Joint Meeting of the Historic Preservation Board and Planning & Development Board – June 29, 2026

A joint meeting of the Historic Preservation Board and the Planning & Development Board was held on June 29, 2026, at 4:00 PM in Hollywood City Hall. The primary agenda item was a recommendation to the City Commission on a Comprehensive Plan Amendment (File No. 26-L-18) covering three policies: flexibility units, the Hollywood Beach Hotel Density Bonus Program, and a Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) program. An informational presentation on the Hollywood Beach Zoning Overlay & Urban Design Guidelines was also given. The meeting lasted approximately one hour and faced procedural disputes, last-minute document changes, and public opposition.

Public Comments & Testimony

• Ann Ralston (43-year resident): Asserted the presentation shown was “blocked out” and differed from what was posted. Called the beach “no longer the charming beach we loved” and opposed height changes, urging preservation of existing restrictions.
• Steve Welsh (taxpayer): Questioned whether the draft text and backup materials for the feasibility study directly enable using public land at 1301 South Ocean Drive as a donor site for a private developer’s high-rise. Asked staff to confirm on the record but received no answer. Urged the board to use conditional approval.
• Donna Green (35-year resident): Expressed distrust in city staff and commissioners, saying the public was being “shut out.” Called for a deferral to allow more study, stating the vote grants “carte blanche to developers.”
• Lynn Smith (bank chairman, mortgage banker): Described the process as rushed, with no independent third-party counsel. Proposed a conditional approval requiring zero development rights be transferred until a final feasibility study is completed.
• Michael Selter (real estate professional): Noted the land cost for Hollywood Beach Resort is ~$200 million and redevelopment will exceed $1 billion, so developers will require increased density. Felt the board was unprepared and should delay for proper study.
• Jonas Caulfield (lifetime resident): Called Keith Poliakoff and Mayor Josh Levy “cancers” and urged the board to vote for the people, not developers. Opposed the 1301 project and any changes to the beach character.
• Dana Gallup (president, Hollywood Historic Society): Supported TDR and hotel pooling in concept but argued the vote was premature because the presentation contained blank pages and undefined details. Urged balancing development with historic preservation, especially for the Hollywood Beach Hotel.
• Deltech Thomas (20-year resident, historic home owner): Noted the lack of substantive information and hoped for a middle ground that avoids “crazy high rises” while redeveloping the eyesore Hollywood Beach Hotel.

Discussion Items

• Agenda Order Dispute: Board member Terry Cantrow requested the informational presentation be heard before the vote, arguing it pertained to the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Staff resisted, citing time constraints and the need to handle required business first. After a roll call, the board voted to hear the presentation first (no exact vote tally recorded). The presentation covered the economic feasibility study, bonus framework (height, hotel room pool, flex units, TDR), and the proposed three-tier overlay (precincts, block typologies, character areas).
• Document Revision Concerns: At 4:50 PM, an updated draft of the amendment (Attachment A) was distributed with yellow highlights, underlines, and strike-throughs. Several board members (Bob Glickman, Terry Cantrow, Diana Pitorelli) expressed unease about voting on a document they had not read. Staff explained the changes were mostly deletions to avoid state conflicts and argued the three core items (flex units, hotel density bonus, TDR) remained unchanged.
• Motion to Continue: A motion to continue the item was made by Terry Cantrow and seconded. After debate, the joint board voted 3-4 against continuance (Kathleen Debona: no, Christine Corbo: no, Mena Morgan: no, Oldalis Delgado: no, Diana Pitorelli: yes, Richard Blattner: yes, Bob Glickman: yes, Terry Cantrow: yes). The motion failed, forcing the board to proceed with deliberation.
• Substantive Debate: Board members questioned the legality and necessity of the amendment:
  • Bob Glickman argued the amendment authorizes density/increases without defining standards, potentially violating Florida Statute 163.3177.
  • Diana Pitorelli asked “What is not working with what we currently have?” and opposed “changing everything” instead of case-by-case approvals.
  • Terry Cantrow expressed concern about historic properties, the 1301 project, and the need for a workshop first.
  • Oldalis Delgado and Christine Corbo supported the amendment as a necessary first step, noting that zoning details will come later with full board review.
• Staff Clarifications: Planning staff (Andrea Winget, Cameron Palmer, Anand Bellram) emphasized that the Comprehensive Plan Amendment only sets broad policy; specific height, density, and sending/receiving areas for TDR will be developed in subsequent zoning text amendments that must return to the LPA for recommendation. They cited state laws (SB 180, administrative demolition of non-historic properties) as driving the need for voluntary bonus programs.

Key Outcomes

• Local Planning Agency (LPA) Votes (3-2 on each item):
  • Flexibility Units: Motion to approve – passed 3-2 (Christine Corbo yes, Oldalis Delgado yes, Richard Blattner yes; Mena Morgan no, Bob Glickman no).
  • Hollywood Beach Hotel Density Bonus Program: Motion to approve – passed 3-2 (same split; Mena Morgan no, Bob Glickman no).
  • Transfer of Development Rights Program: Motion to approve – passed 3-2 (same split; Mena Morgan no, Bob Glickman no).
• Joint Board (Historic Preservation Board + Planning & Development Board) Vote (5-3 to deny): A motion to deny all three amendments was made and seconded. Roll call: Diana Pitorelli yes, Bob Glickman yes, Mena Morgan yes, Kathleen Debona yes, Terry Cantrow yes; Richard Blattner no, Oldalis Delgado no, Christine Corbo no. Motion passed 5-3. (Note: The LPA recommendation supersedes the joint board recommendation for statutory purposes, but both will be forwarded to the City Commission.)
• Next Steps: The City Commission will consider the LPA’s recommendation of approval and the joint board’s recommendation of denial at upcoming public hearings (first reading, state review, second reading). Staff will bring forward the detailed zoning text and Urban Design Guidelines for a future joint board meeting.

Adjournment

The meeting adjourned at approximately 5:30 PM, shortly after the final vote, as quorum was lost due to a board member’s departure.