), File 23-DP-97 (design, site plan), File 24-DP-68 (design, site plan), File 23-DPV-50 (variance, design, site plan), File 23-DP-45 (design, site plan), File 23-DP-09 (design, site plan with three conditions).
- Continued: File 25-L-15 (to date and time uncertain) and File 24-DP-24 (to September 2025).
- Denied (recommendation to Commission): File 25-T-45 (chickens text amendment) by a 6-1 vote.
- Informaton Only: Update on university station (affordable housing) project design changes.
Meeting Transcript
Good evening, everyone. Thank you for coming tonight to the City of Hollywood Planning and Development Board meeting for June 10th, 2025. We begin all of our meetings with a pledge of allegiance, so I'm going to ask everyone to please rise. Thank you. Steven Morales. Tara Jafarmadar. Robert Vargas. Bob Gligman. Here. We have a quorum, so thank you. Um, I am going to take a moment of privilege. This is my last board meeting. I've been serving on this board for approximately eight years of last few years as a chair. And I can tell you how humbling I am to have been sitting here with the professional people on my left and on my right, and all my previous boards. I said to the city commission the other day that I think that this is the most educated and the best prepared planning and development team that the city has seen, at least since I've been here, and I'm proud. Unfortunately, I'm leaving, so I won't be able to work with them anymore, but I will be watching all the good things that I know will happen as a result. So with without that, and I thank all of you, you've all been great. I told the city commission that each of you bring something special to the agendas for the input for our decision making because of who you are, your professions, and what you know and your experts' opinions. And I thank all of you. And I think we've done a great job as we drive around the city. I think we all deserve of applause. Anyway, having said that, uh, we're ready to continue. We've got a long agenda tonight. I will try to keep it rolling for all of us, so we won't be here forever tonight. So first we will start with any additions, deletions, or withdrawals for tonight's items. Chair, the um the only withdrawal and not necessarily withdrawal is going to be item number 10. Um this has to deal with the diplomat activity center. The applicant is requesting a continuance to date and time uncertain so that they can work with the community through some of their issues. Okay, fine. So can we have a motion to continue that item? Madam Chair, I'll make a motion to continue file number 25-L-15. Second. We have a motion and second to continue this item. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay, that is continued time uncertain at this moment. So now we'll go to city attorney announcements, please. Good evening. Yes, I will read the quasi-judicial proceedings into the record. Florida courts have determined that there are certain types of matters, including items one through eight, uh, ten being withdrawn, or excuse me, continued, not withdrawn, on today's agenda, which are to be treated differently than other issues considered by the board. Most decisions of the board are legislative in nature, which is item number nine, which means that the board is acting as a policy-making body. In contrast, in quasi-judicial matters, the board is applying existing rules and policies to a particular factual situation and is therefore acting like a judge or jury in a courtroom. In such cases, the courts have decided that due process and fundamental fairness requires that more formal procedures be followed. Therefore, in quasi-judicial matters, all witnesses are sworn in and subject to cross-examination by the parties. In addition, the decision of the board must be supported by competent and substantial evidence presented at the hearing. However, here in Hollywood, we have adopted a rule allowing for waiver of the quasi-judicial formalities. Waiver can only occur if agreed to by staff, the applicant, and any member of the public who is present. So, madam chair, if you would inquire if there's anyone who objects to waiving the quasi-judicial formalities when you call your item.
openpublica.com