The meeting’s most development was the approval of a mural installation at Chrome Marketplace. The Director presented the revised mural design, which incorporated feedback from both the city council and local community members. Key changes to the mural included the addition of a sunflower, a flag, and a soccer ball within the lettering. These elements aimed to reflect local culture and interests. The mural’s wording was also updated to “Greetings from the City of Homestead,” with adjustments made to its positioning to allow more space between the artwork and the building’s front.

Board members expressed enthusiasm for the design changes, particularly the inclusion of sunflowers. The Vice Chairwoman appreciated the local artist’s involvement and was keen on exploring how the mural could further support the neighborhood’s aesthetic. One suggestion was to enhance the prominence of the sunflower within the letter “O” of “Homestead.” Concerns about the mural’s visual presentation were addressed, including the capitalization of the word “City” and the darker background of the revised design compared to the original.

Lighting was another topic of discussion, with proposals to add downlighting to increase the mural’s visibility at night. The board deliberated on whether a formal directive was needed to proceed, and the Director confirmed that an official approval was necessary for the CRA staff to move forward. The mural’s funding, estimated at around $30,000, would come from the Arts and Public Places budget. A motion to approve the mural installation with the discussed modifications was made and seconded, signaling the project’s advancement.

Following the mural discussion, attention shifted to a commercial enhancement grant for a property on North Chrome Avenue. The Director introduced this as the first grant application of the fiscal year. Proposed improvements included resurfacing the parking lot, enhancing ADA access, power washing, repainting, roof replacement, landscaping, and dumpster enclosure repairs. The grant would cover up to $25,000, contingent upon a 10% match from the property owner.

During the discussion, additional suggestions were made to further enhance the property’s appearance and safety. One participant advocated for the removal of security bars from the building’s front, arguing that they contribute to a perception of crime. The participant also recommended installing a specific type of screening for chain link fences to obscure less visually appealing areas behind the building. Lighting improvements were also discussed, with a preference for pole lighting over traditional wall-mounted fixtures to comply with county codes and enhance aesthetics.

Concerns were raised about the disparities in the cost estimates for painting and landscaping, with questions about whether city officials had influenced vendor selection. It was clarified that proposals were sourced independently, with no recommendations from the city.

The potential for phased grant funding was explored, recognizing that a waiting period exists for grantees before applying for additional funds. Although no additional grant programs were available at the time, the board held the discretion to approve further funding if needed. A motion to approve the grant with the proposed enhancements was made and seconded, with a consensus to revisit the possibility of installing impact windows in the future.

An update was provided on La Patronia Bakery, which previously received a grant for renovations. The bakery was reported to be progressing well, with its products now available in local grocery stores.