iPic is a go
There isn’t a happy ending yet. The script isn’t finished. But the happy ending looks possible.
After five-plus hours that spilled into early Wednesday morning, the Delray Beach City Commission approved conditional uses for iPic’s theater/mixed-use project downtown. As the commission majority made clear, however, iPic must continue to revise the project. In both cases, the commission acted correctly.
With three votes, the commission allowed construction of a movie theater in the downtown district, granted about 5 feet of extra height and agreed to abandon a public alley that functions more like a road. The commission also extracted more concessions from iPic CEO Hamid Hashemi, and advised him that the city expects additional changes to make the project more compatible and to respect the public aspect of the site.
My sense going into Tuesday’s meeting was that most commissioners were seeking a way to vote yes. Mayor Cary Glickstein said the project is “an opportunity.” It wouldn’t be another bar or restaurant; downtown has lots of both. It could mean as many as 400-plus jobs, divided roughly between iPic’s corporate employees and theater employees. It would mean high-end office space. It could boost downtown business in the summer, when snowbirds are gone but movie ticket sales are brisk. Elected officials in other cities, Glickstein said, would be “tripping over their body parts” to attract such a project.
The conflict, though, has been the location, between Southeast Fourth and Fifth avenues behind the stores that front onto Atlantic Avenue. The project would add traffic that could create a bottleneck block. The alley serves merchants who worry about delivery disruptions. The site is former public property that the community redevelopment agency “treated like private property,” Glickstein said, which “alienated” some in the community.
Given those factors, and the emotion that supercharges debate over every major project in Delray, Tuesday’s meeting could have dissolved into something resembling the acrimonious, poorly managed planning and zoning board meeting that resulted in a vote against iPic. Instead, the mood was civil, even jovial at times. Bonnie Miskel, iPic’s attorney, said near the end, “Whether you’re for or against the project, it’s been fun.”
One reason was Hashemi’s presence. The community needed to hear directly from the man in charge, who had missed the planning and zoning board meeting. Hashemi reviewed the CRA’s conditions in the request for proposal issued for the site: build in one phase; bring entertainment, office and retail; build a parking garage; create jobs; bring a new downtown “experience.” As Hashemi noted, his project has met every condition.
Hashemi also referenced the 32 changes he has made to the original plan at the request of staff and the community. Regarding traffic, Hashemi said the impact from his project would bring less than many other uses the city could allow on the site. City staff agrees on that point. Hashemi also revealed a new design in which all valet parking would be handled within the project, reducing the chance of backup at the valet entrance on Fifth Avenue. The project would create more parking than is required. Ninety spaces would be for the public.
The commission, however, kept pressing on the ground floor of the three-story project, especially the section on Federal Highway. Commissioner Shelly Petrolia called it “a canyon.” That is supposed to be the public space, where the commission wants iPic to do still more to make the project compatible. Hashemi wants a “living wall” for the south side that would face First Street. Fine, the commission said, but that 16-foot-wide east-west alley? How about making it 20 feet? How about some more public gathering spaces?
Then there’s the size. Glickstein referred to the project as an “overinflated tire” that Hashemi wants to “max out.” Critics say iPic is getting too sweet a deal for the nearly 1.6 acres. The CRA’s price is $3.6 million. Glickstein addressed that issue by saying that a higher price would mean the project “can’t get smaller.”
Given the results of the meeting, only those who flat-out oppose iPic should be unhappy—and they have to explain what their alternative would be. Hint: a park is not an option. Rejecting iPic after all that Hashemi has put into the project after the CRA chose him and laid out the conditions would have damaged Delray Beach’s effort to recruit businesses and promote start-ups and in the worst case could have prompted a lawsuit. Even those skeptical about the project would have to acknowledge that the commission is demanding more. Said Glickstein, “We’re going to get this better than it is.”
The city can make that happen, because approval of the iPic site plan and plat still must go before advisory boards and the commission. At the Site Plan Advisory Review Board, Glickstein said, “We’re going to turn the screws on you.” Commissioner Jordana Jarjura said, correctly, that many of the criticisms raised by speakers Tuesday night— open space, a pedestrian plaza, traffic flow—are “site plan issues.” While Jarjura now believes that iPic has resolved the “traffic circulation issue,” the new traffic design came just last week. The staff will need more time to review it.
With Hashemi, Jarjura said, the city has “the type of partner we want.” The commission’s job now is to “facilitate a better development.” That is happening. It needs to keep happening quickly. IPic has an October deadline to obtain all its approvals, though Hashemi could apply for an extension. “We’ve come a long way,” Katz said. Even as the commission extended the meeting past 11 p.m. and then past midnight, there was resolve to reach a compromise that would work for the developer and the commission and would bring a project that enhances not just downtown Delray but all of Delray. If that happens, it will have been a good night/morning’s work.
Sweet dreams
After the iPic vote, with 1 a.m. approaching and everyone in the commission chambers spent, Glickstein unilaterally adjourned the meeting, even though agenda items remained. Normally, a commission majority is required for adjournment. No one objected.
Locals on the Iran deal
U.S. Rep. Ted Deutch made news this month when he announced—in an oped article written for the South Florida Sun-Sentinel—that he would not support the agreement on Iran’s nuclear program. Deutch is a Democrat, representing southwest Palm Beach County and northwest Broward. He will be opposing a president from his own party on the president’s major foreign policy initiative.
In practical terms, however, Deutch’s opposition probably won’t affect the fate of the deal. Nor is his opposition all that surprising.
Three months ago, 150 House Democrats signed a letter to President Obama supporting his diplomatic effort on Iran, in conjunction with Britain, China, France, Germany, Russia and the European Union. The letter said, in part, “If the United States were to abandon negotiations or cause their collapse, not only would we fail to peacefully prevent a nuclear-armed Iran, we would make that outcome more likely.” Deutch did not sign it. Neither did Lois Frankel, who represents coastal Palm Beach and Broward.
Congress’ 60-day review of the agreement ends in a month, at which time there will be a vote. If the House and Senate reject the deal, Obama will veto the action. Overriding the veto would take a two-thirds majority in each chamber.
Multiple recent news reports confirm that House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi has held together that 150-member coalition. The House has 435 members. If all vote with Obama, the override will fail. Obama won’t need support from Deutch, Frankel—who hasn’t taken a position on the deal—or the other two Democrats who represent portions of Palm Beach County: Alcee Hastings and Patrick Murphy. Neither signed the May letter. Murphy is now running for the U.S. Senate.
Polls vary, but the American Israel Political Affairs Committee has been leading a campaign against the deal. AIPAC consistently echoes the view of whatever government holds power in Israel, and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu vehemently opposes the deal. Deutch and Frankel are Jewish—Deutch’s district has the second-highest percentage of Jewish residents nationwide—but so is Democrat Jan Schakowsky of Illinois. She was one of three primary authors of the May letter.
Frankel and Debbie Wasserman Schultz, another Jewish Democrat who represents three-fourths of Broward, also may come out against the deal in the next four weeks. Unless any of the 150 defect, however, it won’t matter except to Frankel’s and Wasserman Schultz’s respective political futures.
About the Author
Randy Schultz was born in Hartford, Conn., and graduated from the University of Tennessee in 1974. He has lived in South Florida since then, and in Boca Raton since 1985. Schultz spent nearly 40 years in daily journalism at the Miami Herald and Palm Beach Post, most recently as editorial page editor at the Post. His wife, Shelley, is director of The Learning Network at Pine Crest School. His son, an attorney, and daughter-in-law and three grandchildren also live in Boca Raton. His daughter is a veterinarian who lives in Baltimore.
