The Planning and Development Board of Hollywood convened on July 11, 2023, to discuss a contentious application for a new school. The meeting was marked by extensive debate over the adequacy of the application and its implications for the community.

The session began with staff presenting the application, which was met with skepticism from board members regarding its completeness. Concerns were raised about inconsistencies in the traffic study and the site plan, as well as the lack of necessary approvals from the fire department and the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). Staff indicated that while they had worked with the applicant for several months, the application was still not fully compliant with all criteria.

Board members questioned the timing of the application, noting that significant negotiations were still ongoing. The applicant explained that they had made concessions to address community concerns but felt compelled to move forward due to a lack of cooperation from neighbors and other stakeholders. This led to further inquiries about the ownership of the awning in question and whether it posed any historical preservation concerns.

As discussions progressed, board members expressed frustration over the lack of public outreach by the applicant, with one member highlighting that their association had not been contacted. The applicant defended their outreach efforts, stating that they had followed the city's guidelines for notifying residents.

The fire chief provided clarification on the status of the fire plan, indicating that while it was under review, it did not need to be approved for the application to proceed. However, board members remained concerned about public safety, particularly regarding traffic and parking issues, given the proposed school's location.

As the meeting neared its conclusion, board members voiced their disappointment over the incomplete nature of the application and the potential risks to community safety. Several members suggested that the applicant should consider tabling the application to address the outstanding issues, but the applicant opted to proceed with a vote.

Ultimately, the board faced a decision framed by legal considerations under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA), which protects religious institutions from undue burdens. The city attorney reminded the board that traffic and parking concerns alone may not constitute a compelling governmental interest for denial.

After deliberation, a motion was made to deny the application, reflecting the board's concerns about the lack of sufficient information and community support. The board's decision underscored the complexities of balancing legal obligations with community interests, leaving the future of the proposed school uncertain.